The Politicians And The Medical Establishment Fudge Science To Appease Abrahamic Religions!

Manchester, England. In England the National Health Service (NHS) defines sex as the biological sex that you were born with. It is determined by the sex organs (gonads) which are the testes in males and the ovaries in females.

So there you have it!

You are going to be discriminated against by the medical and political establishment forever if you can’t demonstrate possession of one or the other and this is the excuse used for equality legislation that is designed to marginalize into ghettos those who don’t meet the heterosexual dominated establishment rules.

National Health Service (NHS)

The NHS is the ubiquitous healthcare system in England (also used collectively when referring to three of the four national health services in the UK).

The National Health Service Act (1946) took effect on 5 July 1948. The Department of Health, headed by the Secretary of State for Health, is responsible for the NHS.

The NHS has a formal charter which enumerates the legal rights and responsibilities of the NHS, its staff, and users of the service. It also makes non-binding pledges regarding general operations and quality of care.

The NHS is publicly funded and provides healthcare to UK residents. Services at the point of use for the patient are generally delivered at no charge. However, there can be additional fees for aspects of dental care, eye tests, prescriptions, and personal care.

The NHS is largely funded from general taxation (including a proportion from National Insurance payments) and commands most of the department's expenditures.

Since the turn of the 21st century the private sector has been increasingly relied upon by the NHS to increase capacity. Private health care has continued in parallel to the NHS, provided largely by private insurance purchased by the consumer. Today, about 8% of the population uses private insurance as an add-on to NHS services.

Unless we destroy the myth that Gender Dysphoria is a mental illness, we cannot achieve equality.

So bring in the psychiatrists and create Gender Dysphoria, making the definitions so broad that you can capture everyone who identifies as gay and lesbian and you can make discrimination complete.

In England the National Health Service states that Transsexuals have a life-long and extreme form of gender dysphoria. They seek to alter their sex using hormone treatment and surgery. [N1]

A person who seeks to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone surgery to alter their sex (also known as transition) may be known as a trans man (female to male) or a trans woman (male to female).

Brilliant!

The Politicians and Medical Establishment say you can’t be a woman or man unless we said so at birth so you have got to make do with Gender.

The obscene lie of transsexual mental illness must be destroyed whatever the cost.

That means we will give you a Gender Recognition Certificate but now you appear on a new Government List that links back to your original certificate.

The new Birth Certificate — whilst it will mean you can now marry someone with a different sex on their birth certificate to your new one — also requires you to have a civil partnership if the sex on theirs is the same as the one you have acquired.

Of course you must divorce if you are already married and want a Gender Recognition Certificate which of course means that there are women with a penis in England who are now in a Civil Partnership with someone they used to be married to.

Confused?

You should be and It gets worse:

The Government is about to pass into English Law the Single Equality Act 2010 which is a piece of illogical nonsense that enshrines the rights of Religious Groups to discriminate at will against anyone who doesn’t fit into the creationist view of God making man as a strong superior dominant being and then woman as an inferior playmate for man.

So we now have to contend with protected characteristics which read like a bigot’s hit list of age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.

The Act creates “Protected Characteristics” that are a wonderful bigots’ charter. For example, the wonderfully misnamed Equality and Human Rights Commission states that exceptions include:

For religious organizations an exception may restrict facilities to men so as to comply with the doctrines of that religion or avoid offending the religious susceptibilities of a significant number of its followers.

In hospitals and establishments for persons requiring special care and attention it is permissible to take a less favorable approach towards transsexual people in the provision of goods, facilities or services provided that to do so is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Similar exceptions are applicable to charities and the use of communal accommodation. [N2]

Aren’t proportionate and legitimate great equality words?

No, they are an excuse for discrimination in the same way as the excuse was I was only following orders when I dropped in the gas canister.

Why not just write as someone who does not conform to strict Caucasian male supremacy we will invent a whole new litany that will be enshrined in law to make you believe that we your masters believe in equality as given to us by God.

Let’s just avoid some unpalatable facts:

1. We are all unique individual beings so any grouping is arbitrary and wrong — by definition.
   
   
2. Equality means equal — full stop. (So marriage must not be dependent on sex.)
   
   
3. Exercising personal Choice is not a mental illness on some things but not on others.

Doctors are not Gods. They cannot determine brain sex at birth and politicians have no right to make the sex assigned at birth (and the doctors' mistakes) absolute and uncorrectable.

You could say that it’s all about control and manipulation by power and guilt of the elite over the masses whilst what human beings really want is love, health and happiness.

Maybe we should stop categorizing human beings as male and female at birth?

But what we must do is destroy the stigma of a mental illness for transsexual people.

Unless we destroy the myth that Gender Dysphoria is a mental illness, we cannot achieve equality and this obscene lie must be destroyed whatever the cost.

Go in Peace and be true to yourself.

Maggie Fiona Fox is the human being produced by a cake shop assistant from Tredegar, Monmouthshire. She was adopted at birth and educated at Bassaleg Grammar School Newport and the Queen Mary College, University of London Nuclear Engineering Department. After a diverse career encompassing Ladies Fashions, Commercial Management, Information Technology and even Biscuit Making.

She is now retired and lives mostly in Manchester, England indulging her passion for music, art and literature. Maggie knows equality requires you to embrace peace & the spirit of love.

The TS-Si News Service is a collaborative effort by TS-Si.org editors, contributors, and corresponding institutions. The sources can include the cited individuals and organizations, as well as TS-Si.org staff contributions. Articles and news reports do not necessarily convey official positions of TS-Si, its partners, or affiliates.

We welcome your comments. Use the form below to leave a public comment or send private correspondence via the TS-Si Contact Page. We will not divulge any personal details or place you on a mailing list without your permission.

TS-Si is dedicated to the acceptance, medical treatment, and legal protection of individuals correcting the misalignment of their brains and their anatomical sex, while supporting their transition into society as hormonally reconstituted and surgically corrected citizens.

Tweet

Comments (45)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/hide comments

..., I've long wondered what some of the politicians in

04 September 2010     

I've long wondered what some of the politicians in the UK were smoking, but they are all good at cheating on their expenses to get at the taxpayers money. This bit sounds like a return to the Old days of English law and will probably result in another trip to the court for the EU.
Pamela

..., What paranoid rubbish! I'm surprised that TS-Si s

04 September 2010     

What paranoid rubbish! I'm surprised that TS-Si should stoop so low as to publish this piece of TG-inspired ignorance. To mention just one distortion - that NHS site you link to and quote is a help site for the general reader seeking basic information. It has little or no authority. It's written by journalists for a start!
hipparkhia

..., @ Hipparkhia Hipparchia chose not the tasks of ri

04 September 2010     

@ Hipparkhia Hipparchia chose not the tasks of rich-robed woman, but the manly life of the Cynic. Little survives of her own philosophical views, but like most Cynics, her influence lies in the example of her life, choosing a way of life which was usually considered unacceptable for respectable women of the time. The story of her attraction to Crates, and her rejection of conventional values, became a popular theme for later writers. Nice choice of alias lol

Maggie

Hipparkhia, Thank you for your comment. "We often publis

04 September 2010     

Thank you for your comment. "We often publish material that presents challenges and insights worthy of extended discussion." (from our Terms of Usage. I recommend a careful reading when commenting to fully understand the arguments as presented, as well as the national and cultural context of the author. We encourage Maggie Fox to respond on her own - it is her opinion column after all. In the meantime, we will continue to present varying views, and do so in hope we can have a civil and reasoned discussion.

Sharon S. Gaughan

So, Hipparkhia & Maggie, Where, if anywhere, does TG stu

04 September 2010     

Where, if anywhere, does TG stuff enter into the situation discussed in the column?
Sharon S. Gaughan

..., Excuse me, Sharon, but I am well aware of the natio

04 September 2010     

Excuse me, Sharon, but I am well aware of the national and cultural context of the author. After all, I am English and I am transitioning under the National Health Service. Let me just point to one aspect of that context. Every appointment I've had at the Charing Cross clinic has been free of charge (private clinics charge at least £100 a time). My hormones and anti-androgens are charged at the same rate as all other medications (ie £7.20 a time even though my Zoladex injections actually cost over £300!) and when I was unemployed were free of charge. I had a dozen or so sessions of Speech Therapy free of charge. In a month or two I'll be having a Cryto-Thoracic Approximation and possibly a Tracheal Shave free of charge. I'm currently undergoing genital electrolysis - free of charge. And my SRS early next year? Free of charge. So, yes, while there is much to criticise about the NHS let's put it in context. This essay is not simply a matter of opinion, Maggie Fox makes factual claims which are untrue. As I've already mentioned, she quotes an information website written by journalists as if it were government policy. It is not. For instance, the NHS does NOT consider gender dysphoria a life-long illness. If you successfully complete RLE and get referred for surgery you are discharged from the gender clinic (it has just happened to me). If you successfully apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate you obtain full legal rights as a woman and therefore cannot any longer be said to suffer from gender dysphoria. That is the actual legal and medical policy in this country. The NHS does not define sex. According to UK law we are the sex it says on our birth certificate. Which is exactly why people campaigned for the passing of the Gender Recognition Act. So what is the problem with being provided with a new birth certificate that states our correct sex? If I obtain a birth certificate that gives me full legal rights as a woman how is it that I will "have to make do with gender"? According to Maggie Fox, anyone who applies for a Gender Recognition Certificate (as I have recently done) will go on some mysterious Government List. What does she mean by that? That one's original birth certificate is retained by the Registrar General? Does she imagine that such a fundamental change as that of a birth certificate can be achieved without any record that a change has been made remaining? In any case when you use your new certificate no link to the original is visible to anybody else. And what is the alternative? If you don't get a GRC then your birth sex is recorded on all government records. When you transition and change your name the tax office and social security and so on will change your gender to female - but they keep a marker attached to that: "Used to be male". When you get a GRC that marker is deleted and you are female to everyone who accesses those records thereafter. Does Maggie Fox prefer that government employees continue see transsexuals as "used to be male?" So, a little perspective is in order, no? Perhaps we should weigh up the benefits of the GRC and consider the very real protections it offers before indulging in wholesale dismissal? I confess I don't understand the problem regarding marriage. According to UK law as it currently stands a person may marry another person of the opposite sex or contract a civil partnership with a person of the same sex. The GRC gives the same rights to transsexuals. I have never asked for anything more than to be treated exactly as any other woman. Why should exceptions be made for those who wish to continue a marriage contracted before transition? You may argue that marriage law is unjust - but you have to argue that it is unjust for all. As for "protected characteristics" - analogous exceptions were made in the Sex Discrimination Act which allow discrimination against one sex or the other in certain circumstances. I think a rather subtler analysis is required before calling the Equality Act a "bigot's charter" and comparing the government to Nazis. MAggie Fox offers no practical alternative to the Gender Recognition Certificate indulging instead in portentous warnings about potential abuse (but without offering any evidence that such abuse occurs) and vague hand-waving towards an undefined equality.

hipparkhia

..., MAggie, When you lift stuff wholesale from Wikiped

04 September 2010     

MAggie, When you lift stuff wholesale from Wikipedia you should at least use quotation marks... I am perfectly familiar with the historical Hipparchia. And with Greek philosophy - so, unlike you, I understand the significance of her referring to her adoption of Cynicism as "the manly life". It's a very cheap shot to use it to put me down as some kind of cross-dresser. Anyway, for your information, my inspiration for choosing that screen-name was the book Hipparchia's Choice by Michelle Le Doeuff.

hipparkhia

..., Sharon, you ask what is TG about Maggie Fox's artic

04 September 2010     

Sharon, you ask what is TG about Maggie Fox's article. Well, there are various indications. Discomfort about the importance of genitals. The dismissal of things vital to any transsexual - like a valid birth certificate, for instance. The obsession with discrimination. Dislike of categorisation. Strident belief in same-sex marriage. It all adds up to typical TG ideology.
hipparkhia

Thank you, Hipparkhia, Your comments were very interesti

04 September 2010     

Your comments were very interesting and well worth considering. Good read.
Sharon S. Gaughan

..., Ooops forgot the "" never mind I didn't use them in

04 September 2010     

Ooops forgot the "" never mind I didn't use them in the main article either I'm pleased you got so much free off the state (you must live in a Primary Care Trust area with money to burn). I know people who went to Charing Cross and were brainwashed into agreeing to electric convulsive therapy to cure them of GID , others who were interviewed by psychiatrists there who had their hands in their pants and others who were refused treatment for wearing too short skirts or not earning the right to wear trousers - I could go on. HM Government & the NHS is not as you describe for the vast majority of women who were unfortunately born with a birth defect but then I guess you are very young so have plenty of time to learn the truth. Still I wish you well with your correction operation and that you get the best surgeon there as they are certainly not equal in skill but I expect you'll do your research first. As regards an alternative simply destroy the original, that is how we used to do it before Corbett vs Corbett

Maggie

..., My TG ideology lol America Please Learn From Our M

04 September 2010     

My TG ideology lol America Please Learn From Our Mistakes (Part 3): TransLobby. Maggie Fox. TS-Si.org (18 February 2010). Click here for article.
Maggie

..., No, of course you don't use quotation marks - that

04 September 2010     

No, of course you don't use quotation marks - that would mean taking care and being accurate. Everything I have off the state is what every transsexual is entitled to in this country. Yes, some PCTs try to avoid their legal obligations. But the point is, exactly, that those obligations are legal. Attack certain PCTs for their shortcomings but don't pretend they are justified by government policy. You know people who were given ECT by Charing Cross. I don't doubt it happened. But when? In the past year? Five years ago? Ten? Twenty? Don't try and tell me it still goes on today. And your other examples? Well, it's not 1980 any more.... The argument is not about what used to happen in the bad old days. Your article is about the present. Are you seriously suggesting the vast majority of transsexual women in the UK cannot access the means to correction? Really? And don't patronise me - I'm not very young and I've certainly come across people like you before with a political axe to grind about the NHS. And it's the priority you place on the grinding of that political axe over the actual everyday needs of transsexual women that made me accuse you of being TG.

hipparkhia

..., Sorry, but I have friends that used the NHS for the

05 September 2010     

Sorry, but I have friends that used the NHS for their transition and the problems they had were no fun, they finally ended up going "private" for the Psych part of their transition and then ended up with the "Butcher" of Leicester for their SRS, BOTH had problems and got a very old fashion operation compared to what I received in Thailand. One got MRSA and has suffered a partial prolapse, the other got an infection and lost part of her neovagina; certainly NOT a very good recommendation for the NHS, did I mention the long wait for a bed in the hospital and the surgery. So you get it all free, just remember, "You get what you pay for". BTW, are they STILL doing the penile inversions under the NHS?? Just asking. Pamela

Pamela Dunn

Pam, How long ago did your friends have these experience

05 September 2010     

How long ago did your friends have these experiences. Are they current?
Sharon S. Gaughan

