Tamsin sutherland

I do agree Kittens in that it's taken me and quite a lot of people by surprise and the way it's gained momentum and the way a lot of politicians seem to have bought into it. I think drunk the kool aid is the phrase I've seen? To my mind it doesn't seem logical. After all why would you want to piss off and upset 50% of your voting public for 0.3%? It just doesn't add up. I know that women get a raw deal mostly but we do still vote!

Still think there's someone/some group pulling strings behind the scenes in terms of the rapid acceptance of TRA theory in politics and the media and people walking back their positions in a way that indicates either fear or pressure being brought to bear on them, just don't think it has anything to do with Islam, the Clintons, etc.

Indeed.

The trans issue is made more complex because the opposition to the ideology has meant very disparate groups have found common ground but not always for the same reasons. It's a bit of a headfuck.

My perspective is that "men can't become women, and vice versa" is at such a "water is wet, fire is hot" level of obviousness that it's inevitable that you'll end up with people agreeing on that who don't agree on anything much else. It's kind of like you have one small group of people going "gravity isn't real and you're a bigot if you say it does!", and everyone else going "wait, what?"

I also think it's reasonable to be worried about the rise of robots and AI.

None of this is very new though- the dystopian speculative fiction writers have predicted pretty much everything.

I appreciated the way T has thought about so many different issues, and considered if there is a common energy behind them.
The sexualisation of children, the eradication of women, the expectation to chant propaganda which is clearly untrue, no platforming, racial tension, no debate...

Considering possibilities does not mean you are paranoid.

I feel kind of stuck in the middle here because I understand why frogsoup went "wait a fucking minute" about threats of doxxing, and I do think Infamous is well into tinfoil hat territory at this point, but I don't have the sort of reflexive I'm horrified that this was even said response that some people do. I think it's a side effect of being an ex pat kid, you get used to hearing wildly different theories on how the world works and having to filter for bias and reasonability.

Still think there's someone/some group pulling strings behind the scenes in terms of the rapid acceptance of TRA theory in politics and the media and people walking back their positions in a way that indicates either fear or pressure being brought to bear on them, just don't think it has anything to do with Islam, the Clintons, etc.

I agree Ova in that most people's activism should be based on personal principles rather than alignment with other factors. My alignment tends to be with me in that I find this whole thing worrying in the impact on women and children. Not particularly rad fem but definitely pro-female.

I remember the QC that withdrew his support from the petition and without question, there was something going on behind the scenes. It was sinister. He wouldn't talk about it.

I’m pretty sure the only thing Jo Maugham QC was thinking about was his leftist credentials.

The trans issue is made more complex because the opposition to the ideology has meant very disparate groups have found common ground but not always for the same reasons. It's a bit of a headfuck.

I've read a number of Federalist articles I've thought were well written and have broadly agreed with but I don't wish to align with the Fundamental Christian Right.

I will be relieved if the DUP are one of the reasons that the Torys are backtracking on GRA reform but I don't support or align with the DUP.

Ditto any argument against TRAs that neo nationalists have.

I do like reading a range of views, even those I deem unpleasant but I want my personal activism to be purely centred on rad fem foundations and pro female arguments.

I don't think it's a coincidence that polarised views are emerging in this era of censored debate.

Exactly

I think ideas should be talked about and tested. I don't think it's a coincidence that polarised views are emerging in this era of censored debate.

Yeah, ornery bastards are a soft spot for me too. I think Infamous's theory that Islam is plotting to destroy the West by transing children is nonsense though - there are plenty of people and organizations closer to home more likely to be responsible, and in terms of global conspiracies the major players are the US, the EU, China, and Russia. The only Muslim majority country with any claim to being a significant global player is Saudi Arabia, and I really don't see them as having anything to do with this particular mess.

I'm still checking in but I really must do some work! I need to get it done! Argh! This is so distracting...

Well. I still like InfamousT. I am fond of people who piss everyone off. They give me a sense of security. If there's one thing you can be certain of, when everything is in a state of flux, T will still be pissing people off.

I don't think my fondness is only because T male and gender critical, I like the turns of phrase, the passion and the conviction. I wouldn't feel the same about a TIM who was boring and unoriginal.

Felt a bit sorry about the spiralling out randomness, but its not the end of the world.

I don't really have a 'go to' site, I ramble across the internet and far from reading any one site exhaustively I tend to come across stuff usually through reading one thing then finding another from that.

I think you'll find there are any number of clear headed and sensible people within this debate. But the main thing I do worry about and which T touched on is the concerted efforts to silence people, the whole no debate thing worries me more than most things. It seems to me that slogans such as this seem more prevalent recently than in previous times: no debate, no platform etc. We won't be on the same 'side' for everything but I do see that many of us have come together and we want to fight this corner and we may have to put aside our normal politics to do that.

RE the various commenters praising Infamous earlier in the thread, my take is that there's a tendency for any trans person who appears to be gender critical who shows up to be showered with praise because everyone is so happy to see any deviation from the uncritical "no debate" stance usually adopted by TRAs. It's that dynamic that could use a bit of a rethink, imo, because I think it was that more than anything Infamous actually said that promoted the response. Give people some time to show you who they are and they usually will (so for example I'm now totally willing to engage with Pigeon because I've seen enough to go oh, hey, this actually is a sensible person worth talking things out with, whereas at a certain point Infamous headed in the other direction.)

frog said very well what I suppose I was getting at. I know from a variety of sources all I need to know about Breitbart to be sure I don't need to hear what they have to say.

It helps you to know what other's are thinking and make an informed choice.

There's a big difference between having a 'go to' site and stumbling across something and having a read.

Wow, this thread went weird.

I do think we need to be clear that noone here is reviling, threatening, doxxing, spitting on or otherwise being horrible to infamousT - that's ridiculous hyperbole. There are posters disagreeing, and I'm very much one of them, but I don't have the energy right now to detail out why - there's an awful lot there. frogsoup, I get you.

Agreed on keeping an eye on those attempting to mislead, but I'm still not going to wade through the various rants that Infamous just posted and rebut every single claim. As I said upthread, doing so would clearly be a waste of time, same way I don't stop and have political debates with the homeless guy who rants at me about chemtrails.

It's one thing keeping an eye on both the daily mail and the guardian. But reading breitbart as part of forming 'a balanced view' is bizarre. It's a far-right site with links to neo-nazi groups and no compunction about making up entirely fake articles. At least the UK print media has a press complaints commission and regulation of sorts. Breitbart though? You know there are nutcases out there, how on earth does it help you gain a balanced perspective to read a bit of racist hate propaganda along with your morning cereal?!

It's a fine balance.

Oh definitely Tallulah, but you can watch the hypnotist without looking at the watch I think.

its important for those with robust critical thinking skills to keep an eye on what the hypnotists are up to, otherwise who is going to challenge their narrative?

I know I venture to places others may be more cautious - but I have an inbuilt "this is bullshit" voice that kicks in after having given things consideration - I am sure I can't be the only one.