Many of the other somatic psychiatric treatments of the twentieth century were given predominantly to females. Pressman (1998) wrote that “an enduring mystery of the psychosurgery story, is why women were lobotomized nationally at a rate twice that of males” (p. 303). Braslow (1997) argued that the doctors entwined madness and unladylike behavior, and psychosurgery was seen as a potential intervention to restore femininity. In addition, women were “shackled, straightjacketed, bound and secluded” much more often than men (p. 157). Women who masturbated could be ordered to undergo clitoridectomy; men who masturbated and acted out “never lost their penises or testicles as a cure for these activities” (p. 168). In a feminist account, Showalter (1985) also portrayed psychiatry as a history of the colonization and subjugation of women.
Homosexuals’ bodies have also been a favored site for experimental twentieth century medical and surgical interventions in which treatment, social control, and punishment goals blur.
My final historical example is the hormonal treatment of “tall girls” and “short boys.” From the 1960s through until the 1980s, large numbers of adolescents, who had no underlying medical pathology or hormonal abnormality, were prescribed hormonal treatment for their height (Cohen & Cosgrove, 2010). The reasons stated for such treatments, for what nowadays might be called “height dysphoria,” included that adolescents were distressed, and their height had negative social impact. For example, “careers in classical ballet or being an airline hostess were closed” to “tall girls” and their prospects of finding a husband were jeopardized (Wettenhall et al., 1975). Some adolescents and their parents eagerly sought this treatment, led to it by the encouragement of physicians and school nurses, enthusiastic media promotion, and pharmaceutical companies’ advertising. At the time, the hormones were declared safe, but years later concerns emerged about long-term adverse effects, including impaired fertility and increased risk of cancers (Benyi et al., 2014; Venn et al., 2004). Some boys treated with growth hormone developed Creutzfeld–Jacob disease, an aggressive early onset and fatal dementia. In Australia, this led to a federal government inquiry and an apology. In France, criminal charges were laid against some of the physicians involved (Cohen & Cosgrove, 2009, pp. 262, 350). Importantly, there had been a lack of controlled trials to confirm the efficacy, either on improving psychosocial outcome or the impact on height, of these treatments. A retrospective cohort study of “tall girls” revealed that 42% of the study group regretted the hormonal treatment they received (ibid., p. 232). Tall girls and short boys may be a visual affront to some societal “ideals” of male strength female fragility. This seems another part of the story of medicine acting to reinforce society’s sex stereotypes, and for some patients it came at disastrous personal cost.
Masculinizing chest surgery is part of the controversial gender affirmative treatment approach to GD youth. This approach is underpinned by the view that a child or adolescent’s stated gender identity should be endorsed not questioned, and that they should be supported to undertake social transition, medical transition, masculinizing chest surgery, and, some also argue, genital surgery. Those advocating this approach consider these gender affirming treatments medically and ethically essential (Baams, 2021; de Vries et al., 2021; Transgender Health, 2020; Walch et al., 2021).
Some influential LGBTIQ and parent groups are vocal in their support of affirmative treatments for GD youths, but other such groups express concern. Some consider that placing the label “trans” on gender non-conforming youth is an expression of the homophobia of our society. They are concerned that the hormonal and surgical interventions maybe a repetition, albeit unwittingly, of historical treatments that aimed at converting homosexual people to fit with heterosexual norms (Stock, 2021, pp. 83–84). There is emerging research data that support these concerns.
How, then, do we best read the affirmative treatment approach for GD youth? Should it be read triumphantly as cutting-edge, ethical, and evidence-based medicine continuing on its progressive march of improving human life? Or is it a manifestation of dangerous medicine, that despite best intentions will cause more harm than benefit to vulnerable youths, and over which future historians and physicians will shake their heads?
Between the ages of 16 and 20, Kiera Bell identified as a man and took testosterone and underwent a double mastectomy. She then detransitioned. In a court testimony, she described her regret: “I felt like a fraud…more lost, isolated and confused than I did when I was pre-transitioned…only recently…I have started to think about having children and if that is ever a possibility, I have to live with the fact that I will not be able to breastfeed my children…I made a brash decision as a teenager…trying to find confidence and happiness…now the rest of my life will be negatively affected” (Bell, 2020, pp. 21–22). In these words, Bell holds herself responsible for making a “brash decision” in her youth. This may be an indication of maturity and taking responsibility, but it also has a more concerning element–a victim blaming herself for mistreatment. In my view, the medical profession needs to consider whether, in its championing of the gender affirmative approach for GD youth, it is also acting brashly and making mistakes that will negatively impact some young people for the rest of their lives.
Category: Transgenderism
Cancel culture: Gender, sex and power, the debate dividing universities
Lawford-Smith, a New Zealand-born woman in her late 30s, is an associate professor of political philosophy at the University of Melbourne. In late February she launched a website, www.noconflicttheysaid.org, that invited women to contribute anonymous stories “about the impacts on women of men using women-only spaces”.
When Hannah McCann, a lecturer in gender studies at the same university, heard about the website, she was outraged. Two days later, McCann tweeted out an open letter to the university leadership accusing a staff member of creating a website that “vilified” trans people by denying the legitimacy of trans women and promoting the stereotype of trans people as predatory.
More than 2700 people signed the letter, including about 170 academics and 17 professors.
Students and staff staged a rally of more than 100 people and marched with placards to the office of the Dean of Arts, demanding action against one academic who, like many of them, identifies as a feminist and on the Left.
The letter caused divisions within the National Tertiary Education Union.
Big internet companies are increasingly defining gender-critical feminism as hate speech. In 2019, Lawford-Smith was reported for hate speech for tweeting that trans women who were biologically male should not have access to women-only spaces. Twitter banned her and she lost all her professional contacts and platform. Her protests to Twitter produced only automated responses.
“I’m in the peculiar position of being an associate professor at a great university, who cannot have a Twitter account to promote her own research, because it’s deemed hateful,” she says. “It’s terrifying that an American company is controlling the speech of the whole world.”
Lawford-Smith’s claim seemed to be borne out by a recent episode of the ABC program, You Can’t Ask That, on lesbians. A trans woman cheerfully tells the camera: “Trans women are women… I can be a lesbian and suck some dick. It just has to be attached to a good-looking lady.” On the same show gender-critical feminists, many of whom are lesbian, were casually trashed as TERFs, without a representative of that viewpoint being heard.
Source: Cancel culture: Gender, sex and power, the debate dividing universities
Gender Critical Feminism Soon May Be Criminalized in Canada – Women Are Human
CA — . Gender critical feminism may soon be construed as hate speech in Canada under the Canadian Criminal Code.
Gender critical feminism is a branch of feminism that maintains that one’s objective, biological sex is immutable and should take priority over one’s subjective, self-identified gender. All other principles of gender critical feminism rely on these main principles of biology over ideology. Gender critical feminists are, first and foremost, feminists, and as such we prioritize the rights, safety and dignity of women and children.
Collectively, bills C-10 and C-36 will have devastating effects on both freedom of expression and women’s rights in Canada. They will effectively censor and criminalize gender critical feminism. They will censor our ability to freely speak to our uniquely sex-based experiences, to biological reality, and to our ability to name our oppressors. This is the ultimate twenty-first century practice of misogynistic, sex-based female oppression.
The time to speak up is now, before women are silenced and punished by the law like the so-called “witches” who were burned alive during the 16th and 17th centuries. The time to speak up is now, before one more woman is fired from her academic post for maintaining that sex is an immutable trait. The time to speak up is now, before one more Canadian female author is doxed and forced to live in exile in Mexico. The time to speak up is now, before the concept of female loses all meaning in the collective consciousness. The time to speak up is now, before one more man is credited as being the “first ever female to…” achieve a certain distinction that has always been held by males. The time to speak up is now, before one more female author’s feminist book is banned from local bookstores and burned by gender ideologues. The time to speak up is now, before one more woman fleeing abuse and poverty is forced to sleep on the cold streets at night while men occupy beds in her local women’s shelters. The time to speak up is now, before one more teenage girl has her healthy breasts surgically removed because she is fleeing womanhood like a house on fire. The time to speak up is now, before one more man from drag queen story hour for children turns out to be a registered sex offender. The time to speak up is now, before one more male rapist and murderer is transferred into a women’s prison, like a lion entering a cage of gazelles. The time is now, before one more female athlete has her skull smashed in like a tin can by a male opponent who identifies as a woman. The time to speak up and write to your Member of Parliament is now, before bills C-10 and C-36 have passed.The time is to speak up is now, before democracy receives another blow!
