Gender Essentialists Shutter Lesbian and Gay RCPsych Conference

Quick follow-up on this Post: Transgender: Time to Change
Fundamentalist sex-role essentialists have been successful in efforts to prevent Lesbian and Gay Psychiatrists from meeting to discuss treatment of sex roles in their field. Transgender lobbyists claim that lesbians and gays have no right to discuss increasing medical sterilization of children who fail to conform to traditional sex roles. They also maintain feminists have no right to publicly discuss sex roles, as such discussion offends their belief in the essential nature of sex roles.
Christian Conservatives, Muslim Fundamentalists, Orthodox Jews, Transgenderists and other right wing groups believe sex roles are innate to one’s physical sex.  In many cases these groups demand sex role incongruence be “corrected” with drugs and surgical “treatment”, altering the appearance of physical sex to protect the status quo. This extends to children as young as eight years old whom gender essentialists advocate treating with drugs to prevent sexual maturity in expectation of surgical sterilization. Most of the children being “treated” for sex role incongruence are lesbian and gay.
RCP sponsors of the Lesbian and Gay conference announced today that the conference was being cancelled due to poor ticket sales leading up to the May 20th event following weeks of complaints from sex-role fundamentalists that the conference, which featured sex-role critique was offensive to their beliefs.
Prior to the cancellation Charing Cross Hospital, which runs the largest “Gender Clinic” in the UK  (and claims to “treat” individuals suffering from sex role dysphoria – distress associated with a mismatch between psychological sex role and natally assigned sex) publicly withdrew it’s support from the Lesbian and Gay group when it realized that the event may include some critique of the sex roles they claim to treat.
The RCP is to be complimented for attempting to arrange a conference critical of the sex-roles held so dearly by gender fundamentalists and also for bravely addressing the practices of many of their professional colleagues in promoting sex role compliance.
Gender believers may have bullied yet another Gay and Lesbian group into keeping their sex-role conversations private but they cannot and will not stem the increasing tide of awareness of how such sex-role fundamentalism is harmful to women, to gays and lesbians, and to children.

0 thoughts on “Gender Essentialists Shutter Lesbian and Gay RCPsych Conference

  1. When are the LGB going to kick the T out of the alphabet?
    Clearly tranzjacktivists are anti-gay/lesbian. Gay and lesbian groups and individuals are their main protest targets now.
    So sorry this conference got cancelled, I was going to try to make it.

  2. I don’t know when the T is getting kicked out, but it won’t happen unless the radical L’s start raising some hell with our organizations wherever and whenever this comes up. I think one good way of fomenting revolution around this is to comment about it wherever the blogger isn’t afraid to let this view in (mostly men’s blogs at this point and in any case, it’s really they who have the audiences. Pam’s House Blend is the only lesbian-headed political blog and it’s firmly in the thrall of the trannies). If Dan Savage or John Aravosis or Michelangelo Signorile start getting uncomfortable with little gay boys getting hormone treatments, the house of cards may begin to fall.

    1. Noanodyne, if I remember correctly, Signorile once made a statement to the effect that someday, “the gay masses would shake off the B and the T.” That was some time back in the eighties or early nineties. In his recent publications, however, he has completely backtracked on the trans issue.
      My guess is that the widely read gay male bloggers will simply assume, for now, that doctors who support transsexual ideology are nice, preogressive types who are not the least bit homophobic, therefore they would never, ever prescribe hormones for anything but the most enlightened, progressive reasons. Said bloggers, being nice progressives themselves, are not at all concerned with the fact that nice progressives usually have the same view of women as Rush Limbaugh, they’re just a tad more subtle about it.
      Dan Savage might be reachable. He has moved off his anything goes dime recently, and has even been willing to say in print that some practices are too extreme for anyone to give meaningful consent to. (Interestingly, he made that statement in reference to men who live out castration fantasies.) Unfortunately, he seems to think that F2T transition is just part of the wackiness of female sexuality, which is always slipping, and sliding, and transmuting, and morphing into whatever anyone wants it to be. (Because women are so malleable! It’s probably because they have, like, cycles.)

      1. Good info, LLG, and absolutely right on about nice progressives. I hate even thinking of them as possibly helpful in all this… well, I hate thinking about them, generally, but I’ve started to see pissy gay boy comments about all this T stuff. It’s cramping their style. Signorile especially likes to camp it up old style, talking about dresses and such, and I’m sure he hates being told that kind of thing is now transphobic. Their points of reference are of course themselves, so with luck all that ego will be useful when applied to this little issue. The sex part of it absolutely makes some of them supremely uncomfortable — maybe even (or especially?) Savage.

      2. Btw — after posting this, I wasted a few minutes reading Savage’s latest column. It contains this gem, addressed to a man who is uncomfortable with only finding women sexually attractive, and whose friends, who are “very into the post-gender, post-modern cultural studies mind-set,” have mocked him for his het-ness:
        “Accept that you’re straight, COLD [Cock Observer Laments Disconnect], pursue the women you’re attracted to, and stay the hell away from heterophobic, post-gender/post-modern/pansexual cultural studies majors whose immaturity, self-loathing, and anger all manifest in a refusal to accept that a good guy can also be a straight guy.”
        In another response, Savage shows a glimmer of awareness that the letter-writer’s wife may never come around to tolerating his lactation fetish, because…DUH. Then, of course, he reverts to type, implying that Priority No. 1 should always be getting back to a hoppin’ sex life, new baby or not.
        Then there’s the usual BS about threesomes…
        In another time, Savage would have had an exclusively gay male readership, and stayed within the bubble of the gay raunch culture. That’s a closed world, and even though it has more than its share of dehumanizing ugliness, it’s easier for the participants to ignore that, because of the “circle the wagons and don’t criticize our own” mindset, and because men can never really shed the social advantages of being male, even when they’re 22 and have given their questionable consent to having some older guy whip the living shit out of them for kicks.
        Early in his career, however, Savage seems to have realized that there’s more money in playing Court Perv Jester for heterosexuals. The trouble is, once you have women, straights, transsexuals, and “queers” in the mix, it’s harder to ignore all the BS and logical inconsistency in the so-called sex positive movement, especially the pomo academic branch. He’s starting to acknowledge, even if only jokingly at times, that some of this stuff is just plain nuts. I’m hoping the pervy heterosexuals who hang on his every word will pay attention.

  3. Excellent use of terms and description to cut through all their lies, Mag: “[S]ex-role fundamentalism is harmful to women, to gays and lesbians, and to children.”
    And this is EXACTLY who they are and what they are about:
    “Fundamentalist sex-role essentialists”
    “[S]uch discussion offends their belief in the essential nature of sex roles”
    “Gender essentialists advocate treating with drugs to prevent sexual maturity in expectation of surgical sterilization”
    “Sex-role fundamentalists”
    “[P]romoting sex role compliance”

  4. How incredibly depressing 🙁 I mean seriously, I don’t even know what else to say. This is just really leaves me so very disappointed.
    I seriously considered attending this conference and if it had been longer than a day I might have (money was an issue, as I am in the US).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 512 MB.
You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other.
Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded.