You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Critique of Trans Ideology’ tag.
—Chapters—
(0:00) – Coming Up
(0:57) – Intro
(2:22) – Writing “Trans”
(9:46) – Women and Biological Reality
(19:50) – Age Solidarity Among Women
(24:57) – Narcissism, a Key Contributor
(34:53) – Fetishes & the Unbalanced Psyche
(36:57) – Breaking the Fantasy
(42:25) – Freud & the Oedipal Complex
(48:11) – Context Defines Your Identity
(55:45) – Transhumanist “Meat Lego”
(59:40) – The Depth of the Battle, the Death of God
(1:05:54) – Lying to Children, Ellen Page
(1:10:27) – The Social Pillory
Something went wrong between the 2nd and 3rd wave of female political action. The class based analysis so firmly rooted in the second wave seemed to have been gradually pushed to the margins and replaced with a the conception of intersectionality that in its initial phase could have gone hand in hand with the more traditional feminist analysis. Intersectionality is the idea that people can experience different layers of discrimination simultaneously based on their race, sex, and class served to furtherfill out traditional radical feminist theory and increase the sensitivity toward women with diverse race and cultural backgrounds.
So far so good? Right?
Well it would be all good if we just incorporated this utilitarian and useful 3rd wave innovation. The notions of ‘identity’ and ’empowerment’ were also gifts from the third wave and where some of the analysis began to go off the rails.
From the notion of ’empowerment’ we get most of the dead branch known as Liberal Feminism that is about doing actions in society, that if they feel good and make you feel good, they are in fact empowering acts. This leads to the idea that activities like pole dancing and stripping can be ‘feminist’ acts because they are empowering the individual woman with agency (?) and power within society.
Many feminists would pause here because like most features of society, patriarchy operates on the macro as well as the micro level. To return to our previous example, the occupations of both pole dancing and stripping may indeed provide empowerment on the level of the individual, but on a boarder social analysis both serve the male gaze and continue to reinforce the commodification and objectification of the female body. So perhaps we can see where some friction exists between these two theoretical feminist standpoints.
The notion of identity is also useful in certain contexts because it allows discrimination and oppression that exist within society to be categorized and analyzed with greater precision. Identity is a tonic against the sometimes homogenizing nature of theoretical work and allows theory and praxis better able to respond to the needs of women from diverse backgrounds.
Identity has now metastasized. In certain ideological circles it rests above nearly all other theoretical concerns. More importantly the notion of identity has been severed from the social, material reality we all share. What we think about ourselves now has a certain reified air that precludes any sort of questioning or critical examination.
For instance, it is now popular to ‘come out’ as non-binary. Being non-binary is a vague notion that an individuals personal expression isn’t tied to their sex – so a male person can have a ‘boy-day’ or ‘girl-day’ depending on their mood. You gentle reader, would not be alone in concluding that people claiming be non-binary may just be fulfilling the need to feel edgy and special in society. It’s nice to stand out I suppose, but adopting male or female stereotypes and demanding that others play along with your wacky pronouns and related charade seems like a rather cumbersome and ultimately anti-social way to go about achieving that goal. Furthermore, since no person embodies all of the stereotypes of their sex but rather a mixture of the two, we are all, in fact, non-binary (just with less narcissism that those boldly ‘coming out’).
Another particularly problematic aspect that has arisen is the notion of self identification and that one’s personal declaration of gender somehow overrides the societal norms and expectations we all follow. The most common point of friction is when men, because they have gender feelings, decide that they are women and should therefore have access to female spaces, services, and sports. The problem is that self id does not change the male socialization, nor the male patterns of behaviour that require all inhabitants of the class of men to be excluded from female only spaces.
Transgender ideology is deeply misogynistic. Women who disagree with gender ideology and men in their spaces are ostracized, threatened, and called bigots because they have the temerity to raise concern with the erosion of their boundaries and sex based rights within society. Transgender ideology is also an impediment to the safeguarding of women and children as again, male gender-feelings are given precedence over female safety in society. The conflict will not resolve until the men involved in the transgender movement respect female boundaries and the female ‘no’.
Being gender diverse is fine, but one must respect the material realities of sex and sex based oppression that exist within our society.
It is going to be very disheartening for people who bought into the puberty blockers as a solution to their ‘gender dysphoria’ realize that they were the first test subjects in a long term trial. What they were told, and what will happen are likely to be two very different occurrences.
“When ECRI was contacted by this author and asked why WPATH guidelines were not included, and why the Endocrine Society guidelines did not have a scorecard rating, they responded in an email, saying that the reason the Endocrine Society guidelines did not meet inclusion criteria to be rated was because “Only a few of their recommendations were supported by the systematic review; the majority were not.” The reason WPATH was not included, ECRI stated, was because the guidelines were over five years old, and “did not use a systematic review to process”.
They did not use a systematic review to process.
ECRI
A search of the Canadian database yielded no results for transgender treatment. When contacted, Joule’s response was “In order to be included in our database, all guidelines have to be either developed or endorsed by an authoritative medical/healthcare organization. Neither the WPATH nor the Endocrine Society guidelines on transgender care have been endorsed by any Canadian organization(s) and therefore are not included in our database”. A search of the GIN library also yielded no results for transgender care.
Neither the WPATH nor the Endocrine Society guidelines on transgender care have been endorsed by any Canadian organization(s) and therefore are not included in our database.
Joule
Guidelines over five years old are at high risk of becoming clinically irrelevant due to new research findings, or changes in patient populations. Given the rapidly changing epidemiology and treatments in transgender care, seven-year-old guidelines are severely outdated in this field. One case in point is that when the WPATH guidelines were published in 2011, natal males were the primary group presenting to gender clinics in adolescence, but now males have been eclipsed by natal females 3 to 1.
Research on male adolescent clients cannot be generalized to females, an age-old fallacy in medicine. This makes the entire recommendation section for adolescent transgender care in the WPATH SOC dubious at best, irrelevant at worst. Investigation must be undertaken to determine why a new cohort has developed, and whether this group can be included in guidelines that were developed for a group with different histories and possibly different etiologies.”
[..]
To their credit, WPATH does not say anywhere in the SOC that treatment is proven safe and effective. Instead, the overall message in the guidelines is to urge physicians to follow the patient’s wishes only, putting aside scientific evidence and ethical delivery of care.
The concept of an innate gender identity is unproven, unverifiable, and does not even have a clear definition. In the same spirit of historical psychiatric misadventures, somatic treatments are being prescribed for a psychologically based identity disorder. How many vulnerable children, adolescents and young adults will be harmed before we realize that history is repeating itself.
It doesn’t work that way. Because enforcing male delusions of gender on women and society is a shitty deal for the female half of the species.
This whole trans induced irruption away from the world of fact always leaves shaking my head (alternative facts anyone?). This isn’t about hating a particular subset of people because they are a certain way, this is about disagreeing with the bullshit they spew and the demands they make. Case in point, the idea that somehow biological sex is merely a social construct (it isn’t, it is an observable fact), or that by the power of deep gender-feels, one can change an immutable features of ones physical body.
Is this hatred of trans-people? Absolutely not, but rather disagreement with statements about reality that simply don’t jive with what we know about the world.
1. Fact – Biological sex is immutable.
2. Fact – Biological sex is the basis for the oppression of women, by men.
3. Fact – Strong feelings about either 1 or 2 do not change the empirical truth value of either statement.
But yet, when discussing trans ideology and inclusion with liberal feminists (handmaidens) it comes down to feelings and how unkind it is not to cater to men and their gender fantasies. Most of what I’ve seen of trans-ideology is conservative, misogynistic, patriarchal status-quo conforming doublespeak and twaddle. Backed up by emotional appeals meant to obscure the real meanings of many of their statements – I am a male and I get to define not only my own reality, but yours as well – which of course the same ole’ Male Supremacist bullshit we all know and love.
Should we censure the UN for acknowledging that the categories of female and male exist? Let’s take a peek at what that might look like…
“U.S. live-birthers (“”“females”“”) are more likely to die during childbirth than live-birthers in any other developed country. This is oppressive, seeing as trans women are not dying from child birth, and that’s just not inclusive enough. This is also false, because there would need to be a biological difference between bleeders and non-bleeders, and we all know that’s not true.
United Nations official website claims there are ~biological~ differences between what main diseases “males” and “females” suffer from in developing countries, and that “females” major burden of diseases are related to our “reproductive function and reproductive system” and the way society treats or mistreats them due to our “sex.” United Nations: @confirmed-terfs ???
I think so!
Heres the transphobic info below:
“Females”: 1) maternal, 2) STDs, 3) tuberculosis, 4) HIV infection, 5) depressive disorders.
“Males”: 1) HIV infection, 2) tuberculosis, 3) vehicle injuries, 4) homicide and violence, 5) war.
Like how did they even get that info considering there is no ‘male’ and ‘female?’Another TERFy thing United Nations reported is that in 1990, the majority of birth control was estimated that: at 17% was ‘female’ sterilization, 12% “intrauterine” device, 8% pill, 5% ‘male’ sterilization, 5% condom, 2% other supply methods, 8% non supply methods. Like where does the UN get off, differentiating ‘female’ and ‘male’ sterilization, or even stating they exist???? How did they get that info? Again, all TERF propaganda.
The World Health Organization claims that some factors that prevent “females” to benefit from quality health services were from the following:
-unequal power relationships between bleeders and penis-havers
-social norms that decrease education and employment opportunities
-an exclusive focus on bleeder’s reproductive roles and
– potential or actual experience of physical, sexual and emotional violence.
They also report that poverty yields a higher burden on bleeder’s health???!! Excuse me, cant these bleeders just grow up and identify as men already??? That’s clearly the solution to this problem?Abortion currently being fought against only makes me angry because I’m sure there are some trans women that would love to have an abortion. Abortion effects everyone equally, and if there was really something called “biology,” then this wouldn’t be an issue… I think?
“Female” genital mutilation? I don’t think so! Clitorises are chopped and burned off of both boys and girls, and it’s severely unfair cause I’m sure some trans women would kill to have a vagina to sew up. Can bleeders like shut up about this now? Discussing “female” genital mutilation like being sewn up and burned and cut at an impressionable age might trigger trans women to think of their female genital mutilation: being circumcised in a clean hospital as a baby.
Period stigma and menstrual cycles harm trans women because they don’t get to feel the pain, too. They aren’t shamed and called dirty, or put in a hut to bleed while losing education. Like bleeders are actively oppressing trans women by even talking about our disgusting periods. In Nepal, a uterus-haver died from smoke inhalation in her sleep because she was forced to sleep outside in a hut, and lit a fire to keep herself warm. Makes you wonder why she just didn’t identify as something else so they would let her sleep inside??? Is Nepal so backwards where they think biology is real??
The World Health Organization reported that 1,000 women die every day of the consequences of pregnancy and child birth. I think The WHO is also a TERF, seeing as they are excluding trans women from these numbers. Like, hello, do a report to see how many trans women die a day from reproductive health issues regarding children and birth, and then come back to me to compare numbers. This is a subject that effects ALL women, trans and cis!!!
The WHO also states that breast cancer is the top cancer in women. Which is ridiculously offensive because we should focus on prostate cancer when it comes to women, and we should also probably sexualize prostate cancer as much as breast cancer is sexualized?
Anyways for my conclusion, “sex” based oppression does not exist and neither does biology. No. All these things happen to women because we identify as women, and if people everywhere just simply identified as men, there would be none of the previous issues stated!!! Biology isn’t real, reproduction is a sham, “mother” nature is a liar, and if you still believe in biology (like Nepal, the United Nations or the World Health Organization)… chances are you probably need to die along with all the other terfs :/”
If simply identifying as a man is the solution, then why aren’t adult human females flocking over the divide and leaving their life of oppression behind? It’s almost as if one’s personal identity isn’t inherently regarded as factual data when it comes to how society works…
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…