Women Born TranssexualI confess, I check out Questioning Transphobia several times a week depending on my work schedule. I’ll be perfectly honest in saying that I often get irritated as all hell by the constant use of “cis” but if I over look that point of irritation I often find this blog makes some extremely important points.
Julia Serano’s book gave us an analysis that called transphobia for what it is, misogyny. The sisters at Questioning Transphobia extends the dialogue.
I’m adding them as a side bar link.
Amazing… What are the chances of them doing this with GID? Something they invented after delisting homosexuality.
Now we should demand they stop abusing transkids.
APA PRESS RELEASE
August 5, 2009
Contact: Kim Mills
(202) 336-6048 until Aug. 5
(416) 585-3800 – Aug. 5-9
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT SEXUAL ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS WORK, SAYS APA
Practitioners Should Avoid Telling Clients They Can Change from Gay to Straight
TORONTO—The American Psychological Association adopted a resolution Wednesday stating that mental health professionals should avoid tellingclients that they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other treatments.
The “Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts” also advises that parents, guardians, young people and their families avoid sexual orientation treatments that portray homosexuality as a mental illness or developmental disorder and instead seek psychotherapy, social support and educational services “that provide accurate information on sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school support and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth.”
The approval, by APA’s governing Council of Representatives, came at APA’s annual convention, during which a task force presented a report that in part examined the efficacy of so-called “reparative therapy,” or sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE).
“Contrary to claims of sexual orientation change advocates and practitioners, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation,” said Judith M. Glassgold, PsyD, chair of the task force. “Scientifically rigorous older studies in this area found that sexual orientation was unlikely to change due to efforts designed for this purpose. Contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates, recent research studies do not provide evidence of sexual orientation change as the research methods are inadequate to determine the effectiveness of these interventions.” Glassgold added: “At most, certain studies suggested that some individuals learned how to ignore or not act on their homosexual attractions. Yet, these studies did not indicate for whom this was possible, how long it lasted or its long-term mental health effects.
Also, this result was much less likely to be true for people who started out only attracted to people of the same sex.”
Based on this review, the task force recommended that mental health professionals avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts when providing assistance to people distressed about their own or others’ sexual orientation.
APA appointed the six-member Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation in 2007 to review and update APA’s 1997 resolution, “Appropriate therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation,” and to generate a report. APA was concerned about ongoing efforts to promote the notion that sexual orientation can be changed through psychotherapy or approaches that mischaracterize homosexuality as a mental disorder.
The task force examined the peer-reviewed journal articles in English from 1960 to 2007, which included 83 studies. Most of the studies were conducted before 1978, and only a few had been conducted in the last 10 years. The group also reviewed the recent literature on the psychology of sexual orientation.
“Unfortunately, much of the research in the area of sexual orientation change contains serious design flaws,” Glassgold said. “Few studies could be considered methodologically sound and none systematically evaluated potential harms.”
As to the issue of possible harm, the task force was unable to reach any conclusion regarding the efficacy or safety of any of the recent studies of SOCE: “There are no methodologically sound studies of recent SOCE that would enable the task force to make a definitive statement about whether or not recent SOCE is safe or harmful and for whom,” according to the report.
“Without such information, psychologists cannot predict the impact of these treatments and need to be very cautious, given that some qualitative research suggests the potential for harm,” Glassgold said. “Practitioners can assist clients through therapies that do not attempt to change sexual orientation, but rather involve acceptance, support and identity exploration and development without imposing a specific identity outcome.”
As part of its report, the task force identified that some clients seeking to change their sexual orientation may be in distress because of a conflict between their sexual orientation and religious beliefs. The task force recommended that licensed mental health care providers treating such clients help them “explore possible life paths that address the reality of their sexual orientation, reduce the stigma associated with homosexuality, respect the client’s religious beliefs, and consider possibilities for a religiously and spiritually meaningful and rewarding life.”
“In other words,” Glassgold said, “we recommend that psychologists be completely honest about the likelihood of sexual orientation change, and that they help clients explore their assumptions and goals with respect to both religion and sexuality.”
A copy of the task force report may be obtained from APA’s Public Affairs Office or at http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/therapeuticresponse.pdf
Members of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation:
Judith M. Glassgold, PsyD, Rutgers University – Chair
Lee Beckstead, PhD
Jack Drescher, MD
Beverly Greene, PhD, St. John’s University
Robin Lin Miller, PhD, Michigan State University
Roger L. Worthington, PhD, University of Missouri
The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the
United States and is the world’s largest association of psychologists. APA’s membership includes more than 150,000 researchers, educators,
clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian
provincial associations, APA works to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting health, education and human
welfare.
http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20090805101509108
Wednesday, August 05 2009 @ 10:20 AM CDT
Contributed by: Anonymous
by J. Rogue – Common Action, Workers Solidarity Alliance
Transfeminism developed out of a critique of the mainstream and radical feminist movements. The feminist movement has a history of internal hierarchies. There are many examples of women of color, working class women, lesbians and others speaking out against the tendency of the white, affluent- dominated women’s movement to silence them and overlook their needs. Instead of honoring these marginalized voices, the mainstream feminist movement has prioritized struggling for rights primarily in the interests of white affluent women. While the feminist movement as a whole has not resolved these hierarchal tendencies, various groups have continued to speak up regarding their own marginalization – in particular, transgendered women. The process of developing a broader understanding of systems of oppression and how they interact has advanced feminism and is key to building on the theory of anarchist feminism.
Transfeminism builds on the work that came out of the multiracial feminist movement, and in particular, the work of Black feminists. Frequently, when confronted with allegations of racism, classism, or homophobia, the women’s movement dismisses these issues as divisive. The more prominent voices promote the idea of a homogenous “universal female experience,” which, as it is based on commonality between women, theoretically promotes a sense of sisterhood. In reality, it means pruning the definition of “woman” and trying to fit all women into a mold reflecting the dominant demographic of the women’s movement: white, affluent, heterosexual, and non-disabled. This “policing” of identity, whether conscious or not, reinforces systems of oppression and exploitation. When women who do not fit this mold have challenged it, they have frequently been accused of being divisive and disloyal to the sisterhood. The hierarchy of womanhood created by the women’s movement reflects, in many ways, the dominant culture of racism, capitalism and heteronormativity.
Mainstream feminist organizing frequently tries to find the common ground shared by women, and therefore focuses on what the most vocal members decide are “women’s issues” – as if the female experience existed in vacuum outside of other forms of oppression and exploitation. However, using an intersectional approach to analyzing and organizing around oppression, as advocated by multiracial feminism and transfeminism, we can discuss these differences rather than dismiss them. The multiracial feminist movement developed this approach, which argues that one cannot address the position of women without also addressing their class, race, sexuality, ability, and all other aspects of their identity and experiences. Forms of oppression and exploitation do not exist separately. They are intimately related and reinforce each other, and so trying to address them singly (i.e. “sexism” divorced from racism, capitalism, etc) does not lead to a clear understanding of the patriarchal system. This is in accordance with the anarchist view that we must fight all forms of hierarchy, oppression, and exploitation simultaneously; abolishing capitalism and the state does not ensure that white supremacy and patriarchy will be somehow magically dismantled.
Tied to this assumption of a “universal female experience” is the idea that that if a woman surrounds herself with those that embody that “universal” woman, then she is safe from patriarchy and oppression. The concept of “women’s safe spaces” (being women-only) date back to the early lesbian feminist movement, which was largely comprised of white, middle-class women who prioritized addressing sexism over other forms of oppression. This notion that an all-women space is inherently safe not only discounts the intimate violence that can occur between women, but also ignores or de-prioritizes the other types of violence that women can experience; racism, poverty, incarceration and other forms of state, economic and social brutality.
The Transfeminist Manifesto states: “Transfeminism believes that we construct our own gender identities based on what feels genuine, comfortable and sincere to us as we live and relate to others within given social and cultural constraint. (1)” The notion that gender is a social construct is a key concept in transfeminism, and are also essential (no pun intended) to an anarchist approach to feminism. Transfeminism also criticizes the idea of a “universal female experience” and argues against the biologically essentialist view that one’s gender is defined by one’s genitalia. Other feminisms have embraced the essentialist argument, seeing the idea of “women’s unity” as being built off a sameness, some kind of core “woman-ness.” This definition of woman is generally reliant on what is between a person’s legs. Yet what specifically about the definition of woman is intrinsic to two X chromosomes? If it is defined as being in possession of a womb, does that mean women who have had hysterectomies are somehow less of a woman? Perhaps, if we reduce the definition of “woman” to the role of child-bearer. That seems rather antithetical to feminism. Gender roles have long been under scrutiny in radical communities. The idea that women are born to be mothers, are more sensitive and peaceful, are predisposed to wearing the color pink and all the other stereotypes out there are socially constructed, not biological. If the (repressive) gender role does not define what a woman is, and if the organs one is born with do not define gender either, the next logical step is to recognize that gender can only be defined by the individual, for themselves. While this concept may cause some to panic, that does not make it any less legitimate with regards to a person’s identity.
It is important to note that not all transgender people chose to physically transition, and that each person’s decision to do so or not is their own. The decision is highly personal and generally irrelevant to theoretical conceptions of gender. There are many reasons to physically change one’s body, from getting a haircut to taking hormones. Some reasons might be to feel more at ease in a world with strict definitions of male and female. Another is to look in the mirror and see on the outside (the popular understanding of) the gender one feels on the inside. Surely, for some, it is the belief that gender is defined by the physical construction of one’s genitalia. But rather than draw from speculation as to the motivations for the personal decisions of trans people (as if they where not vast and varied), it is more productive to note the challenge to the idea that biology is destiny.
Thus far, gender and feminist theory that includes trans experiences exists almost solely in academia. There are very few working class intellectuals in the field, and the academic language used is not particularly accessible to the average person. This is unfortunate, since the issues that transfeminism addresses affect all people. Capitalism, racism, the state, patriarchy and the medical field mediate the way everyone experiences gender. There is a significant amount of coercion employed by these institutions to police human experiences, which applies to everyone, trans and non-trans alike. Capitalism and the state play a very direct role in the experiences of trans people. Access to hormones and surgery, if desired, costs a significant amount of money, and people are often forced to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order to acquire them. Trans people are disproportionately likely to be members of the working and under classes. However, within the radical queer and transfeminist communities, while there may be discussions of class, they are generally framed around identity – arguing for “anti-classist” politics, but not necessarily anti-capitalist.
The concepts espoused by transfeminism help us understand gender, but there is a need for the theory to break out of academia and to develop praxis amongst the working class and social movements. This is not to say that there are no examples of transfeminist organizing, but rather that there needs to be an incorporation of transfeminist principles into broad based movements. Even gay and lesbian movements have a history of leaving trans people behind. For example, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act does not protect gender identity. Again we see a hierarchy of importance; the gay and lesbian movement compromises (throwing trans folks under the bus), rather than employing an inclusive strategy for liberation. There is frequently a sense of a “scarcity of liberation” within reformist social movements, the feeling that the possibilities for freedom are so limited that we must fight against other marginalized groups for a piece of the pie. This is in direct opposition to the concept of intersectionality, since it often requires people to betray one aspect of their identity in order to politically prioritize another. How can a person be expected to engage in a fight against gender oppression if it ignores or worsens their racial oppression? Where does one aspect of their identity and experiences end and another begin? Anarchism offers a possible society in which liberation is anything but scarce. It provides a theoretical framework that calls for an end to all hierarchies, and, as stated by Martha Ackelsberg, “It offers a perspective on the nature and process of social revolutionary transformation (e.g. the insistence that means must be consistent with ends, and that economic issues are critical, but not the only source of hierarchal power relations) that can be extremely valuable to/ for women’s emancipation. (2)”
Anarchists need to be developing working class theory that includes an awareness of the diversity of the working class. The anarchist movement can benefit from the development of a working class, anarchist approach to gender issues that incorporates the lessons of transfeminism and intersectionality. It is not so much a matter of asking anarchists to become active in the transfeminist movement as it is a need for anarchists to take a page from the Mujeres Libres and integrate the principles of (trans)feminism into our organizing within the working class and social movements. Continuing to develop contemporary anarchist theory of gender rooted in the working class requires a real and integrated understanding of transfeminism.
This article neglects to address another important concept: the idea that biological sex is somewhat socially constructed as well. Given the high prevalence of intersex folks, it is worth re-evaluating whether or not there are only two supposed biological sexes. This is a whole additional discussion, and one that would require a bit more research. Recommended sites for more information are http://www.isna.org and http://www.eminism.org.
Notes
1. The Transfeminist Manifesto by Emi Koyama (2000)
2. Lessons from the Free Women of Spain an interview with Martha Ackelsberg
by Geert Dhont (2004)
This article appears in the latest issue of the Northeastern Anarchist: http://www.nefac.net/en/node/2480
From the Washington Blade
http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=26608
By CHRIS JOHNSON, Washington Blade
Aug 5 2009, 12:00 PM
UPDATED: Aug 5, 1:46 PM
An Oregon lawmaker made history Wednesday by introducing a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in the U.S. Senate, marking the first time ever that a trans-inclusive bill has been considered in that chamber of Congress.
Sen. Jeff Merkley, a first-term Democratic senator, told the Blade he’s sponsoring the legislation because “it stems from core conviction” about his belief in fairness and equality.
“For me, one of the huge issues that I’ve cared a lot about is equality under the law and fairness to all Americans, and this was just a core part of the way I view the world,” he said.
Merkley said he was designated as the lead sponsor of ENDA because he championed a similar non-discrimination bill in Oregon as a lawmaker in the state House, as well as legislation enacting domestic partnerships in Oregon.
As of Wednesday, Merkley had 37 co-sponsors to the legislation, including Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), according to a statement released by Merkley’s office.
Merkley is a member of the Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee, which would hold hearings on the legislation and fine-tune the bill before it reaches the Senate floor. But whether the committee will hold hearings on the legislation, Merkley said, has “yet to be addressed.”
“That is certainly one of the things that I’ll be pursuing with Sen. Dodd and with Sen. Kennedy’s team,” Merkley said.
Allison Herwitt, the Human Rights Campaign’s legislative director, said HRC is hoping for hearings in the Senate, but doesn’t know whether they would occur in September or October.
While Kennedy was slated earlier to introduce the Senate version of ENDA this Congress, Merkley said he’s championing the legislation instead because Kennedy has not been as present on Capitol Hill as he had been in the past. Kennedy is battling brain cancer.
“Sen. Kennedy talked with his team, and felt that he wants to take key issues that he cares a lot about and pass the baton because he’s not as able to be here in person in the way that he would have been here a year ago,” Merkley said.
Merkley wouldn’t confirm that Kennedy’s illness prevented him for being the lead sponsor of the legislation.
On the House side, gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) introduced a version of ENDA in June. HRC is expecting further activity on the bill in September when lawmakers return from their August recess.
Herwitt said she’s expecting the House Education & Labor Committee to hold hearings on the bill in September, followed by a markup later the same month. She said HRC is hoping for a floor vote in October.
“Barney has said numerous times that he wants to come back together in September, see where we are with the votes and hopefully be able to move the fully inclusive bill to the House floor,” she said.
Passing ENDA in the Senate, Merkley said, will require member-to-member conversations. Merkley said he’s uncertain about the timing for passing the bill or when a committee markup of the legislation or any floor vote could take place.
“I certainly am going to be having conversations with basically all my colleagues,” he said. “We want to get a complete a lay of the land and understand how close we are to the level of votes that we need.”
Asked how confident he was that ENDA would be enacted into law this Congress, Merkley replied: “Ask me that after I and my co-sponsors have the conversations with our colleagues, but I can’t evaluate it right now.”
Herwitt, however, said the chances are good that Congress will be able to pass ENDA this Congress.
“I think we’ve put to work the whole community to really educate our members, and obviously Barney and [Rep.] Tammy [Baldwin] and now [Rep. Jared] Polis have been having what arguably is the most important part of the education process, and that’s member-to-member conversations,” she said.
Merkley predicted that opponents of ENDA would challenge the bill’s gender identity provisions as it makes its way through the Senate.
“Given the past record in Capitol Hill conversation, I expect that that will be a point of contention,” he said. “It did not become a key point of discussion when I worked on these issues in Oregon, but I think given the history here, that will come up.”
Still, Merkley said there’s a “strong sense” among those supporting the legislation that “discrimination is simply wrong, and that gender identity discrimination is a key part of this area.”
“We shouldn’t be slicing and dicing different components of it,” he said.
Herwitt said she believes the bill’s gender identity provisions would remain intact as it makes its way through Congress.
“The members and the advocates are committed to moving this legislation when we have the votes to protect the full integrity of the legislation,” she said.
Merkley said the passage of hate crimes legislation as an amendment in the Senate “raises the possibility” of a similar path for ENDA, but he added that a decision on “what pathways might be feasible” wouldn’t be made until further discussion occurs.
August 2, 2009, Evolutionary Psychology
Although it is not Susan Pinker’s intention in writing it, reading her excellent book The Sexual Paradox: Troubled Boys, Gifted Girls and the Real Difference Between the Sexes cannot help but further reinforce my view that modern feminism in the 21st century is simultaneously illogical, unnecessary, and evil.
First, modern feminism is illogical because, as Pinker points out, it is based on the vanilla assumption that, but for lifelong gender socialization and pernicious patriarchy, men and women are on the whole identical. An insurmountable body of evidence by now conclusively demonstrates that the vanilla assumption is false; men and women are inherently, fundamentally, and irreconcilably different. Any political movement based on such a spectacularly incorrect assumption about human nature – that men and women are and should be identical – is doomed to failure.
How misogynisticaly Nazi is this?
To read more shit from this dick go to:
Women Born Transsexual 