It’s incredibly easy to criticise Susie Green, the influential and, as of Friday, ex-CEO of Mermaids. But I’d like to say this in her defence: she never lied about who she was.
From her early interviews in 2012, when her trans daughter, Jackie, then 19, became a Miss England finalist, Green, then an IT-manager, was utterly open about how she first knew her child was trans: “As a toddler, Jackie always headed for the dolls in toy shops.” And if a four-year-old looking at dolls weren’t evidence enough that this child should be committed to a lifetime of medicalisation, Green added, “[Jackie] loathed having her hair cut.” Green put Jack — as he was then known — on puberty-blockers and flew him to Thailand for a sex change operation when he was 16, making him the youngest person in the world to undergo that surgery.
She merrily recalls in a YouTube interview that because Jack’s penis hadn’t developed due to the blockers, “there wasn’t much for the surgeon to work with” when constructing their vagina. “Sorry, Jackie!” she laughs.
During her time at Mermaids, Green has been advising parents, schools, the police, the media and NHS trusts about how to deal with other children who dare to not be gender stereotypes. She was their first staff member — before Mermaids was run by volunteers — and under her leadership, she has transformed the organisation from a quiet, low-key charity to an energetically active lobbying group, and her theories about childhood and gender have been at least as influential as Judith Butler’s. Mermaids has been endorsed by the Be Kind brigade, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jameela Jamil and Emma Watson, accrued a slew of corporate sponsors and been awarded £500,000 by the National Lottery. Progressive newspapers advise readers to contact the service should they have any concerns about their child.
Since 2017, I regularly asked editors at the newspaper where I worked if I could write about Mermaids in general and Green specifically, because it was so obvious that something was very wrong here. The answer, always, was no, but the reasons given were fuzzy: it wouldn’t be right in that section, they couldn’t see the news peg, it felt too niche. A more likely reason was one articulated to me with some passion on social media any time I tweeted anything sceptical about Green or Mermaids: to question either was to wish trans children would die. Doubt the charity, hate the cause, in other words. Weirdly, this attitude seems to hold true only for charities connected to trans issues: no one, as far as I know, screamed that The Times hates starving people when they investigated Oxfam in 2018 about allegations that some of its workers paid for sex.
I do have some sympathy with those who were too scared to question Mermaids. Under Green’s leadership, the organisation has done its utmost to evade scrutiny, trotting out — even in parliamentary committees, even in the 2018 ITV drama Butterfly, starring Anna Friel, and for which Green was the series lead consultant — the claim that 48% of young trans people attempt suicide. A terrifying statistic for any parent of a gender dysphoric child, and almost as scary for any organisation that cares more about being kind than being accurate. Happily, the statistic is bunkum, as the researcher behind the study it’s based on has said, because the study involved 27 self-selecting trans volunteers, and therefore its findings should not be widened out to all gender dysphoric young people, as Mermaids had done.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“Because Green never once hid who she was.” – I had a friend recently go on tear about child abuse in the Catholic Church and how awful it was that our parents generation didn’t stop it. My response was that the abuse was 1) hidden and 2) denied. I then pointed out that our generation is not only tolerating child abuse that is publicly acknowledged and right out in the open – many – maybe most – of our generation are openly celebrating it. Medically transitioning children is simply evil. Everyone knows this – yet many champion it anyways.
Yep, and as we all know a large portion of the kids who get caught up in this insanity are gay. It’s homophobic to its core. How progressives unquestioningly support it staggers me.
Because being gay is now passé. Trans is where it’s at. Just think of the Alison Bailey case: just a few years ago she would have been unassailable, siting at the intersection of three ‘oppressed’ groups – woman, lesbian, and black. But those were all trumped by trans, hence the discrimination she faced at her place of work.
It also emboldened the privileged, expensively educated journalistic mediocrity that is Zoe Williams to righteously chastise an articulate and principled Nigerian female survivor of abuse for her concern about women’s safe spaces. “I’m not having that!” said the bold Ms Williams.
Am I the only one to find this quote (not that easy) and realise that it is taken completely out of context. She is absolutely not chastising the Nigerian lady for concern, she is pointing out that her generalisation that ALL women have the concerns that she has is totally wrong, which it obviously is. Read for yourselves: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/nov/28/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-bbc-reith-lecture-freedom-truth-trans-rights
Next time the Nazis turn up they won’t be blokes in Hugo Boss designer uniforms…(to paraphrase Churchill or Orwell or whoever). Nowadays we know what they will look like; Ever so nice, furrowed brow narcissists with permanently slightly hurt expressions.
Am I the only one to find this quote (not that easy) and realise that it is taken completely out of context. She is absolutely not chastising the Nigerian lady for concern, she is pointing out that her generalisation that ALL women have the concerns that she has is totally wrong, which it obviously is. Read for yourselves: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/nov/28/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-bbc-reith-lecture-freedom-truth-trans-rights
Next time the Nazis turn up they won’t be blokes in Hugo Boss designer uniforms…(to paraphrase Churchill or Orwell or whoever). Nowadays we know what they will look like; Ever so nice, furrowed brow narcissists with permanently slightly hurt expressions.
I could look forward to the passing of trans as the Current Big Thing, if I didn’t fear the coming of the Next Big Thing. What monster is now waiting in the wings for its introduction?
The destigmatising of ‘minor attracted people’ is one possible contender.
That was actually once supported by the German Greens Party but probably didn’t get them too many votes..
“Germany’s Greens, Europe’s most influential environmentalist party, have been obliged to open a detailed investigation into past policy and practice amid revelations that in the 1980s, its members actively supported paedophile groups which campaigned to legalise sex with children”
(The ‘Independend’ 18 May 2013)
Advocating for simple, plain old homosexuality was also fringe at one time.
Still is in , probably, in most of the world.
funnily enough, its not… still illegal if you do your research?
funnily enough, its not… still illegal if you do your research?
Your point?
Still is in , probably, in most of the world.
Your point?
Advocating for simple, plain old homosexuality was also fringe at one time.
It was supported by the Labour Party 4 decades ago
Hi Ethniciodo, please could you provide a link that supports your claim? Many thanks
Hi Ethniciodo, please could you provide a link that supports your claim? Many thanks
Heaven forbid, but I fear you are correct.
I think that one has been and gone. The Paedophile Information exchange is now the object of ridicule and horror.
It appears to have been rebranded as Mermaids.
It appears to have been rebranded as Mermaids.
That’s out there amongst wokey marxist types who never forgot that to undermine the state you have to undermine the family.
That was actually once supported by the German Greens Party but probably didn’t get them too many votes..
“Germany’s Greens, Europe’s most influential environmentalist party, have been obliged to open a detailed investigation into past policy and practice amid revelations that in the 1980s, its members actively supported paedophile groups which campaigned to legalise sex with children”
(The ‘Independend’ 18 May 2013)
It was supported by the Labour Party 4 decades ago
Heaven forbid, but I fear you are correct.
I think that one has been and gone. The Paedophile Information exchange is now the object of ridicule and horror.
That’s out there amongst wokey marxist types who never forgot that to undermine the state you have to undermine the family.
It’s useful to scrutinize the rave critical reviews of the ‘brilliant’ (WaPo) play “Downstate”, which pleads for sympathy for convicted sex criminals, including a child molester.
The Observer likens their cruel & unusual oppression – the regulation of where offenders can reside and the regular checking of their ankle monitors – to the lynching of innocent black men in US history.
There seems to be an attempt to normalize the most basic, fundamental societal taboos. Cultural Marxists understand this trend quite well…
It would seem unthinkable that anyone might try to soften our disgust at the idea of cannibalism, but…Welcome to 2022.
…youth in asia, for those who don’t listen to the experts.
What’s coming next? This book out early next year might give you some clues: https://www.dukeupress.edu/circuits-of-the-sacred
Brace yourselves!
The cover of that book is enough to put you off. God help us.
The cover of that book is enough to put you off. God help us.
“And what rough beast, its hour come round at last…” Seems like we’re stuck on historical repeat again. Horrid thought though.
Sex with children….that is the next boundary they want to cross.
You are seeing all the hints of it already. Academics publishing that pedophiles require “understanding”.
Ads for clothing and other items.
THAT is the next thing. Should scare the crap out of you.
Pedophilia is next, it has already begun.
After that will be either bestiality or necrophilia, they are already practicing their lines.
Tho, snuff could make a big comeback, esp as euthanasia is being normalized.
The destigmatising of ‘minor attracted people’ is one possible contender.
It’s useful to scrutinize the rave critical reviews of the ‘brilliant’ (WaPo) play “Downstate”, which pleads for sympathy for convicted sex criminals, including a child molester.
The Observer likens their cruel & unusual oppression – the regulation of where offenders can reside and the regular checking of their ankle monitors – to the lynching of innocent black men in US history.
There seems to be an attempt to normalize the most basic, fundamental societal taboos. Cultural Marxists understand this trend quite well…
It would seem unthinkable that anyone might try to soften our disgust at the idea of cannibalism, but…Welcome to 2022.
…youth in asia, for those who don’t listen to the experts.
What’s coming next? This book out early next year might give you some clues: https://www.dukeupress.edu/circuits-of-the-sacred
Brace yourselves!
“And what rough beast, its hour come round at last…” Seems like we’re stuck on historical repeat again. Horrid thought though.
Sex with children….that is the next boundary they want to cross.
You are seeing all the hints of it already. Academics publishing that pedophiles require “understanding”.
Ads for clothing and other items.
THAT is the next thing. Should scare the crap out of you.
Pedophilia is next, it has already begun.
After that will be either bestiality or necrophilia, they are already practicing their lines.
Tho, snuff could make a big comeback, esp as euthanasia is being normalized.
The more this insanity evolves, the more I am convinced that we are victims of a cruel media loop strategy, which has become an industry in and of itself. Someone starts a completely insane idea/movement, organizes it and morphs a non-profit organization, employing many rubes, it is then catapulted into the mainstream by the willing media, who sees the potential click bait, fans the flames with vicious attacks on any dissenters, then it comes full circle with an entire cohort of willing participants decrying the insanity of the original movement. I’m hereby jumping off this modern day, dystopian, cyber merry-go-round.
I am planning to become both, as to save tiresome expensive dinners and dates, I can stay at home and have sex with myself AND go outside for a cigarette afterwards and not have to moan at myself, or then get myself a taxi home.
Won’t you miss the morning ‘walk of shame’?
Won’t you miss the morning ‘walk of shame’?
It also emboldened the privileged, expensively educated journalistic mediocrity that is Zoe Williams to righteously chastise an articulate and principled Nigerian female survivor of abuse for her concern about women’s safe spaces. “I’m not having that!” said the bold Ms Williams.
I could look forward to the passing of trans as the Current Big Thing, if I didn’t fear the coming of the Next Big Thing. What monster is now waiting in the wings for its introduction?