Source: Gender Critical Feminism Soon May Be Criminalized in Canada – Women Are Human
Stonewall crumbles, Prick News settles, Owen Jones and mates in dumb and dumber shocker. – by Suzanne Moore – Letters from Suzanne
The wall of stupid starts to crumble and now more people may begin to understand why Stonewall and that crew has held onto its ‘no debate’ policy for so long. While they hand out incorrect advice on the law to those who have signed up their Diversity Champions Scheme, they have always refused to actually debate those who question their current stance, even if these people are founding members of their organisation.
No debate is a tactic ,one can see running through what is known as Dentons , a document produced by the Thomas Reuters Foundation https://www.iglyo.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/IGLYO_v3-1.pdf .
It outlines ways to get the law changed in several countries so that children may legally change their gender without the approval of their parents. Comparing different countries , it says such a stance is unlikely to win popular support but that one of the ways to push through changes in law is to avoid media exposure. Keep the press out in other words. Introduce legislation by sleight of hand .
Then we got Nancy Kelley of Stonewall , it’s CEO finally agreeing to be interviewed on Woman’s Hour.
Kelley kept trying to talk about being a Mum, perhaps because this was Woman’s Hour. Who knows? Who cares? But the kicker was when she said that actually you cannot change biological sex and that it is possible to have ‘gender critical beliefs’ that are not harmful to trans people.
When I said these things in The Guardian well….we know what happened. Yet now the head of Stonewall says them.
IOC: Males No Longer Required to Reduce Testosterone to Compete in Women’s Sports – Women Are Human
On November 16, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) issued new guidelines, which it said followed a two-year consultation with over 250 athletes and concerned stakeholders.
“IOC Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations” determined there should be no presumption that male athletes seeking to participate in women’s sports have an automatic advantage over female competitors.While 2015 IOC guidelines recommended male athletes maintain testosterone blood levels at 10 nmol/L or below for at least 12 months before they were eligible to compete in women’s sports, the new framework discards the requirement, concluding that athletes should not be pressured to undergo medically unnecessary procedures or treatment or be forced to undergo invasive physical exams to determine their sex.The IOC’s new framework flies in the face of recent professional research.
Source: IOC: Males No Longer Required to Reduce Testosterone to Compete in Women’s Sports – Women Are Human
Why US feminists are behind their UK counterparts – and how they’re catching up
Kara Dansky’s book, ‘The Abolition of Sex: How the ‘Transgender’ Agenda Harms Women and Girls’ is part of a growing struggle by US feminists.
Source: Why US feminists are behind their UK counterparts – and how they’re catching up
Abuse of Incarcerated Women by Male ‘Trans’ Inmates Drives Lawsuit Against California – Women Are Human
US — California. Incarcerated women forced to share cells, shower with and be naked in the presence of male inmates – many of whom have intact male genitals and some of whom sport beards – are suing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). The women say SB 132, also known as The Transgender Respect, Agency and Dignity Act, “cannot be applied in any manner that avoids violating the federal and state constitutional rights” of incarcerated women. According to a complaint filed at the United States District Court yesterday by Women’s Liberation Front on women who are currently or were previously incarcerated, at least 23 male inmates have been transferred into women’s prisons under SB 132, which was passed into law on January 1, and “several hundred” other men have requested placement in women’s prisons.
