Yes, an appalling paper, by the current director of the group whose conference it was. No, there has been no comment or report at all, which might mean it seemed unremarkable to women philosophers! The abstract was amongst the advance publicity on the venue's site, but all that has come down now. Ironically I only tripped across it following a link from a site for researchers into how gender can be included in primary school teaching - they were publicising the conference as helpful in that! Does that mean, I wondered, we may soon see such hate taught in schools?
Shockingly the paper is by the head of a research unit to help "victims". And she writes a paper casting us - so often victims (bullying, sexual abuse, hate crime, medical mistreatment, trafficking, legal discrimination, denial of identity or privacy, etc.) - as perpetrators of harm upon all women!
One would have to suspect that the philosophy department, at least at Durham, is not a safe place for T* students or faculty.
Worse yet, remember that medical ethics - a relatively new field that could offer much help to us - is part of philosophy. So this provides shocking context for ethicist Simona Giordano, who presented her outstanding paper[1] on how children are handled unethically in the UK most powerfully at Richard Green's conference in September.
There is no formal evidence of trafficking of T* people that I can find. But a vital plank of the treaties and guidelines has been to watch for it, compile evidence, and use that to stop the traffic internationally, and T* people (except if subsumed as children) are excluded from that. Anecdotally there are many cases known. A drug-enslaved UK M2F found in a raid on an LA brothel, seized originally in a gay pub. A Vietnamese M2F found by a roadside in the UK, disposed of from a brothel after becoming HIV+. A friend of mine who, some years ago, fled a brothel in NYC at 15 after overhearing negotiations for ownership of her between the owner, who had given the self-transitioned teen shelter, and Japanese Yakuza, who had just been pressing her to do unspeakable acts.
T* people should be recognised as potential victims of trafficking, as their gender of identity, and covered as such by the treaties and conventions. But we'd have the very well-placed Janice Raymond to contend with.
Was there any undertaking given, when the compromises were being made on the GerBil, that the legislation would be revisited some time? The need for the government to supposedly comply with the Goodwin judgment was perhaps a never-to-be-repeated access to parliamentary time. I simply cannot see Britain sweeping away all the awful (and permanent) breaches of privacy and insults to our identities, not least the requirement for a mental disorder diagnosis, the GRA created.
What specifically did SW call for to be changed in that address?
Politics doesn't have to be secretive and underhand, nor work against human rights in the name of doing the opposite.
[1] Giordano, S. Gender atypical organisation in children and adolescents: Ethico-legal issues and a proposal for new guidelines. The International Journal of Children's Rights 15, 365-390 (2007).
Re: Helen says
Shockingly the paper is by the head of a research unit to help "victims". And she writes a paper casting us - so often victims (bullying, sexual abuse, hate crime, medical mistreatment, trafficking, legal discrimination, denial of identity or privacy, etc.) - as perpetrators of harm upon all women!
One would have to suspect that the philosophy department, at least at Durham, is not a safe place for T* students or faculty.
Worse yet, remember that medical ethics - a relatively new field that could offer much help to us - is part of philosophy. So this provides shocking context for ethicist Simona Giordano, who presented her outstanding paper[1] on how children are handled unethically in the UK most powerfully at Richard Green's conference in September.
There is no formal evidence of trafficking of T* people that I can find. But a vital plank of the treaties and guidelines has been to watch for it, compile evidence, and use that to stop the traffic internationally, and T* people (except if subsumed as children) are excluded from that. Anecdotally there are many cases known. A drug-enslaved UK M2F found in a raid on an LA brothel, seized originally in a gay pub. A Vietnamese M2F found by a roadside in the UK, disposed of from a brothel after becoming HIV+. A friend of mine who, some years ago, fled a brothel in NYC at 15 after overhearing negotiations for ownership of her between the owner, who had given the self-transitioned teen shelter, and Japanese Yakuza, who had just been pressing her to do unspeakable acts.
T* people should be recognised as potential victims of trafficking, as their gender of identity, and covered as such by the treaties and conventions. But we'd have the very well-placed Janice Raymond to contend with.
Was there any undertaking given, when the compromises were being made on the GerBil, that the legislation would be revisited some time? The need for the government to supposedly comply with the Goodwin judgment was perhaps a never-to-be-repeated access to parliamentary time. I simply cannot see Britain sweeping away all the awful (and permanent) breaches of privacy and insults to our identities, not least the requirement for a mental disorder diagnosis, the GRA created.
What specifically did SW call for to be changed in that address?
Politics doesn't have to be secretive and underhand, nor work against human rights in the name of doing the opposite.
[1] Giordano, S. Gender atypical organisation in children and adolescents: Ethico-legal issues and a proposal for new guidelines. The International Journal of Children's Rights 15, 365-390 (2007).