Who is the driving force behind the Trans agenda?

I get a train into Central London for work on a regular basis and am often outnumbered by men in a particular area or carriage.

It is mostly polite, besuited chaps who are reading their phones or listening to music on headphones. But every so often there is a man, often an older man, who seems to resent my presence - baleful glances. They resent me taking up a seat, being there in rush hour, working...something?

I think a lot of it is to do with women gaining ground and some men resenting that.

The article itself was interesting but look at the vast majority of articles on the website.

mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federalist/

I wonder do men* need some sort of taboo element in sex. It seems they are always pushing the boundaries. Is transgression necessary for them?
*usual disclaimers apply.

The Federalist website (linked to by an earlier posting) is basically a milder version of Breitbart.

The article was by Jennifer Bilek, who is not a member of the alt right. Do you consider it somehow contaminated by association, or what's your point?

Hello, middle-aged man here. First posting and god I really hope this is not a prime example of mansplaining...I have started to learn about the TRA and GRA etc via Glinner. I have finally understood the difference between gender and sex and genuinely now see patriarchy where I formerly only saw normality. I have started contributing to WPUK and I am still trying to take it in and reconcile with my previous direct experience over the past 40 years of having a small number of post-op male and female trans friends.

I just wanted to say I am seeing a lot of brave women and some men being pummelled for the temerity of putting forward their arguments about the danger of self-ID and I see the misogyny of supposed equality organisations.

I know many here probably feel the Left has completely abandoned them but when I see people approvingly quoting articles by members of the hard right I worry. Those people will throw feminism under the bus as soon as they think it's served it purpose in this particular battle. For instance The Federalist website (linked to by an earlier posting) is basically a milder version of Breitbart. Look at the front page and you will see a slew of articles defending Brett Kavanaugh, applauding Trump, decrying the legalisation of abortion in Ireland etc, etc.

My enemy's enemy is not my friend.

I can well believe that whereas not so long ago fetishes and kinks were kept under wraps, now that porn is regarded as relatively mainstream, it is being seen as a green light for many to bring their philias out into the public sphere.

If Bunce can get away with taking his fetish to work and be feted in the city for doing so, what's to stop all the others? That's certainly what it feels like.

I think there are several strands which have combined. I think a lot of these are opportunistic rather than the prime drive. I’m still not entirely sure what I think has started and is pushing this, or even if it’s a single cause, or of it’s simply a meetingnod several strands of weird shit that’s happening to our culture

MRA and alt right - both these are, as mentioned above, pushing back against the perceived loss of power of white men. Alt right attack on race lines and MRAs and TRAs on sex and gender lines.

Societal control - as the world becomes more educated, more secular you need something else to control people. I think governments have realised that you don't need to send the jackboots in if you just keep people docile via debt, TV, internet and just enough physical comfort. So consumer goods are cheap. Crap food and booze is cheap. Numb yourself with that and don’t think too much about the loss of worker rights, or how expensive land is, or how a few percent of the population are asset stripping and benefitting from your existence.

Where it starts to get into tinfoil territory is when you start thinking about what’s being done and who might benefit from it. If it was simply a matter of free expression and openness, then we’d be seeing a push to remove gender stereotypes, protect everyone and allow free expression. And indeed there are plenty of transpeople who are in this vein (i can’t remember who on the other thread but she was talking about pronouns and how she didn’t want to be making other people afraid.)
But this is not what we are seeing. We are seeing an almost totalitarian push to control thought and language. To demonise those who speak facts. To make people deny biological reality. To strip away women’s rights. To demedicalise adults while medicalising children as young as possible. To confuse people’s view of sexuality (this is a deeply homophobic ideology.) to control the narrative in children by targeting schools. To erase gay children. To place trans children outside of safeguarding. To strip away safeguarding.

Basically it's that Overton window. How far can this be pushed? How much will people take before they revolt? How can you control a population by language and fear? What is truly beyond the pale and can we change that?

I’m a scientist and a cynic, and it worries me that I dont find some of the opinions above tinfoil Hatty at all. I truly think something very, very unpleasant is happening. I do t think we can quite see it yet, but when it’s locked its grip on us we will. And we may have lost the will, the language and the laws to fight it.

Della also seems utterly confused, mis-using the terms 'bisexual' and 'intersex', and appearing to think these words mean transsexual, and that the appearance of nipples on a man means 'we are all transsexuals'.

See, I thought men had nipples so they could be played with...

(Consistently lowering the tone, that's me!)

Seriously though, can we admit that there's a significant correlation between having genderfeels and mental illness now? Because if that's the case it's relevant to every single thing that we're discussing in terms of access to single sex spaces, legal changes, language, etc.

Mental illness should not be treated by forcing society as a whole to adopt the viewpoint of the person who's suffering from it.

I read recently that a large proportion (the majority?) of familial child sex abuse was opportunistic. I'll see if I can find a link.
It suggests higher numbers of men might be persuaded to be paedophiles if the opportunity to offend presented itself.
Not conflating paedophilia with homosexuality - but again previous studies were around the 1% mark for the number of gay males but in actuality the percentage is higher. AIDS campaigners and healthcare organisations coined the coy title "MSM" (men who have sex with men) for males who didn't identify as gay but who have sex (often risky, very often casual and anonymous) with other men. So the percentage of men who would have sex with other men is higher than the self reported percentages for gay and bi men combined.
Even with Tinder on the scene and the prevalence of hookup culture men shagging men are far ahead of women (and straight men). Men who have AGP can find a genuine sexual fanclub on hookup sites, they can have sexual liaisons with other men who seem excited by their "female" selves (but who might just want another warm human nearby to suck/wank off/fuck etc.,) Perhaps the female attire etc gives a man mental permission to do gay things? Several cultures see gay men as inferior because they are assumed to be receptive in sex, perhaps "tops" and "trans chasers" can reconcile their straight life with their illicit sex life more easily. Likewise perhaps the physical disguise allows the AGP to let go and enjoy sexual freedom, compartmentalising the sexual attraction as being part of the persona of the new trans identity. I'm met many many AGPs who refer to their female persona as.if it was a different person, going to far as to reintroduce themselves to people they already know.
Female sexuality is so totally different to the male in terms of anonymous sex that women are conspicuous by their absence on pure hookup sites (when Ashley Madison was exposed the number of fake female profiles outnumbered the real ones by about 9:1). So these men take solace in each other, like in prisons. The main thing that has changed is that it's easier to find each other (internet) and hate crime laws are in place so they are less likely to be subject to (ironically) gay bashing.
The vast majority of these men aren't homosexual, and given the opportunity to live out their paraphilia full time AND still express desire for women they will claim to be lesbians.
Blanchard split the trans women into two: homosexual transsexuals and AGPs. The HSTS men have been outnumbered by the AGP men who have no interest in being medicalised. I'm guessing the teenage girls in binders are largely female HSTS.
I think the increase in transgenderism is due to availability and lack of censure. Men used porn back when it had to be asked for under the counter. They use vastly more now, and major porn site have billions of users daily. Has the visual response been overstimulated in men? No, but endless variety of free stimuli are now available. Are more men actually gay? No, but gay sex is only a click away and women will generally not have sex with a stranger at the drop of a hat (for many reasons not least personal safety!) Are more men trans? I don't think so - what would prove it is if the overall numbers of HSTS remained constant whilst the number of AGPs increased.

Re FPE
Wiki extract:
"In 1960 Virginia Prince began another publication, also called Transvestia, that discussed transgender concerns. In 1962, she founded the Hose and Heels Club for cross-dressers, which soon changed its name to Phi Pi Epsilon, a name designed to evoke Greek-letter sororities and to play on the initials FPE, the acronym for Prince's philosophy of "Full Personality Expression". Prince believed that the binary gender system harmed both men and women by keeping them from their full human potential, and she considered cross-dressing to be one means of fixing this"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_transgender_people_in_the_United_States

The Beaumont Society:

"Originally founded in 1966, the society originally started as a UK Chapter of the secret American organisation “Full Personality Expression” (FPE). In 2010 The Beaumont Society became a registered charity. (No. 1135548). "

"We are the largest and longest established transgender support group in the UK, and have developed a support network which has been at the forefront of the transgender, transvestite, transsexual and cross-dressing community since 1966!

We believe that transgendered people have the right to dignity. The internet often displays transgendered people as sexual objects – the Beaumont Society aims to dispel this myth and is not available for sexual liaisons !"

www.beaumontsociety.org.uk/

I'd imagine it's difficult to get an accurate number deepwater.

I think I read somewhere else that it was 10% of men who were cross dressers - that seemed high to me, but is 3% any more likely I dunno.

I'm not Statto unfortunately...(niche 90s reference there)

Previous post, OP Sunkisses wrote:
"I did a search of Mumsnet and couldn't see any other posts about this extraordinary 1973 discussion show which was produced by transsexuals 45 years ago where they were given free-reign, free from editorial control. Four transsexuals are joined by a psychologist and an MP.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06c83f4/player

Where to start? Maybe with the show's producer and host, Della Aleksander, who is the most bizarre of all the participants. Della starts by claiming that a "chastened and wiser" Adolf Hitler and Queen Victoria have said, through a medium, that "there was a special role for me, in the reconstruction following a world wide collapse in 1978-79". Della also claims to have been sent from another world where the sexes don't exist and that transsexuals are the only model of a "higher race"! Della also claims to have founded the neo-Nazi sounding European National Movement in South Africa whilst serving in the Army there (I couldn't find any info on them, but they sound well dodgy to me).

Della also seems utterly confused, mis-using the terms 'bisexual' and 'intersex', and appearing to think these words mean transsexual, and that the appearance of nipples on a man means 'we are all transsexuals'. Della is, thankfully, corrected by the psychologist at 33.53 mins in who states that it is important to use the correct terminology, but Della wafts such trivialities away by saying "I don't want to get bogged down in medical questions". The MP, Leo Abse, argues against the 'trans umbrella' (before this term was invented by Stonewall etc) at 36 mins in.

There is clear evidence of autogynephilia (AGP - the sexual fetish of a man loving himself as a woman) at 33.23 when Della says the "sex act" is a "transsexual one", as "one attempts to become and absorb the beloved".

At 26 mins in one of the speakers, Rachel Bowen (the working class northern transsexual with dark hair), says that having a female birth certificate is a "status symbol". Another of the transsexuals, Laura Pralet, at 27 mins preposterously claims that "we are not a minority", and "I have never been a homosexual", even though Laura lives with and has married a man. Laura also says their husband is never happier when they are "in the kitchen", and at 31 mins in says they wanted to become a woman as "women have the best deal anyway".

It's absolutely fascinating and well worth a watch."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3327193-BBC-Open-Door-programme-45-years-ago-on-transsexuals-a-real-jaw-dropper

Interestingly from Stephen Whittle's Wiki page: 'He had read articles about people like Della Aleksander'

From THe Guardian article above:
(extracts)
"It is eye-opening how trans people have only recently acquired the most basic of rights. Britain was one of the last countries in Europe to recognise a person's right to change their gender in law, and it was not until the Gender Recognition Act of 2004 that trans people could become a different gender in law. The court of appeal only established the right for people to access gender reassignment treatments on the NHS in 1999, and it only became illegal to sack someone who changed or planned to change their gender in 1997.

Whittle, who "transitioned" nearly 40 years ago, was one of three trans men and three trans women who did an unusual thing in 1992: they went to meet Liberal Democrat MP Alex Carlile in Westminster. The unusual element was not the meeting but the fact that they travelled together – at the time, trans people never dared to because it increased the likelihood that they would be spotted and abused. These six wanted to start a campaign group; Carlile advised them to avoid the word "transsexual". So, in Grandma Lee's teashop opposite Big Ben, an anodyne name, Press for Change, was chosen.

In the 90s, when she was chair of the Women's Supper Club of the local Conservative party association in Cheshire, she quietly joined Press for Change. Even then, the new activists dared not be openly trans. "The thing that held us back in the 1990s campaigning was that fear of being out," admits Burns. Eventually, she came out in 1995; she jokes that she realised she was more embarrassed to be a member of the Conservative party than openly transsexual.

Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press" (continues)

This 2013 article sets out most of the core campaigners who have been pushing the agenda in the UK:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

This talk by Shelia Jeffreys in London a couple of months ago charts the history of how TRAs managed to get international legal & policy changed to link 'gender identity' in with sexual orientation:

The key way this was achieved was via the UN's Yogyakarta Principles:
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogyakarta_Principles&ved=2ahUKEwjb36Ga_erdAhXOZFAKHXFIAk0QFjAAegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw0ITh7nIA4D_fIDa9Y-c91r" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogyakarta_Principles&ved=2ahUKEwjb36Ga_erdAhXOZFAKHXFIAk0QFjAAegQIABAB&usg=AOvVaw0ITh7nIA4D_fIDa9Y-c91r

3% cross dressers is not much considering that an estimated 1% of males are into prepubescent kids, 2% if you increase the cutoff age to 14 year old kids.

Bowl I've been saying similar re. the big pharma supposed conspiracy for ages. I looked up my HRT (genuine replacement, because I am a menopausal woman) in the British Formularly. HRT is cheap as chips. There is no big money to be made there.

Surgery - more of a market, but even so... (Unless surgeons think they can take insurance companies for huge sums of money if reassignment surgery becomes a human right.)

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228002-Yogyakarta-principles

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3284051-yogyakarta-principles-plus-10

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3241837-Why-has-the-trans-lobby-been-so-successful

Formation of Press For Change: Stephen Whittle, Christine Burns etc
www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

It's international and started with cross dressing men's rights activists in the US. They managed to get it recognised internationally as a human rights issue.

redsummershoes this started in the US and across Europe, way before Brexit became a thing.

Not sure where SW gets his funding from. Academics usually need funding, especially for going to conferences abroad.

I'm not sure about stats but there are many men who are cross dressers it's a very common paraphilia. And of course cross dressers are now under the trans umbrella.

I'm on these boards all the time and can't remember where I read it but in the past few days I'm sure someone posted something that iirc posited that 3% of men were into this? Happy to be corrected on that stat as my memory is shite.

Then there are those men who are sexually attracted specifically to those under the umbrella but may not like to admit to having what is in fact a same sex attraction so have a vested interest in TWAW and everyone else believing it to...

theOtherPamAyres

H'mmm, why does that not surprise me. Maybe suppressed male fetishes and kinks are a lot more prevalent that we realise....

It would certainly explain the widening of the trans umbrella.

But where did those civil servants get the agenda from? I mean is it really just that austerity and neloberalism have eviscerated democracy to the point, where a hand full of wealthy guys can push their pet projects through, from Brexit to the validation of their kinky selves, and if some guy gets off on hunting pink rabbits, dying all rabbits pink is then the law of the land? Is that really all their is to it?

Stephen Whittle via the organisation 'Press for Change' was instrumental in getting the GRA passed in 2004. I reckon they have a lot of influence behind the scenes.