The Government is looking at Gender Stereotyping too. I'm suspicious about this bandwagon.

From clithroe's post one means of stultifying their subjects other than by force was by effeminising their subjects by the introduction of taverns, brothels, games, plays, medals, opiates, these served to ensnared the populace who were given over to fulfilling their vain pleasures and fantasies

Chilling!

I’ve had a dive into Methods of Social Control/Engineering, it’s all over the trans agenda, but to what end? There’s certainly elements of Eugenics involved, there’s also a cross over with genetic tinkering; not just with humans, but also with crop growth and food production, apparently the EU are currently being pressured to relax their restrictions on pesticide use and also reduce the controls on introducing pesticides to the environment, pesticides that may not only eradicate the pest it is directed at, but causes cancer or other conditions in humans, if they create issues further up the food chain …., scientists/medicine will deal with that as it arises! The UK is also being targeted so we can receive US food imports after Brexit. Presumably the same pressure could be applied in regard to increasing vaccinations and using 'off label' drugs on the population.

Social Engineering is done via Education, the Media and Technology and are employed to influence individual thoughts, culture and society. People may be forced to conform into believing the new truth initially, but after a while those coming after will obey and accept the new ‘truth’ without question, believing what is currently promoted is the truth and it has always been the truth.

Civil obedience is encouraged, engineered and enforced by the ruling class, the ruling class aren’t necessarily politicians/government, though governments have their uses in enforcing civil obedience and belief through policies, misinformation, appearing visibly generous while taking from elsewhere; I'd argue Penny Mordant/The Gov have done this in respect of the Equality Act 2010, where we are told changes will not be made to alter the Protected Characteristics, however no move had been made to enforce compliance of the EA2010 despite it being widely know among GC circles, though not the wider public, that they are incorrectly applied, even within gov dept's.

Tyranny flows downwards from large individual benefactors, to middling then small beneficiaries, then to all the dregs, deviants and those who think they will benefit from promoting the tyranny of the individual benefactor. With each group clinging onto and trying to curry favour from their benefactor or those who are seen to wield more power and influence; these servants lead fearful and unhappy lives, fawning to the elite for validation, medication, surgery and acceptance. They have a degree of detachment from reality and believe they are working towards being free individuals, whereas the reality is they are becoming increasingly enslaved to the current narrative.

Arendt expresses a similar narrative ‘In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and nothing was true... The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness. (Arendt Origins of Totalitarianism).

Opposition to the Social Engineering and the ‘new truth’ highlights the failings within the narrative, but push back using a counter argument and exposing the propaganda can be unsuccessful because the public are not interested in the nuances of the debate or even seeking out to see if there is a counter argument themselves. Opponents to the ‘new truth’ don’t have access to the education, media or laws that will help them get their voices into the public, even when access is achieved the public can be bamboozled by ‘experts’ employed by the tyrant/state who muddy the waters by providing misleading information and spurious arguments, serving to misinform the public and lull them into acceptance and their own servitude.

Without knocking what is currently being done to raise public awareness are there other ways we can challenge the erosion of women's rights?

I came across an interesting discourse by Etienne de la Boethe (1552/53), that was said to have influence Galton and his views on Eugenics. After the atrocities of the Third Reich during WW2, eugenics became a dirty word though the idea persisted with ‘Transition’ becoming the preferred term.

This passage struck me given the push for TWAW, sex work, normalising BDSM, and the erosion of safeguarding, because in order for men to ‘play and fulfil their pleasures’ women and children need to be dehumanised and coerced into believing they are willingly fulfilling men’s needs.

‘A tyrant does not consider himself to have established complete power until he has reached the point where there are no men of any worth underneath him; one means of stultifying their subjects other than by force was by effeminising their subjects by the introduction of taverns, brothels, games, plays, medals, opiates, these served to ensnared the populace who were given over to fulfilling their vain pleasures and fantasies, lulling subjects into subservience with a few gifts, usually taken from the subjects themselves, the subjects can offer no resistance to tyranny after their public acceptance of their own degradation and willingness to take bribes.
Century of the Self: Discourse on Voluntary Servitude – Etienne de la Boethe
mises.org/sites/default/files/Politics%20of%20Obedience.pdf

Random findings:

I can't remember seeing these articles re the creation of artificial sperm
www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jan/01/scientists-a-step-closer-to-mimicking-way-human-body-creates-sperm

and eggs
www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-create-immature-human-eggs-out-blood-cells-first-time-180970388/

The Most Disturbing Presentation Ever - Our Tech Nightmare (Skinners Box)

The creation of a synthetic limb that via sensors can 'feel' and behave as a real limb that has given a man his mobility and ability to climb; normalising the assimilation of tech & bodies, amazing as the technology is the presenter has to mention growing wings in the future and extending our bodies!

www.ted.com/talks/hugh_herr_how_we_ll_become_cyborgs_and_extend_human_potential?language=en

I agree. Ideas are like magnetic waves that crash through human society. They gather together people who seem to benefit from what is happening, so for instance people who like sadomasochistic sex whilst dressed in animal suits or paedophiles are salivating at the moment. They see the destruction of the moral order of Queer Theory as an opportunity to legitimise their deviant desires. Much sadder are those people who get sucked in because of their own fragile personalities, mental health problems and personal trauma. So the Lily Madigans of this world may be very irritating and a real cause of disruption to many people but they are riding the crest of a wave that is effectively using them. When the wave crashes onto the rocks - they will more than likely crash and burn with it. In the meantime, there are real beneficiaries of what is going on - the sell-out academics who refuse to see the truth, the useful idiot scientists that can't see beyond their own careers and so on. But the real "winners" will be those who own and control the new technologies.

I believe that the trans wave and the whole ridiculous debate about gender stereotypes is an outrageous attempt at mass brainwashing. "They" have currently got people getting their knickers in a twist trying to prove that biological sex differences only exist in areas that they want them to exist - sport for instance but that all other differences are just "social constructs" - as far as I understand the science of the moment this is nonsense.

Do sex differences exist between xx people and xy people - yes
Do these differences exist in a physical, emotional and psychological sense - yes
Can science adequately quantify these differences - no
Is the whole picture confused by the fact that there are great physical, emotional and psychological variations within xx and xy categories - yes.
Is there an innate biologically based difference between the sexes or is this primarily a social construct - we could ask David Reimer if he were still alive.

But hey, let's keep arguing about gender as a social construct while the corporations run massive real world experiments on an unsuspecting public and redefine what it is to be human.

I wonder if society is being socially engineered in order to provide a stream of medical subjects on whom to practice surgery on, gain data and psychological info; as individuals currently identifying as trans are disposable, though the information gained from them is invaluable and will help provide the info necessary for the medical/scientific community to push forward with implementing the various elements of 'transitions'.

Is this why we are expected to acknowledge somebody is trans if they say so, because people with a spectrum of psychological disorders are required in order to discover differences between how various groups react to current medication/surgeries, before the practices are refined, developed further and introduced more widely as safe, especially to the elite where you'd want to be able to offer some certainty.

We're currently supposed to believe that an individual will commit suicide if they don't get surgery/medication, yet transition/transhumanism is supposed to enable humans to remain on an earth scarce of resources, the elite, powerful and monied or those deemed as having relevant skills to offer will receive preferential access to reduced food resources and/or future technology, I can't see the suicidal children and AGP adults clamouring for today's treatments being able to fulfill the criteria.

Is the attack on women an unintended consequence, or a means of disrupting current society and diverting attention?

ByGrab I found this review of a novel by a Dr Helen Sedgwick who is a physicist and bioengineer - written in 2017 and called The Growing Season. This is about a future uterus that is a fluid-filled pouch that can be worn on the stomach of either men or women. She sees this as a positive thing for equality.

www.bionews.org.uk/page_142629

Other than Hacking Darwin I am drawing a blank on good critical books that also explain current developments. I have a book that is quite old now which is a good general introduction called Brave New Worlds: Staying Human in the Genetic Future by Bryan Appleyard.

Genetic engineering is the ultimate way to smash all gender stereotypes as the human being is enabled to become whatever it wants to be. It seems to me that this is why gender fluidity is being pushed so hard by governments all over the world. This is where the virtual world of the avatar meets science. This is where the crude mutilation of the "sex change" is leading us.

Just getting on thread to make sure I read links later.

Have meanwhile.

Yes, I think male/transgender women gestation of foetuses will be less the issue. It will be used, as the transgender issue is currently being used, as a crowbar into the mass consciousness - to get people to think the previously unthinkable as, I think, Franz quotes Julian Huxley as saying.

One major problem is the lack of any real regulation. In the the UK the Human Genetics Commission was set up in 1999 in order to provide the Government with advice on the legal, ethical, social and economic implications of emerging healthcare technologies but by 2012 it was decided to bring this “arm’s length” body inside as a Departmental (of Health) Expert Committee named The Emerging Science and Bioethics Advisory Committee (ESBAC). It would seem that the Department then proceeded to ignore this body, and its panel of experts in social sciences, law and biotechnology. They were left twiddling their thumbs and were given no work to do at all. They sought to generate their own work and the whole committee was very disenchanted by 2013.

www.bionews.org.uk/page_397445.asp

This body is now defunct and I have not kept up to date with what happened after this.

The fact that the government did not seek their advice leads me to think that they had their own agenda that they were going to follow anyway. As Metzl said these technologies are coming anyway - the only question is, how they are going to foist them onto the general population with the least fuss possible.

Yes, I think so. I watched the video Clitheroe linked to earlier and was wondering if men being able to gestate babies is somewhat of a red herring.

A man doesn't really have the room or the internal equipment to grow a baby, let alone to term, but what their bodies will do is provide a hostile environment for a foetus/baby, some men would probably volunteer to be guinea pigs, regardless of the harm/outcome to themselves. Once scientists can grow a number of cells to a degree of viability in a man's body, they'll have amassed significant data, which could allow them to adapt and refine any experimentation currently being undertaken on incubating babies external to a womb.

It seems far fetched, but science/medicine already allows us to fertalise an egg outside the womb and babies born at C25wks are increasingly able to thrive with n an incubator with the correct medical care. Theoretically it's only the period between fertilisation and 25 wks that is problematic.

On the subject of which, this was in the Metro last week:

metro.co.uk/2019/05/14/human-babies-born-using-an-artificial-womb-possible-in-a-decade-8156458/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

"With no baby of any species being fully brought to term without a live womb for now, how distant a prospect is this sort of technology?

‘We’re in the process of interacting with the [US Food And Drug Administration] FDA, so it’s not impossible that we could be doing a clinical trial one to two years from now,’ said Dr Alan Flake, of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia which carried out the research using the biobag and the lambs.

And he’s not the only one who’s optimistic with timings:

‘It seems probable that we are only several years away from testing on human subjects,’ social ethics and policy academic Elizabeth Chloe Romanis wrote in the BMJ’s Journal Of Medical Ethics.

Dr Carlo Bulletti, associate professor at Yale University’s obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive science department, thinks that a fully functioning artificial womb could be a real thing within the next 10 years.

Does this mean that the mother/child bond will be severed for good?"

We really are heading for dystopia he'll. Metzl's book sounds like a must read.

I'm going to buy the book as well LeftHandDown when I have the time (not sure when that will be exactly).

It's all pretty scary - but I'd sooner know the truth than bury my head in the sand.

By the way, your DS sounds like a pretty interesting person - you must have some great conversations!

Good luck to you both.

Thanks for the synopsis of the interview Clitheroe. I'll check out your link later today.

I found the interview and the implications of the way science/bio genetics is heading is quite chilling and cannot see it as a 'natural' progression of humanity, I also doubt humanities ability to come to any consensus regarding an ethical code on boundaries as there will always be investors or scientists willing to push beyond any boundaries and individuals willing to put themselves forward as guinea pigs regardless of the cost to themselves.

DS has ordered Metzl's book, hopefully it may answer some of the questions the interview left me with.

The problem with "gender stereotyping" is that it's not just about pink/girls, blue/boys it now also means that assuming penis = male is gender stereotyping....

Thank you for the Joe Rogan clip LeftHandDown. I hadn't seen it before nor heard of his book.

This confirms that one of the central things that ties everything together including

• the sexualisation of children
• transgender ideology
• queer theory
• the attempt to destroy all aspects of traditional sex roles

is the dramatic and audacious moves that science is making to redefine the human being. As the interviewee argues this is becoming a new international arms race as any country that falls behind in genetic improvement of its human resources will fall behind in every aspect of national development. China announced the birth of the first genetically modified children in October 2018 - I absolutely do not believe that this was the first time that this has happened nor that China were the first to do this.

Central to this is the dislocation between sex and procreation. The new human being will be increasingly a product of the laboratory.

Central to this is the destruction of the role of the woman as the bearer, nurturer and protector of children

Central to the role of this is the feeling of responsibility of the male to his own offspring.

We are not just looking at the erasure of lesbians or women - this is happening but is just a by-product of the erasure of the human being as it has been for thousands of years.

The human being will increasingly be the property of the state and the corporations that control them.

One of the first people to explore this for the popular audience was a young filmmaker called Aaron Franz - in his film The Age of Transitions he traces these moves back to the eugenics that was developed by the British elite. This film is now a few years old but you may find it interesting - he is not as optimistic as Rogan's interviewee.

theageoftransitions.com/video

The government needs to be commissioning research into male violence

But that would require pattern recognition skills and class analysis, maybe even the accurate recording of male crimes - these things are verboten .

Even without the dangers of it being used for the trans agenda, tackling gender (sex) stereotypes as the cause of women's inequality misses the point completely.

Feminisation, female subordination is caused by male violence, not by dressing little girls in pink and giving them dolls to play with. Dressing little girls in pink merely identifies more easily who men can attack.

The government needs to be commissioning research into male violence, particularly sexual violence and its effects on women and girls. At least that would be making a start.

Also here's a campaign against it

Looks like a few GC radfems are on board - Feminist Current, Nordic Model Now, and Kathleen Richardson at least.

If you want dystopian, fill your boots on this future nightmare:

Why female sex robots are more dangerous than you think

A brief history of men who build female robots

Talking of tech and biotech industries, my son was telling me about a Joe Rogan interview with Jamie Metzl; I'm only a third of the way through but the implications of what he is saying is currently going on and where biotechnology is heading is quite concerning and questions whether we, as a society are ready for the changes the technology will bring.

Joe Rogan interview

Brief outline of the book
www.atlanticcouncil.org/news/press-releases/hacking-darwin-atlantic-council-s-jamie-metzl-has-a-new-guide-to-thriving-in-the-genetics-revolution

ByGrabtharsHammarWhatASaving I totally agree. Can't put my finger on exactly what though, either. We need to keep our eyes on what's going on in the tech and biotech industries I think. The pace of technological development in the 20th century was astronomical - think of how much things changed in our grandparent' or great grandparents' lives, for example - both technologies and also in terms of social norms.

But this is the thing - the pace of change, driven by technology, is not only not slowing down, it's accelerating and by all accounts, it will continue to do so. The changes we see in our own lifetimes will be much greater than in our grandparents' time.

I was thinking of starting a thread about possible dystopias we're heading towards, just today as it happens (depressing shit). Might do that tomorrow...

There is a HUGE downside to what the TRAs mean by tackling stereotypes. It's not what we on the Left have meant by it for years, not at all. But because they're using the language of the left, everyone assumes we know what they're talking about. But you really need to scratch below the surface and examine what's actually being said, and to think about the real world implications, to understand what's going on here.

Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders expert Ray Blanchard says, in this interview

Educated people in general have a sympathy for the downtrodden or the unfortunate that’s built into liberal-arts education in the Western world — and I think that’s a good thing. I think it’s a good thing that people should get some kind of built-in bias towards the underdog and towards the suffering.

But I think in this case, that tendency and that bias on the part of liberal media has been misused by trans activists to influence treatment of cases of those who would actually do better in the long term if they could simply accept their anatomic sex, and here I’m talking about the young kids, 60 to 80 percent of whom are going to normalize in gender identity even without any clinical intervention.

The same is happening here. TRAs are using language we think we recognise eg "tacking gender stereotypes* to push an agenda that's VERY different to what we assume is meant by the phrase.

I don't think there's much of a downside to looking into gender-stereo-typing

Please read my post above. That's the downside of looking at gender stereotyping.

There is a massive push at the moment to use dehumanising language to describe women and particularly mothers. And this is tied up with ideas about stereotyping.

Also, there are LOADS of young / trendy parents bringing their DC up as gender neutral these days. On the surface it sounds great, they eschew gender stereptypes and bring their DC up to be whomever they want to be! Sounds brilliant!

But - I know loads of these parents and many of them are gaslighting their kids. They like to pretend that sex differences don't exist. So, when they're telling them about, for example, periods, they don't say women get periods. They say people with uteruses get periods, some of these are women, some are men.

They give their children the idea from a very young age that they can change sex if they want. Then get HUGE support and validation from their online communities if they decide their child is trans/gender fluid etc.

I've seen discussions on FB with them trying to work out how to deal with telling their kids about sex differences in the animal world. (In the end, they decided not to tell them that eg male bees are drones, the female bees are the workers. Just that there were drones and workers).

This kind of gaslighting is done in the name of breaking down stereotypes. But while we live in a world where men and the power to, fro example, outlaw abortion, and where rape is common and largely unpunished, this isn't breaking down stereotypes, it's hiding them under supposedly "inclusive" language, but will stop us from being able to talk about sexism, male violence, women's health issues.

I bet it will end up being about how women have to change how we think about themselves.

I don't know. There's something up, but I don't know what. Something wrong, something's gone wrong somewhere. I don't think it's about trans people - "canary in the mine" was the phrase someone used the other day. I don't know what the game is, but something weird is happening. We need to start looking broader. I have a nasty feeling we're being distracted from something bigger. A lot of stuff is happening all over the world to woman's rights, it's happening really fast and all happening at the same time. It feels coordinated but I don't know why or how or by whom. Feel like I'm going crazy atm, like a paranoid tinfoil hat nutter.

I don't think there's much of a downside to looking into gender-stereo-typing, since it's been used for ever to stop girls and women from doing what they want to do - both in the playground and in the workforce. As far as toys and clothes manufacturers go, yes, they should be involved because it's the pink-blue thing and the stupid slogans on t-shirts that contributes to people thinking boys are good at one thing and girls are good at another. And that continues in the work place where women are given more office housework and do more of the emotional labour, neither of which contribute to promotion or are compensated.