You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Gender Self ID’ tag.
Only by telling and retelling of stories can we raise the consciousness of others. Thank you for your words Incessant Sentinel.
Grooming
The general concept of grooming is often too narrowly defined. While, yes, we usually see it used to reference paedophiles grooming young children, the word’s application has a much broader scope. The most common factor between all applications of this word is an individual or group of individuals slowly, methodically desensitising and preparing a person for an illegal activity, or an activity the person would not usually participate in (perhaps has even declined participating in already). Whether intentional or passive, the grooming individual will typically gently nudge and push boundaries of what their victim is comfortable with, but not so much the victim will immediately reject it. The idea is to then have a reference point: ‘If you were comfortable doing this thing then this next slightly further thing surely isn’t that big of a deal’, etc. This compounds and escalates until the victim has reached the desired final goal; usually a behaviour or specific act. Even if the groomer becomes more bold or escalates more rapidly, by this point the victim is usually inducted into a social circle where they feel they cannot air their grievances.There is a lot of overlap here with the practices of cults. First a vulnerable or malleable target is a selected. Next, the target is love-bombed; inundated with acceptance, support, emotional-availability, and generally making the person feel special and unique. After this, the victim is encouraged to cut ties with friends and family who are not part of the “in crowd” – this is often both an emotional and physical isolation, designed to remove the victim’s exposure to naysayers and censor their media input. And finally is the control. When a victim has no other structure or framework available in their lives, a cult will threaten to revoke any and all love, support, etc. (and with it the victim’s only lifeline) if they do not comply with all they ask of them. A lot of groomers operate on this same emotionally manipulative level.
The biggest difference between grooming and friendly persuasion is consent. Friendly-persuasion seeks to have an individual state their views or practices, and reasons for having them, in the hope that by providing clarity they may encourage another person to come round to their view. Grooming is more subversive, and by definition more malicious – it is a conscious (though sometimes unintentional) practice in which someone seeks to mould and perhaps even force someone round to views that the perpetrator knows they would not normally be comfortable with. It is a process so slow, and so invasive, that while it is clear as glass to any outsider, few victims realise the true scope of what has happened to them until they are removed from the situation. Looking back on my own experience, I find it inconceivable that I was ignorant to what was happening for so long.—Parts of my pre-teen – early teenage years are a grey area for me; I have many clear memories of school and my small circle of friends, but the areas of my life referenced in this article are not so clear-cut in my mind. While I do not believe I experienced any event so traumatic as to erase all memory, said memory associated with this part of my life is not pleasant to think about – I believe it is less abject trauma, and more emotional discomfort. Whatever the cause, some isolated events are difficult to put into sequential order. While I remember the individual pockets clearly, I will admit I may make minor errors in terms of what order some occurred.
But to what exactly am I referring? Well, while I may make commentary at parts, I think it more pertinent and respectful to those reading to allow room for personal judgement. Baring in mind my introduction to this piece, I encourage you to read my experiences with a critical brain.
—The Human Library
My pubescent period was a difficult time for me. I could write an entire article all about what an unequivocal wreck of a human being I was (in spite of my wonderfully supportive mother), but I will try and succinctly list my situation at the time:
- I was recovering from an intense period of physical and mental bullying from two previous schools (institutionally backed up by the headmasters’ “boys will be boys” attitude) that still leave scars to this day.
- I had undiagnosed mental health problems and learning difficulties. I’ve since learned I’m high functioning Aspergers/ASD which overlaps with Dyspraxia, a co-morbid symptom of both being depression and/or chronic anxiety. I have an exceptionally high IQ in some areas, followed by comically sharp dips into below-average struggling in others. This can affect my ability to make friends and perform socially.
- Puberty is a fucking nightmare. I was in a vulnerable and confused place about my sexuality, and where my attraction lay. It is only these years later that I have come to make a peace with my bisexuality. I was always an androgynous individual.
The Human Library is a world-over project in which pockets of the group organise public meets. The “books” are volunteers who feel their “title” is often misrepresented or misunderstood: homeless, OCD, single mother, fraud victim, etc. If it’s something worth talking about you can volunteer. A book is “rented” by a member of the public for a few minutes, and the two can sit down with the pretext of asking any awkward or burning questions you don’t normally get to ask. It is a wonderful concept. My mother was originally involved, talking about her experiences in mental health, though after a while she began to dip off due to other commitments. I was drawn to this project by a number of factors. They lacked any teenagers, and I’d been bullied for a myriad of reasons I knew other teens (particularly girls) felt unable to speak about – such innocuously subversive things it was hard to put into words. I initially had my title as ‘Tomboyish/Androgynous’, in the hope my personal perspective might make some sceptics realise the weight of the words they slung, or to make at least one person like myself not feel so alone and to offer them catharsis.It is in the waiting area of these events that I first met someone that we’ll call “Rita“. The first time I met Rita, I assumed they were a man, right up until they told me their name. They looked, sounded, and behaved exactly like your typical “bloke”, complete with a fresh-shaved stubble and wide leg-spread sitting, and it was only when they took their coat off that I realised they had breast implants. I will not claim to know the ins and outs of Rita’s life, nor will I pass value judgements on it, but this was my initial impression of them. Later, at other events, there was also “June“, an older individual who fit in the same category appearance and situation-wise as Rita. Meeting June, I initially thought they were a 50/60 year old man with mid-length hair, until told otherwise. Whatever their individual tags or labels, it was clear these people were attempting to pass for female, or at the very least more feminine than they were. Given the environment we were in, I promised myself to keep an open mind. I didn’t even know them after all.We talked aimlessly in classic British style, weather, the refreshment station lacking tea, etc. for some time, then chatted briefly about our “book titles” – this provided good way of practising our spiel for the public, so I was not opposed to it. I explained my title, my desire to remove the stigma in growing girls who were experiencing non-typical behaviour, and vaguely hashed out the idea of my own confusion in my appearance and attraction. Hindsight is a beautiful thing. With the benefit of it, I can pinpoint the exact first instance of “nudging” I experienced from this group. It was when Rita started talking with me, a girl under the age of 16 they barely knew, about their breasts and their implants.And later, details on the surgery of sexual organs, particularly turning a penis into a vagina.The topic of their breasts came up at least once every Human Library afternoon, like Rita couldn’t resist talking about it. If I looked uncomfortable, it was waved away as me being naive, uneducated on the subject, or even part of the “problem stigma”. It was framed in a way that insisted ‘it’s ok, that’s why we’re at the human library, I’ll educate you‘. I felt unable to silence them when uncomfortable, given the conditions of the Library. When June was in attendance, they often corroborated Rita about how any hesitation to listen to them marked a form of ignorance or even bigotry. Despite my discomfort, I also found an odd acceptance within the group. These few members were proposing titles and labels to me in a way that made me feel normal and accepted. Terms like “genderqueer”, “genderfluid” or “transvestite/genderplay”. They said it with such authority, enthusiasm and kindness, that I felt comforted by the notion. I was gradually and consistently directed to stories and suggestions of transgender-ism, surgery options, and chest binding. Once again with the benefit of hindsight, these conversations often took place out of earshot of the other Library volunteers.Some of the places I became directed to by this group were online communities. Many were men-turned-women like Rita and June, but others were teenagers or young adults. Here they discussed and actively encouraged drastic changes, via surgery or binding/stuffing, as if promising a final elixir to contentment and happiness. Via both the Human Library group and online, people constantly attempted to bait me into incrementally more intimate discussions, with limited or non-existent results due to my shyness. Rita had, however, made references to my own chest and cup-size in conversation at least twice. In this confusion of terminology and candour, I soon became fixated on the idea of being “gender-queer”.—Gender and Dyspraxia
Throughout all my multiple experiences and events I volunteered at, I now recognise a presiding theme of one-upmanship. Some of the regular volunteers, whether the problem groomer-types or not, often felt a need to be the “most special”. It was frankly exhausting to be around. The gentleman with chronic OCD, we’ll call him “Frank”, was initially endearing if eccentric, and I honestly saw a lot of myself in him and his social isolation. However, even he was not immune to this trait.After one Library session of using the book title ‘Genderqueer’, something didn’t sit right with me. I was tomboyish, certainly, but to imply it as an accomplished identity felt uncomfortable to me. It just wasn’t a label that fit. I felt like a fraud, and like I’d been almost jimmied into it a little, then pressured to stay. Now, myself and my mum had always suspected me of having some kind of high-functioning ASD-type issues, and had begun more seriously digging into the prospects at the time, having read that this general uncertainty and confusion could be more physical than psychological. I was personally over the moon at the prospect. I was a textbook Dyspraxic, all bar a formal diagnosis, and the idea of having some diagnosis that finally explained and helped me rationalise one of the biggest set of problems in my life was invigorating. It didn’t fix the issues, but it gave me a firm foundation of understanding to work from.
During our lunch break during a Library session, I quite rightly sought to share this newfound insight with what I believed to be some of my most open minded and accepting of friends/acquaintances. The reception was a mixture of ambivalent and unempathic results. I was either actively steered away from this path, with insistences that others were just trying to suppress my gender identity and attempts to blame my problems on something else, or was met with people competitively throwing out gems like: ‘Oh, well, I’ve got dyspraxia too. And depression. And OCD and anxiety and aspergers, sooo-‘ and then bizarrely proud, smug shrugging, as they’d somehow “won” the conversation by out-pathologising me. This particular example came from Frank.
The next time we had a public session, I used the title “Dyspraxia / ASD”. I came at it from an honest and open position of being new to the concept of it, yet being a possessor of it, and how I now realised it affected my life. That day, my title was hands-down one of the most demanded talks in the Library, and I was enthused with the progress that was made, along with the fantastic conversations I had with individuals just like myself. To accomplish my original goal, of making gas-lit, jaded victims of bullying and cruelty feel vindicated and justified almost drove me to tears. Rita and some of the inner-circle seemed displeased and did not share my newfound happiness, often passive-aggressively trying to put down my success whenever I returned to the waiting area. I was becoming less dependent, less enamoured with them and the concept of cross-dressing or gender-play, and their attempts to label the ones I now reached out to as the enemy only succeeded in me severing ties with them and the Human Library altogether.—
Follow UpsOur area is small, and as such the political circles are smaller still. I have encountered Rita at various discussions or debates, mostly gender related, and more or less ignore their work now. I find myself unable to objectively listen to their stances, given the inappropriate references to gynaecological surgery and my breasts I encountered when underage, no matter how well-intentioned they thought it was – I will not degrade anyone involved by pretending to listen to someone I can no longer respect.Frank continued to Facebook message me once, maybe twice a year up until 2018 – I’d originally friended him so I could like/share the posts about the junior football team he coached, and help support them. The messages were mostly harmless, if exceptionally overly-familiar – he often acted as if we were close friends. Some details were a little too intimate, but nothing rude or crass, simply overtly-emotional. Until, after having not spoken to him more than 7 times in my life (3 of which were online), he randomly messaged me with: ‘I think I’m transgender.’ followed by something along the lines of ‘I paint fingernails. I need advice’. It is worth noting that Frank is younger than Rita, but still a good chunk older than myself. I had no response, and it was quite frankly the final nail in a coffin of over familiarity and oppressively non-appropriate behaviour. I did not really know this man, yet had been asked on many separate instances by him to answer unusual and intimate questions for his own benefit. I doubt maleficence in his case, but over-exposure to a cult of over-sharing, to the point where I think he genuinely believed this was normal, everyday behaviour between near-strangers. I politely, but firmly, explained I no longer believed any further communication was appropriate, that I was not the one to discuss these issues with (nor was I qualified to), and have not heard from him since.
Epilogue
I bring us to the end of this tale with the unfortunate reflection that there is no one message to glean from it. This article is different to my usual, in that it is more a telling of facts and experience than introspection. But I would like it to serve a purpose.If it were to find any such purpose, let it be the knowledge that my story is not unique. Indeed, it is also one that has a significantly happier ending than most who also tell it. The subversive behaviour is often hard to describe – when we victims attempt to cite it we are often dismissed or ignored. Grooming, cultish behaviour, stamps a lasting impression on our lives, and yet I still find myself struggling to formulate a description of the seditious nature of many involved. Even now, I find myself simultaneously appalled to remember all that occurred, yet not feeling my article has done justice to the constant chipping and nudging I was bombarded with for so long.
