Trans rights: a perspective

[Nearly Sane]

I'm well past being concerned about being labelled right-wing. I've been harassed and discriminated against at work (confirmed by an official investigation conducted by my civil service ex-employer), pursued through the streets of Manchester by a baying mob while the police did nothing, and surrounded by masked thugs with loud hailers calling me a nazi - again, while the police did nothing. My ex-colleagues were given a training course at work that informed them that me referring to myself as an adult female human was the equivalent to using a racial slur against someone else. Told that stating that sex is a material reality, and in some circumstances important, makes me a bigot.

I'm not interested in labels any more. I don't believe what I'm told by previously trusted sources.

I'd recommend everyone reads The Denton's Document, about how to promote and impose an unpopular, indefensible political agenda. Authoritarians are on the left as well as the right.

If people want to read, and read about the document, link here:

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/2020/07/23/that-dentons-document/

[Christine]

Ill-informed covers it. I agree with you on the rest of it, but if we are to change people's minds we have to engage in ways that aren't so confrontational that they are just forced into defending their position.

A lot of people don't think too deeply, if at all, about the issue, which I fear is the real problem and they will tend to follow the aforementioned "be kind" brigade, in other words the bilge that is pumped out as "guidance/lifestyle" by the likes of the BBC. They are dealing with cost of living, job insecurity, crap schools, malfunctioning NHS, etc. some of them don't have the bandwidth to be bothered with it.

I think more and more people are seeing the reality now, though. 'No debate' (as recommended in The Denton's Document) is over. People might not care much about women in prison, but parents are demanding to see what their children are being taught in school and when they find out, they are horrified, and publicise it. Boys and men competing in women's sports has brought home the reality of male physical advantage. The whole thing is insane, and I'm not using hyperbole.

The costs are huge. Not just the public money being wasted and the time and resources it takes up. Ruined lives. No way back from irreversible harm perpetrated on children and vulnerable adults by people they ought to have been able to trust.

Two YT recommendations: The Lost Boys, a film directed by Jennifer Lahl; and Transbarnen, a Swedish documentary from about 4 or 5 years ago.

Thanks for welcoming me back, I appreciate it. I don't mean to be confrontational  It's hard to remember sometimes that there was a time when I didn't know all this stuff. When my memory wasn't polluted with knowledge of the butchery done to innocent children, mostly for money. Actually, perhaps don't watch the videos. Even though they are by no means graphic, the words are disturbing enough.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm well past being concerned about being labelled right-wing. I've been harassed and discriminated against at work (confirmed by an official investigation conducted by my civil service ex-employer), pursued through the streets of Manchester by a baying mob while the police did nothing, and surrounded by masked thugs with loud hailers calling me a nazi - again, while the police did nothing. My ex-colleagues were given a training course at work that informed them that me referring to myself as an adult female human was the equivalent to using a racial slur against someone else. Told that stating that sex is a material reality, and in some circumstances important, makes me a bigot.

I'm not interested in labels any more. I don't believe what I'm told by previously trusted sources.

I'd recommend everyone reads The Denton's Document, about how to promote and impose an unpopular, indefensible political agenda. Authoritarians are on the left as well as the right.

Presume you will have seen this crowdfunder, Christine, from someone effectively suspended by her employer, and bullied, and harassed, and threatened for speaking at a Let Women Speak event. And still through this time, Starmer equivocation on what a woman is, and didn't speak out about the threats to Rosie Duffield. But, of course, it is us with the extreme views.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/belfast-film-festival-discrimination/

[Nearly Sane]

Nonsense

  And yet the breakthrough of UKIP happened because of Farage, and the breakthrough of UKIP was what brought about the referendum.

[ProfessorDavey]

I was in position of struggling to find somewhere to carry my vote at the start of the election campaign because some parties were too keen to give up women's sex based spaces, and some were too Tory but I'm finding that they are making a real effort to give me more reasons not to vote.

Whether or not you vote is of course completely up to you. However I find it bizarre that you are prepared not to vote on the basis of various parties position on trans rights. Surely there are far, far more significant and important issues at play in this election.

I know you are obsessed with this issue (I've never really understood why), but the reality is that there are a tiny number at both extremes (pro and anti trans) who seem to be obsessed while the vast, vast majority simply doesn't see it as an important issue - as the unprompted 'issues' polling shows where even at the height of the GRA debate in Scotland barely 1% considered it to be an important issue, and it has so little resonance in the UK that it has never even registered on the longstanding monthly IPSOS issues index as an issue that people consider to be important.

[Nearly Sane]

Whether or not you vote is of course completely up to you. However I find it bizarre that you are prepared not to vote on the basis of various parties position on trans rights. Surely there are far, far more significant and important issues at play in this election.

I know you are obsessed with this issue (I've never really understood why), but the reality is that there are a tiny number at both extremes (pro and anti trans) who seem to be obsessed while the vast, vast majority simply doesn't see it as an important issue - as the unprompted 'issues' polling shows where even at the height of the GRA debate in Scotland barely 1% considered it to be an important issue, and it has so little resonance in the UK that it has never even registered on the longstanding monthly IPSOS issues index as an issue that people consider to be important.

I note your pejorative language again. Is Christine 'obsessed'? I don't think.enabling rape, and trauma to women is a thing to be ignored. I don't think touting anti science is trivial. I don't think that death threats to women for defending single sex spaces is trivial. Though you seem to.

I note you just edited out the rest of my post which wasn't about that.

[ProfessorDavey]

I note your pejorative language again. Is Christine ',obseesed'? I don't think.enabling rape, and trauma to.womem is a thing to be ignored. I don't think touting anti science is trivial. I don't think that death threats to women for defending single sex spaces is trivial. Though you seem to.

I note you just edited out the rest of my post which wasn't about that.

Yawn - we all know your views NS as you rant endlessly about them and I do consider your views to be extreme - just the other day you described trans people as being mentally ill. You are just as extreme as those who consider that if you are a man and wake up one morning and consider yourself to be a woman then you are a woman.

But my point was largely about the notion that most people do not consider this to be an issue - and by the way this will include the 500 or so women polled in a typical 1000 person issues index.

Just to give you context - at the very height of the GRA debate in Scotland just 2 women out of 508 people polled (and just three people overall) consider gender reform to be the most important issue and less than 1% considered it an important issue (those polled can effectively name as many issues as they feel important). And in the UK given that the threshold seems to be 2 people responding to be on the list of issues then maybe one, perhaps zero people out of 1000 seems to consider it important. Oh and by the way the polls don't demonstrate whether those who did think it an important issue are pro or anti trans rights.

You might be obsessed NS, but most people simply aren't. And I would suggest that most people consider a middle path to be best, considering both extremes to be equally shrill and unhelpful. I think most people want to see trans people and cis-women (wait for the explosion from NS when I use this term) treated with respect and dignity but also to ensure that all people, including trans people, are safe.

[Nearly Sane]

Yawn - we all know your views NS as you rant endlessly about them and I do consider your views to be extreme - just the other day you described trans people as being mentally ill. You are just as extreme as those who consider that if you are a man and wake up one morning and consider yourself to be a woman then you are a woman.

But my point was largely about the notion that most people do not consider this to be an issue - and by the way this will include the 500 or so women polled in a typical 1000 person issues index.

Just to give you context - at the very height of the GRA debate in Scotland just 2 women out of 508 people polled (and just three people overall) consider gender reform to be the most important issue and less than 1% considered it an important issue (those polled can effectively name as many issues as they feel important). And in the UK given that the threshold seems to be 2 people responding to be on the list of issues then maybe one, perhaps zero people out of 1000 seems to consider it important. Oh and by the way the polls don't demonstrate whether those who did think it an important issue are pro or anti trans rights.

You might be obsessed NS, but most people simply aren't. And I would suggest that most people consider a middle path to be best, considering both extremes to be equally shrill and unhelpful. I think most people want to see trans people a and cis-women (wait for the explosion from NS when I use this term) treated with respect and dignity but also to ensure that all people, including trans people, are safe.

And where have I said that I want anyone treated with respect and dignity? Thinking that someone is mentally ill doesn't mean that I wouldn't and it's rather revealing that you think that it is.


I'm not sure why you are using a ad populum argument about whether something is actually important.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not sure why you are using a ad populum argument about whether something is actually important.

Ad populum arguments are where you claim something is right or true based on majority opinion. That isn't what I am doing at all. Sure there are a small number of people who consider this issue to be important - but whether or not someone considers something important is clearly subjective. Now it is rather easy to argue that if an issue negatively impacts a very small minority in society that only a small minority will consider it important as most people aren't impacted. That's why we have embedded minority rights within society. So there are very, very few trans people and therefore only a tiny number of people can have the 'lived experience' of a trans person.

But you seem to argue that women's rights are being massively eroded. But women aren't a tiny minority in the population. In fact they are a majority. So if women and their rights are being massively impacted by trans rights how come when women are asked in issues polling (unprompted) what important issues are facing them and the country virtually none of them mention the impact of trans rights. So in this context it is significant that, when asked, the people purported being negatively affected don't see this as an issue.

[ProfessorDavey]

And where have I said that I want anyone treated with respect and dignity? Thinking that someone is mentally ill doesn't mean that I wouldn't and it's rather revealing that you think that it is.

Once again you are failing to read my posts - I said that considering trans people to be mentally ill was an illustration of the extremism of your views. I might also argue that is pretty disrespectful to describe trans people as mentally ill (people used to make the same kinds of arguments about gay people), but that wasn't what I said in my post.

[Nearly Sane]

Ad populum arguments are where you claim something is right or true based on majority opinion. That isn't what I am doing at all. Sure there are a small number of people who consider this issue to be important - but whether or not someone considers something important is clearly subjective. Now it is rather easy to argue that if an issue negatively impacts a very small minority in society that only a small minority will consider it important as most people aren't impacted. That's why we have embedded minority rights within society. So there are very, very few trans people and therefore only a tiny number of people can have the 'lived experience' of a trans person.

But you seem to argue that women's rights are being massively eroded. But women aren't a tiny minority in the population. In fact they are a majority. So if women and their rights are being massively impacted by trans rights how come when women are asked in issues polling (unprompted) what important issues are facing them and the country virtually none of them mention the impact of trans rights. So in this context it is significant that, when asked, the people purported being negatively affected don't see this as an issue.

And the women sexually assaulted by Karen White are just unimportant to you because you are using an ad populum to say what should be cared about.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

That it's disastrous I might agree but it doesn't mean that others agree, and doesn't mean that Farage isn't one of the most effective and successful, in their own terms, politicians in the UK in the last 50 years.

I agree that he was successful in the sense that he had a big effect on the outcome he wanted to achieve, but monuments are meant to commemorate people – ie, to show respect for or celebrate their achievements. I suppose there might be enough people still who think that Brexit was a good idea to endorse that idea, but it’d be a tough argument to make given what we all now know.

By the way, did you really describe trans people as mentally ill?       

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Yawn - we all know your views NS as you rant endlessly about them and I do consider your views to be extreme - just the other day you described trans people as being mentally ill. You are just as extreme as those who consider that if you are a man and wake up one morning and consider yourself to be a woman then you are a woman.

But my point was largely about the notion that most people do not consider this to be an issue - and by the way this will include the 500 or so women polled in a typical 1000 person issues index.

Just to give you context - at the very height of the GRA debate in Scotland just 2 women out of 508 people polled (and just three people overall) consider gender reform to be the most important issue and less than 1% considered it an important issue (those polled can effectively name as many issues as they feel important). And in the UK given that the threshold seems to be 2 people responding to be on the list of issues then maybe one, perhaps zero people out of 1000 seems to consider it important. Oh and by the way the polls don't demonstrate whether those who did think it an important issue are pro or anti trans rights.

You might be obsessed NS, but most people simply aren't. And I would suggest that most people consider a middle path to be best, considering both extremes to be equally shrill and unhelpful. I think most people want to see trans people and cis-women (wait for the explosion from NS when I use this term) treated with respect and dignity but also to ensure that all people, including trans people, are safe.

