US Government rules on Gender Identity

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby liminalOyster » Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:14 am

I can see the merits of many arguments that sometimes find expression on Gender Trender but that site itself, I've always thought, periodically engages in some particularly nasty scapegoating ala mugshots of some or another transwoman accused of a terrible crime then extrapolated to speak to an explanatory link between sociopathy and trans people. There are some examples of this that pretty objectively (IMO) resemble MAGA scapegoating of immigrant criminals. I'm not dismissing the whole site but also not surprised that the medium/semantics of such stories would easily port over to MAGA land.

On second thought - disregard. This is actually not a discussion I want to get into or truly feel terribly strongly about.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:41 am

Now you mention it, I think that's a good point.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Transgender Totalitarianism

Postby Heaven Swan » Mon Nov 19, 2018 12:39 pm

JackRiddler » Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:24 am wrote:
Heaven Swan » Sat Nov 17, 2018 6:19 am wrote:that you examine how and why you’ve been conditioned to react to buzzwords like SJW, then imply unfounded characterizations, instead of thinking things through.


This is exactly the opposite. Why have you been conditioned to use a buzzword like "SJW," which is a broad and confusing attack-term that lumps together anything the alt-right targets, related or not? I don't think anyone willingly calls themselves by this term. This is a slur -- like TERF! It will always produce a reaction against you, for good reason. It will always define you as right-wing. So if you don't want that, you can use more precise terms for whomever you are actually referring to. Otherwise you are on your own extreme here and show it. .


*bolding mine

Calm down Jack.

We discussed on another thread (sorry, can't remember which one) the need to find a term besides SJW to define the "brainwashed., dogmatic, shallow, effete, cloistered, steeped in identity politics, quick to censor, smear and shut down those who don't toe their line, forgotten or never knew about class, manipulated by elite "divide and conquer" agenda" type of liberal.

I know that the right coined SJW but I just haven't found an alternative. Any ideas?

When, as a teenager, I joined a Marxist organization in another country, the comrades taught us to listen carefully to oppressed people to understand their needs and to read extensively from all sides of the political spectrum. They wanted us to become critical thinkers capable of astute analysis. The left is not (or was not) a club or a cult. Many think that the whole concept of left vs right is outdated and is fading into history. and I've become one of them.

I'll leave you with an article from "The American Conservative" as food for thought (and as a nod to LO's horror at discussions condemning a sick, opportunistic pedophile just because they come from the right)


https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... tarianism/

Transgender Totalitarianism
By Rod Dreher • November 18, 2018, 2:37 PM


Image
OK, but how far is too far?

How far will society let this go? From the UK:

An astonishing 17 pupils at a single British school are in the process of changing gender, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Most of the youngsters undergoing the transformation are autistic, according to a teacher there, who said vulnerable children with mental health problems were being ‘tricked’ into believing they are the wrong sex.

The whistleblower says few of the transgender children are suffering from gender dysphoria – the medical term for someone who feels they were born in the wrong body – but are just easily influenced, latching on to the mistaken belief they are the wrong sex as a way of coping with the problems caused by autism.

More:

It means that 150 autistic teenagers were given puberty blocker drugs which stop the body maturing.

The teacher says she felt compelled to speak out to protect pupils, many of whom she believes could already be taking the powerful drugs and may go on to have life-changing surgery.

She believes schools and some politicians have swallowed ‘hook, line and sinker’ a politically-correct ‘fallacy’ peddled by a powerful transgender lobby.

And:

She has asked The Mail on Sunday to conceal her identity for fear of dismissal after almost 20 years as a teacher, But in a shocking interview, the woman, who we shall call Carol, tells how:

She was advised to keep parents and other teachers in the dark if a pupil claimed to be transgender;

Older pupils at her school who changed gender ‘groomed’ younger, mainly autistic students to do the same;

One autistic teenager is soon to have a double mastectomy;

Pupils who say they were born the wrong sex mimic transgender YouTube stars Carol believes are partly to blame for convincing vulnerable children they have gender dysphoria.

Read the whole thing. The details about how the trans cult manifested itself among the students at that school sound very much like what my friend Mrs. DK told me a couple of years ago was happening at her daughter’s school. Two days ago, Mrs. DK posted this in a comments thread here:

Our autistic and academically gifted daughter is home from college for her 20th birthday. After almost a year on testosterone, her voice sounds like a young man’s, and she has fine hair above her lip and on her chin. The university is talking to her about a double mastectomy! My Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria support group continues to pick up more concerned parents from across the Balt/Wash area and northern VA. Almost all liberal and very secular parents, we all look like we’ve been hit by a train — and we can get no answers from the schools, universities, therapists, and doctors who are doing this.

In the meantime, look at Detrans Voices on twitter as more and more women suffer from the side effects of hormones and complications from surgery. Look at transbrainfx.com for information on the non-FDA-approved hormones being given out to our kids like candy. Yet fighting this is like fighting Leviathan. The beginnings of our Godforsaken transhuman future.

Fighting this is like fighting Leviathan. It is totalitarian.

For example, the trans-critical blog GenderTrender published the pre-transition name of Jonathan “Jessica” Yaniv, a Canadian man who now claims to be female, and has filed human rights claims against women’s salons who will not wax his testicles (he has not had bottom surgery) because the estheticians do not want to touch male genitalia. GenderTrender published information related to the man’s social media activities related to underage girls, and used the name Jonathan Yaniv. As a result, WordPress kicked GenderTrender off, claiming that “deadnaming” (using a trans person’s pre-transition name) is a violation of terms of service. Gallus Mag of GenderTrender said in a statement:

Will this new policy be widely enforced? Of course not. I believe this change to the WordPress TOS was hastily conceived as a guise to censor lesbian and feminist authors who are critical of “gender identity” ideology, specifically those who investigate or critique the actors behind various political or judicial campaigns to limit the rights of women. I believe this change is a direct result of GenderTrender’s exposure of Jonathan Yaniv, the figure behind 16 Canadian human rights complaints against women who declined to wax his balls, as an alleged sexual predator. I believe this unannounced change to the TOS, applied retroactively without prior warning or notification, is a ruse to justify the specific targeted censorship of certain popular long running lesbian and feminist blogs who critique the ingrained (and sometimes criminal!) misogyny of the transgender movement. I believe this is an organized, intentional initiative by WordPress.com to eliminate lesbian and feminist criticism and exposure of the epidemic harassment, predation, and sex-specific terrorism of male bodied people upon female bodied people, regardless of their personal “identity”.

Below, what GenderTrender was blogging about: Yaniv’s social media activity asking people for advice on how to approach 1

Image

Image

WordPress’s policy protects creeps like Jonathan Yaniv. But it would also shut down any blog that discusses Bruce Jenner’s Olympic career. If you have a WordPress blog, they will censor you if you attempt to publish factual information that offends a transgendered person by in any way — even passively — questioning their proclaimed identity. That entire feminist blog, GenderTrender, has been erased, including its archive. It’s gone.

UPDATE: A reader comments:

Gender Trender didn’t publish a former name. Yaniv still currently uses “Jonathan” (and “he”) on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook.

linkedin -> /jonathanyaniv
twitter -> /trustednerd
facebook -> /trustednerd

And, for you people who object to my using the word “totalitarianism,” I refer you to this short passage from a Michael Hanby essay about Augusto del Noce:

Like Wilhelm Reich, who popularized the term, Del Noce sees the sexual revolution as the culmination of “total revolution.” It is one face of a “new, more dangerous, and more radical form of totalitarianism” than any seen heretofore, “even though these new positions claim to represent the highest degree of democracy and anti-fascism.” Unlike previous authoritarianisms, it is not a positive political program bent on world domination, but a negative “totalitarianism of disintegration” aimed at the perpetual destruction of antecedent order.

The order marked for destruction can be summed up in one word: Europe—the intellectual and spiritual synthesis of Rome, Athens, and Jerusalem. The new totalitarianism proceeds by negating every form of transcendence, especially the religious truth and universal reason which Del Noce calls “Platonism.” It reconceives reality as “a system of forces, not of values.” Being and nature are dissolved into the flux of history. And truth is reduced to social and psychological “situations” to be administered by social scientists.

UPDATE: A reader comments:

At my daughter’s school, over 5% of the students id’d as trans. All showed signs of autism. One had a mastectomy at age 16. Teachers & admins reacted like this was normal. Parents blindly supported their kids’ choices.

My daughter started believing she was a trans man four years ago after she attended a school presentation. She is very smart, socially awkward, and has autism. When I sought help for her, every therapist I talked to said she knew her identity and I must affirm or she was at higher risk of suicide. I was pushed by a clinician to put her on puberty blockers & was told they were perfectly safe.

I have written to countless journalists about my story, begging them to report what is really going on. Only conservative journalists will report. Others continue to push propaganda.

I have had private conversations with MDs, teachers, and therapists about this. While they might sympathize with my situation, none will speak out.

My daughter is almost 18 now and still convinced she must medically transition to be her authentic self. Our insurance covers full medical transition, as do countless four-year colleges.

At my older daughter’s college, she has seen many kids suddenly identify as trans & start hormones right away. She knows several girls who have had mastectomies. If have seen their social media accounts where they brag about their hormones and surgeries.

Very soon, my husband and I will be faced with the choice of cutting her off financially to make medical transition more difficult.

This is a nightmare.

MORE AT:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... tarianism/
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Elvis » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:35 pm

This is where it gets a little too weird for me... this is a biological male posting that he "needs to change his pads"..."ugh" indeed.

It strikes me as mental illness, whether or not he's being genuine. Call me whatever, but it's madness. If nothing else, it sounds like he wants to get with 10-year-old girls.


Image
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Agent Orange Cooper » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:25 am

liminalOyster » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:57 pm wrote:FWIW the gendertrender piece in question was posted and enthusiastically commented upon on Reddit's The Donald sub. Havent read the piece in its entirety myself so not commenting on its content so much as the fact of its apparent appeal to MAGA filth one way or another.


WTF are you talking about? As if this weird guilt-by-association strawman factoid has any bearing on the discussion whatsoever. How do you even know that it was "posted and enthusiastically commented upon" on r/The_Donald? Do you browse there frequently? Because here is the only instance I can find of the article being shared on T_D, and 12 comments, some of them actually finding it "funny," others just blaming the radical feminists for it, doesn't strike me as "enthusiastic commenting" or any kind of "appeal to MAGA filth".

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/9vxux3/cant_take_no_for_an_answer_jonathan_yaniv_files/

But here's a comment on T_D on another thread in which the rad-fem/trans divide is discussed, just to give you a better idea of what T_D thinks of GenderTrender and other radical feminist activists:
"Just to clarify for people not familiar with TERFs, they are not some sort of "good guys" just because they haven't bought into Trans everything, all the time. Notice the RF stand for "radical feminists." They believe the same garbage as other rad fems (patriarchy, rape culture, wage gap, etc.) outside of trans issues."
User avatar
Agent Orange Cooper
 
Posts: 610
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby PufPuf93 » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:54 pm

Here is an uplifting narrative in the face of catastrophe.

‘I give Diana Credit for Saving Our Town,’ Says Stirling City Fire Chief About Humboldt County Firefighter

As teams sift ashes in Paradise today searching for bone fragments of those who were killed in the deadliest fire in modern California history, not far away, residents of a much smaller town, Stirling City, return to their untouched homes after being evacuated for 10 days. They do so in part because of Division U Supervisor Diana Totten, a Humboldt County resident and one of the few transgender wildland firefighters in the nation. Totten and a Mendocino County man alternated the Division U Supervisor position–for over ten days, they traded off sleeping and doing paperwork while the other ran the line. At times they had close to 300 personnel under their direction battling the Camp Fire.

“I give Diana credit for saving our town,” Pete Cuming, Chief of the Stirling City Volunteer Fire Department, said warmly. Over the years, Cuming who has been chief since 1987 and been a volunteer firefighter since 1980, has poured a lot of love into his community. He has carefully restored the oldest house in town, built his own trucking business, and created a scale model of the old mill which he has lent to the local museum.

clip

“We were there with a group of dozers operators,” Cummings explained. “She introduced herself as Division Uniform.”

Totten remembers the incident well. She said that one of the operators said something about Division Unicorn–a reference to her transgender status. “I don’t think he thought I would hear,” she said. From then on she adopted that as the group’s name–they became Division Unicorn.

“It was instant chemistry,” Cuming said. “Diana loves input. She asks for input and then can make an educated decision.”
Totten said the chemistry was mutual. She, like Cuming, had been a logger. They both came from small communities they were passionate about, and they were both determined to save Stirling City. “It’s a cute little town,” she said.

“We were trying to build a battle plan for the north side of the fire,” Cuming explained. He said he and his men worked to give the two Division Supervisors “as much local knowledge as possible.”

Cuming credits Totten for coming up with a way of reducing fuel between the town and the massive, deadly fire racing towards them by clearing out dozer lines and backfiring huge swaths of land. “She was able to build a plan and her plan worked,” he said.