Petra Bueskens – by Savage Minds – Savage Minds
Dr Petra Bueskens, psychotherapist, writer and Honorary Fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne, discusses her op-ed last year on JK Rowling which which went viral opening up a debate within the Australian Sociological Association and led to a minority of members denouncing her as a “transphobe.” Lending a sociological perspective, Bueskens discusses the Balkanisation of cultural and political debates around this issue into “silos of unreason” which do not follow the pre-digital rules of debate. Jumping from the Jarod Lanier who has been outspoken about the destruction wrought by social media where outrage results in more online engagement, Bueskins discusses how online culture has resulted in social groups that are almost entirely based upon an identification with oppression noting how both sides of this debate are “limbically hijacked.” Turning to a class criticism within identity politics, Bueskins analyses the betrayal of the working class by the left which has taken over the institutional managerial class composed of baby boomers who sold out the left as careerists and the younger generation who lack the tools to critique this discourse.
Listen now (99 min) | S2E9
Keep Kids Away From The UN’s ‘Sexuality & Gender Expert’ – by JL – The Glinner Update
The UN ‘sexual orientation and gender expert’ has endorsed gender affirming treatment in extremely young children and made claims that puberty blockers are reversible. Victor Madrigal-Borloz is a Costa Rican-born human rights lawyer who now lives in Boston. Much of his career has focused on LGBT issues. He is a signatory of the Yogyakarta Principles plus 10.
The dangers and side effects, many of which are only now just coming to light, have been expertly and meticulously documented by Professor Michael Biggs.
Either Victor Madrigal-Borloz, the UN’s sexuality and gender expert and a Harvard senior researcher, is completely unaware of the ever-burgeoning evidence that demonstrates puberty blockers are hazardous and experimental, or he is well aware of the dangers and the warnings, yet still chooses to peddle them to vulnerable kids.
Either way, he’s a danger to children.
Source: Keep Kids Away From The UN’s ‘Sexuality & Gender Expert’ – by JL – The Glinner Update
Judge: Prison Would be Too Hard for ‘Transgender’ Repeat Stalker, Con – Women Are Human
AU — Brisbane. A former nurse avoided a prison sentence after a judge determined that it would be too difficult for an individual with a transgender identity to spend time behind bars. Reluctance of judges to convict or sentence to prison defendants who identify as transgender, even for serious crimes, appears to be growing in Brisbane.
37-year-old Chloe Jessica Earle, who is male and identifies as a woman, pleaded guilty to two counts of Extortion and a count of Stalking.
The defendant, who was previously named Clinton Earle, advertised escort services in an online ad in 2019.
While on bail, Earle extorted a man who had declined to meet following a sexual phone conversation. The 48-year-old transferred $200 after Earle called back and got aggressive. Earle received $500 more after posting messages about the man on social media and calling his wife. He continued the attempts at extortion.
There is a growing pattern of judges refusing to give a conviction or prison sentence on the grounds that the defendant is ‘transgender’.
Vetea Joseph Bunton, also of Brisbane, was found in possession of a mobile device that contained “15 images depicting young boys between the age of five years and 16 years posing naked, performing oral sex or engaging in anal intercourse, either with other young people or adults.” He pleaded guilty. An attorney presented a forensic psychologist report, which determined that the images were downloaded out of “curiosity” while struggling with “transgender identity” and “sexual identity.” A judge rejected the argument and sentenced Bunton to probation, but in 2019, a Court of Appeal ordered the record of conviction expunged due to such “unusual circumstances” as Bunton’s “psychological profile.”
Jeffrey Terrence Anderson of Brisbane was convicted of raping a 12-year-old child and two six-year-old children while he was babysitting. While Anderson was in prison, corrections officers found a three-page story in which he detailed a fantasy of raping a three-year-old. He was discovered with images of children as late as 2017. A psychologist observed: “Anderson’s belief that the risk of re-offending would be mitigated by becoming a woman is not supported and somewhat naive.” Still, a judge accepted Anderson’s claim that the cross-sex hormones he had begun using in prison decreased his urges to rape children. Anderson was released from prison on June 4, 2020.
Source: Judge: Prison Would be Too Hard for ‘Transgender’ Repeat Stalker, Con – Women Are Human