September 13, 2015
Testimony admitted by the British Association of Gender Identity Specialists to the Transgender Equality Inquiry in the UK Parliament took a surprise turn when members sounded the alarm over what they warned is an “ever increasing tide” of transwoman criminal sex offenders. They outline how sex-offending transwomen whom they describe as “pretend transsexuals” adopt a transgender identity for various nefarious purposes, often involving increased access to vulnerable women and child victims.
Description of the British Association of Gender Identity Specialists, from the August 20, 2015 testimony to Parliament [PDF] [all bolding in this post by me-GM]:
The Association numbers over a hundred members and comprises the overwhelming majority of all clinicians working in every Gender Identity Clinic in the British Isles. The membership is drawn from all the involved disciplines and includes Speech Therapists, Psychologists, Psychiatrists, Surgeons, Psychosexual Counsellors, Nurses, Occupational Therapists, Endocrinologists, General Practitioners and Social Workers.
From the testimony:
The criminal justice system merits quite a bit of thinking about.
On the one hand, many of us can remember patients who were charged with crimes, convicted and who ended up on the sex offenders register when we thought that the same thing wouldn’t have happened if they weren’t a trans person. A good example would be the transwoman charged with sexual assault after some brief fellatio with two males who were two and three years younger than her own age at the time (she was eighteen). They were visitors to the area and boasted to their cousin of their recent sexual encounter. The cousin, enlightening them as to the nature of the person they had had a sexual encounter with, caused them to feel embarrassed. One thing led to another and the patient was charged with sexual assault. Given that she was in a kneeling position at the time and that it would have been perfectly possible for either one of the males concerned to run away this seemed a bit implausible. In the end, she was convicted of being reckless as regard to age. This does place her on the sex offenders register, though. One suspects that she would never have been charged at all if she had been a born female.
The converse is the ever-increasing tide of referrals of patients in prison serving long or indeterminate sentences for serious sexual offences. These vastly outnumber the number of prisoners incarcerated for more ordinary, non-sexual, offences. It has been rather naïvely suggested that nobody would seek to pretend transsexual status in prison if this were not actually the case. There are, to those of us who actually interview the prisoners, in fact very many reasons why people might pretend this. These vary from the opportunity to have trips out of prison through to a desire for a transfer to the female estate (to the same prison as a co-defendant) through to the idea that a parole board will perceive somebody who is female as being less dangerous through to a [false] belief that hormone treatment will actually render one less dangerous through to wanting a special or protected status within the prison system and even (in one very well evidenced case that a highly concerned Prison Governor brought particularly to my attention) a plethora of prison intelligence information suggesting that the driving force was a desire to make subsequent sexual offending very much easier, females being generally perceived as low risk in this regard. I am sure that the Governor concerned would be happy to talk about this.
To recap the points made in that second paragraph:
There is an “ever increasing tide” of incarcerated transwomen accessing transgender care services.
These transwomen are overwhelmingly convicted of “serious sexual offenses”, facing “long or indeterminate” sentences.
These transwomen convicted of serious sexual offences “vastly outnumber” transgender prisoners convicted for ordinary crimes.
Transgender care providers have identified several “improper purposes” utilized by the vast majority of incarcerated transwomen seeking transgender care.
These are identified as follows:
- Access to trips out of prison
- Sexual access to vulnerable incarcerated females
- Early parole due to parole board’s false belief that transwomen are less dangerous than other men.
- False belief that transgender medical treatments will decrease their future impulses to commit criminal sexual offenses.
- Desire for special status within prison system.
- Desire for protected status within prison system.
- Enhanced ability to commit future serious sexual offenses against women and/or children while disguised as women.
The Parliamentary testimony of the Association of Gender Identity Specialists goes on to complain that “Informed Consent” models of transgender care, where adopted, force clinicians to knowingly facilitate criminal sex offenses against women and children through the administration of transgender medicine.
There has been much talk recently of an “informed consent” approach being adopted.
The difficulty is that this phrase is much used in medical practice at the same two word phrase holds a wholly different meaning in the context being suggested. In routine medical practice in this and other countries the phrase “informed consent” means that patients can only be felt to have consented to any medical procedure if they have been fully informed, and understood, the likely consequences, both positive and negative, of the treatment being suggested, advised of alternative treatments that might be available, (including no treatment at all) and the likely positive and negative consequences of those alternatives. It is assumed in advance that the treatment suggestion is that being advanced by the practitioner concerned, the question being whether the patient is consenting to that treatment in a fully informed way.
The same phrase — “informed consent” — seems to the Association to have been borrowed by those suggesting very radical and negative shift in medical practice. It is suggested that provided patients are of sound mind (this amounts to the exclusion of serious mental illness) and understand the nature and consequences of what they request it should, essentially, be the role of the practitioner to fulfil that request. Crucially, there seems to be no recognition or acknowledgement of the view of the practitioner concerned about the merit of the suggested procedure. If actually implemented, this arrangement would leave medical practitioners in the position of having to make diagnoses they do not believe in, prescribe drugs they personally believe will not benefit the patient and undertake surgical procedures that they themselves believe will confer no benefit or cause harm. This is incompatible with medical practice, the first tenet of which is that one should “first, do no harm”.
In practical application, the worrying prisoner described in the paragraph above would be in a position to oblige medical practitioners to advance a plan the basis of which is the facilitation of subsequent sexual assault.
Read the full testimony at the above PDF link.
Filed in Crime, Government, Law, Medicine, Transgender, Women
Tags: British Association of Gender Identity Specialists, gender identity, improper purpose, incarceration, informed consent, prison, sex offenders, testimony, Transgender Equality Inquiry, transgender prisoners, transwomen prisoners
August 21, 2015
Social worker Aydin Olson-Kennedy of the Los Angeles Gender Center is calling on the transgender community to donate funds to perform a double mastectomy on a child with Down Syndrome who is currently in an Intensive Care Unit due to her complex medical issues. “Just say yes to donating and sharing”, urges Olson-Kennedy. Aydin is a representative of The Child and Adolescent Program at Los Angeles Gender Center, which works in collaboration with Dr. Johanna Olson, Md. at Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, rubber-stamping children as psychologically competent to undergo the irreversible medical gender treatments the doctor provides before the age of consent. Aydin is a lesbian who takes testosterone and has undergone breast removal herself. Regular readers may remember her long-running YouTube channel “Aydin33” where she deliberated at length over her own gender-related mental health issues. Aydin Olson-Kennedy and Johanna Olson were legally married in a lesbian ceremony last month which was featured in Gay Weddings Magazine. In addition to their positions facilitating and administering off-label sex hormone treatments to children under the age of consent, both Aydin Olson-Kennedy and Dr. Johanna Olson are also employed by the Endo International Pharmaceutical corporation which formulates and markets the hormones being prescribed.
The fundraiser for the developmentally-disabled child, named “Sky”, is scripted by her mother, “Mary T”, as the child is apparently unable to read and write, or dictate on her own. It reads:
I have come a ways on my journey as a transgender young man, feeling awkward and out of place in the female assigned body in which I was born. Realizing my male identity, I have felt since early puberty that this is wrong, that this isn’t the way a dude’s body is supposed to appear. I have, accordingly, worn multiple baggy layers to cover the uncomfortable masses on my chest for the last many years and tried to convince everyone that I came across that it’s not me, that I’m a guy. It pains me even to look at an image of myself. I acknowledge that it has been quite a journey for my mom to adjust too, having had no previous knowledge that I was actually born this way. When my mom was finally on board with the right understanding and able to affirm my gender, we spent the last few years together, trying to find all the right treatments and supports. Read the rest of this entry »
Filed in Children, Medicine, Transgender Children
Tags: age of medical consent, Aydin Kennedy, Aydin Olson-Kennedy, Aydin33, Children's Hospital of Los Angeles, cognitive impairment, developmental disability, differently abled, Down Syndrome, Endo International, Endo Pharmaceutical, eugenics, informed consent, Johanna Olson, Johanna Olson-Kennedy, Los Angeles Gender Center, pediatric medicine, pediatrics, transgender medicine
Planet Fitness revokes membership of woman who reported a man in the women’s locker room, citing “No Judgement Zone” policy
March 7, 2015
A woman in Midlands, Michigan was banned from the Planet Fitness gym and had her membership revoked after she complained of being frightened by a man in the women’s locker room.
Yvette Cormier told news channel WNEMTV5 that she supports LGBT people but that the man in the locker room gave no indication whatsoever of being a transgender person. “This is very unprofessional. It’s very scary”, she said. “I was stunned and shocked. He totally looked like a man. He was not dressed like a woman at all.”
She reported him to Planet Fitness management. “They proceeded to tell me that they have to embrace whatever sex somebody thinks they are.” She was told by management that Planet Fitness policy allows any male who “self-reports” an internal “female identity” the right to access areas of public nudity which are sex-segregated for the privacy and protection of women and girls, and that no attempt would be made by management to screen for males who might choose to access such spaces for improper purposes. Their policy states: “…members and guests may use all gym facilities based on their sincere self-reported gender identity.” [Italics by me-GM].
The male individual involved in the incident has not been publicly identified.
Days after the incident a Planet Fitness corporate representative contacted Cormier and informed her they had learned that she was discussing the incident with other women in the locker room, and that women expressing “judgement” about their safety and privacy in regard to sharing a locker room with men was a violation of the company’s “no judgement” for women policy.
Transgender activists hailed the outcome as a victory for the male rights of “transwomen”, who seek the elimination of the human rights of privacy, public safety and free speech of actual female persons- those formerly known as “women”. (Per the transgender male rights movement, women are no longer permitted to refer to themselves by the word “women” without a qualifier, in order to equalize the rights of 0.2% of the male population’s “gender feelings” with the rights of the entire female 51% of the Earth’s population).
In a follow-up, news station WNEMTV5 apologizes to the public for referring to the man as “male” in the earlier report; According to the transgender rights movement (and the news professionals at WNEM!), a man’s objective biological sex is whatever he claims “to feel it to be” at any particular moment.
Yvette Cormier accepts that Planet Fitness has the right as a private business to allow males into women’s areas of nudity at their gym, whether the men “feel female” at the moment or not. But she feels women have the right to be warned of the unisex policy before the business forces women without consent into close contact with males in public locker rooms. “They should point that out before you sign up to join their gym, or post it on the front of the bathroom door” she told WNEM.
Women in Michigan could lobby for a state law to that effect. Currently Florida is considering just such a statute. Florida Bill HB 583 states, in part, that such unisex facilities must be “conspicuously designated” as such.
*UPDATE* The man involved in this incident has come forward. See updates in comments here: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/03/07/planet-fitness-revokes-membership-of-woman-who-reported-a-man-in-the-womens-locker-room-citing-no-judgement-zone-policy/#comment-49710
Filed in Feminism, Gender, Law, Trans Politics, Women
Tags: bathroom bill, Carlotta Sklodowska, carlottabullshit, Florida HB 583, improper purpose, informed consent, Planet Fitness, public accomodations, right to consent, War On Women, women's rights vs. male gender feels