Stephen Whittle
I have done quite a few posts on Stephen Whittle in an attempt to get my head around how a, same sex attracted, female could embrace an ideology which harms women and gay rights. Whittle, if you are not aware, no longer embraces the label woman and instead claims the status of a “trans man”. Whittle is quite a key figure in the United Kingdom, sadly, they also have global reach. Whittle advises the U.K government, the Council of Europe and the European Union. They also worked with the trans lobby group ILGA-Europe and were a signatory to the Yogyakarta principles.
. They were also the President of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) from 2007-2009.Whittle is quite prolific and I can’t possibly do justice to the scale of the damage she has inflicted; as a proponent of Gender Identity ideology. I will link the full series at the end, for those of you who fancy a deep dive. This will just be a whistle stop tour and, I hope, will garner insight into the ideology/ compulsion that drives her life’s work.
Here Whittle denies that sexual orientation has anything to do with SEX. Apparently it should not compromise your attraction, to, for example, David Beckham, if he turned out to be sans penis!
This would be a harmless, niche, opinion were our political class not listening to Whittle and following orders. This 👇 is the David Lammy who pushed through the Gender Recognition Act when he was in government.
Back to Whittle who believes sex has nothing to do with, er, sex. This has major implications for the legally protected characteristic of SEXual Orientation. Already Lesbians in Tasmania have lost the legal right to exclude males from Lesbian dating events. Even in the U.K many events have gone underground to exclude the opposite sex from gay male /lesbian events.
Whittle also attacks the U.K. law on the offence of obtaining sex by deception. This law which criminalises lying about your sex to an intimate partner. In the U.K this has, thus far, resulted in a handful of females convicted for lying about their sex. They typically use emotional coercion to entrap girls into engaging in sexual activity, in circumstances which allow the perpetrator to maintain the deception. The victims are left feeling utterly betrayed and also humiliated by having “fallen” for the deception. Whittle wants the law, criminalising this behaviour, to be abolished. What she should be doing is making sure “trans men” are not indoctrinated to believe that your biological SEX plays no role in sexual attraction. (Trust me the “trans” generation take this as gospel). I did a series on this issue which you can read here: 👇.
Whittle does not like being reminded of her biological sex and therefore she wants sex, as a biological category, to be deprioritised. Unlike many others Whittle does not deny biological sex exists, or that sex is a material reality, she just thinks it is not important. This extends to a belief that sex doesn’t matter for societal infrastructure, impacting the provision of single sex spaces. Many trans-activists are campaigning to be allowed to self-declare their sex on key data sets which would severely hamper research into sex based inequalities. Whittle is of the view that if we simply stopped seeing “gender” then sex based inequalities would disappear. This is Neo-Phallus in Wonderland territory.
This is what Whittle has to say about the liberating potential of a “trans” identity. In this clip she actually seems to believe that the only way women can repudiate sex stereotypical roles is to identify out of her sex, or her “woman gender”, as Whittle refers to it.
I will give Whittle credit for some honesty about the negative impact of “trans” surgeries. It’s a qualified welcome because Whittle offers up an honest assessment of the limitations of these surgeries and then rows back. She first asks the community to be realistic about modifications to their body and then adds a caveat that unrealistic expectations can nevertheless confer happiness. This is what she had to say about surgeries for males who repudiate their sex. This was seven years ago. I have only seen detransitioners speak about the negative impact on sexual function in the last two years. How many more men are going to embark upon surgeries that leave 80% inorgasmic?
Quite a stark warning. She also is concerned about the surgeries females are having and believes they have a poor understanding of the expected outcomes.
Though Whittle has some understanding of the negative impacts of these surgeries her concern is insufficient to persuade her to jeopardise her status within the “trans” community. I will leave you with this statement, by Whittle. Feel free to allow yourself a hollow laugh.
This is the only purported “civil rights” movement, in history, that is dedicated to stripping away the rights of another oppressed group: Women!
You can read the entire series here with links to the primary sources.
Yogyakarta principles sought to elevate the principle of gender identity over sex. A link to the full document is contained in this article. Yogyakarta Principes
Astounding! I never heard of this individual--how can this be, considering how obsessed I've become? I have Exulansic here, visiting for a weekend, and we plan to make a 7 minute blurb for my youtube channel, titled The Fallacies of Cross-Dressing. Confused, unstable and psychiatrically ill individuals with "gender dysphoria" must be told honestly that cross-dressing is wasteful, excessive expense and be schooled on the facts of water and air pollution in the countries doing most textile production (India and China). They need to get a grip on the fact that it's trained narcissism and cross-dressing is the Olympics of mirror-gazing. Unreasonable demands sally out in public then, where random individuals all over must affirm that you "are the sex that you're wardrobing into." It is not liberation, but quite the opposite, it is confinement in sexual stereotypes straight out of Mad Men.
Ute Heggen YouTube channel, for the Exulansic and Ute dialogue, to go up later on Dec. 17.