Explaining why it's necessary to move beyond silos and avoid getting trapped in research rabbit holes, and instead embrace public dialogue to seek a better understanding of the trans phenomenon
Quoting Hellen Keller is so apt. She “saw” beyond sight and “listened” beyond sound. This is the type of insight it will take to rescue society and its wounded victims from the stranglehold of trans ideology. I hope this conference is both well attended and broadcast for as many eyes as possible!
Thank you Stella for marking this moment of progression.
I owe you and everyone involved in Genspect such a debt of gratitude for quantifying what parents like me with an affected family knew intrinsically, clinging together to maintain our sanity in the beginning, with so much help from yourself.
Looking forward to being in Lisbon in September for *that* moment.
Wouldn't it be a thing if one day there was an event to mark the end of madness with a truth and reconciliation process between our families and the those who felt they would come forward to accept some of the responsibility?
In the autumn I am going to join each one of the main UK political parties one by one, make a maiden speech in each local meeting to explain our situation and invite members to throw me out if they didn't feel able to support ours and Cass's position as an official branch stance. I'll start with the Greens because that is the easiest one from which to be ejected.
Good for you, I bet you’ll be brilliant with your maiden speech. You could maybe start with this fab line “ Wouldn't it be a thing if one day there was an event to mark the end of madness with a truth and reconciliation process between our families and the those who felt they would come forward to accept some of the responsibility?
With replies and comments already filled with respectful sharing of opinion and experience.
The greatness of this conference is maybe greater than surface appearance.
I have wondered a great deal about how to interact with peers in medicine/health in my work, our GP and therapists with my children, family and friends whose children have identified as opposite sex, and beautiful people who have transitioned in later life.
All sensible and decent people who I've known for some time. Very dear people also. How do I actually support their acceptance in society when I am fighting with my life to extricate my family from the ideology that is likely doing damage to all of us?
How on earth do I speak with my dear nephew, whose support has lead his child well into transition?
My intersex friend, who still uses the same pronouns after he transitioned with many years of careful deliberation?
My friend at work who is supporting her traumatised child who now wants to transition?
Like- how on earth do I discuss this when they have supportive views of affirmative care, reasoning they think -or may even be- sound,
mentors/ advisors/practitioners who they trust.
I think about them all and I think about my child, who I am on good terms with, but who will not discuss this topic at all with me.
It's such a tightrope.
It's like thinking about David Tenant... he's just another parent like I am, and maybe has been in deep pain around this issue-found ways forward driven by love for his child, parenting with profound intent because of the ideology rising in his household, surrounded by beautiful LGB colleagues in his industry who've fought hard for their peace in acceptance.
My lovely LGB friends and colleagues, who I love dearly, but who can't see what I see.
So, I often wonder, how do I reconcile all I read - here and with authors I see on common lists here- and allow space for being ok to speak with these lovely souls who've taken the baited rhetoric?
And then I realise- until the conversation moves into the mainstream, and all these decent people I'm thinking about have access to what I know, then there's going to be:
1)ignorance driving their desparate decisions about their children/clients; following advice from
2) compassionate practitioners ignorantly following the 'force fed' paradigm or patronisingly delivering the 'party line' through ego or laziness;
3) doing disservice to the tiny minority (of adults?)who might really need proper, thorough, soundly supported health care, in deciding privately whether to transition
4) And in delivering poor health care to vulnerable others ; following the state driven policies ALSO driven by laziness, lack of thorough research, due diligence or informed attention;
5) being fed by the powerful minorities whose pockets, egos or entire narcissistic identities derive great gain from confabulating the whole shebang....
6) being disseminated on powerful POWERFUL global propaganda machines, driven also by power and profit, being 'sold' to all states as assets to society and community....
And
7) being placed in children's pockets without 'driver's licenses' for them OR their parents....
PHEW!
4, 5, 6 and 7 are beyond me, although I'm seeing other people here make brave inroads.
Many of you here are my mentors with No. 3. One by one, speaking to politicians and decision-makers and sharing what you know and have experienced. Educating slowly so the truth trickles through.
Exceptionally brave people.
From what I read I see very clearly the change is happening... And the answer is here- from your description in this post. This conference, the people involved in this and last year's conference, the open gathering for informed sharing of experience, understanding and knowledge... HERE is the answer.
THIS is why the change is occurring.
I loved reading there is also a focus on this conference on moving forwards and out into 'freedom'. Where the vision is already being built of this cult having no hold in society.
That's what I do daily. Imagine a life where I'm free to let my kids live normal lives without me looking for the cult representative behind every not- so-benign door.
This is looking more and more a reality, and what you've described here- to move out of the silo's- tells me yet again it's not just my imagination telling me things are heading in the right direction.
What an incredible conference this will be.
Loads of knowledgable, experienced, determined, informed, understanding adults respectfully and openly getting together to listen to each other, consider and share what they know, support each other, decide next steps forward and, inevitably, moving with the lot of us... forwards together.
Genspect made a colossal error in judgment when it engaged James Lindsay to speak at its 2023 Denver conference. Don't take my word for it. Below the main body of this comment you can read what Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal, trailblazing journalists on the detransitioner beat, had to say about it on their podcast "Blocked and Reported."
At the very least, putting Linsday on the speaker's panel demonstrated slipshod vetting that was out of touch with American online politics. At worst, it raised questions about Genspect's political leanings, since Lindsay is a committed right-winger who sees communists under every bed. Genspect now has James Linsday in common with right-wing youth firebrand Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA Faith. At Turning Point USA Faith's conference in April 2024, Lindsay informed the audience that "communism and 'woke' are the same thing." [1]
The problem with associating with toxic figures such as James Linsday is that it turns off people on the center left who might otherwise be receptive to the gender critical message. Because progressive states are the stronghold of gender identity ideology in the U.S., it is essential to persuade left-of-center voters there that trans activism has gone too far. They won't listen to right-wing culture warriors such as Chris Rufo and James Lindsay.
That is why it is concerning that Peter Boghossian, one of Lindsay's collaborators in the Grievance Studies Affair, [2] is on the agenda at Genspect's Lisbon conference. Is Genspect aware that Boghossian, like Linsday, is one of the leading lights of the anti-woke movement? Here is how The New Republic characterizes Boghossian and his ideological buddy Ilya Shapiro:
"Joining a time-honored tradition, both Shapiro and Boghossian have parlayed their sympathetic treatment in some quarters of the media into what can best be described as a 'cancel culture speaking tour.' They made a joint appearance in March at a Princeton panel titled 'Mob Rule: The Illiberal Left’s Threat to Campus Discourse.' "[3]
Does Genspect not know that Boghossian captured headlines in 2022 when he journeyed to illiberal Hungary under the aegis of the Mathias Corvinus Collegium? This is how The New Republic describes the institution:
"The Mathias Corvinus Collegium or MCC, a small, private educational institution run by Orbán allies with a semi-explicit mission of training a cadre of future right-wing elites. The school, which Orbán recently granted more than $1.7 billion, now controls assets worth more than the country’s entire higher education budget, according to reporting from The New York Times. It has wielded this windfall to attract high-profile figures in media and academia from across the Atlantic: Senior visiting fellows like Boghossian earn up to 10,000 euros (around $9,700) a month, or 11 times the average Hungarian assistant professor’s salary. Never let it be said that taking a blowtorch to democracy isn’t lucrative." [4]
Why is Genspect going back to the culture-war speakers' bureau a second time at the Lisbon conference? Boghossian, like Lindsay, carries right-wing partisan baggage that will likely undermine Genspect's mission among politically attuned liberals who might be open to rejecting gender identity ideology. Is that what Genspect wants?
[Here, Jesse and Katie discuss Genspect’s Denver conference of November 4 – 5, which co-host Jesse Singal attended. Before turning to the main topic of their conversation, Jesse gives his opinion on James Lindsay and Mr. Lindsay's talk at the conference. ]
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
/ / /
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s postmodern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think [Linsday] really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
Hi thank you for your comment. I just asked Peter if he was right wing and he said not at all so I'm afraid you're wrong on that point. However on a more fundamental principle, Genspect is very clear to reject all attempts at guilt by association. We believe it is a very regressive way to behave. We are also very keen to listen to all sides of the political spectrum. You can read more about it here: https://genspect.org/our-position-faqs/#guilt-by-association and also here: https://genspect.org/why-genspect-talks-to-everyone/
The wisest thing a therapist has ever said to me was "Don't be so open minded your brains fall out."
