The site makes it very easy to click through to the proof. For example, here’s kristoff at the eunuch archives claiming that he and two other members presented at a WPATH conference:
Identity development. Eunuchs then and now. Organizer and Chair: Thomas W. Johnson. OAK AMPHITHEATRE
Eunuchs: Seeking voluntary castration. Richard J. Wassersug, PhD.
Eunuchs: Personality and sexuality. Thomas W. Johnson, PhD.
Eunuchs: Body integrity identity disorder and castration. Krister Willette, PhD.
Eunuchs: An historical perspective. Shaun Tougher, PhD.
Case study of a transition from “male to not-male” or “male to eunuch” (MtE). Randall D. Ehrbar, PsyD.
I don’t have any reason to doubt the rest of reduxx’s work in tying down the three usernames mentioned above to which of those 5 people presented, but here’s part of it if you’d like to look into this further:
But according to posts made to the forum in March and April, Johnson let his identity slip and invited site members to partake in an academic survey on “childhood experiences, castration desire and sexual history,” as well as watch him give a talk at CSUC via Zoom.
To me, the more important thing isn’t exact identities, but the fact that WPATH consulted with multiple child castration fetishists. That’s horrendous, and taints the entire organization’s work. As I said in another comment, this is the sort of thing that can turn back the clock on trans rights. Your average person will hear about this and think “trans = pedos”. WPATH badly needs to clean house.
Your 1st link is a forum. It doesn’t clearly tie the professors to being the owners of those accounts. Who’s to say someone isn’t masquerading as them on that forum. Has the associated email address and IP addresses of those accounts been tied to the professors?
You might find it weird, but experts in their fields often conduct speeches on their area of expertise.
“Clean house”… have they been charged with anything? Show me definitive proof those professors own/control those accounts and I would agree they need to go. Otherwise its just conjecture.
A second, but larger, online survey that Wassersug and Johnson (2007) posted
So we have the user kristoff claiming widely on eunuch.org that he is Krister H. Willette, and we have Krister H. Willette publishing research that shows intimate, active knowledge of eunuch.org along with his co-authors. To doubt that the user kristoff is Krister H. Willette, you would have to believe that Krister H. Willette had his identity stolen by the user kristoff, had knowledge of this for decades, and has done nothing about it. It is far more believable that they are the same person.
You might find it weird, but experts in their fields often conduct speeches on their area of expertise.
Are you talking about Johnson’s talk at CSUC? If so, it’s not about the talk itself, it’s that by mentioning the talk, the user revealed that he is Thomas W. Johnson, as the reduxx article points out. To doubt this, you again have to believe that the academic is intimately familiar with eunuch.org, sees someone widely claiming to be him, and does nothing about it. That’s not a rational position to take.
have they been charged with anything
This is revolting behavior, but likely not illegal. IANAL, but AFAIK sexual stories involving children generally aren’t considered illegal in the US. That’s not the right question to be asking though. Do you think WPATH should be welcoming pedophiles into its ranks, even if they “keep it legal”? I, and most other people, would say “hell no”.
EDIT: You made me go and create an account. If you doubt any of this, just go and look for yourself, he’s not trying to hide it. He repeatedly signs his messages as “krister”, has access to the PO Box mentioned above, and has inside knowledge of WPATH happenings.
Here’s another link where “Jesus” claims to be Thomas W. Johnson:
If you have any questions about the survey and its use or purposes, feel free to contact Prof. Thomas W. Johnson ([email protected]). I will be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
I do like socks, but I’m no puppet. I’m interested in discussion about this article because it looks legitimate, which is horrifying. If you’re able to disprove the claims, that would be a relief.
This is the sort of useful conversation I was looking to have. I think we’re in agreement. In another comment, I wrote this:
WPATH should clean house and purge all pedophiles, retract SOC 8, publish an apology, and write a new version that doesn’t have input from known pedophiles.
