What do you think are the most significant events in the gender culture war this year?
Some suggestions: California laws—including the one Newsome vetoed. The shutting down of Wash U’s youth gender clinic. [22?] Bans in red states. Expanded access in blue states. SEGM and Genspect conferences. A Democrat dissented in Texas. Posey Parker and the tomato juice in New Zealand. The long-awaited release of the NIH data (aka the Chen paper).
What else has happened this year that you think is really significant (whether you think it’s good or bad)?
Lisa, I hope this won’t be unwelcome, but I actually thought, in the end, this incident--or really not so much the incident itself as what ensued in response thereafter--provoked some really interesting, intelligent discussion from a variety of perspectives on issues I was only minimally aware of and that I see now are far from trivial. (I am not on Twitter and only bookmark a very few people there, so I came to this late and was sort of stunned and of course concerned about some of what I saw.) The people I found most helpful in sorting through what had occurred and how to think about it included you, Lisa, with your incredibly thoughtful post, Helen Joyce, with her superb post on organizational growing pains and how to put appropriate procedures in place for addressing flare-ups, and Kate Parker, weighing in here. I thought also Zach Elliott made a good contribution.
Susan, I agree wholeheartedly. I actually see the different positions that emerged from this incident as very important outside of the world of gender-critical people. Those looking from the outside in, especially the ones who are critical of GC beliefs, have a very distorted view of what (I think) most GC people believe. The Blue Dress incident is helping clarify thoughts and positions, and I think it is really important for the purposes of strong and meaningful activism. It's really hard to fight against youth gender transition when the leading organization (Genspect) is sometimes at odds with itself about some fundamental things, like who gets to wear what. I was super happy to see what Stella wrote as Genspect's response to the incident.
I'm not on social media, so I have no way of letting her know how important I think her point of view is, so Julia, if you're reading this: Thank you, I'm SO glad you said this!
1. Female athletes refusing to play against males. 2. JK Rowling refusing to cave in to those who hate her for defending women's rights to women-only spaces and sports. 3. "A woman is an adult female human."
I’ve been very heartened to see momentum building in the UK on several fronts, thanks to the extraordinarily hard and good work by Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce at Sex Matters, Kelly-Jay Keen and her Let Women Speak events, Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock at The Lesbian Project, and so many other individuals and groups. We are much further behind the curve in the US, but thanks to all who, like Lisa, Kara Dansky, and so many others who keep speaking out, I am hopeful that we are making headway, too.
3 international conferences (Genspect, SEGM) which brought together journalists, researchers, lawyers, advocates, clinicians, detransitioners, and educators. This networking raises spirits, motivates participants, destigmatizes the gender critical position, and creates a legitimate opposition.
So agree! And, while not without growing pains, as we’ve recently seen, the creation and development of organizations like this is just critical to forward momentum. BTW, on the subject of growing pains, this conversation between Stella and KJK is excellent: https://youtu.be/OqG2gYvXm9A I am hopeful this is something these two formidable women can build on, online and off, in continuing conversation toward our shared objectives.
Many spelled out well in Jesse's great analysis and in the viral Reddit post which pointed out why its problem wasn't that it was so methodologically weak but that it was so methodologically strong and could not find evidence of benefit and hid a lot of the outcomes.
The Dutch Zembla documentary: The transgender protocol. This documentary shows that the Dutch protocol - which is considered a reference for the medical treatment of transgender young people - is scientifically flawed and the treatments are experimental. https://www.bitchute.com/video/AEFZv6dqtERN/
In the US, I have seen that the state of New Jersey has at least two now, that I’ve heard of, school boards *reversing* the policy of withholding preferred name/pronoun data from parents. I don’t live in New Jersey, but am hoping like social contagion, that spreads to my current state of Maryland where our Montgomery County Public School is very, very liberal and does have the policy where schools and teachers can’t tell the parents if their kids are socially transitioning at school. It really sets up a mistrust between parents and teachers, whereas for many, many years past I believe parents and teachers were collaborating as mature, responsible, caring adults for the well-being and upliftment of the children.
Zembla and the collapse of the Dutch protocol. Everyone saying go back to the Dutch protocol because the Dutch found (smith 2001) that many who didn't meet their criteria later on didn't want to transition, and the Dutch kids seemed simpler. Not as much going on. And I guess some who were happy having transitioned did look like the Dutch profile when young. But Abbruzzese et Al 2023 describe a Dutch group where all the kids desisted. And describe outcomes from the few from the Dutch protocol that they've now followed up...many having issues. Significant number changing their identity...post surgery.
I nominate the interviews with Vaishnavi Sundar on the topic of her upcoming documentary profiling 18 trans widows. Find 2 trailers at Lime Soda Films YT channel. An excerpt that will appear in Behind the Looking Glass, from my memoir:
Bad news Nov 22, 2023: "BOSTON — A new State Police unit will work with other law enforcement agencies and community partners as Gov. Maura Healey's administration looks to bolster strategies for addressing hate-based incidents tied to race, ethnicity and religion, among other biases." Other biases?? How long will we have any freedom of speech at all? With these kinds of onslaughts, not long. Organize now while you still can.
Lifting this up again. Today, 11/27, is the last day to submit comments on what looks to be an extremely bad proposed federal foster care regulation. Here’s the information I have:
I have submitted a comment. Below is the text. I urge everyone to do so. It’s best to use your own words, but feel free to use this as a base. You don't need to be an expert, though all here most likely are:
I write as a staunch Democrat and also a lesbian, which I indicate so there can be no mistake about my perspective, to beg of you not to proceed with this change in regulations until you have fully acquainted yourself with the harms that are being caused by inappropriately applied "gender affirming care." Foster children are at particular risk for confusion about their sex and sexuality and can easily be swept into thinking they are born in the wrong body, when the cause, if examined properly through thoughtful mental health therapy, may likely lie elsewhere.
As just one example, the proposed regulations state, with regard to prospective foster parents, "For example, to be considered a safe and appropriate placement, a provider is expected to utilize the child's identified pronouns, chosen name, and allow the child to dress in an age-appropriate manner that the child believes reflects their self-identified gender identity and expression.”
This is what is called "social transition." The eminent British pediatrician, Dr. Hillary Cass, in her interim report on gender identity services for children and young people, found of social transition that “this may not be thought of as an intervention or treatment, because it is not something that happens within health services. However, it is important to view it as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning. There are different views on the benefits versus the harms of early social transition. Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge
Ill-considered regulations like the one proposed here have the potential to consign children whose distress is caused by other factors to life-long medical interventions which cause them harm and do not resolve the underlying issues.
What is needed here is to step back from regulations like this and conduct a systemic review like that which has been done in many enlightened European countries. Only from that point will it be possible to determine the best approach in caring for these vulnerable children.
"...The measure, which Kotek is expected to sign, will protect providers who perform abortions or gender-affirming care from prosecution or civil liability as other states restrict or ban such care. It also would strengthen requirements that health insurers cover reproductive health care and gender-affirming care, including treatments like facial feminization surgery and electrolysis that are now treated as cosmetic procedures..."
Lula, so with you on this! I am also on the lookout--so much of this slips under the radar. In NYS, as one example, the legislature passed, and the governor signed, a bill that will now be put on the ballot to amend the state constitution. The bill is touted as protecting abortion rights, but tucked in there (in the same manner as the federal Equality Act), is a provision that redefines sex to include gender identity. There is no concerted opposition to this, which is frightening. One big missing piece in opposing such things is an organizational watchdog the primary purpose of which is to track federal and state legislation and send out alerts when comments need to be submitted or electeds need to be called. (Right now, as you’ll see in my comment today, there’s a terrible proposed regulation on foster care, and the last day to comment is today. I haven’t seen any alerts on this from organizations I follow.) Erin Friday and Our Duty appear to be stepping into the breach on this in CA, and I hope this will expand to other states.
Thanks, this is just the thing. I saw these posts and skimmed, but didn't put them together with "Chen paper." Thank goodness for journalists like Singal who can parse the intricacies of these things. Reminds of tobacco companies funding studies that proved smoking was good for your health.
Perhaps the most underreported story of the year - NEJM finally publishing critiques to the Chen study from Michael Biggs and others....and Chen and deVries rather pathetic responses
"But grandpa, what did you do in the great Blue Dress debate of 2023?" - Absolutely no one in 2033
The nonevent of the year!
Lisa, I hope this won’t be unwelcome, but I actually thought, in the end, this incident--or really not so much the incident itself as what ensued in response thereafter--provoked some really interesting, intelligent discussion from a variety of perspectives on issues I was only minimally aware of and that I see now are far from trivial. (I am not on Twitter and only bookmark a very few people there, so I came to this late and was sort of stunned and of course concerned about some of what I saw.) The people I found most helpful in sorting through what had occurred and how to think about it included you, Lisa, with your incredibly thoughtful post, Helen Joyce, with her superb post on organizational growing pains and how to put appropriate procedures in place for addressing flare-ups, and Kate Parker, weighing in here. I thought also Zach Elliott made a good contribution.
Susan, I agree wholeheartedly. I actually see the different positions that emerged from this incident as very important outside of the world of gender-critical people. Those looking from the outside in, especially the ones who are critical of GC beliefs, have a very distorted view of what (I think) most GC people believe. The Blue Dress incident is helping clarify thoughts and positions, and I think it is really important for the purposes of strong and meaningful activism. It's really hard to fight against youth gender transition when the leading organization (Genspect) is sometimes at odds with itself about some fundamental things, like who gets to wear what. I was super happy to see what Stella wrote as Genspect's response to the incident.
Also, I wanted to give a shout out to Julia Malott, who also spoke about this very compellingly, in my opinion: https://twitter.com/AlottaMalotta/status/1727164676499222784?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
I'm not on social media, so I have no way of letting her know how important I think her point of view is, so Julia, if you're reading this: Thank you, I'm SO glad you said this!
1. Female athletes refusing to play against males. 2. JK Rowling refusing to cave in to those who hate her for defending women's rights to women-only spaces and sports. 3. "A woman is an adult female human."
Time to Think, published in Feb 2023, which is also when the Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling came out.
Yes, the publication of Time To Think was very welcome - at least IMHO.
I’ve been very heartened to see momentum building in the UK on several fronts, thanks to the extraordinarily hard and good work by Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce at Sex Matters, Kelly-Jay Keen and her Let Women Speak events, Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock at The Lesbian Project, and so many other individuals and groups. We are much further behind the curve in the US, but thanks to all who, like Lisa, Kara Dansky, and so many others who keep speaking out, I am hopeful that we are making headway, too.
3 international conferences (Genspect, SEGM) which brought together journalists, researchers, lawyers, advocates, clinicians, detransitioners, and educators. This networking raises spirits, motivates participants, destigmatizes the gender critical position, and creates a legitimate opposition.
So agree! And, while not without growing pains, as we’ve recently seen, the creation and development of organizations like this is just critical to forward momentum. BTW, on the subject of growing pains, this conversation between Stella and KJK is excellent: https://youtu.be/OqG2gYvXm9A I am hopeful this is something these two formidable women can build on, online and off, in continuing conversation toward our shared objectives.
Jamie Reed's courageous whistleblowing yes.
Block's Boston globe article.
The nejm publishing critiques of Chen et Al.
Many spelled out well in Jesse's great analysis and in the viral Reddit post which pointed out why its problem wasn't that it was so methodologically weak but that it was so methodologically strong and could not find evidence of benefit and hid a lot of the outcomes.
https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/15hhliu/the_chen_2023_paper_raises_serious_concerns_about/
Time to think
Turban not understanding what a systematic review is
The Brandt files
There's so much....
The Dutch Zembla documentary: The transgender protocol. This documentary shows that the Dutch protocol - which is considered a reference for the medical treatment of transgender young people - is scientifically flawed and the treatments are experimental. https://www.bitchute.com/video/AEFZv6dqtERN/
In the US, I have seen that the state of New Jersey has at least two now, that I’ve heard of, school boards *reversing* the policy of withholding preferred name/pronoun data from parents. I don’t live in New Jersey, but am hoping like social contagion, that spreads to my current state of Maryland where our Montgomery County Public School is very, very liberal and does have the policy where schools and teachers can’t tell the parents if their kids are socially transitioning at school. It really sets up a mistrust between parents and teachers, whereas for many, many years past I believe parents and teachers were collaborating as mature, responsible, caring adults for the well-being and upliftment of the children.
Oh yes, and some school districts in California, too. Good call!
Zembla and the collapse of the Dutch protocol. Everyone saying go back to the Dutch protocol because the Dutch found (smith 2001) that many who didn't meet their criteria later on didn't want to transition, and the Dutch kids seemed simpler. Not as much going on. And I guess some who were happy having transitioned did look like the Dutch profile when young. But Abbruzzese et Al 2023 describe a Dutch group where all the kids desisted. And describe outcomes from the few from the Dutch protocol that they've now followed up...many having issues. Significant number changing their identity...post surgery.
I nominate the interviews with Vaishnavi Sundar on the topic of her upcoming documentary profiling 18 trans widows. Find 2 trailers at Lime Soda Films YT channel. An excerpt that will appear in Behind the Looking Glass, from my memoir:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qriekEerELw&t=17s
Bad news Nov 22, 2023: "BOSTON — A new State Police unit will work with other law enforcement agencies and community partners as Gov. Maura Healey's administration looks to bolster strategies for addressing hate-based incidents tied to race, ethnicity and religion, among other biases." Other biases?? How long will we have any freedom of speech at all? With these kinds of onslaughts, not long. Organize now while you still can.
Exactly. "hate-based incidents" is wide open to interpretation by cops, govt, courts, media...
is Woman-face a "hate-based incident" yet?
Lifting this up again. Today, 11/27, is the last day to submit comments on what looks to be an extremely bad proposed federal foster care regulation. Here’s the information I have:
To be approved for placement, prospective foster parents are, among other things, “expected to utilize the child’s identified pronouns, chosen name, and allow the child to dress in an age-appropriate manner that the child believes reflects their self-identified gender identity and expression.” Here’s the federal register link: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/09/28/2023-21274/safe-and-appropriate-foster-care-placement-requirements-for-titles-iv-e-and-iv-b
I have submitted a comment. Below is the text. I urge everyone to do so. It’s best to use your own words, but feel free to use this as a base. You don't need to be an expert, though all here most likely are:
I write as a staunch Democrat and also a lesbian, which I indicate so there can be no mistake about my perspective, to beg of you not to proceed with this change in regulations until you have fully acquainted yourself with the harms that are being caused by inappropriately applied "gender affirming care." Foster children are at particular risk for confusion about their sex and sexuality and can easily be swept into thinking they are born in the wrong body, when the cause, if examined properly through thoughtful mental health therapy, may likely lie elsewhere.
As just one example, the proposed regulations state, with regard to prospective foster parents, "For example, to be considered a safe and appropriate placement, a provider is expected to utilize the child's identified pronouns, chosen name, and allow the child to dress in an age-appropriate manner that the child believes reflects their self-identified gender identity and expression.”
This is what is called "social transition." The eminent British pediatrician, Dr. Hillary Cass, in her interim report on gender identity services for children and young people, found of social transition that “this may not be thought of as an intervention or treatment, because it is not something that happens within health services. However, it is important to view it as an active intervention because it may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning. There are different views on the benefits versus the harms of early social transition. Whatever position one takes, it is important to acknowledge
that it is not a neutral act, anda better information is needed about outcomes. "https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Cass-Review-Interim-Report-Final-Web-Accessible.pdf
Ill-considered regulations like the one proposed here have the potential to consign children whose distress is caused by other factors to life-long medical interventions which cause them harm and do not resolve the underlying issues.
What is needed here is to step back from regulations like this and conduct a systemic review like that which has been done in many enlightened European countries. Only from that point will it be possible to determine the best approach in caring for these vulnerable children.
Thank you for your consideration.
https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2023/06/21/abortion-transgender-care-bill-that-nearly-torpedoed-oregon-legislative-session-heads-to-governor/
"...The measure, which Kotek is expected to sign, will protect providers who perform abortions or gender-affirming care from prosecution or civil liability as other states restrict or ban such care. It also would strengthen requirements that health insurers cover reproductive health care and gender-affirming care, including treatments like facial feminization surgery and electrolysis that are now treated as cosmetic procedures..."
I'm not happy that this bill links the issue of abortion care with "gender - affirming" care. Two VERY different things.
I don't live in OR but I'm always on the lookout for state's actions that could mushroom to more states.
Lula, so with you on this! I am also on the lookout--so much of this slips under the radar. In NYS, as one example, the legislature passed, and the governor signed, a bill that will now be put on the ballot to amend the state constitution. The bill is touted as protecting abortion rights, but tucked in there (in the same manner as the federal Equality Act), is a provision that redefines sex to include gender identity. There is no concerted opposition to this, which is frightening. One big missing piece in opposing such things is an organizational watchdog the primary purpose of which is to track federal and state legislation and send out alerts when comments need to be submitted or electeds need to be called. (Right now, as you’ll see in my comment today, there’s a terrible proposed regulation on foster care, and the last day to comment is today. I haven’t seen any alerts on this from organizations I follow.) Erin Friday and Our Duty appear to be stepping into the breach on this in CA, and I hope this will expand to other states.
This has just been published in Australian newspapers.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/talking-trans-adolescents-gender-transition-and-the-conversations-we-need-to-have-20231103-p5ehin.html
This is behind a pay wall. Do you have an archived version you can post here?
Is this accessible?
https://www.theage.com.au/national/talking-trans-adolescents-gender-transition-and-the-conversations-we-need-to-have-20231103-p5ehin.html
No, sadly it's not...
I'll see what I can do when I'm be ack at my laptop.
I somehow missed this Chen paper/release of NIH data. Has there been discussion around that? What are the takeaways from various camps? Analysis?
I hadn’t heard of it either. Jesse Singal has a good breakdown here of some issues, about midway through: https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-scientific-transparency-researcher
Thanks, this is just the thing. I saw these posts and skimmed, but didn't put them together with "Chen paper." Thank goodness for journalists like Singal who can parse the intricacies of these things. Reminds of tobacco companies funding studies that proved smoking was good for your health.
Unless this is a different study?
It seems to be the same paper? I clicked through Singal's link, and it takes me to a paper dubbed in January of this year, lead author is "Chen."
Singal wrote 2 great essays, also https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/15hhliu/the_chen_2023_paper_raises_serious_concerns_about/
Perhaps the most underreported story of the year - NEJM finally publishing critiques to the Chen study from Michael Biggs and others....and Chen and deVries rather pathetic responses
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297#article_letters