A pushback against trans activism in Britain

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#1
An interesting piece on the continued rumbling on of this particular bit of the culture wars and the activism from certain quarters.
I do wonder how long it'll take for some of tsr's resident crack pots to come out insinuating that the Economist is a bastion of far right bigots again though :rolleyes:


for some years now, schools, the nhs and the police have been accommodating the needs and concerns of transgender people. gids, Britain’s only gender identity clinic for children, based at the Tavistock nhs trust, has been making it easier for trans teenagers to transition medically. But now some critics of the moves are pushing back, claiming that gids is giving children puberty blockers too liberally, and that attempts by other bodies such as the police to combat transphobia are leading to an attack on free speech.Three groups of people have recently applied for judicial reviews, the legal means to challenge public bodies. On January 22nd, a 23-year-old woman, Keira Bell (pictured), joined one of these lawsuits. She charges that gids is performing “experimental” treatment on children by giving puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to more than 1,000 children and teenagers, including herself, some as young as 11. She had a double mastectomy, and subsequently detransitioned.The number of referrals to gids has risen more than 30-fold in the past decade, reaching 2,590 in 2018-19. Yet there are no long-term studies that show the impact of puberty blockers, and there is concern that many kids with mental health issues or on the autism spectrum are pushed towards using them. Critics point out that they are the same drugs used to chemically castrate sex offenders. The head of gids, Paul Jenkins, said last year that puberty blockers are “reversible” but an nhs review has challenged his wording. And Carl Heneghan, the professor of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University, said last year, “Given the paucity of evidence, the off-label use of drugs…in gender dysphoria treatment largely means an unregulated live experiment on children.”Supporters of Ms Bell say transgender activist groups such as Mermaids are encouraging liberal prescription of puberty blockers. “Mermaids are not medical professionals. They are a lobby group pushing for earlier medical intervention to prevent the natural development of children’s bodies,” says Stephanie Davies-Arai of Transgender Trend, an activists’ group. Mermaids denies exerting any pressure on clinics. “We have seen great distress caused to some children with the onset of puberty, and in some cases hormone blockers can go a considerable way to alleviating that distress,” said a spokesman.An earlier judicial review was brought by Harry Miller, a 54-year-old small business owner and former policeman. Last year he retweeted a joke about trans women; shortly afterwards, he says, a police officer called him and said, “We need to check your thinking.” Mr Miller says he told the officer that “‘1984’ is a dystopian novel not a how-to manual.”Mr Miller’s actions were logged as a “non-crime hate incident”, and thus might show up on a police background check carried out by a prospective employer. Police guidelines say that such incidents must be recorded when a complaint is made “irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element”, and there is no chance of appeal.The review is challenging the guidelines on the grounds that they do not adhere to the Equality Act of 2010, which bans discrimination on the basis of nine “protected characteristics”. The guidelines only recognise five: disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and, crucially, “transgender”. Mr Miller points out that “sex” has been omitted and that although “gender reassignment” is a protected characteristic, “transgender” is not. “So if you are a woman and I call you a *****, you are not protected,” he says. “But if you are a man who identifies as a woman and I call you a *****, then you are protected. It is madness.”Mr Miller believes that advocacy groups, especially Stonewall, have undue influence over public bodies. “These organisations are lobby groups,” he says, “Yet their advice is being taken as impartial.” Stonewall would not answer specific questions but said that it “will continue to work with schools, employers, communities and policymakers until no one has to face this abuse in their everyday life.” The judge’s ruling is expected within weeks.The third application for judicial review is being brought by two parents and a teacher in Oxfordshire, who say the guidance being used for primary schools is “unlawful and damaging to children”. One of the parents, Victoria Edwards, says the guidelines used in her local school, the Oxfordshire Trans Inclusion Toolkit, written in association with Allsorts and Gendered Intelligence, two other transgender lobby groups, “places the rights of trans identified children above the rights of all other children and staff”. It advises schools to allow boys who identify as girls to use girls’ changing rooms, toilets and dorm rooms on residential trips. A spokesperson for Oxfordshire County Council said “We utterly refute the suggestion that we are failing to safeguard children.”The impetus for these legal challenges comes from several directions. Some feminists worry that the rise of trans rights poses a threat to safe spaces for women; the judicial reviews suggest sizeable parts of the country may agree. A Populus poll in 2018 asked if a person born male, identifying as a woman but still possessing male genitalia should be free to use a female changing room where women are undressing; 59% said no and 14% said yes. The experiences and scars of detransitioners like Ms Bell may reinforce doubts about the direction of travel.

