I wanted to write a review of #GirlLikeYou, which is ABC’s portrait of coercive control.
However someone’s already written in for us!
As a little extra – just look out for the flashbacks to the childhood videos. The despondent child in the corner. Is he a victim, or is he just petulant? How would we know – the mood images are presented as evidence that Lewis lived on the brink of suicide. But we don’t know that at all do we?
You can find printable pro-formas to encourage GPs to refer children to the service.
There are a number of videos affirming the trans child identity. Parents, older trans individuals and young people describe the importance of an affirmative approach. There is no mention of desistance as an option for a child presenting to the clinic.
A linear path is presented to children
Navigating the ‘gender forest’ (oh please) is done in a straight line toward the GP Tree festooned by gender transition leaves. Your entry to the ‘forest’ leads directly and only to medicalisation.
The referral proforma presents linear flow charts to describe the steps for treating youth with medical gender issues.
There is NO mention of desisting from a trans identity.
There is NO reference to detransitioners, and their voices are NOT HEARD in any of the videos.
They present puberty blockers as ‘reversible’ (they’re no).
They present binding and tucking as ‘harmless’ (they’re not).
Deciding your goals
The ‘gender forest’ directs children to “decide on your goals”. This is an enormous amount of pressure to put on a child. Or on an adult. What are YOUR life goals? Do you want to cut your breasts off one day? C’mon we need an answer.
Trans away the gay
A lengthy video features 2 adolescents – a male and a female – talking about their transitions. The male relates how he initially ‘came out as gay’. The female adolescent talks about transitioning to escape “glitter and sparkly princess dresses”.
The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health has just published this excellent article pointing out that the science is FAR FROM settled on the application of piberty blockers to treat gender dysphoric children.
Listen to me read out this article then check it out yourself
Quotes (all from the article)
Further, the magnitude of the post-treatment improvements in mental health was small. The depression (Beck Depression Inventory) scores improved by around 3 out of 63 points,
A study of 14 young people with gender dysphoria who were rejected from puberty suppression due to “psychological or environmental factors” found that at follow-up 1–7 years aer the original application, 11 of 14 did not feel any regret about not undergoing gender confirmation.7
…this same study, which to date is the only attempt to replicate de Vries and colleagues,5 found “no evidence of change in psychological function with GnRHa treatment“, including measures of distress and self-harm
The study concluded that the reported psychological improvements are “either of questionable clinical value,
Puberty blockers for gender dysphoria: the science is far from settled – The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health
When you are deciding whose evidence to follow, are you following the doctors who are providing treatments that put children on a life-long medical pathway? Or are you listening to these clinicians whose only aim is to help children get healthy so they can live their lives free of medical intervention?
Malone, D’Angelo, Beck, Mason and Evans don’t get paid to ask you to think twice before medicalising your kids. Gender Therapists, on the other hand, do stand to make a lot of money by convincing you that a perfectly healthy boy is really a girl because he likes Barbies.
All the comments and reactions are variants of “good luck with that mate” because we aren’t homophobic, xenophobic, transphobic and whatever else we’re accused of.
The worst you’ll find is women who are repelled by men in dresses arguing with women who don’t kind so much.
Or some disagreement about whether the “true trans” is a real thing.
Lots of newly peaked women freaking out and finding their bearings.
But wait! What’s a dog whistle?
Dog whistle politics is where you say seemingly reasonable things which are a cipher for your truly regressive and oppressive politics. The wider public trust your “moderate” approach and your base still understands that you are with their extreme interests.
“Family values” is a good example. Does this mean more schools or does this mean ban homosexuality? It could mean both. An audible message and an inaudible “dog whistle” second meaning.
With a little enquiry, it is possible to find out whether a dog whistle is in play.
So what’s the GC dog whistle? You have to ask that question. An accusation of dog whistle politics is an accusation that you are a liar.
YOU have to challenge this accusation wherever it occurs. Ask “what is the deeper meaning?”
It won’t take long to uncover their lies and lazy arguments. There’s no hidden meaning. Men are not women. No child is born in the wrong body. There’s nothing wrong with being a lesbian.
Patriarchy is a word that gets over-used and is often misunderstood. I don’t use it very often.
Patriarchy is men’s control of women in order to control their reproductive capacity. It can be hard to demonstrate clearly. Yet here is the perfect example of Patriarchy in action.
A mother, just after giving birth looks on as a male has taken her child and taken her place in the bonding ritual. Instead of learning to nourish the child and form the mother-child dyad, she is a forlorn onlooker. Her missing breasts have cast her into the role of the female eunuch.
The newborn child has not consented to starve while they suck at a dry male breast. The mother may have consented to give up her reproductive power, but that baby has not. It has been born as an accessory to a male fetish.
He is clearly in control. He has taken the mother’s child and rewards her by being “proud of [her] work”. She looks on as he calls the shots, as he takes what is hers. “We’re going to supplement the feeding” he says “so that my baby can get the nutrients it needs”.
It. Not a person. An ‘it’. A ‘mine’.
“I’m still feeling hopeful.” He adds, as though hope can feed a baby. His baby.
Maya Forstater has won her appeal against her dismissal for “transphobic” tweets.
On appeal, the tribunal ruled in June 2021 that Forstater’s beliefs and their expression were protected under articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Wikipedia).
In other words, women have won the right to believe and state that sex exists and sex matters,
This is a monumental development for women’s rights in the UK, and it will resonate around the globe.
So, why is the ABC silent?
On the left is the global coverage when searching “Maya Forstater” and on the right is the ABC coverage.
You can see that ABC found it fit to cover the story in 2019, using criticism for JK Rowling as an entry point to the issue. They sum it up nicely:
JK Rowling is facing widespread criticism from the transgender community and other activists after tweeting support for a researcher who lost her job for stating that people cannot change their biological sex.
As trans women (males) are at the forefront of conversation, you might get the impression that it is trans-women (males) who are most victimised. After all, we know that women are more victimised by men, and trans women claim to be “more marginalised” than women. It makes sense that they would be more often the victims of sexual abuse.
However the reverse is true. Trans men (FEMALES) are twice as likely to be victims of sexual abuse than trans women (MALES).
Women descended on ABC headquarters in Sydney today in protest over biased media coverage of gender-related issues.
Organiser Eileen Haley says she tipped off Media Watch to the issues in a recent Australian Story episode on Michelle Telfer’s gender clinic.
Ms Haley says “This broadcast covers up and misrepresents what Dr Michelle Telfer did in 2014. She told a patient there would be no long-term consequences to the use of puberty blockers. Experts now admit the long-term consequences of puberty blockers are unknown. The very positive treatment accorded Dr Michelle Telfer in ‘Australian Story’ was enhanced by distorting her 2014 professional performance to make it look more nuanced and fact-based than it actually was. It surely isn’t, or shouldn’t be, the role of the ABC to misrepresent and cover up deficiencies in a high-profile featured subject’s professional performance in this way, particularly when it involves such a serious issue as gender dysphoria.”
Another protestor commented “it is homophobic to say that a feminine boy should become a girl”.
ABC News also failed to report on the landmark Keira Bell court case in the UK where it was found that children could not consent to puberty blockers.
Signs read “No child is born in the wrong body” and “Don’t leave it to Murdoch to blow the whistle” on puberty blockers, unfairness in women’s sport, and female erasure in response to the ABC silence on these issues.
The women demanded representation of feminist perspectives from the ABC, naming Holly Lawford-Smith and Janet Fraser, Feminist Legal Clinic and Womens Guild NSW as parties who are ready, willing and able to participate in panels and discussions.
Other protesters asked to remain anonymous because they fear repercussions from online mobs.
IWD Brisbane Meanjin held a similar protest in Queensland.
‘our’ ABC’s editorial policy states it will “present a range of views with impartiality” and that it “presents a diversity of perspectives”. But on gender identity ideology, the ABC refuses to interview women from women’s and lesbians’ organisations who actively oppose gender identity ideology. How about some balance from ‘our’ ABC?And guess what? As we take it to the streets, “we’ve only just begun ….”