WoLF works to abolish regressive gender roles and the epidemic of male violence through legal and policy advocacy and public education.
Source: Women’s Liberation Front
Category: Global
It’s not transphobic to question transgenderism | The Spectator Australia
At no point during my lifetime has any fixation consumed western culture with the rapidity of our obsession with transgenderism. I’ve never seen anything like it. Documentaries flooded television schedules. Films and series suddenly had trans characters; Transparent had a trans protagonist. Publishers are now awash in manuscripts about coming out as trans and transitioning. Schools, even kindergartens, have revamped their curriculums, social services their protocols. On university campuses, it’s now routine to include one’s ‘preferred pronoun’ in class introductions. None of this is new to you Speccie readers, who have withstood the same cultural avalanche. But if you’re savvy, you’ve either exclusively talked up how bloody marvellous this all is, or you’ve kept your mouth shut.
So what sorts of, if you will, transgressive thoughts do acquaintances fear being overheard? They sometimes venture timidly that maybe, just maybe, telling three- and four-year-olds that they have to ‘decide’ what gender they are, before they’re old enough to entirely grasp what gender means, might be a little confusing. Or that perhaps adolescents whose brains are still developing should be discouraged from taking irreversible medical steps while they’re still figuring out who they are. Others might worry tentatively that swapping genders could seem to offer the troubled a cure for problems that are bound to survive surgery intact. Still others might puzzle over why so few gung-ho parents on those documentaries seem concerned about their kids’ capacity to reproduce.[R]ight now children and adolescents are making radical, often permanent, decisions about their futures that some kids might come to regret. The least we owe them is to talk about it.
Source: It’s not transphobic to question transgenderism | The Spectator Australia
Transgender Facebookers Scheme to Burn ‘TERFs’, Lesbians in Bonfire | Women Are Human
US — . Two transgender-identifying Facebook users were seen on Facebook yesterday apparently plotting to burn women they identify as TERFs. Transgender allies cheered them on. “The best remedy for a TERF is gasoline and a match,” Pacy Willa, who is male and uses she/her pronouns, wrote in a status posted to Willa’s Facebook page […]
Source: Transgender Facebookers Scheme to Burn ‘TERFs’, Lesbians in Bonfire | Women Are Human
Woman: human being or profit centre? | Morning Star
Socialists should not support the decriminalisation of prostitution – an institution of oppression that has been used for centuries to ensure the subordination of women and the division of the working class, writes ANNA FISHER.
The Nordic Model approach decriminalises those who are prostituted and provides them with support, genuine alternatives and routes out.
It also cracks down on pimps and traffickers, and makes buying sex a criminal offence — with the key aim of changing men’s attitudes.
This approach is founded in the socialist feminist understanding of prostitution as an institution of oppression that has been used for centuries by the capitalist system to co-opt men, and to ensure the subordination of women and the division of the working class.
More recently women have become the locus of wealth extraction as the global capitalists have turned to mining women and girls’ bodies for the primitive accumulation of capital through the industrialisation of prostitution, porn, egg harvesting and surrogacy.
Prostitution in all its forms is inherently dangerous and can never be brought into line with even the most basic health and safety guidelines.
We need to reduce the size of the prostitution system, while providing those caught up in it with a viable transition out.
This is exactly what the Nordic Model aims to do — and can do when implemented properly and with solid support from the working class.
Evidence for puberty blockers use very low, says NICE – BBC News
The evidence for using puberty blocking drugs to treat young people struggling with their gender identity is “very low”, an official review has found.The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) said existing studies of the drugs were small and “subject to bias and confounding”.
The assessment of the evidence into the drugs was commissioned by NHS England.
NICE also reviewed the evidence base for gender-affirming hormones – sometimes known as cross-sex hormones.
The review found the evidence of clinical effectiveness and safety of gender-affirming hormones was also of “very low” quality.
“Any potential benefits of gender-affirming hormones must be weighed against the largely unknown long-term safety profile of these treatments in children and adolescents with gender dysphoria,” NICE said.
Source: Evidence for puberty blockers use very low, says NICE – BBC News
The UN, ILGA, Stonewall and the Women’s Caucus: Jo Bartosch investigates calls for the removal of laws prohibiting sex with or between adolescents – Lesbian and Gay News
In 2020, on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Fourth World Conference on Women, 200 NGOs signed a so-called ‘feminist declaration’ which calls for the removal of laws prohibiting sex with or between adolescents, the abolition of laws prohibiting of certain forms of violence against women and the full decriminalisation of prostitution.
The ‘feminist declaration’ was the work of the Women’s Caucus, a collection of organisations which lobby on the fringes of the UN. The declaration is hosted on the website of the New York based NGO, the International Women’s Health Commission (IWHC). IWHC are described on their website as co-conveners of the Women’s Caucus. According to their most recent financial report, one of IWHC’s most generous donors is the Open Society Foundations (OSF) which gave in excess of $100,000 in 2018-19. OSF donate to many organisations which call for the full decriminalisation of the sex industry, and the replacement of sex-based rights with those based on gender identity.
Here, couched in the language of human rights, is a call for a reduction in the age of consent. The World Health Organisation define adolescence as occurring between the ages of 10-19. Furthermore, the phrase “sexual and reproductive services” ushers in the possibility of commercial sexual exploitation of adolescents in surrogacy and prostitution.
Elsewhere in the document there is a commitment to “replacing punitive laws with comprehensive social interventions” with regard to issues including “female genital mutilation, domestic and intimate partner violence, and child, early and forced marriage.” This would seem to be a call for decriminalisation of some the most pernicious forms of violence against women and children.
Interestingly, the UN has some qualms about the type organisations with which they will work. Those who promote what are in effect laws that could lead to the rape of children are welcomed into the fold. Whereas grassroots organisations which promote women’s sex-based rights are not to be tolerated.
On 26 March 2021 the WHRC were removed from the online space on the grounds that they had ‘disrupted discussion’ during an event and made ‘offensive comments related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, physical appearance, political affiliation, age, race, national and/or ethnic origin, immigration status, language, religion, or indigeneity’. WHRC co-ordinator, Jo Brew, contests this;
“My only comment in chat during the whole event was that the opening meeting was inspiring” she said. “It is impossible for me to have done the things that they say that I have. Chat transcripts from conference events would confirm this.”
The story here extends far beyond lobby groups like ILGA and Stonewall. The Women’s Caucus document could legitimately be recognised as rolling-back every gain feminists have made over the past two hundred years. It is clear there are a host of organisations working at an international level to undermine basic human rights and moral boundaries.
The amendment threatening to derail the domestic abuse bill – Politics.co.uk
Parental alienation’s origins begin in the 1980s with a rogue psychiatrist named Richard Gardner. Gardner had an unusual obsession with child sexual abuse. He believed that there were certain natural sexual inclinations between adults and children, and that modern societies were engaged in unnecessary hysterics over paedophillia. In order to prevent fathers from facing any consequences for child sexual abuse, he invented a concept called Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) to be used in courtrooms. His goal was to prevent accusations by mothers of child abuse by fathers from being believed.
The power of PA is that it seems like a reasonable concept; you can imagine scenarios where one parent acts to exclude another. Yet PA has instead become a smokescreen, a tactic to obfuscate custody hearings and garner sympathy from judges and custody evaluators who may have an instinctive suspicion towards women. Its objective is to make abusive men the victims and protective mothers the perpetrators. Although PA proponents use gender-neutral language, empirical studies have demonstrated that its impact is gender-specific.
Although there is an obvious grift taking place, the PA industry’s growth has also been due to its main philosophical driver. This is the belief that children require equal access to both parents for a healthy upbringing, and that this should take precedence over any violent behaviour. Once the court submits itself to this idea, any action a mother takes to protect her children from an abusive father is deemed an act of “alienation”. Women’s expected obligations are now not to her children’s welfare, but to facilitating contact with a father, regardless of his behaviour.
This is making it almost impossible for women to protect their children from men who they know are dangerous.
Including an amendment that would make PA a form of abuse itself will further entrench accusations of “alienation” as an instrument to manipulate the courts. The state will willingly allow itself to become a weapon that abusive men can use against their children and former partners. It will have fully submitted itself to this repugnant market.
Source: The amendment threatening to derail the domestic abuse bill – Politics.co.uk
Lesbians vs. Pedophiles: A Recent History
Forty years ago, lesbians booted pedos out of the gay rights movement. Is it time to do it again?
Last March, the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex Association (known as ILGA in its short form) co-sponsored a declaration which included a demand for the reform of laws which limit the “recognition” of an adolescent’s “agency” to consent to sex.* An “adolescent,” by international standards, is a youth of 10-19 years of age.
This declaration, and its stuffed-in mandate, flew relatively under the radar, with very few activists groups or media outlets catching the sneaky addition buried on page 5 among a host of other, more reasonable, demands.
This is not the first time the ILGA has pushed to expand access to minors for sex. In fact, the last time such a thing had happened was in the 1990s, and the ILGA was expelled from its consultative status with a UN body for having ties to NAMBLA – the North American Man-Boy Love Association. NAMBLA is the oldest organized “pedophile rights” group in the world.
ILGA formally removed NAMBLA from its membership in 1994 – a shame it still carries to this day, evidenced by the maintenance of a statement on its official website condemning NAMBLA and pedophilia.
But the damage of association, across so many gay rights groups, had long since been done.
How much of this damage could have been mitigated had the gay rights community just listened to the lesbians – the women activists who had been throwing up red flags as early as the 1970s?
With the renewed inclusion of the amendments about “sexual liberation” for minors in the new ILGA declaration, history appears to be repeating itself only 40 years later. And, once again, it will no doubt fall to the women, the lesbians, to right the ship.
Trans Women are Men . . .including Me – – Debbie Hayton
When Sons Become Daughters: Parents of Transitioning Boys Speak Out on Their Own Suffering – Quillette
What follows is the introductory instalment of When Sons Become Daughters, a four-part Quillette series that explores how parents react when a son announces he wants to be a girl—and explains why so many of these mothers and fathers believe they can’t discuss their fears and concerns with their own children, therapists, doctors, friends, and relatives.
Putting aside general concerns about gender ideology, there are medical worries that pertain specifically to males. In particular, there’s insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy or safety of hormonal treatments prescribed to many young men in the United States. A Swedish study has pointed out the alarmingly poor outcomes for many MtF post-operative transsexuals, suggesting that surgery is far from the mental-health panacea it is often portrayed to be. Another study shows that 19.9 percent of those taking MtF hormones stopped mid-course. Compare this to the equivalent figure for FtM (female to male) hormone treatments, which is 6.6 percent. In the same study, 23 of the 117 MtF transsexuals failed to participate in the one- to four-year follow-up, almost one-fifth of the cohort. This is a figure that might well raise eyebrows: Four years is not a long amount of time to stay in touch with a research team, particularly given the highly invasive nature of the associated surgical procedures.