I find it really disturbing PD that you think being described as "mentally ill" is an insult. It's people like you that make it hard for people with mental illness to get help because they fear the judgemental attitude that you have just displayed.

I think the attempts by institutions and employers to police our thoughts, our speech and curtail freedom of expression is a really big issue. People were being threatened with loss of livelihood and/ or criminal records or non-crime hate incidents for disagreeing with unproven beliefs about gender. More importantly children were being physically mutilated or having their fertility destroyed by gender clinics based on shockingly limited evidence - it really, really matters that the model of care at the Tavistock clinic was leaving young people “at considerable risk” of poor mental health and distress based on nothing more than lobbying by Stonewall, ideology and dogma. Physical mutilation of children that causes ongoing physical and mental health problems into adulthood (even if it is happening to a small minority of children) really, really matters. The explosion in young girls especially wanting these procedures really, really matters.

We have Equalities legislation passed by Parliament that protects women in single-sex spaces in sport and prisons and hospitals because biology matters, getting raped, sexually assaulted or getting injured in sport by a man really, really matters because women are physically at a disadvantage to men. Having your dignity violated really, really matters to women. Yet trans activists including Stonewall were trying to circumvent Parliament and democracy and get State institutions and employers to go along with their dogma by misrepresenting the law and by trying to set mobs on people who disagreed with their beliefs and dogma.

That you think people who are fighting to change these physical outcomes for girls are "obsessed" is nothing more than misogyny on your part.

Sure trans women can really, really believe they are women if they want, but it is not ok for the State to try to force us to say we believe what they believe.

You sound like Vlad claiming atheists are obsessed because they are trying to roll-back the State's privileging of religious beliefs. 

I don't think you would think it was a non-issue if you could be convicted of a hate crime or even a non-crime hate incident or you lost your job for saying you think Allah is a figment of a Muslim's imagination. I think you would get pretty "extreme" about a political party trying to force you to say you agree that Jews are God's chosen people or that Jesus really did die for your sins.

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

I agree that he was successful in the sense that he had a big effect on the outcome he wanted to achieve, but monuments are meant to commemorate people – ie, to show respect for or celebrate their achievements. I suppose there might be enough people still who think that Brexit was a good idea to endorse that idea, but it’d be a tough argument to make given what we all now know.

By the way, did you really describe trans people as mentally ill?     

I said that if someone goes through full surgery and takes massive amounts of hormones to mimic the other sex then I regard that person as mentally ill and in need of full support in being treated, and that in the case of a man who does it, I do not regard them as suitable for being in a women's prison.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Out of interest - if someone believes they are white when their skin is brown and uses bleach to lighten their skin and scrubs their skin daily to the point of scarring it to try to remove the brown pigment - would we think that indicated some kind of mental illness?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

I said that if someone goes through full surgery and takes massive amounts of hormones to mimic the other sex then I regard that person as mentally ill and in need of full support in being treated, and that in the case of a man who does it, I do not regard them as suitable for being in a women's prison.

Labelling someone “mentally ill” is a big statement (and one you’ve rightly cautioned people here against doing in the past by the way). Diagnosing mental illness is a clinical determination that, with respect, I suspect you as a lay person in this field are no more qualified to make than I am.

How did you bridge the gap from “behaving in a way I find unfathomable and alien” to a clinical diagnosis of mental illness? 

[bluehillside Retd.]

VG,

Out of interest - if someone believes they are white when their skin is brown and uses bleach to lighten their skin and scrubs their skin daily to the point of scarring it to try to remove the brown pigment - would we think that indicated some kind of mental illness?

We might well think it, but neither of us would be qualified to diagnose it. 

[Nearly Sane]

NS,
 

Labelling someone “mentally ill” is a big statement (and one you’ve rightly cautioned people here against doing in the past by the way). Diagnosing mental illness is a clinical determination that, with respect, I suspect you as a lay person in this field are no more qualified to make than I am.

How did you bridge the gap from “behaving in a way I find unfathomable and alien” to a clinical diagnosis of mental illness?

I didn't give a clinical diagnosis of mental.illness. I expressed my opinion that it is mental illness if someone were to do that.

Do you think that a man who has gone through extreme surgery and is taking massive amounts of hormones is a suitable person to be put in a women's prison as a women?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

I didn't give a clinical diagnosis of mental.illness. I expressed my opinion that it is mental illness if someone were to do that.

But your opinion about that would be entirely unqualified (literally so in clinical terms) so what value would it have?

Do you think that a man who has gone through extreme surgery and is taking massive amounts of hormones is a suitable person to be put in a women's prison as a women?

No, but nor would I jump to an unqualified opinion about metal illness. Consider Gabriella’s scenario for example, but in reverse:

“Out of interest - if someone believes they are black when their skin is white and uses harmful dyes to darken their skin and applies them to  their skin daily to the point of scarring it to try to remove the white pigment - would we think that indicated some kind of mental illness?”

A lay person may well think so. Someone more qualified though would want to know a lot more first – for example about context. What if for example that person was an albino living in the the African Great Lakes region where:

“…people with albinism have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinos dug up and desecrated. At the same time, people with albinism have also been ostracised and even killed for exactly the opposite reason, because they are presumed to be cursed and bring bad luck. The persecutions of people with albinism take place mostly in Sub-Saharan African communities, especially among East Africans.[3]: 8”?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_people_with_albinism#:~:text=Tanzania%20is%20thought%20to%20have,properties%20of%20albinos'%20body%20parts.

Armed with that knowledge, I suspect I’d find their behaviour intensely sane instead.   

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

But your opinion about that would be entirely unqualified (literally so in clinical terms) so what value would it have?

No, but nor would I jump to an unqualified opinion about metal illness. Consider Gabriella’s scenario for example, but in reverse:

“Out of interest - if someone believes they are black when their skin is white and uses harmful dyes to darken their skin and applies them to  their skin daily to the point of scarring it to try to remove the white pigment - would we think that indicated some kind of mental illness?”

A lay person may well think so. Someone more qualified though would want to know a lot more first – for example about context. What if for example that person was an albino living in the the African Great Lakes region where:

“…people with albinism have been persecuted, killed and dismembered, and graves of albinos dug up and desecrated. At the same time, people with albinism have also been ostracised and even killed for exactly the opposite reason, because they are presumed to be cursed and bring bad luck. The persecutions of people with albinism take place mostly in Sub-Saharan African communities, especially among East Africans.[3]: 8”?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_people_with_albinism#:~:text=Tanzania%20is%20thought%20to%20have,properties%20of%20albinos'%20body%20parts.

Armed with that knowledge, I suspect I’d find their behaviour intensely sane instead.

  Again, I'm not making a clinical diagnosis. I don't think male criminals should be put in women's prisons at all but ones who have gone through extreme surgery and take massive hormones to mimic women fmdi not to me have any more right to be kept in women's prisons and I regard that behaviour as a layperson to be behaviour thar is not indicative of sanity in a day to day use of the term. Further for thinking thar and expressing it, my view is according to Prof D extreme. Would you agree with him?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

  Again, I'm not making a clinical diagnosis.

What I asked you though was what value you think your unqualified opinion about mental illness has. And if the answer is “none”, why bother expressing it?

You’re also still making a big jump here from “I find X’s behaviour unfathomable” to “in my opinion person is therefore mentally ill”.

I don't think male criminals should be put in women's prisons at all but ones who have gone through extreme surgery and take massive hormones to mimic women fmdi not to me have any more right to be kept in women's prisons and I regard that behaviour as a layperson to be behaviour thar is not indicative of sanity in a day to day use of the term. Further for thinking thar and expressing it, my view is according to Prof D extreme. Would you agree with him?

“Extreme” is an unqualified term. Also “not indicative of sanity” is a considerable dilution of “X is mentally ill”. Personally I’d find that person’s behaviour impossible to understand, but I wouldn’t feel qualified to pronounce on his/her sanity.

As to the scenario, no I wouldn’t think the trans person’s right to be in a female prison outweighs the rights of the other prisoners not to be put at unreasonable risk. On a case-by-case basis though I’d want a professional evaluation of whether or not the person actually was likely to be any more a risk than any other prisoner.     

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

What I asked you though was what value you think your unqualified opinion about mental illness has. And if the answer is “none”, why bother expressing it?

You’re also still making a big jump here from “I find X’s behaviour unfathomable” to “in my opinion person is therefore mentally ill”.

“Extreme” is an unqualified term. Also “not indicative of sanity” is a considerable dilution of “X is mentally ill”. Personally I’d find that person’s behaviour impossible to understand, but I wouldn’t feel qualified to pronounce on his/her sanity.

As to the scenario, no I wouldn’t think the trans person’s right to be in a female prison outweighs the rights of the other prisoners not to be put at unreasonable risk. On a case-by-case basis though I’d want a professional evaluation of whether or not the person actually was likely to be any more a risk than any other prisoner.     

And what would you say to the women sexually assaulted by Karen White when he was deemed safe? Or to women in prison traumatised by the very idea of a man being imprisoned with them? That they shouldn't mind because someone you deem an expert said it was OK?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

NS,

What I asked you though was what value you think your unqualified opinion about mental illness has. And if the answer is “none”, why bother expressing it?

You’re also still making a big jump here from “I find X’s behaviour unfathomable” to “in my opinion person is therefore mentally ill”.

“Extreme” is an unqualified term. Also “not indicative of sanity” is a considerable dilution of “X is mentally ill”. Personally I’d find that person’s behaviour impossible to understand, but I wouldn’t feel qualified to pronounce on his/her sanity.

As to the scenario, no I wouldn’t think the trans person’s right to be in a female prison outweighs the rights of the other prisoners not to be put at unreasonable risk. On a case-by-case basis though I’d want a professional evaluation of whether or not the person actually was likely to be any more a risk than any other prisoner.     

And do you want a professional evaluation on a case by case basis of whether a biological man in a woman's prison was actually likely to be any more risk than any other prisoner? If not, why not? Do you think all men are rapists? If you don't think all men are rapists what is the rational for not letting men, even those who don't identify as women, be housed in women's prisons?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

No, but nor would I jump to an unqualified opinion about metal illness. Consider Gabriella’s scenario for example, but in reverse:

“Out of interest - if someone believes they are black when their skin is white and uses harmful dyes to darken their skin and applies them to  their skin daily to the point of scarring it to try to remove the white pigment - would we think that indicated some kind of mental illness?”

Just on that point - what do you think about the law restricting access to sunbeds for tanning to over 18s due to their link to cancer? https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/get-involved/our-campaigning-successes/sunbeds

Do you think it is ok that the NHS, the Tavistock clinic in particular and lobby groups were allowed to be more cavalier about children's safety when allowing them access to hormones such as puberty blockers than society is about allowing children access to sunbeds?

Especially given the sudden huge percentage jump in teenage girls identifying as trans boys and wanting puberty blockers? And what a coincidence - it was happening in a time when teenage boys have easy access and are showing worrying levels of addiction to explicit pornography that dehumanises girls to nothing more than sexting images and mindless orifices and receptacles for the boys' sexual gratification - do you think the 2 could be linked somehow?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

And what would you say to the women sexually assaulted by Karen White when he was deemed safe?

I would say that the risk evaluation had failed, just as it would have failed if a non-trans woman had attacked another female prisoner. You seem to be carving out transitioned women as a special risk category here, whereas I’d have thought all incoming prisoners should be assessed for their potential risk to the inmates. A violent non-trans woman is as capable of knifing someone as White was as capable of her/his assault – why wouldn’t you just risk assess all incoming prisoners, albeit fully aware that the process isn’t perfect no matter what their status?

Or to women in prison traumatised by the very idea of a man being imprisoned with them?

I would want to address whether their concern was just a prejudice, or instead grounded in evidence that transitioned women are statistically more of a threat than any other type of prisoner.   

That they shouldn't mind because someone you deem an expert said it was OK?

 

No more than if, say, an expert had said that a non-trans woman with a history of knife crime was ok.

Some people are more dangerous that other people – trans and non-trans alike. I don’t see why you think trans women should be treated as a different category of risk for this purpose. Is there any evidence for that?   

None of this by the way has anything to do with your unqualified opinions about labelling people as mentally ill.