Transwomen are not Women - Part 14

[Elaedith]

UKCP's statement seems more and more odd the more I read it.

Firstly they say they would never have signed the MoU if they thought it related to children and minors.
They say they were told (by who?) in 2019 that it did relate to all ages, but they still wait until now to withdraw from it.
They imply they just discovered unresolved concerns amongst clinicians after an 'investigation', but they have been trying to silence dissenters since the MoU was signed.
They say there was meant to be a review in 2021 that never happened, and new evidence of safety concerns in November last year, but they apparently only just realised that there is no such thing as having a dialogue with gender activists.

I'm wondering if the timing of this decision is related to to the final Cass review coming out tomorrow. The review is probably going to reiterate in stronger terms that social transitioning children before puberty is potentially harmful.

 

[Lplus]

UKCP's statement seems more and more odd the more I read it.

Firstly they say they would never have signed the MoU if they thought it related to children and minors.
They say they were told (by who?) in 2019 that it did relate to all ages, but they still wait until now to withdraw from it.
They imply they just discovered unresolved concerns amongst clinicians after an 'investigation', but they have been trying to silence dissenters since the MoU was signed.
They say there was meant to be a review in 2021 that never happened, and new evidence of safety concerns in November last year, but they apparently only just realised that there is no such thing as having a dialogue with gender activists.

I'm wondering if the timing of this decision is related to to the final Cass review coming out tomorrow. The review is probably going to reiterate in stronger terms that social transitioning children before puberty is potentially harmful.

Perhaps they've decided that perhaps they backed the wrong horse after all and are now trying to change metaphors mid stream

 

[Ziggurat]

It isn't remotely complicated and it comes down to just a few key claims:

1. All human beings have a gender identity—the sex or gender the individual knows themself to be.
   
2. A person’s gender identity is a fundamental component of their identity that is durable and deeply rooted.
   
3. Gender identity cannot be changed by social or medical intervention.
   
4. Someone’s sex or gender is properly understood to be the same as their gender identity.
   

These claims may be true or false but they are fairly straightforward and uncomplicated from where I'm sitting.

Nothing like parsing, say, Judith Butler.

I disagree. I think parsing this summary is exactly like parsing Judith Butler, because you need to appeal to Judith Butler (or similar) to define what "gender" even means in this context, and none of those definitions are in the least bit straightforward. Her ideas of gender are very much wrapped up in this whole thing. You've hidden all the problems within the word "gender", and then claimed that there are no problems because you can't see any outside of the word "gender".

 

[theprestige]

No, that's knowing that I 'm a man, just from looking at myself in the mirror. Not an "innate fundamental part of my identity " if I were to wake up one day magically in a woman's body it wouldn't cause any special discomfort. (I would prefer that to be in an unfit or old man's body for example). I would then (after looking at the mirror) know that I was a woman. Nothing about "identity" in all of this. Just observing reality.

It might cause some discomfort when you accidentally pee down your leg because you haven't yet realized that you're built a bit different



Pretty well said.

I figure it's not an identity any more than height is an identity. I don't have some innage fundamental part of my psyche that's related to my height. I don't "feel" like I'm in alignment with being 5'2". What I do have is a measuring tape, and the observation that I can't reach the cereal boxes on the top shelf of the grocery store.

Here's the fun part, at least for me. My mental image of myself - what my brain has constructed for how it thinks I fit into the world - is about 6 inches taller than I actually am. I'm frequently surprised that I can't reach things. But I don't think I feel any dysphoria about it, largely because I am aware that our brains lie to us and tell us wrong things on a regular basis.

This is a bit of an aside, but to me this seems to be kind of at the heart of the whole thing. Brains aren't reliable. They get things wrong all the time. We forget things, we misremember things, we insert things that never happened over what actually happened. We incorrectly perceive the world around us. We believe things that turn out to be false. We have ample evidence that our brains are unreliable witnesses, and often suck at perception.

If we accept that our brains can be wrong, then it seems pretty easy to accept that our bodies are simply what they are, and that there's no right or wrong about them. Our bodies can be independently verified by other people, and those other people are going to be in agreement about it.