Which might not be how you would phrase it, but largely agrees with:
If that’s the case then I think most sane people would agree they should not consult with them anymore, and revisit any influence they might have had on policy.
deleted by creator
Reduxx is a known anti-trans website. I didn’t see proof that the professors named were the ones who controlled the aliases.
The site makes it very easy to click through to the proof. For example, here’s kristoff at the eunuch archives claiming that he and two other members presented at a WPATH conference:
You’re welcome. The WPATH conference has been interesting. Jesus, eunuchunique, and I all presented papers at the conference this AM. More later.
Looking at the symposium guide from WPATH, you can see the people that presented:
I don’t have any reason to doubt the rest of reduxx’s work in tying down the three usernames mentioned above to which of those 5 people presented, but here’s part of it if you’d like to look into this further:
To me, the more important thing isn’t exact identities, but the fact that WPATH consulted with multiple child castration fetishists. That’s horrendous, and taints the entire organization’s work. As I said in another comment, this is the sort of thing that can turn back the clock on trans rights. Your average person will hear about this and think “trans = pedos”. WPATH badly needs to clean house.
Your 1st link is a forum. It doesn’t clearly tie the professors to being the owners of those accounts. Who’s to say someone isn’t masquerading as them on that forum. Has the associated email address and IP addresses of those accounts been tied to the professors?
You might find it weird, but experts in their fields often conduct speeches on their area of expertise.
“Clean house”… have they been charged with anything? Show me definitive proof those professors own/control those accounts and I would agree they need to go. Otherwise its just conjecture.
A second click will bring you here:
https://reduxx.info/top-trans-medical-association-collaborated-with-castration-child-abuse-fetishists/
You should really read it, it has a lot of details. In particular, it links to this page:
https://archive.ph/Ea36u
Where the user kristoff solicits donations and types this:
You can go here to search for the file number
699082500046to find Wyrm Wyvern, Inc., with this info:Who is one of the academics named in the reduxx exposé, and who has published research directly referencing the Eunuch Archives. A quote from that article shows that these academics are actively involved in the community:
So we have the user kristoff claiming widely on eunuch.org that he is Krister H. Willette, and we have Krister H. Willette publishing research that shows intimate, active knowledge of eunuch.org along with his co-authors. To doubt that the user kristoff is Krister H. Willette, you would have to believe that Krister H. Willette had his identity stolen by the user kristoff, had knowledge of this for decades, and has done nothing about it. It is far more believable that they are the same person.
Are you talking about Johnson’s talk at CSUC? If so, it’s not about the talk itself, it’s that by mentioning the talk, the user revealed that he is Thomas W. Johnson, as the reduxx article points out. To doubt this, you again have to believe that the academic is intimately familiar with eunuch.org, sees someone widely claiming to be him, and does nothing about it. That’s not a rational position to take.
This is revolting behavior, but likely not illegal. IANAL, but AFAIK sexual stories involving children generally aren’t considered illegal in the US. That’s not the right question to be asking though. Do you think WPATH should be welcoming pedophiles into its ranks, even if they “keep it legal”? I, and most other people, would say “hell no”.
EDIT: You made me go and create an account. If you doubt any of this, just go and look for yourself, he’s not trying to hide it. He repeatedly signs his messages as “krister”, has access to the PO Box mentioned above, and has inside knowledge of WPATH happenings.
Here’s another link where “Jesus” claims to be Thomas W. Johnson:
https://archive.ph/O48mL#selection-725.0-729.64
An article posted by a sock puppet.
I do like socks, but I’m no puppet. I’m interested in discussion about this article because it looks legitimate, which is horrifying. If you’re able to disprove the claims, that would be a relief.
deleted by creator
How about this? “WPATH removed lower age limits in SOC8 while consulting with child castration fetishists”
deleted by creator
This is the sort of useful conversation I was looking to have. I think we’re in agreement. In another comment, I wrote this:
Which might not be how you would phrase it, but largely agrees with: