Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
retracted.
-
Up Front: R.O.A.R., in reply to mark taslov,
the most risible
To address potential accusations that this line of reasoning is an attempt to minimise criticisms of the crypto-antisemitic insinuations made in the current deadly climate – this was certainly not intended as anything more than a personal response to the marginalisation of trans concerns in the local discourse by cis people. My apologies at having presented the impression of hierarchization.
From a personal standpoint the crypto-antisemitism fails to pass any acid test deeming it worthy of debate simply on the grounds that global documentation of gender minorities predates Soros, Buffett et al by some considerable length as does the medicalisation of transgender people (though there are some troubling overlaps in the original article’s argument) and that medicalisation remains – despite claims we have now adopted ‘an informed consent model’ – incongruent with strict gate-keeping which still occurs under the jurisdiction of some DHBs and practitioners.
This expansive history of gender diversity is most evident locally when accounting for longstanding recognition of fa’afafine, fakaleiti and the revival of takatāpui etc rendering this spurious conspiracy as to the creation/promotion/recognition of gender minorities for the benefit of big pharma as both largely Eurocentric and farcical for any educated ally, gender minority or concerned individual with access to Google, as opposed to the allegations against the NZ health system, medical profession, guardians – which while easily refutable by those in the know – play largely – without much in the way of data – on fear of the unknown among the general population.
Though both preposterous and dangerous in their way – I assume part of the reason for the silence by the trans ally cis population wrt the child abuse allegations is in part due to lack of access to information required to refute that.
-
Up Front: R.O.A.R., in reply to ,
Thats brutal.
Meanwhile in Ireland:
Among those the Guardian spoke to, there was no evidence of the legislation leading to individuals – in particular teenagers – being pressured to undertake medical transition, or men falsely declaring themselves female in order to invade women-only spaces, as some feminist activists have feared.
-
Up Front: R.O.A.R., in reply to mark taslov,
Having said that, the most risible accusation and damaging myth disseminated is arguably:
Gender critical feminists like me also question the use of hormone blockers, or the taking of testosterone, by children as young as five
This is not a claim about some global crypto-antisemitic conspiracy theory, these are very serious allegations being made about the New Zealand Health system, the medical professionals that administer it and the guardians giving consent. As the cis population have been falling over themselves to discredit the sensationalist Soros/Buffett conspiracy, this has been a key focus of the transgender community – who have been largely talked over throughout this fallout:
Let’s talk hormones next. If the young person wants to go on cross hormones, so estrogen if you were AMAB (people thought their baby was a boy) or testosterone if you were AFAB (people thought their baby was a girl), then it’s more steps and more appointments. This is because unlike blockers cross hormone treatment causes some permanent changes. In New Zealand, on rare occasions cross hormones have been prescribed at 14. For most trans youth it is 16 or older. Before prescribing there are psychological assessments and upfront discussions with the endocrinologists. Not all trans youth (or adults ) are able or even want to take hormones. It’s a very personal choice.
While there may or may not be extremely remote odds (don’t quote me) of a pre-teen with Precocious Puberty (affecting 1 out of 5,000 children) or other exacerbating conditions being subject to this type of intervention – the circumstances would be so rare as to render the incrimination wildly irresponsible and entirely misrepresentative of contemporary standards of care and gender affirming guidelines (pdf) in Aotearoa.
Which leads to the rather unusual circumstance where a member of the Government has been allocated a Herald column to defend superfluities such as linguistics and historical precedent, leaving the role of defending Ministry of Health protocols (pdf – page 32) to impacted and concerned citizens offsite – as Kylie Parry has done (above).
If the young person is under 16, and usually until the age of 18 (though not legally required),gaining consent from both the young person and parents/caregivers as family support is strongly recommended during the transition process. However,in exceptional circumstances if the young person is under 16 and deemed Gillick competent they alone may be allowed to consent. We would recommend this is discussed with other health professionals experienced with working with youth prior to starting treatment
-
Hard News: Getting serious about the…, in reply to Russell Brown,
The thing is, selecting cannabis solely on its THC potency is actually kinda dumb. Research on cannabis social clubs in Europe found that many people like the clubs because they provided access to weed that wasn’t rocket fuel.
Good article, on that note, as has been discussed here previously specifically wrt to smokable cannabis; personally higher potency generally means I’ll smoke less entailing less tar in the lungs, likely producing less severe potential physical health consequences. I felt McCoskrie’s story was a bit of a self-own in that regard.