..., Firstly can I assure readers that the ECT I mention

05 September 2010     

Firstly can I assure readers that the ECT I mentioned happened in recent times (2001) and the other incidents were in (2006) I won't quote examples of current problems as the people concerned have yet to access surgical correction and it seems certain psychiatrists in the NHS are very vindictive if they recognise who I am talking about. Anyway we've strayed from the point of this article. Equality cannot be achieved if you label people as mentally ill when they are not and the NHS and the Private Sector in England play this invented game. Politicians are in the business of attracting votes so legislation is framed to satisfy creationists in the Abrahamic religions that have more influence on them than the tiny, tiny number of people whose brain sex was incongruous with their genitalia. The UK Trans lobby of self appointed political lobbyists has a vested financial interest in maintenance of the transgender myth and aggressively denounce as prejudice any deviation from their doctrine. I don't care if you are compelled to live as the opposite sex to the one you were assigned at birth temporarily, permanently or wether your reason is medical or philosophical or even sexual. None of those reasons justify classification in DSM V as an illness. What I do care about is that someone who has corrected a birth defect to the limits of medical science is given the unconditional status of the sex they have corrected to with no exceptions for political, cultural or religious reasons. Equality and Gender Theory are incompatible Equality means Equality full stop. I wrote it here I stood up and said it in the Quaker meeting in Manchester today and I will carry on saying it and writing it. Thanks to the girls here for defending the site against the coincidental DNS attacks. Peace, Love and God Bless America

Maggie

..., The so-called "Butcher of Leicester" is irrelevant

05 September 2010     

The so-called "Butcher of Leicester" is irrelevant to anything I said given that I referred to Charing Cross and that particular surgeon does not work there. The fact that some particular surgeons or psychiatrists are inadequate does not count as evidence of the evils of the NHS or the British Government. In any case, most comparative discussions of SRS are extremely partial and prejudiced and I've no desire to get involved in such a discussion. Needless, to say, I don't think I have encountered a single surgeon who doesn't have some disappointed patients (even Suporn). And also, techniques improve over time - what was true in 1990 or 2000 is not necessarily the case in 2010. I will tell you, though, why articles like this make me see red. There is one thing which provokes me still to comment on transsexual sites and that is the constant moaning about how difficult transition is and how we face nothing but discrimination from the rest of the world. I realise that I run the risk of sounding like some kind of Pollyanna when I dispute that but I can't help it. I'm just sick and tired of, on the one hand, transvestites who should never be transitioning pretending their inevitably negative experiences will be mine. And, on the other hand, I'm fed up with superannuated transsexuals who hang around on forums years after correction regaling us with their baleful wisdom gleaned from the bad old days. Thanks to both groups and their almost total dominance of discussion I was absolutely terrified of making my first visit to Charing Cross. So much did I expect to be challenged and obstructed that I didn't even realise - until I was calmed down by my GP - that that first visit actually went extremely well. As did all subsequent visits. I changed my name, got my prescriptions for hormones and then my referral for surgery. And that's it, really. I didn't even have to undergo any "therapy". I have every sympathy with those who were subjected to the inappropriate treatment of certain doctors in the past. I am not totally ignorant of what went on, I have heard plenty of stories - and I was myself referred to Charing Cross in my youth. The whole experience of that first attempt at transition so traumatised me that I became a virtual recluse from life for the next decade and a half. So I am well aware of how much has changed since then. To return to the argument... I'll say it for the third time, the NHS Choices website is NOT an authoritative source for government policy. Actual government policy does not see gender dysphoria as a life-long mental illness - if it had the Gender Recognition Act would not have been passed. So far as that Act is concerned it is certainly possible to criticise certain inconsistencies. But let's see someone with a bit of legal knowledge do it and not someone who puts the blame on n conspiracy of the "heterosexual dominated establishment", "capitalist ideals", "Caucasian male supremacy" and other bogeymen. Maggie Fox is free to do without the NHS if she wants and go the private route for her healthcare. But don't disparage those of us who can't afford to go that way and who do perfectly all the same. And anyone is free to live without a Gender Recognition Certificate. But they have to accept that they are still a man under UK law, cannot legally marry, and are marked as a transsexual on all official government records. I'd rather take the Certificate and get on with my life as a woman.

hipparkhia

..., I'll say no more. Maggie, your whole argument is wa

05 September 2010     

I'll say no more. Maggie, your whole argument is waffle and self-contradiction.
hipparkhia

..., Pot kettle black lol

05 September 2010     

Pot kettle black lol
Maggie

Speaking as a ..............................., "superann

05 September 2010     

"superannuated transsexual who hangs around on forums years after correction regaling us with their baleful wisdom gleaned from the bad old days" - hiparkia ... I attended charing back in the day. I was one of the last few patients of the rather grumpy and straight shooting, Dr. John Randell, and yes there was very much a "no nonsense" approach to the candidates. If you didn't measure up back then they had absolutly no problem in showing you the door. ah ... the good old days

Leigh

The DSM, I wrote a column a while back that may be relev

05 September 2010     

I wrote a column a while back that may be relevant. Grey Lady Down: The Wreck Of The DSM. Sharon Gaughan. TS-Si.org 18 July 2008. Link "The Manual for Diagnosis of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) has long outlived its intended purpose, the legitimization of psychiatry as a medical discipline. Even if we forgive the suspect origins of the DSM and respect the intentions of subsequent generations, the book — and that is what it is — has been overtaken by events."

Sharon S. Gaughan

..., OK< one more comment. @Maggie - I made rational cr

05 September 2010     

OK< one more comment. @Maggie - I made rational criticisms of your post. You've ignored every one of them and just indulged in ad hominems against me. @Leigh - I wasn't thinking of people like you! You don't go around picking at old wounds and telling everyone things will be just as miserable for them as they were for you. On the contrary, you are one of those who give the rest of us hope. @Sharon - That article is relevant, except the UK uses ICD-10 not the DSM. I'm not against criticising the idea that gender dysphoria is a mental illness. But we have to be wary of any attempt to get rid of it right now. Yes, ideally, it would be infinitely better to have a simple, reliable physiological test to diagnose transsexualism. But we don't. Not yet. So there has to be some way of distinguishing those who actually need the medical interventions and legal changes.

hipparkhia

DSM/ICD, As it happens, I have done professional work on

05 September 2010     

As it happens, I have done professional work on the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD), the international standard diagnostic classification for general epidemiology and health management. Please forgive my brevity as it risks oversimplification, but a look back might help in understanding the relationship between the DSM and ICD. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) was very influential in the early ICD developments since before internationalization the DSM was the only organized resource in widespread use. Earlier ICD standards were largely a parochial rehash of DSM to make it more general for the international audience. An often ignored aspect of this is the subject of medical "coding" to account for and track treatment costs. Since America had the most elaborate - and detailed - methodology, it was very influential over developments elsewhere. However, the American Psychiatric Association made a preemptive decision to publish the DSM-III revision in 1987, then set up the DSM-IV Task Force. That impaired any influence over the ICD-10 format since the WHO had already made the major decisions. Both DSM-IV and the ICD came into widespread use in 1993 with many conflicts between the two. Medical establishments, even in the UK, continue to pick and choose between the two and make arbitrary interpretations. After that, it is a matter of medical "coding" to force-fit business accounting decisions that meet national standards. It was thought that the DSM-IV would be based on a sound range of empirical data and trump other national or international classification schemes. General scientific opinion had it that there should be no more DSM revisions without compelling scientific reasons. It did not work. Well, here we are again, working on DSM-5. I believe it is a game of catch up with internationalization and science that, in my opinion, will surely fail. Worse, there are rumblings within the ICD committees that some of the DSM-5 multi-axis formats be adopted in subsequent ICD updates. Moreover, both the DSM and ICD are deficient because of their limited awareness of landmark upheavals in science and biomedicine, as well as the changing economics of health care. All this is happening without going back and questioning two important premises that underlie both the DSM and ICD: (1) what are medical conditions in the first place, and (2) how do we identify and track costs. We should remember that the ultimate source of all this was a comparatively ancient standard put out by American pathologists to consistently identify the causes of death, pinpoint treatment responsibility, and identify research priorities. Now international, the pathologists have jumped back in with some suggested improvements. Here we go again.

Sharon S. Gaughan

..., Well I do find it difficult to take seriously someo

05 September 2010     

Well I do find it difficult to take seriously someone who hides behind an alias and then tries to spin psychiatry & current policy based on: "I was myself referred to Charing Cross in my youth. The whole experience of that first attempt at transition so traumatised me that I became a virtual recluse from life for the next decade and a half. So I am well aware of how much has changed since then." For example: Do psychiatrists now offer puberty delaying drugs in the UK? No - you have to take your child to America. If GID was not categorised as a mental illness then you and people who go through the UK free state system would not have had 10+ years of their life stolen because someone needed a diagnosis for you to affirm the person you really are. You were very lucky second time around a lot of others are not. I believe the current system still damages those who submit fully to it but then like my article that is just an opinion. As Sharon says "both the DSM and ICD are deficient because of their limited awareness of landmark upheavals in science and biomedicine, as well as the changing economics of health care. " And if you bother to read the UK Mental Capacity Act then current UK practices are illegal as is any policy that applies a more onerous pathway than that required to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate. Possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate by the way both guarantees the funding of your corrective surgery and gives you Choice of surgeon and hospital. You may like to use that last bit? Do enjoy your life I certainly do.

Maggie

..., "Moreover, both the DSM and ICD are deficient becau

05 September 2010     

"Moreover, both the DSM and ICD are deficient because of their limited awareness of landmark upheavals in science and biomedicine, as well as the changing economics of health care." I quite agree. My objections to Maggie Fox's article were to her politically biased presentation of the question, her blatant distortion of government and NHS policy, and her obvious personal issues with the GRA (which is not really relevant to anyone else).

hipparkhia

About NHS Choices, Hipparkhia questioned the credibility

05 September 2010     

Hipparkhia questioned the credibility of the NHS site Maggie Fox quoted in her article. TS-Si has been in contact with their management. They assure us that NHS Choices is funded by the UK Department of Health and reviewed for content accuracy and appropriateness. NHS Choices does not carry advertising and declines corporate sponsorship. Their purpose includes provision of information about the English health service in England, accenting its history, organization, and benefits. Beyond that, I leave it to our English readers and those experienced with the UK and/or Charing Cross to debate the veracity of the reference.

Sharon S. Gaughan

..., What? - "hides behind an alias"? You lambast the GR

05 September 2010     

What? - "hides behind an alias"? You lambast the GRC because it means the Registrar General keeps a copy of your original birth certificate but you dare criticise me for using an alias on the internet??!!! Do you really not understand why a transsexual might not use her real name? And shall I tell you what I really think? Given the people I've seen in the waiting room at Charing Cross - most of whom quite obviously are deluded cross-dressers who will never transition successfully in a hundred years - it doesn't surprise me in the least that the doctors think most of them are mentally unbalanced. Enough of this nonsense.

hipparkhia

..., Pam, How long ago did your friends have these expe

05 September 2010     

Pam, How long ago did your friends have these experience 05 September 2010 How long ago did your friends have these experiences. Are they current? Sharon S. Gaughan They had their operations less than 6 years ago, I went to Thailand in October of 2003 and visited them in England in the late Spring of 2004, so it was after that. I guess you could class that as being "current". Pamela
Pamela Dunn

..., Oh, how I love it; "hipparkhia", the all knowing an

05 September 2010     

Oh, how I love it; "hipparkhia", the all knowing and the source of "all truths" who says "piffle" on anyone else with a dissenting opinion. Not only that but she is a superb judge of others Transsexuality and condemns those that don't meet her "standards" as "mentally deluded cross-dressers" who will never transition and that the doctors she uses are so correct when they think most of them are "mentally unbalanced"; YES SIR, certainly a place and group of Doctors I would trust and believe in for my transition. Now as to what went on with my friends, that was and still is the "standard" practiced in the UK although Doctors elsewhere have moved on to newer and better techniques. If the UK was truly treating TS people correctly, they would do as the state of Virginia where I was born; upon presentation of the letter from my Therapist and the letter from my surgeon (Dr Suporn), along with the appropriate court order, they issued a NEW Birth Certificate identical in every way to the original EXCEPT that it lists my new name AND shows that I was a live FEMALE birth; the old record is expunged, no trail back, no "wink, wink" like the UK and no need of a GRC. The only "nonsense" I've seen spouted has come from "hipparkhia" herself.

Pamela Dunn

..., Pamela Dunn, another one who wouldn't recognise a r

05 September 2010     

Pamela Dunn, another one who wouldn't recognise a rational argument if it bit her on the bum. You poor sad thing, you do realise that barely 10% of the patients at Charing Cross are even surgery-tracked? Maggie Fox certainly does - she quotes the figure herself in a previous article. And what do you think the GRC is? It's the equivalent of the court order you obtained. And the birth certificate issued here is just like the one you were issued. See, that's the problem with articles like this - weak minds become confused by their rhetoric.

hipparkhia

..., OK, here's somebody who shares some of the same con

05 September 2010     

OK, here's somebody who shares some of the same concerns as Maggie Fox but look, she manages to discuss the issue rationally without the absurd political bias (and, by the way, supporting the criticisms I have made of the article above) - http://www.changelingaspects.c...ent-01.pdf
hipparkhia

..., Sharon, NHS Choices provides information - I never

05 September 2010     

Sharon, NHS Choices provides information - I never denied that. What I said was that it is written by journalists for the general public. It cannot be used as an authoritative guide to policy.
hipparkhia

..., He now uses a link to an Australian web site to arg

05 September 2010     

He now uses a link to an Australian web site to argue that the one I used which we've proved is an official National Health Service site is wrong in terms of UK policy - nice one! Where is the official policy in the UK shown then? Answer it isn't to be found! We have to take his word for it that he knows better lol Questions based on my "absurd political bias" : What will be UK policy when GP commissioning takes over from PCTs? How low a priority will it be? As an expert on NHS policy I do hope he tells us and where to find confirmation of it? (Corrective Surgery is classed low priority now by the NHS) By the way I'm using he deliberately as this anonymous critic states they haven't got a GRC and have not had corrective surgery hopefully the reduction in testosterone will help them post operatively. I'm off to bed now so he can rant on that the World is Flat, Abrahamic Religions have no influence on Parliament and that the National Health Service has changed beyond belief by a conversion of faith similar to that of Saul of Tarsus except they don't bother to tell people about it!

Maggie

..., Do the non-English readers of this site realise tha

05 September 2010     

Do the non-English readers of this site realise that virtually all the opposition in this country to the Gender Recognition Act comes from people who want to remain married to their wives after transition? You can't stay married and get a GRC - that's what they protest. Well, I agree with the law.
hipparkhia

I have my Gender Recognition Certificate .. , fast track

05 September 2010     

fast tracked it here from the states a few years back. A few observations: That whole GRC panel, well lets just say it was like going cap in hand to the Gay and Lesbian Task Force. I found it humiliating to have to deal with what is in essence a transgender-gay-lesbian organization and have to jump through their silly hoops and lay bare myself to their scrutiny. The list of "approved" GRS Surgeons from which they would take my proof of GRS, did not include ANY from the United States. That may have changed, but I was left with no option than to pick a UK Surgeon and have them check my Charing Cross records, and communicate and certify that my surgeon Dr Meltzer, had in fact performed surgery on me. It was that or fly to England and pull my pants down... Yes the UK now has the so called gender recognition, and yes they will change your birth certificate, but at what cost? The UK is so "transgender theory" entrentched it like to make me throw up just having to ask their permission to get my birth certificate changed. God help us if that happens here in the states, where long term post ops may one day be going in front of the likes of Autumn Sandeen, to judge their right to be given a "Gender Recognition Certificate"

Leigh

..., Maggie, how clever and witty of you to refer to me

05 September 2010     

Maggie, how clever and witty of you to refer to me as a man. That surely proves your article was right all along.
hipparkhia

Pronoun Usage, As a matter of our policy here, individua

05 September 2010     

As a matter of our policy here, individuals who are in a meaningful transition toward hormonal reconstitution and surgical correction are addressed by and referred to as their target sex. On that basis, referring to Hipparkhia as "he" is unacceptable.
Sharon S. Gaughan

Apologies, Please pass on my unreserved apologies to Ste

05 September 2010     

Please pass on my unreserved apologies to Stephanie. I was illustrating English law. I will refer to her as her from now on. Goodnight all.
Maggie

Illustrating English Law ? , ... which one would that b

05 September 2010     

... which one would that be?
Leigh

..., Sadly, Hipparkhia thinks she offers a "rational arg

06 September 2010     

Sadly, Hipparkhia thinks she offers a "rational argument" when in truth her arguments are all biased by her opinion of herself. NO dear, quite sorry, BUT the Court Order is NOT even remotely similar to the GRC which is issued by a "panel" of "experts" who decide that you have met the requirements and if I recall correctly they will grant a GRC even if you haven't had any surgery; that is not the case under Virginia Law which mandates documentation of the gender surgery

Pamela

..., Sorry, in posting I lost some of my comments-----

06 September 2010     

Sorry, in posting I lost some of my comments----- In Virginia, they do not accept a simple removal of the testicles as gender reassignment surgery; The decision is made by a single Judge up on presentation of the proper documentation. They law considers that the original Doctor errored in filling out the birth certificate, so a new one is issued and there is NO link to the old one which is sealed. If I understand correctly from previous statements, in England there is always a link back to the original document and that is not the case in Virginia. Of course the other problem in England is the long wait to get into a gender clinic (wasn't it Leeds that had a two year waiting list for the clinic before you could start your two year RLE under supervision?). Then you have to get your local Health Council (PCT?) to fund the surgery, wait for an opening in the hospital and the surgeons schedule and usually have no choice in which hospitral or surgeon you have to use. The final straw is that you end up on a general surgical ward with no privacy and lacadaisical care. I wonder why I met so many English girls in Thailand and knew of others that chose to go elsewhere despite the "free" service in the UK.

Pamela

Well thank god for Virginia !, .... because an orchi is

06 September 2010     

.... because an orchi is not GRS no matter how you cut it (pun intended) As for a "panel of experts", what absolute rubbish. What are they being "expert" about? Either a person has undergone RLT and SRS or they havn't. If they have and they have their Doctors letters to that effect, why in the hell do they need a panel of anyone to issue a certificate? All that created was a government bureaucracy to placate the transgender activists. It's bloody humiliating after all we go through to then have to go cap in hand to a "panel of (transgender) experts" as you call them to issue a stupid certificate so you can get a birth certificate changed. I don't know how it is these days at Charing, but it used to be pretty strict about candidates for SRS. I well remember my first encounter with John Randell, oh lord was he a no-nonsense a-hole. "Go out and find verifiable womens work or never darken my doors again", he virtually bellowed as our session came to an end! I did, in less than a week too, but sheesh, you were given no benefit of the doubt back then (7, no slack at all. You either danced on their strings or you were cut loose. Maybe that's why you met so many english "girls" in Thailand ...

Leigh

..., Like so many of these comment sections after an ess

07 September 2010     

Like so many of these comment sections after an essay these discussion have turned to a debate which has turned into name calling and downright bad behaviour by YOU Maggie Fox. However I note that you have apologised and that is to your credit however your comments towards Hipparkhia did nothing to further your argument. In the face of your onslought she remained a lady I applaud her. The only valid point you have made is that GID as a diagnosis for genuine transsexuals must be removed. However in the absence of a need for SRS the diagnosis and sex marker on documentation remaining as decided at birth is entirely appropriate, except in the case of forced surgery performed in infancy as a result of one of the multitude of intersex conditions. As to your claims of poor treatment endured by people attending Charing Cross these are no different to the exact same claims that were made back in the eighties when I attended there. I knew the individuals who were complaining about their treatment and I can tell you that as far as I am concerned they would be waiting still in 2010. Clearly the Doctors at Charing Cross agreed with me. Against the backdrop of the treatment of Russel Reid is it surprising they excersise caution there. In the wake of that particular debacle I am surprised Charing Cross can find practiotioners willing to practise in the field. Maggie don't think for one second that your whole motivation for this essay has not been seen for the attempt it is to argue for same sex marriage and that you are useing transsexual narrative to further your ends. Everyone has seen through you. By all means argue for same sex marriage but don't drag heterosexual marriage into the fight. Argue as a lesbian and not a transsexual. To do otherwise is plain dishonest. The only people complaining about the current situation in the Uk are the transvestites who have become so delusional they want to be lesbians with their heterosexual wives they married as husbands. Come on do me the courtesy of having a brain. I don't buy that I never have and never will. These people are men living a fantasy and have pursuaded far to many through the political correctness route to go along with them. Which they do to their face and out of sight laugh at their stupidity. Before you protest at that I've seen it first hand, it happens. The trouble is you only see it when people are comfortable you are not involved. The UK has fallen into the trap of trying to legislate for everyone and to please everyone and for every eventuality. That is never going to happen someone is always going to cry "foul". The whole concept of a woman with a Penis and a man with a vagina is total popycock. Wake up live in the real world people it's actually a beautiful place.

Evangelina

..., I accept that I chose a bad way to try to shut up s

09 September 2010     

I accept that I chose a bad way to try to shut up someone who was trying to say that the official NHS Choices web site did not accurately describe Department of Health policy as regards the mental illness of Gender Dysphoria whilst offering no evidence to the contrary other than 10 years after been turned away from Charing Cross Gender Identity Clinic she was now getting loads of treatment free of charge. I have letters signed by HM Labour Government Ministers to support the NHS Choices statement “Transsexuals have a life-long and extreme form of gender dysphoria.” I don’t know what a “true transsexual” is as it implies there are false ones. My point is that Gender Dysphoria is not a mental illness and I’d go further and say it is a complete invention by a group of disgruntled psychiatrists who were forced to give up their claim that homosexuality was a mental illness. My next article for this site will be “The Absurdity of Gender” which will no doubt provoke more DNS attacks on this site and cries of we’re not really like that from psychiatrists. I stand by my view that there is no justification for retaining the original birth record for those who have corrected their genitalia by surgery at whatever age and for whatever reason medical or otherwise. I abhor your statement “I knew the individuals who were complaining about their treatment and I can tell you that as far as I am concerned they would be waiting still in 2010.” You may not have noticed that the Mental Capacity Act was passed which means that the patient is free to make whatever decision they like and if it’s a mistake it’s simply their problem. In my opinion Russell Reid was a fool but the psychiatrists who took him to the GMC are just as bad and yes I too am surprised Charing Cross can find practitioners willing to practice in the field. For someone who does it’s like putting a big badge on saying “I’m a Charlatan” as I do the bidding of the state to preserve caucasian male heterosexual supremacy and anyone who wants to cut off their penis must be mad. Gender Dysphoria is an invention and the Gender Recognition Act was the only way HM Government could find a way around the problem of the Religious Bigot majority in the House Of Commons and avoid repeatedly being hauled in front of the European Courts for breaches of the European Convention of Human Rights. The law is a mess because the self appointed representatives of women who were unfortunately born with a birth defect of a penis were more concerned with establishing their Gender Theory to further their Queer Political objectives than having a law that met the legitimate requirements of women. My primary motivation is not same sex marriage it is the total removal of gender as a concept and therefore by definition a mental illness. “Argue as a lesbian and not a transsexual” I’m neither I’m a woman so I argue from a woman’s equality aspect . I don’t care if “transvestites who have become so delusional they want to be lesbians with their heterosexual wives they married as husbands.” want to be whatever they want. I agree with “These people are men living a fantasy and have persuaded far to many through the political correctness route to go along with them. Which they do to their face and out of sight laugh at their stupidity.” so I’m not going to protest at that! I also agree with “The UK has fallen into the trap of trying to legislate for everyone and to please everyone and for every eventuality.” “The whole concept of a woman with a Penis and a man with a vagina is total poppycock.” is a very confusing statement in the way you use it. My view is that if someone corrects their birth defect to the limits of current surgical skill then they have the right to demand to be recognised by the state as the sex that their brain always was. That means no mental illness classification as being or having been diagnosed as “Gender Dysphoric” and no record of a “transition” and most importantly the destruction of the original birth certificate. I think I am wide awake and yes the real world is a beautiful place and I live my life in it to the full despite the best attempts of the Establishment to frustrate me. Maggie PS I’d be happy to meet Hipparkhia and apologize in person as no matter how much I was provoked I should have retained my composure. Hope she enjoys my next piece anyway.

Maggie

..., I have been away so couldn't respond sooner. For t

12 September 2010     

I have been away so couldn't respond sooner. For the record I was never "turned away from Charing Cross Gender Identity Clinic". That's not what I said. I agree that gender is a fiction and that transsexuality is not a mental illness. However, I still maintain your argument is sloppy. Your admitted desire to shut me up rather than actually engage me in argument says it all, so far as I'm concerned. At the very least you could try to understand that the perspective of people currently transitioning is perhaps not the same as those who transitioned many years ago. What I mean is, we tend to focus on the immediate practicalities. I need my operation, I need my birth certificate. I'll argue about the politics afterwards.

hipparkhia

..., The offer of a face to face apology hipparkhia stan

12 September 2010     

The offer of a face to face apology hipparkhia stands. I agree you need to be pragmatic your way as regards NHS treatment. I don't expect anyone else to do as I did which was to argue against mental illness from before day 1 of transition. You will gain the absolute legal right to state funded surgery at the hospital of your choice and with the surgeon of your choice once you have (your gender recognition certificate and) a female birth certificate so you should not worry about completion. Good luck for your future. Maggie

Maggie

Show/hide comment form

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment