Independent Leyton Orient Forum

This is astounding



SU = service user (ie, woman seeking to use a rape crisis centre/shelter)

ERCC = Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre.

NC is questioning, MS is a board member at Edinburgh Rape Crisis centre, where the CEO is a male with no gender recognition certificate nor surgery, who claims to be a woman.

At the risk of labouring the point, the stuff that is demonstrably happening here is stuff that you’d think was a parody of what a right winger thinks might happen.

Someone might say to me “CEB you’re being ridiculous! You’ve fallen for a right wing lie that men are running rape crisis centres and forcing rape victims to be counselled by males and turned away if they object! That would never happen! Get real”

But here it is, clearly actually happening.

I don't really see how anyone sane can argue in support of this. Where we discussed the other month about some of your examples possibly being extreme and/or hyperbolic, it's like they've been made flesh.

Bigot.

This has all been signposted for a long time, I think a year or so ago on this thread I referred to this case and specified in support of my sticking my neck out on this that there’s a rape crisis centre with a male CEO with a penis who claims to be a woman despite not having had surgery etc - it just sounded so mad that it got zero traction
(incidentally, it’s because there were zero rape crisis centres in Edinburgh offering assurances of single sex support for raped women that the much maligned JK Rowling funded one entirely herself)

(I’m not saying that to call you out specifically - it’s just that stuff like this is why I’ve been so frustrated: my central point - as I was getting to before RTW told me I’d lost all perspective - has always been that mainstream trans activism is not benign, and the mainstream *is* the extreme.

Right now there are prominent trans activists happily framing women’s horror at what’s unfolding here, as “HC bigots are trying to get a woman (*male) sacked just for being trans inclusive”

It’s nuts.

(since RTW noped out, I’ll just come out with what my conclusion was going to be: in Scotland, under what is currently proposed, his own position on this, as he’s already outlined, would constitute “conversion therapy” and would actually, if he was the parent of a gender non conforming kid, mean that the school could secretly use a new name for the child and put the child in touch with charities that advocate “affirmation” and puberty blockers without his knowledge. If he found out and took issue? He could be prosecuted.

Not hyperbole.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/2 ... trans/amp/

Is your pet trans or non binary?

Story of O wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 10:15 am https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/01/2 ... trans/amp/

Is your pet trans or non binary?

So depressing that these things keep giving the worst people tap-ins like this.

Yep. Does nothing to help people experiencing real psychological distress. Does a hell of a lot to let The Sun type takes be popularised

Yes it’s a link from bloody “Libs of Tik Tok”, but the footage it links to is real

I'm not sure which bit hits worse, the obvious pain and trauma on the child's face when they're having the implant put in (obviously one tiny step in a much longer, painful journey) or the way they clung to their teddy afterwards.

This is why I lost my sh*t at Mick McQuaid months ago when talking about a young male about whom “everything about her presents as female” after casually dismissing those who had concerns about puberty blockers

Saw some other clips on that thread too and, while appreciating I should probably watch the whole thing to see whether there are any contextual issues etc, that being said, the Mum...does not come across well.

Nope.
And it gets to the crux of what I was trying to get at with RTW - when a person in a position of authority/trust is working on a different definition of what it is to be a “girl” from the standard one, then by definition some boys will be girls according to that definition, without there being anything special about them making them a girl, aside from knowing that they fit the definition they’ve learned.

The mum doesn’t come across well, but the crucial thing is that at no point in trans activism is there a reality/sanity check of “wait - is this child REALLY trans?” (Even the question is considered an attempt at conversion therapy) and parents who would prefer “a cis outcome” (that is - the child reconciles with their body) are considered transphobic, because of the idea that it’s better to be cis than trans

That’s why Mermaids is such a scandal IMO - the Ted talk Susie Green gave, which I posted months ago, is clear (and not at all hiding it) that Susie’s son was discouraged from playing with girls toys because her husband thought he was gay. They took away his barbies, he was inconsolable, he was given sneaky barbie dolls by his grandma, and then, after months of being told he couldn’t have natives because they were for girls, he decided he was a girl. It’s regressive bullshit all the way to the top.

The problem is it’s been successful because most people casually assume it’s just the next battle in the progressive march towards equality, and not many people have pulled at the threads that don’t quite make sense.

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 1:19 pm This is why I lost my sh*t at Mick McQuaid months ago when talking about a young male about whom “everything about her presents as female” after casually dismissing those who had concerns about puberty blockers

Thanks for clarifying. Bareley a day has passed without me thinking about that.

Impossible to watch that without tearing up.

Damn, mick you accidentally clicked post before adding in the bit where you either defend your position or say “on reflection, I don’t think I understand the issue enough”

Like seriously - is there no part of you that at all thinks “hmmmm, I might have got this wrong”? Or are you fully behind your original posts despite being, by your own admission, not too knowledgable?

You were pretty happy to argue the substance before someone who knows the subject took you to task, is snark all you have?

*tumbleweed*

For a rights movement that apparently regards childhood transition as essential to prevent young trans kids offing themselves, there’s really not many people who have advocated for it who are prepared to answer questions

#BeKind and f*ck your kid up.

I've always found it terrifying that kids could be taught this stuff, resulting in mad drugs and surgery.

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 1:31 pm Saw some other clips on that thread too and, while appreciating I should probably watch the whole thing to see whether there are any contextual issues etc, that being said, the Mum...does not come across well.

As an aside, and because I know you’ll have thought about language, can you see now why I’ve decided to not compromise on language? I totally get why you used “they” (to not acquiesce with the harm you can see being done, but also not wanting to be as harsh as to say “he” about a child who has clearly had some issues around identity?), and I probably would have done a while ago, but I think now it’s important to recognise that gender non conforming boys are just as male as anyone else, and there’s a political imperative to use language that recognises that there’s space in “maleness” for boys who like having long hair, relate to “feminine” coded activities & traits etc

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 2:22 pm I've always found it terrifying that kids could be taught this stuff, resulting in mad drugs and surgery.

This is what I was getting at with RTW

If you teach children “being a girl isn’t about your genitals, it’s about how you feel!”
then children have nothing other than societal messaging about what girls should be like on which to base their idea of what a girl is.

And in practice, that will mean that female children who aren’t feminine will, according to that definition, be boys. And male children who are feminine will be, according to that definition, girls.

And then, for some reason, despite trans activism saying that it’s nothing to do with bodies, it then becomes a race against time to block children from having the “wrong puberty” for their gender identity.

It’s utterly indefensible.

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 2:26 pm

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 1:31 pm Saw some other clips on that thread too and, while appreciating I should probably watch the whole thing to see whether there are any contextual issues etc, that being said, the Mum...does not come across well.

As an aside, and because I know you’ll have thought about language, can you see now why I’ve decided to not compromise on language? I totally get why you used “they” (to not acquiesce with the harm you can see being done, but also not wanting to be as harsh as to say “he” about a child who has clearly had some issues around identity?), and I probably would have done a while ago, but I think now it’s important to recognise that gender non conforming boys are just as male as anyone else, and there’s a political imperative to use language that recognises that there’s space in “maleness” for boys who like having long hair, relate to “feminine” coded activities & traits etc

Its a tricky one. I'm pretty ambivalent towards the use of 'they' in many instances but - and while I can see your point - where kids are concerned it just doesn't sit well to insist on gendering them in a way they might not be comfortable with, especially if there's already a degree of trauma involved. But also, I was reluctant to also use 'she' as I didn't think that was entirely appropriate given the apparent circumstances.

Agree it’s a tricky one - and I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong to do so, there’s a good argument for dealing with “where we are” rather than the ideal where children are encouraged to reconcile with their bodies (and I think that if I were working in a school for eg, I would probably use “they” as a compromise in some circumstances, on the basis that it’s better to pick battles) but in discourse - especially when I’m articulating an opposition to the idea that some male children are girls - I think using language that shows that “he” is being encouraged down a pathway to genital surgery, hormonal interventions, complete sexual disfunction & infertility, rather than that “she” is getting to be her true self, or that “they” don’t know yet if they’re a boy or girl, allows for clearer communications