-
Up Front: It's Beginning to Look a Lot…, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,
Don’t. Do. Christmas.
Yeah, if anything’s going to meaningfully address the gendered labour imbalance ingrained in our society, cancelling a festival is likely to be. that. silver. bullet. smh.
-
TERFs
Imagine spending years building a career as an award winning evidence based environmental reporter only to comprehensively torch what was left of that already tattered reputation in one incredibly poorly researched article. A year ago I rated her as both a hero and a style icon, now I’m left scratching my head as to what she has against George Soros.
-
Up Front: It's Beginning to Look a Lot…, in reply to Emma Hart,
For myself, I am pleased to find that my expectations of my sons are both the same
Totally feeling that, I’ve no idea what that must feel like as a parent – at this juncture you’re doing a heck of a lot better than my folks. I was particularly impressed at the way this section mixed things around and challenged assumptions while not displacing some home truths:
It is my younger son’s job to dry the dishes. He does this. But about three times a week, including tonight, it is apparently my job to remind him to dry the dishes. On the other hand, in the run-up to Christmas last year, my older son came and asked me if there was anything he could do to help. My younger son saw a basket full of clean laundry and just sorted and folded it. One of these things requires me to do invisible work. The other saves me a job.
-
oops: this was the Herald article I meant to link to re: Baker, Collings etc
-
Up Front: It's Beginning to Look a Lot…, in reply to Emma Hart,
I thought this paragraph nailed something:
And yeah, I know, women do some of this to ourselves. My mother was a freaking saint, but she still raised me by example to believe that men were utterly useless, and therefore excused. It was only after she died that I realised the reason she always got peas in pods for Christmas was so she could send the small kids and the men outside to shell them, so they didn’t get underfoot.
to the extent I’m incredibly familiar with the premise that by virtue of my assigned sex by some quarters I was/am automatically depicted as ‘utterly useless’, which gets more bizarre when transitioning and suddenly – based on what are largely superficial changes – being seen as useful. So wrt your brother it’s easy to understand how being seen – implicitly or otherwise – as utterly useless gets modelled and internalised – at least at a young age – not making excuses for him as an adult mind because I strongly agree that this discussion around the gendered nature of invisible labour is invaluable and which I’m very much here for.
There is the sense – as intimated above – of their being something of a self-fulfilling prophecy at play which requires intervention, as you suggest:
THEN work out, together, with discussion, how your particular family is going to navigate it.
Obviously coming from a queer perspective it’s difficult to ignore that the heteronormative discussion is largely irrelevant to gay and lesbian couplings etc, but more so that it conforms perfectly to an observation as to the cyclical nature of these types of contemporary discourse i.e. that when the queers assert themselves it is invariably closely followed by a resetting of the discourse back to a (generally speaking exclusionary) gender binary normality.
So it’s difficult to ignore the inherent binarism in the framing of these types of discussions and the extent to which they assist in the perpetuation of academised stereotypes on an issue which is – as indicated by the diversity of opinion above – largely intra-familial – and as you pointed out – intrinsically predicated on the negotiation of boundaries with significant others.
: a mode of thought predicated on stable oppositions (such as good and evil or male and female) that is seen in post-structuralist analysis as an inadequate approach to areas of difference also
: a specific dichotomy subscribed to or reinforced in such thought
Refrencing an earlier discussion; i.e. am I a bicycle? Am I a car? A skateboard? The median strip? the gutter? Who is excluded by that metaphor?
Which is a longwinded way of declaring I’m onboard but that there have been clear framing issues in the premise to the discussion, namely the abhorrent cissexism by Baker etc – which in and of itself should have been cause for dismissal though I’ve not seen a word written about it:
"you can’t have a Santa with boobs"
which in its way is absolutely fuel for dysphoria, as in:
My younger son socially transitioned about a year ago. He desperately wants top surgery, not so much because of dysphoria but to lessen his chances of being outed.
And that goes both ways in the community – both in terms of trans men requiring chest reconstruction to be read as male and trans women requiring interventions to be read as female – and even beyond the community in the way it feeds anxiety and interventions driven by essentialised notions of body image. This essentialism taken to infantile lengths by Howick Local Board chairman David Collings whose comment in the above article I’ll not quote because it’s 100% shit house. Vote that fucker out Howick!
Anyway, just some peripheral observations which I hope aren’t too much of a derail. To reiterate – very much in favour of serious discussion on the unequal division of labour, but pretty meh on framing that within discussions about the gender of mythological characters and outright disgusted by Baker etc’s cissexism.
