Showing posts with label Gender Dysphoria. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gender Dysphoria. Show all posts

Saturday, 29 August 2020

When Doing Grievous Harm Becomes the Norm

The Factory of "Gender Change"

The Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) in the UK is increasingly becoming a place of controversy.  A long article has appeared in Spiked  detailing the arguments and counter arguments that are racking the GIDS.  It is worth a read.

Here are some striking paragraphs:

Unsurprisingly, GIDS’ activity at the Tavistock has been subject to increasing public attention, and, more recently, scrutiny. In 2018, an internal report, by then staff governor Dr David Bell, effectively accused GIDS of fast-tracking children and adolescents for gender transition. Featuring damning quotes from whistle-blowing clinicians and unhappy staff members, it reinforced the growing sense that GIDS has been a little too eager to encourage young people to transition and potentially undergo life-changing medical treatment. Indeed, since 2017, over 35 clinicians have quit GIDS because they are worried about ‘overdiagnoses’ of gender dysphoria. Sonia Appleby, who works at GIDS as its Named Professional for Safeguarding Children, is even bringing a case against the Tavistock on the grounds that it is failing in its duty to safeguard children, by encouraging staff not to report any child safety concerns to her. . . . 
Nevertheless, Marcus and Susan insist that hormone therapy and other treatments should be a last resort, and even then only in extraordinary cases. They should be something that takes place after all other avenues of therapy and mental-health treatment have been explored. But too many at the Tavistock, Marcus says, are simply ‘not interested in the downside of treatment’. ‘There’s all this sort of pressure to say, “Well, it’s not really a medical decision – is it any different from, you know, having plastic surgery?”‘

Yet it is very different from having your nose done or your ears pinned back. Hormone therapy, for instance, is a serious, life-altering treatment. ‘It should try to not be at all for children’, says Susan, citing the potential for future ‘sterility or infertility’. She points out how absurd it is that we are encouraging some young people to take a decision that could change their lives forever. ‘There’s a reason we don’t let children marry or have tattoos. And somehow we’ve unrolled this treatment!’ . . . . 
This problem has come to head in the case of Keira Bell. Bell underwent surgery and medication to transition to male during her teen years, and is now acting as a claimant, alongside Mother A, in a legal case being brought against the Tavistock, for which Susan is a witness. Bell claims she was given poor care. She alleges that instead of challenging her demands to transition, and taking into consideration her poor mental health at the time, doctors and nurses at the Tavistock allowed her to undergo life-altering treatment which she now regrets. ‘I was allowed to run with this idea that I had, almost like a fantasy, as a teenager’, Bell told the BBC, ‘and it has affected me in the long run as an adult’. When asked about the importance of listening to, and not questioning, children who are claiming to want to change genders, Bell told a BBC reporter ‘it’s up to institutions like the Tavistock to step in and make children reconsider what they’re saying’. . . . 
 Yet at the same time, it is not enough to ask questions of GIDS, or trans-activist charities like Mermaids. We need to ask ourselves searching questions, too. After all, what has happened to our society that means thousands of children are encouraged to feel estranged from their own bodies? Why is it that some feel so averse that they want to change those bodies? And what does it say about us as adults that instead of questioning these children’s demands we are all too willing to give in to them?

Saturday, 23 May 2020

Spurious Genderism: Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Hungary Defines Sex as Biological

Media, NGOs Outraged 

Virginia Hale
Breitbart News

Activists and the media claim Hungary is being driven “back towards the dark ages” after the country voted to define gender based on biological sex.

According to the latest wave of establishment fury against the central European nation, transgender people will “flee” Hungary or else be driven to suicide by the law, which passed on Tuesday after a 134 to 56 parliamentary vote.

Minister of the Prime Minister’s Office, Gergely Gulyás, had responded to attacks with a letter last month insisting that Hungary “guarantees everybody’s fundamental rights”, adding that the measures relating to gender would ensure “legal clarity in harmony with the constitution”.    NGOs and mainstream media outlets characterised the country’s right-wing populist leader, Viktor Orbán, as an “autocrat” in pushing through the legislation, which defines gender as “biological sex based on primary sex characteristics and chromosomes”.

Saturday, 7 March 2020

The Transgender Debate

It Pays to Hold Your Nerve . . . Always


Steve McAlpine
The Gospel Coalition/Australia


With the latest news out of the UK that a young woman is calling out the National Health Service’s gender clinic for not challenging her strongly enough when she was 16 and wanting to transition to male, it feels like the ground is shifting back to sanity.

And if you’ve been holding your nerve and saying, “Wait a minute—some of what we are doing in the name of the Sexular Age is deeply dangerous, and elevates ideology over science,” then maybe you might actually be on the right side of history. Fancy that!

So a young woman, Keira Bell, who went through a regime of puberty blockers and then surgery to remove her breasts, says that she “should have been challenged over my transition.” 

