The Skeptic Community's Blind Spot for Gender Theory

I was listening to a podcast I really like earlier on- Griefcast, by Cariad Lloyd. She was doing a thing for her sponsor, The Economist, and said something like “Facts are so very important, especially these days” and I wanted to shout “So why do you think that people can be born in the wrong body when there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support that view!!!!”

I have been intensely frustrated that more of the skeptic community isn't speaking out but someone did just post this. I haven't had time to watch it all yet and didn't agree with everything he says but some of it seems to be good.

Are you thinking that article is evidence of a conspiracy?

I think its a little dodgy myself.

@Mermoose

Apologies for the late reply

I was very busy yesterday and am also today so this is going to be quick

Conspiracy theories sound nutty because bizarre conspiracy theories are all over the internet and people are, quite rightly skeptical of them

I recommended a book in my above post because it details the experience of a journalist and media professional with first hand personal experience and who can provide insight into how fake news and conspiracy theories are used for social engineering.

The book is not "the answer", it is not magic and will not prove or solve everything but it will provide useful material for anyone interested in how society became so batshit crazy.

I do not understand why you would dismiss the book when you have not read it.

Dismiss David Icke and other similar loons by all means, crack on and I'll join in, but the writer is articulate and credible and has something to offer.

Also, one of the problem with the insane conspiracy theories is that they ensure that real conspiracies are likely to be dismissed.

I read an article today in the BBC that, if true, has some resonances with the current trans situation

It is a short article and does not take too long to read. I would welcome your thoughts

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-48619734

That's it from me for today :)

However that creates an opportunity for those with the relevant skills and abilities to start our own movement

I have to disagree. If people can’t even put on The Vagina Monologues without genuflecting to the mighty girl cock I don’t see how the performing arts can help.

It’s really up the the science and skeptical community to say, stop, this is bullshit.

It would make a massive difference if Cordelia Fine stood up. The liberal press lavished praise in Delusions of Gender and Testosterone Rex. Having conceded their is no gendered brain when talking about men and women they can’t backtrack on that if Fine explicitly links that same argument to trans-identity.

Ta hood. Deep reading for me tbh but I do read what you write and is very informative

ooh just seen that Peter Pomerantsev has a new book out later in the year

This is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality

www.amazon.co.uk/This-Not-Propaganda-Adventures-Against/dp/0571338631/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_sims?tag=mumsnetforu03-21&ie=UTF8

I can only say that I found Nothing is True and Everything is Possible: Adventures in Modern Russia to be very informative and helpful.

Others may disagree of course :)

This is where we diverge. I don't see the prevalence of gender theory as being necessarily more sinister or mysterious than any other illogical, harmful idea that takes hold - various religions, quack medicines, the anti-vaxx movement.

I would argue that it is more dangerous because it is an attack on logic, rationality and thinking. I am writing an article about this at the moment, too long to post here

I agree with some of what you say about many people preferring a magical view of the world to a materialistic one (I see the appeal myself). But that's precisely why I don't think we have to see this as a conspiracy.

I agree that we should not believe in conspiracies unless there is evidence of them. I also think that people have a natural tendency to believe in corruption and conspiracies rather than in say, incompetence and everything being overwhelmingly complicated.

It's caught on because it appeals to subconscious beliefs and biases that we probably all have to some degree: the belief in mind/body dualism; deep-seated, subconscious sexism; political tribalism.

This I have no argument with, well said in fact

There's no secret council directing this. It's an idea that appeals to a lot of people.

I cannot claim that there is one secret council, I believe there is evidence of at least one, but there may be many.

And, we're living at a time when people use marketing-type strategies to push political messages, and marketing by-passes debate and critical argument, and aims at emotions and biases. This goes for a LOT of political messages, both good and bad.

Here is the crux of the matter. We live in a "post truth" world and powerful people are using psychology and marketing-type strategies to influence elections, undermine democracy and asset strip entire nations.

This has been well reported in this excellent book which I recommend

www.amazon.co.uk/Nothing-True-Everything-Possible-Surreal/dp/1610394550?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

It is a beautifully written account, from a former insider (someone who worked within the system and reported his observations very eloquently), with many insights into how the system works

I agree that the woke is big with the Skeptic Community.

They are as fanatical about the vagaries of homeopathy and anti vax as those that purport to either sell or are against them.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm all for vaccinations and think homeopathy is junk science.

I know that biology dictates that there are two sexes for reproduction. Gender is a social construct. The two, sex and gender should never be conflated because, biology.

The worst examples I've seen of wokeness is on Badscience, ironically.

I'm only posting again to object to the labelling of all continental philosophy as pomo bullshit It really, really isn't. A lot of continental philosophy is the absolute opposite of that. (I'm saying that as a huge Hegel fan)

Yes yes. Not all continental philosophy is postmodern. I know and speak to quite a few philosophers and none of them have time for gender theory.

Skeptics aren't in my experience nearly as knowledgeable about philosophy or science as they think they are. They generally have no real knowledge of epistemology or metaphysics, and dismiss any kind of attempt to look at the limits of science as postmodernism (which it isn't.) They tend to bias certain cultural ideas too, if you look at American skeptics thought on midwifery for example, they consider it to be obvious woo, not supported by their obstetrical associations. The fact that many other nations consider it best practice notwithstanding.

The arts world has been massively infiltrated / appropriated by the opponent, this is quite apparent

However that creates an opportunity for those with the relevant skills and abilities to start our own movement :)

Yes - exactly like Santa Claus!

They aren’t in ‘our’ armoury. They are 100% in the trans armoury.

I don't understand

We have artists, satirists, film makers etc. in out communities and if we don't we'd better get busy and rectify the situation :)

This is a really good example of how to educate people about a prevalent cause of societal problems, in the case "positive thinking".

An intelligent and well considered discourse illustrated by entertaining animation

Just off the top of my head I think that the following are helpful weapons in our armoury; humour especially satire, theatre and performing arts, poetry, film, visual art.

They aren’t in ‘our’ armoury. They are 100% in the trans armoury.

Yes, I think you're spot-on with that. If you subject gender theory to critical argument people react like you're grilling a small child about Santa Claus.

YY.

So the main problem is that theories aren't being challenged critically, would you agree?

Good question

I believe we really need to investigate the nature of the opponent when we consider a strategic response.

The opponent (for want of a better word) possesses a number of qualities that is going to make this an uphill struggle

It seems to me that we are a war with sinister forces who are extremely knowledgable about human psychology and skilled at manipulation, public relations and social engineering.

Human beings, in groups, are extremely easy to manipulate once you know the codes / narratives that affect them

Most human beings would rather take the easy route and not think about difficult things, people tend to take the path of least resistance and tend to sleepwalk into dangerous / oppressive situations.

The opponent has been targeting vulnerable minority groups and astroturfing such groups for decades possibly longer.

The opponent is able to act abusively and criminally - it it the nature of the beast - but we must act legally - this puts us at a disadvantage

The opponent makes use of the good, positive aspects of our society against us. Most noticeable to me is the way in which human rights legislation and human rights organisations can be used for oppressive purposes. This does not mean that human rights are bad or unimportant, just that we need to be aware of the complexity of the situation.

People prefer to believe in wondrous magical things than believe in science because it is more narcissistically rewarding and optimistic.

Teaching people about the wonders of science is, of course, important, but we also need to find ways to educate people, including children, about the danger of pseudoscience.

Just off the top of my head I think that the following are helpful weapons in our armoury; humour especially satire, theatre and performing arts, poetry, film, visual art.

There is so much more to write about this but this is all I can manage now

There was a fawning review of a talk on gender identity by a member of the Edinburgh Skeptics group (from a few years back).

It was on their website until a few months ago and then removed.

When it turns out that skeptics are not so, um, skeptical after all...

Re Dr Az Hakeem

I am still unsure about what to think of him, however I notice with interest that his book, TRANS: Exploring Gender Identity and Gender Dysphoria

www.amazon.com/TRANS-Exploring-Gender-Identity-Dysphoria/dp/1911246496?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

includes a chapter by someone I am very familiar with Professor Kevan Wylie of the Porterbrook Clinic at Hallam University

Wylie keeps interesting company

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20130427065018/www.baseuk.org/static.aspx?pg=AdvisoryBoard&m=aboutus" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20130427065018/www.baseuk.org/static.aspx?pg=AdvisoryBoard&m=aboutus

Wylie’s book the ABC of Sexual Health contains and interesting chapter worthy of scrutiny

books.google.co.uk/books?id=oH64CAAAQBAJ&pg=PA121&lpg=PA121&dq=%22kevan+wylie%22+tantra&source=bl&ots=3BsX64pHRR&sig=ACfU3U05lAJ8B-u2pi8aO4rigZ0tLOdSZg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiSpoTx4fDiAhUMJhoKHQ0KAwsQ6AEwCXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22kevan%20wylie%22%20tantra&f=false

Wylie also invited various “tantric healers” and similar charlatans to promote their activities to an event named “Sexual Pleasure” at the Royal Society for Medicine in 2009, an event that doctors and surgeons and allied health professionals received CPD credits for attending.

The event was co-organised by Professor Kevan Wylie and the paedophilia apologist Tuppy Owens who operates the Outsiders and TLC projects. Outsiders and TLC claim to be “empowering the disabled” but their strategy seems to be to introduce vulnerable people to tantric sex workers and to then exploit them for PR and social engineering purposes. This has obvious parallels with the way that vulnerable people who identify as “trans” and people with false memories of sexual abuse and satanic ritual abuse are exploited as mascots for PR purposes by people with sinister agendas.

The event included a presentation from a woman called Sue Newsome who runs some dodgy sexual grooming operation called Shakti Tantra and also a strip-tease performed by a sex worker to a paraplegic man in a wheelchair. This event has mostly gone from the archive and from the RSM website - however I have screen shots of the whole thing.

There is a Times article about it here, but I do not have a share token - can any reader help with this?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/is-sex-for-the-disabled-the-last-taboo-t2xvzbmz2r6

also see this link to one of a growing number of dodgy “toolkits” (it may be that there are some good toolkits around but there are so many dodgy ones that I get anxious just seeing the word) - anyway, here’s the link

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190617141631/www.sexualrespect.com/about.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20190617141631/www.sexualrespect.com/about.html

on a tangent, Cassandra Lorius, a sex and relationship therapist with a long history of working at Wylie's Porterbook Clinic and with dodgy tantric therapists promoting genital massage as a therapeutic modality can be seen here addressing an audience at the Royal Society of Medicine in 2012

vimeo.com/40957046

also see

www.facebook.com/cassandra.lorius.3

and

I have no idea whether Kevan Wylie organised the 2012 event where Lorius presented her dubious ideas to doctors at the RSM, but given his past form it is fairly likely.

I telephoned the Royal Society for Medicine in 2009 to try to whistleblow about the cults and predators involved in the event but was told “You’ll have to speak to Kevan, the event is his baby”.

Obviously, given Kevan’s associations and activities, I did not want to talk to him.

For the avoidance of doubt, there is a lawyer called Kevan Wylie who is not the same man. The Kevan Wylie I am referring to can be seen in this video and is the first speaker

I have not watched the video, I have included it purely to identify Professor Kevan Wylie the tantric sex enthusiast from the lawyer of the same name whose opinions on tantric sex are unknown to me.

I am still none the wiser re Az Hakeem as I find his description of his stance a little contradictory (maybe just complex? - maybe queer theory is not as dangerous as some women are saying?) however I am concerned that he is associated with Kevin Wylie and would be very interested to know whether any GC posters here have read Wylie’s chapter in Hakeem’s book and if so what they thought about it

My impression is that some people's vision of the world is set when they are children - whether it be sexist, or pessimistic/optimistic, or with a tendency to shortcut through plausible but scientifically risible claims, including religious ones (or UFOs, etc). A lot of the time, the risible claims come from an authority figure.

Then they grow up and part of their growing includes a certain amount of 'rationality' and completely refusing the irrational they held onto previously, and 'rejecting' authority. But this is a painful and unstable process - you need to be constantly reinforced in your new beliefs, convinced that you're doing 'right', or you are 'right', or - unfortunately the most common response - you can tell who's right and who's stupid. It's almost as if most people only have enough self-resources to go through this kind of mental readjustment once, when they're young. And of course they tend to then be very vocal about the one readjustment they did have: they have the zeal of the neophyte.

But we all know that neophytes are no good for nuance, be they religious converts or newly opened to the possibility of challenging authority. When they - or their peers - become 'the authority', there is no need to challenge it. They are challenging something external and which had power on them - not because it was intrinsically fallacious (though they like to think that that is the reason, as it makes them feel righter) but because it was powerful. One of the great successes of the genderist take-over is the claim of victimhood ... surely there is no 'authority' there, nothing powerful at all that needs to be challenged [ yes, that's the bit that really makes me see red: compelled speech and thought is the very essence of 'power', and these people are too preoccupied by their internal righteousness that they can't see that]

I had Novella's book as an audiobook in the car - practically every fallacy he mentioned would apply to genderism, and yet nothing. Well, he does start the book by saying he used to believe in UFOs and other such fun stuff.

Another person who disappoints on the blanket acceptance of genderism, who has that 'gullibility' (for want of a better word - I am trying hard not to judge) from childhood, and that you would expect better of, is Neil Gaiman. His father was big in Scientology.

I do too, Mermoose, not that I've met the man! I've been to some interesting skeptics talks, they are good events.

It puzzles me that there's such a lack of critical thinking when this stuff is so obviously flawed and damaging to the trans community (transmen starting menopause through testosterone when if they were not describing trans feelings and having a natural early menopuase they'd be automatically getting HRT to protect their health; trans kids being given drugs without any rationale; and trans women who are clearly not all gender dysphoric and all the fun issues that brings) and women, and institutions alike.