Pages

Saturday 12 September 2020

Why Do Safeguarding And Oversight Fall Apart When The Trans Card Is Played?

Cartoon of a trans woman magnified by Wendy Cockcroft for On t'Internet
Public bodies, including charities, are escaping scrutiny by playing the trans card. Why? Is "trans" really a get out of jail free card? Is there a way to hold the organisations that represent them to account?

In this post I'm going to look at the way gender identity ideology captures public bodies so completely that common sense goes out the window. It is this ideology that underpins the movement referred to as "trans rights," which is wreaking havoc wherever it is implemented. The institutional capture we're seeing at the moment is enforcing and locking this down.

Before we dig in to these, let's take a look at what gender identity ideology actually is in theory and practice.

What is gender identity ideology?


The first thing we need to understand is that gender identity ideology is like Fight Club. You don't talk about gender identity ideology, per this tweet thread:


This is nonsense. The theory that underpins gender identity notions is queer theory. Identity politics springs from this. So, given the wealth of scholarly papers that prove Mallory wrong, why does she persist in saying this, given that she claims to want to provide practical support for transwomen? It seems to me that she's been convinced by gender identity ideologues that anyone who doesn't fully and completely accept gender identity ideology without question is actively against them. She has adopted their tactics of denial, attacks without evidence, and bigoteering (the practice of using the threat of labelling dissenters bigots to force them to comply). Take another look at the linked tweet thread. First she denies that there's any such thing as gender identity ideology, or "gender ideology" as it is more popularly called. Really? Do your own search and see how many articles and papers you see on it. The name "Judith Butler" will come up over and over again. Next, she attacks by claiming that people who complain about gender identity ideologists are right-wing conspiracy theory nutters and provides "proof" by linking to right-wingers' posts. Finally, she plays the bigot card by claiming that complaints about gender identity ideology is about opposing trans rights. It's gaslighting. So, then, what exactly is gender identity ideology?

Overview


First and foremost, gender identity ideology denies material reality and reduces sex and sexuality to feelings and emotional positions.

Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Gender identity can correlate with a person's assigned sex at birth or can differ from it. Gender expression typically reflects a person's gender identity, but this is not always the case. While a person may express behaviors, attitudes, and appearances consistent with a particular gender role, such expression may not necessarily reflect their gender identity. The term gender identity was originally coined by Robert J. Stoller in 1964.  - Wikipedia

There is an ever-growing multiplicity of gender identities, including tetrisgender, I kid you not. Why? Because, when you're queering (deconstructing, questioning, and challenging the accepted version) gender as a concept, a wide range of possibilities emerges in a fluid and chaotic paradigm. Since the object of queering is to challenge heteronormativity, nothing can ever be normal. The minute it becomes normal, something new that challenges the norm must emerge. Once you understand that this is at the root of gender identity ideology and the movement that propels it, everything the proponents do, including their gaslighting and abusive practices, makes sense.

Secondly, the idea of a shared concept of reality is at odds with this. Reality itself is constantly being questioned, challenged, misrepresented, and ignored. This explains the outright rejection of settled science about biology. It's where "Transwomen are women" (TWAW) comes from. Anyone who asserts that there are only two sexes are confronted with the astroturfed articles planted in the Scientific American and Harvard University blogs and editorials in UK science journal Nature to "prove" that sex is a spectrum (it's not). Needless to say, anyone who disagrees is immediately attacked as anti-science and therefore in league with the right-wing devil.

Thirdly, it's important to note that many people struggle to fit into the traditionally accepted (heteronormative) gender roles, e.g. wife and mother, that exist. Such people are known to gender (ideology) critical women like myself as "gender non-conforming" or GNC. Since the "normal" view that there are only two genders, male and female, is being questioned, pulled apart, and the possibility of other genders existing being explored, it shouldn't surprise us that there are currently several hundred genders and that the number gets bigger every day. That is the point. The value is in the opportunity afforded to non-conforming people to claim sanctuary in a label that marks them out as vulnerable, special, and a trendy cause du jour.

Fourthly, since the role of personal feelings and emotions is exalted, anyone who claims a particular identity is under no burden to prove or demonstrate this in any way.

Image

Anyone who can't see what a problem this is ignores the weight of evidence that such views are incredibly harmful when put into practice.




Finally, it's totalitarian. No debate or discussion is permitted. We must accept what we're told, even if it doesn't pass the laugh test, or face the consequences.

Writing that the issue is not about “in-fighting between JK Rowling and myself”, he added: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.” [Emphasis mine] - Daniel Radcliffe

The sheer effrontery of that statement bears repetition. TWAW must not, cannot be questioned, ever. Why? Scrutiny erases identity and dignity. Radcliffe doesn't say how, we are expected to accept it. He then qualifies this by stating it goes against all advice by healthcare associations. Really? Which ones? But, ladies, gentlemen, and others, a celebrity has spoken so shut ye up and may the feelz be with you.

How have they captured institutions?


The process by which institutions have been captured is opaque. The lobbyists who get their training materials into institutions often misrepresent the law, substituting "gender identity" for sex in the name of diversity and inclusion. Councillors and politicians wanting to make a name for themselves are jumping on the gender ID bandwagon, and this, it seems, is one of the entry points. Gendered Intelligence is cited as expert advisers in many cases, most notoriously ActionAid's recent debacle in which they decided that gender identity takes precedence over sex despite their core mission being the protection and enabling of women and girls. What's interesting is that they apparently don't mind losing supporters over it. This is due to the international efforts of a global lobby group called WPATH, the The World Professional Association for Transgender Health. All roads lead back to them.

WPATH recognizes that health is dependent upon not only good clinical care but also social and political climates that provide and ensure social tolerance, equality, and the full rights of citizenship [Emphasis mine]. - WPATH standards of care, V7

This project began in America in 1992 as the brainchild of lawyers Martine Rothblatt and Phyllis Frye. Rothblatt drafted the International Bill of Transgender Rights. UK professor of equalities law Stephen Whittle got involved, bringing the agenda to Britain.

The Transexual and Transgender Health Law Reports initiated by Frye and Rothblatt and then Whittle, became a working draft for another global document and committee outlining transsexual/transgender rights in the UK, the Interdepartmental Working Group on Transexual People, advanced by yet another male, transsexual, lawyer, Christine Burns and set up by the Home Secretary of the UK in 1999. [Emphasis mine] Membership at the Working group included representatives from Scotland, Ireland, Wales and the US.
Whittle too has been extremely instrumental in driving trans activism, especially in the UK. She became part of the human rights experts team, who elaborated on the international human rights guidelines, the Yogyakarta Principles at Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, Indonesia in November 2006. The meeting added SOGI (Sexual Orientation Gender Identity) principles to the YP, known as Plus 10. Used as international legal guidelines, they are not actually law but are being treated as such by LGBT NGOs fronting for the medical industrial complex...- Martine Rothblatt: A Founding Father of the Transgender Empire, by Jennifer Bilek for Uncommon Ground, 06/07/2020

Basically, they're fighting a three-front battle: medical, social, and political. They've had their fingers in the UK pie since the 1999 and have been expanding their reach into all areas of law from the courts to the police and into schools, businesses, and charities. If you read the WPATH document I linked you'll notice that while they accept the fact that childhood dysphoria mostly resolves into homosexuality, they're still advocating psychotherapy that explores gender identity and hormones and surgery as the go-to treatment. Now that they've got the legal and medical establishment in their pockets, they're working on the social side. However, negative impacts on women and the growing number of detransitioners has resulted in a pushback from the public while their plants and and allies on social media carry on regardless. Meanwhile, the stifling atmosphere is telling on psychologists, who are now questioning whether affirmation is the way forward in dealing with children with dysphoria. The NHS has also changed its page on the subject.

The role of social media


The sneaky obfuscation of the lobbyists involves the use of astroturfing via social media. This can and does result in blowback from unintended consequences as the internet takes the TWAW ball and runs with it. I'm sure the accomplished lawyers who got the ball rolling in 1992 had no clue about what 4Chan and assorted trolls might do to represent their idea of trans rights. The result is a hodge podge of blue-haired teenage know-it-alls, sweaty, bearded basement-dwelling men's rights activists, bitter incels, and trendy hipster woke folk pushing an increasingly fractured line. Most of them have no real idea of what's involved except the right to bash women who don't play TWAW ball. Those who have more of a clue resort to pseudoscience and misdirection and the rest of them either haven't thought it through or just hate women. As a result there are competing strains of activism ranging from violent abusers and hate mobs who try to ruin people's lives to the more serious ones who tend to get their teaching materials into the civil services, businesses, and schools, etc. Some of these strains are getting their extremist agenda through, which has resulted in women being fined for liking status updates and women prisoners being raped in jail by men serving sentences for rape who then claimed trans identity. The rights being championed by the keyboard warriors require scrutiny, to say the least. I'd be remiss to fail to include the workplace activists who often push past the law to enact policies that end up harming women in the name of inclusivity. I'll let Thomas Sowell have the last word on this:


The culture of political correctness that escaped academia, then trickled down through the civil service to businesses, is enabling the current madness.

The empire expands


Our Glorious Leaders' tendency to hive off public services to charities on principle coupled with aggressive lobbying and activist civil servants is creating a perfect storm of abuses against women, children, and the public purse. The emerging market in transitioning treatments is projected to grow to $1.5BN in the US alone, and needless to say, the Covid-19 pandemic has created fertile ground for online entrepreneurs to get in on the act. One of the newly-minted licences to print money is the increasing number of trans charities. While most of them focus on providing training to companies, etc., (e.g. Gendered Intelligence), others are aiming squarely at kids, particularly the vulnerable ones.

Exist Loudly - an unfolding scandal


When Tanya Compas set up a charity drive for queer Black youth, it was launched in a flurry of publicity with a huge boost provided by Gay Times, Bustle, Vogue, and TimeOut, to name but a few of the outlets she got her story into. Her excellence at self-promotion is worth an article of its own; public relations might be a way forward for her later on. She had premium venue The Roundhouse booked for a workshop for 18/25 year olds in July. She announced on her Twitter platform that she planned to register it as a CIC that same month as the money flowed in to her fundraiser. None of the GC crowd was paying much attention until 9th September, when Tanya did a Very Stupid Thing.


Inviting kids to take part in a paid research project throws up a load of red flags. Why link them with 23 year olds? Tanya is "an award-winning youth worker." She should know this. She also wants them to be photographed:


But, per Safiya, it gets worse: there's no parental consent, Gillick competence assessment, or any due diligence with regard to what the research is for and how they're going to protect the data. Freaked out by this apparently cavalier attitude to child and data protection, gender critical Rosie did some digging and found that a company registered in the name of Exist Loudly by Tanya Compas had been subject to compulsory dissolution for failing to submit accounts. Exist Loudly has not been registered as a charity, either. Compas complained that digging into her activities and posting the results was doxxing, but this is publicly available information. So far, so dodgy. It "only" looks like a scam to fleece the woke on behalf of queer youth. Here's the kicker:


Erm, what is she doing working with an admitted paedophile on a project aimed at kids? Instead of denying it or cutting ties with Brianna, she's complaining about being persecuted by evil TERFs.


Brianna is not helping Tanya much. Here "she" is, claiming that being trans renders "her" untouchable.

Tweet thread with Blueberry Girl and MAP Brianna.

53 year old Brianna is incredibly creepy, too. Needless to say, "she" has latched on to the LGBT movement for support and complains that those who are repulsed by MAPs (minor attracted persons) are bigots. The shambles of cobbled-together identities "she" co-opts makes for a ridiculous picture. At one point "she" tried to get BLM on board. Brianna is fond of porn. This may have caused the closure of "her" account. Notice that Tanya uses the same language as MAPs do when confronted: "They don't care about kids." If Tanya wants to clear herself of guilt by association with MAPs, she has only to deny association with Brianna, but she hasn't. Instead, she tries to DARVO her way out of it and doubles down.

This is the tweet Tanya issued to justify the research project:


Yes indeed, it's to justify the project's existence. It is clearly and obviously some kind of scam, but she refuses to be held accountable or to adhere to the best practice and safeguarding she should already know about as "an award-wining youth worker." Note the liberal use of the word "TERF" and the blatant pedophrasty in her tweets on the subject. She has been called to account in the press already and hopefully will face an inquiry of some kind. People with such attitudes should not be anywhere near kids.

The cause du jour


The point of bringing this to your attention is to advise that complete degenerates are latching on to the LGBT movement looking for cover and trying to build acceptance. Back in the Seventies and Eighties the cause du jour was gay, and the perves latched on to that. Now that most of the aims of the LGB movement have been met (due to presenting themselves as normal, everyday people), Stonewall et al need a new cause to keep the money rolling in, and trans fits the bill. They've recently added intersex as a backup, although intersex is a medical condition, not a sexuality or gender identity. Needless to say the progressive left is all over it and, as usual, is not asking questions or showing any willingness to learn from the past. Now, as then, the perverts are working to get their materials into schools using trans advocacy and inclusion as cover and, once again, they're embedded in government and the civil service. The obfuscation and pseudo-intellectual justifications provided by queering are shutting down debate and stopping scrutiny.

Warnings from the past and for the future


That the same people in the same departments and institutions are receiving the same warnings from the same people is profoundly disturbing. The capture effected by the trans lobby and its hangers-on may be stifling discussion but I'm hoping that someone will break ranks sooner or later and the perves will be kicked out again. We will have to be vigilant, though; they will keep trying to get back in.

Now that we know and understand their tactics, we can fight back by calling them out for the DARVO lies that they are. Nobody should be above scrutiny — or the law, and no subject ought to be beyond debate. Safeguarding and oversight should never be cast aside for fear of being accused of transphobia. Rather, such accusations should be robustly challenged, whatever the cost. We owe it to the kids as much as to ourselves to show a bit of backbone when the DARVO starts. Let's be challenging our representatives, institutions, and other bodies to be accountable, transparent, and fit for purpose. If we don't, who will?

No comments:

Post a Comment