I would be interested in contributing something - but would need an idea of how long the article/letter/piece would need to be and when it needs completed by. I have written a commentary on the events for the Psychology of Women Section Review (POWSR) as well.___________________________________ The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at: http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/ There is a threaded discussion forum: http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi There is a twitter feed: http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below. David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask]) To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
Jem
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:06:36 +0000
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: sponse
To: [log in to unmask]
I am in agreement for a readers letter and an article if people feel qualified to do this but for myself I would be unable to dedicate the time that this would require in order to do it justice and I'm not sure I have the level of expertise in this area that would be required in order to counter Zuckers theories in a potent and powerful manner.
Sorry David for not making my wishes known sooner after all your efforts on our behalf!
Jacx
> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 21:01:29 +0000
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: our Statement re.Zucker & The Psychologist
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> First thanks to David for following this up. I think it is worth
> responding, at least with a reader's letter, to the inaccuracies in the
> event report. A number of people on the list were concerned about Zucker's
> work impacting negatively on individual children, and narrowing down what it
> means for all of us to have a sexual and gendered identity. I really like
> the last sentence of Phil Mollon's letter: "I suggest we need to respect
> developmental autonomy and the evolution of the unknown self – core values,
> it seems to me, that can help to provide a protected psychotherapeutic space
> for reflection on the deeply personal mystery of sexuality". Unfortunately
> the rest of his letter is about the issue of "reparative therapy for
> homosexuality" in response to Susan Kapp's letter which I havent read (where
> oh where is my December copy of my beloved Psychologist?) so I'm not sure
> how the debate got shunted into this blind alley.
>
> I agree with Gavi about proceeding with caution. I would be very interested
> in reading an article about how children identifying very strongly against
> their assigned gender challenges our ideas of human sexual identity and how
> Zucker's work (crude behaviourism) is as much of an unsatifactory attempt at
> closure as crude biological determinism. As I often ponder when faced with
> such questions "what would Judith Butler say?". However, it might be quite
> an undertaking to propose a special issue along these lines for the
> Psychologist. On the other hand a well-written "think piece" reflecting on
> Zuckergate would probably be suitable for Clinical Psychology Forum, if
> anyone would like to give it a go.
>
> Deborah
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fryer, David" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 4:16 PM
> Subject: Re: our Statement re.Zucker & The Psychologist
>
>
> There has been little indication that List members suggesting the List
> wishes to take up Jon Sutton on this offer or indeed to continue with debate
> and action on this matter. I am aware of only 3 posts since 8th Dec: Deborah
> argued tentatively in favour of pursuing this; Gavi issued a caution re
> strategy; and Richard seems to suggest "a well prepared symposium/special
> edition, or whatever" would be more suitable than a Reader's letter in the
> Psychologist. Am I reading the list accurately enough to summarise that in
> general the List members do not wish to take this matter further in the ways
> suggested below? I feel I should respond to Jon in some fashion
> David
>
> David Fryer
>
> ________________________________
> From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List
> [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Fryer
> [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 08 December 2010 07:50
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: our Statement re.Zucker & The Psychologist
>
> Dear All,
> You will remember that the Statement of Concern re Prof Zucker's work was
> sent amongst others to the Editor of The Psychologist, Jon Sutton. He has
> now replied. The whole string is pasted in below FYI. Note that Jon asks
> some questions and also sends us a copy of an 'event report' in which Prof
> Zucker comments and a reader's letter which will be published. The identity
> of the author of the reader's letter is disclosed. I checked if it was OK to
> circulate this letter on the List and Jon said it was but asked that the
> letter and the report not be circulated beyond this list prior to
> publication.
>
> There are a number of issues for us to decide upon, here are some which
> occur to me:
>
> Do we want the statement published as a reader's letter?
>
> If so do we want to amend it now the conference has taken place and in the
> light of the event report and other letter as Jon suggests? Note that a
> 'reply 'would also be published.
>
> Would want to offer and alternative event report? Partly because it is
> inaccurate or at least I have read a rather different report by Jemma, and
> partly because it is yet another case of the Society offering a platform for
> Zucker's voice and not really an event report.
