Such an excellent piece (and title). Do you consider trying places like The Free Press, Quillette, I suppose that the WSJ was anonymously referenced, and Reuters maybe doesn't publish opinion pieces? Probably nothing here is a useful suggestion, but just in case iI might remind you of something worth checking, here goes... The Financial Times, the economist, Atlantic, Pew research, Christian science monitor, The Bureau of investigative journalism, Make use of... , Boston Review, UnHerd, Newsweek, The messenger. Your writing is important!
This is a good article, Ms. Davis. Another point that might have been germane to the diagnosis of youth gender medicine could have been the political perspectives of parents whose children are afflicted with transgenderism. Most parents of ROGD kids are politically liberal, yet are made homeless on the left by their skepticism of this new and most important dogma.
Such a good op-ed and a shame that it was passed up for what I assume are political motivations.
Would it be more palatable to re-focus the piece around the lack of support of desisters in health care and political institutions? How “desisters” has become a forbidden word and how some want them to go away because they force inconvenient conclusions. Most of the same info could be used, it would just be a reframe.
Just a thought in the hopes that your great work can find a wider audience!
The data from trans widows contains information which informs the public on the misrepresentation of 'affirmation' therapy by the mental health practitioners, and other harms suddenly "transitioning" fathers cause children and their ex-wives. This only initial data on those who opted out of a suddenly inauthentic marriage and the only data on a group as large as 43. (in the world) The rate of physical assaults, never reported to law enforcement, committed my men claiming to be female is quite shocking. The cohort is women who left. The women who stay sweep a great deal under the rug, this I know as a woman who was in it for over 2 years and others who were in it for as long as 10 years before reclaiming her life. A link to the video on YouTube channel, Trans Widow Ute Heggen is included in the blog post. As our group of respondents grows, percentages will be worked out. As of now, the stats read like this 9 of 43 women were physically assaulted by her crossdressing husband. 2 of them were reported to law enforcement.
As an Australian, I remember a time in the 1970s and 1980s when the social democratic, trade union and feminist Left in our country, and the non-Leninist elements of our socialist Left, regarded the Scandinavian countries as the exemplars of best practice in progressive politics and public policy. I wish that this was still the case because the Scandinavian countries continue to set a better example than the Anglosphere in most areas of policy - including the ones we discuss in this forum - yet our younger progressives seem enamoured of US and UK trends that, with all due respect to US and UK readers of this comment, don't set such a good example.
The ability of proponents of the gender orthodoxy to enforce "no debate" in spaces that they control or can intimidate, and the willingness of "goodthinking" leftists and liberals to "go along to get along" with the assertions of the orthodoxy, have a range of negative consequences - including, in a sense, for adherents of the orthodoxy. One is that they overestimate the extent of considered agreement with their assertions (as distinct from people simply not putting their heads above the trenches on these issues). Another is that they don't understand that there are reasoned arguments against, and criticisms of, some of their positions and practices that aren't just confined to the perspectives of either actual transphobes of the right, or people who fully embrace gender-critical feminist perspectives - thus when they accuse critics of the "affirmation-only" model of advocating "conversion therapy", I suspect that this is often because they are genuinely incapable of conceiving that there can be any position on gender medicine other than either of these poles.
One of many things I appreciate about Lisa’s posts is the way they can spur further thinking. This one led me to think, what are other ways to frame discussion of these issues and what concrete proposals can be made? Here are two thoughts, in each case under the general principle of focusing on the science and making proposals that reflect that:
>to make sound, fair judgments about inclusion of biological males in competitive women’s sports, look to the current state of science to determine whether and how (biological) males can be included in competitive sports while preserving fairness to (biological) females. If these determinations are truly based on the current state of the science, it should help avoid the need to personalize these issues. Ross Tucker and Emma Hilton are both excellent on the science, including with regard to people with DSDs. On the latter issue, Hilton is excellent in this interview: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001np6v?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile (I think her segment starts about 24:30).
Love this! Also, Politically Non-binary is actually the name of my podcast ☺️, which, fun fact, Lisa was on once to discuss her book Tomboy, back when my podcast was going by one of its former names.
Such an excellent piece (and title). Do you consider trying places like The Free Press, Quillette, I suppose that the WSJ was anonymously referenced, and Reuters maybe doesn't publish opinion pieces? Probably nothing here is a useful suggestion, but just in case iI might remind you of something worth checking, here goes... The Financial Times, the economist, Atlantic, Pew research, Christian science monitor, The Bureau of investigative journalism, Make use of... , Boston Review, UnHerd, Newsweek, The messenger. Your writing is important!
This is one of your best, Lisa! Your work is much appreciated. I look forward to sharing it.
Good piece - and the irony of what was one punishment for gays - Lipton - is now “treatment” for gay minors. Astounding. That really focuses.
Keep up the good work.
Yep I wrote about it a while back. I meant to write Lupton, not Lipton - iPhone correction
This is a good article, Ms. Davis. Another point that might have been germane to the diagnosis of youth gender medicine could have been the political perspectives of parents whose children are afflicted with transgenderism. Most parents of ROGD kids are politically liberal, yet are made homeless on the left by their skepticism of this new and most important dogma.
Such a good op-ed and a shame that it was passed up for what I assume are political motivations.
Would it be more palatable to re-focus the piece around the lack of support of desisters in health care and political institutions? How “desisters” has become a forbidden word and how some want them to go away because they force inconvenient conclusions. Most of the same info could be used, it would just be a reframe.
Just a thought in the hopes that your great work can find a wider audience!
Thank you, Lisa! Good grief, indeed. It's infuriating. I will share this widely.
The data from trans widows contains information which informs the public on the misrepresentation of 'affirmation' therapy by the mental health practitioners, and other harms suddenly "transitioning" fathers cause children and their ex-wives. This only initial data on those who opted out of a suddenly inauthentic marriage and the only data on a group as large as 43. (in the world) The rate of physical assaults, never reported to law enforcement, committed my men claiming to be female is quite shocking. The cohort is women who left. The women who stay sweep a great deal under the rug, this I know as a woman who was in it for over 2 years and others who were in it for as long as 10 years before reclaiming her life. A link to the video on YouTube channel, Trans Widow Ute Heggen is included in the blog post. As our group of respondents grows, percentages will be worked out. As of now, the stats read like this 9 of 43 women were physically assaulted by her crossdressing husband. 2 of them were reported to law enforcement.
https://wordpress.com/post/uteheggengrasswidow.wordpress.com/6136
As an Australian, I remember a time in the 1970s and 1980s when the social democratic, trade union and feminist Left in our country, and the non-Leninist elements of our socialist Left, regarded the Scandinavian countries as the exemplars of best practice in progressive politics and public policy. I wish that this was still the case because the Scandinavian countries continue to set a better example than the Anglosphere in most areas of policy - including the ones we discuss in this forum - yet our younger progressives seem enamoured of US and UK trends that, with all due respect to US and UK readers of this comment, don't set such a good example.
The ability of proponents of the gender orthodoxy to enforce "no debate" in spaces that they control or can intimidate, and the willingness of "goodthinking" leftists and liberals to "go along to get along" with the assertions of the orthodoxy, have a range of negative consequences - including, in a sense, for adherents of the orthodoxy. One is that they overestimate the extent of considered agreement with their assertions (as distinct from people simply not putting their heads above the trenches on these issues). Another is that they don't understand that there are reasoned arguments against, and criticisms of, some of their positions and practices that aren't just confined to the perspectives of either actual transphobes of the right, or people who fully embrace gender-critical feminist perspectives - thus when they accuse critics of the "affirmation-only" model of advocating "conversion therapy", I suspect that this is often because they are genuinely incapable of conceiving that there can be any position on gender medicine other than either of these poles.
One of many things I appreciate about Lisa’s posts is the way they can spur further thinking. This one led me to think, what are other ways to frame discussion of these issues and what concrete proposals can be made? Here are two thoughts, in each case under the general principle of focusing on the science and making proposals that reflect that:
>to make sound judgments about the effectiveness of gender-based pediatric medical interventions, the US should commission a systematic review of the evidence. Moti Gorin makes an excellent case for this and how it might be done here: https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pediatric-gender-care-the-cure-for-politicized-medicine-is-evidence-based-medicine/
>to make sound, fair judgments about inclusion of biological males in competitive women’s sports, look to the current state of science to determine whether and how (biological) males can be included in competitive sports while preserving fairness to (biological) females. If these determinations are truly based on the current state of the science, it should help avoid the need to personalize these issues. Ross Tucker and Emma Hilton are both excellent on the science, including with regard to people with DSDs. On the latter issue, Hilton is excellent in this interview: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001np6v?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile (I think her segment starts about 24:30).
Love this! Also, Politically Non-binary is actually the name of my podcast ☺️, which, fun fact, Lisa was on once to discuss her book Tomboy, back when my podcast was going by one of its former names.