I have a branding problem - and so does Genspect

I'm a little nervous releasing this but I think it needs to be said. I really appreciate any and all thoughtful comments.

My head nearly fell off and rolled on the ground when I heard Peter Boghossian ask Phil Illy if it was “wrong for males to wear dresses at feminist conferences.” Why on earth, I thought to myself, did Peter think that Genspect held ‘feminist conferences’? I know Peter! He’s an intelligent and educated man and he spoke at our conference in Lisbon. However, the tendency to label every woman who criticises trans ideology as a ‘gender-critical feminist’ continues. This is bad for everyone – for gender critical feminists and for everyone else who criticises trans ideology.

Of course gender critical feminism is brilliant and I fully support the concept – it is a crucial aspect of feminism in the twenty-first century. Holly Lawford-Smith wrote a great book about gender critical feminism that I found very thought-provoking. As far as I can tell - and I’m sure someone will help me out with this - old-school gender-critical feminists believed that the concept of gender is based upon oppressive stereotyping and should be abolished while new-school gender-critical feminists typically challenge ideas associated with gender identity theory. Either way all of us challenge the crazy notion that gender identity should override biological sex in areas like legal definitions, policies, and access to women’s spaces. However, the gender-critical viewpoint is not the entirety of my concern about trans ideology, nor is it the reason Genspect was established.

Genspect was initially established in June 2021 ‘to promote the voices of parents of trans-identified children’ and emerged from the Gender Dysphoria Support Network. However, from the moment we began, other groups reached out to us for assistance, and by August 2021, we were already helping detransitioners. As a result, we launched Statsforgender.org and BeyondTrans.org and expanded our mission to promote ‘a healthy approach to sex and gender.’

Even so, since Genspect began, people have assumed we’re a feminist organisation. This has never really made sense to me—I’m not a feminist scholar, and nothing on our website suggests we’re based upon feminism theory. Indeed, our FAQs very clearly set out our broad-church viewpoint. Yet the notion persists. Is it because I’m a woman and the founder-director of Genspect? That seems far-fetched and, frankly, regressive. Or is it because we criticise trans ideology, and any organisation who does so is presumed to be underpinned by gender critical feminism?

I guess it probably stems from the early days of the trans phenomenon. When my film Trans Kids: It’s time to talk was released in 2018, it was mostly feminists who defended me when trans activists attacked. (Although even then there were quite a few feminists who hated me on sight and called me a “dick-pandering handmaiden” because I am heterosexual and I really love men.) Perhaps every woman who spoke up back then is assumed to be a gender critical feminist?

For the record, my understanding of this issue is not rooted in a critique of gender oppression and the patriarchy. I’m psychologically minded and I view this issue as a psychological mass formation as described by the psychologist Mattias Desmet. I don’t believe that sex-based oppressive stereotypes fully explain this issue—though I do believe that sex-based stereotypes can be oppressive and certainly contribute to this social contagion. Equally, while I also recognise that some are profiting from this issue, I don’t think "following the money" fully explains it either. Instead, I believe that a deep sense of loneliness, disconnection, floating anxiety, frustration, and rage are the primary drivers behind this trend, and I am primarily focused on these issues to better understand why so many people are drawn to the idea of becoming a different person with a new identity.

Pleeeeeeaaaaase don’t get me wrong (though I know many people will, but anyway…). I fully support women’s sex-based rights and equality between the sexes. I believe in feminism, but feminist theory doesn’t resonate with me as strongly as psychology does. Women’s reproductive rights, sex-based violence, and the need for same-sex spaces are all deeply important to me. I’m certainly not anti-feminist; in fact, I find feminist theory interesting, especially gender-critical feminism. But I’m not a ‘gender-critical feminist,’ and Genspect is not a ‘feminist organisation.’

Thankfully there are loads of gender-critical feminist organisations and conferences and Genspect supports the good ones. Filia are amazing. Women’s Place UK are brilliant. So are the Women’s Rights Network, WDI and Fair Play for Women and Save Women’s Sport. All fantastic. The brilliant Sex Matters is a leading force that seems to be shaped by gender-critical feminism, and we all owe a great debt of gratitude to Maya Forstater for her landmark court case, which protects the ultra(!) important right to hold gender-critical beliefs. There are loads more gender-critical feminist organisations – too many to mention – and anyone who is sensible is thankful that they are protecting women and girls sex-based rights. But although Genspect certainly and wholly supports the gender critical viewpoint, this isn’t Genspect’s only focus and never has been.

Genspect’s priority is to provide a healthy approach to sex and gender. We believe that trans ideology causes great harm and that medical transition is a destructive and needless intervention. We believe that people who are distressed about their identity should seek out psycho-social interventions. We are focused on the harms of trans ideology in all its manifestations – especially on the irreversible nature of medical transition. We are very concerned about ROGD and understand that the general consensus is that it affects girls and boys at a 70:30 ratio. We hold conferences across the world at the same time and in the same town as WPATH – Killarney, Denver and Lisbon – in order to highlight the devastation that has been carried out by WPATH’s Standards of Care. WPATH is a discredited organisation that, in our view, is knowingly harming children and vulnerable adults, and we believe it should be shut down. And for those in the back of the class: we don’t want to replace WPATH—why would we? WPATH promotes medical transition, while we believe medical transition is harmful.

Genspect’s role isn’t to champion any one viewpoint but to stand as an evidence-based resource for individuals, families, and professionals who are deeply concerned about the medicalisation of gender-related distress. Our mission is to advocate for thoughtful, non-invasive approaches that respect each individual’s well-being and to push back at irresponsible clinicians who push harmful medical interventions as a first resort. We’re not here to fight a battle over labels or affiliations; we’re here to create a space where people can question, challenge, and discuss – where the health of those affected by trans ideology is always the central focus.

We don’t have to be feminists to build a world where we can all prioritise healthy, evidence-based approaches to sex and gender over ideology. Our focus is simply on helping people—parents, families, detransitioners, concerned professionals, and everyone else—find paths forward that honour their sex and their health.