It’s all BS and it’s insane that we need to even explain that, but you did it here so well.
“A 70-pound anorexic who “feels like” she is obese does not have “weight dysphoria.” She is suffering from mental illness, and nobody would give her liposuction to affirm her delusions. Likewise, males do not need hormones, surgery, or birth certificate changes to affirm their delusions, whatever fuels them.”
2) I disliked transsexual from the moment I heard it as a child - it is almost painful mentally because it’s a class of words or ideas that have no truth value. There is no transit between sexes. Transanimate, a staple of science fiction, would be similar. You can’t transfer life between two entities. It makes it hard to manage cognitively.
3) the correct “medical” phrase would be “dolosexual” (sexual deceiver) or “antisexual/contrasexual” as in “against the grain”. A particular favorite is “larvasexual” or “person who masks their sex”. Another great one is “pseudosexual” or one who lies or falsifies sex.
4) I completely agree on gender. I’ve thought carefully about it structurally and boiled down some notes, I hope it might have value for your formidable rhetorical arsenal.
Society continually evolves mechanisms for men to induce women to submit to them sexually.
The gender system has gradually evolved into a way to deceive women into having sex with men.
It does to by intentionally using social tolerance to evade defenses.
It grooms people to accept as a fact the falsehood that a man can be female.
This grooming includes punishment with ostracism or violence for disagreement.
The system activates as a man imitating a female confronts a woman, demanding consent to the fiction.
Grooming and cognitive dissonance confuses and distracts her instinctive responses.
Either her protest or acceptance are responses which can bring him sexual pleasure.
She has responded to him sexually without full awareness or consent.
This conjecture may explain every single behavior you inventoried.
I don’t entirely agree that it is delusional, it’s simply a version of sexual predation similar to flashing.
The idea has metasticised so far that it needs a strong corrective to evolve soon.
I would agree with you that the sexual aspect applies to "some" men, but almost certainly not all, at least not as the sole motivation. Ritchie Tulip, a male detransitioner, recently wrote an interesting Substack post that addressed this. He wrote that his cross-dressing began in preschool, before anyone does anything for purely sexual motives, and before anyone is capable of truly predatory sexual behavior. As time went on, he says it began to merge with some sexual stuff he got into online as a teen. But, he writes that while there were aspects of transition that apprealed to him sexually, that was not the primary motive, nor was it on his mind in public. He may be a bit different than many TIMs in that he had full surgical transition procedures, meaning his sex drive would have been affected much more severely and totally than men who take hormones only, or those who don't medicalize at all. Still, though, while I have no personal experience in the area, my feeling is that few humans are really that one-dimensional in their motivations or interactions. Some probably are, I don't really know. But most people are more complex than this in their motivation for just about anything. Not to mention that pretty much every adult is motivated far more by instinctual desires that may be unconscious, including but not limited to sex, than we'd like to admit. We are complex creatures. Yet, we are not solely driven by evolutionary instinct. Usually.
Anyway, I have a thought about the language thing. I do like some of the alternatives presented in this comment-i think I like pseudosexual best. But, to me, having spent decades immersed in the health care field and listening to and using health care language, "trans" means "across" . Not "change" or "become the opposite" but rather it refers more to the space or the path between the two, at least in my head. So, to me, "transsexual" or "transgender" has always kind of implied that they're sort of straddling the in-between. Which I think is somewhat accurate. They're kind of trying to occupy the between-space, at least if they medicalize.
A tiny quibble about your OP, Kat, and it is just my opinion. But, I'm older than the trans craze by a decent number of years. And, my whole life, I've heard "gender" applied to humans, at least colloquially. It's just that before trans took off, it was used mostly as interchangeable with "sex" in casual conversation-meaning, conversations that weren't had between biologists, say, and weren't specifically referring to the physiological characteristics only (although some people actually have used it that way too for as long as I can remember). So, for example, someone might casually suggest "maybe we should split the class by gender for this activity" and it would have just meant boys over here, girls over there. So, while you are probably technically correct, and the APA report was likely concerned with highly technical usage as well, in everyday conversation, at least in all the places I've lived in my lifetime, many if not most people tended to use it often to apply to humans, and without any real distinction between "gender" and "sex". I say this simply because languages do evolve over time, often with the "official" or dictionary definitions lagging behind the casual meaning in everyday conversation. That's not unique to the trans movement. What IS unique, in my estimation, is the insistance that humans can morph into the opposite sex (or gender or whatever you want to call it). Like you mentioned with transanimates, THAT is the part that really does it for me. Because the meaning of some words can vary widely over time and even between regions. But human capability doesn't vary THAT widely. Everyone knows that humans can't just change sex. Thus, the cognitive dissonance. Especially for children who still think very literally.
The literal basis of the “trans” bullshit is that sex and gender are totally different.
That is what Judith Butler has been saying for decades, not to mention the other idiot “gender” scholars.
Now you’re telling me that they’re interchangeable?
What is “gender affirming” care? It affirms “sex”? How? What is a “gender” identity? What is “gender” dysphoria? Why do these terms exist if gender and sex are the same now?
Then why use the word “gender” at all? Just say sex. There’s two.
Please tell Judith Butler that. They’ve apparently been telling lies for the past 40 years.
Gender is a linguistics term. John Money started this to cause confusion. He’s responsible for “gender roles” bullshit. Guess what, it worked.
I actually agree with you on the linguistics thing because these two terms used to be interchangeable - sex and gender. You would see "gender" on forms followed by the blank or checkbox with a M and an F. From memory, (I'm 60), I would say that most forms used "gender" rather than "sex" except for medical records and school records (but obviously not anymore). My understanding of the use of the word "gender" to replace "sex" in conversation was because of "sex" having different meanings, like many words do, as a verb or as a noun, and *sex* being a taboo term for casual conversation (back in the day, lol, but alas, no more). Wikipedia gives the explanation that I, as a mere layperson, am referring to: "Though sex and gender have been used interchangeably at least as early as the fourteenth century, this usage was not common by the late 1900s.[15] ... [blah blah blah ... John Money ... blah blah blah ...]. Before the work of Bentley, Money and Stoller, the word gender was only regularly used to refer to grammatical categories.[21][22][23]". I'm not defending "trans" as being authentic, because I am totally with the gender-critical crowd in my belief that it doesn't exist and is a made-up thing. However, I think there is a gentler way of saying it, and this is important for parents like me in trying to have effective communications with their TID (adult or minor) children to avoid offending them and shutting them out/down, but also with those (on the left?) who have jumped right onto the trans-rainbow wagon. I understand your point is in the larger vernacular and I agree that now is the time to go hard in dismantling this whole trans fantasy. But our conversations at times must be nuanced. My kid was always one of those "softy" boys and that is not likely to change, hence my call for "gentleness" and "nuance". I don't think eliminating the word from the English language entirely is all that appropriate, lol. But we do need governing bodies to clarify the meaning of "gender" and how it will be used. I do not agree that legal terminology needs to exchange the word "sex" for the word "gender" or that laws and policies even need to include the word "gender" or offer special protections for anybody identifying as trans or anything else on the rainbow spectrum. I feel that, on the most basic level, that shit is none of anyone's business. Just go do your thing, be queer, do your fetishy or LGBTQIA+xyz... stuff, or whatever, but I don't feel that anybody choosing an alternate "gender identity" deserves or needs to be defined as a protected class as far as law and policy are concerned. (I'm terfy like that). I am on the same side as Riley Gaines and even Caitlin Jenner (I hate that I'm using that name, I grew up with Bruce Jenner and he WAS a hero). I'm also terfy enough to also believe that this trans movement is primarily male-led and is, in essence, female erasure, whether you're talking mtf's or ftm's. It is just a lifestyle choice since they have now made it clear that "sex and gender are completely different concepts". The idea that it is immutable is completely bonkers (go, Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Alito, in his recent commentary on the Skrmetti case!) There is hope for us yet.
So, I do have to disagree with you on your application of predatory behavior here. While it may be true that for some men, being called "she" or "Sue" or whatever is sexually thrilling, most all of us have provided dozens of sexual thrills (probably far more than dozens) to others without full knowledge or consent. I've struggled with examples like yours since first hearing them, because nearly all adult humans become sexually aroused at least a little bit when they see or here others in certain situations. For many men, the teenager strutting around the beach in a tiny bikini is a thrill, while she may not even know he exists. Or, that pair of jeans that you think are flattering on you, probably are, and there are probably plenty of people who see your butt in those as you walk away and moan in their heads. For some, certain voices are sexually arousing. For others it's leather. Or large breasts, or large biceps. I have a feeling, admittedly unproven, that most anyone who has ever worked out in public has aroused others at some point, without knowing it or consenting. It's just kind of the way we work as a species. People are sexually attracted to each other, as well as to a wide variety of different characteristics or words or situations or whatever. I don't think TIMs, even those who are doing it for the sexual charge of being seen in public in a dress, are unique that way. Nor do I think it is practical to insist that a person becoming sexually aroused by another, in public, without the other necessarily knowing, can accurately be described as predation. Predation, to me, requires violating the other person somehow. And if the other person is fully alert and conscious and is not aware that the TIM is sexually aroused, that to me may be gross to think about but just doesn't rise to the level of predation. If it does, then ANYONE who has thought to themselves "mmmm, look at that [fill-in-the-blank]" as another person crosses the street a block away is ALSO a predator. And I think that would define most any adult except for those who have some sort of sexual dysfunction.
The predatory aspect to me is wanting to elicit the protest response. All trans I knew before the 90’s were intent on “realness” and being recognized as not female was a failure of the coping mechanism.
In Thomas Wolf’s “Bonfire of the Vanities” there was a moment where characters wore fur, and the point was to see who would get the most violent reaction from the anti-fur brigade. That is what was in my mind.
Far from passing as a woman, there’s a streak of sadomasochism in recent versions of trans where there is a demand for compliance… or else - “I dare you to call me a man.”
And to be clear, the sadomasochism is only targeted at women. These men don’t give a shit about being recognized as women by men. They certainly don’t any to have sex with them!
I’ve been to many (!) private male parties where fetish wearers show up in god know what, but in that context the sexual gratification of the performance is assumed - that’s what certain kind of fetish events are for. We’re all there to let others enjoy getting their freak on.
The problem is where the “get the freak on” is about shocking and intimidating people who didn’t consent to the event. The gratification is precisely in the discomfort produced, the masochism is in the intentionally eliciting “you’re a fucking trannie man” abuse. Then the sadism is in the righteous punishment of any woman not complying with demands to participate in the sex fantasy verbally (call me “Susan” he whispered menacingly, my pronoun is “She”) personally (I’m going to watch you undress in the gym whether or not you want), and socially ( if you don’t cooperate with Susan you will abused publicly ).
If someone appeared in outrageous blackface in public for the purpose of being abused, and in turn became verbally abusive and violent being called out for being offensive, nobody would think twice. Looney bin.
But turning out in minstrel-like trans getup gets a pass. I’ve been around a lot of unusual sexual behaviors - but this is the only one which doesn’t get a “I’m sorry you must leave”. Walk into a restaurant in full constraint bondage, or furry fetish, or slave-collar and leash, or soaked in piss with rubber waders, or bleeding from a flayed back, or covered in motor oil (or worse), or full SS uniform, or in handcuffs, or blindfolded or wrapped in Saran Wrap or you-name it. Out the door. Trans hooker?
Totally ok? You’ve been groomed.
Old trans was about self-deception. New trans is foisting sadomasochistic confrontations, and grooming people to believe that it is acceptable progressive thought to let it pass.
And it’s only on women.
Men absolutely don’t give a shit. To them it’s some rando guy who they don’t think about for 1 second, and call bullshit instantly.
NAILED IT!!! (on your two last thoughts mostly). This 100% thank you! (I always read all the comments before commenting lol). And I also feel I've been groomed to some degree! We have been desensitized to a degree (not only by the school indoctrination and govt/corporate DEI policies, but) by grown men prancing around town in nothing but a thong and a rainbow feather boa (oh yeah, and over-the knee stack/platform boots, and probably some gaudy make up and false eyelashes, "hookerwear" lol - reference PrideFest, June 2022, Indianapolis, IN (of all places) - unfortunately for us, we were there for cancer treatment during the fever pitch craziness (me and my TID mtf son - he is still non-presenting and non-medicalized, but has a new "girlfriend"...) and these rainbow clad people were flooding the streets - we were stuck in traffic and surrounded by them (it was hard not to gawk); it was completely shocking to me at the time, but now it is almost expected (and for sure encouraged in many places, whataworld, whataworld, whataworld...).
Notice how the focus is on MtoF trans only. Not a word about women who think they're men, which is a far larger cohort in this discussion, especially among adolescents. This seems like just more psuedofeminist claptrap, which is a main reason we got to this insanity in the first place.
What is it the Trans activists cry when faced with facts? “We exist, we have always existed, and you are promoting genocide” Yes. Mental illness has always existed and what we promote is reality, and compassionate care and understanding for the mentally unwell.
Actually addressing the problem, whatever it is, takes work, focus usually on childhood trauma, ending porn addictions, focusing on diet and exercise, etc. It's not lucrative or quick, which is why doctors don't want to do it.
Giving mentally unstable people hormones, surgery, etc., and acting like they're heroes because it's a civil rights movement, is quick, hugely profitable, and social status boosting.
That is why the medical industry pushes this. And anyone who stands against it is attacked. But just give it time--they didn't address opioids until it got truly bad either.
It’s about money, but it’s also about hard work. As a clinician of 25+ years, I can say without any hesitation that working with gender questioning youth to get to the deeper issues is the hardest work I’ve ever been called to do. Most graduate programs are not preparing clinicians to take on such complex and challenging cases, and it’s just so much easier to turf someone over to the gender clinic for blockers, hormones, surgeries, especially since that’s what the APA and other professional governing bodies are saying to do.
Interesting article. Generally I agree with your premise that the trans histeria that has gripped western cultures is fraudulent. Yet your article seems to be searching for an explanation of it’s origins and you seemed to have attributed it to the medical/pharmaceutical/psychology industries. You may be correct that there is a profit motive that has capitalized on this fad. Yet trans ideology has been around longer than pharmaceuticals or psychology industries could have profited from it. It has existed in SF for awhile as a cultural component, although it was limited. It also was never hoisted upon the public at large with such intensity. There seems to be a something else going on and as everyone is trying to pin the tail on the donkey, this tail is bound to be pinned all over the place. The medical profit sources are easy to eliminate. Medical liability for providers, age restrictions of >21 years old & no public funding of medical treatments. A larger issue is how could such a fringe ideology, that denies long standing truths, be hoisted upon societies around the world
One thing can have many causes. It doesn't have to be one cause.
This article was about doctors in particular, specifically with regard to the most recent DSM. The modern form of the "trans" nonsense is driven largely by the medical industry and its search for profits, as pushed by subversive billionaires. Jennifer Bilek has done a ton of research into that. Everyone should read her work. That's more recent, that's where the recent push has come from.
Add to that social media and internet pornography, which are significant issues, especially among the youth. But young people couldn't get hormones and surgeries if their doctors didn't say yes to it--hence Jennifer Bilek's work.
Add to that a media push in movies, TV shows, Netflix, books. I wrote a recent article on examples of that.
Add to that idiotic academia writing that has been going on for years, morons like Judith Butler who has been writing about "gender" for years. That seeps out into culture since what universities teach bleeds down into high schools, middle schools, elementary schools. Teachers in those places are indoctrinated in universities that teach "gender is a spectrum" and all that other bullshit.
Keep in mind male perversion has always existed, so it existed in places like SF in the 1960s or even before in Berlin in the 1930s with Magus Hirschfeld and his institute.
In a very tiny number of other third world cultures, men set strict rules about how males have to act. Then homosexual males fail them, so they create a pseudo "woman" category so gay men can act like they're a fake type of woman and preserve the sanctity of masculinity while still having gay sex somehow (like the fa'afafine in Samoa). It's cool though, they're women with dicks so it's still straight, bro!
But this has no relevance in today's modern society, so citing this is not a justification for giving males estrogen or letting men into girls' bathrooms. I can't stand it when tranny defenders cite this as a reason to allow doctors to mutilate children. It's bullshit, I'm just pointing it out to demonstrate how male behavior works and fuels this.
Lots of providers do this and will be held liable for what is now being uncovered, hence the lawsuits by Chloe Cole and Kayla Lovdahl. Those girls were 15 and 13 when they had their breasts removed, so there is no age restriction of over 21. That is simply false.
In terms of no public funding of treatment, that is simply false as well. Do you understand what's going on here?
Medical profit source is a major reason, so it cannot be eliminated. Please read more about this, specifically Jennifer Bilek's work.
I understand what is going on is horrible and agreeing with your point that this fraud will go away.
“Lots of providers do this and will be held liable for what is now being uncovered, hence the lawsuits by Chloe Cole and Kayla Lovdahl. Those girls were 15 and 13 when they had their breasts removed, so there is no age restriction of over 21. That is simply false.”
I know that there currently aren’t uniform age restrictions across all states. I brought it up in the 3 points of age restrictions, medical liability & lack of public funding as suggested trifecta that will eliminate this wide spread medical malpractice. If public insures won’t pay for these procedures then private insurers will also drop them, unless they’re legally mandated to pay for them.
I will read the article you posted, thank you for the recommendation
Lawsuits is what will end this, eventually. They're already starting.
Legislatures won't because the laws can get vetoed by governors (including Republicans) who are controlled by the same money and people who push it. That's happened several times already.
Public healthcare covers this. This is publicly covered in Massachusetts, for example.
When lawsuits start, both APAs have to change what doctors do and the DSM has to change. When doctors say no, this will end. That's essentially what will stop this, when they figure out they will lose money rather than make money. People ask for stupid things from doctors all the time, and doctors can say no all the time. They say no if people can't pay.
I’m far from an expert on the this topic. I’m also vague with the fa’afafine in Samoa & may be getting it confused with Tongans. Are fa’afafine also part of the culture when a family doesn’t have a female child the youngest boy basically takes on the role of a women in dress, mannerisms, taking care of his parents, ect?
It's actually pretty recent, and it's a bunch of BS. It's usually younger males in a family, and it's not always if they don't have a sister. It's a way to avoid homosexuality, mostly, as in Iran. Samoans are not Shia Muslim though, obviously.
If you want to learn about the medical industry, read Jennifer Bilek's work. She covers Martin Rothblatt, the Pritzker family, Stryker, Marc Benioff, etc. Their money is a huge reason this is proliferating.
I’ll check those articles too. Russians, Egyptians, Iranians, & most traditional cultures have illogical belief systems around homosexuality. About 15 years back an Egyptian man was convicted of homosexuality and punished with a jail sentence where he was serially raped by a large number of men. The story was so bizarre that it doesn’t even make sense from a western perspective. The punishment for homosexuality being setting up non-consenting homosexual acts 🤷🏽♂️ Homosexual rape is also common in Russia’s military & the person being raped is considered homosexual not the male soldiers raping new enlistees. Therefore the people perpetuating homosexual acts are not burdened by the stygma of being homosexual. It’s almost completely the opposite of how Americans would think of it. Iran is full of contradictions too
We should put "I feel like a woman" in the same category as "I have a personal relationship with Jesus" or "I prayed to God and he said...". People get mad when I call the latter two a delusion, but it obviously is the same thing - a perhaps sincere but etiologically incorrect introspective state. And both should be treated the same legally - you can believe what you like, you can "live" those beliefs so long as you don't think those beliefs are good enough to base public policy on or require us to treat them differently from any other empirical claim with regard to demanding evidence.
The analogy to religion is not correct, and I'll explain why.
First, I'm an atheist. I'm not religious in any way, and I would never defend religion. All religions are false, though they're not all damaging in the exact same way.
The delusion of "trans" is not the same as religion because it is possible for someone to convert to Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Mormonism, Islam, etc. Someone can become a Christian--it is provable and possible. For example, if someone joins the Catholic Church, there is a baptism, First Communion, Confirmation, etc. Someone can prove their membership. If someone becomes a Muslim, there is a shahada, paying the zakat, fasting, doing pilgrimage.
There are certain criteria to prove that one has joined a faith and is a member. I'm not saying you can read their minds or what the faiths teaching are true. I'm saying it is possible to convert and join a religion.
Therefore, in the US and most civilized countries, religious belief and freedom are constitutionally protected. The First Amendment protects that here. The government cannot say that it's illegal to be an Episcopalian or Presbyterian or whatever. It's declared in law, for a specific reason. I know other countries are different (churches are illegal in Saudi Arabia for example).
When a man gets the stupid idea in his head that he is a woman, he is chasing a lie. He cannot become a woman the way he can become a Muslim or Mormon. It's literally impossible.
Furthermore, this is not protected by law because the law does not protect mental delusions the way it protects religious freedom. It just doesn't.
Nobody would say that a 70-pound anorexic who "feels fat" has the right to get liposuction or force others to call her fat, or that is the same as a religious right. Nobody would say a schizophrenic has the right to force everyone to call him Napoleon, and that's the same as a religious belief.
"Trans" is mental illness. This is a medical scandal. It's not the same as religion and religious freedom.
I do see some parallels in that these mentally ill people have tried to turn themselves into a religion ("trans people are sacred!") or their mutilation into a ritual, as when the woman literally injected herself with testosterone in front of the city council in Florida and called it a "ritual."
If she were to convert to Christianity, she can become Christian. Christian teachings aren't true, but one can be a Christian. That belief is protected under modern law.
She cannot be a man and will never be a man. That is impossible and based on mental illness. That is not protected by law, just like lobotomies are not protected by law. Nobody has the right to demand a lobotomy.
Religions exist. One can become a Christian or a Muslim or a Mormon. Freedom of religion is a basic democratic right.
No man can become a woman, or "feel like" he's a woman. That does not exist and that's objectively provable with a karyotype test. And there is no right to it.
How is a religious belief thst involves thinking you talk to Jesus not a delusional? Or maybe perhaps in both the case of religious beliefs and gender identity beliefs we are mistaking a symbolic belief for an empirical belief amd that while for some “fundamentalists” in both camps the belief is literal, for many others it's just symbolic. I grew up around evangelicals and the “personal relationship with Jesus” thing I heard constantly as a kid is the first thing I thought of when trying to understand what kind of belief the “I feel like a woman” thing is. Both think introspection are compelling ways of knowing ans mistake faith for facts and imagine a feeling can explain its own causes. I think we should treat gender identity beliefs precisely how we treat religious beliefs. Beliefs are protected, acting on a belief is protected, but making others believe isn't. And we don't make laws based on either kind of faith.
I didn't say religious people are NEVER delusional. They sometimes can be.
I said someone CAN become a Christian and that is a constitutionally protected belief.
Someone CANNOT become the opposite sex and that belief is not constitutionally protected.
Male rapists are being put in women's prisons due to this agenda. This isn't just about beliefs. This is a medical industry scandal, backed by billions of dollars, a media and culture agenda backed by very powerful institutions.
There is no such thing as "gender identity." You cannot protect something that does not exist. Religions exist. That is the difference.
The problem here is that you do not understand the arguments and you have no clue where this "gender" bullshit comes from. That's why you say such ridiculous things.
Having a personal relationship with Jesus is NOT like a man saying he's a woman. That is even stupid to say. Someone can become Christian. A man cannot become a woman--it's provable with a simple chromosome test. And when men say these things, it has knock-on effects in all areas of life, from sports to prisons to schools. This is not protected by law like religious freedom is.
Please educate yourself before you speak. Go read my other posts and read Jennifer Bilek's work. You lack basic understanding of what is going on.
My analogy isn’t to “being a Christian” (whatever that is - I am not sure who holds the copyright on that). It is the sort of metaphysical “intrspection as truth” beliefs used to explain their faith. “I feel like a woman” = “I pray to Jesus and he answers”. The latter is a delusion as is the former. But in both cases, I think you actually have a range of what a delusion entails in the real world. I think both for maximal New Atheists and the most literalist anti-woke, there needs to be more attention of knowing when a belief is merely symbolic and when it is literal and the line is really fuzzy at the margins. If a Christian said “I prayed about this and Jesus told me I should…” how is that not a delusion? You pay attention to a inner emotional state and think you have an explanation for it that involved metaphysics and magic, that is kind of a delusion. But I am not sure this is always a literal belief, although it sounds like it. If you read @Eliza Mondegreen and her research on trans reddit communities, the things people say often make you think that for many people with gender distress, they pretty intuitively feel the conflict between symbolic and literal beliefs, but, just like with religion, being surrounded by co-religionists that form a moral tribe harden the views into putting a force field around the literal beliefs. Anthropologist Scott Atran talks about religious beliefs not even having propositional content given the contradictions and inconcistencies that can’t be squared and I increasing see gender identity beliefs like this. The way to combat the craziness of gender identity ideology is to figure out a way to sever critique of gender identity nonsense from a broad spectrum of trad con panic culture because the clear alterior motives (anti-gay, pro-Jesus) to any effective political pushback to it makes the crucial center say to themselves “Yeah, there is something weird about this trans stuff, but the only people I see making noise about it are the people who clearly think gays are going to hell and think Jesus talks to him, so I guess this is what we are doing now”. I work in a liberal field and when I have conversations about this, you’d be surprised how often this is where we end up.
I often see, that this or that commeîntator, when mentioning the work of Dr. Anne Lawrence, appears bereft of a particularly relevant fact, being that Dr. Lawrence is a man, indeed, a trans-identified male, who has been one of the few researchers actually doing properly scientific study into the phenomenon of transsexualism, as well as suffering under that very same delusion himself. For this reason his name will never pass the lips of any "transgender rights activist," despite an extensive body of work that in any other field would secure recognition as a preeminent investigator within it, and the "lived experience" that presumably i grant Perhaps it is quotable passages like this one that stick in their craws?
"I propose that nonhomosexual (i.e., presumably autogynephilic) MtF transsexuals are probably at increased risk for the development of narcissistic disorders— significant disorders in the sense of self—as a consequence of the inevitable difficulties they face in having their cross-gender feelings and identities affirmed by others, both before and after gender transition. As a result, many autogynephilic transsexuals are likely to be particularly vulnerable to feelings of shame and may be predisposed to exhibit narcissistic rage in response to perceived insult or injury… I propose that narcissistic disorders in autogynephilic transsexuals are important and probably common phenomena, which deserve more extensive study than they have thus far received. I also suggest that clinicians and scholars should be aware of the susceptibility of autogynephilic transsexuals to narcissistic injury and should try to avoid inflicting such injury.
It is widely accepted that transsexualism represents a fundamental disorder in a person’s sense of self (Beitel, 1985; Hartmann, Becker, & Rueffer-Hesse, 1997), and this may be particularly true of nonhomosexual MtF transsexualism. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more dramatic example of a disturbed sense of self than for a person who has lived an outwardly successful life as a man to believe that he genuinely is, ought to be, or would be happier living as a woman."
Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism. Archives of Sexual Behavior (2008) 37:457–461 DOI 10.1007/s 10508-008-9325-1
I don't use the word "transexual" because it makes the implication that sex can be changed. "Trans" means to go from one side to the other ("transcontinental" or "transatlantic"). They're just men. Men in dresses, men in wigs, men who are delusional, men with perversions.
Nobody can go from male to female or vice versa. It has never happened, and even if someone passes, he's only an imitation. Nobody has ever turned fool's gold into gold. It's still fool's gold even if it tricks everyone.
None of this is real, and the answer to everything they ask for must be no.
There is only one thing to know about the gender ideology.It is all lies! There is not one iota of truth from the lie that anyone can be “ born in the wrong body” to the lie that trans”women “ are actually women, to the lie that men can breastfeed.The lies are backed up by changing the language ..crazy words like “ transphobia “ “ “ cisgender “, etc.The trans cult is an authoritarian religion trying to take over society . They are a dangerous lying cult! And yes, it’s insane!
While we are hopefully coming out of this nightmare, it seems prudent to review how we got here and spend some time in it. We are already seeing how quickly other horrendous “expert” policies are dismissed (Covid, BLM, anti police). How can we learn and guard against these self-interests?
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer.
Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned. However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as actual harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (especially women). Finally, others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
If "gender" is just stereotypes, why do men need to take estrogen? Why are they removing their testicles and inverting their penises and shaving down their Adam's apples?
"Gender" is a linguistic term for words only. Words have gender; humans do not.
If you mean stereotypes, say so. Much of the "trans" lie is rooted in men who hate women and build their "identity" on sexist stereotypes, fueled by porn addiction, autogynephilia, and general male perversion. We live in a society that coddles male stupidity at the expense of women's safety and reality. That's not complicated.
This is also fundamentally a medical industry scandal, so they make colossal profits from mutilating people biologically. That includes hormones, surgery, etc.
So, if "gender" and "transgender" were actually social (which I have been told many times), there would no need for biological manipulation.
None of that makes sense, and that's because this whole thing is a lie.
Transsexual are a natural variant of humans. They have been reported across time and the globe. Many cultures made space for them and allowed them to just be people. This type of rhetoric is toxic to women’s rights as it is easy to disprove and easy to point to when saying that women who want female only spaces are bigots. It is the flip side of the coin from those who scream TERF at every opinion that doesn’t conform to the cult. This all mixes together to allow male rapists to be sent to women’s prison. That is what I care about. Female only spaces and the right to gather as females to discuss being female without a forced male in the mix screaming it is discrimination to even think about something being not for them. Australia lost their right to a female only beach that had been so for 140 years. A Canadian infant rapist was not only put into a women’s prison but into a women’s prison with an infant ward. The stood outside leering at the mothers and infants. When a prisoner tried to stop them she was grabbed by the hair, thrown across the room and broke her ribs. The prisoner with the broken ribs was reprimanded for starting the confrontation by calling the pedophile a pedophile. The monster wasn’t moved to a men’s prison until after beating the crap out of a second prisoner. The victim- 3 month old baby boy, required reconstructive surgery.
Karen White, England. So violent that trans women were shocked that the prisoner system put them into a women’s prison. The prison system said, oh, whoops.
Men using the concept of trans women to get into female prisons and raping prisoners. Into shower rooms to show off their dicks.
Maybe talk about this. It is common ground between a real transsexual woman and a TERF. Neither want this bullshit to happen. The TRANSGENDER movement wants to silence this and doesn’t address it at all. Try telling one of them that women have been raped by trans women and those claiming to be one and you will get the stock response - the guards rape them anyway. Cis men rape women too. So, what’s a few more rapes?
Well let’s hope this doesn’t become a trend in psychiatry or those deluded by sky cults and messianic beliefs in unsubstantiated claims humans have risen from the dead may be next.
I'm an atheist, so I will not defend any religions or claim that anything they teach are true.
But one can become a Christian or Hindu or Mormon. One can convert and be a member of a religion, which do exist. Freedom of religion is a basic right in all civilized countries.
No man can become a woman. That does not exist because sex is binary and immutable.
Those who want to are suffering from something else which must be treated.
That's the difference. If you do not understand that, you will fail to understand anything.
Lol, oh really? And the industry that just handed out heroin to people in the form of Oxycontin, leading to hundreds of thousands of overdoses--they're smart enough?
The industry that used to do lobotomies? The industry that used to have doctors advertise cigarettes? The industry that has been sued multiple times for dozens of scandals that were nothing but profit-making schemes? The ones who are removing breasts from 13 year old girls and giving 11 year old boys estrogen--they're smart enough?
The people defending this, from Bruce Jenner to "Chase Strangio" are the smart ones?
Let me guess, you're the smart one? Okay.
Do the following:
1. Define what a man is
2. Define what a woman is
3. Explain how a man can "transition" to a woman and show evidence
It’s all BS and it’s insane that we need to even explain that, but you did it here so well.
“A 70-pound anorexic who “feels like” she is obese does not have “weight dysphoria.” She is suffering from mental illness, and nobody would give her liposuction to affirm her delusions. Likewise, males do not need hormones, surgery, or birth certificate changes to affirm their delusions, whatever fuels them.”
1) I love your writing, it’s so exuberant.
2) I disliked transsexual from the moment I heard it as a child - it is almost painful mentally because it’s a class of words or ideas that have no truth value. There is no transit between sexes. Transanimate, a staple of science fiction, would be similar. You can’t transfer life between two entities. It makes it hard to manage cognitively.
3) the correct “medical” phrase would be “dolosexual” (sexual deceiver) or “antisexual/contrasexual” as in “against the grain”. A particular favorite is “larvasexual” or “person who masks their sex”. Another great one is “pseudosexual” or one who lies or falsifies sex.
4) I completely agree on gender. I’ve thought carefully about it structurally and boiled down some notes, I hope it might have value for your formidable rhetorical arsenal.
Society continually evolves mechanisms for men to induce women to submit to them sexually.
The gender system has gradually evolved into a way to deceive women into having sex with men.
It does to by intentionally using social tolerance to evade defenses.
It grooms people to accept as a fact the falsehood that a man can be female.
This grooming includes punishment with ostracism or violence for disagreement.
The system activates as a man imitating a female confronts a woman, demanding consent to the fiction.
Grooming and cognitive dissonance confuses and distracts her instinctive responses.
Either her protest or acceptance are responses which can bring him sexual pleasure.
She has responded to him sexually without full awareness or consent.
This conjecture may explain every single behavior you inventoried.
I don’t entirely agree that it is delusional, it’s simply a version of sexual predation similar to flashing.
The idea has metasticised so far that it needs a strong corrective to evolve soon.
Thank you for reading my post!
You raise some interesting points. I think you're right that for at least some men this isn't about delusion as it's more about sexual predation.
I also like the term "pseudosexual" in regard to that it is fake. I never use "transexual" since you're right--there's no transition to be had.
I would agree with you that the sexual aspect applies to "some" men, but almost certainly not all, at least not as the sole motivation. Ritchie Tulip, a male detransitioner, recently wrote an interesting Substack post that addressed this. He wrote that his cross-dressing began in preschool, before anyone does anything for purely sexual motives, and before anyone is capable of truly predatory sexual behavior. As time went on, he says it began to merge with some sexual stuff he got into online as a teen. But, he writes that while there were aspects of transition that apprealed to him sexually, that was not the primary motive, nor was it on his mind in public. He may be a bit different than many TIMs in that he had full surgical transition procedures, meaning his sex drive would have been affected much more severely and totally than men who take hormones only, or those who don't medicalize at all. Still, though, while I have no personal experience in the area, my feeling is that few humans are really that one-dimensional in their motivations or interactions. Some probably are, I don't really know. But most people are more complex than this in their motivation for just about anything. Not to mention that pretty much every adult is motivated far more by instinctual desires that may be unconscious, including but not limited to sex, than we'd like to admit. We are complex creatures. Yet, we are not solely driven by evolutionary instinct. Usually.
Anyway, I have a thought about the language thing. I do like some of the alternatives presented in this comment-i think I like pseudosexual best. But, to me, having spent decades immersed in the health care field and listening to and using health care language, "trans" means "across" . Not "change" or "become the opposite" but rather it refers more to the space or the path between the two, at least in my head. So, to me, "transsexual" or "transgender" has always kind of implied that they're sort of straddling the in-between. Which I think is somewhat accurate. They're kind of trying to occupy the between-space, at least if they medicalize.
A tiny quibble about your OP, Kat, and it is just my opinion. But, I'm older than the trans craze by a decent number of years. And, my whole life, I've heard "gender" applied to humans, at least colloquially. It's just that before trans took off, it was used mostly as interchangeable with "sex" in casual conversation-meaning, conversations that weren't had between biologists, say, and weren't specifically referring to the physiological characteristics only (although some people actually have used it that way too for as long as I can remember). So, for example, someone might casually suggest "maybe we should split the class by gender for this activity" and it would have just meant boys over here, girls over there. So, while you are probably technically correct, and the APA report was likely concerned with highly technical usage as well, in everyday conversation, at least in all the places I've lived in my lifetime, many if not most people tended to use it often to apply to humans, and without any real distinction between "gender" and "sex". I say this simply because languages do evolve over time, often with the "official" or dictionary definitions lagging behind the casual meaning in everyday conversation. That's not unique to the trans movement. What IS unique, in my estimation, is the insistance that humans can morph into the opposite sex (or gender or whatever you want to call it). Like you mentioned with transanimates, THAT is the part that really does it for me. Because the meaning of some words can vary widely over time and even between regions. But human capability doesn't vary THAT widely. Everyone knows that humans can't just change sex. Thus, the cognitive dissonance. Especially for children who still think very literally.
The literal basis of the “trans” bullshit is that sex and gender are totally different.
That is what Judith Butler has been saying for decades, not to mention the other idiot “gender” scholars.
Now you’re telling me that they’re interchangeable?
What is “gender affirming” care? It affirms “sex”? How? What is a “gender” identity? What is “gender” dysphoria? Why do these terms exist if gender and sex are the same now?
Then why use the word “gender” at all? Just say sex. There’s two.
Please tell Judith Butler that. They’ve apparently been telling lies for the past 40 years.
Gender is a linguistics term. John Money started this to cause confusion. He’s responsible for “gender roles” bullshit. Guess what, it worked.
I actually agree with you on the linguistics thing because these two terms used to be interchangeable - sex and gender. You would see "gender" on forms followed by the blank or checkbox with a M and an F. From memory, (I'm 60), I would say that most forms used "gender" rather than "sex" except for medical records and school records (but obviously not anymore). My understanding of the use of the word "gender" to replace "sex" in conversation was because of "sex" having different meanings, like many words do, as a verb or as a noun, and *sex* being a taboo term for casual conversation (back in the day, lol, but alas, no more). Wikipedia gives the explanation that I, as a mere layperson, am referring to: "Though sex and gender have been used interchangeably at least as early as the fourteenth century, this usage was not common by the late 1900s.[15] ... [blah blah blah ... John Money ... blah blah blah ...]. Before the work of Bentley, Money and Stoller, the word gender was only regularly used to refer to grammatical categories.[21][22][23]". I'm not defending "trans" as being authentic, because I am totally with the gender-critical crowd in my belief that it doesn't exist and is a made-up thing. However, I think there is a gentler way of saying it, and this is important for parents like me in trying to have effective communications with their TID (adult or minor) children to avoid offending them and shutting them out/down, but also with those (on the left?) who have jumped right onto the trans-rainbow wagon. I understand your point is in the larger vernacular and I agree that now is the time to go hard in dismantling this whole trans fantasy. But our conversations at times must be nuanced. My kid was always one of those "softy" boys and that is not likely to change, hence my call for "gentleness" and "nuance". I don't think eliminating the word from the English language entirely is all that appropriate, lol. But we do need governing bodies to clarify the meaning of "gender" and how it will be used. I do not agree that legal terminology needs to exchange the word "sex" for the word "gender" or that laws and policies even need to include the word "gender" or offer special protections for anybody identifying as trans or anything else on the rainbow spectrum. I feel that, on the most basic level, that shit is none of anyone's business. Just go do your thing, be queer, do your fetishy or LGBTQIA+xyz... stuff, or whatever, but I don't feel that anybody choosing an alternate "gender identity" deserves or needs to be defined as a protected class as far as law and policy are concerned. (I'm terfy like that). I am on the same side as Riley Gaines and even Caitlin Jenner (I hate that I'm using that name, I grew up with Bruce Jenner and he WAS a hero). I'm also terfy enough to also believe that this trans movement is primarily male-led and is, in essence, female erasure, whether you're talking mtf's or ftm's. It is just a lifestyle choice since they have now made it clear that "sex and gender are completely different concepts". The idea that it is immutable is completely bonkers (go, Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Alito, in his recent commentary on the Skrmetti case!) There is hope for us yet.
So, I do have to disagree with you on your application of predatory behavior here. While it may be true that for some men, being called "she" or "Sue" or whatever is sexually thrilling, most all of us have provided dozens of sexual thrills (probably far more than dozens) to others without full knowledge or consent. I've struggled with examples like yours since first hearing them, because nearly all adult humans become sexually aroused at least a little bit when they see or here others in certain situations. For many men, the teenager strutting around the beach in a tiny bikini is a thrill, while she may not even know he exists. Or, that pair of jeans that you think are flattering on you, probably are, and there are probably plenty of people who see your butt in those as you walk away and moan in their heads. For some, certain voices are sexually arousing. For others it's leather. Or large breasts, or large biceps. I have a feeling, admittedly unproven, that most anyone who has ever worked out in public has aroused others at some point, without knowing it or consenting. It's just kind of the way we work as a species. People are sexually attracted to each other, as well as to a wide variety of different characteristics or words or situations or whatever. I don't think TIMs, even those who are doing it for the sexual charge of being seen in public in a dress, are unique that way. Nor do I think it is practical to insist that a person becoming sexually aroused by another, in public, without the other necessarily knowing, can accurately be described as predation. Predation, to me, requires violating the other person somehow. And if the other person is fully alert and conscious and is not aware that the TIM is sexually aroused, that to me may be gross to think about but just doesn't rise to the level of predation. If it does, then ANYONE who has thought to themselves "mmmm, look at that [fill-in-the-blank]" as another person crosses the street a block away is ALSO a predator. And I think that would define most any adult except for those who have some sort of sexual dysfunction.
The predatory aspect to me is wanting to elicit the protest response. All trans I knew before the 90’s were intent on “realness” and being recognized as not female was a failure of the coping mechanism.
In Thomas Wolf’s “Bonfire of the Vanities” there was a moment where characters wore fur, and the point was to see who would get the most violent reaction from the anti-fur brigade. That is what was in my mind.
Far from passing as a woman, there’s a streak of sadomasochism in recent versions of trans where there is a demand for compliance… or else - “I dare you to call me a man.”
And to be clear, the sadomasochism is only targeted at women. These men don’t give a shit about being recognized as women by men. They certainly don’t any to have sex with them!
I’ve been to many (!) private male parties where fetish wearers show up in god know what, but in that context the sexual gratification of the performance is assumed - that’s what certain kind of fetish events are for. We’re all there to let others enjoy getting their freak on.
The problem is where the “get the freak on” is about shocking and intimidating people who didn’t consent to the event. The gratification is precisely in the discomfort produced, the masochism is in the intentionally eliciting “you’re a fucking trannie man” abuse. Then the sadism is in the righteous punishment of any woman not complying with demands to participate in the sex fantasy verbally (call me “Susan” he whispered menacingly, my pronoun is “She”) personally (I’m going to watch you undress in the gym whether or not you want), and socially ( if you don’t cooperate with Susan you will abused publicly ).
If someone appeared in outrageous blackface in public for the purpose of being abused, and in turn became verbally abusive and violent being called out for being offensive, nobody would think twice. Looney bin.
But turning out in minstrel-like trans getup gets a pass. I’ve been around a lot of unusual sexual behaviors - but this is the only one which doesn’t get a “I’m sorry you must leave”. Walk into a restaurant in full constraint bondage, or furry fetish, or slave-collar and leash, or soaked in piss with rubber waders, or bleeding from a flayed back, or covered in motor oil (or worse), or full SS uniform, or in handcuffs, or blindfolded or wrapped in Saran Wrap or you-name it. Out the door. Trans hooker?
Totally ok? You’ve been groomed.
Old trans was about self-deception. New trans is foisting sadomasochistic confrontations, and grooming people to believe that it is acceptable progressive thought to let it pass.
And it’s only on women.
Men absolutely don’t give a shit. To them it’s some rando guy who they don’t think about for 1 second, and call bullshit instantly.
NAILED IT!!! (on your two last thoughts mostly). This 100% thank you! (I always read all the comments before commenting lol). And I also feel I've been groomed to some degree! We have been desensitized to a degree (not only by the school indoctrination and govt/corporate DEI policies, but) by grown men prancing around town in nothing but a thong and a rainbow feather boa (oh yeah, and over-the knee stack/platform boots, and probably some gaudy make up and false eyelashes, "hookerwear" lol - reference PrideFest, June 2022, Indianapolis, IN (of all places) - unfortunately for us, we were there for cancer treatment during the fever pitch craziness (me and my TID mtf son - he is still non-presenting and non-medicalized, but has a new "girlfriend"...) and these rainbow clad people were flooding the streets - we were stuck in traffic and surrounded by them (it was hard not to gawk); it was completely shocking to me at the time, but now it is almost expected (and for sure encouraged in many places, whataworld, whataworld, whataworld...).
Notice how the focus is on MtoF trans only. Not a word about women who think they're men, which is a far larger cohort in this discussion, especially among adolescents. This seems like just more psuedofeminist claptrap, which is a main reason we got to this insanity in the first place.
What is it the Trans activists cry when faced with facts? “We exist, we have always existed, and you are promoting genocide” Yes. Mental illness has always existed and what we promote is reality, and compassionate care and understanding for the mentally unwell.
It's hard to make a lot money by only attempting to talk someone out of their delusional denial of their sex.
You are 100% correct.
Actually addressing the problem, whatever it is, takes work, focus usually on childhood trauma, ending porn addictions, focusing on diet and exercise, etc. It's not lucrative or quick, which is why doctors don't want to do it.
Giving mentally unstable people hormones, surgery, etc., and acting like they're heroes because it's a civil rights movement, is quick, hugely profitable, and social status boosting.
That is why the medical industry pushes this. And anyone who stands against it is attacked. But just give it time--they didn't address opioids until it got truly bad either.
Although frankly I would pay a lot of money if anyone could talk my daughter out of a delusional denial of her sex.
It’s about money, but it’s also about hard work. As a clinician of 25+ years, I can say without any hesitation that working with gender questioning youth to get to the deeper issues is the hardest work I’ve ever been called to do. Most graduate programs are not preparing clinicians to take on such complex and challenging cases, and it’s just so much easier to turf someone over to the gender clinic for blockers, hormones, surgeries, especially since that’s what the APA and other professional governing bodies are saying to do.
Yep. It’s completely illogical. They can’t even define the words they use in a non-circular manner. It’s completely intellectually dishonest.
It's all illogical, you are right.
Interesting article. Generally I agree with your premise that the trans histeria that has gripped western cultures is fraudulent. Yet your article seems to be searching for an explanation of it’s origins and you seemed to have attributed it to the medical/pharmaceutical/psychology industries. You may be correct that there is a profit motive that has capitalized on this fad. Yet trans ideology has been around longer than pharmaceuticals or psychology industries could have profited from it. It has existed in SF for awhile as a cultural component, although it was limited. It also was never hoisted upon the public at large with such intensity. There seems to be a something else going on and as everyone is trying to pin the tail on the donkey, this tail is bound to be pinned all over the place. The medical profit sources are easy to eliminate. Medical liability for providers, age restrictions of >21 years old & no public funding of medical treatments. A larger issue is how could such a fringe ideology, that denies long standing truths, be hoisted upon societies around the world
One thing can have many causes. It doesn't have to be one cause.
This article was about doctors in particular, specifically with regard to the most recent DSM. The modern form of the "trans" nonsense is driven largely by the medical industry and its search for profits, as pushed by subversive billionaires. Jennifer Bilek has done a ton of research into that. Everyone should read her work. That's more recent, that's where the recent push has come from.
Add to that social media and internet pornography, which are significant issues, especially among the youth. But young people couldn't get hormones and surgeries if their doctors didn't say yes to it--hence Jennifer Bilek's work.
Add to that a media push in movies, TV shows, Netflix, books. I wrote a recent article on examples of that.
Add to that idiotic academia writing that has been going on for years, morons like Judith Butler who has been writing about "gender" for years. That seeps out into culture since what universities teach bleeds down into high schools, middle schools, elementary schools. Teachers in those places are indoctrinated in universities that teach "gender is a spectrum" and all that other bullshit.
Keep in mind male perversion has always existed, so it existed in places like SF in the 1960s or even before in Berlin in the 1930s with Magus Hirschfeld and his institute.
In a very tiny number of other third world cultures, men set strict rules about how males have to act. Then homosexual males fail them, so they create a pseudo "woman" category so gay men can act like they're a fake type of woman and preserve the sanctity of masculinity while still having gay sex somehow (like the fa'afafine in Samoa). It's cool though, they're women with dicks so it's still straight, bro!
But this has no relevance in today's modern society, so citing this is not a justification for giving males estrogen or letting men into girls' bathrooms. I can't stand it when tranny defenders cite this as a reason to allow doctors to mutilate children. It's bullshit, I'm just pointing it out to demonstrate how male behavior works and fuels this.
Lots of providers do this and will be held liable for what is now being uncovered, hence the lawsuits by Chloe Cole and Kayla Lovdahl. Those girls were 15 and 13 when they had their breasts removed, so there is no age restriction of over 21. That is simply false.
In terms of no public funding of treatment, that is simply false as well. Do you understand what's going on here?
Medical profit source is a major reason, so it cannot be eliminated. Please read more about this, specifically Jennifer Bilek's work.
https://jbilek.substack.com/p/women-are-the-spoils-in-the-tech?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
I understand what is going on is horrible and agreeing with your point that this fraud will go away.
“Lots of providers do this and will be held liable for what is now being uncovered, hence the lawsuits by Chloe Cole and Kayla Lovdahl. Those girls were 15 and 13 when they had their breasts removed, so there is no age restriction of over 21. That is simply false.”
I know that there currently aren’t uniform age restrictions across all states. I brought it up in the 3 points of age restrictions, medical liability & lack of public funding as suggested trifecta that will eliminate this wide spread medical malpractice. If public insures won’t pay for these procedures then private insurers will also drop them, unless they’re legally mandated to pay for them.
I will read the article you posted, thank you for the recommendation
Lawsuits is what will end this, eventually. They're already starting.
Legislatures won't because the laws can get vetoed by governors (including Republicans) who are controlled by the same money and people who push it. That's happened several times already.
Public healthcare covers this. This is publicly covered in Massachusetts, for example.
When lawsuits start, both APAs have to change what doctors do and the DSM has to change. When doctors say no, this will end. That's essentially what will stop this, when they figure out they will lose money rather than make money. People ask for stupid things from doctors all the time, and doctors can say no all the time. They say no if people can't pay.
https://www.mass.gov/gender-affirming-care-for-masshealth-members
I’m far from an expert on the this topic. I’m also vague with the fa’afafine in Samoa & may be getting it confused with Tongans. Are fa’afafine also part of the culture when a family doesn’t have a female child the youngest boy basically takes on the role of a women in dress, mannerisms, taking care of his parents, ect?
It's actually pretty recent, and it's a bunch of BS. It's usually younger males in a family, and it's not always if they don't have a sister. It's a way to avoid homosexuality, mostly, as in Iran. Samoans are not Shia Muslim though, obviously.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2176197/
If you want to learn about the medical industry, read Jennifer Bilek's work. She covers Martin Rothblatt, the Pritzker family, Stryker, Marc Benioff, etc. Their money is a huge reason this is proliferating.
https://www.the11thhourblog.com/
A software programmer once told me all her mistakes were caused by 1. Thus she decided to write code only with 0
I’ll check those articles too. Russians, Egyptians, Iranians, & most traditional cultures have illogical belief systems around homosexuality. About 15 years back an Egyptian man was convicted of homosexuality and punished with a jail sentence where he was serially raped by a large number of men. The story was so bizarre that it doesn’t even make sense from a western perspective. The punishment for homosexuality being setting up non-consenting homosexual acts 🤷🏽♂️ Homosexual rape is also common in Russia’s military & the person being raped is considered homosexual not the male soldiers raping new enlistees. Therefore the people perpetuating homosexual acts are not burdened by the stygma of being homosexual. It’s almost completely the opposite of how Americans would think of it. Iran is full of contradictions too
That is because men are crazy.
That is an underlying reason for this, and most of the world's problems.
All of the worlds problems can be simply reduced as binary in origin, male or female.
Men are the origin, that is, adult human males.
Because it's not really about trans. The trans issue is a proxy for degenerating our cognitive liberty.
Great article. Thanks for digging into this.
Thanks for reading!
This is so good. I wish everyone would read it.
Hey thanks!
We should put "I feel like a woman" in the same category as "I have a personal relationship with Jesus" or "I prayed to God and he said...". People get mad when I call the latter two a delusion, but it obviously is the same thing - a perhaps sincere but etiologically incorrect introspective state. And both should be treated the same legally - you can believe what you like, you can "live" those beliefs so long as you don't think those beliefs are good enough to base public policy on or require us to treat them differently from any other empirical claim with regard to demanding evidence.
The analogy to religion is not correct, and I'll explain why.
First, I'm an atheist. I'm not religious in any way, and I would never defend religion. All religions are false, though they're not all damaging in the exact same way.
The delusion of "trans" is not the same as religion because it is possible for someone to convert to Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Mormonism, Islam, etc. Someone can become a Christian--it is provable and possible. For example, if someone joins the Catholic Church, there is a baptism, First Communion, Confirmation, etc. Someone can prove their membership. If someone becomes a Muslim, there is a shahada, paying the zakat, fasting, doing pilgrimage.
There are certain criteria to prove that one has joined a faith and is a member. I'm not saying you can read their minds or what the faiths teaching are true. I'm saying it is possible to convert and join a religion.
Therefore, in the US and most civilized countries, religious belief and freedom are constitutionally protected. The First Amendment protects that here. The government cannot say that it's illegal to be an Episcopalian or Presbyterian or whatever. It's declared in law, for a specific reason. I know other countries are different (churches are illegal in Saudi Arabia for example).
When a man gets the stupid idea in his head that he is a woman, he is chasing a lie. He cannot become a woman the way he can become a Muslim or Mormon. It's literally impossible.
Furthermore, this is not protected by law because the law does not protect mental delusions the way it protects religious freedom. It just doesn't.
Nobody would say that a 70-pound anorexic who "feels fat" has the right to get liposuction or force others to call her fat, or that is the same as a religious right. Nobody would say a schizophrenic has the right to force everyone to call him Napoleon, and that's the same as a religious belief.
"Trans" is mental illness. This is a medical scandal. It's not the same as religion and religious freedom.
I do see some parallels in that these mentally ill people have tried to turn themselves into a religion ("trans people are sacred!") or their mutilation into a ritual, as when the woman literally injected herself with testosterone in front of the city council in Florida and called it a "ritual."
If she were to convert to Christianity, she can become Christian. Christian teachings aren't true, but one can be a Christian. That belief is protected under modern law.
She cannot be a man and will never be a man. That is impossible and based on mental illness. That is not protected by law, just like lobotomies are not protected by law. Nobody has the right to demand a lobotomy.
That's the difference.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/trans-activist-injects-testosterone-front-florida-medicine-board-protest-new-policy-minors
Gender Identity = a soul, a disembodied yet sexed spirit
Belief in Gender Identity Theory is the belief in something unproven, invisible, unfalsifiable, i.e. a religion
Religions exist. One can become a Christian or a Muslim or a Mormon. Freedom of religion is a basic democratic right.
No man can become a woman, or "feel like" he's a woman. That does not exist and that's objectively provable with a karyotype test. And there is no right to it.
That's the difference.
How is a religious belief thst involves thinking you talk to Jesus not a delusional? Or maybe perhaps in both the case of religious beliefs and gender identity beliefs we are mistaking a symbolic belief for an empirical belief amd that while for some “fundamentalists” in both camps the belief is literal, for many others it's just symbolic. I grew up around evangelicals and the “personal relationship with Jesus” thing I heard constantly as a kid is the first thing I thought of when trying to understand what kind of belief the “I feel like a woman” thing is. Both think introspection are compelling ways of knowing ans mistake faith for facts and imagine a feeling can explain its own causes. I think we should treat gender identity beliefs precisely how we treat religious beliefs. Beliefs are protected, acting on a belief is protected, but making others believe isn't. And we don't make laws based on either kind of faith.
Male reading comprehension skills ftw.
I didn't say religious people are NEVER delusional. They sometimes can be.
I said someone CAN become a Christian and that is a constitutionally protected belief.
Someone CANNOT become the opposite sex and that belief is not constitutionally protected.
Male rapists are being put in women's prisons due to this agenda. This isn't just about beliefs. This is a medical industry scandal, backed by billions of dollars, a media and culture agenda backed by very powerful institutions.
There is no such thing as "gender identity." You cannot protect something that does not exist. Religions exist. That is the difference.
The problem here is that you do not understand the arguments and you have no clue where this "gender" bullshit comes from. That's why you say such ridiculous things.
Having a personal relationship with Jesus is NOT like a man saying he's a woman. That is even stupid to say. Someone can become Christian. A man cannot become a woman--it's provable with a simple chromosome test. And when men say these things, it has knock-on effects in all areas of life, from sports to prisons to schools. This is not protected by law like religious freedom is.
Please educate yourself before you speak. Go read my other posts and read Jennifer Bilek's work. You lack basic understanding of what is going on.
My analogy isn’t to “being a Christian” (whatever that is - I am not sure who holds the copyright on that). It is the sort of metaphysical “intrspection as truth” beliefs used to explain their faith. “I feel like a woman” = “I pray to Jesus and he answers”. The latter is a delusion as is the former. But in both cases, I think you actually have a range of what a delusion entails in the real world. I think both for maximal New Atheists and the most literalist anti-woke, there needs to be more attention of knowing when a belief is merely symbolic and when it is literal and the line is really fuzzy at the margins. If a Christian said “I prayed about this and Jesus told me I should…” how is that not a delusion? You pay attention to a inner emotional state and think you have an explanation for it that involved metaphysics and magic, that is kind of a delusion. But I am not sure this is always a literal belief, although it sounds like it. If you read @Eliza Mondegreen and her research on trans reddit communities, the things people say often make you think that for many people with gender distress, they pretty intuitively feel the conflict between symbolic and literal beliefs, but, just like with religion, being surrounded by co-religionists that form a moral tribe harden the views into putting a force field around the literal beliefs. Anthropologist Scott Atran talks about religious beliefs not even having propositional content given the contradictions and inconcistencies that can’t be squared and I increasing see gender identity beliefs like this. The way to combat the craziness of gender identity ideology is to figure out a way to sever critique of gender identity nonsense from a broad spectrum of trad con panic culture because the clear alterior motives (anti-gay, pro-Jesus) to any effective political pushback to it makes the crucial center say to themselves “Yeah, there is something weird about this trans stuff, but the only people I see making noise about it are the people who clearly think gays are going to hell and think Jesus talks to him, so I guess this is what we are doing now”. I work in a liberal field and when I have conversations about this, you’d be surprised how often this is where we end up.
I often see, that this or that commeîntator, when mentioning the work of Dr. Anne Lawrence, appears bereft of a particularly relevant fact, being that Dr. Lawrence is a man, indeed, a trans-identified male, who has been one of the few researchers actually doing properly scientific study into the phenomenon of transsexualism, as well as suffering under that very same delusion himself. For this reason his name will never pass the lips of any "transgender rights activist," despite an extensive body of work that in any other field would secure recognition as a preeminent investigator within it, and the "lived experience" that presumably i grant Perhaps it is quotable passages like this one that stick in their craws?
"I propose that nonhomosexual (i.e., presumably autogynephilic) MtF transsexuals are probably at increased risk for the development of narcissistic disorders— significant disorders in the sense of self—as a consequence of the inevitable difficulties they face in having their cross-gender feelings and identities affirmed by others, both before and after gender transition. As a result, many autogynephilic transsexuals are likely to be particularly vulnerable to feelings of shame and may be predisposed to exhibit narcissistic rage in response to perceived insult or injury… I propose that narcissistic disorders in autogynephilic transsexuals are important and probably common phenomena, which deserve more extensive study than they have thus far received. I also suggest that clinicians and scholars should be aware of the susceptibility of autogynephilic transsexuals to narcissistic injury and should try to avoid inflicting such injury.
It is widely accepted that transsexualism represents a fundamental disorder in a person’s sense of self (Beitel, 1985; Hartmann, Becker, & Rueffer-Hesse, 1997), and this may be particularly true of nonhomosexual MtF transsexualism. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more dramatic example of a disturbed sense of self than for a person who has lived an outwardly successful life as a man to believe that he genuinely is, ought to be, or would be happier living as a woman."
Shame and Narcissistic Rage in Autogynephilic Transsexualism. Archives of Sexual Behavior (2008) 37:457–461 DOI 10.1007/s 10508-008-9325-1
I don't use the word "transexual" because it makes the implication that sex can be changed. "Trans" means to go from one side to the other ("transcontinental" or "transatlantic"). They're just men. Men in dresses, men in wigs, men who are delusional, men with perversions.
Nobody can go from male to female or vice versa. It has never happened, and even if someone passes, he's only an imitation. Nobody has ever turned fool's gold into gold. It's still fool's gold even if it tricks everyone.
None of this is real, and the answer to everything they ask for must be no.
There is only one thing to know about the gender ideology.It is all lies! There is not one iota of truth from the lie that anyone can be “ born in the wrong body” to the lie that trans”women “ are actually women, to the lie that men can breastfeed.The lies are backed up by changing the language ..crazy words like “ transphobia “ “ “ cisgender “, etc.The trans cult is an authoritarian religion trying to take over society . They are a dangerous lying cult! And yes, it’s insane!
While we are hopefully coming out of this nightmare, it seems prudent to review how we got here and spend some time in it. We are already seeing how quickly other horrendous “expert” policies are dismissed (Covid, BLM, anti police). How can we learn and guard against these self-interests?
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer.
Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned. However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as actual harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (especially women). Finally, others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
If "gender" is just stereotypes, why do men need to take estrogen? Why are they removing their testicles and inverting their penises and shaving down their Adam's apples?
Are those just stereotypes?
Kay: Ask them. I can’t explain mental illness.
I can explain it.
"Gender" is a linguistic term for words only. Words have gender; humans do not.
If you mean stereotypes, say so. Much of the "trans" lie is rooted in men who hate women and build their "identity" on sexist stereotypes, fueled by porn addiction, autogynephilia, and general male perversion. We live in a society that coddles male stupidity at the expense of women's safety and reality. That's not complicated.
This is also fundamentally a medical industry scandal, so they make colossal profits from mutilating people biologically. That includes hormones, surgery, etc.
So, if "gender" and "transgender" were actually social (which I have been told many times), there would no need for biological manipulation.
None of that makes sense, and that's because this whole thing is a lie.
Transsexual are a natural variant of humans. They have been reported across time and the globe. Many cultures made space for them and allowed them to just be people. This type of rhetoric is toxic to women’s rights as it is easy to disprove and easy to point to when saying that women who want female only spaces are bigots. It is the flip side of the coin from those who scream TERF at every opinion that doesn’t conform to the cult. This all mixes together to allow male rapists to be sent to women’s prison. That is what I care about. Female only spaces and the right to gather as females to discuss being female without a forced male in the mix screaming it is discrimination to even think about something being not for them. Australia lost their right to a female only beach that had been so for 140 years. A Canadian infant rapist was not only put into a women’s prison but into a women’s prison with an infant ward. The stood outside leering at the mothers and infants. When a prisoner tried to stop them she was grabbed by the hair, thrown across the room and broke her ribs. The prisoner with the broken ribs was reprimanded for starting the confrontation by calling the pedophile a pedophile. The monster wasn’t moved to a men’s prison until after beating the crap out of a second prisoner. The victim- 3 month old baby boy, required reconstructive surgery.
Karen White, England. So violent that trans women were shocked that the prisoner system put them into a women’s prison. The prison system said, oh, whoops.
Men using the concept of trans women to get into female prisons and raping prisoners. Into shower rooms to show off their dicks.
Maybe talk about this. It is common ground between a real transsexual woman and a TERF. Neither want this bullshit to happen. The TRANSGENDER movement wants to silence this and doesn’t address it at all. Try telling one of them that women have been raped by trans women and those claiming to be one and you will get the stock response - the guards rape them anyway. Cis men rape women too. So, what’s a few more rapes?
There is no such thing as a "real transsexual."
There is no such thing as "trans" or "cis."
They're all delusional men, and they should all be in mental hospitals.
Well let’s hope this doesn’t become a trend in psychiatry or those deluded by sky cults and messianic beliefs in unsubstantiated claims humans have risen from the dead may be next.
I'm an atheist, so I will not defend any religions or claim that anything they teach are true.
But one can become a Christian or Hindu or Mormon. One can convert and be a member of a religion, which do exist. Freedom of religion is a basic right in all civilized countries.
No man can become a woman. That does not exist because sex is binary and immutable.
Those who want to are suffering from something else which must be treated.
That's the difference. If you do not understand that, you will fail to understand anything.
You’re not smart enough to decide who must be treated by whom for what.
Lol, oh really? And the industry that just handed out heroin to people in the form of Oxycontin, leading to hundreds of thousands of overdoses--they're smart enough?
The industry that used to do lobotomies? The industry that used to have doctors advertise cigarettes? The industry that has been sued multiple times for dozens of scandals that were nothing but profit-making schemes? The ones who are removing breasts from 13 year old girls and giving 11 year old boys estrogen--they're smart enough?
The people defending this, from Bruce Jenner to "Chase Strangio" are the smart ones?
Let me guess, you're the smart one? Okay.
Do the following:
1. Define what a man is
2. Define what a woman is
3. Explain how a man can "transition" to a woman and show evidence
Go ahead.
Look for where I said that before you leap
You sound delusional. I’m not going to waste my time on dumb people. I don’t have the patience or time for this.
That’s good news.
Have a productive day
Truth isn't hate.
None of the tranny defenders could argue rationally if their lives depended on it.
Run along before I block you because you're boring me.