These individuals were given unprecedented access to myself, and other vulnerable persons. Laughably, persons with direct labels on themselves as to how they may be manipulated, literally like a book on the shelf to be perused and selected. It doesn’t matter if the intention is malicious or ignorant, there are increasing pockets of sub-cultures in which this damaging behaviour is encouraged, overlooked, excused, and even hidden. Children are having normal, sometimes transient, issues and parts of maturation pathologised into immediate, permanent, life-changing surgery. Pre-teens who have not fully developed their sexuality are having said sexuality scrutinised and laid-bare by grown men and women who have no rights to it, nor qualifications beyond ‘I think it’. And we have grown women regretting their transitions as the freedom of their adult lives finally allows escape and outside perspective on these sub-cultures.
I cannot force judgement or groom any who reads the stories of myself or others, but I can hope for friendly persuasion. I can hope for mindfulness and scrutiny to the damage being done by unqualified, emotionally stunted individuals with no medical credentials. I escaped the “Cult of the Queer”, yet others are still firmly at the mercy of these people, the whims of the incapable, and many vulnerable books still sit on the shelves unaware they’re being selected.
The rest of the article reprinted here with the exception of the hyperbolic response from the trans groups in NZ that who were afraid to debate Meghan Murphy in person on live TV.
“Meghan Murphy is a radical feminist who believes transgender women aren’t women – views that have seen her banned from Twitter.
She was the star guest at Feminism 2020 on Friday – an event organised by Speak Up For Women that was originally going to be hosted at Massey University, but cancelled before being picked up by ACT leader David Seymour and hosted at Parliament.
Murphy told Newshub Nation on Saturday her position was “pretty straightforward”.
“I don’t believe that it’s possible to change biological sex, so I think that you’re born either male or female, and you remain male or female for life.
“Being a woman isn’t a feeling – it’s a fact. I guess I don’t quite understand what the purpose is in identifying the opposite sex.”
Murphy said she has concerns about “women’s rights as a whole”, but added she feels “total empathy” towards people with gender dysphoria, mental illness and their identities.
“The problem with trans is there’s no definition of transgender – it’s just an announcement,” she told Newshub Nation. “There’s no way to discern who is transgender. It’s just something that you say.”
***Update*** Just found the transcript!
On Newshub Nation: Simon Shepherd interviews Meghan Murphy
Simon Shepherd: It’s Transgender Awareness Week, the same week a feminist group, Speak Up For Women, has brought Megan Murphy from Canada to speak in New Zealand. Murphy is a radical feminist who believes trans women aren’t women, views that have seen her banned from Twitter. We asked representatives from several trans and rainbow organisations to engage in a debate, but no one was available. So I began by asking Megan Murphy to explain her position.
Megan Murphy: Sure, I mean, my position is pretty straightforward, in my opinion. I don’t believe that it’s possible to change biological sex. So I think that you’re born either male or female, and you remain male of female for life. So I disagree with the idea that you can identify as female if you’re male. I also, of course, have concerns about gender identity legislation and policies and the way that they impact women, and particularly women’s spaces where women and girls might be particularly vulnerable, so change rooms, transition houses, prisons.
We’ll get to those specific examples in a moment. Gender self-identification — what is wrong with a trans person declaring that they’re a woman, though, if that’s how they feel?
Well, being a woman isn’t a feeling, it’s a fact. I guess I don’t quite understand what the purpose is, in identifying as the opposite sex. I understand that some people suffer from, you know, what you might call gender dysphoria.
That’s right. And that’s a medically recognised diagnosis, isn’t it?
Well, the problem is that now gender identity legislation and policy isn’t based on any kind of medical diagnosis. I would disagree with the concept of gender dysphoria, but that’s sort of a more complicated topic we could maybe get into later. But right now, what we’re talking about is literally just a person announcing that they’re the opposite sex, based on nothing, not based on any kind of mental illness or whatever.
Well, there is one thing that we should raise, though. What about intersex people — the definition is people who do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies. Where do they fit into this?
Well, they don’t fit into this, because trans people aren’t intersex, they’re just males or females who don’t identify with the gender stereotypes attached to males and females.
Yeah, but you are saying that biologically you are one or the other, but these people are both or neither.
Well, actually, with intersex conditions, usually those people are male or female, and then they have an intersex condition. There’s some people that it’s more complicated and harder to decipher, but for most people, it’s actually not that hard to decipher, and they just have abnormalities.
Right, so, if someone chooses — if they are intersex and they choose to become a female, is that acceptable to you?
Well, I mean, this conversation really doesn’t have anything to do with intersex, so I’m not particularly interested in debating that issue. I think that’s separate. And, you know, I’m not a doctor, so that’s an issue between the person and their doctor, how they want to go about dealing with this condition.
Sure, but it doesn’t fit into your—
But what we’re talking about is a male who’s obviously male, clearly male, simply saying, ‘I’m a woman,’ and expecting to be accepted as a literal female.
The non-binary community is tiny; some studies here put it at about 1%. So why does a feminist like yourself feel threatened by trans people calling themselves women?
Well, I don’t know that it’s about me feeling threatened per se. Is that I have concerns for the impact on women’s rights as a whole, and particularly marginalised women. So, for example, when we’re talking about female prisons, the women who are in female prisons are among the most marginalised people in the country. And men are being transferred to these prisons and assaulting and sexually harassing these women.
Trans people have a high suicide rate here. There’s a study recently that more than 50% of them have considered suicide in the past year. They are very marginalised as well. Shouldn’t there be some empathy towards them?
I totally have empathy towards people who struggle with gender dysphoria, who struggle with mental illness, who struggle with, you know, their identities, who are marginalised in various ways. It’s really not about empathy or a lack of empathy. I mean, we’re talking about legislation, so it has to be about more than just how you feel. And really, what I’m concerned about is why no one in this conversation seems to have empathy or concerns for women and girls — I mean, they’re totally being left out and shut out of this debate.
And you are fighting for what you say has been the oppression of women over centuries. Do you believe that, in a way, this is also the oppression of another minority, or a marginalised society — that your opinions about them is marginalising them and oppressing them?
Well, I mean, my opinions about people who identify as trans are not offensive or judgemental or hateful in any way. I’m really just saying these basic things like you can’t change your sex.
Yeah, but some cultures have accepted this for years. I mean, there’s cultures around the world that have a history of gender fluidity. So why is it an issue right now?
I don’t have an issue with gender fluidity. And many of those cultures actually didn’t necessarily accept these people as literally the opposite sex. They accepted them as, you know, a male who adopted feminine stereotypes. Or there was, like, a ‘third gender’, but it wasn’t the same as what we’re talking about now.
So you’re saying that society— In your view, should society treat trans people differently, have a different category than male or female?
No. I mean, the problem with trans is that there’s no definition of transgender. It’s just an announcement. So there’s no way to discern who is transgender. You know, what does that mean? What does it mean to be transgender? It’s just something that you say.
The transgender community feels feminists like yourself are what they call exclusionary. They call you TERFs — trans exclusionary radical feminists.
Mm-hm.
So you’re excluding them from society. That’s what their argument—
I’m definitely not excluding them from society.
So why do you object on the terms?
And I’m not excluding trans people from anything. I mean, females who identify as transgender are welcome in women’s spaces, males who identify as transgender are welcome in male spaces and welcome everywhere else. What we’re saying, what we’re talking about specifically is men, so I really feel frustrated when people start talking about it as oppression of trans people or about transphobia, for example, because it’s really not about the trans identity. It’s really about biological sex, and that’s it.
These people feel like they’ve been trapped in the wrong body. That’s one of the things that you hear.
Well, it’s not possible to be trapped in the wrong body. You’re just born with the body and you deal with it. I mean, lots of people don’t like their bodies and wish they had different bodies, but, you know, too bad.
So, you’re a male; you’re always going to be a male. That’s right? You just cannot identify—
Of course. And everyone knows that. I mean, you have to agree it’s not possible to change sex. How would that happen?
Well, medically, it’s possible to change sex.
It’s not possible to change your chromosomes. It’s not possible to change your bones. It’s not possible to change your pheromones. I mean, you can get cosmetic surgery, so you can be a male with breast implants or you can get genital surgery, but that doesn’t literally change your biological sex.
Do you think that you have the privilege in this debate?
Definitely not.
I mean, you know, you are a cis-gender woman, and—
I am not a cis-gender woman. I don’t identify with femininity.
All right.
I don’t identify with sexist gender stereotypes.
Okay. All right. So you’re a woman.
I’m a woman. I’m a female. That’s right.
Okay. You’re a female. But you are not being marginalized, are you? I mean, because women are 50% of the population. So therefore you have the power in this relationship with people—
I mean, I— Me personally— This conversation really isn’t about me personally. It’s about all women and girls, and around the world, you have to agree that women still suffer enormously in many parts of the world. I mean, in Saudi Arabia, women still, you know, can’t function on their own. They’re not allowed to drive.
Sure. So, I guess the argument is with that kind of understanding, why do you not have an understanding of people who feel like they are in the wrong bodies and they want to identify as women and that’s what their natural state should be?
You know, we can’t base legislation based on a few people’s feelings, especially when those people are male and potentially present a threat to women and girls.
Okay. Well, let’s talk—
I mean, just because a man identifies as a woman, I don’t think that means he should be allowed access to women’s change room and be able to be there naked with his penis out around women and girls.
All right. So, they can—
I think surely you can agree that’s inappropriate.
Okay, so let’s talk about the practicalities. You say that a trans woman who hasn’t had a genital change should not be allowed into women’s spaces. Is that right? In women’s changing rooms?
Definitely.
Okay. So you shouldn’t share bathrooms. What about sport? Should trans women compete against other women in sport?
I mean, this is a really big issue, and I’m really glad that you brought it up, because males have an obvious advantage over females in most sports, and that’s why they compete separately. So, you know, women fought to have the right to compete on fair ground, and that’s being rolled back really quickly, and they’re being forced to compete against males. And there’s no— There’s nothing that a man can do, you know— These are men who have gone through puberty; they have male bodies. Even if they reduce their testosterone, that doesn’t mean that they—
Because many sports bodies do have levels of testosterone that are acceptable to have trans women versus women.
I know, but those men still have more muscle mass, their bones are different. You know, males have, like— their bodies are completely different than female bodies. They have different organs — they have bigger lungs, they have bigger hands, they have longer limbs, and you can’t change any of that by reducing testosterone.
What about self-identification on passports and drivers’ licences, these official kinds of documents?
I mean, I don’t see the point, but, again, I think that it’s dangerous to legally change a person’s sex, because what that means is that then that person, if he’s male and he has changed his sex to female on his ID and whatnot, then he must be accepted in women’s transition houses, in female prisons, in women’s change rooms.
Are trans women really a threat in those kinds of places?
Definitely not trans women. Men. Males. So, it doesn’t matter if you identify as trans or not. I don’t think that trans women are any more dangerous or predatorial than any other man, and I don’t even think all men are predatorial. But we know that the people who are predatorial towards women, who sexually harass women, who sexually assault women are generally males, not females.
So you’re saying that a male cannot change their spots if they’re a bad male, whether they be a trans woman or a male?
I mean, I hope that men can change their spots. By transitioning, they’re definitely not changing anything. That’s not the kind of change that we’re looking for.
You say that self-identification is a regressive ideology that’s trying to erase sex-based rights. So you’re saying that if somebody wants to self-ID as a trans woman, they’re erasing women’s rights.
I think that if ‘woman’ no longer has a definition and there’s no such thing as a women, then there’s no basis for women’s rights.
Nice to see a Hillary Clinton speaking up and addressing the fact that transgender ideology needs to be examined and debated in regards to how it affects women.
“To repeat, Hillary Clinton – that’s Hillary ‘basket of deplorables’ Clinton – has quite carefully and deliberately said that women have ‘legitimate’ concerns about transgender issues and those concerns should be recognized.
There are those, in the UK and US, who refuse to accept that questions and critical thinking about this issue are legitimate, and who refuse to acknowledge that those concerns are felt across the political spectrum. Even though the organized campaigns to raise those issues, especially A Woman’s Place UK, are mainly driven by women on the traditional left of the Labour party, there are trans rights activists and progressive campaigners who persist in claiming that this is all a confection of the wicked right.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the fact that Hillary Clinton is among those who say there are indeed legitimate questions here will quieten those claims, and maybe even prompt more people to start listening.
Or perhaps Clinton will simply be treated like all those other women who have dared to question transgender orthodoxy and find herself consigned to the ‘wrong side of history’ with the other witches and heretics.”
Time to examine trans ideology and what it means in society, the sooner the better.
I’m fairly new on Twitter but have already had the displeasure of witnessing the fury of faux-progressive backlash against feminism and feminists attempting to speak their mind in public places… in Canada. Canada?? The easy going, live and let live notions we like to believe in the more sensible regions of Canada seem to dissipate in our larger cities. Queer rights activists and trans activists have mounted a vigorous assault not on the arguments of gender critical feminists, but rather their character, the venues that host said feminists, and a rather hyperbolic set of straw assertions/mantras that serve as conversational dead ends/thought terminating cliches.
This is not the left that I grew up with, nor do I intend to ever associate with. These individuals seem to believe that their individualistic solutions to systemic social problems will somehow win the day. Not gonna happen.
The comparison between the regressive left and religious is worthy of examination. James Bloodworth makes the comparison in his essay on Unherd.
“But politics as religion invariably comes with a cost. There is, naturally, a constant hunt for heretics. Public denunciations followed by ‘cancellations’ are de rigueur. Rigid adherence to doctrine is celebrated, while those who err are pompously told that they are on the “wrong side of history”. Political spats focus on the moral character of a person rather than the content of their arguments. Public arguments in which, as Swift phrases it, “identity leftists spend a great deal of time expending venom… at fellow leftists with whom they have some minor disagreements” are ubiquitous on Twitter and other social media.
All of this takes the Left further into the echo chamber, away from the people it is supposed to represent. Attitudes which are held by the vast majority of Britons — that there should be some upper limit on immigration, that sex differences exist, that gender isn’t entirely a social construct — are enough to get a person ‘cancelled’ by today’s hobbyist Left. Moreover, the slippery equation of words — or even thoughts — with violence creates a censorious climate where activists feel justified in hounding people from public life completely.”
See the transactivists haranguing women and trying to disrupt two public (in Toronto and Vancouver respectively) gatherings that featured Meghan Murphy and other feminist speakers was solid proof for me of the parallel.
It is sad to see people who are so far out to lunch they would rather ban Meghan Murphy from the Toronto Public Library than make an argument against her. This bullshit is happening in Canada and it fucking sucks.
The woke twitter outrage is real. 
Next, the baseless accusation of Transphobia. Expect this particular scarlet epithet to be hurled when it is clear that people won’t sit down, shut-up and blithely accept the unreality that is gender-self id and transactivist ideology. The name calling, not engaging with arguments is par for the course, and unsurprisingly happens here as well.
When insults don’t work, threatening violence is the next step as always. Because when your arguments are shit, your playbook is limited. Name calling, harassment and violence are the standards at work here.
Oh, I forgot about deplatforming, suggested so kindly here by Mr Male Adam Pottle. Because we certainly cannot have those uppity women speaking about topics that directly affect them and their sex based rights and protections. That sort of speech is dangerous (it threatens the patriarchal status quo) and should not be allowed.
It is really a shit show, but there are few people on the thread that are invested in the basic principles of a free and democratic society that are speaking out against the bullshit that is identity politics. Thank heavens not all of us have lost our way.
Sweet jebus cooking crab-cakes: This is the “LITERAL VIOLENCE AND HATRED” being discussed – males are not females, pretending males are females adversely impacts the sex based rights of females, and sexist stereotypes are bad. All apparently hatespeech. This is lunacy and needs to stop. Women speaking out defending their rights, boundaries, and safety is NOT hatespeech, but rather should be encouraged and discussed.
All of the accusations screenshotted above are typical of what happens when discussing things with the Woke. You have to wade through fields of straw and thought terminating cliches before you can even start to have a reasonable discussion. The calls for ‘cancelling’ and ‘deplatforming’ are bullshit of the highest order, I won’t stand for it.
Reality is important folks, we should respect it.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…