Neither I nor anybody else in the world is made better by other people playing along with my brain's incorrect construct of me being 5'8" tall. On the other hand, I'm better off acknowledging that my self-perception is flawed, and adapting to the fact that my brain is a liar about my height.

I think we're talking past each other. I think maybe you are both so eager to repudiate a certain ideology of gender as a social construct, that you're misunderstanding my position to be a tacit endorsement of that ideology. I assure you, it is not. But it's also not something I want to argue about. I'll keep what you've both said in mind, and think about whether I can frame my ideas some other, better way.

 

[Paul2]

It isn't remotely complicated and it comes down to just a few key claims:

1. All human beings have a gender identity—the sex or gender the individual knows themself to be.
   
2. A person’s gender identity is a fundamental component of their identity that is durable and deeply rooted.
   
3. Gender identity cannot be changed by social or medical intervention.
   
4. Someone’s sex or gender is properly understood to be the same as their gender identity.
   

These claims may be true or false but they are fairly straightforward and uncomplicated from where I'm sitting.

Nothing like parsing, say, Judith Butler.

But it does need some parsing. Particularly, how are you defining "sex" and "gender" such that one can tell whether the "or" in "sex or gender" means that sex and gender are synonyms instead of meaning something different than the other but either one is sufficient?

 

[JoeMorgue]

The whole thing is gibberish right out the gate.

1. "All human beings have a gender identity" is just "the sex I wish I was" with theatricts and 2-4 just lead on from that.

"Identity" is not a magic word that turns "What I want to be" into "What I am."

 

[d4m10n]

I think parsing this summary is exactly like parsing Judith Butler, because you need to appeal to Judith Butler (or similar) to define what "gender" even means in this context, and none of those definitions are in the least bit straightforward.

Which of the four claims strikes you as confusing or ambiguous?

Her ideas of gender are very much wrapped up in this whole thing.

I don't disagree, but the ACLU is phrasing things much more simply and straightforwardly.

You've hidden all the problems within the word "gender", and then claimed that there are no problems because you can't see any outside of the word "gender".

To be clear, I haven't hidden anything, I've only passed on what the foremost American civil rights activists have claimed in their own words.

 

[d4m10n]

But it does need some parsing. Particularly, how are you defining "sex" and "gender" such that one can tell whether the "or" in "sex or gender" means that sex and gender are synonyms instead of meaning something different than the other but either one is sufficient?

Again, it's not me, it's the ACLU.

AFAICT they don't really care what those terms are taken to mean since they are both deprecated and superseded by identity.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I don't think Sphensic was having a swipe at you... I think they were having a swipe at... err, someone else?

I didn't think it was a swipe at me specifically... but on reading your post, I believe I might have caught on to the implication that I previously missed...

 

[Emily's Cat]

https://www.reuters.com/sports/naia-bans-transgender-athletes-us-collegiate-sports-2024-04-08/

The National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics on Monday banned transgender women from competing in women's sports, taking a more hardline stance than other athletic bodies that allow trans athletes to compete based on testosterone levels.
The NAIA, representing mostly small colleges, is less influential than the larger National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) but its decision carries some political weight in the wider U.S. debate about transgender rights.
"Only NAIA student-athletes whose biological sex is female may participate in NAIA-sponsored female sports," the association said in its policy.​

The vote was 20-0

Clear cut and decisive!

 

[Emily's Cat]

UKCP's statement seems more and more odd the more I read it.

Firstly they say they would never have signed the MoU if they thought it related to children and minors.
They say they were told (by who?) in 2019 that it did relate to all ages, but they still wait until now to withdraw from it.
They imply they just discovered unresolved concerns amongst clinicians after an 'investigation', but they have been trying to silence dissenters since the MoU was signed.
They say there was meant to be a review in 2021 that never happened, and new evidence of safety concerns in November last year, but they apparently only just realised that there is no such thing as having a dialogue with gender activists.

I'm wondering if the timing of this decision is related to to the final Cass review coming out tomorrow. The review is probably going to reiterate in stronger terms that social transitioning children before puberty is potentially harmful.

It sounds like a lot of CYA kind of stuff. But still, it's a move in a rational direction - even if they had to be pulled there kicking and screaming.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think we're talking past each other. I think maybe you are both so eager to repudiate a certain ideology of gender as a social construct, that you're misunderstanding my position to be a tacit endorsement of that ideology. I assure you, it is not. But it's also not something I want to argue about. I'll keep what you've both said in mind, and think about whether I can frame my ideas some other, better way.

I'm fairly confident that we're talking past each other. At this point, I feel that I have a good understanding of your position.

I also confess that it's the use of the term "identity" that is causing me problems. So perhaps a different framing will get me past that speed-bump

 

[Emily's Cat]

The whole thing is gibberish right out the gate.

1. "All human beings have a gender identity" is just "the sex I wish I was" with theatricts and 2-4 just lead on from that.

"Identity" is not a magic word that turns "What I want to be" into "What I am."

Sometimes you cut straight to the heart of it so well, that I'm left wondering why I couldn't have just said that.

 

[Pixel42]

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-gender-identity-let-down-by-nhs-report-finds

Thousands of vulnerable children questioning their gender identity have been let down by the NHS providing unproven treatments and by the “toxicity” of the trans debate, a landmark report has found.

The UK’s only NHS gender identity development service used puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, which masculinise or feminise people’s appearances, despite “remarkably weak evidence” that they improve the wellbeing of young people and concern they may harm health, Dr Hilary Cass said.

Cass, a leading consultant paediatrician, stressed that her findings were not intended to undermine the validity of trans identities or challenge people’s right to transition, but rather to improve the care of the fast-growing number of children and young people with gender-related distress.

But she said this care was made even more difficult to provide by the polarised public debate, and the way in which opposing sides had “pointed to research to justify a position, regardless of the quality of the studies”.

“There are few other areas of healthcare where professionals are so afraid to openly discuss their views, where people are vilified on social media, and where name-calling echoes the worst bullying behaviour. This must stop.”

The BBC's piece on the report:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68770641

It's currently the top story on both sites.

 

[Aber]

Final Report

https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/

 

[lionking]

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-gender-identity-let-down-by-nhs-report-finds



The BBC's piece on the report:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68770641

It's currently the top story on both sites.

The tide is getting stronger….

 

[Samson]

There is a media blackout in New Zealand so far. No country has gone harder down the path of social and medical transition, with the complete backing of parliament. It will be interesting to watch.

 

[Elaedith]

One of the most shocking aspects of the Cass review was that, following the interim review, there was meant to be a long-term study following up those who had been through gender clinics to assess long-term outcomes. However, this study has had to be stopped because gender clinicians at GIDs and adult gender clinics refused to cooperate. This is detailed on page 6 of Appendix 4, under 'stopping the study'. There is a list of reasons given by clinics and the researchers responses to them.

Hence recommendation 5 on page 34 "NHS England, working with DHSC should direct the gender clinics to participate in the data linkage study within the lifetime of the current statutory instrument. NHS England’s Research Oversight Board should take responsibility for interpreting the findings of the research."

This is research to get data that should have been systematically collected from the outset.

 

[Elaedith]

There's a good interview with Hilary Cass in the Guardian today.

Children are being used as a football’: Hilary Cass on her review of gender identity services

It mentions the problems caused by clinicians being scared of being called transphobic or being accused of conversion therapy.

It also mentions the attempts by gender clinics to thwart research. '“I do think it was coordinated. It seemed to me to be ideologically driven,” she said. “There was no substantive reason for it. So I can only really conclude that it was because they didn’t feel that it was the right thing to do to try and nail down this data.”'

 

[Ziggurat]

Which of the four claims strikes you as confusing or ambiguous?

The word "gender" is ambiguous.

To be clear, I haven't hidden anything, I've only passed on what the foremost American civil rights activists have claimed in their own words.

OK, they hid all the problems in the word "gender".