Speak Up for Women has been subjected to a three-year misinformation campaign designed to discredit us and mislead the New Zealand public – and our law makers – about the nature of our concerns with sex self-identification. Organizations such as Gender Minorities have called us a hate group, bigots, anti-trans and transphobic. They have also accused us of being funded by the international Christian conservative / alt-right. None of these assertions are true and in fact it is Gender Minorities who receives international funds from lobby groups, not the other way around. In the table below we address some of the misinformation being promoted by Gender Minorities. We want an open and honest dialogue with this organisation and would welcome a public debate. It is time to leave the ad hominem smear tactics behind and address the substance of the issue of sex self-identification. Gender Minorities claims are distributed through their online material, and are summarised in this document. GMA claims on male pattern violence There is no evidence that trans women perpetrate violence toward other women at a higher rate than other women do. Anti-trans groups may cite a study in which it was found that older trans women face high levels of imprisonment and arrest, however, one of the women who conducted this study, Cecilia Dhejne, explained that this study does not show “male pattern violence,” and that to say it does is a gross misrepresentation Feminists Say There is no evidence that identifying as a woman reduces the risk of male pattern violence. There is no evidence that even undergoing sex reassignment surgery reduces the risk. The available evidence is to the contrary. The study by Cecilia Dhejne was a long term (1973-2003) follow up study of transsexual persons undergoing sex reassignment surgery in Sweden. Published in 2011, it found1: “[R]egarding any crime, male-to-females had a significantly increased risk for crime compared to female controls (aHR6.6; 95% CI4.1-10.88) but not compared to males (aHR 0.8; 95% CI 0.5-1.2). This indicates that they retained a male pattern regarding criminality. The same was true for violent crime.” This conclusion remains in the published work. If the authors have recanted this finding, we would like to see the evidence. GMA claims on women’s prisons There are systems in place to minimise violence, including sexual violence, between prisoners housed together. Department of Corrections confirmed that it is prepared to make adjustments if the Bill should pass. Other countries with similar legislation have not reported any negative effect on women prisoners. Feminists Say This claim is demonstrably false and there are many examples. Karen White 2 in the UK self-identified as a woman, was moved into a women’s prison and committed sexual assaults there. A recent high court ruling in the UK makes it clear that including transgender women in female prisons comes at a cost to female prisons. In handing down the Judgement, Lord Justice Holroyde noted: “the unconditional introduction of a transgender woman into the general population of a women’s prison carries a statistically greater risk of sexual assault upon non-transgender prisoners than would be the case if a non-transgender woman were introduced.3” Transgender prisoners are five times more likely to carry out sex attacks on inmates at women’s jails than other prisoners are, official figures show4. The New Zealand Human Rights Act specifically allows for single sex accommodation on the grounds of privacy, decency, and safety. Women in prison are among the most vulnerable in society and therefore the most needing of these protections. GMA claims on women’s bathroom/refuges/spaces These do not require birth certificates to enter. Women’s refuges already allow transgender women and have for many years. They have evidence-based processes and protections in place to ensure all women who enter are kept safe. They already protect women who are fleeing violent relationships with other women, where those abusive partners may seek to access the refuge by deception. No woman can enter a women’s refuge without legitimate need. Other countries with similar legislation have not reported any rise in sexual violence in women’s spaces as a result of the legislation Feminists Say Where is the evidence for this claim? Some may cater for transwomen, but others highly value their female only status, as evidenced in the case of Shelter vs Kimberley Nixon5. Female violence is a very different profile to male violence and so is not comparable. In addition, it is statistically insignificant compared with the numbers of women fleeing male violence. No male should ever enter a women’s refuge. Feminist women self-funded and built refuges for women. “Other countries with similar legislation have not reported any rise in sexual violence in women’s spaces as a result of the legislation” This claim is false. in 2012 Christopher Hambrook6 assaulted women in two homeless shelters in Toronto, gaining access by claiming he was a transwoman. State law had changed earlier that year to recognise sex self-identification. In 2014 he was found guilty of sexual assault and criminal harassment. GMA claims on abuse of sex self-ID There are no reported cases of men in NZ using the statutory declaration process to change the sex marker on their passport in order to ”game the system” and sexually assault women. Feminists Say Single-sex service providers can enforce their rights to be female- only services, but they generally don’t need to under the existing law because we have a social understanding that transsexuals have made a meaningful transition (they tend to appear female). This is supported by law that requires people who change sex on their bith certificates to have undergone medical treatment. Women have this understanding and if a person of typical male appearance enters e.g. a changing room, women feel confident in their right to tell him to leave. That all changes under sex self-ID. Sex self-ID requires no medical or even appearance change. So the social understanding of what a transwomen is changes and women will lose their confidence in challenging a male who presents as a man in women’s spaces. No one uses a birth certificate to access these spaces, so there’s no way of knowing if the person is a gender non-conforming transwomen or a man. No one wants to upset someone or be called a bigot, so women will stop challenging men in their spaces. This is dangerous to transwomen as well as to women and children. GMA claims on legal sex Trans women are already legally recognised as women and there have been no ill effects Feminists Say Transwomen are not legally recognised as women, so this claim is false. The BDMRR Act states “Notwithstanding this Part, the sex of every person shall continue to be determined by reference