Whether Genspect likes it or not, the public will associate the organization with the toxic and crazy politics of James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian's flirtation with autocracy.
No reasonable person should be keen to platform James Linsday's current segment of the political spectrum. I trust Jesse Singal and Yascha Mounk on Lindsay's credibility and the merits of cultural Marxism more than I do whoever at Genspect is selecting speakers from the front lines of the culture wars.
The point of Genspect is that it can be a broad church of discussion.
The debate around the medicalisation of 'trans' identities amongst our children has shown me that a left-right political spectrum does not apply here.
This social contagion has been a terrible human phenomenon and all rivulets of our culture have been affected.
As an adult I believed that a Marxist analysis was a useful tool for explaining structures in Western societies. I was one of the 'marching' people.
In the 1980s I was having shouting matches with men in the Socialist Workers Party about their then fringe views about resourcing sex-change operations on demand as an aberration of our socialistic ideals. And here we are.
Over the course of my lifetime I have changed my views based on my experience and thought about a lot of things, especially in the last five years.
I support Genspect in giving a platform to credible and learned people who can support their position with evidence or reasoned philosophical stand points, on the subject that unites us. I would even support 'Tommy Robinson' sharing on a platform if he had something honest and human to bring to our table.
Left and right and centrist politicians, bureaucrats and medics have all f-ked up on our mutual area of concern so everyone needs a chance to re-evaluate and re-align.
"The debate around the medicalisation of 'trans' identities amongst our children has shown me that a left-right political spectrum does not apply here."
When right-wingers embrace the gender critical cause, which they do, it turns off persuadable centrists and liberals. It makes it hard for Democratic politicians to entertain curbs on, say, youth gender medicine, because in the public's mind the issue is associated with the religious right and Trumpists in places such as Texas. Or Chris Rufo.
"I support Genspect in giving a platform to credible and learned people who can support their position with evidence or reasoned philosophical stand points, on the subject that unites us."
My criticism is directed at Genspect's platforming of James Lindsay, who is neither credible nor as learned as he thinks he is and who, as Jesse Singal noted in the comments quoted above, did not support his position with evidence or reasoned philosophical standpoints.
Peter Boghossian is under a cloud because of his association with the illiberal Hungarian establishment. At some point the baggage outweighs whatever "honest and human" a speaker brings to the table.
Quoting Hellen Keller is so apt. She “saw” beyond sight and “listened” beyond sound. This is the type of insight it will take to rescue society and its wounded victims from the stranglehold of trans ideology. I hope this conference is both well attended and broadcast for as many eyes as possible!
Thank you, I hope so too!
Thank you Stella for marking this moment of progression.
I owe you and everyone involved in Genspect such a debt of gratitude for quantifying what parents like me with an affected family knew intrinsically, clinging together to maintain our sanity in the beginning, with so much help from yourself.
Looking forward to being in Lisbon in September for *that* moment.
Wouldn't it be a thing if one day there was an event to mark the end of madness with a truth and reconciliation process between our families and the those who felt they would come forward to accept some of the responsibility?
In the autumn I am going to join each one of the main UK political parties one by one, make a maiden speech in each local meeting to explain our situation and invite members to throw me out if they didn't feel able to support ours and Cass's position as an official branch stance. I'll start with the Greens because that is the easiest one from which to be ejected.
Good for you, I bet you’ll be brilliant with your maiden speech. You could maybe start with this fab line “ Wouldn't it be a thing if one day there was an event to mark the end of madness with a truth and reconciliation process between our families and the those who felt they would come forward to accept some of the responsibility?
xlent line thanks
Oh... you are an awesome person- wow- I can really see the power in this action. My hat comes off to you
This is fantastic!
What a positive, real, and decisive post.