https://www.economist.com/britain/20...ism-in-britain
0
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
Helen Joyce is a know trans antagonist

Helen Joyce is clinically , Scientifically and legally illiterate

Helene joyce has a platofrm via the Economist , funded by its (far) right wing owners
2
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
Helen Joyce is a know trans antagonist

Helen Joyce is clinically , Scientifically and legally illiterate

Helene joyce has a platofrm via the Economist , funded by its (far) right wing owners
Can you support your claim that it is funded by the far right?
1
Johnny Tightlips
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
Helen Joyce is a know trans antagonist

Helen Joyce is clinically , Scientifically and legally illiterate

Helene joyce has a platofrm via the Economist , funded by its (far) right wing owners
I think you represent the problem. There is very little debate around these issues; it's either the trans way or the highway. Anyone opposed to pro-trans legislation is immediately labelled a fascist/bigot/far-right etc.
Debate and compromise is key, so everybody is (reasonably) happy
5
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by DiddyDec)
Can you support your claim that it is funded by the far right?
You can call the economist many things but saying it is but a mouth piece for neo-nazis is ummm rather amusing it must be said. Bless that user :lol:
0
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by Napp)
You can call the economist many things but saying it is but a mouth piece for neo-nazis is ummm rather amusing it must be said. Bless that user :lol:
Neo -Nazis are not the only facet of the far right ... the US far right includes 'religious' types who have been pumping money into groups such as Hands across the Asile and the fake medicla Organisations such as ACPeds

nevermind the fact trans antagonists have been seen wit hte likes of Stephen Yaxley lennon
0
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
Neo -Nazis are not the only facet of the far right ... the US far right includes 'religious' types who have been pumping money into groups such as Hands across the Asile and the fake medicla Organisations such as ACPeds

nevermind the fact trans antagonists have been seen wit hte likes of Stephen Yaxley lennon
So which ones are funding The Economist?
0
J Papi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Napp)
I do wonder how long it'll take for some of tsr's resident crack pots to come out insinuating that the Economist is a bastion of far right bigots again though
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
Helene joyce has a platofrm via the Economist , funded by its (far) right wing owners
this is comedy :rofl:
0
Stiff Little Fingers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
As always, everything in that article is false - puberty blockers aren't untested, there is decades of long term impact assessments (lupron has been used since the 80s as a puberty blocker) and the line about autism is just pure ableism, entirely dependent on the infantialisation of neurodivergent people. Of course, it's unsurprising, the press in this country is crap at accurately covering the topic (put simply there are cranks, like the author in the OP, who want children to suffer and those that survive to be miserable adults because they hate what they don't understand and that's treated as a position that's worth discussing, as if people's lives were up for debate) - hell, discussing puberty blockers here and they quote not one medical professional, but they've got room for a quote from a sculptor that runs a hate group: impartial ****ing journalism my arse.
5
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
As always, everything in that article is false - puberty blockers aren't untested, there is decades of long term impact assessments (lupron has been used since the 80s as a puberty blocker) and the line about autism is just pure ableism, entirely dependent on the infantialisation of neurodivergent people. Of course, it's unsurprising, the press in this country is crap at accurately covering the topic (put simply there are cranks, like the author in the OP, who want children to suffer and those that survive to be miserable adults because they hate what they don't understand and that's treated as a position that's worth discussing, as if people's lives were up for debate) - hell, discussing puberty blockers here and they quote not one medical professional, but they've got room for a quote from a sculptor that runs a hate group: impartial ****ing journalism my arse.
Pray tell what makes your opinion better than actual medical evidence? :lol:
0
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
Neo -Nazis are not the only facet of the far right ... the US far right includes 'religious' types who have been pumping money into groups such as Hands across the Asile and the fake medicla Organisations such as ACPeds

nevermind the fact trans antagonists have been seen wit hte likes of Stephen Yaxley lennon
Did you seriously just lump The Economist and its staff in with that crack pot? You really are just embarrassing yourself further.
But, again, pray tell what makes your OPINION more valid than anyone elses? I mean if you're going to call anyone who doesnt agree with your particular version of what constitutes gospel truth a homophobic, transphobic fascist then you cant go whining when they turn around and call your position offensive and perverse can you?
Last edited by Napp; 1 month ago
0
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by Napp)
Did you seriously just lump The Economist and its staff in with that crack pot? You really are just embarrassing yourself further.
But, again, pray tell what makes your OPINION more valid than anyone elses? I mean if you're going to call anyone who doesnt agree with your particular version of what constitutes gospel truth a homophobic, transphobic fascist then you cant go whining when they turn around and call your position offensive and perverse can you?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...sgender-tweets


the simple fact remains that my 'opinion' as you call it is a factual statement of the scientific and clinicla evidence and that transphobic rehtoric is nproscribed and in no way protected by the law of the land in the UK
0
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by Napp)
Pray tell what makes your opinion better than actual medical evidence? :lol:
the actual medical evidnece as seen in the WPATH guidleines and theoperational guidelines of every Paediatric genderservice in the developed world is that puberty delaying treatment is safe and effective , the drugs involved have been used for 40 years in CPPand 30 years in trans YP ...
0
J Papi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
in no way protected by the law of the land in the UK
1. This particular decision was a first-instance decision made in the context of an employment dispute and concerns the test for a 'philosophical belief' under s.10(2) of the Equality Act. One of the five criteria for something to be deemed worthy of respect as a 'philosophical belief' is that it must be 'worthy of respect in a democratic society', that it is not 'incompatible with human dignity', and that it does not 'conflict' with the fundamental rights of another (Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010]). The point is we're dealing with a ridiculously open-textured requirement that has a) been developed through caselaw (Grainger was only an EAT decision - it's worth keeping that in mind), which can, as a result, be b) massaged either way by a judge. In layman's terms, there's a massive 'grey area' on what qualifies for protection and what doesn't.

2. It's also clear from the judgment that the case turned on the misgendering, not on the woman's wider comments regarding the GRA. This is made clear in the article you quoted (you didn't even need to delve into the judgment to find this!), where the lawyer for the employer was quoted as saying: "A number of commentators have viewed this case as being about the claimant’s freedom of speech. Employment Judge Tayler acknowledged that there is nothing to stop the claimant campaigning against the proposed revisions to the Gender Recognition Act or, expressing her opinion that there should be some spaces that are restricted to women assigned female at birth. However, she can do so without insisting on calling transwomen men."

I guess that it comes down to what you'd consider as 'transphobic rhetoric'. Does 'rhetoric', in your mind, only include deliberate misgendering, abuse, incitement of violence, etc., or does it also include ignorant and poorly researched statements that happen to go against the pro-trans viewpoint?

3. There are several ways in which 'the law' (not just the Equality Act) can interact with a transphobic statement. In some contexts, 'transphobic rhetoric' is tolerated and/or protected. In others, it is not.

The judgment can be found here btw: https://drive.google.com/file/d/12P9...ew?usp=sharing
Last edited by J Papi; 1 month ago
1
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by InArduisFouette)
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...sgender-tweets


the simple fact remains that my 'opinion' as you call it is a factual statement of the scientific and clinicla evidence and that transphobic rehtoric is nproscribed and in no way protected by the law of the land in the UK
Can you substantiate your claim that The Economist is funded by the far right?

You are so keen on evidence, but when you are asked to provide it for your own outlandish claims to just go silent. Why is this?

Police probe into 'transphobic' tweets unlawful
0
Ragman75
Badges: 15
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
As always, everything in that article is false - puberty blockers aren't untested, there is decades of long term impact assessments (lupron has been used since the 80s as a puberty blocker) and the line about autism is just pure ableism, entirely dependent on the infantialisation of neurodivergent people. Of course, it's unsurprising, the press in this country is crap at accurately covering the topic (put simply there are cranks, like the author in the OP, who want children to suffer and those that survive to be miserable adults because they hate what they don't understand and that's treated as a position that's worth discussing, as if people's lives were up for debate) - hell, discussing puberty blockers here and they quote not one medical professional, but they've got room for a quote from a sculptor that runs a hate group: impartial ****ing journalism my arse.
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Thats such an immoral thing to say, "we have tested these drugs on sick people for years therefore we can give them to healthy people and noting with happen". If you have a health condition your body will react differently to one that doesn't.
1
JWatch
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
On certain subjects it feels that if you don't agree with the popular majority you are hounded and vilified, and people think you hate them because you happen to disagree with what they say. I'm concerned this could be leading to a world where freedom of speech is stifled, because people don't want the aggro from saying something unpopular and instead just limit themselves to repeating the safe, popular stuff that everybody wants to hear rather than express what they truly believe in. I don't believe in the concept of non binary genders. It's not because of hatred, I don't have anything against those people, I don't treat them badly, I just don't agree that you can define yourself in that way. It's staggering the amount of people who have given me abuse for that view, taking offense at the fact that I dare to have a different opinion. It's like a complete inability to process that other people are allowed to have their own view, and there should maybe be a bit of acceptance and understanding or agree to disagree where no full agreement can be reached. At times it feels we are moving towards a very intolerant world and it's a little frightening.
Last edited by JWatch; 1 month ago
2
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by JWatch)
On certain subjects it feels that if you don't agree with the popular majority you are hounded and vilified, and people think you hate them because you happen to disagree with what they say. I'm concerned this could be leading to a world where freedom of speech is stifled, because people don't want the aggro from saying something unpopular and instead just limit themselves to repeating the safe, popular stuff that everybody wants to hear rather than express what they truly believe in. I don't believe in the concept of non binary genders. It's not because of hatred, I don't have anything against those people, I don't treat them badly, I just don't agree that you can define yourself in that way. It's staggering the amount of people who have given me abuse for that view, taking offense at the fact that I dare to have a different opinion. It's like a complete inability to process that other people are allowed to have their own view, and there should maybe be a bit of acceptance and understanding or agree to disagree where no full agreement can be reached. At times it feels we are moving towards a very intolerant world and it's a little frightening.
There is no freedom of speech in the UK and there never has been. That is an American concept.
0
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#19
What has this got to do with it?

the simple fact remains that my 'opinion' as you call it is a factual statement of the scientific and clinicla evidence and that transphobic rehtoric is nproscribed and in no way protected by the law of the land in the UK
No, your opinion (as that what it is) is little more than the rankest form of propaganda - it meeting every single requirement for it - and you disgraceful attempt to silence and dissenting opinion is, for lack of a better word, stalinist.
As to your nominal statement of 'scientific and clinical evidence' ...well, we both know that this is simply not true.
0
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by Napp)
What has this got to do with it?


No, your opinion (as that what it is) is little more than the rankest form of propaganda - it meeting every single requirement for it - and you disgraceful attempt to silence and dissenting opinion is, for lack of a better word, stalinist.
As to your nominal statement of 'scientific and clinical evidence' ...well, we both know that this is simply not true.
everyone but you and your fellow bigots and fascists know the clinicla and scientific facts on the topic

The WHO , all the relevant learned Medical Societies, health systems in developed countries and much of the USA

the Forstater case has a great deal to do with it ...


the judges summing up
“I conclude from … the totality of the evidence, that [Forstater] is absolutist in her view of sex and it is a core component of her belief that she will refer to a person by the sex she considered appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The approach is not worthy of respect in a democratic society.”
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What factors affect your mental health the most right now? (select all that apply)

Lack of purpose or routine (65)
15.59%
Uncertainty around my education (73)
17.51%
Uncertainty around my future career prospects (39)
9.35%
Isolating with family (25)
6%
Lack of support system (eg. Teachers, counsellors) (16)
3.84%
Lack of exercise/ability to be outside (33)
7.91%
Loneliness (41)
9.83%
Financial worries (14)
3.36%
Concern about myself or my loved ones getting ill (41)
9.83%
Exposure to negative news/social media (30)
7.19%
Lack of real life entertainment (eg. cinema, gigs, restaurants) (40)
9.59%

Watched Threads

View All