Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

[Rolfe]

Your midnight check-in on the petition reports 71,452 signatures, so 653 new signatures today. Again events in Westminster seem to have boosted numbers.

The new magic number is 307.

 

[Nick Terry]

Your midnight check-in on the petition reports 71,452 signatures, so 653 new signatures today. Again events in Westminster seem to have boosted numbers.

The new magic number is 307.

To put this in perspective, the petition was at 64,231 on December 31 around 4pm in the afternoon, you calculated the magic number back then as 325/day. So after 17 days of January, just over half the month, it's added only about 7,000 signatures, averaging about 400/day over that time. It now has just over 28,000 to go, and 93 days left on the clock, so three months basically, which does indeed work out at 307/day.

The blocking of the Scottish bill doesn't therefore seem to have boosted numbers, most likely because the legal and constitutional issues are flying over a lot of people's heads, and maybe because the Westminister government's actions might reassure some people who would otherwise sign if they were more concerned or worried that this would pass.

The debate in the Commons produced some interesting results: Labour didn't really show up so only 11 of their MPs voted against the invocation of article 35, the rest didn't vote at all. Starmer et al likely realise that irrespective of the subject matter, the Scottish bill simply can't stand in the light of the devolution act, and thus would stand little chance procedurally in the Supreme Court.

For light relief: https://twitter.com/moleatthedoor/status/1615500881624965123

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not familiar with that meme, but it was funny. Someone needs to do a Downfall parody of this.

I think the fact that it was trickling along at about 400 a day then suddenly jumped to over 600 a day - more than a 50% increase - when the s35 thing hit the fan suggests there has been some effect. But I think that having got over 70K well before the half-way point of the run, and continuing to add signatures, suggests that it will get there. The issue isn't going to die the death over the coming few months.

 

[Nick Terry]

Meanwhile, LSE has joined UCL in ending its partnership with Stonewall. No news as to why - some speculate donors may have leant on them, otherwise it might relate to concerns over academic freedom.

 

[Rolfe]

All this publicity is educating people who had no idea what was going on and who probably wouldn't have believed us if we'd told them.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

 

[Elaedith]

Meanwhile, LSE has joined UCL in ending its partnership with Stonewall. No news as to why - some speculate donors may have leant on them, otherwise it might relate to concerns over academic freedom.

UCL was quite open about this. LSE seems to be less transparent.

UCL used an anonymous ballot of academics (anonymity being essential due to fears of threats and harassment) and the majority voted to leave Stonewall. The EDI committee voted to retain ties with Stonewall but the university management sided with academics.

"...UCL’s senior leadership team has accepted the academic board’s advice about the fundamental need to uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech in an academic context, recognising that a formal institutional commitment to Stonewall may have the effect of inhibiting academic work and discussion within UCL about sex and gender identity"

All I can find about LSE is outrage from student unions and activists.

 

[Nick Terry]

UCL was quite open about this. LSE seems to be less transparent.

UCL used an anonymous ballot of academics (anonymity being essential due to fears of threats and harassment) and the majority voted to leave Stonewall. The EDI committee voted to retain ties with Stonewall but the university management sided with academics.

"...UCL’s senior leadership team has accepted the academic board’s advice about the fundamental need to uphold academic freedom and freedom of speech in an academic context, recognising that a formal institutional commitment to Stonewall may have the effect of inhibiting academic work and discussion within UCL about sex and gender identity"

All I can find about LSE is outrage from student unions and activists.

This is why I said 'no idea as to why'. Indeed, the only real confirmation is the open letters of outrage, so it might be a misunderstanding for all we know.

 

[Rolfe]

I saw a tweet from someone who was a post-grad student at my old university. She said that when she was doing her PhD she suffered a miscarriage while at the university. She was able to get to the nearest Ladies room and access all-female help that way. Now, she says, she'd have to either climb or descend two or three flights of stairs to get to a Ladies room, because so many former Ladies rooms have been designated as gender neutral.

Men really have no idea of the range of things that goes on in female intimate spaces, things we really don't want to have to cope with where males are around. They don't understand the need for an all-female space where the sisterhood will rally round, where we can be sure everyone in there has some clue what is happening. Apparently a non-trivial percentage of miscarriages happen in pub lavatories, the very environment where there is most pressure to go gender-neutral.

All this stress and humiliation so that the feelings of a few straight middle-aged white men won't be hurt. (Except they will be hurt, because there is no appeasing them.)

 

[d4m10n]

Amy Eileen Hamm in the dock

Anyone else following the Amy Hamm tribunal in British Columbia?

Between approximately July 2018 and March 2021, you made discriminatory and derogatory statements regarding transgender people, while identifying yourself as a nurse or nurse educator. These statements were made across various online platforms, including but not limited to, podcasts, videos, published writings and social media.

https://www.bccnm.ca/Public/complaints/Pages/Notice.aspx?NoticeID=790

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/files-204/1674073757_2022_06_28_BCCNM_Hamm_Citation2028129.pdf

Evidently she said some wrongthink out loud and now she stands to lose her career.

Fairly interesting to see cancel accountability culture in action, IMO.

 

[LondonJohn]

Anyone else following the Amy Hamm tribunal in British Columbia?



https://www.bccnm.ca/Public/complaints/Pages/Notice.aspx?NoticeID=790

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/files-204/1674073757_2022_06_28_BCCNM_Hamm_Citation2028129.pdf

Evidently she said some wrongthink out loud and now she stands to lose her career.

Fairly interesting to see cancel accountability culture in action, IMO.

Interesting (and revealing) use by you of the Orwellian term "wrongthink" there.

Tell me: suppose for a moment that this woman had been identifying herself as a nurse or nurse educator and had been making podcasts, videos, social media posts etc stating that homosexuality was a mental health disorder* and that gay people were nothing but hetero people with sexual deviancies? Do you think it would have been fair or unfair to bring disciplinary procedures against her?


* Because (and I realise almost all transgender denialists/mockers in this nasty little thread either choose to ignore this or pretend it's not the case) transgender identity is now - just like homosexuality - recognised in mainstream medicine & medical science as NOT a mental health disorder....

 

[d4m10n]

Tell me: suppose for a moment that this woman had been identifying herself as a nurse or nurse educator and had been making podcasts, videos, social media posts etc stating that homosexuality was a mental health disorder* and that gay people were nothing but hetero people with sexual deviancies?

Suppose for a moment that we address words she actually said or wrote, instead of making up hypotheticals which may or may not be analogous thereto.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[LondonJohn]

Suppose for a moment that we address words she actually said or wrote, instead of making up hypotheticals which may or may not be analogous thereto.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I see. Evasion* duly noted. Unsurprisingly, of course.

As you were!

* Not to mention characteristic hypocrisy - seeing as you are clearly happy to hold the opinion that she's being treated unfairly without "address(ing) words she actually said or wrote". Interesting and illuminating, that.

 

[lionking]

Suppose for a moment that we address words she actually said or wrote, instead of making up hypotheticals which may or may not be analogous thereto.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

It’s the only argument LJ is left with. The fact that it has been comprehensively refuted seems not to concern him.

 

[LondonJohn]

It’s the only argument LJ is left with. The fact that it has been comprehensively refuted seems not to concern him.

LOL. "Refuted by bigots" =/= "refuted"


Maybe I'll try to make it easier for you:

It's now precisely as anti-mainstream-medicine and offensive to say "transwomen are simply men with mental health disorders" as it is to say "homosexuals are simply people with mental health disorders".

I realise you may find it uncomfortable to confront that truth internally, and that you may choose to deal with the truth by flat-out denying it. But there it is. Fortunately society will move on without the views of people like you.

 

[Elaedith]

Suppose for a moment that we address words she actually said or wrote, instead of making up hypotheticals which may or may not be analogous thereto.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

LJ apparently really thinks 'sex is binary and immutable and should not be conflated with or replaced by subjective concepts of gender identity in language, law, science, statistics and policy' is analogous to 'gay people are mentally ill'.

He has displayed various amusing intellectual contortions to protect this belief, which by now appear to be increasingly desperate.

 

[d4m10n]

LJ apparently really thinks 'sex is binary and immutable and should not be conflated with or replaced by subjective concepts of gender identity in language, law, science, statistics and policy' is analogous to 'gay people are mentally ill'.

Surely she must've said something far worse than that.

...seeing as you are clearly happy to hold the opinion that she's being treated unfairly without "address(ing) words she actually said or wrote".

I am happy to discuss (on a discussion board) whether Hamm is being treated fairly or unfairly by the powers that will decide her professional fate. Personally, I didn't see her post anything that might indicate she would treat trans gender patients worse than others, but then I've not read her entire Twitter timeline.

The homosexuality analogy is arguably even more off target than the race analogy, and here is why: One group requires a DSM-based diagnosis in order to access medical treatment (e.g. puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, orchiectomy) and the other group requires only that others let them live their lives in peace.

 

[LondonJohn]

LJ apparently really thinks 'sex is binary and immutable and should not be conflated with or replaced by subjective concepts of gender identity in language, law, science, statistics and policy' is analogous to 'gay people are mentally ill'.

He has displayed various amusing intellectual contortions to protect this belief, which by now appear to be increasingly desperate.

Oh dear.

The analogue is "sexuality is binary and immutable: all people are heterosexual".

You really are very far gone, aren't you? Fortunately you're in no position to influence mainstream medical opinion or political* policy: best leave that to the adults in the room, eh?


* Oh and on the matter of politics, nobody should be in any doubt about what the adults in the UK and Scottish parliaments are currently clashing over. Because it's nothing whatsoever to do with the fundamental validity of transgender identity and the need to grant and protect rights to transgender people: both parliaments agree overwhelmingly with those things, and are busy legislating accordingly. The dispute is over separation of powers and problems over differential legislation in different parts of the UK. It's only bigots and reactionaries (most of whom are cloaking their transgender denialism behind "Reefer Madness" scaremongering over "mutilating da kidz" and women in prison) who believe transmen are women (and vice versa). Enjoy your irrelevance and thankful decline and fall

 

[Elaedith]

Oh dear.

The analogue is "sexuality is binary and immutable: all people are heterosexual".

No, the structural analogy to saying 'male/female people who identify with a gender other than that assigned to them on the basis of their sex are not men/women and might need to socially and medically transition so their sex characteristics match their gender' is 'male/female people who have a sexual orientation other than that assigned to them on the basis of their sex are not men/women and might need to socially and medically transition so their sex characteristics match their sexual orientation'.

Your statements are increasingly incoherent and disconnected to reality.

 

[Rolfe]

This is a cracker of an article.

Nicola Sturgeon and the truth about ‘transphobia’

All we’re doing, say Sturgeon and her acolytes, is expanding trans rights. Surely only a horrible Tory transphobe could oppose that. In truth, the SNP wants to institutionalise in law a borderline religious idea that many people simply do not accept – namely, that we all have something called a ‘gender identity’, a gendered soul, and sometimes this soul is in conflict with our biological casing. And in such cases, the solution is to give the person’s gendered soul, their subjective feeling about what sex they are, full recognition in law. There are people in Scotland who reject this article of faith as surely as others reject the idea that bread becomes the body of Christ during Mass or that Muhammad flew to heaven on a winged horse. Why should they be forced to abide by the eccentric, reason-lite beliefs of their rulers?

It comprehensively shreds Nicola Sturgeon and her government. I'd have thought John would have approved.

 

[Elaedith]

Surely she must've said something far worse than that.

As far as I know she is accused of opposing medical transition for minors.