The more this insanity evolves, the more I am convinced that we are victims of a cruel media loop strategy, which has become an industry in and of itself. Someone starts a completely insane idea/movement, organizes it and morphs a non-profit organization, employing many rubes, it is then catapulted into the mainstream by the willing media, who sees the potential click bait, fans the flames with vicious attacks on any dissenters, then it comes full circle with an entire cohort of willing participants decrying the insanity of the original movement. I’m hereby jumping off this modern day, dystopian, cyber merry-go-round.
I am planning to become both, as to save tiresome expensive dinners and dates, I can stay at home and have sex with myself AND go outside for a cigarette afterwards and not have to moan at myself, or then get myself a taxi home.
Yes. If gender roles are purely socially constructed then there’s no link between them and physical sex. There can be no right or wrong body. If on the other hand playing with dolls makes a ‘girl’ and with cars a ‘boy’, then gender roles are immutable and from nature. Of course the truth is nuanced, but in the trans ‘debate’ today there is no nuance, so which is it? Relative or absolute? Or just each by turns as suits the ideological subversion of human relations and individual identity as we descend into nonsense?
Both homosexuality and the wish to transition are quite serious psychological disorders and the fact that one of these disorders has been accepted by a large portion of the population as “normal” does not alter the fact.
The incessant warfare between the two is worrying, as neither seem to have much to gain from victory
Homosexuality which was illegal in my youth, has now been widely accepted, but people who practise it are afraid that the general hetero public lump it together with the even more questionable transitionism and begin to re-examine both.
Fear drives this battle, but we should be examining our values and their effect on our children.
Homosexuality was not illegal, sodomy was.
I’m sure I remember reading of many homosexuals who were arrested and fined for soliciting.
Promiscuity appears to be an intrinsic part of the behaviour, which also seems to have links to addiction.
I’m sure I remember reading of many homosexuals who were arrested and fined for soliciting.
Promiscuity appears to be an intrinsic part of the behaviour, which also seems to have links to addiction.
Homosexuality was not illegal, sodomy was.
Because being gay is now passé. Trans is where it’s at. Just think of the Alison Bailey case: just a few years ago she would have been unassailable, siting at the intersection of three ‘oppressed’ groups – woman, lesbian, and black. But those were all trumped by trans, hence the discrimination she faced at her place of work.
Yes. If gender roles are purely socially constructed then there’s no link between them and physical sex. There can be no right or wrong body. If on the other hand playing with dolls makes a ‘girl’ and with cars a ‘boy’, then gender roles are immutable and from nature. Of course the truth is nuanced, but in the trans ‘debate’ today there is no nuance, so which is it? Relative or absolute? Or just each by turns as suits the ideological subversion of human relations and individual identity as we descend into nonsense?
Both homosexuality and the wish to transition are quite serious psychological disorders and the fact that one of these disorders has been accepted by a large portion of the population as “normal” does not alter the fact.
The incessant warfare between the two is worrying, as neither seem to have much to gain from victory
Homosexuality which was illegal in my youth, has now been widely accepted, but people who practise it are afraid that the general hetero public lump it together with the even more questionable transitionism and begin to re-examine both.
Fear drives this battle, but we should be examining our values and their effect on our children.
Why, do you think? How could it happen in the open, as you say? If it’s the MSM, then why? If it’s social media, then why? How could a generation fail to understand what’s wrong and right?
This is an afterthought; what does this generation want?
What does this generation want? In the immortal word of Samuel Gompers, nineteenth-century labor leader, “More.”
A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see. The way my family looked but didn’t see what my oldest brother was doing to me. Because abuse is that thing that always, always happens to others. We all need to slow down, look more closely, and not be afraid to ask the questions we don’t really want answers to.
“A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see.”
That is not quite true in relation to P Johnson’s comment. What happened to you was confined to family and kept that way. How much closer do we need to look to witness what is being publicly displayed, and not only that but approved of and supported publicly? So a generation has actually given approval for these acts against children. Why?
“A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see.”
That is not quite true in relation to P Johnson’s comment. What happened to you was confined to family and kept that way. How much closer do we need to look to witness what is being publicly displayed, and not only that but approved of and supported publicly? So a generation has actually given approval for these acts against children. Why?
Might I humbly suggest that we have lost the habit of Christian belief or am I being too naive?
I’m not sure about that. The people who support these extremes seem to think in a very moralistic way. It seems simple enough to them; this is good, that is wrong. Things are viewed as either black or white. That’s a very primitive and uneducated way of viewing the world, but also very similar to the superstitious way the church, in the past, has controlled its members, and those who were not. They’re like a mob, caught up in the excitement of chasing devils and heretics, conferring with the relics of saints and the bleeding virgin, receiving the answers they want.
I’m not sure about that. The people who support these extremes seem to think in a very moralistic way. It seems simple enough to them; this is good, that is wrong. Things are viewed as either black or white. That’s a very primitive and uneducated way of viewing the world, but also very similar to the superstitious way the church, in the past, has controlled its members, and those who were not. They’re like a mob, caught up in the excitement of chasing devils and heretics, conferring with the relics of saints and the bleeding virgin, receiving the answers they want.
What does this generation want? In the immortal word of Samuel Gompers, nineteenth-century labor leader, “More.”
A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see. The way my family looked but didn’t see what my oldest brother was doing to me. Because abuse is that thing that always, always happens to others. We all need to slow down, look more closely, and not be afraid to ask the questions we don’t really want answers to.
Might I humbly suggest that we have lost the habit of Christian belief or am I being too naive?
Yes, Green had her son castrated and sterilized. I’d count that as abuse. At 16 did he really understand the consequences?
Why has this Green person NOT been charged with inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) may I ask?
Is not FGM illegal? Then why not MGM?
We could start a crowd funding page to fund a private prosecution
Before we do that, please understand that my daughter accused me of the heinous crime of raising her as a Christian during her childhood. She “discovered” at college that she had been lied to all along and was seriously upset with me for years. It might not be long that I, too, will be someone worth prosecuting. And to think that I paid for 4 years of this “education”.
Before we do that, please understand that my daughter accused me of the heinous crime of raising her as a Christian during her childhood. She “discovered” at college that she had been lied to all along and was seriously upset with me for years. It might not be long that I, too, will be someone worth prosecuting. And to think that I paid for 4 years of this “education”.
We could start a crowd funding page to fund a private prosecution
More than that, did he really have the agency to accept or reject? It sounds like momma had him thoroughly programmed.
I recall a news article a few years back about a young man who was raised as a girl by his mother who wanted a daughter. The truth of his sex wasn’t revealed to him and society until he was around 8-9 years of age. Mother was sectioned, young man put into care and then received years and years of counselling to help him come to terms with not being female and mother being nuts. I suspect there is going to many more instances like this to come.
Great illustration.
Great illustration.
I recall a news article a few years back about a young man who was raised as a girl by his mother who wanted a daughter. The truth of his sex wasn’t revealed to him and society until he was around 8-9 years of age. Mother was sectioned, young man put into care and then received years and years of counselling to help him come to terms with not being female and mother being nuts. I suspect there is going to many more instances like this to come.
We’re told by the woke Left that, yes, of course he knew what he was doing! But, then again, no, he possibly couldn’t – hence their defence of Shamima Begum. So, when it suits their politics, the woke Left ‘inform’ us that minors know exactly what they’re doing; when it doesn’t, they obviously don’t. Discombobulating Marxist theory rides again! Go figure, as our American friends would say.
Why has this Green person NOT been charged with inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) may I ask?
Is not FGM illegal? Then why not MGM?
More than that, did he really have the agency to accept or reject? It sounds like momma had him thoroughly programmed.
We’re told by the woke Left that, yes, of course he knew what he was doing! But, then again, no, he possibly couldn’t – hence their defence of Shamima Begum. So, when it suits their politics, the woke Left ‘inform’ us that minors know exactly what they’re doing; when it doesn’t, they obviously don’t. Discombobulating Marxist theory rides again! Go figure, as our American friends would say.
Although separate cases the Savile story also involved hidden abuse, denial, and the reluctance of those in authority to challenge a celebrity narrative.
There’s a theme here – how many people strive to build fame and celebrity to hide their failings from others (including themselves).
The virtue hides the sin… as they say
The virtue hides the sin… as they say
The abuse in the Catholic Church was hidden in plain sight. Same as Jimmy Savile. And now, the same as Mermaids and this whole child-mutilation scandal.
Not everyone in the Catholic Church is a child abuser, however everyone who worked for Mermaids is involved in enabling child abuse because that is the only point of Mermaids.
Thanks for making this necessary distinction.
Thanks for making this necessary distinction.
It was furtive and there was a disconnect between what they preached and what they practised. The trans ideologues are open about what they do.
Yes, but everyone knew… but they were afraid to say anything. Same with “Mermaids” and the like.. hiding in plain sight, but people afraid to say anything in case they got cancelled / fired. A chilling effect. Case in point is the author of this piece, who was hounded out of “The Guardian”.
Really, there is an inner logic to this kind of scandal. In the beginning phase, the institution / individual is strong, it’s socially advantageous to turn a blind eye. Cracks in the alibi start to appear, but there are pile-ons, lest the society’s self-belief is harmed. Scapegoats are found. But still the allegations continue. In “alternative” media first. Eventually, a prime-time documentary. Then plink, plink, plink, and the avalanche happens. Court cases. Inquiries. A state apology. The end-point of it all is that it becomes socially advantageous to castigate the institution / individual that did the abuse.
With the Catholic church we have come to the end of the process. With the mutilation of children caught up in the gender cult, it looks like we are about half-way through.
Yes, but everyone knew… but they were afraid to say anything. Same with “Mermaids” and the like.. hiding in plain sight, but people afraid to say anything in case they got cancelled / fired. A chilling effect. Case in point is the author of this piece, who was hounded out of “The Guardian”.
Really, there is an inner logic to this kind of scandal. In the beginning phase, the institution / individual is strong, it’s socially advantageous to turn a blind eye. Cracks in the alibi start to appear, but there are pile-ons, lest the society’s self-belief is harmed. Scapegoats are found. But still the allegations continue. In “alternative” media first. Eventually, a prime-time documentary. Then plink, plink, plink, and the avalanche happens. Court cases. Inquiries. A state apology. The end-point of it all is that it becomes socially advantageous to castigate the institution / individual that did the abuse.
With the Catholic church we have come to the end of the process. With the mutilation of children caught up in the gender cult, it looks like we are about half-way through.
Rule by homosexuals will be as successful for us, as it has been for the Catholic Church
Not everyone in the Catholic Church is a child abuser, however everyone who worked for Mermaids is involved in enabling child abuse because that is the only point of Mermaids.
It was furtive and there was a disconnect between what they preached and what they practised. The trans ideologues are open about what they do.
Rule by homosexuals will be as successful for us, as it has been for the Catholic Church
Sorry, I’m piggy backing on another comment again, but I have a question for others on this site – does anyone else find that they can reply to someone’s comment, but cannot add comments? This has been happening frequently to me recently, and to say that it is annoying is an understatement.
Yes, and I see the problem on some articles and not others – I think there’s a bug in the web page code 🙂
Be good to have it fixed
Yes, all the time!
Yes! Same for me. I’ve been in contact with the Unherd Help section and they claim to be working on it but offer no explanation of why it’s happening.
Yes. It very unfair to the commenter on whose back we have to piggy, but there is no other way in. We pay to comment, so UnHerd owes it to subscribers to fix this immediately.
I agree Allison. At least half the attraction of UnHerd is the comments section. If I can’t respond to an article or someone else’s comment because of a technical bug, I feel very short changed.
The commenters are all very intelligent on this site. Even when I don’t agree with them, I want and appreciate their opinion. No trolls, no bomb throwers, no personal invective – just well-considered argument. Well-worth the subscription price, so get it together, UnHerd!
The commenters are all very intelligent on this site. Even when I don’t agree with them, I want and appreciate their opinion. No trolls, no bomb throwers, no personal invective – just well-considered argument. Well-worth the subscription price, so get it together, UnHerd!
I agree Allison. At least half the attraction of UnHerd is the comments section. If I can’t respond to an article or someone else’s comment because of a technical bug, I feel very short changed.
This happened to me a few months ago. Contact [email protected]
Yes – happens all the time
Yes, same problem, I contacted UnHerd and was advised to refresh the page, which works.
It does not work for me, though
Oh, sorry to hear that. It is very trying.
Oh, sorry to hear that. It is very trying.
It does not work for me, though
Yes, and I see the problem on some articles and not others – I think there’s a bug in the web page code 🙂
Be good to have it fixed
Yes, all the time!
Yes! Same for me. I’ve been in contact with the Unherd Help section and they claim to be working on it but offer no explanation of why it’s happening.
Yes. It very unfair to the commenter on whose back we have to piggy, but there is no other way in. We pay to comment, so UnHerd owes it to subscribers to fix this immediately.
This happened to me a few months ago. Contact [email protected]
Yes – happens all the time
Yes, same problem, I contacted UnHerd and was advised to refresh the page, which works.
There’s a clear tell re Freeman’s suspicion that Green’s interest is in her own rights to subject her child to hormones and surgery: her aside about his p***s – “Sorry, Jackie!”.
Poor Jack! Given that he was doomed to a micro p****s by his mother, he was only left with the choice of seeing though the transformation instigated by his selfish mother. No wonder there are concerns of suicidal tendencies amongst the trans community. Surely it’s only going to grow as young people come to terms with what is being done to them and that so many in society are celebrating it!
Most chaps have growers or show-ers.
Most chaps have growers or show-ers.
Poor Jack! Given that he was doomed to a micro p****s by his mother, he was only left with the choice of seeing though the transformation instigated by his selfish mother. No wonder there are concerns of suicidal tendencies amongst the trans community. Surely it’s only going to grow as young people come to terms with what is being done to them and that so many in society are celebrating it!
“. . . constructing their vagina”. This author buys into the absurd misuse of the correct, accurate pronoun “his”. Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy. The singular surgeon was also he or she. If it’s incredibly easy to criticize Susie Green, it’s necessary to dismiss writers who mangle language in the same way.
The author is part of the media loop that is being foisted upon us.
UnHerd should change their style guide to always refer to sex-change cases by their original pronouns.
‘Its style…’? Unherd is singular.
A couple of years ago I complained to Unherd about a couple of instances of the woke racist capitalisation of “black”. To their credit, Unherd explicitly undertook to desist from this practice, and have kept their word.
‘Its style…’? Unherd is singular.
A couple of years ago I complained to Unherd about a couple of instances of the woke racist capitalisation of “black”. To their credit, Unherd explicitly undertook to desist from this practice, and have kept their word.
UnHerd should change their style guide to always refer to sex-change cases by their original pronouns.
“Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy.”
He still is.
The author is part of the media loop that is being foisted upon us.
“Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy.”
He still is.
What is the equivalent term to “misogyny” that would capture the deep hatred of everything male and masculine that seems to be present in some of these my-little-boy-wants-to-be-castrated mothers?
Misandry?
The word you are thinking of is misandry.
As a general comment about Hadley Freeman’s article, the newspaper that was censoring her is The Guardian. All this has happened under Katharine Viner’s editorship. So much for “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” (C. P. Scott).
It always seems to be the mothers pushing the trans madness, fathers don’t seem to be as enthusiastic
So, of course, Smaltime J describes attempts to push back against the madness as the definition of the patriarchy. It’s a woman’s right to persuade her son to castrate himself.
Hmmm. Perhaps the entire written history of mankind had something after all?
Sounds exactly like Nazi anti-Semitism, transferred to gender.
Sounds exactly like Nazi anti-Semitism, transferred to gender.
Very interesting point.
So, of course, Smaltime J describes attempts to push back against the madness as the definition of the patriarchy. It’s a woman’s right to persuade her son to castrate himself.
Hmmm. Perhaps the entire written history of mankind had something after all?
Very interesting point.
The term in this case is homophobia. A young boy who was not ‘male’ or ‘masculine’ enough, one who didn’t fit society’s ridiculous male stereotype. Someone recently asked me when did all of this homophobia come back again? My response was that it never left, it has been here all along.
Quite right. Humankind has been aware of this defect for eons. It’s only been about the last 30 years that the concept of “homosexual rights” has been promulgated.
Strictly speaking, there are no such things as homosexual rights – or as heterosexual rights either, for that matter. The phrase “homosexual rights” or “gay rights” is simply a piece of verbal shorthand, used to indicate that ordinary human rights, which are a matter of natural justice, apply to homosexuals just as they do to everyone else, and are not a privilege reserved to the heterosexual majority.
Strictly speaking, there are no such things as homosexual rights – or as heterosexual rights either, for that matter. The phrase “homosexual rights” or “gay rights” is simply a piece of verbal shorthand, used to indicate that ordinary human rights, which are a matter of natural justice, apply to homosexuals just as they do to everyone else, and are not a privilege reserved to the heterosexual majority.
homophobia is a non word that means fear of single
The word “homophobia” is philologically unsound – and its root meaning is not “fear of single” but “fear of the same” – but the phenomenon which it was coined to denote is only too real, although it is thankfully becoming ever less common.
The word “homophobia” is philologically unsound – and its root meaning is not “fear of single” but “fear of the same” – but the phenomenon which it was coined to denote is only too real, although it is thankfully becoming ever less common.
Quite right. Humankind has been aware of this defect for eons. It’s only been about the last 30 years that the concept of “homosexual rights” has been promulgated.
homophobia is a non word that means fear of single
And given that culturally men are being taught to despise themselves, is this having an impact?
Misandry?
The word you are thinking of is misandry.
As a general comment about Hadley Freeman’s article, the newspaper that was censoring her is The Guardian. All this has happened under Katharine Viner’s editorship. So much for “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” (C. P. Scott).
It always seems to be the mothers pushing the trans madness, fathers don’t seem to be as enthusiastic
The term in this case is homophobia. A young boy who was not ‘male’ or ‘masculine’ enough, one who didn’t fit society’s ridiculous male stereotype. Someone recently asked me when did all of this homophobia come back again? My response was that it never left, it has been here all along.
And given that culturally men are being taught to despise themselves, is this having an impact?
Hear hear
Anyone advocating interfering in the sexual development of a child is by definition a pervert.
Not necessarily. Early onset (formerly precocious) puberty has been recognised for centuries and impairs social and pyschological development. Today, treatment with anastrazole is common, particularly while the underlying aetiology is established.
But w/ the medical intervention of puberty blockers used in gender clinics we are talking about developmentally normal kids, puberty blockers have never been approved for that use.
But w/ the medical intervention of puberty blockers used in gender clinics we are talking about developmentally normal kids, puberty blockers have never been approved for that use.
Not necessarily. Early onset (formerly precocious) puberty has been recognised for centuries and impairs social and pyschological development. Today, treatment with anastrazole is common, particularly while the underlying aetiology is established.
But we know that with the Catholic Church, investigations were made, priests were publicly named and shamed, those who were alive went to prison. What I really cannot believe is that an IT Consultant from Leeds is going to ‘resign’ from a charity that has catastrophically effected so many children and get away with it? And the same applies to a paedo sympathiser? Breslow will just continue in this job at LSE after his sabbatical without any repercussions! And I can guarantee, after the amount of money she made and the messiah complex she has, she will set up another Charity and continue her work in another form. And I have to throw in Vicky Ford the previous then Families and Children’s Minister – where was she when GIDS were operating? She is back in a high profile Ministerial job!
It’s evil, abusive and should be illegal. Today a parent can easily be supportive of a child who questions their sex until such time they are consenting adults.
then why does no one ever comment on the under 12 boys abuse, legal in so many Islamic countries? fear of ” racism”?!!!
then why does no one ever comment on the under 12 boys abuse, legal in so many Islamic countries? fear of ” racism”?!!!
Yep, and as we all know a large portion of the kids who get caught up in this insanity are gay. It’s homophobic to its core. How progressives unquestioningly support it staggers me.
Why, do you think? How could it happen in the open, as you say? If it’s the MSM, then why? If it’s social media, then why? How could a generation fail to understand what’s wrong and right?
This is an afterthought; what does this generation want?
Yes, Green had her son castrated and sterilized. I’d count that as abuse. At 16 did he really understand the consequences?
Although separate cases the Savile story also involved hidden abuse, denial, and the reluctance of those in authority to challenge a celebrity narrative.
There’s a theme here – how many people strive to build fame and celebrity to hide their failings from others (including themselves).
The abuse in the Catholic Church was hidden in plain sight. Same as Jimmy Savile. And now, the same as Mermaids and this whole child-mutilation scandal.
Sorry, I’m piggy backing on another comment again, but I have a question for others on this site – does anyone else find that they can reply to someone’s comment, but cannot add comments? This has been happening frequently to me recently, and to say that it is annoying is an understatement.
There’s a clear tell re Freeman’s suspicion that Green’s interest is in her own rights to subject her child to hormones and surgery: her aside about his p***s – “Sorry, Jackie!”.
“. . . constructing their vagina”. This author buys into the absurd misuse of the correct, accurate pronoun “his”. Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy. The singular surgeon was also he or she. If it’s incredibly easy to criticize Susie Green, it’s necessary to dismiss writers who mangle language in the same way.
What is the equivalent term to “misogyny” that would capture the deep hatred of everything male and masculine that seems to be present in some of these my-little-boy-wants-to-be-castrated mothers?
Hear hear
Anyone advocating interfering in the sexual development of a child is by definition a pervert.
But we know that with the Catholic Church, investigations were made, priests were publicly named and shamed, those who were alive went to prison. What I really cannot believe is that an IT Consultant from Leeds is going to ‘resign’ from a charity that has catastrophically effected so many children and get away with it? And the same applies to a paedo sympathiser? Breslow will just continue in this job at LSE after his sabbatical without any repercussions! And I can guarantee, after the amount of money she made and the messiah complex she has, she will set up another Charity and continue her work in another form. And I have to throw in Vicky Ford the previous then Families and Children’s Minister – where was she when GIDS were operating? She is back in a high profile Ministerial job!
It’s evil, abusive and should be illegal. Today a parent can easily be supportive of a child who questions their sex until such time they are consenting adults.
“Because Green never once hid who she was.” – I had a friend recently go on tear about child abuse in the Catholic Church and how awful it was that our parents generation didn’t stop it. My response was that the abuse was 1) hidden and 2) denied. I then pointed out that our generation is not only tolerating child abuse that is publicly acknowledged and right out in the open – many – maybe most – of our generation are openly celebrating it. Medically transitioning children is simply evil. Everyone knows this – yet many champion it anyways.
It sounds like this woman had to believe that what she did for her son was the absolute correct thing to do. Instead of confronting the horror of her actions she tried to get others on board in order to validate herself.
Every adult who pushed this insanity on to children should be registered as a sex offender and kept away from them forever,
Yes, that was how I interpreted it too. A case of protesting too much. I also thought that one day Jackie might turn on her and that when that happened, her life’s work would turn to dust. Perhaps that is what’s going on – hence the suddenness and refusal to provide any information.
At, someone has probably come close to the truth. This woman needed help but never got it, and just look at the consequences. Well said, Julian.
I find that to be the case with Covid true believers, as well. It is now proved that everything we were told about C19 was a deliberate lie, yet those who got the shots and wore the masks religiously will never admit it.
In these egotistical times it is very nearly impossible to “sorry, I was wrong “.
Something to do with the fact that ‘we’ are so litigious these days?
Did you ever think about anti-COVID true believers? They, too, refuse to change their beliefs, no matter what argumetns they are faced with.
So . . . the people who were right all along should change their beliefs? Oh gee, you’re right: I never got Covid so I should run out and get the shot that gives it to me? Weird take, RF.
I, too, believe I was right all along. I guess the difference is tha I am open to the possibility that I might be proved wrong at some point. Can you say the same?
With all due respect, Rasmus, you’ve been proven wrong time and time again about COVID. It’s now coming out that lockdowns were completely disastrous for the global economy and the majority of people now dying of COVID are the vaccinated. Countries and states that didn’t have strict lockdowns are now faring betters than those that did.
I believe in the existence of Wuhan Flu, mainly because I didn’t enjoy the feeling of cannabis hangover which it gave me when I had it in February. On the other hand, I completely agree with you about lockdown. If the state ever tries this on again, we will have to smack them down hard.
And the hospitals will once again have to deal with the dead bodies.they are not fictitious like some comments on here.
And the hospitals will once again have to deal with the dead bodies.they are not fictitious like some comments on here.
Julian, if almost everybody is vaccinated (and they are) then the majority of the (small number) of people now dying of covid will be vaccinated. The arguments against lockdowns and masking are very well founded but this particular line of attack against the vaccines is illogical.
Take a look at third world countries where poor people were dropping like flies because they COULD’NT get enough vaccines. How did they catch it ? Nothing has been proved about covid, only that it came from china, the only thing that ever lasted more than a month.
I believe in the existence of Wuhan Flu, mainly because I didn’t enjoy the feeling of cannabis hangover which it gave me when I had it in February. On the other hand, I completely agree with you about lockdown. If the state ever tries this on again, we will have to smack them down hard.
Julian, if almost everybody is vaccinated (and they are) then the majority of the (small number) of people now dying of covid will be vaccinated. The arguments against lockdowns and masking are very well founded but this particular line of attack against the vaccines is illogical.
Take a look at third world countries where poor people were dropping like flies because they COULD’NT get enough vaccines. How did they catch it ? Nothing has been proved about covid, only that it came from china, the only thing that ever lasted more than a month.
With all due respect, Rasmus, you’ve been proven wrong time and time again about COVID. It’s now coming out that lockdowns were completely disastrous for the global economy and the majority of people now dying of COVID are the vaccinated. Countries and states that didn’t have strict lockdowns are now faring betters than those that did.
Where is the proof the disbelievers were “right all along”. I assume you mean yourself and that you expect others to fall for your bul**hit.
I, too, believe I was right all along. I guess the difference is tha I am open to the possibility that I might be proved wrong at some point. Can you say the same?
Where is the proof the disbelievers were “right all along”. I assume you mean yourself and that you expect others to fall for your bul**hit.
So . . . the people who were right all along should change their beliefs? Oh gee, you’re right: I never got Covid so I should run out and get the shot that gives it to me? Weird take, RF.
“Everything”, “proved”, “deliberate lie”,”religiously”, “believers” – pretty hysterical statements.
My wife has a transplant and absolutely no immunity from taking the vaccines. We’ve seen the data for reduced immunity patients that shows if she catches it they probably won’t be able to save her, but they ‘hope’ antivirals might do so. There are 500,000 people in the U.K. in the same boat as her – permanently exposed. And now they are withdrawing the antiviral treatment for immune suppressed people in January because they cost too much, so then there will be no treatment options for this group. They’re the ones who are still copping it in the covid statistics.
It’s always interesting to see the ignorance of fanatics like you who seem to think these people are of no consequence.
You obviously never worked in critical care where patients were dying at an unheard level due to a virus some disbelievers described as a cold. They were dying at such a rate the mortuaries had the bodies piled up and there was bargaining with other hospitals involved in trying to ease the backlog. Until you have experienced it your delusions cannot be taken seriously.
In these egotistical times it is very nearly impossible to “sorry, I was wrong “.
Something to do with the fact that ‘we’ are so litigious these days?
Did you ever think about anti-COVID true believers? They, too, refuse to change their beliefs, no matter what argumetns they are faced with.
“Everything”, “proved”, “deliberate lie”,”religiously”, “believers” – pretty hysterical statements.
My wife has a transplant and absolutely no immunity from taking the vaccines. We’ve seen the data for reduced immunity patients that shows if she catches it they probably won’t be able to save her, but they ‘hope’ antivirals might do so. There are 500,000 people in the U.K. in the same boat as her – permanently exposed. And now they are withdrawing the antiviral treatment for immune suppressed people in January because they cost too much, so then there will be no treatment options for this group. They’re the ones who are still copping it in the covid statistics.
It’s always interesting to see the ignorance of fanatics like you who seem to think these people are of no consequence.
You obviously never worked in critical care where patients were dying at an unheard level due to a virus some disbelievers described as a cold. They were dying at such a rate the mortuaries had the bodies piled up and there was bargaining with other hospitals involved in trying to ease the backlog. Until you have experienced it your delusions cannot be taken seriously.
it looks like munchausen by proxy to me
*Transhausen by proxy.
*Transhausen by proxy.
Yes, that was how I interpreted it too. A case of protesting too much. I also thought that one day Jackie might turn on her and that when that happened, her life’s work would turn to dust. Perhaps that is what’s going on – hence the suddenness and refusal to provide any information.
At, someone has probably come close to the truth. This woman needed help but never got it, and just look at the consequences. Well said, Julian.
I find that to be the case with Covid true believers, as well. It is now proved that everything we were told about C19 was a deliberate lie, yet those who got the shots and wore the masks religiously will never admit it.
it looks like munchausen by proxy to me
It sounds like this woman had to believe that what she did for her son was the absolute correct thing to do. Instead of confronting the horror of her actions she tried to get others on board in order to validate herself.
Every adult who pushed this insanity on to children should be registered as a sex offender and kept away from them forever,
This is the part that gets me: “And how could so many LGBT activists champion and defend a woman who saw effeminacy — and therefore homosexuality — in her two-year-old and feel she had to “correct” this “defect”?
The challenge often starts with people who can’t accept a less stereotyped view of gender: that girls aren’t all pink doll lovers and boys aren’t all macho angry GI Joe types. Loads of girls want to be boys when faced with parents who wish they were ‘more girly’, and loads of boys want to be girls when their dads can’t handle them ‘acting like girls’. Just stop it and let kids like what they like and be who they are.
Many LGBs reject the association with Ts, and are among the most active campaigners against trans ideology.
Among other things, lesbians don’t like being told (by Stonewall) that they are ‘transphobes’ if they refuse to have intimate relationships with transwomen, i.e. men.
Mermaids’ homophobia is evident in their attempt to have charity status withdrawn from the LGB Alliance, which was formed when Stonewall was captured by extreme trans ideology.
Yes, and it will soon appear what a hugely inadvisable course Mermaids took, exposing their charlatanry and the viciousness of their motivation.
It is as you say but msm has suppressed stories about the LGB groups and activists who speak out about the misogyny and homophobia of ‘transgenderism’ and how dangerous it is to women, and LGBs but esp. to the children, teens, and young adults.
But once the T was force-teamed onto the LGB for greater acceptance of the T every former LGB advocacy org in the U.S and the U.K. was parasitized by the trans movement. Money talks and the trans movement has wealthy men (male, heterosexual, cross-dresser sexual fetishists, autogynephiles/transvestic fetishists) funding it, promoting it, and the ones primarily benefiting by it (see the 11thhourblog.com). So integrity was thrown under the bus along w/ women’s and LGB’s sex-based rights and the futures of ‘transitioned’ young people.
Janice Raymond, a lesbian feminist professor at the U of Mass, wrote the book, The Transsexual Empire, in 1979 warning of the dangers of trans. And the lesbians and the feminists who’ve been calling it out the danger for decades have been threatened, de-platformed, and vilified for doing so.
But when the collective madness of transgenderism is checked we will remember the Judas goats, all the orgs., media, and individuals, including pharma and medical professionals, who sold out to the gender Borg and enabled the ‘sexual lobotomy’ of so many young people.
do they have dry stonewall in The Cotswolds?
Yes, and it will soon appear what a hugely inadvisable course Mermaids took, exposing their charlatanry and the viciousness of their motivation.
It is as you say but msm has suppressed stories about the LGB groups and activists who speak out about the misogyny and homophobia of ‘transgenderism’ and how dangerous it is to women, and LGBs but esp. to the children, teens, and young adults.
But once the T was force-teamed onto the LGB for greater acceptance of the T every former LGB advocacy org in the U.S and the U.K. was parasitized by the trans movement. Money talks and the trans movement has wealthy men (male, heterosexual, cross-dresser sexual fetishists, autogynephiles/transvestic fetishists) funding it, promoting it, and the ones primarily benefiting by it (see the 11thhourblog.com). So integrity was thrown under the bus along w/ women’s and LGB’s sex-based rights and the futures of ‘transitioned’ young people.
Janice Raymond, a lesbian feminist professor at the U of Mass, wrote the book, The Transsexual Empire, in 1979 warning of the dangers of trans. And the lesbians and the feminists who’ve been calling it out the danger for decades have been threatened, de-platformed, and vilified for doing so.
But when the collective madness of transgenderism is checked we will remember the Judas goats, all the orgs., media, and individuals, including pharma and medical professionals, who sold out to the gender Borg and enabled the ‘sexual lobotomy’ of so many young people.
do they have dry stonewall in The Cotswolds?
Well said
Many LGBs reject the association with Ts, and are among the most active campaigners against trans ideology.
Among other things, lesbians don’t like being told (by Stonewall) that they are ‘transphobes’ if they refuse to have intimate relationships with transwomen, i.e. men.
Mermaids’ homophobia is evident in their attempt to have charity status withdrawn from the LGB Alliance, which was formed when Stonewall was captured by extreme trans ideology.
Well said
This is the part that gets me: “And how could so many LGBT activists champion and defend a woman who saw effeminacy — and therefore homosexuality — in her two-year-old and feel she had to “correct” this “defect”?
The challenge often starts with people who can’t accept a less stereotyped view of gender: that girls aren’t all pink doll lovers and boys aren’t all macho angry GI Joe types. Loads of girls want to be boys when faced with parents who wish they were ‘more girly’, and loads of boys want to be girls when their dads can’t handle them ‘acting like girls’. Just stop it and let kids like what they like and be who they are.
Not to be pernickety, but you say towards the end
“… a sex change”
This is Mermaids talk. You may change your appearance or get a piece of paper that says that unicorns exists, but you canNOT change sex. All you can have is prosthetic surgery and be on life long medications.
“Sex change” really isn’t Mermaids-talk. They go for “gender affirmative” surgery.
The left always needs to talk in euphemisms if the public tends to deplore the topic or the process being described. The most recent poster child is the substitution of “women’s healthcare” for the word, abortion. Other favorites are:
“Gay” for homosexual, “investment” for taxes or spending, “gender-affirming” for sex change, etc. The list goes on and on.
The left always needs to talk in euphemisms if the public tends to deplore the topic or the process being described. The most recent poster child is the substitution of “women’s healthcare” for the word, abortion. Other favorites are:
“Gay” for homosexual, “investment” for taxes or spending, “gender-affirming” for sex change, etc. The list goes on and on.
“Sex change” really isn’t Mermaids-talk. They go for “gender affirmative” surgery.
Not to be pernickety, but you say towards the end
“… a sex change”
This is Mermaids talk. You may change your appearance or get a piece of paper that says that unicorns exists, but you canNOT change sex. All you can have is prosthetic surgery and be on life long medications.
“Green had given them to her child, as she repeated so often, and she wouldn’t deliberately harm her own child, right?”
She both would and did. She had him castrated.
Quite so. The first thing that came to mind on reading this was the contrast with anti-vaxxers, “mask deniers” and what have you. We’re told that those people are dangerously deluded idiots but that someone like Susie Green deserves sainthood for rescuing her child from the tyranny of biology. Go figure.
As someone with a visceral hatred of masks, I need no convincing of the rightness of your comment.
As someone with a visceral hatred of masks, I need no convincing of the rightness of your comment.
Quite so. The first thing that came to mind on reading this was the contrast with anti-vaxxers, “mask deniers” and what have you. We’re told that those people are dangerously deluded idiots but that someone like Susie Green deserves sainthood for rescuing her child from the tyranny of biology. Go figure.
“Green had given them to her child, as she repeated so often, and she wouldn’t deliberately harm her own child, right?”
She both would and did. She had him castrated.
Yes, she’s been trying all of this time to justify and validate her and her ex-husband’s homophobia, by encouraging the same in others.
That’s entirely possible, but I’d point the finger of blame at narcissism rather than homophobia. Her child was SO unique and special that the normal societal rules did not apply. And as other comments have affirmed, once you allow yourself to go down that route, admitting that you may have used bad judgement, or even actively harmed your own child, would require a massive threat to your values, one that Green apparently refuses to face.
That’s entirely possible, but I’d point the finger of blame at narcissism rather than homophobia. Her child was SO unique and special that the normal societal rules did not apply. And as other comments have affirmed, once you allow yourself to go down that route, admitting that you may have used bad judgement, or even actively harmed your own child, would require a massive threat to your values, one that Green apparently refuses to face.
Yes, she’s been trying all of this time to justify and validate her and her ex-husband’s homophobia, by encouraging the same in others.
The exposure of Susie Green and Mermaids is one brick in the wall of gender ideology. It may be the brick that sends the whole wall crashing down. Tragically there are many powerful forces intent on shoring it up. But too many, including your former employer have done what those in the BBC did regarding Jimmy Saville and chosen not to look at what was and remains in plain sight.
Saville was a different case entirely. It was well known that he was behaving in a criminal manner, the senior management was fully aware that he, and quite possibly they could end up in jail and chose to collude in obstructing justice – a criminal act in itself.
I don’t see any difference at all. Susie Green is very obviously a criminal – she had her son castrated – as the Mermaids senior management knew perfectly well.
I don’t see any difference at all. Susie Green is very obviously a criminal – she had her son castrated – as the Mermaids senior management knew perfectly well.
Saville was a different case entirely. It was well known that he was behaving in a criminal manner, the senior management was fully aware that he, and quite possibly they could end up in jail and chose to collude in obstructing justice – a criminal act in itself.
The exposure of Susie Green and Mermaids is one brick in the wall of gender ideology. It may be the brick that sends the whole wall crashing down. Tragically there are many powerful forces intent on shoring it up. But too many, including your former employer have done what those in the BBC did regarding Jimmy Saville and chosen not to look at what was and remains in plain sight.
Triggernometry interviewed whistle blower Marcus Evans about a year ago,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ_bD6N1zNw
Nothing in Hadley Freeman’s article should come as a surprise to anyone who watches it.
If anything, if Evans is to be believed, the truth is far worse.
No indeed. The article sums up well known facts and anecdotes, but the titles and the closing sentence are very good and sums everything up nicely.
I think one of the problems today stems from generation life hack. So many are always looking for the easy route through life and there is no easy route.
No indeed. The article sums up well known facts and anecdotes, but the titles and the closing sentence are very good and sums everything up nicely.
I think one of the problems today stems from generation life hack. So many are always looking for the easy route through life and there is no easy route.
Triggernometry interviewed whistle blower Marcus Evans about a year ago,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ_bD6N1zNw
Nothing in Hadley Freeman’s article should come as a surprise to anyone who watches it.
If anything, if Evans is to be believed, the truth is far worse.
Interesting that around the same time Hadley has left the Guardian, the paper has started to run a few stories on trans issues (by stories, I mean actual journalism, not their previous vanity work for Stonewall, Mermaids, Owen Jones etc), including on Mermaids. Also interesting that Amelia Gentleman, of Windrush reporting, is writing them. It feels like the early stages of a highly-strategised reverse ferret, or at least an attempt to cover their arse when the full extent of the Great Trans Capture is revealed via Cass and other channels
Speaking of the Guardian, is Zoe Williams useful, or just an idiot?
Her interview with Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie strongly suggested just an idiot
An articulate Nigerian survivor of abuse is concerned about women’s safe spaces. Williams’ response? “I’m not having that!”
An articulate Nigerian survivor of abuse is concerned about women’s safe spaces. Williams’ response? “I’m not having that!”
An idiot from time immemorial. I recall an article from some years back, stating that “there IS no white working class”. Clearly written by someone who never left London, never mind going outside the M25.
Where we live in rural Somerset, the main demographic is white working class.
She and Toynbee. God help us
She’s obviously never visited the United States then.
She’s obviously never visited the United States then.
Her interview with Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie strongly suggested just an idiot
An idiot from time immemorial. I recall an article from some years back, stating that “there IS no white working class”. Clearly written by someone who never left London, never mind going outside the M25.
Where we live in rural Somerset, the main demographic is white working class.
She and Toynbee. God help us
Speaking of the Guardian, is Zoe Williams useful, or just an idiot?
Interesting that around the same time Hadley has left the Guardian, the paper has started to run a few stories on trans issues (by stories, I mean actual journalism, not their previous vanity work for Stonewall, Mermaids, Owen Jones etc), including on Mermaids. Also interesting that Amelia Gentleman, of Windrush reporting, is writing them. It feels like the early stages of a highly-strategised reverse ferret, or at least an attempt to cover their arse when the full extent of the Great Trans Capture is revealed via Cass and other channels
10 days after Green gave a rare interview, refuting all recent criticisms of her organisation.
No she did not. Refute means to prove wrong. She simply denied it.
Yes, that error – only too common these days – struck me as well. It’s one of those changes that impoverish the language and damage debate, and we need to resist it: indeed, er… to refute it!
Reject is the word. Irrefutably.
Reject is the word. Irrefutably.
Refute | verb
1. Disprove
2. Deny
Yes, that error – only too common these days – struck me as well. It’s one of those changes that impoverish the language and damage debate, and we need to resist it: indeed, er… to refute it!
Refute | verb
1. Disprove
2. Deny
10 days after Green gave a rare interview, refuting all recent criticisms of her organisation.
No she did not. Refute means to prove wrong. She simply denied it.
Superb piece. My overwhelming feeling is horror that normally decent and intelligent people fell for Green’s evil nonsense, and still do.
Yes, it is horrifying and not only in this particular context, which is itself only one terrifying feature of wokism. And it’s not a profound defect of only one irrational and anti-intellectual generation. History is littered with examples of this phenomenon. How could so many “normally decent and intelligent” Germans have fallen for Nazi nonsense? (Not all Germans became Nazis, but of those who did, not all were raving maniacs running around with torches and pitchforks.) Think also of the witch hunts (both medieval and recent), the Cultural Revolution in China, the moral panic over “Repressed Memory Syndrome,” the vigilantism of “#MeToo” and so on. What’s terrifying is the likelihood that succumbing to mass panic is an innate feature of the human condition. No society, whether religious or secular, seems immune to these brief but profoundly destructive spasms of collective neurosis or even psychosis.
“. . succumbing to mass panic is an innate feature of the human condition.”
Yes indeed, and “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds” is a worthwhile read on this. Written by Charles Mackay, published 1841. Follow it up with Douglas Murray’s more recent book, “The Madness Of Crowds”.
“. . succumbing to mass panic is an innate feature of the human condition.”
Yes indeed, and “Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness of Crowds” is a worthwhile read on this. Written by Charles Mackay, published 1841. Follow it up with Douglas Murray’s more recent book, “The Madness Of Crowds”.
…for the evil nonsense of the trans activists generally…
“Why did so many people turn off their intelligence when faced with this former IT consultant from Leeds?”
Ouch. What have you got against Leeds?
“Why did so many people turn off their intelligence when faced with this former IT consultant from Leeds?”
Ouch. What have you got against Leeds?
Yes, it is horrifying and not only in this particular context, which is itself only one terrifying feature of wokism. And it’s not a profound defect of only one irrational and anti-intellectual generation. History is littered with examples of this phenomenon. How could so many “normally decent and intelligent” Germans have fallen for Nazi nonsense? (Not all Germans became Nazis, but of those who did, not all were raving maniacs running around with torches and pitchforks.) Think also of the witch hunts (both medieval and recent), the Cultural Revolution in China, the moral panic over “Repressed Memory Syndrome,” the vigilantism of “#MeToo” and so on. What’s terrifying is the likelihood that succumbing to mass panic is an innate feature of the human condition. No society, whether religious or secular, seems immune to these brief but profoundly destructive spasms of collective neurosis or even psychosis.
…for the evil nonsense of the trans activists generally…
Superb piece. My overwhelming feeling is horror that normally decent and intelligent people fell for Green’s evil nonsense, and still do.
I’m sorry…it’s all just too disgusting for words.
I’m sorry…it’s all just too disgusting for words.
It might be a scary thing to tell an emperor the truth about his new clothes but why on earth was it so impossible to tell Green the truth about her open child abuse?
It might be a scary thing to tell an emperor the truth about his new clothes but why on earth was it so impossible to tell Green the truth about her open child abuse?
Interesting article but why do you keep referring to Jackie Green as ‘she’ or ‘her’? That may be how Jackie would prefer to be referred to but it is not reality and he should not be forced/encouraged to think that only girls like My Little Pony etc. I liked dolls for a bit when a young boy and that is just how some are/were.
Trans people and their supporters seem to be be the most forceful supporters of gender stereotyping, along with crazy wish fulfillment.
We all need to tolerate, try to emphasis with trans people but we MUST NOT play their game of referring to them as other than their real gender.
Indeed we shouldn’t, as the Cass report indicates that affirmation should not be perceived as a neutral action. Criminal investigations need to undertaken urgently.
The poor creature has been so damaged by their parents we should call them what they like and hope they are being supported by better quality friends.
It’s such a sad story.
*The poor boy has been so damaged by his parents we should call him what he likes and hope he is being supported by better quality friends.
*The poor boy has been so damaged by his parents we should call him what he likes and hope he is being supported by better quality friends.
My elder so had a rag doll, left behind by an older cousin when he was a toddler. He carried it around with him, fed it, put it to bed and generally “took care” of it. After about a year he simply lost interest in it.
I never thought anything of the matter and still don’t. Children play at roles, act out their experiences and perceptions. It’s just what they do.
Indeed we shouldn’t, as the Cass report indicates that affirmation should not be perceived as a neutral action. Criminal investigations need to undertaken urgently.
The poor creature has been so damaged by their parents we should call them what they like and hope they are being supported by better quality friends.
It’s such a sad story.
My elder so had a rag doll, left behind by an older cousin when he was a toddler. He carried it around with him, fed it, put it to bed and generally “took care” of it. After about a year he simply lost interest in it.
I never thought anything of the matter and still don’t. Children play at roles, act out their experiences and perceptions. It’s just what they do.
Interesting article but why do you keep referring to Jackie Green as ‘she’ or ‘her’? That may be how Jackie would prefer to be referred to but it is not reality and he should not be forced/encouraged to think that only girls like My Little Pony etc. I liked dolls for a bit when a young boy and that is just how some are/were.
Trans people and their supporters seem to be be the most forceful supporters of gender stereotyping, along with crazy wish fulfillment.
We all need to tolerate, try to emphasis with trans people but we MUST NOT play their game of referring to them as other than their real gender.
Why isn’t this woman looking at life through bars at His Majesty’s pleasure?
Why isn’t this woman looking at life through bars at His Majesty’s pleasure?
The lady should be in jail. Folks can have their kids removed for giving them a spank, but genital mutilation is ok?
For some reason, I am not finding a box to comment, so I will reply here. First off , his mother thought because he wanted to play with certain toys he needed to change from a boy to a girl. Why can’t boys play with all toys like girls can? He didn’t need to change his body. He needed to be allowed free range of toys. Obviously the mother was a neurotic and narcissistic nutcase.
Gender dysphoria is difficult for most of us to get our heads round. Even those of us who are parents of trans children have little idea of what it must feel like or why it is so important to the individual. It is also something which has recently become very controversial and something of a political football. Even now very little help pr advice is available for parents or children.
It would be helpful if this debate vould be dialed fown a bit, it is difficult enough picking one’s way through the often contradictory advice without having to listen to accusations of ” child abuse”
“Dialed down” to what?
How do you dial down a debate about castrating young boys??!?
The problem with “gender dysphoria” is that it is an ideological construct, which you either believe in, or you don’t.
“Dialed down” to what?
How do you dial down a debate about castrating young boys??!?
The problem with “gender dysphoria” is that it is an ideological construct, which you either believe in, or you don’t.
Gender dysphoria is difficult for most of us to get our heads round. Even those of us who are parents of trans children have little idea of what it must feel like or why it is so important to the individual. It is also something which has recently become very controversial and something of a political football. Even now very little help pr advice is available for parents or children.
It would be helpful if this debate vould be dialed fown a bit, it is difficult enough picking one’s way through the often contradictory advice without having to listen to accusations of ” child abuse”
Green is evil personified. To have her own son given experimental medication and then have him surgically mutilated is as wicked as anything done by Mengele and worse, done to her own child!
For some reason, I am not finding a box to comment, so I will reply here. First off , his mother thought because he wanted to play with certain toys he needed to change from a boy to a girl. Why can’t boys play with all toys like girls can? He didn’t need to change his body. He needed to be allowed free range of toys. Obviously the mother was a neurotic and narcissistic nutcase.
Green is evil personified. To have her own son given experimental medication and then have him surgically mutilated is as wicked as anything done by Mengele and worse, done to her own child!
The lady should be in jail. Folks can have their kids removed for giving them a spank, but genital mutilation is ok?
Liberals have no idea what to do with psychopaths which is one reason our institutions are prone to capture.
Liberals have no idea what to do with psychopaths which is one reason our institutions are prone to capture.
We in the west have lost our ability to think critically. Puberty blockers are an awful idea. It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon or peer-reviewed studies to figure this out. You don’t need a PHD to realize that children should be discouraged from taking life-altering, medically unnecessary surgery.
We in the west have lost our ability to think critically. Puberty blockers are an awful idea. It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon or peer-reviewed studies to figure this out. You don’t need a PHD to realize that children should be discouraged from taking life-altering, medically unnecessary surgery.
I’m not convinced that we should refer to a boy who claims to be a girl and had some medical intervention as “she”. It might be nicer to the person concerned but it’s a lie.
I’m not convinced that we should refer to a boy who claims to be a girl and had some medical intervention as “she”. It might be nicer to the person concerned but it’s a lie.
Absolutely brilliant!
This quote should be placed before all the ‘useful idiots’:
But all the journalists, teachers, editors and activists who endorsed Green’s obviously ludicrous ideas and shouted down anyone who didn’t, they really need to take a long look at their judgement, their motives and themselves
Absolutely brilliant!
This quote should be placed before all the ‘useful idiots’:
But all the journalists, teachers, editors and activists who endorsed Green’s obviously ludicrous ideas and shouted down anyone who didn’t, they really need to take a long look at their judgement, their motives and themselves
I never cease to be amazed than anyone such as Susie Green can be given the wherewithal to cause such damage on the basis of her own personal experience. Because that’s all it is, and using the particular to manipulate the general can never be a good idea but we see it put forward so often; someone saying that some random thing MUST be true because it happened to them.
It’s not a failure of intellect of the person making such claims that’s the problem, rather the failure of everyone else who takes the specific and limited experience of the claimant as legitimate evidence.
I never cease to be amazed than anyone such as Susie Green can be given the wherewithal to cause such damage on the basis of her own personal experience. Because that’s all it is, and using the particular to manipulate the general can never be a good idea but we see it put forward so often; someone saying that some random thing MUST be true because it happened to them.
It’s not a failure of intellect of the person making such claims that’s the problem, rather the failure of everyone else who takes the specific and limited experience of the claimant as legitimate evidence.
I believe China has realised foot binding was wrong.
It took more than 2,000 years to work that out.
It took more than 2,000 years to work that out.
I believe China has realised foot binding was wrong.
There is a strange and rather dangerous spirit stalking this land. It dare not be opposed, for fear it will turn and rip you to shreds. Otherwise intelligent and sensible people keep their views to themselves and hope it will pass but know their employment could be endangered by speaking out. Isn’t this what Stalinism was like?
The state has always been at war with the family. Thanks to the totalitarian centralisation of education and the growth of public funding for pressure groups and other vested interests the state is now well on the way to winning that war.
Even if it’s not intentional they should be able to see how, as a result of their policies, the family is under pressure.
Even if it’s not intentional they should be able to see how, as a result of their policies, the family is under pressure.
The state has always been at war with the family. Thanks to the totalitarian centralisation of education and the growth of public funding for pressure groups and other vested interests the state is now well on the way to winning that war.
There is a strange and rather dangerous spirit stalking this land. It dare not be opposed, for fear it will turn and rip you to shreds. Otherwise intelligent and sensible people keep their views to themselves and hope it will pass but know their employment could be endangered by speaking out. Isn’t this what Stalinism was like?
It should be no surprise that Green was religious and the poor kid grew up in a homophobic household. My older sister, a born-again Christian, referred her young son to this sexist charity as it was problematic that he liked playing dress-up and trying on Halloween wigs (what kid doesn’t?). I think she is terrified he might be gay but I played like that and I’m happily married to a woman – who cares? He has been on puberty blockers for 5 years and clear cognitive stunt compared to his peers, all because he didn’t confirm to the rigid stereotypes that Mermaids and his homophobic mother advocates. Most of us cut off for not being supportive & ‘bigots’ for not being ok with a perfectly normal kid being sterilised & stunted. It has totally destroyed our family all because of a sexist, homophobic ideology that requires children to conform, or else.
It should be no surprise that Green was religious and the poor kid grew up in a homophobic household. My older sister, a born-again Christian, referred her young son to this sexist charity as it was problematic that he liked playing dress-up and trying on Halloween wigs (what kid doesn’t?). I think she is terrified he might be gay but I played like that and I’m happily married to a woman – who cares? He has been on puberty blockers for 5 years and clear cognitive stunt compared to his peers, all because he didn’t confirm to the rigid stereotypes that Mermaids and his homophobic mother advocates. Most of us cut off for not being supportive & ‘bigots’ for not being ok with a perfectly normal kid being sterilised & stunted. It has totally destroyed our family all because of a sexist, homophobic ideology that requires children to conform, or else.
I’ve always had doubts about the veracity of SG’s story, and there’s one reason in your article. Jack’s father ws homophobic, Jack was their first child so how was he gravitating toward Polly Pocket and My Little Pony at one year old? Why were those toys in the house?
Very good point.
Very good point.
I’ve always had doubts about the veracity of SG’s story, and there’s one reason in your article. Jack’s father ws homophobic, Jack was their first child so how was he gravitating toward Polly Pocket and My Little Pony at one year old? Why were those toys in the house?
This is quite an interesting link on this topic:
https://elizamondegreen.substack.com/p/when-embodiment-goals-outlast-trans
That a graduate researcher dare step into this minefield, attests to some slipping of the hold the fanatics have over the topic, and the opening statement is so mind blowingly narcissistic it points to the real personality disorder at play.
Difficult read on so many levels. And what on earth does “desist” mean?
Bit of a guess, but I think it’s referring to cis gender (as in made up word for identifying as born sex). Desisting would be the process of stopping that.
Although I am not 100% sure because it doesn’t quite fit the following paragraphs.
Ah, as in “de-cis-ting”…
Desist is to stop identifying as the other gender, although not necessarily to lose the sense of unease in one’s body [dysphoria.]
Ah, as in “de-cis-ting”…
Desist is to stop identifying as the other gender, although not necessarily to lose the sense of unease in one’s body [dysphoria.]
‘Desist’ is used to describe ceasing to socially identify as ‘trans’. It’s used to describe those who haven’t medicalised their transition before changing their minds.
‘Detransition’ is used to describe ceasing to medicalise (ie stopping cross sex hormones and / or seeking remediation to repair some of the results of reassignment surgery) and ceasing the ‘trans’ identification.
Bit of a guess, but I think it’s referring to cis gender (as in made up word for identifying as born sex). Desisting would be the process of stopping that.
Although I am not 100% sure because it doesn’t quite fit the following paragraphs.
‘Desist’ is used to describe ceasing to socially identify as ‘trans’. It’s used to describe those who haven’t medicalised their transition before changing their minds.
‘Detransition’ is used to describe ceasing to medicalise (ie stopping cross sex hormones and / or seeking remediation to repair some of the results of reassignment surgery) and ceasing the ‘trans’ identification.
I’m guessing “Eliza Mondegreen” is a pen name. A Mondegreen is a misheard line from poetry or song.
‘For they’ve killed the Earl of Murray
And the Lady Mondegreen:
Difficult read on so many levels. And what on earth does “desist” mean?
I’m guessing “Eliza Mondegreen” is a pen name. A Mondegreen is a misheard line from poetry or song.
‘For they’ve killed the Earl of Murray
And the Lady Mondegreen:
This is quite an interesting link on this topic:
https://elizamondegreen.substack.com/p/when-embodiment-goals-outlast-trans
That a graduate researcher dare step into this minefield, attests to some slipping of the hold the fanatics have over the topic, and the opening statement is so mind blowingly narcissistic it points to the real personality disorder at play.
She is a person most probably driven by her own guilt and justification of her weakness and wrongdoing. But I am left wondering whether the author was implying that had Green lived in London and not Leeds and not been in IT, her views would have been more understandable? Unlikely? Is Leeds here seen as a provincial backwater, a joke or den of progressive madness? Like IT consultants? Unnecessary cliched derision of both.
I don’t think either were meant that way.
It could have just as easily be “a supermarket manager from Wimbledon” or “a pension consultant from Cambridge”.
Nope, I think Hadley, being an impeccably well-connected liberal journalist, meant it exactly as I read it too. And I have no time for Green or her views.
Hadley has much bigger fish to fry. She’s too busy exposing her former editors to engage in cheap shots against random cities and jobs.
Hadley has much bigger fish to fry. She’s too busy exposing her former editors to engage in cheap shots against random cities and jobs.
Nope, I think Hadley, being an impeccably well-connected liberal journalist, meant it exactly as I read it too. And I have no time for Green or her views.
I don’t think either were meant that way.
It could have just as easily be “a supermarket manager from Wimbledon” or “a pension consultant from Cambridge”.
She is a person most probably driven by her own guilt and justification of her weakness and wrongdoing. But I am left wondering whether the author was implying that had Green lived in London and not Leeds and not been in IT, her views would have been more understandable? Unlikely? Is Leeds here seen as a provincial backwater, a joke or den of progressive madness? Like IT consultants? Unnecessary cliched derision of both.
“ There is a fine line between using your parenting experience to help others, and validating your parenting choices by encouraging others to do the same.”
I think this line encapsulates why Mermaids ever came into existence. Doubling down is a popular tactic, as seen numerous times with Covid policies.
“ There is a fine line between using your parenting experience to help others, and validating your parenting choices by encouraging others to do the same.”
I think this line encapsulates why Mermaids ever came into existence. Doubling down is a popular tactic, as seen numerous times with Covid policies.
Trans people are not oppressed. They demand rights that would remove rights from other people and then cry oppression when it is problematic
not sure why peoples sexual preferences now pervades every aspect of life, it used to be something personal
Trans people are not oppressed. They demand rights that would remove rights from other people and then cry oppression when it is problematic
not sure why peoples sexual preferences now pervades every aspect of life, it used to be something personal
Green is a deeply sinister woman who shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near kids, her own or anyone else’s.
Green is a deeply sinister woman who shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near kids, her own or anyone else’s.
Brilliant. Thank you.
I tell you what though. B4U-ACT is actually a group designed to help people with paedophile desires avoid acting on them. (The clue is in the name). The fact that Hadley chucks the connection in here, absent of context or explanation, is a smear, deliberately dishonest. Which in my view throws the trustworthiness of the rest of the piece into question. Whatever you think about the trans issue in general.
I’d say that bit’s somewhat lazy rather than dishonest. If you have any doubts about the inappropriateness of Breslaw’s appointment, I suggest checking out the blogposts in which he writes, inter alia, about his sexual desire for children (“It isn’t the gender of my sexual object choice that is the sole basis of my desire, but the age and subsequent deviance of that desire that is important”) and his admiration for ‘Destroyer’ magazine: archive.ph/gZ8Dw. Or you could read the academic monograph in which Breslaw writes about his desire for the twelve-year-old boy who is performing a sexualised dance.
Then ask anyone involved in child safeguarding what red flags all of this (and worse) raises, and they’ll say that this person shouldn’t be anywhere near a charity that works with young people who are often deeply confused and distressed about sexuality and gender.
Aside from his work as a queer theorist with a particular interest in one subset of ‘deviant’ sexualities, Breslaw appears to have precisely zilch in the way of qualifications for the role of trustee. In other words, he was appointed not despite but because of his academic/political interests and the personal predilections from which they stem.
As for the unreliability of the rest of the article: no. Check the link to the comprehensive debunking of the suicide statistics. It takes a special kind of manipulative sociopathy to conjure the spectre of suicide in this way when one has been presented, as Mermaids were, with such strong refutations of the statistical claims. They chose to ignore the facts that didn’t accord with their dogma, just as they dismissed the growing concern about the disproportionate number of gender-dysphoric young people (girls in particular) who were depressed, or had an eating disorder, or were autistic, or came from a looked-after background, or had a history of abuse, and/or whose gender dysphoria developed rapidly and unexpectedly. All of this was brushed aside in Mermaids’ and others’ championing of the affirmation model that has seen so many young people needlessly led down the medical path. They, and their useful idiots, deserve all the opprobrium they’re getting.
Not Breslaw who wa in the ” Carry on” films?
Not Breslaw who wa in the ” Carry on” films?
That is their headline aim but I took the time to do more research (including Jacob Breslow’s paper to their conference) and it is not quite as squeaky clean as it sounds.
I can’t be bothered to go through it all again – you can research it yourself along with the other affiliations and interests of those involved.
Breslow’s paper was pretty abhorrent as well, as are his other writings with regard to child sexuality and ‘intergenerational love’ in which he professes his own leanings.
I’d say that bit’s somewhat lazy rather than dishonest. If you have any doubts about the inappropriateness of Breslaw’s appointment, I suggest checking out the blogposts in which he writes, inter alia, about his sexual desire for children (“It isn’t the gender of my sexual object choice that is the sole basis of my desire, but the age and subsequent deviance of that desire that is important”) and his admiration for ‘Destroyer’ magazine: archive.ph/gZ8Dw. Or you could read the academic monograph in which Breslaw writes about his desire for the twelve-year-old boy who is performing a sexualised dance.
Then ask anyone involved in child safeguarding what red flags all of this (and worse) raises, and they’ll say that this person shouldn’t be anywhere near a charity that works with young people who are often deeply confused and distressed about sexuality and gender.
Aside from his work as a queer theorist with a particular interest in one subset of ‘deviant’ sexualities, Breslaw appears to have precisely zilch in the way of qualifications for the role of trustee. In other words, he was appointed not despite but because of his academic/political interests and the personal predilections from which they stem.
As for the unreliability of the rest of the article: no. Check the link to the comprehensive debunking of the suicide statistics. It takes a special kind of manipulative sociopathy to conjure the spectre of suicide in this way when one has been presented, as Mermaids were, with such strong refutations of the statistical claims. They chose to ignore the facts that didn’t accord with their dogma, just as they dismissed the growing concern about the disproportionate number of gender-dysphoric young people (girls in particular) who were depressed, or had an eating disorder, or were autistic, or came from a looked-after background, or had a history of abuse, and/or whose gender dysphoria developed rapidly and unexpectedly. All of this was brushed aside in Mermaids’ and others’ championing of the affirmation model that has seen so many young people needlessly led down the medical path. They, and their useful idiots, deserve all the opprobrium they’re getting.
That is their headline aim but I took the time to do more research (including Jacob Breslow’s paper to their conference) and it is not quite as squeaky clean as it sounds.
I can’t be bothered to go through it all again – you can research it yourself along with the other affiliations and interests of those involved.
Breslow’s paper was pretty abhorrent as well, as are his other writings with regard to child sexuality and ‘intergenerational love’ in which he professes his own leanings.
I tell you what though. B4U-ACT is actually a group designed to help people with paedophile desires avoid acting on them. (The clue is in the name). The fact that Hadley chucks the connection in here, absent of context or explanation, is a smear, deliberately dishonest. Which in my view throws the trustworthiness of the rest of the piece into question. Whatever you think about the trans issue in general.
Brilliant. Thank you.
I have read suggestions that Green’s replacement will have ‘life experience’, i.e. will be trans. As usual the revolution eats itself as others eye Green’s salary and public position.
As for why Green and Mermaids survived for so long … there are two reasons. We no longer educate young people to think. The contradictions that Hadley mentions simply weren’t obvious to most of the young people supporting Green. Secondly, there was just too much money thanks to the NHS spending so much of their budget on the medical and psychological procedures.
I read a quote in The Telegraph that referenced “lived experience” not “life experience”. The two can mean different things depending on the frame of reference.
In the case of Mermaids the quote said; her replacement “needs strong EDI (equality, diversity and inclusion) experience, ideally lived experience”, with some staff believing this means being transgender.
In my view, if it is “lived experience” we may have woke marxism right there, since “lived experience” is the experience one has that is determined by having a particular position in a power structure – hence, in woke-speak, “positionality”.
As I understand it, according to gender marxism, it is determined by an oppressive structure of social relations between the statistically normal people or superstructure(was bourgeoisie), and the statistically abnormal people or infrastructure(was proletariat). That structure determines how they act and what they are as individuals – hence, in woke-speak, ‘structural determinism’.
I reckon if gender marxism is going on, then EDI (equity NOT equality BTW), is its tool in this case. So Diversity for example, is not diversity of people – that is, with a diversity various characteristics – but only those characteristics as understood and expressed in an authentic way – and that is according to how gender marxism sees diversity – in other words, a diversity of marginalised, minority oppressed class of gender identities.
I read a quote in The Telegraph that referenced “lived experience” not “life experience”. The two can mean different things depending on the frame of reference.
In the case of Mermaids the quote said; her replacement “needs strong EDI (equality, diversity and inclusion) experience, ideally lived experience”, with some staff believing this means being transgender.
In my view, if it is “lived experience” we may have woke marxism right there, since “lived experience” is the experience one has that is determined by having a particular position in a power structure – hence, in woke-speak, “positionality”.
As I understand it, according to gender marxism, it is determined by an oppressive structure of social relations between the statistically normal people or superstructure(was bourgeoisie), and the statistically abnormal people or infrastructure(was proletariat). That structure determines how they act and what they are as individuals – hence, in woke-speak, ‘structural determinism’.
I reckon if gender marxism is going on, then EDI (equity NOT equality BTW), is its tool in this case. So Diversity for example, is not diversity of people – that is, with a diversity various characteristics – but only those characteristics as understood and expressed in an authentic way – and that is according to how gender marxism sees diversity – in other words, a diversity of marginalised, minority oppressed class of gender identities.
I have read suggestions that Green’s replacement will have ‘life experience’, i.e. will be trans. As usual the revolution eats itself as others eye Green’s salary and public position.
As for why Green and Mermaids survived for so long … there are two reasons. We no longer educate young people to think. The contradictions that Hadley mentions simply weren’t obvious to most of the young people supporting Green. Secondly, there was just too much money thanks to the NHS spending so much of their budget on the medical and psychological procedures.
“mainly because I don’t care what Emma Watson thinks about anything”
Isn’t she the UN ambassador for feminism?
And didn’t she receive a standing ovation for her speech?
Maybe you care just a little bit?
Not when you realize that most organizations are all too eager to appoint celebrity airheads to convey their message.
It wasn’t particularly successful just popular because she’s a celebrity. She’s a very privileged celebrity, that can’t act, so grifts using movements she doesn’t really care about. She’s got some serious internalised misogyny.
Not when you realize that most organizations are all too eager to appoint celebrity airheads to convey their message.
It wasn’t particularly successful just popular because she’s a celebrity. She’s a very privileged celebrity, that can’t act, so grifts using movements she doesn’t really care about. She’s got some serious internalised misogyny.
“mainly because I don’t care what Emma Watson thinks about anything”
Isn’t she the UN ambassador for feminism?
And didn’t she receive a standing ovation for her speech?
Maybe you care just a little bit?
This article is about 90% given up to criticism of a person’s parenting skills. Call me old-fashioned, but that’s not how I judge a charity or any organisation. And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities. There may be legitimate criticisms to be made of Mermaids, but an ad hominem attack on its leader for not being a good enough mother is not one.
I’m also not sure I buy all the criticisms of the organisation that are made. I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders. If they had parental consent they wouldn’t be turning to this organisation I presume and the idea that the older generation should decide what kids do with their breasts is just about the definition of patriarchal control. My old secondary school certainly gave students of all access to condoms and tampons without parental permission (tampons being controversial to some Muslim parents). My body my choice etc.
And as the trustee of a charity who has been involved in recruiting other trustees, conducting a google and social media search of someone who is in a trusted professional position seems to go far enough for me.
I don’t know enough about puberty blockers or to comment and the linked articles are behind a paywall. But I presume that prescribing them has always been the preserve of doctors as opposed to this charity.
My eyes just rolled a full 360 degrees.
Idiot.
“I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders.”
The below study is the first of its kind, and was conducted by The Binding Health Project at Boston University, which asked 1,800 people about their binding practices.
“Over 97 per cent of respondents said they had experienced at least one negative health outcome from binding including pain, overheating, and shortness of breath. Fifty even reported rib fractures.”
I hope you are not a parent!
Same here. Almost all the medical treatments used, such as puberty blocking, are extremely damaging to long term health.
It does seem however that more and more are detransitioning and prepared to go public with their (horrific) stories.
Same here. Almost all the medical treatments used, such as puberty blocking, are extremely damaging to long term health.
It does seem however that more and more are detransitioning and prepared to go public with their (horrific) stories.
If the writer were citicising Ms Green’s running of a widget factor by making reference to her parental behaviour then you might have a point, but her behaviour as a mother is the crux of the matter, and may actually explain what she did at Mermaids.
“I’m also not sure I buy all the criticisms of the organisation that are made. I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders.”
Because they can be extremely damaging for starters, and because the child was a minor.
God help us.
Part of the evil of this trans derangement is the encouragement for teachers/schools/’experts’ to cut parents out. Whatever the issue this is evil per se and is an attempt to destroy the familly and leave us in a Marxist culture where nobody cares about children or, in fact, anyone else and where we are all controlled by the State and its experts.
Trans mania is an additional layer of evil on top of the parent/family destruction.
“And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities.”
That statement might be even more stupid than the anti-semitism article.
The entire point of the article is juxtaposing Green’s decision making as the parent of a trans child with her role as the CEO of a trans charity.
Because breast binders are known to be medically harmful, I expect. They have no medical application.
The criticism of Susie Green’s parenting is relevant because it is her only claim to involvement with the charity. She is not a medical or psychiatric professional, she has (repeatedly, publicly and explicitly) levied her child’s personal experience to become the CEO of a charity and wield power and influence in a field in which she has no other expertise. Thereby making said parental experience extremely pertinent. I am certain HF would issue the same critique had a father done the same.
Re breast binders, they cause explicit physical harm. If my child wished to bind her feet against my wishes I wouldn’t expect a charity (with no medical authority) to issue the materials and instructions to her behind my back. ‘My body my choice’ has pretty obvious limitations.
Are you for real ?
You sound very dangerous.
With you attitude, you should never hold any position of authority however minor.
Two words: child safeguarding. Look it up
I see you are one of the “My body my choice” brigade. Happy to see children encouraged to self-harm, engage in sex with adults, commit suicide – all choices children might indulge in with appropriate encouragement by ill-disposed adults and which responsible parents might protect them from?
The transgender movement (and other LGBQT ‘science’) is rooted in unethical research similar to that performed by Dr. Josef Mengele in World War II: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money
“I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders”
Are you going to argue for a change to age of consent laws too?
“This article is about 90% given up to criticism of a person’s parenting skills.”
The parenting skills of the CEO of a children’s charity who had her son castrated.
“Call me old-fashioned, but that’s not how I judge a charity or any organisation. And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities.”
Most CEO’s don’t castrate their sons.
My eyes just rolled a full 360 degrees.
Idiot.
“I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders.”
The below study is the first of its kind, and was conducted by The Binding Health Project at Boston University, which asked 1,800 people about their binding practices.
“Over 97 per cent of respondents said they had experienced at least one negative health outcome from binding including pain, overheating, and shortness of breath. Fifty even reported rib fractures.”
I hope you are not a parent!
If the writer were citicising Ms Green’s running of a widget factor by making reference to her parental behaviour then you might have a point, but her behaviour as a mother is the crux of the matter, and may actually explain what she did at Mermaids.
“I’m also not sure I buy all the criticisms of the organisation that are made. I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders.”
Because they can be extremely damaging for starters, and because the child was a minor.
God help us.
Part of the evil of this trans derangement is the encouragement for teachers/schools/’experts’ to cut parents out. Whatever the issue this is evil per se and is an attempt to destroy the familly and leave us in a Marxist culture where nobody cares about children or, in fact, anyone else and where we are all controlled by the State and its experts.
Trans mania is an additional layer of evil on top of the parent/family destruction.
“And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities.”
That statement might be even more stupid than the anti-semitism article.
The entire point of the article is juxtaposing Green’s decision making as the parent of a trans child with her role as the CEO of a trans charity.
Because breast binders are known to be medically harmful, I expect. They have no medical application.
The criticism of Susie Green’s parenting is relevant because it is her only claim to involvement with the charity. She is not a medical or psychiatric professional, she has (repeatedly, publicly and explicitly) levied her child’s personal experience to become the CEO of a charity and wield power and influence in a field in which she has no other expertise. Thereby making said parental experience extremely pertinent. I am certain HF would issue the same critique had a father done the same.
Re breast binders, they cause explicit physical harm. If my child wished to bind her feet against my wishes I wouldn’t expect a charity (with no medical authority) to issue the materials and instructions to her behind my back. ‘My body my choice’ has pretty obvious limitations.
Are you for real ?
You sound very dangerous.
With you attitude, you should never hold any position of authority however minor.
Two words: child safeguarding. Look it up
I see you are one of the “My body my choice” brigade. Happy to see children encouraged to self-harm, engage in sex with adults, commit suicide – all choices children might indulge in with appropriate encouragement by ill-disposed adults and which responsible parents might protect them from?
The transgender movement (and other LGBQT ‘science’) is rooted in unethical research similar to that performed by Dr. Josef Mengele in World War II: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money
“I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders”
Are you going to argue for a change to age of consent laws too?
“This article is about 90% given up to criticism of a person’s parenting skills.”
The parenting skills of the CEO of a children’s charity who had her son castrated.
“Call me old-fashioned, but that’s not how I judge a charity or any organisation. And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities.”
Most CEO’s don’t castrate their sons.
This article is about 90% given up to criticism of a person’s parenting skills. Call me old-fashioned, but that’s not how I judge a charity or any organisation. And call me old-fashioned again, but I don’t think any article about a male CEO would focus on his parental abilities. There may be legitimate criticisms to be made of Mermaids, but an ad hominem attack on its leader for not being a good enough mother is not one.
I’m also not sure I buy all the criticisms of the organisation that are made. I don’t really get why teens should have to get ‘parental consent’ before obtaining breast binders. If they had parental consent they wouldn’t be turning to this organisation I presume and the idea that the older generation should decide what kids do with their breasts is just about the definition of patriarchal control. My old secondary school certainly gave students of all access to condoms and tampons without parental permission (tampons being controversial to some Muslim parents). My body my choice etc.
And as the trustee of a charity who has been involved in recruiting other trustees, conducting a google and social media search of someone who is in a trusted professional position seems to go far enough for me.
I don’t know enough about puberty blockers or to comment and the linked articles are behind a paywall. But I presume that prescribing them has always been the preserve of doctors as opposed to this charity.