No Challenge

Clearly she wasn’t. And clearly a judge thinks there is a case for the NHS and Tavistock to answer, as a full hearing has been given the go-ahead.  The centre is, of course, denying any fault, and claims to have made strong scientific-based decisions, rather than ideological ones. And, for a while, it seemed like the whole world was going along with this.

Tuesday, 12 November 2019

UN Moves to Make Gender a "Social Construct"

General Assembly Inches Toward Redefining Gender as Social Construct


By Stefano Gennarini, J.D.
C-Fam
Centre for Family and Human Rights

NEW YORK, November 8 (C-Fam) Nations clashed over a proposed UN treaty on crimes against humanity at UN headquarters last week. If adopted, the new treaty would change the definition of gender in international law to include more than 100 genders.

“While the term ‘sex’ is used to refer to biological attributes, ‘gender’ is now more expansively used in recognition of the variety of gender identities and expressions—man or woman, both or neither—which may or may not align with the gender typically or socially associated with a person’s sex,” said the delegate of Canada, expressing gratitude for the decision of the International Law Commission to scrap the definition of “gender” as it appears in the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The International Law Commission proposed a draft treaty on the investigation and prosecution of crimes against humanity that drops the definition of gender from the Rome Statue. The 1998 treaty defined gender as “man and woman in the context of society.” The General Assembly must now decide if they want to adopt the treaty, and whether to modify it or not.

Thursday, 17 October 2019

Totalitarianism On the March In the UK

The Madness of it All

The following article has appeared in The Spectator magazine.  It alerts Oxford citizens to a horrible, detestable crime wave which is sweeping across the town and surrounding districts.  James Kirkup, writing for The Spectator, briefs all and sundry on this new horror.

A ‘Transphobic’ Crime Wave Has Hit Oxford


James Kirkup
The Spectator

Oxford is suffering a crime wave. Police are investigating numerous serious offences over more than six months. Thames Valley Police has issued this sweeping statement about unacceptable acts in the city:

Thames Valley Police is appealing for witnesses following a number of public offences in Oxford.

Officers are investigating a large number of offensive stickers that have been placed across Oxford city centre containing transphobic comments. It is believed they started appearing in March 2019 within the High Street, Catte Street and Parks Road area.  Investigating officer PC Rebecca Nightingale based at St Aldates police station said: “Behaviour like this is not acceptable and we take incidents of this nature very seriously.

“I am appealing for anyone who may of witnesses these stickers being placed around the city or anyone who has information that may assist our investigation to call the non-emergency number 101, quoting reference 43190163238 or report online.

“Alternatively, you can contact the independent charity Crimestoppers 100% anonymously on 0800 555 111.” 

Sounds serious, eh?

Thursday, 10 October 2019

We Are Going To See More of This

What The First Nonbinary American Wants The Supreme Court To Know About Transgenderism


‘After a good-faith period of participation in the grand gender experiment, I came to believe the whole thing was smoke and mirrors, complete quackery,’ says Jamie Shupe.

By Nicole Russell
The Federalist


The U.S. Supreme Court hears a landmark case on gender identity and sex Tuesday, in oral arguments for R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. James Shupe offered his perspective in an amicus brief for that case.

The following is an interview between me and Shape, who made waves for being the first “legally non-binary person” in the United States. Shupe achieved clarity through therapy, and returned to life as his birth sex even though the LGBT community shunned him. He’s begun to share his story and speak out against the dangers of transgender medicine.

In 2016, an Oregon circuit court ruled Shupe could change his gender to nonbinary, the first legal ruling of his kind. LGBT activists lauded it as a landmark decision that now plagues Shupe.

Here’s a closer look at his experience living as the opposite sex, regretting it, returning to live as his birth sex, and becoming a vocal opponent of transgender medicine altogether. This transcript has been edited for clarity and length.

For readers who may be unaware of your journey, describe why you decided to become the “first legally non-binary person” in the United States?

I experienced a major mental health crisis at age 49. I began researching psychiatric issues on the internet. It didn’t take very long for me to stumble upon gender identity disorder, transgenderism, and transsexualism.

At first, I was skeptical that I could actually be a female based on this newly discovered thing called “gender identity,” something I’d never heard of before because I’d always understood myself to be a male. But numerous medical and media articles describing mental health issues disappearing after undergoing a gender transition quickly convinced me that I was a woman and that transition would fix me. I also discovered the Department of Veterans Affairs had a newly launched transgender medical care program [that] erased all of my doubts completely.

Tuesday, 8 October 2019

Warning Bells Are Sounding

EXCLUSIVE: New UN Treaty May Put Gender Ideology in International Law

By  | October 4, 2019
NEW YORK, October 4 (C-Fam) 
In a new treaty, the General Assembly may scrap the definition of gender as “male and female” currently in international law and endorse a definition of gender as “socially constructed.” The new definition would open the door to 100+ “genders” in binding law.
The International Law Commission has asked the General Assembly to discard the legal definition of gender in international law as “the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society.” That hard-fought definition was decided in the Rome Statues creating the International Criminal Court and excludes any “meaning different from the above.”
The left-leaning commission proposed the change in a new treaty on the prosecution of crimes against humanity that will be reviewed by the General Assembly’s legal experts later this month.
In making the recommendation, the commission cites “several developments in international human rights law and international criminal law.” As evidence, the commission lists the non-binding opinions of human rights bodies and other international law entities who promote gender as a social construct, including the notions of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”
The commission cites, for instance, the UN Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, who has written that gender is “each person’s deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth.”
The report also cites the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, according to whom gender is not a biological reality but a “social construction” related to the “accompanying roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes assigned to women and men, and girls and boys.”
The legal effect of discarding the Rome Statute’s definition of gender will be to enshrine gender as a social construct in international law. It wouldn’t merely leave the definition of gender open to each country’s national legislation to define, as some may believe. Far from it. Because of the elaborate rationale in the report of the commission, dropping the definition will have the legal effect of defining gender in international law very broadly.
The request is likely to attract controversy in the General Assembly. The Commission told the General Assembly in the last two years that it would not change any of the definitions from the Rome Statute in this new treaty. And it has gone back on its word because of intense lobbying from LGBT groups.
Moreover, the commission wholly overlooks the fact that a majority of countries do not consider gender as a social construct. Indeed, the UN entities and bodies cited by the commission go further than most countries’ laws.
Through 2019, only seven countries allow gender change based on self-identification alone, according to the pro-LGBT group Amnesty International.
Even in the roughly 40 other countries where individuals are allowed to legally assume an identity different from their biological sex, countries restrict who may do so and under what circumstance.
In most countries identity change is only permitted after a psychiatric determination of gender dysphoria or a surgical operation to mutate the sexual physiognomy of an individual. In addition, some countries require individuals to divorce their spouses and do not allow individuals with children to change their gender.
The sixth committee of the General Assembly is scheduled to review the report of the International Law Commission, where the new treaty is contained between October 28 and November 6.

Friday, 4 October 2019

A "Hateful Conduct" Policy At Work

What a Mess at Massey

We have been chuckling over the twirling dervishes being performed at Massey University at the moment.  A group defending the free speech rights of lesbians will soon be speaking on the Massey Campus, Wellington shortly--or so we are led to believe.  
Meghan Murphy, a Canadian feminist blogger who believes transgender rights endanger women, has been invited to speak at the campus' theatrette in November.  A radical feminist banned from Twitter for violating its hateful conduct policy will panel a ticketed event hosted by Massey University in Wellington.  [Stuff]
But this "event" has been vigorously opposed by a bunch of gender dysphoric folk.
Tallulah Farrar, College of Creative Arts Representative, said "concerning information" about the event had pushed her to lay a complaint. She "worried about the wellbeing and safety of students" if the event went ahead.

"This event is marketed as controversial, and will bring more radical, exclusionary, hateful voices onto our campus who we should not be welcoming. Being complicit in these kinds of conversations is akin to breeding hate towards members of our Massey community who are already marginalised."
Of course we support free-speech rights and thus believe that lesbian Meghan Murphy has every right along with her mates to speak about the conflicts between lesbians and the gender dysphoric.  We would argue that Massey's  commitment to free speech, however, would be more convincing if and when that institution opens its doors to groups and speakers promoting the free speech rights of males. 

Massey University you recall recently closed down a public meeting at which Dr Don Brash was invited to speak.

Tuesday, 1 October 2019

Deadly Lupron

Drugs Used as Puberty Blockers for Gender Dysphoric Kids

Linked to Thousands of Deaths in Adults


by Jordyn Pair
September 26, 2019
DISRN

Drugs commonly used to as a treatment for gender dysphoria in gender-confused youth has been linked to thousands of death in adults, according to government data.  The Food and Drug Administration says there have been thousands of death linked to Lupron, a puberty-blocking drug normally used to treat prostate cancer and endometriosis. Complications can include breast disorders, malignant neoplasmsa, and psychiatric and nervous disorders.

The FDA documented more than 40,500 adverse reactions to the drugs Lupron and triptorelin (which includes Lupron and similar drugs used by clinics) between 2012 and June 30 of this year. Over 25,500 reactions were labeled as “serious,” which included 6,370 deaths.

The drug can induce hypogonadotropic hypogonadism when injected into a normally-functioning body.  “It’s a serious condition that endocrinologists would normally diagnose and treat because it interferes with development, but in [gender dysphoria] cases they’re inducing this disease state,” Michael Laidlaw, a Rocklin, California-based endocrinologist said in an interview with the National Catholic Register.