Looked After Children & Gender Dysphoria. 2

Wallace Wong

Wallace Wong is a Gender Identity Specialist based in Vancouver. He boasts that, of the 1000 children in his care, 500 are children from the looked after system. That is children who are, in some way, wards of the state. Wallace Wong works for the Ministry of Children and Families and also has a private practice.

He arrived at his current career path after noticing how many “transwomen” were impacted by the HIV/AIDs crisis. He initially began working with adults but soon noticed that the age of those with “Gender Identity” confusion was becoming increasingly younger.

You can listen to the full audio at this site. I imagine that many of you may diverge from their larger aims (as do I) however, given the dearth of coverage in other media outlets I will link to their research. This is the only way to honour my commitment to provide primary sources, where possible. The link is below.

Wallace Wong

The clips in my piece were included in the vimeo embedded in the above link. I have listened to it, in its entirety, and can attest to the accuracy of the transcribing. It is a long presentation and I can’t do justice to all of the issues it raises but below is a brief overview.

Wong argues that we must not confuse gender incongruence/roles with being Transgender but most of the examples supplied are of boys who like “girly” things. Expect lots of references to princesses and pretty things. He dismisses research showing high rates of desistance in children who, historically, claimed a trans-identity. He argues that “gender” is innate and quotes some research about hard-wired neurological causes based on MRI scans proving #LadyBrain. He also quotes some self-reported adherence to sex stereotypical behaviour, typically associated with the opposite sex. I suspect Wallace has not heard of the, Shakespearean, quote “the wish was father to the thought” (Henry IV, Part II). We are treathing retrospective wish fulfilment as if it is peer reviewed evidence. Laverne Cox & Caitlin Jenner are wheeled out to confirm the idea that children know they are trans age three. Caitlin, you may remember managed to father five children and win Olympic medals during his male life. Laughably, at one point a video commentator appears to think the existence of Facebook “genders” has some sort of evidential significance.

He is also at pains to dismiss any concern that confusion could arise between emerging homosexuality and a proto transkid. Similarly he argues that high rates of autism can be expected because both autistic traits and transgender traits are biologically determined. High rates of co-morbid mental health issues are to be expected, he argues, because being transgender is hard.

Below Dr Wallace seems keen that we should know he is seeing patients as young as 3. He also makes it clear about the fast pace of this change and the fact that research has not kept pace with this development.

Below is where Wong makes the startling admission that 50% (500 out of his 1000 referrals) are from the Ministry of Children and families. This means they are somewhere in the care system and commonly referred to as “Looked After Children”. Dr Wallace doesn’t appear to have much professional curiosity about the exponential growth in “transkids” over this period.

Jenn Smith (also based in Vancouver) is a male who expresses “feminine” and ascribes this to his experience within the care system. Jenn argues that children in care are particularly vulnerable to “identity” issues which also extend to “gender identity”. It was Jenn Smith who first made me consider this aspect of the debate.

You can catch up with Jenn Smith on his YouTube channel and here Jenn Talks specifically about this issue here:

Jenn Smith: Foster Kids

Listening to Jenn Smith talk it is hard not to be concerned about an estimated figure of one in ten LAC (Looked After Children) identifing as transgender. This is contrasted with an estimated figure of one in 200 of children residing with their birth families. Another disturbing dimension is whether the indigenous children, over-represented in LAC settings, are also being medicalised as “transgender”. This has dangerous echoes of the scandal of sterilisation of indigenous peoples which is a stain on Canada’s history. If they are included in this population, of transkids, that is a damning indictment of those tasked with the welfare of children in British Columbia.

Wong does identify the dangers of social contagion in his presentation. I suspect this is now such an obvious phenomenon he feels obliged to address it. He prefaces the quotes below with some arguments that the internet has allowed “trans children” to develop an awareness of their identity and find acceptance, and knowledge, in on-line communities. Below, he at least acknowledges the dangers of kids, particularly those “on the spectrum” (referring to Autism I assume) to be swept along with trans-ideation.