>
> Do we have a position on Phil Mollon's letter and if so would we want to
> weave that in to a revision?
>
> Do we want to ask for space for a longer article in The Psychologist also?
>
> When a consensus on the above is reached or evident I am willing to reply on
> behalf of the List collectively if that is the wish of the List or we can
> agree another way to proceed
>
> David
>
> ----- Forwarded Message ----
> From: Jon Sutton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: David Fryer <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tue, 7 December, 2010 23:14:35
> Subject: Re: Your letter on Zucker
>
> Hi David,
> Yes, that’s fine, on the understanding that both letter and report are
> confidential to the list members until publication.
> Cheers
> Jon
>
> On 07/12/2010 12:07, "David Fryer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Jon,
> Thanks for the request for clarification, further information and
> opportunity for revision. I sent the message but it was produced
> collectively by the UK Community Psychology Discussion List members. I will
> liaise with the other members before answering your question by circulating
> your email and report. Is it OK to also circulate Phil Mallon's letter when
> I do so ? that would be useful. I am assuming it would be OK as obviously
> Phil's letter is meant for public circulation but wanted to check with you
> first
> David
> ________________________________
> From: Jon Sutton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: David Fryer <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tue, 7 December, 2010 22:27:04
> Subject: Your letter on Zucker
>
> Dear Dr Fryer,
> Your statement of concern was copied to me. Can I ask whether you intended
> it for publication in The Psychologist, and if so whether you would like to
> take the opportunity to amend it in light of the event itself, and our
> audience? You might also find our report of the event, due out in the Jan
> issue, helpful. I have also copied a letter in response to the letter on
> p.952 of the December issue: this is also set for Jan.
> Any resubmission or revision would be considered for our February issue now.
> This would hopefully allow time for a suitable response.
> Best wishes
> Dr Jon Sutton
> Editor
>
> Event report:
> The distant chants of a small but noisy protest could be heard throughout
> Ken Zucker’s (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto) keynote on
> Gender Identity Disorder (GID) in children and adolescents. According to an
> introduction from DCP chair Jenny Taylor, several BPS groups, including the
> Psychology of Women and the Psychology of Sexualities sections, had called
> for Zucker’s invite to be rescinded on the basis that children’s gender
> confusion shouldn’t be pathologised and amidst allegations that Zucker had
> practised ‘reparative’ therapy for homosexuality. Zucker denied this – ‘it’s
> an urban myth,’ he said – and also denied that his clinic had ever had the
> goal of reducing homosexual outcomes in children.
>
> Zucker described the diagnosis of GID and gave several examples of children
> who fulfill the criteria, including one girl who pleaded with her parents to
> be given a penis for her sixth birthday. The key criteria are a strong and
> persistent cross-gender identity, dressing in opposite-gender clothing,
> disliking of one’s sexual anatomy, and verbalising the wish to change
> genders. Zucker, who is chair of the American Psychiatric Association’s
> DSM-5 work group for Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders, said that the
> current proposal was to change the name to ‘Gender Incongruence’ and to drop
> the word ‘Disorder’ in the hope of reducing stigma. The explicit desire to
> change gender was also going to be made a compulsory criterion for
> diagnosis.
>
> Regarding developmental trajectories, there appear to be two pathways. Most
> young children diagnosed with GID lose their ‘gender dysphoria’ with time.
> By contrast, the feeling of being the wrong gender persists in 75 per cent
> of adolescents, only subsiding with the help of surgery or hormone
> treatment. As for links with homosexuality (another issue raised by
> protestors), the majority of boys diagnosed with GID grow up to be
> homosexual adults, Zucker said, but only a minority of girls with a
> diagnosis of DID develop into adult lesbians.
>
> Letter:
> In her letter to the Psychologist (December 2010), Sylvia Kapp, on behalf of
> the DCP Faculty of HIV and Sexual Health states: “The Faculty believes that
> healthcare professionals who attempt to change sexual orientation may be
> committing human rights violations”. The implication seems to be that some
> practitioners may set out with an intention of somehow ‘changing’ a person’s
> sexual orientation – perhaps a bit like the behavioural aversion therapists
> of the 1960s and early 70s. I doubt there are many of those around these
> days. However, is it considered unethical to assist a person in exploring
> their thoughts and feelings? Sometimes people are uncertain of their sexual
> orientation. It can happen that a young person may conclude, in the course
> of therapy, that his or her sexual orientation has a less fixed and rigid
> quality than they may previously have thought, and may choose to explore
> other aspects and forms of sexual expression. Of course, stigmatisation of
> homosexuality can give rise to deep distress. On the other hand it is often
> our human attachment to rigid identities - all ultimately illusory, false,
> and culturally shaped – that can create psychological prisons that cause
> misery. Regarding the Bartlett study quoted by Kapp, it would be easy to
> draw a misleading inference that if a psychotherapist or counsellor were to
> say he or she had ‘helped’ a lesbian, gay, or bisexual person reduce their
> sexual feelings, this must mean it was the therapist’s intention to do so,
> rather than it being simply one outcome of the client’s self-exploration.
> Sexuality is perhaps more fluid and multifaceted, and identity less fixed,
> than Kapp’s letter (paradoxically) implies. I suggest we need to respect
> developmental autonomy and the evolution of the unknown self – core values,
> it seems to me, that can help to provide a protected psychotherapeutic space
> for reflection on the deeply personal mystery of sexuality.
>
> Phil Mollon
> Psychoanalyst
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The British Psychological Society
>
> This email is intended for the addressee only. It may contain confidential
> information: disclosure of or action in reliance upon this information by
> anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please notify us by return email and delete the message.
>
> Any views are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of
> the Society, which accepts no liability for the consequences of any actions
> taken on the basis of this information unless confirmed in writing by a
> Society Manager.
>
> We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by viruses: you are
> advised to conduct your own checks on any attachments. When emailing us, be
> aware that email is not a 100 percent secure medium.
>
> The British Psychological Society is a charity registered in England and
> Wales, Registration Number : 229642 and a charity registered in Scotland,
> Registration Number : SC039452 - VAT Registration Number : 240 3937 76
>
> www.bps.org.uk
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Scanned for viruses and unwanted content by emailsystems
>
> If you believe this email is spam, please forward via email to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Information regarding this service can be found at
> www.emailsystems.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The British Psychological Society
>
> This email is intended for the addressee only. It may contain confidential
> information: disclosure of or action in reliance upon this information by
> anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please notify us by return email and delete the message.
>
> Any views are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of
> the Society, which accepts no liability for the consequences of any actions
> taken on the basis of this information unless confirmed in writing by a
> Society Manager.
>
> We accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by viruses: you are
> advised to conduct your own checks on any attachments. When emailing us, be
> aware that email is not a 100 percent secure medium.
>
> The British Psychological Society is a charity registered in England and
> Wales, Registration Number : 229642 and a charity registered in Scotland,
> Registration Number : SC039452 - VAT Registration Number : 240 3937 76
>
> www.bps.org.uk
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ___________________________________ The Community Psychology List has a new
> website/blog at: http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/ There is a threaded
> discussion forum:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi There is a
> twitter feed: http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK To post on the website blog,
> forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below.
> David Fryer ([log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>) or
> Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>) To
> unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit
> the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
>
> ___________________________________
> The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/
> There is a threaded discussion forum:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi
> There is a twitter feed:
> http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK
> To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David
> at the email addresses below.
> David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey
> ([log in to unmask])
> To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list,
> visit the website:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
>
> ___________________________________
> The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/
> There is a threaded discussion forum:
> http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi
> There is a twitter feed:
> http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK
> To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below.
> David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask])
> To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
___________________________________ The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at: http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/ There is a threaded discussion forum: http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi There is a twitter feed: http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below. David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask]) To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
'Zoos are full, prisons are overflowing... my, how the world still dearly loves a cage.' -Maude
٠•●♥Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ♥●•٠·˙