With replies and comments already filled with respectful sharing of opinion and experience.
The greatness of this conference is maybe greater than surface appearance.
I have wondered a great deal about how to interact with peers in medicine/health in my work, our GP and therapists with my children, family and friends whose children have identified as opposite sex, and beautiful people who have transitioned in later life.
All sensible and decent people who I've known for some time. Very dear people also. How do I actually support their acceptance in society when I am fighting with my life to extricate my family from the ideology that is likely doing damage to all of us?
How on earth do I speak with my dear nephew, whose support has lead his child well into transition?
My intersex friend, who still uses the same pronouns after he transitioned with many years of careful deliberation?
My friend at work who is supporting her traumatised child who now wants to transition?
Like- how on earth do I discuss this when they have supportive views of affirmative care, reasoning they think -or may even be- sound,
mentors/ advisors/practitioners who they trust.
I think about them all and I think about my child, who I am on good terms with, but who will not discuss this topic at all with me.
It's such a tightrope.
It's like thinking about David Tenant... he's just another parent like I am, and maybe has been in deep pain around this issue-found ways forward driven by love for his child, parenting with profound intent because of the ideology rising in his household, surrounded by beautiful LGB colleagues in his industry who've fought hard for their peace in acceptance.
My lovely LGB friends and colleagues, who I love dearly, but who can't see what I see.
So, I often wonder, how do I reconcile all I read - here and with authors I see on common lists here- and allow space for being ok to speak with these lovely souls who've taken the baited rhetoric?
And then I realise- until the conversation moves into the mainstream, and all these decent people I'm thinking about have access to what I know, then there's going to be:
1)ignorance driving their desparate decisions about their children/clients; following advice from
2) compassionate practitioners ignorantly following the 'force fed' paradigm or patronisingly delivering the 'party line' through ego or laziness;
3) doing disservice to the tiny minority (of adults?)who might really need proper, thorough, soundly supported health care, in deciding privately whether to transition
4) And in delivering poor health care to vulnerable others ; following the state driven policies ALSO driven by laziness, lack of thorough research, due diligence or informed attention;
5) being fed by the powerful minorities whose pockets, egos or entire narcissistic identities derive great gain from confabulating the whole shebang....
6) being disseminated on powerful POWERFUL global propaganda machines, driven also by power and profit, being 'sold' to all states as assets to society and community....
And
7) being placed in children's pockets without 'driver's licenses' for them OR their parents....
PHEW!
4, 5, 6 and 7 are beyond me, although I'm seeing other people here make brave inroads.
Many of you here are my mentors with No. 3. One by one, speaking to politicians and decision-makers and sharing what you know and have experienced. Educating slowly so the truth trickles through.
Exceptionally brave people.
From what I read I see very clearly the change is happening... And the answer is here- from your description in this post. This conference, the people involved in this and last year's conference, the open gathering for informed sharing of experience, understanding and knowledge... HERE is the answer.
THIS is why the change is occurring.
I loved reading there is also a focus on this conference on moving forwards and out into 'freedom'. Where the vision is already being built of this cult having no hold in society.
That's what I do daily. Imagine a life where I'm free to let my kids live normal lives without me looking for the cult representative behind every not- so-benign door.
This is looking more and more a reality, and what you've described here- to move out of the silo's- tells me yet again it's not just my imagination telling me things are heading in the right direction.
What an incredible conference this will be.
Loads of knowledgable, experienced, determined, informed, understanding adults respectfully and openly getting together to listen to each other, consider and share what they know, support each other, decide next steps forward and, inevitably, moving with the lot of us... forwards together.
Brilliant.
Thank you for your insightful comment, I really appreciate it xx
Genspect made a colossal error in judgment when it engaged James Lindsay to speak at its 2023 Denver conference. Don't take my word for it. Below the main body of this comment you can read what Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal, trailblazing journalists on the detransitioner beat, had to say about it on their podcast "Blocked and Reported."
