That Denton’s Document

Primary Sources.

This document sets out the strategy for advancing Transgender Rights across Europe, with a specific focus on young people.

You can find the 65 page document on-line here Link

I attach a version which I downloaded in December 2019. IGLYO_v3-1. I notice there is another version. I attach both, in case of any changes, IGLYO_v3-1 2

Astro-Turfing

The introduction flags up the Corporate backing for this, allegedly, marginalised minority. The world’s largest law firm and a global foundation are writing strategy documents to embed Gender Identity ideology, in law. This has all the hallmarks of astro-turfing; which is when a well funded, social engineering, project is presented as an organic, grassroots campaign. In reality Transgender Ideology is backed by significant funding. You can read more on this phenomenon here

And now Google are interfering. Jo Bartoch Article here.

Another relevant piece, by Jennifer Bilek, lifts the veil on the rich & powerful men driving Transgender Ideology. here

These are the organisations providing pro-bono support for the report under consideration. Thomson Reuters Foundation and the largest Legal Firm in the world.

D9D5A510-38A4-4430-9943-AF25C29BE863 — Thompson Reuter’s

055BB537-186A-498A-8443-35537B4343E1 — Dentons

Dissenting Voices from the LGB & I

The report is on behalf of a group of 96 organisations, who claim to speak for LGBTQI youth across the Council of Europe region.

In the U.K, we now have a breakaway group, LGB Alliance, who do not feel their interests are served by mainstream LGBTQI organisations. These organisations reject the notion of biological sex /sexual dimorphism thereby making it difficult/impossible, to defend sexual orientation. Exhibit A: Stonewall UK have, as an Ambassador, a bearded male who claims to be a Lesbian. See Alex Drummond. 👇

Stonewall Lesbian

It is also worth noting the letter I, in LGBTQI, claims to represent Intersex people. These are people with Disorders/Differences of Sexual Development. Many of this community also resent their medical condition being co-opted as an “identity”, by the rainbow alliance.

To hear more of these dissident voices you can read about LGB Alliance here

You can follow an intersex advocate’s blog here

U.K. Named & Anonymous Backers

To return to the Denton’s document. It outlines the progress in establishing transgender rights across European countries. Here’s who is involved in the U.K. Note that one of the organisations didn’t even want their name to be made public. The other one already accesses state funding.

Mosaic received funding from the Government Equality Office for a project working to stop homophobic, bi-phobic and transphobic bullying in schools. You can find this information in the accounts submitted to the Charity Commission.

A quick check on their timeline shows a devotion to the Trans Advocacy lobby group Mermaids. #PinkNews #Stonewall #ProudTrust also figure prominently. Mosaic Youth Trust are enthusiastic advocates for medical intervention, for children, even using an emotive appeal from a trans identified child.

Twitter account @TheMosaicTrust. Their Website

There are very few public resources available on their twitter timeline or website. This, I find, is one of the more disturbing aspects of many of these smaller charities. No public access to resources that are going into our schools! The Denton’s document proffers an explanation for this secrecy, which I will get to…

Introduction

The introduction was written by a well known Trans Activist based in the UK.

You can read more about this activist here. Identifies as non-binary. In a relationship we would have formerly described as heterosexual. As Ugla makes clear here this is no longer acceptable. Heterosexuality is thus redefined as queer. Hey presto it’s under the 🌈 and there’s a crock of s**t at the end of this one.

Mentioning the fact biological sex exists is now a “transphobic dog whistle”.

Legislation by stealth

The two admissions in this next paragraph are crucial to understanding how so much has happened without people, particularly women, marshalling our resources to resist. Most of us didn’t know there was a new threat to women’s rights wearing Joseph’s technicolour raincoat. We were too busy attending Pride marches and gleefully singing #BornThisWay. While we were singing Lady Gaga there was a new Gaga Lyric in town #BornInTheWrong Body.

👇Here are some of the strategies recommended. Pass legislation “under the radar”, “latch…onto more popular legal reforms”. This tactic has served them well. Note that Ireland passed legislation around Gender Recognition before it legalised abortion. Malta still has not legalised abortion but it does allow self-identification of “Gender”.

For Trans Activists the failure, in Ireland, to lower the age for Legal Gender Recognition is seen as a warning against compromise. The stage is set for a new offensive. Note that the age for gender recognition is also under review in Scotland, who seem minded to implement the more controversial of reforms. This legislation is also under review in England and Wales which appears to be heading in a different direction. However, there is no room for complacency.

The role of education & attacks on parental rights

Below is a snippet on Tactics picked up from Portugal. First make sure you train teachers. Get the teachers on board with gettin rid of sex segregated toilets.

The inculcation of gender ideology is well underway in the UK. Many parents are now discovering this with recent publicity on School Transgender policies. (Quite a few of which have been withdrawn as parents protest about their contents). The Denton’s dossier is a full frontal attack on parental protective responsibilities. Here is a thread I did on those school Transgender guidance packs, specifically how they seek to undermine parental responsibility. Thread

Here a few examples of how parents are referred to in numerous school packs on Transgender pupils.

Another common tactic is to talk about “minors” say you mean 16-18. Then switch to “child”. Talk a lot about a child’s legal rights and their autonomy. This is another attack on parental responsibility. As is made more explicit. They want Parental Consent to be over-ridden

Here are some quotes about parents in the document under consideration here. 👇

These excerpts are even more disturbing. Mandating state action against parents advocating for “watch and wait” rather than medical intervention. It is factually true ,historically, some jurisdictions enforced sterilisation clauses prior to undergoing Sexual Reassignment surgery. These clauses have rightly been removed. However we have not eliminated this for young people. Children put on Puberty Blockers, invariably, progress to cross sex hormones, they will not have a puberty and will be rendered infertile.

Norway allows legal gender recognition for six year olds. For now (?) this is restricted to children with disorders of sexual development. It is possible that I am overly cynical /hyper-vigilant about why these kids are being housed under the Transgender Umbrella. They are not “transgender” kids, however, could their status be hijacked to campaign for Gender recognition of 6 year olds. Even if they are not “intersex” but do believe they are born in the wrong body?

De-medicalising the process or Medicalising it?

Another aspect of the coverage deemed problematic is the focus on medicalising Gender Identity. This is deemed unhelpful. The problem identified in this quote exposes a central contradiction in trans ideology. For adults there is a push to de-medicalise the process for self-identification of your “gender”. For children there is a push to medicalise them. Here it is claimed that UK voices are simply “confused”.

The debate is confused. Not, however, on the Gender Critical side. It is reflective of an internal contradiction on the Trans Activist side.

The penis retention status of so many Trans-identifies males has not escaped the attention of U.K. females. Indeed the phrase suck on my dick appears with unfailing regularity in responses to inconvenient women. Had the esteemed authors of this report consulted women they would have known the deployment of the penis, by our wannabe sisters, was a strategic fail. Documented here Peak Trans

Here is a direct focus on the “highly problematic” system of separate toilets for girls/women and boys/men. 👇 Given the history of women’s fight to have safe public bathroom facilities this is a direct attack on the rights of women and girls. Note the vehicle for grooming our children to accept this is Teachers. . This is what the frequent “we just want to pee“ is really about. 👇

The document undertakes a country, by country analysis and the United Kingdom is singled out for its non-compliant women. The document doesn’t shy away from using a slur associated with threats of rape and violence (Terf) . It goes on to draw the conclusion that press coverage is problematic. The lesson to be learned is that the freedom of the press has created a divisive issue. In fact the press have, finally, begun to cover something which simply is a contentious issue.

Women are labelled “trans-hostile” because we are not giving up sex based rights without a fight. These are existing rights enshrined in Law, by a Labour government, but the document suggests only the right wing media are raising it. By extension, it implies, it’s only right wing women who have an issue with it. (The uber left wing Morning Star is one of the papers that has tried to provide coverage for these non-compliant women).

The preferred campaign strategy is to provide human interest stories but, the document claims, the current atmosphere is so hostile they are unable to do so. The Guardian and the BBC, Teen Vogue, Pink News, Independent, Mirror, Sun, Telegraph appear not to have received the memo. Coverage of “trans kids” is ubiquitous. This is a strategic. By deploying children it de-sexualises motives for transition and helps persuade people that the trans community are a vulnerable community.

Another way this strategy has been deployed, in the UK, is the many Trans Activists who refuse to appear, along side feminists, to debate any issues. The series on Radio 4 Women’s hour was notable for the number of Trans Activists who would only provide pre-recorded discussions, rather then debate the issues with feminists. Example here

The above is laughably poor research into the actual profiling of young trans people in the British media. A quick search brings up masses of coverage of Young Trans Children. There was a seemingly endless parade of “transgender kids” on British Media. There are loads of celebratory tales of young “transgender” children. Here’s an entire documentary by Victoria Derbyshire. Transgender Kids.

The Children’s BBC programme “I am Leo” was broadcast directly to our kids on CBBC. I presume this was just in case the home schooled had missed out on Transgender Indoctrination. The documentary follows a young female as she embarks on medicalisation to cement her male Gender Identity. Below is a clip of he Director of the U.K’s premier Gender Identity Clinic, who appeared on I am Leo. Juxtaposed with a contemporary statement , somewhat at odds with what our children were told.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The language of Human Rights advocacy is deeply embedded in the propagation of this ideology. Women’s rights to privacy and dignity has been trampled underfoot which underlines the depressing realisation that we are not considered human. Access to women’s sex segregated spaces is now badged a human rights issue for male bodied “women”.

Of course anyone who is trans-identified should have human rights. The women fighting for our sex based rights are not trying to strip rights away from any male who is a refugee from his sex. The rights we are asserting are existing rights, in law, to allow women to act as a political class to defend women’s, sex based, rights.

Watching the naivete of young, female, politicians who are throwing away women’s rights I think they need to read this document and consider if they are being played. The young politicians are being targeted. The senior, older, politicians, don’t want to lose the youth vote so are letting them lead the way.

Another tactic is to make sure activists get ahead of the politicians. It’s a new area and fraught with political banana skins. What better way to avoid a slip. Outsource your opinions to Lobby groups. They are more than happy to oblige. It’s a great strategy.

This document is a must read. Don’t use it to hold anyone accountable. Lawyers must Lawyer and they have already got their defence ready. Power without responsibility

Martine Rothblatt: Chapter 4

Featured

This is from a series on this book 👇

This is the second edition. The original was titled: The Apartheid of Sex. The author is a trans-identified male who is also interested in “Transhumanism” which, crudely, envisages a post human life for man melded with technology. Most rational people would find his ideas ludicrous but, unfortunately, he is taken seriously and is now one of the trustees for The Mayo Clinic which is sometimes referred to as a world leading hospital. He is also very rich.

This post covers the fourth chapter of his book.

Notice he puts “objective reality” in scare quotes. Let us hope our politicians row back from following this book as if it were an instruction manual. The truth is this is a man and all the surgery in the world has not disguised him.

The chapter is broken down into the following sub-headings.

Love and Marriage

He starts with gay marriage which sounds perfectly reasonable until you see he wants the eradication of sex in life and law. Inevitably this means denial of same sex attraction.

This summarises his aims. 👇. To get rid of the recording of sex on any documents. Marriage to Rothblatt should be “sex blind”. He is also keen on mixed sex bathrooms and changing rooms. Basically he wants to penetrate all female spaces and he is quite clear a man, with a penis, can identify as a “woman”.

He is a qualified lawyer and very keen on using the law to get his own way. Here he argues that “transsexuals” are ideally placed to contest the recording of sex on marriage certificates.

A recurrent theme is drawing comparisons to the recording of race and racist laws against mixed sex marriage.

The Lovings were a couple who challenged the law which stated that their marriage was illegal. A fight they won, with the help of the ACLU, before they spent their energy attacking women’s rights in the name of Gender Identity Ideology.

Rothblatt argues that a legal case needs to quote the Loving v Virginia precedent to strike down the requirement to record sex on marriage certificates.

For the gay men and lesbians going along with this the goal is erasure of your sexual orientation. If you have not caught up with the #CottonCeiling /#BoxerCeiling now is a good time. The new generation of “transgender” ideologues think you are morally mandated to accept partners of the opposite sex if they identify as Lesbians/Gay men.

Let that sink in!

Government and Sex

Warming to his theme, Rothblatt argues that nobody is male or female.

He then uses the Ruth Bader Ginsberg case; in which she successfully won a male spouse the same rights as females, married to men in the armed forces. I am not sure Bader Ginsberg would have anticipated the way this case would be used by trans-activists; though she did act for a “transsexual” to be allowed to serve his time in women’s prisons.

Rothblatt’s thinks the government don’t need to collect data on sex for its census. He proposes that we add a “transgender “ or “other” category to the census. This has already happened in the U.K and it took a fight to make the Office for National Statistics (ONS) change the guidance to allow men to tick “female” if that was how they identified. A similar fight was lost in Scotland.

Rothblatt aims for a world in which “transgendered” becomes the main category.

In his ideal world the sex question would be dropped altogether and arguments about needing to know which diseases (and treatments) need differentiating by sex he regards as specious as arguments to record race. This is dangerous. To give one example; multiple sclerosis affects women in 68% of cases. At the same time men are more likely to get the progressive version of the disease and their prognosis is worse. Similarly we only recently discovered females were dying at higher rates after heart attacks. Turns out female symptoms present differently and they were being under diagnosed.

This next paragraph is a tiresome. A toddler realising the difference between males and females is a developmental milestone. Activists use this to argue that this is awareness of “gender identity”. Again he attacks the notion of female and male brains, at certain points, but he also argues for the “transgendered” brain. Separating the sexes has been done for safeguarding reasons because the male of the species have trouble regulating their penises. It’s not akin to Apartheid and it’s an odious analogy.

In Rothblatt’s ideal world we need a “Gender Pioneer” to challenge the legislature and argue against recording their sex, or their child’s, then all the other agencies will need to follow suit. We have already see Freddy McConnell fight to be recorded as the “father” on their child’s birth certificate; even though she is female. Another activist has spent years going through the courts to be acknowledged as neither male nor female. In addition a govt funded Research Council handed out a grant to examine this topic.

The bathroom bugaboo

This is the definition of “bugaboo”. He thinks women’s concerns are childish.

In fact there are huge inequities in toilet provision for females and women have been screaming into a void about this for decades. Yet the moment some men have “Lady Feelz” governments, public bodies and corporations have leapt into action. Clara Greed works in this field and has this to say.

You can watch Greed talking about this here:

Toilets WPUK

The author thinks that we can address issues with female provision by removing the division between male and female toilets. He recognises that males may feel discriminating against if urinals are removed and also that the vagina-havers will end up cleaning up male urine. He dismisses these concerns. He is also dismissive about rape. He calls these concerns mere “speculation”.

In fact this is the research.

Unisex spaces and women’s safety

Rothblatt instead chooses to focus on a woman who was arrested for using the male facilities to avoid the queues at the women’s facilities. She is now a campaigner for “potty parity”. Yep, Martine, we want equal provision but we don’t want to share with men.

Papering the Transhuman

In this section argues for the registration of artificial “humans”.

Martine is living in the realms of science fiction and in this chapter he argues for the registration of “trans humans” to enable people to live on in a different form. He has given this a lot of thought even down to worrying about he can maintain controls of his sizeable fortune.

So he wants to reorder the world to fit his fantasy and, thus far, he is getting what he wants.

You can support my work here: Donations gratefully received but don’t prioritise me above important legal cases, or your gas bill.

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtish

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

£10.00

That Equaliteach Project

This project came to my attention when they were asked to remove the Government Equality Office (GEO) endorsement from their project report. The first version, below, clearly included the GEO logo.

Online Link to the project report (now deleted) was here

Document uploaded here. FREE-TO-BE-rev5

In fact the GEO funded this project to work with 27 primary schools. At a superficial level the project aims may seem laudable, a resource to tackle bullying in Primary Schools. However an examination of the materials in this pack reveal the underlying relationship to Queer Theory and the political project of disrupting social norms. Some social norms, such as homophobia, needed (still need) to be challenged. Other social norms exist for a reason, for example, to stigmatise the dangerous sexualisation of children. This entire document is a clear example of the political project of Queering the classroom. You can read and article on this here

My first red flag was a dangerous reliance on Stonewall reports.

The rise of hate crime on the basis of homophobia is disturbing. Especially since this is the least covered of the letters by Stonewall. However Stonewall extrapolates from the data to show an alarming % of hate crime, 53% in the 18-24 age bracket. However a hate crime is recorded based on the self-perception of the reporting individual and we know some of these are simple “mis-gendering”. Another puzzling claim is that this project aimed to dismantle gender stereotypes. This is the most disingenuous of claims since we are teaching children, who don’t perform sex stereotypes “correctly”, that they may be #BornInTheWrongBody.

My next red flag was a reference to this person Dr Ronz. The good doctor describes zimself as a “queer, black, androgynous, intersectional feminist”. Of course zie does. After making a good point about lack of visibility; which does impact Lesbians, in particular, she then colludes with the literal erasing of female, often Lesbian, bodies. A young woman describes difficulty walking, struggling to breathe, a hunched back and ribs popping out, all caused by breast binding. This young woman is manifesting an obvious bodily hatred. Dr Ronz fails to interrogate any underlying, psychological, issues, instead she merely advises her to wear a larger binder!

For further reading you can check out this excellent article on the different attitudes to breast ironing (bad) and Breast binding (progressive) in this article. here. What next corsets?

At last more organisations have realised they cannot get away with lying about the nine, legally protected characteristics. This is, at least, an accurate list. 👇. Brief sigh of relief but read on….they are still going to do it, just in a bit more of a sneaky way.

Later on we see the sleight of hand. They emphasise that the correct legal terms should be used except its OK to use “gender” instead of Sex & Gender Reassignment. The very same two protected characteristics now under attack can be replaced with the Stonewall preferred term. Coincidence? I think not.

Don’t take us for fools Stonewall. We see exactly what you are doing even if you have successfully hoodwinked the GEO. This is straight up Stonewall Law. Here’s Stonewall on The Equality Act. 👇

To ram home the point it quotes some of the schools involved who have proceeded to introduce mixed-sex toilets. No doubt after being introduced to this US Transgender Rights Activist who they quote in the document. 👇 Their claim to fame is destroying access to single sex toilets/changing rooms in their home state. There is quite a lot about making sure toilets are “gender neutral” in the pack as teachers fall over themselves to queer the toilet facilities.

Policing Language

There follows a long list of terminology for our primary school children, and likely the teachers, to learn. Why do primary age children need to know about “cisnormativity”, “heteronormative“, “pansexual” and “queer” . Kids are taught about “heterosexism” which is defined as a “belief that heterosexuality is normal and the norm”. Again this is straight out of Queer Theory. A reference to disrupting social norms which exposes the social engineering inherent in “free to be “. A long list of terminology but it only includes the word for the majority sexual orientation in the description for “heterosexism”. These Trans Ally activists seem to have studied Module 101 of how to provoke a backlash, to hard won rights for the LGB and even, ironically, the T.

A dissertation on pronouns follows. Why are we telling primary school children that an incorrect use of pronouns may constitute harassment?

Actually lying about the Law in a project sponsored by the Government! The Equality Act says no such thing! Wrong pronouns do not contravene the Equality Act!

These are primary age kids and, just in case we have all forgotten, we don’t use pronouns to anyone’s face! They are used to refer to people when they are not there!

Welcome to Dystopia. 👇

Gender Identity Ideology.

Naturally the document is saturated with teaching about Gender Identity. The pack quotes research showing that children from age three “can be aware of and talk abut their gender identity”. Children, as young as three, can show awareness of the expectations for their sex and conform to behaviours based on Gender stereotypes. This does not mean they have an innate “gender identity”. It just means boys and girls are socialised to conform from a very young age. Primary school children can indeed be aware of their sexual orientation but it is over-reach to claim that both sexual orientation and Gender Identity are innate. There is much evidence for the former but not the latter. This is not education its indoctrination.

This curriculum seems designed to inculcate a bodily dissociative disorder. The below quote is to remind us of the odious Section 28 legislation, which forbade references to homosexuality. However, Gender identity Ideology is actually the Woke Section 28. We are disproportionately sweeping up our gay youth in the Transgender phenomenon because, guess what, Butch Lesbians and Femme Gay males are a thing. We used to bully femme boys by them by calling them cissy/girl and now we are telling them they are literally girls! So, yes, we are promoting being transgender.

The document also admits that staff, who were worried about reactions from parents, initially, proceeded to teach this ideology in secret. As more parents became aware of this it generated a backlash. Recognising the days of stealth indoctrination have passed, our woke overlords resort to lying about the law and emotional blackmail. Teaching about Gender Identity is not mandated by law. Parents are objecting! And NO it is not a moral and legal duty. 👇

The document addresses questions of religious belief in the context of sexual orientation and then proceeds to answer the question encompassing the LGB & the T. This is a standard tactic. Many opponents of Transgender Identity Ideology are themselves homosexual. This is because there is a conflict between having a SEXual orientation, and demands that you include anyone with the same Gender in your dating pool, regardless of their biology. Activists know that people are generally shamed by being called homophobic so they exploit this fear to push transgender ideology.

Beware!

Next up is a scurrilous attack on organisations which question the new hegemony of “Born In The Wrong Body”, or raise issues of concerns about the impact on Women’s Rights. Worth reproducing this in its entirety. Note that once again Stonewall are quoted, approvingly, as are Mermaids. (The latter is a prominent, UK based, charity, which promotes medicalising “transgender kids” . The BBC has recently removed Mermaids from the list of charities they refer to as sources of advice). This document quotes them as a reputable group.

The authors are keen to make sure that parents and schools reject these organisations and do not, on any account, read what they have to say. They then detail tactics for making sure the entire school buys into the ideology. Get the Governors on board, get parents in for friendly coffee mornings…..basically “groom” them. The document also wrongly tells parents they can’t reject LGBT education. Not true. Sex Educations is expected to be mandatory from September 2020. It is not yet. There is no obligation to teach Gender Identity in schools but note that this document makes it clear it is to be embedded across the curriculum.👇

However if the Government reverse the mandatory sex education the document outlines how to make sure there will be no escape. There are pages and pages of all aspects of the curriculum and how to “Queer” it. There are examples of Home/School contracts so that parents know what is expected of them and their child. There are books like this by Jazz Jennings, the poster child for Gender Dysphoria. 👇 The little boy who had his puberty blocked and sadly, at age 16, did not know what an orgasm felt like. Nice accessible, heart-warming stories. Nothing about puberty blocking causing a penis so small there was not enough material to fashion a neo-vagina and Jazz Jennings multiple, and continuing, corrective surgeries.

Another part of the document includes retrospectively transitioning women, who masqueraded as men to access male professions, such as Dr James Barry. Or even claiming that Plato supported the LGBT+ which is ahistorical nonsense.

They do manage to dredge up an actual transsexual to offer up as a role model for children. Robert (a) Cowell was a late transitioning WW2 Fighter pilot, with a less than savoury tale.

Woke Stasi?

There is a reason why this term exists. Here teachers, it is suggested, observe pupils and keep a diary of their behaviour. Checking for implied homophobia or, heaven forfend, a style of play that assumes heteronormativity!

Parents

I have written about the way parents are treated in these guidance packs. Suffice to say that this one also advocates hiding information from parents. Affirming children at school and concealing this information from parents, This despite also claiming our children are at a heightened risk of suicide. Whilst repeating the mantra: This is not a safeguarding issue?

I will restrict myself to this one quote.

More on parents and transgender guidance is available here Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

Queering the curriculum. Sexing it up?

The references and signposting at the end tells its own tale. Stonewall, Stonewall, Stonewall. Also Gendered Intelligence and Mermaids! Not to forget the Proud Trust, proud purveyors of the Dice Game as covered by this article. here.

The forces pushing this ideology have finally come out of the shadows, they have spread their tentacles throughout councils, parliament, police forces, the Judiciary, Universities and our schools. No longer acting in stealth more and more “normies” are waking up to its more sinister content.

You can support my work by taking out a paid subscription to my substack or donating below. All donations gratefully received and they do help me cover my costs and also to keep content open for those not able to contribute. Every amount helps me to sustain my work.

My Substack

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/STILLtis

Researching the history and the present of the “transgender” movement and the harm it is wreaking on our society.

Putting the Loco in Loco Parentis

The Law: In Loco Parentis

Parents entrust our kids to the School/Teachers to look after their safety and well-being, in our stead. Forcing our girls to share mixed sex spaces, and hiding information from parents is a grave dereliction of that duty.

Transgender Guidance in Schools.

More and more parents have begun to raise concerns about School guidance, supposedly, developed to accommodate Transgender pupils. Grass roots organisations, such as Safe Schools Alliance, have emerged to challenge these policies. In 2020, transgender guidance has been withdrawn in Kent, Cornwall, Shropshire, Barnsley, Warwickshire and Oxfordshire. There are challenges underway in three further schools, of which I am aware. Thus far all the guidance has been withdrawn rather than face a legal challenge.

The Oxfordshire case is illustrative of a problematic attitude to the protected characteristic of sex. A 13 year old girl challenged Oxfordshire County Council via a Judicial Review. Her case aimed to gain recognition of the conflict between the protected characteristics of Sex & Gender Reassignment. The guidance from the Department of Education argues that the protected characteristic of Gender Reassignment covers pupils who identify as Transgender. Link to government guidance is here

Here is the relevant excerpt and look who is advising them! GIRES!

This is despite the fact under 18’s cannot apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate or, legally, obtain Sexual Reassignment Surgery, in the UK. The Transgender pupils are therefore anatomically indistinguishable from the rest of their natal sex.

Rather than face a judicial review the council withdrew the policy. They are clearly hoping to hide behind the skirts/trousers of the EHRC. Oxfordshire issued a statement which contained no apology, to the female pupil. Instead the Council ends with a statement about the safeguarding of its trans-identifying pupils. Nothing about a duty to safeguard, potentially vulnerable, natal girls.

In this post I want to specifically focus on the way parents are regarded in these transgender toolkits. Both the parents of children who manifest as Gender Dysphoric and the parents of other pupils. I estimate I have looked at about twenty of these guidance packs. Below are examples of what they have to say about parents.

Most of the guidance refers to the high rate of suicidal ideation, in our trans-identifying children. Yet the policies repeatedly state there is no, inherent, safeguarding risk. If our children reveal a state of gender confusion , to a member of staff, they are reminded that this is confidential information, not to be shared, even with the child’s parents. How can schools claim our children are at a high risk of suicide attempts and, simultaneously, state there are no safeguarding issues. How is it Ok to conceal this information from parents?

Suffolk council divides parents into the good and the bad ones. The good ones “work alongside their child”. Are the bad ones those who think the best outcome is a reconciliation to biological sex and not a lifelong dependence on BigPharma?

Barnsley expresses the hope that parents will be concerned for their child’s welfare but is clearly sceptical. At no point, in any of the policies, is there an understanding that parents, who express caution, are the ones acting in the best interests of our children. Every pack I have examined is suspiciously keen to emphasise actions the child can take independently of their parents.

More sinister is an open statement that a school, in this case a Catholic school, can put in place a transition plan that does not involve the parents! This is my old school and I have young relatives who attend there.

Here is another Catholic school which labels parent’s as prejudiced. It then goes on to make the claim that Parents/Guardians may not be the most appropriate people to guide their child through transitioning! Why is transitioning our children seen as an unmitigated good? A direct attack on parental duty of care and parental rights from the Catholic Church!. I am an atheist but it is quite astonishing to see the undermining of Parental responsibility emanating out of Catholic schools.

Leicestershire Council appear to see themselves as a Tavistock (Gender Identity Services) referral agent: Actually stating here that Teachers & School Nurses, even Youth Workers are able to make referrals!

Where are the parents in the Leicester guidance? Once again the confidentiality of the child is placed in the foreground. What this actually means is that the school has the right to keep secrets from the parents. Even whilst so many of these packs claim our children are at a significant risk of suicide attempts. Still it is not a safeguarding issue?

This next clip is even more disturbing. The Leicester policy sets out a scenario where one of the parents will be actively deceived about what is going on.

Of course we can all think of scenarios where parents are a risk to the safety and well-being of their child. Why are parents, who question the uptick of girls (and boys) with Gender Dysphoria, labelled as problematic. Having navigated this territory, for my male child, I was keen that he was afforded protection but not at the expense of the female pupils. Puberty can be a difficult time for teenage girls and they too deserve dignity, privacy and protection. Like the parent below I was able to navigate a careful path between the two protected groups. Unlike this parent, from the Cornwall guidance, I was not faced with a Social Justice Warrior undermining these careful arrangements.

The Cornwall policy was jointly drafted with a female police officer. I was surprised the statement on the left made it into the document. Apart from a disturbing focus on links to reporting #HateCrime it was not the worst Transgender policy I read. It is, however, a, regrettably, low bar. The document also brands parents as potentially prejudiced and again argues that the child may have a perfect legal right to exclude parents from any role in preserving their healthy bodies.

You can read about the Fraser Guidelines, and Gillick Competence, mentioned above here. Activists argue that transitioning children /teens against their parent’s wishes is in line with the rights of young people. You will start to see more references to these guidelines and Gillick competence. This is intentional and designed to draw a false equivalence to access to contraception. References will also be clothed in Human Rights speak and references to bodily autonomy.

A lot of these guidance packs go to some lengths to make sure schools know they can honour a pupil’s preferred name and pronoun. School systems can be amended to reflect this. There is no need for a legal name change. They also point out that, once a pupil reaches 16 they no longer need parental permission.

Shropshire also favours hiding this information from parents who are not “supportive”. I know, first hand, of parents who only discovered what was going on, with their own child, when a letter was sent home with a new name & pronouns. Do not tell parents can be a very dangerous message. Some parents have children with eating disorders, psychiatric co-morbidities, and other conditions which the school may be unaware about.

The pack which seems to be the template for most of the packs I have seen remains in operation. This is the All Sorts pack, from Brighton and Hove. A pupil’s right to confidentiality is elevated above parental obligations, or the rights of other pupils. Again, because they claim it is not a safeguarding issue it can be kept from their own parents and the parents of other children.

Where a parent raises a concern, about a male-bodied person in girls changing rooms, the pupil/parent’s are admonished for denying the “girlhood” of the other pupil. In this scenario, I as a parent of a trans-identifying male, agree with the female pupil and her parent’s concerns. I would not want my son to be exposed to the hostility, that would likely ensue, from such a stance. At the same time, if the guidance is followed, I would be totally unaware my child had formally claimed trans-status at the school. Who does this protect? Not my son. Not the girls in his school.

Another common feature of the Transgender Guidance is the near ubiquity of signposting to Mermaids Charity. This charity is a keen advocate for keeping secrets from parents. Here is an article on their website. It was modified so children could quickly exit the site and avoid their parents discovering they are seeking counsel on Gender Identity Issues.

The BBC has now amended their guidance to remove signposting to Mermaids and other trans lobby groups. I wonder how long it will take for all School guidance packs to do the same?

My Next blog will explore this document? Based on a project funded by the Government Equalities Office,

Here is what they have to say about parents. This is a lie. The Equality Act does not mandate pronouns.

Tavistock 5: Marcus Evans

This is one of a series of blogs on The Tavistock, the UK’s Main Gender Identity Service. Based at the Tavistock NHS Trust, in London, it is often abbreviated as simply GIDs. Marcus is an ex-employee of the Tavistock and an important voice in this debate. You can find him on twitter Here The paper is an excellent reference point. Open access and with comprehensive references to all sources. Great reading list for the curious.

Link to the paper here

Given the history of silencing research in this field here is the download Freedom to think- the need for thorough assessment and treatment of gender dysphoric children | BJPsych Bulletin | Cambridge Core

If you have read any of my earlier pieces you will already know there’s been an unprecedented rise in referrals to GIDs /Tavistock. There has also been a change in the sex of the referrals. The proportions have completely inverted, from 75% male to 75% female. In addition there is an increase in teenage onset cases. This has been termed: Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, and is a recent phenomenon. The changing nature of the referral population, numerically, by sex and teenage onset should have raised serious questions about treatment protocols. Yet in 2011 the Tavistock actually accelerated the pace of earlier medicalisation.

Affirmation Only.

The predominant treatment is to “affirm”. This means it is now unacceptable to question your own / any child. This, despite the fact that we know, left alone, most would desist from a trans-identity.

Practitioners are expected to support the child’s self-identification and not to explore or question it. Affirmation is a nice, positive sounding word and it has become the mainstream treatment protocol. The affirmative approach, as explained below, sets these children on a path to irreversible medical interventions. In the UK this can happen for children as young as 10 years old.

The political ideology under-pinning this approach is a belief that children can ,literally, be Born in the Wrong Body (sex) for their Gender Identity. Gender is an internal sense of self so only the child can determine the truth of their condition. This makes the child the ultimate arbiter of their authentic self. Parents are expected to affirm their child’s Gender Identity based on their child’s self-assessment.

Memorandum of Understanding/Conversion Therapy

This article, however, makes it clear that there are dissenting voices, and organisations, who are not wholeheartedly on board with Affirmation as the right pathway or at least not as the only one. Many organisations have signed a Memorandum of Understanding which treats questioning of Gender Identity as akin to Gay Conversion Therapy. However the Royal College of Psychiatrists declined to sign the MOU when the definition was expanded in 2015. 👇

The government are currently consulting on a new bill to ban Conversion Therapy. Whether, or not, it uses the expanded definition will be crucial for the rights of children labelled “Transgender”. Most people will look no further than Gay Rights and assume that, of course, it should be outlawed. However, for all the reasons I have covered in previous blogs, affirming a Gender Identity in young children/teenagers may literally be Gay Conversion Therapy. The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

A growing number of parents are expressing concern about the treatment of their children with Gender Dysphoria. 30% are estimated to be on the autistic spectrum and with other co-morbidities. Many are simply gay males and Lesbians. The parent’s, referred to here 👈actually managed to get a letter published in the Guardian. They also raised concerns about on-line grooming of their children into the tenets of Transgender Identity. In the UK there are now two groups of Parents who are questioning the current approach to their Gender Dysphoric children. Bayswater Support Group: Twitter here and Our Duty here. (Both groups have other on-line forums and real life meet ups for parents to reach out for support).

Professionals are also becoming more vocal in questioning the medical approaches. Carl Heneghan pulls no punches in this reference to Puberty Blockers.

I can’t stress this point enough. Once your child starts down this path they rarely go back and they will be dependent on cross-sex hormones for life to maintain this “identity”. Tragically some of the women, and men, who have de-transitioned are still dependent on synthetic hormones, for their own sex, because they had ovaries/testes removed.

👈Here are two more organisations calling out the dearth of evidence based research, under-pinning the treatment of these children/teenagers. The House of Lords seems to have more dissenters and Lord Winston has written/spoken on this topic, from his own experience, in dealing with consequent fertility issues.

A high rate of complications and loss of fertility. A reminder that the hippocratic oath requires Physicians to Do No Harm. The existence of an unelected chamber has always been a source of concern, for me, but elected politicians seem, almost universally, cowed into submission. It seems we do need some people ,not bound to the electorate/ lobby groups, to voice these uncomfortable truths. The House of Commons remain is largely silent on this issue. Silence is complicity. A salutary lesson.

Here Bernadette Wren, of GIDs makes a startling, and actually quite frightening, admission: given that the GIDs protocol remains Affirmative. 👇. Must we wait an entire generation to discover we have been unwise?

Professor Donal Shea is another dissenting voice.

The NHS is based on the WPATH standards of care. Professor Shea & Dr Paul Moran regard them as harmful and clinically unsafe. Let that sink in.

De-Transitioners/Regret

The Tavistock experiment has been running for nearly 10 years. We are starting to see a new wave of people with regret but, here is some detail about regret from the 1980’s. I rarely see Trans Activists/Trans Allies demanding evidence based research, or long term follow-up studies. I would suggest this is where there is a role for activists. Demand better research and long term follow up studies.

The more vocal trans-activists seem mostly preoccupied with rapid access to treatment and the removal of safeguards which they call “gatekeeping”. That alone should set off alarm bells for clinicians. I cannot imagine anything worse than finding you had taken a healthy body, and destroyed sexual function, only for your patient to regret it. 👇

Watching Jazz Jennings , a 16 year old male, ask if an orgasm was like a sneeze here should have been a wake up call for the cheerleading parents. In Sweden there is a male who has obtaining permission to end his own life, after regretting surgery and realising he was simply a Gay Male. A Belgian Female was also euthanised after regretting their surgery. here

Informed Consent?

Disturbingly here is a claim that discussion of post surgery sexual function was actually a taboo subject at the Tavistock. Especially with the younger cohort who, let me remind you, are making these decisions as young as 10.

Why is this area of treatment operating outside the realms of normal practice?

Anyone who doubts that this is happening can listen to Tavistock practitioners openly discussing the question of children and fertility in my earlier pieces. Parents have direct experience of the cavalier disregard for the long term consequences in our children. They express a fervent wish to change “gender” but these kids/teens have absolutely no concept of the long term implications. They have an entirely superficial understanding about what thy are signing up to. Sadly, it appears, so do some clinicians.

Anger, regret, and impact on women.

Even if someone is expected to benefit from transition some counselling around the reality of the inescapability of your sex would seem to be in order. Yes there may be people who regret this decision and direct their anger inwards. At the same time there seem to be people fiercely committed to their “transition” but utterly unrealistic about sex based reality. This group seem to direct their anger outwards, at their target sex. I am talking of the male transitioners. It is disturbing, watching the violent, even rape, rhetoric, hurled at women on social media (& in real life). Even more terrifying is that our politicians seem to be wilfully blind to this phenomenon. What if you are not just admitting any males into female spaces but a particularly dangerous section who hate and envy women?

Adolescence.

More people should be saying this. I have seen youtubers, now de-transitioned, who genuinely didn’t know that nearly every woman has a terrible time with the onset of puberty and emerging womanhood. How soon this knowledge is lost when young girls are cut off from the wisdom of older women?

Yet instead of working to, therapeutically, resolve this “splitting” we are shutting this down. Only medical pathways are seen as appropriate. Clinicians are branded transphobic for a therapeutic approach.

Parents are alienated from their children who are groomed to see any obstacle in their path as an act of hatred/bigotry. 👇

De-transitioners are now speaking out about their time in the Trans community. They confirm parental reports about our alienation. They also expose the tactics used to game the system and overcome gate-keeping , by learning a script.

Even if children don’t desist counselling can teach them about the wider societal implications of rejecting your biological sex. It is an inescapable fact that a female will still need cervical cancer screening, and a male prostate cancer checks. Yet activists push for the eradication of any sex markers and even new NHS Identity numbers. This de-couple pre-and post transition medical history. This is evidence of an ideological belief / psychological compulsion which is undermining safe practice.

So why is there such utter and total capitulation to an incoherent ideology?

The answer is fear! Not an unrealistic paranoid reaction but a rational response to the consequences of speaking out. Ken Zucker and James Caspian are two high profile victims of the silencing. Urge caution, or wish to study the phenomenon of regret, and you will find powerful forces ranged against you.

Heaven forfend if you wish to research Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.

I have written about the silencing of Michael Bailey over his book: The Man Who Would be Queen, which also covers Lisa Littman here. Another paper, which posited an alternative hypothesis to Born in the Wrong Body, was also completely pulled after activists put pressure on the journal. I cover this here

It is a chilling atmosphere in which to try to serve these children and young adults.

The closing down of debate and discussion about this surge in Transgender Identities is creating a dogmatic adherence to Affirmation/Medicalisation which is already wreaking great harm on our youth and some adults.

Having revealed that there are dissenting voices and organisations, despite efforts to shut them down, Marcus makes a final recommendation. A truly independent service able to withstand the pressure from lobby Groups. Less rigidity in treatment protocols. A new regulator with appropriate oversight.

This needs to be addressed quickly because there won’t be enough alibis to go round.

That Denton’s Document

Primary Sources.

This document sets out the strategy for advancing Transgender Rights across Europe, with a specific focus on young people.

You can find the 65 page document on-line here Link

I attach a version which I downloaded in December 2019. IGLYO_v3-1. I notice there is another version. I attach both, in case of any changes, IGLYO_v3-1 2

Astro-Turfing

And now Google are interfering. Jo Bartoch Article here.

Another relevant piece, by Jennifer Bilek, lifts the veil on the rich & powerful men driving Transgender Ideology. here

These are the organisations providing pro-bono support for the report under consideration. Thomson Reuters Foundation and the largest Legal Firm in the world.

Dissenting Voices from the LGB & I

The report is on behalf of a group of 96 organisations, who claim to speak for LGBTQI youth across the Council of Europe region.

Stonewall Lesbian

To hear more of these dissident voices you can read about LGB Alliance here

You can follow an intersex advocate’s blog here

U.K. Named & Anonymous Backers

Twitter account @TheMosaicTrust. Their Website

Introduction

The introduction was written by a well known Trans Activist based in the UK.

Mentioning the fact biological sex exists is now a “transphobic dog whistle”.

Legislation by stealth

The role of education & attacks on parental rights

Below is a snippet on Tactics picked up from Portugal. First make sure you train teachers. Get the teachers on board with gettin rid of sex segregated toilets.

Here a few examples of how parents are referred to in numerous school packs on Transgender pupils.

Here are some quotes about parents in the document under consideration here. 👇

De-medicalising the process or Medicalising it?

The debate is confused. Not, however, on the Gender Critical side. It is reflective of an internal contradiction on the Trans Activist side.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

This document is a must read. Don’t use it to hold anyone accountable. Lawyers must Lawyer and they have already got their defence ready. Power without responsibility

Incarcerated Paedophile & SRS

I have documented, in an earlier post, a small number of referrals to Gender Identity Clinics who openly admitted their motive for transition was paedophilia. This blog is here: Survey of Referrals to a Gender

This week two more cases of Trans identified males have been convicted of downloading child pornography. Both were afforded female pronouns. I blogged about one yesterday Here: #TheseAreNotOurCrimes

Today we had the outcome for another one. Media coverage here : Woman!

This weeks coverage made me return to this case. As usual, where available, I include the judicial transcript of the case. Here : Transcript

A quote here from the case: “The Claimant, now aged 60, is a transgender woman who seeks a referral for NHS-funded gender reassignment surgery (“GRS”). She is a serving prisoner. In September 2006 she was convicted and sentenced, as a man, for making indecent photographs of children” Bold added for emphasis.

The case was brought because the prisoner wishes to gain access to Sexual Reassignment Surgery (SRS), on the NHS, whilst incarcerated.

The prospective patient is arguing ,the Tavistock are refusing surgery on the basis of a protocol which denies SRS to existing prisoners. (Interestingly the judgement claims SRS is only made available to those with no hope of release!)

The existence of any such protocol is hotly contested. We are then taken through the history of the claimants interactions with Gender identity specialists. In this section we learn the offending history dates back to the 1980’s and the prisoner has a conviction for sexual assault, and grooming, of a young girl age 12. The matter of gender Identity was raised in 2011. 5 years into an indeterminate sentence.

Here the specialist expresses concern the prisoner may be drawn to further offending, even after SRS. The claimant admits this, initially, but then claims he would no longer need to offend, because he would not need to offend to “vicariously experience womanhood”. Below is a dose of common sense from Dr James Barrett. Indeed. Women don’t typically perform our expected gender role by grooming and performing sex acts on 12 year old girls.

” The fact that she had a history of sexual offences was a seriously complicating factor. People with gender dysphoria feel imprisoned in the wrong body, convinced they are a woman living in a man’s body. Women who are living in female bodies do not normally groom children, still less perform oral sexual acts on 12-year-old girls. It is unusual and it made it much harder to accept her history at face value.”

The withholding of SRS seems mostly related to the difficulty of having “Real Life Experience (RLE) “living as a woman”. This is one of the requirements prior to accessing irreversible surgery and there are a few cases which turn on what exactly this means. How does anyone live as a woman? Women are women by virtue of our biology . WE don’t all walk around performing sex stereotypes. Few things irk me more than the idea that a few men can assess another man about how well he is “womanning“. Only a fool would subcontract the definition of women to the opposite sex. There simply is no way to measure how to live as a woman without relying on sex stereotypes. Those same sex stereotypes women have been fleeing from/resisting for centuries.

In the event various clinicians saw the prisoner. They commenced on a low dose of oestrogen and later the dose was increased. Note that the letter below was sent to HMP Whatton, which is a man’s, Category C prison. Note that the prisoner also appears to have embarked on an application for a Gender Recognition Certificate, from within prison. Dr Barrett declined to provide any supporting documentation.

Here Dr Barret and Dr Lorimer both refer to the patients paraphilia, the cross-dressing and the fetishisation of the female experience, though it seems to only concern them when it is targeted at teenage girls.

The first prisoner to obtain a GRC , from within prison, was a pre-operative male as I cover in this blog HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON? This prisoner committed an attempted rape of a woman after being legally re-defined as a woman. There is, to my knowledge, no process for rescinding a Gender Recognition Certificate, and certainly it was not done in the above case.

You can read another case which similarly involved a male paedophile. This one had the idea that the Spice Girls were a template for womanhood. Girl Power: The Spice of Life?

So there you have it. Men re-defining women against our will. Men defining men, as women, based on some projected sex stereotypes. An admission of the co-existence of paraphilias and fetishisation of women. Nobody was willing to outright refuse treatment so this person was given hormones and allowed to go on unsupervised day release, dressed as a woman. I presume the real life experience involved using female facilities.

Male paedophile, dressed as a woman, accessing spaces which could well include teenage girls. Nothing to see here? I now know who is responsible for the Mad Men series of images. Julian Vigo. Genius!

TAVISTOCK PART THREE (B): Aiden Kelly

Tavistock: 1989-2018

This is based on this youtube presentation by a member of staff at Tavistock in March 2018. You can watch this: here.

Here’s a transcript of the talk TAvistock part 3

I have covered the physical interventions we are visiting on children/youth, who present with Gender Dysphoria, here TAVISTOCK PART THREE (A)

I now want to examine what this talk tells us about how we diagnose these children and include a few quotes that didn’t make into part A. .

We are basing this diagnosis on the belief that, somehow, Gender Identity exists independently of biology and is sometimes in conflict with our biological sex.

⇐This slide shows that Dr Kelly recognises biological sex, sexual orientation and sexual identity exist. He also identifies, separately, Gender Roles, Gender Expression and Gender Identity.

Biological Sex is the easy one. Despite efforts to destabilise the definition of sex we are a sexually dimorphic species. Differences/Disorders of Sexual development (also referred to as intersex) don’t disrupt the “binary” of sex. Here are two people qualified to comment on the issue of sexual dimorphism. Claire’s comment, below, is a good one to keep handy as her article, published in the journal Nature, is often wheeled out to claim the opposite of what she meant. It is actually a fascinating Article

Dr Kelly defines our Biological sex as our anatomy and says it is an important part of our sexuality and sexual identity. I am not sure how sexual attraction is only partially reliant on biology, except that this matters in Transgender Ideology. Additionally, what does “sexual identity” mean here? It maybe to accommodate people who identify as the opposite sex (not just gender). Alternatively it is, perhaps, to include people who identify as a particular sexual orientation regardless of their sexed body. That is to be inclusive of self-described “male lesbians”, or female’s who identify as “gay men”.

Gender Identity is here described as a “personal and individual thing” which is not necessarily fixed. Yet another reason why it is not a good idea to base legal concepts on something undefinable and shifting. If Gender Identity relies on a personal, subjective feeling how is it sensible to codify it into Law?

Gender Expression. This seems to mean how you “perform” your gender and how you signal which gender you identify with/as.

Here Dr Kelly, an obvious biological male, talks about his identity as a man. We learn how this might be signalled by the way he dresses, manners, his hands and even the way he crosses his legs. This is all complicated by the notion of metrosexual males who may even cross their legs in a feminine way but still identify as male. Confused? Don’t worry. It is, apparently, complicated and kind of hard to think about. God help those of us with #LadyBrains.

Then there are Gender Roles.

Here he recognises these rely on gender stereotypes. Am I a woman because I pick up the dustpan and brush? Don’t be silly. That’s just a gender stereotype. We want to deconstruct those don’t we? And here we come to a startling admission. “The last thing we want to do is to have a young person changing their body to fit in with… societal rules”. Dr Kelly would love to take Gender out of this issue altogether. But, guess what, we have to deal with reality. I assume he means gender stereotypes are deeply entrenched and changing society is too hard. So what does he propose? We need to “carve out a space” for someone to express their gender, in ways that society will accept. Are we really carving up the bodies of young people because that is easier than transgressing expected norms of behaviour for fe/males? I am old enough to remember when Gender Non-Conforming behaviour was widespread. What happened? I give you Annie Lennox and Boy George. I could supply loads more examples.

Next we are introduced to the Gender Unicorn. (See Header). A slide that Dr Kelly uses to introduce concepts central to his work. Sex is, unsurprisingly, described as “assigned at birth”. People with DSDs are othered as a third sex. Sexual orientation is undermined by the inclusion of romantic/emotional attraction. We are using this tool in primary schools! So, is it entirely unsurprising we are seeing rising rates of Gender Dysphoria in girls, and boys? Who amongst us performs our sex stereotypical expectations 100% accurately?

It gets even more confusing when we examine how young children think about gender. We are provided with this slide which shows how children are socialised into expectations of what makes a boy or girl.

This kind of thinking, in a two year old, is quite cute. It is less so when espoused by our political, media and medical elite. I like my politicians to engage with issues as adults not toddlers.

There is not much to disagree with in the next slide except to wish the Dr would join the dots. Emerging sexuality and associated feelings of shame. (Surely worse for those who realise they are same sex attracted in a heteronormative culture). Anyone paying attention would see that the rigidity of the “gender binary” and the impact of parental or societal expectations has significantly worsened in the last twenty years.

Is the new rigidity of Gender Stereotypes a new Backlash against Women’s rights? As women encroach on male professions is this a new way to put women back in their box? Is the Public Femininity display a way to dispel the ball-breaking bitch trope? Are we displaying hyper femininity to signal we are no threat to men? This could be labelled compliance, or subversion, either way omething seems to be going on.

Moving on to the understanding of gender in 8 year olds. Dr Kelly makes an astute observation about the meaning of gender for young children compared to 38 year olds. Note that we are following one set of diagnostic criteria for both groups. Children pick up social cues which reflect the society in which they live. Adults, mainly males, also absorb expectations from adult depictions of female roles. Some of this in contexts (porn) that, you would hope, your eight year old has not encountered. See this interview with Andrea Chu who is remarkably honest about their pathway. You can read up on Chu’s thoughts on the role of sissy porn and the concept of the female as passive: here

Our kids are navigating such difficult territory. I was one of 8 children. Six of us girls. All the horrific statistics about sexual violence against women and children were played out on our bodies. I was a dungaree wearing, tree- climbing, jumper off buildings. We ran free and I was not unusual. Sure we had pretty dresses, for specific occasions, but overwhelmingly we lived in “playing out clothes”. These were the norm and we would nowadays, describe them as gender neutral. I was brought up in a pretty traditional household. Working class father. Manual occupation. Definitely seen as the breadwinner. Even in that context it was absolutely the norm for we girls to do this. Nowadays this would put us at risk of referral to the Gender Identity Industrial Complex!

Fast forward to puberty. As Dr Kelly recognises this is a hugely challenging time for young people. It’s a turbulent time for even the most well adjusted teen.

What happens if you throw in some complicated family dynamics? Below Dr Kelly outlines some scenarios. There are multiple everyday reasons why girls struggle during puberty. Growing up in a society with record violence against women, endemic woman hating porn, hyper-sexualised expectations for young women. No wonder girls are identifying out of their sex. For young boys, who don’t want to be associated with toxic masculine socialisation, who are gay and on the “femme” side the flip side of this equation comes into play. Throw in some domestic turbulence and you get some extreme rejections of what it means to be female /male in this society.

And lets not forget homophobia. Some parents would prefer a faux-straight child to a male child who they might think the behaviour, described below, signals their son may be a proto-gay male.

Dr Kelly goes on to talk about how people can hold toxic views about gender. People can also have quite toxic views rooted in homophobia.👇

I find myself bewildered that the Gender Identity Specialists didn’t anticipate this. The law of unintended consequences. Spend all your time banging on about undermining heteronormative culture and guess what? You did a great job of establishing a new, pernicious, way of establishing it. All your campaigning around “disrupting binary thinking about gender” and what did it achieve? We have actually established a way to make sex stereotypes “flesh” ; by carving up the bodies of boys and girls who don’t conform.

I wonder how many people, who have dedicated their lives to the furthering of this social revolution, have dark nights of the soul? They should.

Survey of Referrals to a Gender Identity Clinic.

This paper surveys 5 years of referrals to an Oxfordshire Gender Identity Service, up to 2009. Its well worth looking at this paper because it sheds light on the typology of referrals. It also raises the issues of informed consent, co-morbidities, sexual motivation and, crucially, highlights the huge change in the sex of referrals.

See below for a brief summary of the methodology:

We have seen a dramatic shift from mainly male, in this paper, to overwhelmingly female in the decade since. Turns out biological sex is a factor. Current youth referrals are now 75% female. This is a striking change as highlighted by ex staff from the UK’s main Gender Identity Service (The Tavistock). Over 40 staff have left over a three year period, some after expressing concerned about the response to this changing demographic. (Clips from an article in the Times of London. Full Article here. (Paywall) Feels Like Gay Conversion ⇓

As always, feel free to skip my commentary and read the entire paper yourself. You can find it here

This paper pre-dated the changes to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual; which no longer refers to Gender Dysphoria as a “disorder”. Activists fought long and hard to change the way this condition was described, to remove any reference to “disorder. The modern narrative is that our children are simply “assigned” the wrong sex at birth. To develop a sense of Gender, at odds with your sex, is now presented as a normal/natural variation and hence de-pathologized. Well worth reading Dr Ann Lawrence (Transsexual) on the politics behind this change. (Will add link when Dr Lawrence’s website is back after maintenance)

The above paragraph emphasises the rarity of this condition and the high incidence of co-morbidities in the community; i.e. the existence of other mental health issues in the Trans community. Axis 1 disorders are at the most acute level and include schizophrenia and depression. The paper is authored by psychiatrists who were specifically focussed on concurrent and historic, diagnoses of mental health issues.

Other notable features were the low rate of funding approvals for surgery, the rise in self-medicalisation, the prevalence of mental health issues and a disturbing finding of clients who admitted to paedophilia.

As with many other papers the rates of referrals, from those with a diagnosed autistic spectrum disorder, is also noticeable. The authors note that, in the main, their sample did not differ significantly from the findings of other research. They do note, however, the mental health issues were slightly lower than in other findings. The youth of the female subjects is noted.

Below is a breakdown of how many of the subjects were already accessing hormones obtained over the internet, without any medical oversight. Over 50% had either a current or pass mental illness. Depression was the most common diagnosis.

This study is to look specifically at psychiatric diagnoses so it is striking that none had a formal diagnostic interview. The authors conclude that comorbidity is, therefore, likely to be underreported. It would be interesting to see if the location in a student population influenced the rate of young females presenting at the service. ( I do wonder if there will, eventually, be a retrospective review that draws comparisons to females who succumbed to anorexia. My own personal experience was that it impacted, highly motivated/academic females at a disproportionate rate)

Reading the quote below it is refreshing to see reference to issues of capacity to consent in relation to those on the autistic-spectrum. For those of you on twitter it is instructive search “top surgery” and see how many openly proclaim “autistic” in their personal biography. I also signpost you to the #WeAreNotConfused hashtag. This was started to refute any notion that the high prevalence of Autistic youth, with Gender Dysphoria, was an issue of concern. A response which was a reaction to the open letter by JK Rowling which you can read here.

Expressing concern about the high number of autistic females suffering from Gender Dysphoria is not deemed an acceptable opinion within the field of Gender Identity Specialists.

The reference to paedophilia in this paper also triggers push back on social media. It would be interesting to know exactly how this information came into the possession of the clinicians undertaking the assessment. It would seem that this must have relied on a personal disclosure based on the wording below:

9AEF136F-C3EB-4448-9AA1-EB75A145F1A3 — Safeguarding

This is an unmentionable subject on twitter as it has echoes of the association of paedophilia with gay males. Gay activists were quite right to push against such an insidious narrative. At the same time Safeguarding101 is DO NOT create a priest class, who are beyond reproach. It is not that priests became paedophiles. Its that paedophiles became priests. Remember this when people push aside safeguarding concerns because transphobic.

To finish I am going to include this clip again. Pay attention. Reasons for non-referral were that the person was deemed not to be ready, or homosexual or having an autistic-spectrum disorder.

Now watch last night’s Newsnight segment here: Tavistock Ask yourself what has happened to make clinicians throw caution to the winds in the last 10 years?

Tavistock. Part Two: Clinical Dilemmas: Polly Carmichael

Talk by Polly Carmichael.

Part Two on the tension between different approaches for dealing with “Gender Dysphoria”. Hopefully part one provided some background for any neophytes. Tavistock Clinic: Part One.

Dr Carmichaels speech is : here The summary is taken from a transcription provided by Mumsnet volunteers; for which I am very grateful.

The talk took place in the following context:

4500% rise in the number of referrals, to the Tavistock, over a decade.
Rise in females (reversing sex ratio in less than a decade)
Tavistock pilot to place younger children on puberty blockers.

This change in protocol followed work done by Dutch Gender Identity Services. As you will see, from my earlier blog, the Tavistock were under some pressure to revise their treatment protocols to allow earlier medical interventions.

The evidence from introducing puberty blockers, at an earlier age, has resulted in children invariably progressing to cross sex hormones and entrenched on a medical pathway. The pro-medicalisation Lobby argue this is because they are 100% accurate in identifying those children who would persist. The alternative perspective is that the act of blocking puberty somehow locks in the Gender Incongruence. If this is correct we are medicalising those who would have desisted and, historically, many of those would simply be gay. I cover this here The Woke Gay Conversion Therapy?

There are many people working in this field who have raised this as a concern:

We don’t know whether these children would have desisted and reconciled to biological sex. The pro-interventionists have another perspective. They argue this is evidence the screening is working and it may be unfair to the children not put on this clinical pathway! This is also the argument used against setting up a control group. From the perspective of the Tavistock it would be unethical to leave a cohort untreated if they meet the diagnostic criteria for intractable Gender Dysphoria. I do wonder if anyone has thought to include parents, who oppose medical intervention, to see what the long term outcome is for our children?

Another startling admission is that we simply don’t know what the long term implications are on developing brains. 👇This is a clear admission this is an experimental treatment. Have politicians,and parents, been persuaded to take this risk because activists claim our children are at a high risk of suicide? Have activists managed this by leveraging questionable data on likely suicide? (I blogged about this here Suicide in the Trans Community)

This paragraph is important because there are still documents out there calling this intervention a “pause”. Indeed here is Polly herself from the CBBC children’s programme “Becoming Leo”.

Many people working in this field have postulated that going through a natural puberty resolves gender incongruence in the majority of cases. Dr Carmichael is clearly aware of this research and emphasises that the treatment, at Tanner Stage 2, means that these children will at least have had a partial puberty.

She concedes the paucity of long term data on outcomes. She also anticipates concerns about competing mental health diagnoses. In this way the “Gender Dysphoria”, it is implied, has to be treated to resolve these other difficulties. This neatly avoids any suggestion mental health issues underpin the “Gender Dysphoria”, or desire to find a label/treatment.

The framing of this discussion is entirely reliant on whether you believe in an “innate gender”. If you do believe a child can be born in the wrong body it necessitates treatment. If you believe gender is a social construct then societal sex stereotypes are the problem. These seem to be irreconcilable belief systems. Worth having a look at how Mermaid’s diagnostic criteria works. Would anyone not meet the diagnosis threshold given this criteria?

Dr Carmichael , below, frankly admits that the evidence has yet to catch up with practice. She further acknowledges there is no consensus and there is concern about the long term health impact. The only way this treatment can even approach an ethical justification is if you are confident that:

a) Gender Identity is innate

b) The Tavistock have a reliable system for targeting irreversible treatments only on children who would, in any case, have persisted.

c) You believe data that suggests there is a suicide epidemic in trans-identified youth. {This makes intervention a life saver & justifies pharmaceutical interventions}.

So what has effected this change? Political Interest and Lobbying. Let us not forget the role of the Women & Equalities Committee. Since it morphed, from a Women’s committee, it has been successfully colonised. In its original incarnation it focussed on women’s issues. As predicted, women’s concerns have been pushed to one side with a wider focus on “Equalities”.

The quote below👇 touches on the real change in the landscape surrounding “Transgender” children. Dr Carmichael acknowledges that some children are being socially transitioned at pre-school age. This is also a reference to the growing condemnation of “watchful waiting” , now badged as a practice akin to #GayConversionTherapy. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) she references commits to a ban on therapeutic work to resolve Gender Incongruence. BACP (British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy) & the BPS (British Psychological Society) have signed up to a ban on Gender Identity “conversion”. The Royal College of GPs has also signed this MOU.

The fact most desisters are predicted to be gay seems to have escaped their notice. Counselling, to reconcile to biological sex, is now officially condemned by these, erstwhile, esteemed professional bodies. As of May 2020 there are is a further move to outlaw any therapy to address “Gender Dysphoria” by, once again, conflating it with Gay Conversion Therapy. See here ⇒ Gender Identity Conversion Therapy

There’s a huge amount to unpack here. 👇

Dr Carmichael is not happy the Tavistock are being accused of not being sufficiently affirmative. She does appear to be trying to raise awareness of the changing nature of the child referrals. Her interpretation of the parents, mentioned above. does not accord with my own perspective. Socially transitioning a three year old and then attempting to report a young child for the Hate Crime of misgendering another child! Is this the behaviour of parents who are simply being protective! If I was relaying this story, verbally, my incredulity would be at such a high pitch only dogs would be able to hear me!

In the section below there are a lot of erms as Dr Carmichael hesitates over the admission the treatment compromises fertility . She is anxious about this, but not for the reasons you might expect. She is concerned about young people who defer medicalisation to try to salvage their reproductive health. The reason for this is they may not “pass” ,if they delay long enough to have a chance at parenthood. This is not an uncommon viewpoint. One practitioner in this field praises the children who are kind enough to see themselves as future child adopters.

Sacrificing fertility is quite a significant thing to ask children to consent to and yet her concern is one of “presentation”. Polly is aware this is indicative of that great sin of “binary thinking”. {Its almost as if she knows, on some level, there are only two sexes!} No doubt Polly would consider me a “biological essentialist” but, like many women (and men), I was in my thirties before I desired children. I would not have made a mature decision, to place my fertility at risk, at age 12.

And that last sentence! Actually wondering how the Tavistock can support children to feel comfortable enough to live with their bodies! Klaxon Klaxon Klaxon!! This is what parents would like to know! Shouldn’t the first line of treatment be body-positive? In less than a decade we seem to have normalised a bodily dis-associative disorder and completely over-turned decades of work, especially for the female body.

Another thing that is hard to keep up with is the removal of any reference to mental health issues. The diagnostic criteria for Gender Dysphoria has now officially been re-classified to remove suggestions it is a Mental Health issue. I sense Dr Carmichael really wants to find a way to talk about co-morbidities here. However activists have successfully rebadged Gender Dysphoria as a naturally occurring variation and references to mental health are removed from the official diagnostic manual.

How many of these children/teens placed on an irreversible pathway may have benefited from some good therapeutic exploration of their motivations? Therapeutic Interventions to resolve Gender Dysphoria

This is a good summary of what the impact of this Conversion versus Affirmation model does to practitioners in this field. I diverge on many points with Dr Carmichael but she is right that we are favouring medical solutions to resolve psychological issues. The lack of psychological support has also been raised by Tavistock staff who have now left and are whistleblowing.

To balance the pressure for medical intervention we need a diversity of voices. These should include detransitioners, It should include parents of children struggling with this “condition”. It should include people who understand the concept of an iatrogenic “illness”. It should include people who have expressed concern about what we are doing to young people. We need a countervailing voice to Lobby groups like Mermaids, Stonewall and Gendered Intelligence.

The above is not a bad summary.

We need more empirical data, less opinion.
We need to look at contextual factors. (School teaching on Gender Identity, for one)
I disagree about taking a lead from young people. Detransitioners have taught us that.

We need to urgently take measures to make certain we are not medicalising children who could have lived a life without hormone dependency and surgical interventions.

The problem with this service is that it seems to be driven by people who see this as a social justice cause, They are excited at disruptive thinking, eroding or destroying social norms. I will leave you with this quote from Bernadette Wren, who also works at the Tavistock. This is from the Transgender Equality Inquiry in 2015. I sense that Dr Wren should have been more careful. Sometimes a social revolution doesn’t take the form you, naively, imagine it will:

Primary Sources.

Astro-Turfing

Dissenting Voices from the LGB & I

U.K. Named & Anonymous Backers

Introduction

Legislation by stealth

The role of education & attacks on parental rights

De-medicalising the process or Medicalising it?

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Policing Language

Welcome to Dystopia. 👇

Gender Identity Ideology.

Beware!

Woke Stasi?

Parents

Queering the curriculum. Sexing it up?

Share this:

Like this:

The Law: In Loco Parentis

Transgender Guidance in Schools.

Share this:

Like this:

Affirmation Only.

Memorandum of Understanding/Conversion Therapy

De-Transitioners/Regret

Informed Consent?

Anger, regret, and impact on women.

Adolescence.

Share this:

Like this:

Primary Sources.

Astro-Turfing

Dissenting Voices from the LGB & I

U.K. Named & Anonymous Backers

Introduction

Legislation by stealth

The role of education & attacks on parental rights

De-medicalising the process or Medicalising it?

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Tavistock: 1989-2018

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Talk by Polly Carmichael.

Share this:

Like this: