"I can only answer that in good faith the AMA WA thought it was a good product”
On 22 August 2017, the then-President of the Australian Medical Association (AMA), Dr Michael Gannon, was asked to address the widespread, irreversible damage caused to thousands of women irreversably damaged globally by transvaginal mesh implant device that had been marketed and promoted by the AMA WA branch despite not having undergone clinical trials to confirm its long-term efficacy and safety—an oversight that ultimately led to billions of dollars in legal costs. Confronted with this history, ".
Today, the AMA strongly endorses the "Affirmative Model of Gender Care" for children, another medical intervention implemented without the highest level of double-blind, randomised testing to firmly establish its long-term safety and efficacy profile.
It seems that the AMA has failed to learn anything from the Transvaginal mesh disaster.
Yes, and no doubt both are examples of ‘patriarchal’ medicine, which is blind to medicine’s harmfulpractices on women and children—harm that escapes the male medical gaze as unimportant and out of the spotlight of ‘heroic’ techno medical interventions.
👍👌 Some indepth analysis there by the look of it. Put out the lamp of Diogenes as there, by Gawd, stands an honest woman. Few and far between these days. 😉🙂
Though, to cut to the chase, I wonder whether you ever say exactly what you mean by "gender", particularly given your 24 uses of the word. Particularly since most people seem not to have a flaming clue, even so-called therapists purportedly offering cures to "gender dysphoric" kids and their parents.
Read my book! “Gender ideology, social contagion and the making of a transgender generation.” Cambridge Scholars, 2024. I have a chapter on this. There is really no controversy about the definition of “gender.”
Sorry, not sorry, but that is something of an absolute flaming howler.
Any two feminists -- and their various fellow-travelers and useful/useless idiots -- one talks to will have a dozen different definitions for gender between the two of them. An absolute fucking joke. For instance, Viviane who's commented here and Marcus Evans -- of Tavistock Institute "fame" -- have two diametrically opposite definitions:
And "philosopher" Alex Byrne -- who's apparently written a book on the topic -- has recently suggested abandoning the concept -- "squishy to the point of meaninglessness" as Jenny Poyer Ackerman put it:
And you might also read the companion piece at Fairer Disputations -- something of a "debate", though more like the ravings of a pair of half-wits -- on "The Journey of Gender; Does the Sex/Gender Distinction Do More Harm Than Good?"
And the piece by Byrne's fellow debater -- Abigail Favale in the Church Life Journal, no less -- is a classic case of Judith Butler incoherent blatherings:
Reminds me of a favourite quip of mine, a pastiche on something from the American Revolution, the last one, another one in the works?:
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of [gender identity]. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of [Judith Butler].”
Apologies to old Thomas Jefferson, though it might be emphasized that most feminists are "priests in good standing" in Butler's "church".
But I don't think you been paying attention to what other "clinicians", "therapists", and "philosophers" have been saying about gender. Maybe in something of your own echo chamber, some benighted department of "Women's Studies"?
There are two similar versions - one with a commercial publisher - Cambridge Scholars- and the second self published because of the outrageous cost of first edition but it turned out not to help with the cost! 😵💫
Thanks. Yes the commercial version was horribly expensive and the publishers note that it is out of print! That's capitalism for yo. Kills intellectual inquiry. Including the corporate university model. I bought the kindle edition - digital reading these days due to macular degeneration. :-(
Good suggestion! I regret not having done so myself, and will follow your good suggestion. Too easy to focus on the ‘experts’ under the international spotlight and indulge unthinkingly in a bit of cultural ‘’, which I regret and will remediate asap.
I'm sure that Diannna Kenny referred to "gender distressed" young people by meaning young people distressed by gender ideology. There is nothing misguided in her use of language.
And my response to her about Tavistock Institute's "Alumni" Dr. Marcus Evans' comment:
ME: Thank you. I agree that CLINICIANS need to be CLEARER about what we MEAN by “GENDER”. But I wouldn’t define it as two sets of masculine and feminine personality traits. That seems to make gender into a collection of stereotypes, and to treat those traits as if they belong neatly to one sex or the other.
Though the never does get there himself as it is apparently most what he thinks it isn't. And I think he misunderstand where stereotypes come from -- they ain't created in the inner sanctums of "The Patriarchy!!11!!" for the sole purpose of "oppressing womenfolk".
But an absolute bloody joke. Should be hell itself to pay for that, mostly by large chunks of the medical profession who have been perpetrating a fraud, creating a medical scandal that they will be hard-pressed to live-down, one that will probably outlive the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and "Dr." Mengele's WW2 experiments in the annals of infamy. Why else has the US FTC -- their Federal Trade Commission -- been looking into them engaging in fraudulent "quack" "science"?
“…medicine’s greatest challenge is not discovering new knowledge but relinquishing old certainties”. I think this is very true. And yet we also throw the baby out with the bathwater when we relinquish aspects of psychology that were once widely respected, such as human development/ developmental psychology, much of which has been lost to child-led approaches (for example).
"I can only answer that in good faith the AMA WA thought it was a good product”
On 22 August 2017, the then-President of the Australian Medical Association (AMA), Dr Michael Gannon, was asked to address the widespread, irreversible damage caused to thousands of women irreversably damaged globally by transvaginal mesh implant device that had been marketed and promoted by the AMA WA branch despite not having undergone clinical trials to confirm its long-term efficacy and safety—an oversight that ultimately led to billions of dollars in legal costs. Confronted with this history, ".
Today, the AMA strongly endorses the "Affirmative Model of Gender Care" for children, another medical intervention implemented without the highest level of double-blind, randomised testing to firmly establish its long-term safety and efficacy profile.
It seems that the AMA has failed to learn anything from the Transvaginal mesh disaster.
Yes, and no doubt both are examples of ‘patriarchal’ medicine, which is blind to medicine’s harmfulpractices on women and children—harm that escapes the male medical gaze as unimportant and out of the spotlight of ‘heroic’ techno medical interventions.
👍👌 Some indepth analysis there by the look of it. Put out the lamp of Diogenes as there, by Gawd, stands an honest woman. Few and far between these days. 😉🙂
Though, to cut to the chase, I wonder whether you ever say exactly what you mean by "gender", particularly given your 24 uses of the word. Particularly since most people seem not to have a flaming clue, even so-called therapists purportedly offering cures to "gender dysphoric" kids and their parents.
Inquiring minds and all that ... 😉🙂
Read my book! “Gender ideology, social contagion and the making of a transgender generation.” Cambridge Scholars, 2024. I have a chapter on this. There is really no controversy about the definition of “gender.”
Sorry, not sorry, but that is something of an absolute flaming howler.
Any two feminists -- and their various fellow-travelers and useful/useless idiots -- one talks to will have a dozen different definitions for gender between the two of them. An absolute fucking joke. For instance, Viviane who's commented here and Marcus Evans -- of Tavistock Institute "fame" -- have two diametrically opposite definitions:
https://quillette.com/2020/01/17/why-i-resigned-from-tavistock-trans-identified-children-need-therapy-not-just-affirmation-and-drugs/
https://substack.com/profile/21792752-steersman/note/c-358862889
And "philosopher" Alex Byrne -- who's apparently written a book on the topic -- has recently suggested abandoning the concept -- "squishy to the point of meaninglessness" as Jenny Poyer Ackerman put it:
https://jennypoyerackerman.substack.com/p/join-me-at-the-segm-conference-next/comment/357957212
And you might also read the companion piece at Fairer Disputations -- something of a "debate", though more like the ravings of a pair of half-wits -- on "The Journey of Gender; Does the Sex/Gender Distinction Do More Harm Than Good?"
https://fairerdisputations.substack.com/p/the-journey-of-gender
And the piece by Byrne's fellow debater -- Abigail Favale in the Church Life Journal, no less -- is a classic case of Judith Butler incoherent blatherings:
https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/is-gender-too-troubled/
Reminds me of a favourite quip of mine, a pastiche on something from the American Revolution, the last one, another one in the works?:
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of [gender identity]. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of [Judith Butler].”
https://quotefancy.com/quote/918147/Thomas-Jefferson-Ridicule-is-the-only-weapon-which-can-be-used-against-unintelligible
Apologies to old Thomas Jefferson, though it might be emphasized that most feminists are "priests in good standing" in Butler's "church".
But I don't think you been paying attention to what other "clinicians", "therapists", and "philosophers" have been saying about gender. Maybe in something of your own echo chamber, some benighted department of "Women's Studies"?
I’ve discovered your book is self published—a sign of publisher fear of the uncertainty of publishing a controversial topic/author?
There are two similar versions - one with a commercial publisher - Cambridge Scholars- and the second self published because of the outrageous cost of first edition but it turned out not to help with the cost! 😵💫
Thanks. Yes the commercial version was horribly expensive and the publishers note that it is out of print! That's capitalism for yo. Kills intellectual inquiry. Including the corporate university model. I bought the kindle edition - digital reading these days due to macular degeneration. :-(
Good suggestion! I regret not having done so myself, and will follow your good suggestion. Too easy to focus on the ‘experts’ under the international spotlight and indulge unthinkingly in a bit of cultural ‘’, which I regret and will remediate asap.
I'm sure that Diannna Kenny referred to "gender distressed" young people by meaning young people distressed by gender ideology. There is nothing misguided in her use of language.
But that still does NOT say what "gender" IS!!11!!
That's the whole effen problem and issue that pretty much everyone is refusing to face, to grapple with, to deal with the devils in the details.
How can someone be "distressed" by something that no one has a flaming clue as to what it even looks like??? Classic case of "Hunting the Snark":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hunting_of_the_Snark
What do YOU think the word MEANS and DENOTES?
But you might note Jenny Poyer Ackerman's "squishy to the point of being meaningless" on her "TransMuted" Substack:
https://jennypoyerackerman.substack.com/p/join-me-at-the-segm-conference-next/comment/357957212
And my response to her about Tavistock Institute's "Alumni" Dr. Marcus Evans' comment:
ME: Thank you. I agree that CLINICIANS need to be CLEARER about what we MEAN by “GENDER”. But I wouldn’t define it as two sets of masculine and feminine personality traits. That seems to make gender into a collection of stereotypes, and to treat those traits as if they belong neatly to one sex or the other.
https://jennypoyerackerman.substack.com/p/join-me-at-the-segm-conference-next/comment/358068786
https://jennypoyerackerman.substack.com/p/join-me-at-the-segm-conference-next/comment/357274192
https://substack.com/@marcusevanspsych/note/c-358140281
Though the never does get there himself as it is apparently most what he thinks it isn't. And I think he misunderstand where stereotypes come from -- they ain't created in the inner sanctums of "The Patriarchy!!11!!" for the sole purpose of "oppressing womenfolk".
But an absolute bloody joke. Should be hell itself to pay for that, mostly by large chunks of the medical profession who have been perpetrating a fraud, creating a medical scandal that they will be hard-pressed to live-down, one that will probably outlive the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and "Dr." Mengele's WW2 experiments in the annals of infamy. Why else has the US FTC -- their Federal Trade Commission -- been looking into them engaging in fraudulent "quack" "science"?
https://badfacts.substack.com/p/welcome-to-bad-facts-volume-2
What do you think about my definition in this essay?
https://drrachelhannam22.substack.com/p/gender-as-a-moving-process-not-a?r=2gl48m&utm_medium=ios
Have read it anf am thinking about my response. Will get back to you..
“…medicine’s greatest challenge is not discovering new knowledge but relinquishing old certainties”. I think this is very true. And yet we also throw the baby out with the bathwater when we relinquish aspects of psychology that were once widely respected, such as human development/ developmental psychology, much of which has been lost to child-led approaches (for example).
Impressive and compassionate historical analysis, Dianna.