At the very least, putting Linsday on the speaker's panel demonstrated slipshod vetting that was out of touch with American online politics. At worst, it raised questions about Genspect's political leanings, since Lindsay is a committed right-winger who sees communists under every bed. Genspect now has James Linsday in common with right-wing youth firebrand Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA Faith. At Turning Point USA Faith's conference in April 2024, Lindsay informed the audience that "communism and 'woke' are the same thing." [1]
The problem with associating with toxic figures such as James Linsday is that it turns off people on the center left who might otherwise be receptive to the gender critical message. Because progressive states are the stronghold of gender identity ideology in the U.S., it is essential to persuade left-of-center voters there that trans activism has gone too far. They won't listen to right-wing culture warriors such as Chris Rufo and James Lindsay.
That is why it is concerning that Peter Boghossian, one of Lindsay's collaborators in the Grievance Studies Affair, [2] is on the agenda at Genspect's Lisbon conference. Is Genspect aware that Boghossian, like Linsday, is one of the leading lights of the anti-woke movement? Here is how The New Republic characterizes Boghossian and his ideological buddy Ilya Shapiro:
"Joining a time-honored tradition, both Shapiro and Boghossian have parlayed their sympathetic treatment in some quarters of the media into what can best be described as a 'cancel culture speaking tour.' They made a joint appearance in March at a Princeton panel titled 'Mob Rule: The Illiberal Left’s Threat to Campus Discourse.' "[3]
Does Genspect not know that Boghossian captured headlines in 2022 when he journeyed to illiberal Hungary under the aegis of the Mathias Corvinus Collegium? This is how The New Republic describes the institution:
"The Mathias Corvinus Collegium or MCC, a small, private educational institution run by Orbán allies with a semi-explicit mission of training a cadre of future right-wing elites. The school, which Orbán recently granted more than $1.7 billion, now controls assets worth more than the country’s entire higher education budget, according to reporting from The New York Times. It has wielded this windfall to attract high-profile figures in media and academia from across the Atlantic: Senior visiting fellows like Boghossian earn up to 10,000 euros (around $9,700) a month, or 11 times the average Hungarian assistant professor’s salary. Never let it be said that taking a blowtorch to democracy isn’t lucrative." [4]
Why is Genspect going back to the culture-war speakers' bureau a second time at the Lisbon conference? Boghossian, like Lindsay, carries right-wing partisan baggage that will likely undermine Genspect's mission among politically attuned liberals who might be open to rejecting gender identity ideology. Is that what Genspect wants?
=======================================================================
[1] Achterling, Michael. "Politics seep into Bismarck leadership conference hosted by church." North Dakota Monitor. 29 April 2024. https://northdakotamonitor.com/2024/04/29/politics-seep-into-bismarck-leadership-conference-hosted-by-church/
[2] "Grievance Studies Affair." Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair
[3] McCordick, James. "The University of Austin Goes to Hungary." The New Republic. 11 October 2022. https://newrepublic.com/article/168080/university-austin-hungary-shapiro-boghossian
[4] Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocked and Reported
Episode 191: A Man in a Dress in a Pile-On. 18 November 2023.
https://www.blockedandreported.org/p/episode-191-a-man-in-a-dress-in-a#details
[Here, Jesse and Katie discuss Genspect’s Denver conference of November 4 – 5, which co-host Jesse Singal attended. Before turning to the main topic of their conversation, Jesse gives his opinion on James Lindsay and Mr. Lindsay's talk at the conference. ]
(40:00) Jesse: And most regrettably, from where I sit, they invited James Lindsay to give a talk on the Marxification of gender.
Katie: Yeah, James Lindsay. That jumped out at me, and it strikes me that if you want to be taken seriously outside of your bubble, James Lindsay is not the person to invite to speak at your conference, especially on this issue. Like if your conference is about how to have impossible conversations, maybe invite him. But if your conference is about gender, maybe not.
Jesse: Yeah. I mean, from my point of view, someone like Lindsay just tips you in the direction away from legitimate science and discourse, of which there was plenty at this conference, and into demagoguery. James Linsday is not a serious voice on sex and gender. His talk made very little sense. He just has these, like . . . his theories are very superficial and often misguided, in my view. And he’s a huge prick online, a massive asshole, which does not help anyone. Which most people associated with Genspect are not.
/ / /
(43:05) Katie: Actually, I do want to get a little bit more into [James Linsday’s] talk, if you don’t mind. Did he seem crazy, the way he was speaking, the way he does on Twitter? Because he comes across on Twitter like a giant, flaming, fucking asshole.
Jesse: He was more charismatic and less crazy-seeming than I thought, and more polished. There had been one TV appearance that he’d done in the past that was just a train wreck.
Katie: He didn’t just recite a bunch of citations?
Jessie: Well, no. He dropped a lot of names. And I haven’t rewatched it since I saw it. He makes all these claims trying to link everything to Marxism and a lot of what he’s saying is what ideologues in general do: accepting different standards of evidence, trying to change the subject . . . He has, like, this grand theory. Yascha Mounk’s book talks about how a lot of this stuff [i.e., post-structuralist ideologies] isn’t Marxism. It’s postmodern, it’s a rejection of these grand theories. I don’t think [Linsday] really latches onto the nuances of what’s going on or how much of this is human nature and ideology in general. He claims to be an expert on all these different thinkers. I don’t think he is.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi thank you for your comment. I just asked Peter if he was right wing and he said not at all so I'm afraid you're wrong on that point. However on a more fundamental principle, Genspect is very clear to reject all attempts at guilt by association. We believe it is a very regressive way to behave. We are also very keen to listen to all sides of the political spectrum. You can read more about it here: https://genspect.org/our-position-faqs/#guilt-by-association and also here: https://genspect.org/why-genspect-talks-to-everyone/
The wisest thing a therapist has ever said to me was "Don't be so open minded your brains fall out."
Whether Genspect likes it or not, the public will associate the organization with the toxic and crazy politics of James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian's flirtation with autocracy.
No reasonable person should be keen to platform James Linsday's current segment of the political spectrum. I trust Jesse Singal and Yascha Mounk on Lindsay's credibility and the merits of cultural Marxism more than I do whoever at Genspect is selecting speakers from the front lines of the culture wars.
The point of Genspect is that it can be a broad church of discussion.
The debate around the medicalisation of 'trans' identities amongst our children has shown me that a left-right political spectrum does not apply here.
This social contagion has been a terrible human phenomenon and all rivulets of our culture have been affected.
As an adult I believed that a Marxist analysis was a useful tool for explaining structures in Western societies. I was one of the 'marching' people.
In the 1980s I was having shouting matches with men in the Socialist Workers Party about their then fringe views about resourcing sex-change operations on demand as an aberration of our socialistic ideals. And here we are.
Over the course of my lifetime I have changed my views based on my experience and thought about a lot of things, especially in the last five years.
I support Genspect in giving a platform to credible and learned people who can support their position with evidence or reasoned philosophical stand points, on the subject that unites us. I would even support 'Tommy Robinson' sharing on a platform if he had something honest and human to bring to our table.
Left and right and centrist politicians, bureaucrats and medics have all f-ked up on our mutual area of concern so everyone needs a chance to re-evaluate and re-align.
Thank you x
"The debate around the medicalisation of 'trans' identities amongst our children has shown me that a left-right political spectrum does not apply here."
When right-wingers embrace the gender critical cause, which they do, it turns off persuadable centrists and liberals. It makes it hard for Democratic politicians to entertain curbs on, say, youth gender medicine, because in the public's mind the issue is associated with the religious right and Trumpists in places such as Texas. Or Chris Rufo.
"I support Genspect in giving a platform to credible and learned people who can support their position with evidence or reasoned philosophical stand points, on the subject that unites us."
My criticism is directed at Genspect's platforming of James Lindsay, who is neither credible nor as learned as he thinks he is and who, as Jesse Singal noted in the comments quoted above, did not support his position with evidence or reasoned philosophical standpoints.
Peter Boghossian is under a cloud because of his association with the illiberal Hungarian establishment. At some point the baggage outweighs whatever "honest and human" a speaker brings to the table.
I support your right to air your views! See you in Lisbon :) I'll be wearing a tent trying to disguise a fat ankle, with long hair, grey at the front.