The ideological Capture of Psychotherapy

That all makes a lot of sense. I had partly but not completely joined those dots previously when I heard about "otherkin". Wikipedia can be hit and miss but the info on here seems pretty helpful.... and pretty familiar (also links to furries, which I had thought of immediately when I was told about otherkin)

Otherkin

When I found out about it, I immediately thought of my daughter's online persona (name rather than avatar, but same thing in essence) because it refers to an animal. My concern was that otherkin people are apparently getting surgery ATM to match their identity. It's all linked.

Luckily, she and her sister both thought it sounded bonkers. We all agreed that it sounded like a mental illness where people wanted to change their real life bodies to match their online lives.

This...
Imaginative, sensitive souls who are a little 'different' can easily feel more at home in imaginary worlds
...is exactly why I brought it up as a conversation.

It was helpful that it seemed so different from gender identity in her eyes. But obviously I shared it because of the shared principle of all of this.

It sounds like the person you know is getting great comfort from his approach to blend his online and real life lives..... for now..... I can imagine you must be extremely worried.

Back to gender identity, I listened to a really interesting chat between Buck Angel and Blair White some time ago (posted on another thread) and they were both very clear on it being a mental illness where reassignment surgery had to be the absolute last resort. I guess they wouldn't necessarily know what true neutral therapy looks like (Buck said he had therapy, Blair said she did not) but they are both clear that children should not no anything medical. They were also both clear that they wished that their own dysphoria could have been resolved without medical interventions (and the lifelong impact of these).

NB I don't agree with everything that they both say, such as Buck saying that gay men should try her vagina before they say no (FFS, it's the girldick issue again - just the other way around) but I do on the above re dysphoria.

Gaming and online.... fair point re social contagion.

And spot on re creative writing. Phenomenal at it in fact. But then there could be some mum bias in that statement 😉

She's high functioning and very intelligent. If you met her you'd think her very mature and analytical on world politics, news, science etc....

But only has a couple of friends and still isn't accessing school in a standard way. She's got very low social emotional intelligence. So I don't think social contagion applies in her case.

I think allyship is bound up with people's vision of themselves as good/progressive/liberal/kind/TRSOH.

Agreed. Definitely another big factor.

I suspect for trans activist the tip of the GC iceberg is just that; the tip. Beneath the surface, there is a knowledge, or certainly a suspicion, that even those going along with pronouns don't really accept wholeheartedly the rest of the package.

When being 'good' or 'kind' - in the context of trans activism - implies one has to go along with the belief system - it can surely be nothing more than performative

Agreed. My neurotypical daughter said that she believes TWAW but "obviously I know they are men really. I'm just happy to be kind to help them feel more comfortable". So performative from a kind place. I've seen it likened on a different thread to how we believe in the reality of the characters when we're watching a play on stage. It's not quite the same but it's a very close match. We're happy to immerse ourselves in that belief.

which in itself mirrors the performativity of being trans identified or non binary in the first place

This is the nub of where it gets more complicated. I can't remember which thread it's on (I think it's the "how do people believe trans" one) but there was a GP commenting on the complex line between people who know they are presenting with something that is not factual (in the literal sense e.g. biological sex in this context) and people who don't realise what factual and what is not. The poster mentioned that it happens a lot across various aspects of medicine.

I think allyship is bound up with people's vision of themselves as good/progressive/liberal/kind/TRSOH.

*on that thread

I think allyship lies in having a skimmed understanding of the issues and believing it to be a deep one.
Every time I learned more, I felt like I'd reached the final onion layer, but I hadn't.
There is an interesting thread with a GC iceberg. I haven't commented on it because I have issue with some aspects (e.g. my thoughts on TRAs and their fears) and I'm still happy to use pronouns as a form of respect of someone else's belief, within my own limits.... and I'm well aware that by adding comments on there it would take me a long time to explain myself on that thread. Partly because I waffle on in my reasonable way 😉 (not having a go here I promise - this is currently my favourite conversation on the whole board for where it's helping me get my head around stuff and you are a big part of that @NotHavingIt) and I just don't have the energy for it on that board. I'm happy knowing I'm an iceberg anomaly. Ha!

Another interesting aspect of radical transgenderism is the very real sense of fear. Some TRAs will be driven by hatred of feminism and women (and GAP etc) but I suspect many more are driven by a genuine fear.
There was a really good discussion on another thread about Maslow's hierarchy of needs in this respect. If all other needs are met (home, food, warmth etc) the human psyche can be very easily persuaded in to fighting hard if you believe a different (less foundational need) is at risk. All of the misinformation which is shared around suicide stats and misrepresentations of women's concerns about sports and spaces etc (and the risk to children e.g. safeguarding "against transphobic parents") is enough to whip up a massive genuine fear. I think this describes the majority of people who shout, scream and/or turn violent at protests.

I'll watch that, thank you. My pathway towards understanding this is still primarily driven by my desire to help my daughter (step 1 in my "agenda"... to loop back to a previous conversation just for context) but I realised that in order to do that, I needed a fuller understanding. I had initially skipped over the bit about boys who transition in the Sue and Marcus Evans book, because it all got very Freudian and I couldn't see any direct relevance to my daughter. Since then I've learned tons (including the GAP - rearrange letters - stuff) and I can see it's all indirectly relevant to her... As you say:

I think the issue we now have is that radical transgenderism is not just about individuals feeling more comfortable in themsleves, but is a fully fledged political movement for radical social change

My awakening on this happened quite a long time ago now but I'm still adding to it. It still doesn't change my more hands off approach (hands on with safeguarding, hands off with direct intervention) with my daughter but it helps me understand what I'm up against as it were. I was already far too sceptical of the affirmation pathway, which is why I did everything I could to keep her out of GIDS. However, filling in the blanks along the way with conversations like this and Hannah Barnes' book etc is helpful. The Netflix film will also be helpful.

Going back to the person I mentioned, I still speak to her periodically. Interestingly she's been removed as the trans lead in the LGBT group. She wasn't given a reason and I said that it sounded a shame (at the end of our first conversation she told me she loved working with parents of trans children but was a little concerned at the rising numbers... that comment was left hanging). When I asked her why she had been replaced she said "Nobody will tell me. Perhaps I'm just not the right kind of trans". I took that to mean her age, which it still could be. The majority of the people in the group are young. However, this could be a significant part of it.

She's been very helpful in helping me get my head around everything. I also think she's helped me stay grounded. And another person I also speak to from the LGBT group. For example, they are both a big part of why I feel comfortable with using preferred pronouns the way that I do - not for kids (I just avoid pronouns) and not where it's important for context - for every day interactions. I'm never going to add pronouns to my bio though. That's a whole different subject... and goes back to vulnerable people like my daughter thinking it's an important rite of adolescent passage to "decide".

@Redbird87 that is shocking and truly awful.
It highlights in a very stark way what happens when a therapist can't see beyond the bias of an affirmative path. Blaming you for not wanting to help yourself and then stopping treatment. Wow. On a small plus note, this clearly wasn't the right therapist for the job, so stopping treatment with her was a good outcome. However it doesn't help at that moment. Quite the opposite. There seem to be many more coming through that same training programme of thinking, from the article that @ArabeIIaScott posted. I absolutely applaud James Esses for trying to call this out, I'm just concerned that if the message isn't getting through, the delivery of it may need tweaking.

Going back to something @NotHavingIt it said about the difference between gender identity and a religious belief differing on a key point: gender identity belief is fed through validation by others and a religious belief does not need this - I've been thinking back to a really good conversation I had with a transwoman when I was building up my understanding of all things LGBT. She said something like "Oh, I'm aware that everyone sees me as a man but I'm OK with that". She had transitioned (I don't know to what degree) in her 30s I think and is much more comfortable identifying as a woman. This seems like a much healthier kind of gender identity. I don't know and didn't ask about her wider views on toilet usage etc, so I'm not commenting on being transgender over all. I'm just thinking about that one specific aspect in relation to this thread. If someone is at peace with their own gender identity needing personal validation only (like a belief in God), I wonder if this would make them less susceptible to needing surgery? The training that is being done in this field now would have the exact opposite effect of helping clients reach this kind of stable and healthier conclusion, mental health wise.

Redbird, that is shameful. Ritchie/TullipR said something similar, that he desperately wanted therapy and went ahead with his surgery only because he would have lost access to therapy if he'd not continued on the transition pathway. I really hope that one of these days, the therapists and professional bodies failing clients in this way are held accountable for what they've done. I doubt they will be, but I hope they are.

JFC, Redbird. I'm sorry you've been so badly failed.

It's so bad. I have so many stories, but the most egregious is when I was frozen in place, didn't know how to move forward but didn't want to opt for gender care after seeing it go so poorly for friends, and my psychologist asked "Why should I work with someone who wants to commit suicide?"

Those were thoughts I saw her to get past, but she refused me treatment after that point bc in her view, not going forward with medicalization was "not helping myself."

https://www.thefp.com/p/how-therapists-became-social-justice-warriors

This was shared on Helen Joyce's last newsletter.

Oh, I totally agree. I'm just trying to get my head round why it's received in such a polarised way. There will be many factors but I do think this is one. Breaking through with a message that people are receptive to hearing is key. How that is achieved is another matter.

@NotHavingIt as you say, Keir Starmer doesn't achieve that at all when he's so vague.

But I think it's possible to be clear and also considerate. That is different from trying to please everyone. Trying to please everyone is the path to failure.

His message is very wishy-washy. How can 99.9% of women not have a penis? That just sounds odd. So he's saying trans women are women in his view, just in a very wishy-washy way. So if they are women, why can't they play in women's sports? If he thinks they can't, he has just invalidated the "womanhood" of the 0.1% of (trans)women who he thinks are women. He makes no consistent sense.

At a professional conference people should be able to handle straightforward discussion of ideas without having to package it fluffy 'be-nice'ness.

It's the accusation so often leveled by abusers and misogynists who are pretending to be otherwise - if only you'd say things in a different way, or a nicer tone, or at a better time then we could listen to your arguments.

@Ohnohedident I had already scrolled on by after seeing this as nothing more than a disruptive bomb. However, if you want to genuinely talk about this, I'm happy to do so. So that it doesn't disrupt this thread (which is building on the idea that psychotherapy is actually a valuable field, from what I can tell so far), it'd be good to start a new thread. If you do, please tag me in and I'll join you over there. Very happy to have the discussion 👍