Astonishingly he acknowledges that 20% of Transgender kids are autistic but this is simply dismissed because autistic kids and transgender kids are “born this way“. This is not an uncommon feature of arguments from Gender Identity proponents. Once you embrace the belief of an innate gender identity you can find evidence everywhere and fit facts to confirm your hypothesis. Conversely if, like me, you are a sceptic the ideology has more holes than a string vest.

He introduces videos throughout his presentation and one is a parent whose child came out to them at three years of age. I have not included the parent’s quote but suffice to say, like a lot of these tales, it is a boy who likes pink and sparkly things. We are told that her original therapist counselled a watch and wait approach and quoted an 80% figure for expectations of desistance. The same presentation proceeds to rubbish a study based in the Netherlands which supported this observation.

What the audience are not told is that there was only one Gender Identity clinic in the Netherlands so the researchers made the, entirely reasonable, assumption that loss to follow up could reasonably be correlated with desistance. The alternative was that the child had been taken abroad, and paid for treatment, rather than access the free treatment within the Netherlands.

Wong also rubbishes another study which found that most of the boys grew up to be gay. The unfortunately named “Sissy boys” were identified for their Gender non-conforming presentation. Here Wong argues that the study was flawed because they did not use boys who said they were actually girls. It does not seem to have occured to Wong that it was the 1970’s. Identifying as the other sex was not a social norm at the time. It is the near ubiquity of teaching about Gender Identity in our schools (especially in Canada) that has left a generation thinking you can choose your sex.

Wong then utters this statement which shows he is utterly disregarding any research that suggests he may be making an egregious error. To much laughter he dismisses any caution with this facile statement. Apparently, if the 80% is correct he is lucky enough to be seeing the 20% who would persist. Crassly he also argues that some of those kids may not appear in the figures because they will have committed suicide. As I have said, many times, there is just no evidence for this epidemic of transgender suicides in adolescents. Wong may feel blessed and lucky but it was bad luck for any child who walked into his office.

All of which takes me to the more egregious aspect of the advice Wong is dishing out. The question of how to overcome barriers to access to Gender Identity treatment was raised. Wong requests that this part of his presentation is not taped and then, after a side swipe at the gate-keeping goverment, he advises: “Pull a stunt. Suicide, every time, they will give you what you need“

This series is looking at the vulnerability of Children in Care; who have no parents to speak up for them. Not all the parents in Vancover are absent. It was also Vancouver who imprisoned a father who opposed the provision of testosterone for his teenage daughter and refused to remain silent. It would be interesting to see who was the Gender Identity Specialist involved in that case. Is there a connection?

I could not say but I certainly want to do a series on parents caught up in this nightmare.

If you can support my work it will be appreciated. Below is one way to do so until we get more media outlets willing to cover the issues I cover on my blog. Only if it is affordable and regardless my content will remain free.

My next piece will be on the percentage of kids in care referred to GIDs, in the U.K. Are the researchers concerned that these, vulnerable, kids have no parents to question the medical interventions proposed? Or. Are they worried children in care are not being treated fast enough? Watch this space.

paypal.me/STILLTish

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and its impact on Women and our Gay Youth. Support is always appreciated (I have no income). All my content is open access so if you can’t speak publicly, and want to support those who can, only IF you have spare cash, this helps me keep going.

£10.00

Amnesty U.K. What’s going on?

Featured

Like many people I have ceased to donate to Amnesty following the revelation they took advice from Pimp Lobby groups before deciding to adopt the stance #SexWorkIsWork. The majority of the sold are women and the purchasers are, almost invariably, male no matter the sex of those being traded. A purported human rights organisation which prioritises male sexual entitlement over their victims is a Human Rights organisation only because they self-identify as such. 👇

You can read about this in full here https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/22/pimp-amnesty-prostitution-policy-sex-trade-decriminalise-brothel-keepers

As if to remove all doubt about their anti-women stance Amnesty Ireland recently castigated women for defending their sex based rights. Below is an astonishing foray into the controversy of allowing men to self-identify as women. Women who point out the conflict with sex based rights are lazily conflated with far right organisations and, Amnesty argues, should be denied representation for these views.

You can read more in this article, by Julie Bindel, below. 👇

here

However, today I want to talk about Amnesty’s startling intervention in the Keira Bell case. Full details of this case are below. The brief summary is that, in the U.K., a high court judgment has halted administration of puberty blockers, to under 16s, without a court order I have done many posts on the Tavistock and on Puberty Blockers. I have long expressed concern about setting children, as young as ten, on an irreversible path to lifelong dependence on the pharmaceutical industry. So why are a Human Rights organisation setting themselves against this judgement? The presiding, High Court, judges did not believe that children, under 16, could give informed consent to an experimental treatment with such significant implications; for physical and psychological development. They further cautioned, even for those age 16 and 17, an endocrinologist may wish to get court approval. Blog on this case below:

Kiera Bell: Judicial Review

Here was Amnesty U.K proclaiming their support for attempts to overturn the decision.

A cursory look at Amnesty financial statements demonstrate their adherence to the tenets of Transgender Ideology, Here is a statement which states a goal to protect “Gender Identity”. No definition is provided, naturally. It is impossible to define “Gender Identity” without using circular references. How can you have an “internal sense of oneself”, as a woman or a man, without first defining your terms? Invariably they depend on sexist expectations based on stereotypes. This is why so many of these conversations are a dead end.

A cursory glacé at their accounts shows they have one project to look at sex based issues which impact on women and girls. Female Genital Mutilation and forced, early, marriage. A lot of these charities, with an international remit, recognise sex based oppression and abuse, when it occurs overseas, but deny it in the Northern Hemisphere. I do wonder who runs the cognitive dissonance department. 👇. (Dilbert)

Perhaps the explanation for the stance Amnesty U.K. takes is influenced by the chair of their LGBTI network which tells its own tale 👇

Note that, in the Keira Bell case, both Mermaids and Stonewall were refused permission to intervene in the case because their evidence was deemed to have no bearing on the case. That’s a damning indictment of their preparedness /evidence supplied in this case. Amnesty: Do you know who you are allying with?

If you are able to support my ability to focus on this full-time you can do so here.

paypal.me/STILLTish

£10.00

Irreversible Damage: Abigail Shrier

Featured

The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters

Shrier’s book is a timely contribution documenting increasing levels of concern over the rising rate of Trans-identifying Females. Young girls are having drastic surgeries/medical intervention, at ever younger ages, in a quest to become their “authentic selves”. Sadly, some of those young women are emerging, in their earlier twenties, to the realisation they were simply Lesbian or in flight from their sex for other reasons. This self-knowledge sometimes comes after years on testosterone, double mastectomies and even hysterectomies /ovary removal.

Facts and figures on the rising numbers of these girls are included in Shrier’s book. Many of the statistics are from the UK because the NHS makes it easier to keep track of the figures. In the US there are now tens of “Gender Identity” clinics to service the rising rates of “transgender” children /teens. This is a phenomenon across North America, Europe and Australasia. Shrier’s book documents this with extensive references, an excellent bibliography and conversations with many people at the cutting edge. This includes practitioners working in the field or reporting on this area. She also shares personal testimony from the young women and their parents.

I have kept quotations to a minimum because you really should buy this book! I have, however, interspersed some links/blogs to expand, or reference the UK context.

Censorship.

When research papers, articles or books, are published on the phenomenon of Trans-identifying children/ teens, they are inevitably followed by calls to ban them, accompanied by attacks on the author, sackings, loss of office or sponsorship. This book is no different.

Here is Chase Strangio, from the ACLU (Americal Civil Liberties Union), calling Shrier’s book “dangerous polemic” and calling for it to be taken out of circulation.

The ACLU have a proud history defending Civil Liberties and Free Speech. A legacy which has been utterly squandered by its advocacy of Gender Identity Ideology. As an organisation they appear unwilling to accept that Women, LGB people and even Transsexuals, have legitimate concerns about the extremist positions of Gender Identity Ideologues.

Chase Strangio is a Transman and ACLU Lawyer. Anyone questioning the transitioning of children seems to be perceived as an attack on Chase’s identity, as a man. Choosing to critique a book without reading it seems to be common in this “debate” but Chase claims to have actually read it. This doesn’t prevent Chase from seeking to deny other people the opportunity. This smacks of authoritarianism and is shocking from an organisation which, not too long ago, defended the right to free speech for members of the Ku-Klux Clan.

What is happening to Abigail’s book follows a familiar pattern of silencing. This happened to the work of Michael Bailey, Lisa Littman, Ken Zucker and many researchers whose work I have covered on this blog.

Lisa Littman

Lisa Littman coined the term “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria”. Lisa Littman spoke to parents with children claiming to be transgender. These children/teens had not shown any signs of discomfort, with their sex, during childhood, and their stories were also at odds with the experience / recollections of their parents. Diane Ehrensaft, a proponent of Gender Identity Ideology, made this statement about talking to parents (p.28). claiming it was akin to “recruiting from Klan or alt-right sites to demonstrate that blacks really are an inferior race”. I would contend that parents are demonised because we know when our children fabricate a fantasy trans-narrative. This knowledge is perceived as dangerous, as is (legal) parental responsibility, to safeguard our children from youthful mistakes. Parents who affirm biological sex are a direct challenge to ideologues, like Ehrensaft, who contend three year olds are competent to know their “gender identity”.

You can read more about what happened to Dr Littman here https://quillette.com/2019/03/19/an-interview-with-lisa-littman-who-coined-the-term-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria/

You can meet Diane Ehrensaft here: https://youtu.be/DnILbwUL19Y

A tale of two sexes

Ms Shrier’s book centres teenage girls. This makes sense because young girls are emerging as the main demographic being harmed. The causes are also different for females. As a parent of one of the boys, caught up in this, I contend that, whilst there is some overlap in the causality, this is primarily a tale of two sexes. It therefore makes sense to cover boys separately. Let us hope someone takes up the challenge to look at the Transgender Craze in Our Boys. Maybe I will.

Autogynephilia

Shrier does not shy away from covering the more controversial issues accompanying Gender Identity Ideology in our society. This includes a reference to Autogynephilia (AGP) which is a male paraphilia. The love of oneself, as a woman, is the new love that cannot bear to be named. Acknowledging AGP tends to provoke narcissistic rage and backlash and explains a lot of the testeria in this “debate“.

Shrier also talks about the erosion of female only spaces (see anecdote about the bra-fiting for a teenage girl. p.143). She also covers the potential /actual destruction of female sports due to male inclusionary policies. Shrier quotes young women who told her the social cache attached to a transgender identity is in direct contrast to the disregard for Lesbians. (p.151). Why would you want to be Lesbian when it is mainly known as a category of porn? Indeed the depiction of young women, in porn generally, seems suffiicient explanation for a flight from the female sex. Looked at one way adopting a male identity is a perfectly rational response to a hostile environment.

School Policy

Shrier is also excellent on the way Transgender ideology is disseminated, particularly in schools. The same phenonemon is at play in the UK. Sometimes this is done overtly via a Transgender Policy but other times it is slipped in, covertly, under the guise of anti-bullying. To truly root it out you have to check school transgender policy but also anything referencing bullying or equality or inclusion. I am doing a series on all the policies I have found and downloaded. This is one.

School Transgender Policy 1. Brighton: Allsorts

Shrier’s also documents how parents are treated by these policies and by schools, generally. Parents are painted as a safeguarding risk to our children, if we don’t immediately “affirm” a trans identity. I blogged about this here 👇 covering school policies advocating lying to parents about our children and “socially transitioning” them behind our backs.

Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

Another issue subject to scrutiny is the threat of suicide and the topic of transgender kids. Not just in the US but globally. This is despite the fact suicide attempts are actually no higher in trans-identifying children than other kids with mental health issues. Completed suicides are actually very rare in transgender youth but they are higher in the adult group post transition. One Swedish study, with the longest follow up time of any other study, found the suicide rate to be significantly higher than their comparator sex. You can read about this here:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885&type=printable

This is one of the longest follow up studies and points to a need for more after care and a review of the outcomes for post-operative transsexuals. This area is replete with references to suicide as evidenced by the repetition of “Better a live daughter than a dead son” . Yet discussion on post-operative mental health issues is verboten.

I wrote about suicide, in transgender youth, below.

Suicide in the Trans Community

Ray Blanchard

Shrier seems to have spoken to most of the prominent voices in this debate. Ray Blanchard is the man who coined the term Autogynephilia. He is very good on the psychological toll it takes to present as the opposite sex. I have written about this, which I call “imposter syndrome on steroids” , after observing and listening to adult transsexuals. Blanchard goes a bit “bad on both sides” re Trans Activists and Gender Critical Feminists (p. 132) but then we do appear to be, or are, critiquing his life’s work.

Medical Treatment

The book is bold and unflinching on the paucity of medical research and provides case studies on the deleterious impact of experimental, medical, solutions to a trans-identity. She points out that there is no reliable test for an innate “Gender Identity”. There is no biological marker. Detransitioners met the diagnostic criteria in the same way as did those who persist, for now, with a medicalised solution to their distress. She explodes the myth that puberty blockers are a pause and emphasises the public data which shows that 100%, put on puberty blockers, will continue to Cross Sex hormones. This is not a pause, it is the introduction to, an almost inevitable, pathway to medical transition. Shrier deals with the risks of puberty blockers (p.165); the shocking statistic of a 5 times higher rate of heart attack in females on testosterone (p. 169) and the medical complications leading to the high rate of hysterectomies after 5 years on testosterone. (p.171). She is also not afraid to name leading proponents of Gender Identity /Medical transition such as Jo Elsson-Kennedy who dismisses post mastectomy regret with this flip response “if you want breasts later on you can go and get them”. (p. 172)

Personal Testimony

The book is packed with personal stories from parents, adult transsexuals, desisters/de-transitioners. The bulk of these are females, as you would expect, but she does also reference young males. This approach allows us to meet some of the young girls/women caught up in the Transgender phenomenon, putting flesh on the bones of the statistics, just as surely as flesh is being put on the line. We hear the voices of parents endeavouring to navigate a path to protect their children, without alienating them. This is difficult and not always successful. Young women share their stories, one on being a Butch Lesbian, who identified as trans. The anorexic who swapped pro-ana sites for transgender ones. Crucially she ends the book with stories of those who made their way back, to reconcile with their sex and, very often to their formerly estranged families. Because: There is a way back!

Cultural differences

This is clearly a global phenomenon as I have tried to demonstrate. There are also some cultural differences. I don’t think therapy and medicalised responses to children/teenagers distress are quite as embedded in the UK. Though I am from the North of England and we can be a bit “haven’t you got any mates?” (Crocodile Dundee Style😉) about North American reliance on therapy. Shrier has lots to say about parenting styles and our growing impulse to step in when our children encounter difficulties. The phenomenon of Helicopter parents is less embedded in working class culture but is definitely rampant in middle class parenting. Overall this book translates very well, to the U.K. context, and it is eerie how much commonalty there is in the experiences of parents on both sides of the atlantic.

In Conclusion. This is a very important book.

Purchasing Abigail’s book via the link, below, will provide funds to a UK Parent’s group (Bayswater Support Group) who support families, with children who identify as transgender, to navigate a path to wholeness.

My copy of this book will be going to a generous donor who has purchased it to help fund my work. If you wish to support me you can do so here.

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£10.00

British Psychological Society 4

Featured

This is part 4 of a series on the British Psychological Society. This blog will examine the BPS treatment guidelines, from 2019. The 2012 version is covered in part three. The changes between the two versions are indicative of the level of mission creep. Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are taken from this document. 👇

Guidelines for psychologists working with gender, sexuality and relationship diversity

Part One

In Part One I looked at the background to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that commits a number of organisations to reject Conversion Therapy

Part Two

In Part Two I looked at the BPS position statement, on therapy pertaining to sexual orientation, and examined the profiles of the authors.

Part Three

Part Three looks in detail at the recommended treatment guidelines and illustrates how far they stray from the impression given by the position statement.

Part 4 : The 2019 guidelines.

The authors/contributors.

The same names are involved, as were acknowledged in the 2012 version. You can find out more about some of these names in earlier parts of this series. Stonewall UK are also thanked for their help.

What changed in the new Guidelines?

Gone are the warnings that caution is required before any irreversible medical treatments Ditto concern about the impact of Schizophrenia, or Aspergers, on Gender Identity Issues. The fact that most children/teens, with Gender Identity issues, will, turn out to be mainly Gay males and Lesbians has also disappeared. Why? What has changed?

What has survived are the ideas around Sexual Identities / sexual practices.

⇐ Here we see that the guidelines encompass gender, sexuality and those with diverse relationships. The phrase “assigned at birth“ is used, an ideological formulation to suggest it is not obvious in 99.9% of cases. Also “Cisgender”; another, contested, term claiming anyone comfortable with their biological sex is in fact content with their “gender”. As many of us point out, ad nauseum, accepting your biological sex does not mean you are comfortable with “gender” ! Especially since any definition of “gender” seems to be the based entirely on reductive sex stereotypes.

Moving on, here is a full list of what the BPS includes under “diverse relationship/sexual practices”. A veritable, word salad of queer theory inspired, nonsense.

⇒

The practice of BDSM is culturally specific and hardly a biologically determined part of sexuality. The claim this is all part of “human diversity” strongly implies all these “identities” have been with us since the dawn of time. A categorical falsehood which only survives by a historical revisionism, deployed by Trans Activists, which shames Stalin. Anybody who confirms that women,and men, have always rejected the constraints of expected gender roles is simply retrospectively transed.

Membes are instructed on use of ⇒ ⇒⇒ preferred pronouns and warned not to stigmatise diverse sexual practices. Polite pronoun use is one thing, however, the use of “expect” and “correct” smacks of compelled speech and underlines how authoritarian this movement is.

The dismissal of emotional problems and suicide attempts from this client group also seems dangerously lacking in curiosity, or research, into post-transition suicidality. ⇓

Minority stress is undoubtedly an issue for Gay and Transsexual/Transgender clientele. I think it is over-stating the case to dismiss all of these co-morbidities as arising from lack of social acceptance. Some victims of sexual abuse locate their involvment, in BDSM, as a response to these experiences or even how the abuse manifested itself. Some women talk of their involvment in sadomasochistic practices as arising from/causing negative impacts on their mental health and self-esteem. Some transsexuals refer to the mental stress of “imposter syndrome” and the relief garnered from naming, and accepting, their biological sex. The thinking underpinning these guidelines seems to prioritise an ideology rather than centre the client’s well-being. Sweeping all of these identities, sexual practices and relationship types into the prohibition of “conversion therapy” may deny therapeutic help to vulnerable groups. Not analysing underlying /subconcious motivations seems reckless. Yet, the BPS do exactly that: ⇓

Who is covered by the prohibition of Conversion Therapy?

Autogynephilia & Fetishistic Tranvestism

It is also significant that all reference to fetishistic transvestism has disappeared from this edition of the guidelines. Another notable, I would also argue tactical, omission is the phenomenon of Autogynephilia (AGP). This is a paraphilia and affects heterosexual men. The clinical description is that they have an “erotic target location error” and are aroused by the idea of themselves “as a woman”. An AGP male can derive satisfaction, sometimes overtly sexual, from invading female spaces. Is it any wonder that activists do not wish to draw attention to this type of transsexualism/transgender identity?

Here there is a brief mention of the mental health conditions which may play a role in a particular “identity”. This document is very keen to badge these as “extremely rare”.

Notice the shaming tactic of inferring any dissent is akin to racism.

The omission of the paragraph below, from the 2012 guidelines, is more transgender washing. Most people have no idea about autogynephilia, yet it is paraphilia documented for decades. It is also a condition for which men have sought treatment, rather than “transiton” . This begs the question of where they get this help when therapists simply affirm a trans identity.. This is also a tactical omission because acknowledging men adopting women’s clothing/identity, for erotic purposes, isn’t good public relations . Telling the general public, men with a sexual a paraphilia can safely be given to access women’s spaces won’t be appearing on David Lammy’s campaign literature any time soon. (Lammy is the UK, MP responsible for the passage of the Gender Recognition Act)

Too many policy makers are treating any male with a Cross-Sex Identity as if it magically transforms them, literally, into their chosen “identity”. This matters because we treat men, as a class, a certain way becauuse of the the statistical sexual offending rate against women.. There is no evidence this, changes “post transition” whatever that means no we are told it is transphobiv to expect a penectomy has been performed. In fact it sex offenders may, in fact, by higher judging my the males in the UK prison population. Moreover our politicians would know this if they had bothered to undertake any impact assessments. Instead they have shown a feckless disregard for women’s rights.

Social Engineering.

Gender Identity Ideology has gained such traction by the take over of bodies responsible for making policy and laws. Here the BPS calls for its members to become active in policy making and their community to “effect change” . The wholesale social engineering necessary to make organistations afraid to use the word “woman” dopt a whole new (dehumanising) language to describe us is not happenstance. Its indicative of institutional capture.

For emphasis I am including this next paragraph, even thought it is somewhat repeat some earlier points. Here the mandated belief is that sexual attraction operates based on “gender identity”. The wording is, I would argue, deliberately obfuscatory so it is not readily apparent that the BPS are actually de-coupling sexual orientation from sex. We have already been told that a male-sexed, and male-presenting person, can be a lesbian. Shouldn’t a therapist be able to explore what has given rise to this belief, because it is patently delusional. Is it ethicaly to endorse the boundary breaching this entails for the old fashioned kind of Lesbian. AKA WOMEN!

Below it is made explicit that no assumptions should be made about any medical interventions required, or undertaken. Once again, for emphasis, this is why more and more Lesbians and Gay males are starting to sound the alarm for what this means for their exclusive same sex orientation. This ideology parrots the idea that being “exclusive” in your, same sex, dating practices is “transphobic”. Does the BPS agree with this? What does this say about the legally protected characterisic of sexual orientation?

If you have not yet acquainted yourself with the idea of “Lady Penis” then now is the time because it is being taught in primary schools. See my blog below.

That is right. Your children are being taught that some girls have a penis.

This paragraph is also worth reproducing to the maximum size possible. Basically if an obvious man, who belongs to the male sex, tells you that he is, nevertheless, a lesbian it is your duty to accept this. Then again he may wish you to call him “slut” . This immediately makes me wish I knew the relative price comparison for a session with a psychologist versus say, a dominatrix.

Yep. I went there. Being call “slut” by a dominatrix is big in “femdom” and sissy porn. Website below takes you to a content warning that it is only suitable for over 18’s. You can get the drift from the promotional blurb.

https://miss-kimberley.co.uk/

Here is a review: {I had better not be involved in a crime BTW as my search history….}

Ths next paragraph I believe is referred to as a bait and switch. There is growing evidence of the abuse, of female partners, by trans-identified males with Autogynephilia. However this document emphasises that a transitioning partner should not feel inhibited in complaining about an accepting partner. I imagine this excerpt will draw a rueful grimace from transwidows. This excerpt also inverts the power dynamics in a relationship where only one is non-monogamous or practices BDSM. These two “identities”, it is implied, will be the marginalised/oppressed. Thus, in one fell swoop, the woman with a partner who has sex outside the relationship, or pays to visit a Mistress Kimberley, will be deemed at the losing end of a power differential with his partner. This is gaslighting in a gimp mask.

Finally. In the previous version of the guidelines much more time was given to the potential implications of irreversible medical interventions on children/teens. In this version we are simply told that “reproductive optiions…may be more complex”.

I have lost count of the times I have been flat out contradicted for saying we are sterilising kids when we put children on puberty blockers. We are. When you put children, as young as 10, on puberty blockers they invariably progress to cross sex hormones. They will be infertile. We are doing this in the UK.

Finally in my next blog I will make it clear there is opposition/concern within the ranks of BPS members.

Next up: THE 2019 guidance and some dissenting voices from within the BPS membership.

If you are able to support my work please do so. I am unwaged and all my content is open.

Investigating the march of Gender Identity Ideology. The impact on Women’s rights and the cost paid by our Gay offspring & children on the Autistic spectrum.

£5.00

Tag: Gender Affirmation

Looked After Children & Gender Dysphoria. 2

Wallace Wong

Like this:

Amnesty U.K. What’s going on?

Like this:

Irreversible Damage: Abigail Shrier