to the general law of New Zealand”. The DIA has recently stated7 that a birth certificate is not definitive evidence of a person’s sex for the purposes of accessing rights and obligations under NZ law. GMA claims on single-sex schools In Aotearoa, we have many co-ed or mixed gender schools, and students are considered safe attending these. There are currently single sex schools which accept transgender students. Feminists Say Yes they are safe, but there are separate toilet and changing facilities. The need for this is well documented. There may well be some single-sex schools that accept transgender students, but the Human Rights Act, Sections 55 and 58 specifically provides exceptions in relation to sex‐specific schools. Girls and their parents have the right to single-sex schools. GMA claims regarding the impact of sex self-ID on data analysis Transgender people make up just 1% of the overall population, therefore this is unlikely to have much bearing on data about women overall. Feminists Say This is a flippant dismissal of the facts. Over 92% of the prison population is male8. 94-98% of child sexual abuse9 is committed by males and 98-99% of sexual offending10Child Sexual Abuse and Adult Sexual Violence –Perpetration by Gender[/efn_note] against adults is committed by males. It does not take many males self-identifying as women to significantly skew female crime statistics. Crime statistics being based on self-identified sex, rather than birth sex, has huge significance for our understanding of crime, and implications for prevention and punishment. Women have not yet gained equality. Why should women accept any muddying of the data that tracks progress? Transgender people should be tracked and reported on separately for their own benefit as well as that of women. GMA claims regarding public consultation for BDMRRA The Bill has been through the same public consultation process as any other Bill, including public submissions, analysis of submissions, expert advice, and changes as necessary. Many of the anti-trans campaigners made submissions, which can be viewed on the government’s website Feminists Say This is evidentially false. The sex self-Identification clauses were added by the Select Committee after public consultations closed. Some feminists submitted against the inclusion of self-ID, anticipating that an attempt to add it may be made during the Select Committee process. But the public did not have the opportunity to submit on these clauses. This issue was highlighted by Crown Law11 and Tracey Martin referred to it when she deferred12 the bill, so it is misleading to claim the Bill has followed the usual process. Dept of Internal Affairs officials have now stated that Minister Tinetti has not given them time to undertake public consultation before the Bill is re-introduced in August13. GMA claims regarding the impact of sex self-ID on women’s rights The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women ( a United Nations treaty), firmly affirms that transgender women are protected as a sex class. This right to be protected from discrimination on the basis of sex does not detract from any other person’s right to non-discrimination on the basis of sex. This is already the case in NZ, and the Bill will not change this. All women will continue to have the same right to not be discriminated against on the basis of their sex. Feminists Say CEDAW does not consider transwomen as members of the female sex. The inference that it does is simply wrong. CEDAW distinguishes between the discrimination that women experience on the basis of their sex (e.g. child brides, lack of reproductive rights, etc) and those experienced on the basis of gender (e.g. lack of education, gendered expectations of roles in the family, etc). CEDAW was created to protect women from discrimination, and therefore including individuals with male biology even if they are trans women would be outside of the scope of the treaty. Some countries have been including [sexual orientation and gender identity] issues in their state reports to CEDAW, but the idea that [the Convention] requires them to do so, let alone to enact domestic legislation, is wrong14. GMA claims regarding male privilege Both international and local research consistently and constantly shows that transgender women experience higher rates than non transgender women of discrimination in education, housing, healthcare, employment, access to justice, legal documentation, higher rates of violence including sexual violence, higher rates of street harassment, and other indicators of a lack of privilege. No studies show the opposite. This is not what male privilege looks like. Feminists Say We are not aware of any research that has set out to prove whether transwomen have a greater burden of harm than women. Assertion is not the same as evidence.

Auckland 25 June – Today, Justice Gerald Nation granted Speak UP for Women interim relief against Palmerston North City Council, meaning their meeting to discuss the controversial sex self-identification clauses within the Births, Death, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill will go ahead tonight in the Palmerston North Central Library at 6:30pm as planned. In handing down the decision, Justice Nation noted: “Having considered the evidence and submissions of counsel, the Court grants the applicant the relief sought and makes an order that the licence to occupy created by the agreement to hire the mezzanine meeting space at the Palmerston North City Library between 6.30 pm and 8.00 pm on 25 June 2021 continues in force. Reasons will follow in due course.” Speak Up For Women had also issued proceedings seeking an order that Auckland Council allow a booking for the Ellen Melville Centre on Sunday to proceed, for a similar meeting to be held. During the legal proceedings, it was disclosed by Auckland Council that they had identified a unique critical risk with the event proceeding at that location. Given this risk, Speak Up For Women agreed to the offer of a new location, and Auckland Council agreed to make a Public Statement which will be released before 5 PM today. The event in Auckland will now be held in a room within the Council owned Town Hall complex at the original time and date of 6:30pm on Sunday 27 June. “This case was important as it vindicates our group – believing that biological sex matters and should not be replaced by the idea of ‘gender identity’ in law is worthy of respect in a democratic society, and so entitled to protection under the right to freedom of expression” says Beth Johnson, spokeswoman for Speak Up For Women. In the hearing, counsel for both Auckland and Palmerston North City Councils acknowledged that it was neither Councils’ position that the case was about “hate speech”. Rachel Poulain from Free Speech Union says “we’re delighted by this result – it’s a win for free speech in New Zealand, at least when it comes to Councils trying to deplatform views or groups they don’t like.” Ms Johnson says: “As we are a grass-roots women’s group made up of volunteers, our funding comes solely from small donations. With the help of the Free Speech Union, we are crowdfunding to cover our legal costs. We hope to find support beyond feminist circles from New Zealanders who value freedom of speech as we do and who share our concerns about censorious public officials bowing to pressure from activists. New Zealanders who wish to support this effort to stand for free speech are encouraged to donate to the litigation fund at www.fsu.nz/speak_up or to 06-0323-0706649-01. Donations to the fund will remain confidential to Speak Up for Women and the Free Speech Union. -ENDS-

Speak Up For Women’s Beth Johnson talks to Sean Plunket on Magic Talk about Bad News and the Media Council Rulinghttp://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Magic-Talk-.mp3 Bad News with Alice Sneddon is a web-based short series which received $380,000 of taxpayer funds via NZ On Air for 8 episodes. The funding was for a comedy/documentary series. The series was made by The Spinoff and platformed and actively promoted by Radio New Zealand. One episode is entitled “TERFs” and is about Speak Up For Women and our event at Parliament last year. Despite being told that there would be no external filming of our event but that we would be happy to interview with Alice later, she and two other Spinoff staff purchased tickets under a different name and attended the event with the sole purpose of disrupting and filming covertly. Alice was removed from the event after she disrupted the Q&A session and her colleagues filmed. A lawyer representing Speak Up For Women contacted Spinoff to ensure that the footage would not be used as there were many women attending who were afraid of having their faces publicised. We traded legal letters back and forth to little productive end. When the video was finally released and promoted by Radio New Zealand it was entirely one sided and made hugely inaccurate claims. It is an abusive rant in which Alice calls Speak Up For Women “bitches”, “witches”, “TERFs”, and the worst kind of women. We complained to RNZ and they defended their decision to platform it. Then we went to the Media Council. On Tuesday of this week the Media Council announced that they would be upholding none of our complaints despite clear evidence of subterfuge, inaccuracy, imbalance, and abuse. You can read their ruling here. Share this post Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on EmailShare on LinkedIn

Ally Marie Diamond shares her experiences as a prostituted woman in New Zealand. Having exited prostitution Ally Marie now seeks to help women still suffering. She and Speak Up For Women are calling for a review of the current decriminalisation of prostitution. Speak Up For Women supporter & survivor of prostitution Ally Marie Diamondhttp://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Ally-on-Magic.m4a

Yvonne van Dongen’s interview with Jill Abigail has been published at Noted.nz Jill discusses her decades-long involvement in feminist politics, including a long history with the Green Party of New Zealand and recent controversy over NZ gender identity politics. Regarding the claims of transadvocy, Jill states in the interview: “The “innate” gender identity claimed by gender ideology cannot be proven, so basing policies and legislation on subjective feelings rather than evidence is highly questionable.” Jill’s position has lead to controversy. When Jill had an article published the NZ Green Party magazine Te Awa, the web edition was censored to have her article removed, resulting in magazine staff resigning in protest. When gender ideology says biology is irrelevant, that it is how we feel that counts, it ignores the fact that our biology is at the root of women’s oppression under patriarchy. When female foetuses are aborted in certain cultures, it’s not because of gender identity, it’s because a biological female has no value. Jill’s original Te Awa article can be read on the Redline blog. #GenderIdentity #JillAbigail #SpeakUpForWomen

When Massey University responded to activist pressure by cancelling the venue booking for Speak Up For Women’s Feminism 2020 event in Wellington, it proved to be a gift to the event’s organisers.  It ignited public debate around freedom of speech in our universities, and the group was invited to hold the event in the rather more up-market surroundings of Parliament’s banquet hall. A mixed crowd of around 120 people turned out to hear from four women at the centre of the current gender identity debate, including prominent Canadian feminist Meghan Murphy, who had addressed MPs at the Scottish parliament in May.    Event organiser, Jenny Whyte, said that while she was “hugely grateful” for the parliamentary venue, it was a “sad reflection on Massey that it capitulated to the mob and de-platformed some vital feminist voices.” Ani O’Brien, Melissa Derby, Holly Lawford-Smith, Meghan Murphy The speakers covered a range of current feminist issues.  Speak Up For Women spokesperson, Ani O’Brien, spoke of how modern feminism has betrayed women and girls by encouraging them to seek empowerment in pornography, violent sex acts, and prostitution.  AUT academic, Melissa Derby (Ngati Ranginui) spoke of the corrosive effects of identity politics and cancel culture, and of her own experiences of being targeted by activists.  Melbourne University’s Holly Lawford-Smith gave a thoughtful speech on current tensions within academic philosophy around sex and gender, arguing that true liberation requires the dismantling of gender roles, while recognising that sex exists: “it’s good to believe in the things that science tells us there is.”    And ‘we can’t get to equality by pretending we’re already there’. Murphy attracted the most controversy prior to the event, with many critics highlighting her Twitter ban for ‘misgendering’ a Canadian transwoman, Jessica Yaniv.  While Murphy was uncompromising in her insistence she would not “lie” about biological sex, she said she supported transgender people living in a way that feels authentic to them, and she was not “anti-trans”: “I am anti an ideology that says women don’t exist and don’t matter.” The Q and A session that followed was notable for discussion around ways in which to address the current impasse and improve dialogue. In Auckland on Monday night, O’Brien hosted a  conversation-style event with Murphy, attended by 60 people. O’Brien stated:   “These events demonstrate that feminism that centres women is alive and well.  Speak Up For Women will continue to support peaceful and respectful discussion of issues that affect women and girls.”

When Massey University cancelled our room booking it was a blow not just to feminism in New Zealand, but to the principle and practice of free speech. However, following the disappointing decision by the university, MP David Seymour contacted us out of principle to invite us to speak at Parliament. We’re grateful to David for his unwavering commitment to free speech. On Friday evening Speak Up For Women will be hosted by David in the Banquet Hall of New Zealand Parliament. While it will be an amazing experience and a whole lot grander than the lecture theatre we booked outside of term time at Massey, the important thing for us is that we have somewhere to speak up. Below are interviews conducted by Sean Plunket on Magic Talk with David Seymour and our spokeswoman Ani O’Brien. David announces the new venue for Feminism 2020http://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/david-seymour-magic-feminism2020-parliament.mp3 Sean talks to Ani about the new venuehttp://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ani-obrien-magic-radio-feminism2020-at-parliament-november-14.mp3 #ConversionTherapy #Law #Petition

Speak Up For Women is a non-partisan feminist group concerned about the emerging conflict between transgender rights and the sex-based rights of women and girls. We write to express our concern about the way in which the Petitioner has misrepresented the above Petition, and conflated “gay conversion therapy” with therapy designed to address gender dysphoria (a recognised mental health disorder, involving feelings of incongruity between a person’s body and their gender identity.i Conventionally understood, conversion therapy – also known as reparative therapy – is the practice of “treating” homosexual or bisexual people, sometimes coercively, with a view to “converting” them to a heterosexual orientation. It is widely regarded as unethical, as well as ineffective. Mr Tweedie’s Petition (15448 signatories) addresses this harmful practice, and a number of our supporters signed the Petition on this basis.ii However, in the publicity attending the Committee’s recent hearing of 13 June 2019, Mr Tweedie has repeatedly referred, incorrectly, to the Petition as addressing both sexual orientation and gender identity.iii We believe many people would not have signed Mr Tweedie’s Petition if they knew he would misrepresent it in this way. There are fundamental differences between sexual orientation and gender identity and we believe it is a serious mistake to equate them in this context. It is an ideological position, not a scientific one, and it obscures the growing concern about the extraordinary increase in children and adolescents presenting for gender identity treatment (particularly girls); iv the absence of any consensus as to treatment approach; and the paucity of good quality data. Key differences between sexual orientation and gender identity “Although gender identity and sexual orientation may often be analogous and discussed together with regard to social or political values and to civil rights, they are nonetheless distinct – with distinct origins, needs, and responses to medical and mental health care choices.” — Dr James Cantor (clinical psychologist and sexual behaviour scientist) (i) Evidence base The medical consensus is that “conversion therapy” for sexual orientation is not supported by science.vi In contrast, there are no studies of conversion therapy for gender identity, let alone a scientific consensus.vii There is no consensus on treatment approaches for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria, as illustrated by the range of expert opinion in the latest edition of the peer-reviewed journal Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry (April 2019), which is dedicated to trans youth issues.viii (ii) Desistance The cause of gender dysphoria is not known. While some people believe in “innate” gender identities, there is scant evidence of a biological basis: it is likely a mix of biological, social and psychological factors.ix The overwhelming evidence, from multiple studies, is that the majority (up to 80%) of children with gender dysphoria will desist by puberty, with most of these children growing up to be gay or lesbian adults fully content with their biological sex. x There is no reliable method of distinguishing the “persisters” from the “desisters.” Under a conversion therapy model, however, anything short of immediate, uncritical “affirmation” of a child’s expressed gender identity risks being regarded as “conversion.” This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: children who are “affirmed” as being “in the wrong body” (e.g. by parents and authority figures) are more likely to persist.xi We are concerned that clinicians treating gender dysphoric children will be prevented (or in the very least inhibited) from adopting mainstream approaches such as “watchful waiting,” and/or treatments designed to “increase the chances of successful, contented homosexual adaptation in adulthood”xii , thereby avoiding a lifetime of medicalisation and surgery. (iii) Autism and co-morbidity Around one half of children and adolescents seeking gender identity treatment exhibit autism spectrum traits. xiii Children with other psychiatric conditions (most commonly anxiety and depression), and those with a history of abuse, are also significantly over-represented.xiv A recent article in Adolescent Health, Medicine and Therapeutics noted that it “seems unlikely” that this psychopathology is “secondary to gender identity issues.”xv Yet a “conversion therapy” model would prevent therapists exploring and treating these potentially causal factors prior to “affirmation” of gender identity. “This experimental treatment is being done not only on children, but very vulnerable children, who have experienced mental health difficulties, abuse, family trauma, but sometimes those other factors just get whitewashed…If someone was suggesting plastic surgery or any other permanent change we’d be saying hang on a minute.”xvi Former NHS gender clinician (quoted in the Times 8 April 2019) (iv) Homophobia Other evidence suggests that homophobia (parental/peer/internalised) also plays a part.xvii A recent investigation by the Times (UK) reported that NHS gender clinicians have expressed concern that “many children decided they wanted to change gender after suffering homophobic bullying.”xviii The article quotes several former clinicians as follows:xix “There was a dark joke among staff that ‘there would be no gay people left’” “It feels like conversion therapy for gay children” “For some families it was easier to say, this is a medical problem, ‘here’s my kid, please fix them!’ than dealing with a young