“We use fire to fight fire,” Totten explained in an earlier interview. “Those backfires are a very good strategy…Now the fuels are gone ahead of the coming fire.”

Long article and many pictures at: http://kymkemp.com/2018/11/20/i-give-di ... refighter/
User avatar
PufPuf93
 
Posts: 1884
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:29 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby liminalOyster » Tue Nov 20, 2018 6:09 pm

Agent Orange Cooper » Tue Nov 20, 2018 2:25 am wrote:
liminalOyster » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:57 pm wrote:FWIW the gendertrender piece in question was posted and enthusiastically commented upon on Reddit's The Donald sub. Havent read the piece in its entirety myself so not commenting on its content so much as the fact of its apparent appeal to MAGA filth one way or another.


WTF are you talking about?


The fuck would be simply finding it interesting that a relatively obscure rad-fem blog post appeared on an alt-right subreddit. Those groups are usually ideologically discordant. Do you think that MAGA filth would be unwilling to appropriate bits and pieces of whatever appears to support their base worldview? I don't.

As if this weird guilt-by-association strawman factoid has any bearing on the discussion whatsoever.


I think it's worth discussing. The trans movement is targeted for diff reasons both by radfems and the alt-right as being emblematic of something bigger. Both, again for diff reasons, take significant issue with current, popular, predominant frameworks of identity. I didn't put any strawman in play at all - I don't, for instance, think that the article being posted on T_D has any bearing on the article itself. I often appreciate what Caitlin Johnstone has to say, for instance, and have seen her posted there more than once. In case it is not clear, I agree that the scumbag discussed in the article is a scumbag.

How do you even know that it was "posted and enthusiastically commented upon" on r/The_Donald?


Because I searched the web for the article in such a way that was my first hit. It's 2018.

Do you browse there frequently?


No, not really. I don't have the stomach or patience for it - I find it very interesting sometimes. Are you asking if I am a Trump supporter? Also no.

------

There's all sorts of weird new alliances and ideological coalitions these days. Or potential for them. And there's a natural plausible resonance between those who see the Trans movement as a form of misognyist astroturf movement and those who see it as a form of anti-male astroturf movement. I've seen this come up elsewhere too and simply think its interesting to consider, esp. if it leads to greater refinement of purpose and message. I am sympathetic to the first movement and wholly dismissive of the second. But it's still interesting grist, to me, for better understanding.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Transgender Totalitarianism

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:21 pm

Heaven Swan » Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:39 am wrote:We discussed on another thread (sorry, can't remember which one) the need to find a term besides SJW to define the "brainwashed., dogmatic, shallow, effete, cloistered, steeped in identity politics, quick to censor, smear and shut down those who don't toe their line, forgotten or never knew about class, manipulated by elite "divide and conquer" agenda" type of liberal.

I know that the right coined SJW but I just haven't found an alternative. Any ideas?


I am afraid I can't help you find a phrase for this weirdly specific and yet largely imaginary caricature. These adjectives are pretty much a standard set of right-wing smears and prejudices about "liberals," so maybe you'll want to stick with the shorter version. Not really my problem after all.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Agent Orange Cooper » Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:21 pm

liminalOyster » Tue Nov 20, 2018 6:09 pm wrote:There's all sorts of weird new alliances and ideological coalitions these days. Or potential for them. And there's a natural plausible resonance between those who see the Trans movement as a form of misognyist astroturf movement and those who see it as a form of anti-male astroturf movement. I've seen this come up elsewhere too and simply think its interesting to consider, esp. if it leads to greater refinement of purpose and message. I am sympathetic to the first movement and wholly dismissive of the second. But it's still interesting grist, to me, for better understanding.


It's true that there are weird overlaps these days between different groups one would imagine would be totally at odds. But the fact that a hardcore MAGA MRA dude can come together in common ground with a butch lesbian female separatist about this one issue might, in fact, tell us something about how deeply fucked that issue actually is. In my opinion, the trans(human) movement is not just simply misogynist or misandrist, it's both. It's misanthropic to the core.
User avatar
Agent Orange Cooper
 
Posts: 610
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:41 pm

Just a clarification, transgender overlap in some ways but transhumanism is a different thing.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby liminalOyster » Wed Nov 21, 2018 2:56 pm

JackRiddler » Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:41 pm wrote:Just a clarification, transgender overlap in some ways but transhumanism is a different thing.


Post-humanism (Haraway etc) lately sometimes seems to get erroneously conflated with the latter too.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Agent Orange Cooper » Wed Nov 21, 2018 4:12 pm

JackRiddler » Wed Nov 21, 2018 12:41 pm wrote:Just a clarification, transgender overlap in some ways but transhumanism is a different thing.


I don't see it that way. Transgender is part and parcel of the movement towards transhumanism.
User avatar
Agent Orange Cooper
 
Posts: 610
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Nov 21, 2018 4:47 pm

They can be seen as convergent in various ways -- hey, guess what, sort of like some see radical feminism and conservatism as convergent on certain issues. But the origins and the activist base are different. Transhumanism offers a much bigger vision, and is all too compatible with the development of capitalism going back many decades. Transhumanists could be very conservative regarding what they think nature has bestowed. Their thing is that they get to overcome it as individuals, if they wish, thanks to the power of new technologies. If you'll allow a hypothetical example: I don't know where Pinker stands on transhumanism, but I'm using his well-known views as an example. His scientific claims or ideology about human nature and natural sex roles would not be incompatible with overcoming these by transhumanist tech fixes, as he believes these have been overcome gradually by the wonders of Western civilization. Meanwhile, transgender (or rather, any ideology or set of beliefs that would go with it) isn't necessarily technoutopian and arises from a different group.

So I took the above risk of an example, since my point would still stand even if Pinker were not suitable. But then I googled: turns out Pinker calls himself very skeptical regarding transhumanism.

http://opentranscripts.org/transcript/s ... an-nature/
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 21, 2018 9:26 pm

Wow, this is timely. Meghan Murphy of Feminist Current writing about her ban from Twitter and longstanding problems and frustration with the "SJW" (for lack of a better word) crowd. Be sure and check out the comment section, too.




https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/11 ... nk-either/

Twitter wants me to shut up and the right wants me to join them; I don’t think I should have to do either
I don’t want to choose between the left and the right, I want to engage in critical thought, challenge myself, and form my own opinions.

November 20, 2018 by Meghan Murphy

Image

In August, I was locked out of my Twitter account for the first time. I was told that I had “violated [Twitter’s] rules against hateful conduct” and that I had to delete four tweets in order to gain access to my account again. In this case, the tweets in question named Lisa Kreut, a trans-identified male, as the individual who targeted Feminist Current’s ad revenue and led efforts to have Vancouver Rape Relief blacklisted at the 2016 BCFED Convention.

Image

Image

Image

Image

I deleted the tweets in question, then publicly complained on Twitter, saying, “Hi @Twitter, I’m a journalist. Am I no longer permitted to report facts on your platform?” I was promptly locked out of my account again, told I had to delete the tweet in question, and suspended for 12 hours. I appealed the suspension, as it seemed clear to me that my tweets were not “hateful,” but simply stated the truth, but received no response from Twitter.

On November 15th, my account was locked again. This time, I was told I must delete a tweet from October, saying, “Women aren’t men,” and another, asking, “How are transwomen not men? What is the difference between a man and a transwoman?”

After dutifully deleting the tweets in question in order to gain access to my account again, I tweeted, angrily, “This is fucking bullshit, @twitter. I’m not allowed to say that men aren’t women or ask questions about the notion of transgenderism at all anymore? That a multi-billion dollar company is censoring basic facts and silencing people who ask questions about this dogma is insane.” This tweet went viral, racking up 20,000 likes before Twitter locked my account again on Monday morning, demanding I delete it. This time they offered no explanation at all — not even a vague accusation of “hateful conduct.”

Image

Image

To be fair, it’s not that insane. Multi-billion dollar companies are clearly primarily interested in profit, not free speech or women’s rights. But Twitter is a company that represents itself as a platform for communication, for debate, and for sharing ideas, news, and information. While of course, as a private company, Twitter has the right to limit who participates on the platform and what is said, we, the public, have become accustomed to understanding this social media platform as a relatively free space, wherein everyone from politicians, to celebrities, to pornographers, to activists, to students, to anonymous gamers, to feminists, to men’s rights activists may say what they wish.

Despite my disinterest in seeing graphic pornography on Twitter and in being called a “TERF cunt” who should “drink bleach,” I accept that this is something I am likely to be exposed to on Twitter, and choose to use the platform anyway. Cruel and graphic comments are things, for better or for worse, I am accustomed to and that, frankly, don’t bother me much at this point. If you are a public figure, you do just get used to this kind of thing.

What is insane to me, though, is that while Twitter knowingly permits graphic pornography and death threats on the platform (I have reported countless violent threats, the vast majority of which have gone unaddressed), they won’t allow me to state very basic facts, such as “men aren’t women.” This is hardly an abhorrent thing to say, nor should it be considered “hateful” to ask questions about the notion that people can change sex, or ask for explanations about transgender ideology. These are now, like it or not, public debates — debates that are impacting people’s lives, as legislation and policy are being imposed based on gender identity ideology (that is, the belief that a male person can “identify” as female or vice versa). That trans activists and their allies may find my questions about what “transgender” means or how a person can literally change sex uncomfortable, as they seem not to be able to respond to them, which I can imagine feels uncomfortably embarrassing, feeling uncomfortable is not a good enough reason to censor and silence people.

As a result of these attempts by Twitter to silence me, the right has leapt to support me, or at least engage with me, and criticize Twitter’s nonsensical, unwritten policies (nowhere in their Terms of Service does it say users may not differentiate between men and women or ask questions about transgender ideology). While the left continues to vilify me, and liberal and mainstream media continue to mostly ignore feminist analysis of gender identity, people like Dave Rubin and Ben Shapiro (and hundreds of right wingers and free speech advocates online), and right wing media outlets like the Daily Wire and The Blaze have either attempted to speak with me and understand my perspective, expressed support, or covered this undeniably ridiculous decision on the part of Twitter.

Anger at Twitter’s now ongoing attempts to silence me (I remain locked out of my account, awaiting an appeal process that is likely to result in nothing, and received a second notice today that I have been locked out doubly, on account of a tweet posted in May, criticizing Lisa Kreut for participating in a smear campaign against a local feminist, anti-poverty activist. Kreut has publicly admitted to “knowing someone” at Twitter Safety, so this is unsurprising, perhaps, albeit disconcerting) is not limited to the right or to free speech advocates, of course. There are numerous feminists around the world and unaffiliated members of the general public who see transgender ideology as dangerous (or simply ridiculous), and are critical of the ongoing silencing and smearing of those who challenge it. But one thing that does seem undeniable to me — something that the left should consider carefully, in terms of their own political strategizing — is that while the left seems to have taken to ignoring or refusing to engage with detractors or those who have opinions they disagree with or don’t like, the right continues to be interested in and open to engaging. And I think this is a good thing.

Image

Image



In light of my years of negative experiences trying to engage progressives on issues like pornography, prostitution, male violence, and now gender identity, I’ve unfortunately come to see many of them as cowardly, hypocritical, lacking in political and intellectual integrity, and disingenuous. While of course there are leftists who are critical of the sex trade and trans activism, far too many of those who represent progressives (in North America, in particular) — politicians and leftist political parties, as well as activists and representatives of the labour movement — will not speak out about these issues nor will they defend the women being ripped to shreds for speaking out. Radical feminists are largely on their own on these issues, and don’t have the numbers or the access to media or platforms that liberals, leftists, or the right do. I have personally been able to create and build a large platform, and am grateful for this. But I am being punished harshly for having succeeded in doing so. Twitter and their trans activist insiders seem to be working force me off the platform entirely, the left has shunned me, and Canadian media has yet to engage with my arguments with regard to gender identity ideology and legislation at all. Members of the left here in Canada who agree with me are afraid to be associated with me, and anyone who fails to disassociate is vilified or bullied.

I have been thinking about all this a lot lately, not only due to the debate around transgenderism and consequent no-platforming of critics, but more broadly, in terms of political strategy and the general advancement of good ideas and policy. As such, I want to acknowledge some things I once believed, but have changed my mind about.

I no longer believe leftist positions are necessarily most right or most ethical. I no longer believe everyone on the right is wrong about everything. I do not believe all those on the right necessarily have ill intentions, and suspect that many, like those on the left, believe they are working towards a better world. I don’t believe that it’s productive to position everyone who disagrees with the left as “right wing,” and therefore an enemy. I regret refusing to engage with or trying to understand those who are called “right wing” or “free speechers,” flat out. I think this is the wrong approach. I think it is, in fact, very important that we engage with those we may disagree with on various issues, and don’t think it serves us to ignore, mock, or dismiss people because they don’t share our exact political ideology. I am genuinely interested in speaking with people I may disagree with on various issues and am open to the possibility that we may agree on some ideas and not others. I think we should, as leftists and feminists, challenge and question our own ideas and mantras, rather than become too comfortable in the echo chamber.

What this means is that I will speak to and engage with whomever I like — left, right, and centre. I do not wish to play the game of guilt by association. I am tired of limiting ourselves to those who already share our views, and think this approach is unproductive if we genuinely want to effect change and understand the world around us. I think we need to open up, rather than shut down. I think we should model the behaviour we are asking of others — that is, to hear us out, and to engage with integrity. Even when that means engaging with ideas we don’t like, that we may find abhorrent or wrong or insulting. I don’t want to write people off any more than I want to be written off. And I regret only coming to this conclusion and speaking out about it recently, though I am grateful for my ability to think critically about discourse and strategy, and change my mind accordingly, regardless of who I may anger in the process.

I think sometimes we are afraid to engage genuinely and fairly with new ideas because we are afraid we might agree or change our minds. I suspect that many of those who support trans activism fear just this. That engaging with radical feminist analysis and other critiques of gender identity might leave them forced to admit we have a point.

The truth is that if we want our ideas to be good and coherent and evidence-based and convincing, we need to challenge ourselves and question those ideas, and even be open to the possibility that we might be wrong or that we might change our minds as a result.

Michael Knowles at the Daily Wire says I now must choose to “ally with conservatives, who support free speech and insist that ‘facts don’t care about your feelings,’ or persist with a Left that would annihilate feminism altogether.”

But I don’t think I need to choose either. I choose to think independently and critically. I choose to make strategic and thoughtful decisions about who to ally with. I choose to support free speech and also to reject right wing positions on things like abortion and the free market. I choose to continue to support universal healthcare, social housing, reproductive justice, and a viable welfare system. I choose to continue to oppose exploitative labour practices, privatization, and war. I choose to continue to advocate against male violence against women, sexual exploitation, porn culture, and legislation I consider to be harmful to women and girls. I choose to consider facts and take what I consider to be ethical positions based on those facts, even if those facts and positions don’t fit whatever is considered to be politically correct.

There are people on the right who are bad and who are good, who are smart and who are stupid, who are wrong and who are right, and then there are a million combinations in between. The same can be said of the left. And to pretend things are any more simple than that is, in my opinion, a mistake. While we may not agree on much else, the right and I both agree that transgenderism is nonsense, which may be awkward, but is better than being wrong or dishonest. Speaking of which, I reserve the right to be wrong about all of this, and change my mind accordingly, though I suspect I am not.

A lot of great comments at:

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/11 ... nk-either/
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Sounder » Thu Nov 22, 2018 6:36 am

Thank-you-Thank-you-Thank-you-Thank-you Meghan Murphy and Thank-you Heaven Swan. :yay :sun:

What this means is that I will speak to and engage with whomever I like — left, right, and centre. I do not wish to play the game of guilt by association. I am tired of limiting ourselves to those who already share our views, and think this approach is unproductive if we genuinely want to effect change and understand the world around us. I think we need to open up, rather than shut down. I think we should model the behaviour we are asking of others — that is, to hear us out, and to engage with integrity. Even when that means engaging with ideas we don’t like, that we may find abhorrent or wrong or insulting. I don’t want to write people off any more than I want to be written off. And I regret only coming to this conclusion and speaking out about it recently, though I am grateful for my ability to think critically about discourse and strategy, and change my mind accordingly, regardless of who I may anger in the process.



From the comments by Signme Uplease • 7 hours ago

It's incredibly frustrating that women's voices continue to be silenced. I often feel such a white hot rage that I'm shaking. This is one of those times.

Meghan, I will do everything I'm able to get this information out there, but I've been losing connection to more and more people in my life who matter whenever I bring up this subject. It's such a hot button issue that attacks the core of who we are as human beings that people are afraid to even contemplate resisting this toxic narrative that we can now choose our sex. How bad does it have to get?!?!?!? How many women must be tormented by having to deal with these transgender extremists?!?!? I just feel like people are all being driven insane.



It is sad and ironic that a lot of 'smart' people are advocating for gender conformity requirements in the name of 'liberation', and done in a manner providing a nod to the Sharia formula; that being, if you continue to act as a person of the opposite gender, you either have your sex organs changed to make that acting legitimate, have a powerful protector, or die.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests