How did this happen?

Hello OP. I mostly lurk, but I’d like to offer another points that haven’t been discussed:

Some very very very powerful AGP billionaires have been pushing and funding this this for years. You can check out the 11th Hour blog by Jennifer Bilek to see more

WPATH seem to be responsible for many of the policy changes

Look for James Kirkup (from the Spectator) and ‘the Denton’s document’. This is how they’ve gotten it in law under the radar in many places

Queer Theory for 30 years in Universities

I hope this fleshes out the foundations for you.

I think three big things (off the top of my head):

1. Hitching it to LGB and making constant analogies with gay rights, appropriating the language of civil rights movements, so that the unthinking observer thinks it's basically the same thing.

1. The people who have time on their hands to trumpet this stuff all over social media etc are the very young and privileged. They are less likely to have been affected by the real-life issues that come under protected characteristics, or to have come into contact with those who have. They find it easy to identify with a narrative that's all about self-expression, finding your true self, being kind, sparkles and rainbows, and older people being mean bigots.

1. The internet accelerates everything, and the "democratisation" of ideas means an anonymous teenager in the US is given as much credence as anyone else. Some MPs spend a lot of time on Twitter, which is completely unrepresentative of their constituents.

It's good to raise, to begin with, the 'no debate' stance, and how many women who have spoken up have lost jobs, been threatened, etc. Why are women not allowed to discuss women's rights? Why are meetings held in secret? Bomb threats, for feminist meetings, death threats for Joanna Cherry, what is going on?

JKR is a good example. It's worth asking what she has said that is actually transphobic. Still yet to hear that.

Busy leaders and busy-body SJWs saw it could make them look inclusive and progressive so they started using the slogans. It would have seemed harmless at first

I think some of it borders on exploitive tbh we have seen plenty of times on twitter, trans people telling them to pack it in, and to stop alienating women and the customers in their name. It's not helping the cause in the slightest and it must be frustrating for people who have been trans longer than some of these activists and those in charge of the social.media pages have even been alive. I think.it stopped being about the very people they claim.to be supporting a long time ago. And trans people will be picking up up pieces long after the companies and allies move onto the next cause

I also think this film is a great way in for people who know a bit but not what's been going on out there in Internet land.

*transohobes not transphobia.

I think the number one misconception with the trans issue is that people new to this or unaware of it mainly think that transgender women have all 'had the op'. Feelings and shock come quickly to people when you tell them that most TW keep their penises.

I would learn the Staniland question off by heart.

I would have a few examples of sex offenders in women's prisons to hand. Plus photos.

Examples of men on women's sports teams or beating women at wrestling or weightlifting to hand, plus photos.

Ask them if they think Eddie Izzard is a woman.

Ask them if they consider Lesbians and gay men to be transphobia if they are not attracted to people with penises/vaginas.

Start with these things, if they bite you can expand.

I have always sort of wondered why there has been this aggressive rhetoric, this absolute flat out refusal for any other view to be aired that you just don't see in other areas of social issue. The contradictions, the tying up in knots, the appropriation of any group at all to prop up the argument - black women, intersex people, women who have had vaginal surgery, infertile women, trans sex workers in South America

The appropriation of other groups is desperation IMO, laced with a total self-obsession that blinds them to the dreadful things they sometimes say eg Abigail Thorn (?) and the comment about black women’s facial hair, and other racist and horrible comments.

I think this was planned. They put TWAW out there and everyone assumed they meant that TW should be treated as women out of kindness and in social situations. Once that mantra took hold, they carefully made it very black and white - ie if you don’t think TWAW, you’re an evil bigot. They assumed most people would be mortified and go along with TWAW, but they underestimated GC women.

Then they moved to No Debate. If we weren’t going to nod along with their mantra, we wouldn’t be allowed to even discuss it. That served a second purpose of stopping any awkward questions.

Once SW came on board, it was easy. SW are ‘experts’ so their guidance is given credence.

OP, I’d start from what your friends know and are interested in - sport? Keira Bell? JKR? Don’t overwhelm them with too much information. It’s a gradual process, thinking and re-examining your beliefs.

But where is the picture of Hubbard on the podium?

How would you describe how ideological capture of the media and public institutions came about without descending into a rant (or maybe it's only me who goes like that

In a word, people are lazy. There are hundreds of things that companies/organisations could do that would make their businesses more inclusive/accessible. But all of that takes time, research, money etc and no one wants to be the first to abolish regular working hours to allow for parents to take their kids to school then come to work, or even work.from home and as long as its all done by X time it's all good etc or above average maternity amd paternity packages etc There's no elevated status for improved access fir disabled employees/customers etc no ones actually interested in doing anything behind the scenes with no one noticing. It's all instant gratification on social media.

Often men (my dh included) are immediately suspicious of other men and their motives probably as they are there when women are not and see behind the facade of the “nice guy”. So dh would be automatically 🙄 about self Id and the push to open up women’s spaces. Plus he is Lionel Shrivers biggest fan and she has written about this recently.

I was thinking about this after the 50:50 parliament thread and the people who posted on there.

There has been such forceful aggressiveness around the language to do with this issue:

-I am a woman because I say I am and if you object you are an evil bigot.

-Repeat after us: Transwomen are women.

-TERFs

-Misgendering is literal violence/a hate crime

• Constant references to suicide

-A woman who believes that woman is more than a simple declaration from any human, deserves to be sacked from her job.

-And most recently from the fragrant Alex Sobel - do you believe that women should be entitled to single sex shelters, prisons, sport? No.

I have always sort of wondered why there has been this aggressive rhetoric, this absolute flat out refusal for any other view to be aired that you just don't see in other areas of social issue. The contradictions, the tying up in knots, the appropriation of any group at all to prop up the argument - black women, intersex people, women who have had vaginal surgery, infertile women, trans sex workers in South America.

Sure, people are passionate about other issues, but I can't think of another issue with this sort of discourse.

And I've come to the conclusion that it's just about power. If TRAs give just an inch on this, then they won't be able to gain parliamentary representation as women because people might question it, they won't be able to compete in women's sports because people might question it, they won't be able to gain awards and positions meant for women because people might question it, they won't be able to control language around women's health because people might question it. And so on.

Any deviation at all away from the 'I am a woman because I say I am and am therefore entitled to everything meant for women' will mean these things won't happen. And they need for these things to happen. Because otherwise, only females will get these things.

I feel desperately sorry for transsexual people with gender dysphoria who were trying to live their lives the best and most comfortable way they could, without encroaching on anyone else. There are plenty of people who never wanted any of this.

Safe Schools Alliance has a statement from Keira Bell after the court case, if you want a short and to the point info for your friends and family.

www.google.com/amp/s/safeschoolsallianceuk.net/2020/12/03/keira-bell-statement-on-high-court-ruling/amp/

Seen, not scene. Bloody migraine!

I'm just relieved things finally seem to be shifting. Today scene sane and thoughtful articles in the Observer and the BBC. And the Guardian too, I think.

Now he doesn't think its me who is the loon.... now he thinks the problem is the loons took over whilst everyone was asleep on their watch.

It happened for three reasons:

1. People were apathetic and disinterested. They couldn't give a fuck. So other people went around doing shit to further their own self interest, whilst people saying 'fuck' were ignored by the apathetic and dismissed in various ways.
2. People were too busy tripping over themselves to be nice about something and to demonstrate their commitment to an idea they forgot that checking the small print is always a good idea. Be Kind translated into 'switch your brain off and expect someone else to do all the due diligence checking for you'.
3. It was always someone else problem and issue. Until it wasn't. THEN they gave a fuck.

Its about the issue that people can't be arsed to read further than their noses.

People disrespect you when you say: "look there's a problem here" and they dismiss your concerns as 'ridicilous' or make out you don't know what you are talking about and must be mistaken or take the attitude that it couldn't happen because 'they would never let' it. This they being a mythical group who don't exist and its just a convenient way to dodge social responsibility that belongs to us all collectively.

Then it bites you on the arse.

Hard.

I think people just dont want to be on the same side as feminist.

The misconception that it means we must hate all men as opposed to just
recognising the sex class responsible.for our oppression. You cant talk about male violence or the need for single.sex provisions without it being taken as you accusing their husband ir son or brother of being a rapist etc

None.of us hate all men. Many are obviously married and or have sons. Truth is it hurts them as well, the idea that if they don't confirm to masculine stereotypes that's a problem .

But agreeing with feministsseekms to be what off puts most people but this benefitiof the doubt they give to all men and males will not save them from being the victims either.

I guess its easier to just ignore it.