gay kid.” “We had so many families who would talk about not wanting their daughter to be lesbian.” “A parent was allegedly heard saying they did not want their child to have gay friends because they didn’t want them mixed up in that hedonistic lifestyle.” “Young lesbians considered at the bottom of the heap suddenly found they were really popular when they said they were trans.” “A lot of the girls would come in and say ‘I’m not a lesbian. I fell in love with my best girlfriend but then I went online and realised I’m not a lesbian. I’m a boy. Phew!” Even in the absence of a “conversion therapy” model, these clinicians were concerned that “complex histories and adolescent confusion over possible homosexuality are being ignored in the rush to accept and celebrate every young person’s new transgender identity.” They report “ethical stress” arising from pressure from lobby groups to fast-track transitions, at ever-younger ages, in the absence of supporting data.xx (v) Social contagion Data are beginning to emerge about a phenomenon, described as Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, wherein teenagers (usually girls) with no previous sign of unhappiness with their bodies, suddenly announce they are transgender. This typically occurs in the context of a peer group where one or more friends have become trans-identified, and it often follows a period of increased social media/internet use.xxi The data is not complete but it suggests that social contagion may play a role in some adolescent cases, and it underscores the need for caution in applying existing research to this new population. The Times (UK) reported an NHS gender clinician referring to his young patients “enthusing” about trans YouTube stars and similar transition stories in the media:xxii “These are very simplified stories about how easy it would be to transition…that transition is a solution to feeling shit. This is very appealing to lots of teenagers.” (vi) Detransition There is growing awareness of detransitioners (people who “transition” to the opposite sex, but then change their minds and stop treatment and/or undergo additional treatment to revert to their natal sex). It has been reported that “reversal” surgery is increasing. xxiii Despite considerable stigma,xxiv detransitioners have an increasing media presence, xxv including in New Zealand.xxvi (vii) Consequences The stakes are high. The potential consequences of an uncritical affirmation of a child’s expressed gender identity are very serious: social transition, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones (with consequential infertility), and high-risk invasive surgery, with potential loss of sexual functioning. For the purposes of a recently-aired (March 2019) BBC Panorama documentary,xxvii Professor Carl Heneghan of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University carried out an independent analysis of the evidence underpinning the treatment of gender dysphoric youth. Professor Henaghan described the quality of the evidence as “terrible,” and as inconsistent with informed consent and safe practice.xxviii Elsewhere, Professor Heneghan is quoted as characterising the treatment as “largely an unregulated live experiment on children.”xxix A more recent Swedish documentary echoes similar concerns.xxx Until recently, puberty blockers have been touted as safe, “fully reversible” and designed to “buy time” while a child explores their gender identity. It is now recognised that they place the child on a pathway of escalating medical intervention, as virtually all children who start puberty blockers go on to take cross-sex hormones.xxxi There are questions around adverse effects on bone density, height, sex organ development, cognitive development and executive functioning.xxxii In March 2019, Associate Professor Michael Biggs reported that unpublished data from the NHS Tavistock clinic revealed an increase in dysphoric symptoms in patients after 12 months on blockers.xxxiii Conclusion We urge you to look beyond the rhetoric and to recognise that “gay conversion therapy” and counselling of gender dysphoric individuals cannot be equated. Ironically the unquestioning affirmation of a child or adolescent’s gender identity may be regarded as itself a form of conversion therapy (“transing the gay away”). Clinicians practising in this complex, rapidly developing and fraught area need to be able to treat their patients as individuals, and to adopt evidence-based, not ideological approaches. …………….. i https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-dysphoria ii We acknowledge that the related Petition, presented by Maria Lubek, does include gender identity treatment, but this Petition attracted only 5143 signatures iii See for example https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/thehouse/audio/2018699487/parliament-hears-call-to-ban-conversion-therapy iv In England, the NHS Tavistock clinic’s referrals rose from 97 in 2009, to 2519 in 2017. Previously a minority, girls now make up 70% of referrals. There is a small study relating to Wellington’s endocrine services (Delahunt et al, 2018) which reflects similar trends. Late last year, the UK government announced an enquiry into the reasons for this startling increase, and the Tavistock clinic has undergone an internal review after clinicians publicly raised concerns. v James Cantor, “American Academy of Paediatrics policy and trans-kids: Fact checking” 17 October 2018, Sexology Today vi For example: Halderman “The practice and ethics of sexual orientation conversion therapy” Journal of Consult. Clinical Psychology; 62(2) 221-227 vii James Cantor, “American Academy of Paediatrics policy and trans-kids: Fact checking” 17 October 2018, Sexology Today viii https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359104518822694 ix https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359104518822694 x https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_dysphoria_in_children ; https://www.docdroid.net/hY664Sc/steensma2013.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841333/ (“Evidence from the 10 available prospective studies from childhood to adolescence…indicates that for ¬80% of children who meet the criteria for GDC[gender dysphoria in childhood], the GD recedes with puberty”). Cantor, “American Academy of Paediatrics policy and trans-kids: Fact checking” 17 October 2018 Sexology Today at http://www.sexologytoday.org/2018/10/american-academy-of-pediatrics-policy.html . For a mainstream media discussion of these issues see https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/07/when-a-child-says-shes-trans/561749/ . (Critics point out that the higher percentages in some of the older studies are likely inflated by overinclusive definitions of dysphoria). xi Zucker The myth of persistence: response to ‘A Critical Commentary on Follow Up Studies and ‘Desistance’ Theories about Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Children’ by Temple Newhook et al (2018) International Journal of Transgenderism xii Professor Ray Blanchard (The Star, 5 April 2015) https://www.thestar.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editors/2015/04/05/conversion-therapy-billopposed.html xiii https://www.jaacap.org/article/S0890-8567(17)31682-9/fulltext ; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26753812; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345542/ Data from UK’s Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) between 2011-2017 reveal that approximately half of children and adolescents referred to GIDS present with features of ASD: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16D2m4dRWCTZWfQ029tFb962JKZhaQGDn/view (those with moderate or severe ASD are approximately 35%) xiv https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5825045/ xv https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841333/ xvi https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-feels-like-conversion-therapy-for-gay-children-say-clinicianspvsckdvq2 xvii https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10964-017-0749-6 xviii https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/calls-to-end-transgender-experiment-on-children-k792rfj7d xix https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-feels-like-conversion-therapy-for-gay-children-say-clinicianspvsckdvq2 xx https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359104518822694 xxi http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202330 (Lisa Littman, Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria in adolescents and young adults: a study of parental reports (16 August 2016). “Emerging discussions raise concern for post-pubertally abruptly emerging cross-gender identification (“rapid onset”) particularly among biological girls, suggesting a role for intensive media influences and generous group validation as shaping the understanding of, and giving new meanings to, the body discomfort common among female adolescents at large. The persistence of increasing adolescent onset transgender identification is not known.” —  Gender dysphoria in adolescence: current perspectives See also discussion of Dr Littman’s study in the Economist. xxii https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/it-feels-like-conversion-therapy-for-gay-children-say-clinicianspvsckdvq2 xxiii https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/gender-reversal-surgery-rise-arent-talking/ ; https://www.westernjournal.com/doctor-reveals-transgenders-regret/ ; xxiv https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/bath-spa-universityhttps://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gender-reversal-surgery-demand-rise-assignment-menwomen-trans-a7980416.html-caspian-2557060 xxv See e.g. https://www.piqueresproject.com/ xxvi https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11846904 xxvii https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47456938 ; https://blogs.bmj.com/bmjebmspotlight/2019/02/25/gender-affirming-hormone-in-children-andadolescents-evidence-review/ xxviii The principal problems with the evidence include: small sample sizes, retrospective methods, loss of considerable numbers of patients to follow-up; absence of controls; lack of blinding. xxix https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/calls-to-end-transgender-experiment-on-children-k792rfj7d xxx https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJGAoNbHYzk xxxi https://www.transgendertrend.com/puberty-blockers/ xxxii https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1359104518822694 ; https://blogs.bmj.com/bmjebmspotlight/2019/02/25/gender-affirming-hormone-in-children-andadolescents-evidence-review/ xxxiii https://www.transgendertrend.com/tavistock-experiment-puberty-blockers/ #ConversionTherapy #Law #Petition

Speak Up For Women is pleased the Select Committee has rejected a petition that called to end comprehensive counselling and psychiatric services for gender questioning youth. While we support a ban on gay conversion therapy, the petitioner, Max Tweedie, did not recognise and understand the difference between conversion therapy for gay and lesbian people and advice and counselling for transgender presenting children and adolescents. To ban therapy for gender questioning youth is a form of gay conversion therapy.Tweedie, by presenting two petitions as if they were compatible, effectively stymied a bill that would preclude conversion therapy for gay and lesbian people now. Speak Up For Women raised concerns with the presentation of petition number 2017/204 at the last sitting of the Justice Select Committee on 13 June. The petition received 15448 signatories. It read as follows: The Petition of Max Tweedie for Young Labour and the Young Greens: Ban Gay Conversion Therapy The Petition requested that: the House of Representatives ban gay conversion therapy, being any form of treatment or psychotherapy which aims to change, eliminate, or suppress same-sex attraction, or to cure a lack of opposite-sex attraction. The petition reason was given as Gay conversion therapy is incredibly dangerous. It does not work, and is harmful to those who are subjected to it. It can cause anxiety, depression, and in extreme cases suicide as it invalidates the identities of our rainbow community. We believe in their right to be free from such ‘treatment.’ This is in some senses a theoretical matter at this stage but the point Speak Up For Women made is we believe an important one.  In their presentation Max Tweedie and his companion said on a number of occasions that the petition was intended to prevent conversion therapy against gay people (which if successful would mean someone remained heterosexual) but also to prevent gender identity conversion therapy. But as described above this was not the intent of the petition. He also mentioned multiple times that the petition was aimed at the Rainbow community which is broadly understood to be the lesbian, gay and transgender community. This false interpretation of the intent of the petition has also been promulgated in the media. (A further petition to which Max referred was presented to  Parliament and received by Labour MP Marja Lubek. In that petition the title and wording say gay conversion therapy but the final paragraph said “We need to make all types of conversion therapy (“gay, Trans* etc”) either banned or illegal to perform in New Zealand” effectively contradicting the title and the rest of the text.  It gained only  5143 signatures. We believe that many people would not have signed the Parliamentary petition had it proposed to prevent counselling being available to trans children and young people.  While gay conversion therapy aims to discourage homosexuality (and is problematic for many reasons) preventing counsellors and medical staff from properly supporting people who present with gender identity concerns would be disastrous.   The stakes are much higher because, as recently published research by Lisa Littman has shown, there is a strong evidence of social contagion in the dramatic increase of young people presenting themselves for transition. Other researchers have shown, as UK Professor Michele Moore attests, that among the sequellae to a self-diagnosis of being transgender is a high likelihood of associated and untreated serious mental health conditions, including possibly caused by prior abuse.  About a third of young people seeking to transition are on the autistic spectrum and for many young people a temporary belief that they are the other sex is a developmental phase as part of the journey to becoming lesbian or gay as adults.  Professor Moore is an expert in Inclusive Education and Disability Studies and is the Co-Editor of the ground-breaking book Transgender Children and Young People, Born in Your Own Body. Recent research by Associate Professor Michael Biggs, a NZ sociologist at Oxford University, found  that young people on puberty blockers suffered increased distress and thoughts of suicide as a result of the treatment they had received. There are also increasing signs that the decision to transition is being followed in numerous young people by the drastic realisation that they had made the wrong choice  (and here and a NZ case of a woman who destransitioned). Traumatically this is often not until the young people have faced life altering hormones and surgery. The impact of a legal sanction preventing medical staff and counsellors from working with someone who thinks they may be transgender in order to rule out mental health issues, prior sexual abuse and homophobia is to mandate many young people to lives that are fundamentally diminished.  These are outcomes that they would generally not face with counselling and time to mature in their own unmedicated bodies. The medical impacts of transition include puberty blockers which can lead to malformed sexual organs and infertility, life long joint problems and the unknown mental and physical health impacts of failing to go through puberty.  Blockers are already being used in NZ in the Public Health System on children of 10 and over. Sex hormones make life long changes to secondary sexual characteristics and of course surgery is completely irreversible. But NZ teenagers and young people are being prescribed sex hormones and even surgery well before they have any real understanding of the decision they are making. We asked the members of the committee to recognise and understand the difference between conversion therapy for gay and lesbian people and advice and counselling for transgender presenting children and adolescents.  It will be relevant in the proposed changes to the Human Rights Act or if a Private Members Bill outlawing conversions therapy is presented to the house. Speak Up For Women’s submission to parliament 29 June 2019

Kiri Tunks with Beth Johnson’s son, September 2019 Kiri Tunks is a British trade unionist, socialist and women’s rights campaigner. She is a co-founder of A Woman’s Place UK (WPUK), an organisation set up in September 2017 to uphold the Equality Act. The Conservative government had proposed rewriting the law to eradicate single-sex spaces and safeguards for females. A large grassroots movement sprung up to oppose the changes, and now WPUK is carrying on the fight for women’s equality. Jenny Whyte and Beth Johnson, two leading figures in Speak Up for Women NZ, met Kiri and they got to share their experiences. Jenny met Kiri in New Zealand earlier this year after connecting online with WPUK supporters. “We had realised we had a mutual friend in NZ who Kiri was coming to visit. Kiri also has NZ connections through her father – hence her Maori name”. Kiri is a secondary school teacher and had just completed her tenure as President, first of the National Union of Teachers and then Joint President of the newly amalgamated National Education Union in Britain. During her term of office, she has been subject to public campaigns to have her removed from her national positions as well as facing complaints made against her. These actions have been unsuccessful because the Union supports the right of members (and staff) to hold different political positions to the Union (and to campaign for those positions) as long as individuals don’t claim to represent national union policy or use their position to advance their individual viewpoints. “ Despite living on opposite sides of the world “we realised how much our groups had in common” says Jenny. “The sorts of women involved were much the same:  leftists, environmentalists, teachers, medical and health professionals, mothers, and scientists”. Both organisations have been subjected to similar slurs by opponents claiming the women involved are  bigots, Nazis, and TERFs. In both countries there are  increasing numbers of women facing attacks on their livelihoods as a result of speaking up in opposition to sex self ID. “We also talked about how amazed we were that so many young people are attacking second wave feminists – unaware of all they achieved. Young men in particular are happy to attack and denigrate feminist women.” With the ongoing attacks on women’s rights they spoke about the need for good organising skills in both groups – which is why it is good to have trade unionists involved. It was agreed to forge closer ties between the groups and support each other, to keep in closer touch, and to share resources. Beth met Kiri in September this year while visiting the UK. She and Kiri noted how similar the organisations are, including their structure with a core decision making team, a working group of skilled volunteers and a wider group of supporters. Both groups have started out funding campaigns from their own pockets, all positions are voluntary, and the work is sustained with donations from supporters and money raised from event tickets. Women’s Place and Speak Up see ourselves as part of a broad, international women’s liberation movement which is growing in strength and confidence. As Kiri put it, “We are a global network of resistance fighters”. Both organisations realise the fight will take years and we are in it for the long haul.

Massey University has announced that they will be canceling Speak Up For Women’s venue booking for our event Feminism 2020. On the same day, award-winning columnist, Rachel Stewart, quit the New Zealand Herald after editors didn’t publish her regular column because it was about Speak Up For Women. Sean Plunket had Ani O’Brien, Rachel Stewart, and ACT MP David Seymour on his Magic Talk show to discuss the issues. Note: apologies for any rustling or cat noises, we had to do a manual record! Speak Up For Women’s Ani O’Brien http://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Home.m4a Rachel Stewart http://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Home-2.m4a MP David Seymour http://speakupforwomen.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Home-3.m4a

Speak Up For Women is publishing Rachel Stewart’s latest column, as the New Zealand Herald did not publish it. Rachel is an award winning journalist and one of New Zealand’s favourite opinion writers. It seems in today’s anti-women political climate, some feminist opinions are not welcome at the Herald. Please note it was written prior to the news breaking that Massey Uni had cancelled our venue booking. Rachel’s column: It seems far-fetched that the mere hiring of a Massey University venue by a feminist organisation could cause so much indignation and rage, but these are not typical times. A bunch of females getting together within a public space to discuss the issues currently affecting them is far from new, and very far from radical. Yet, the idea that ‘Feminism 2020’ would dare to congregate at a venue on Massey’s Wellington campus saw a number of students stage a sit-in, which culminated in the handing over of a petition calling on the university to cancel the event. What is so threatening about women coming together and talking? According to the protestors and petitioners, the organisers of the event – Speak Up for Women – are essentially devil incarnates. Petition organiser Charlie Myer said the university shouldn’t be “facilitating this kind of discussion”. Feminism 2020 “could have [the event] anywhere” but it wasn’t appropriate for them to hold it at a university, which was supposed to support transgender students.” Last time I looked universities were required to respect and uphold the quaint, old-fashioned tenet of free speech too. And Massey has, thus far, held out against the pressure of every thrown guilt trip known to mankind. You know, we don’t feel “safe”. Myer also disputed the group was feminist and simply meeting to discuss women’s issues. “If your feminism isn’t intersectional, it isn’t feminism.” Don’t you just love it when men tell women what feminism actually is? I find it adorable. Like a possum in my pear tree. So endearing. Another endearing move was to then see the spokesperson for diversity and inclusion accreditation business Rainbow Tick Martin King say that if Massey did not cancel the event it was likely it would trigger a review of its accreditation. The spectre of losing their Rainbow Tick must be downright scary for them. I mean, since students are now their financial customers, Massey naturally wants to keep the client happy at all costs. But back to ‘Speak Up For Women’ and their apparently devilish ways. Why do some students so feverishly want them cancelled lest they be “harmed” by their words? Of course, you’d think simply not attending would put paid to that, but I’m being far too logical. No. These students believe that no one should be allowed to discuss, debate, or hear the reasons why many women are concerned about an amendment (currently on hold) to the Births, Deaths, and Marriages Registration Bill that would allow a person to change their legal gender by simply signing a declaration. The group formed because they were legitimately concerned the amendment would prevent women from excluding men from changing rooms, bathrooms, women’s prisons, women’s shelters and any other women and girls-only space. In a nutshell, they don’t agree that trans women are women just because they say they are. The group supports the current law, which allows a person to change the sex on their birth certificate if they go through certain steps – specifically applying in writing to the Court and obtaining a medical sign-off from a doctor. They also make it clear they support the rights of transgender people to live without violence and discrimination. However they don’t agree that trans women should be allowed to compete against natal females in sport. In their view, it’s not a level playing field. Now, what’s so heinous about that? Why does holding such views mean they should be de-platformed, cancelled, and marginalised? Eerily, many of the organisers and some of the speakers are lesbian so why would the ‘L’ part of the LGBTQ be considered such a threat to organisations such as Rainbow Tick? Is the imperative of ‘diversity’ no longer extended to lesbians? Or feminists – regardless of their sexual preferences? Good ol’ intersectionalism strikes again! It’s a conundrum. And therein lies the problem with intersectionalism. The manic race to win the title of ‘most oppressed and marginalised group’ sets up a spiralling vortex of ever-tightening circles of meaninglessness. Will there be protests if the event goes ahead? Will the protestors consist mainly of male activists telling those women to shut up? Because that’s the rub for me. Seeing men shouting women down via megaphone, rattling windows, banging doors and generally screaming at them, reminds me why I’m a feminist all over again. Tactics like these are being employed in Britain and the U.S. and where they go, we tend to go. If similar methods are on show at the ‘Feminism 2020’ event, it’ll be quite the statement. Ask yourself this. Why is it that some men are angry, abusive, and disruptive around such incredibly important issues to some women? What’s driving their need to shut women up? Why is free speech good for the gander, but not so welcome from the goose? When did an open discussion by women about women’s rights become so threatening? Actually, more to the point, when didn’t it? #feminism2020 #hatespeech #MasseyUniversity #Petition