Anyone see this in the Guardian today?

I do genuinely wish Page happiness, but I’m not sure that this person who so obviously struggles with self esteem, trauma and acceptance issues should be hailed as a a role model for how to deal with said issues.

You are right that Ellen Page's wife has been omitted from that article but the passage about not holding hands etc is about Page's time before she came out as a lesbian. While I was browsing around I came across this interview in the Guardian from 2019 (just 4 years ago) in which Page refers to herself as a woman (and also mentions her closeted behaviour). https://www.theguardian.com/global/2019/jan/20/ellen-page-im-not-afraid-to-say-the-truth-interview-coming-out

I used to like that version of Page.

Basically, gaslighting and deliberately incorrect reporting is the order of the day, even from the broadsheets.

A line is being pushed, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Moral? Don't believe anything you read, always check.

Not even in my wildest nightmares did I think the MSM would become enthusiastic lying cheerleaders for a new cult.

Groupthink must be very attractive to those partaking of it.

I noticed that too, Notbad, and wondered why

The article about Page is horrendous gaslighting. An entire article about Page and relationships and not one single mention of the fact Page was married for 3 years. States Page never held hands in public with a partner even though a google image search of Page and Page’s wife shows photos of them holding hands and kissing. In public. Horrible.

It needs glitter and sparkles. And intentional women, not those tedious accidental ones.

Only a tiny fraction don’t get to speak and they’re all women so it doesn’t matter.

Both Mae Martin and Elliot Page have similar histories of sexual abuse / sexual exploitation at a young vulnerable age. It is no surprise that they want to return to a prepubescent asexual body by removing parts of the body that is a physical and visceral reminder of the abuse. It is tragic and I feel for them.

It’s also criminal that no psychiatrist or psychologist helped them process these emotions. It appears that instead of dealing with the cognitive dissonance and PTSD from the abuse, they identified as trans and NB, which is both tragic for them and now tragic for being hugely influential with young questioning and often autistic girls. It's a new variation to perpetuating the cycle of abuse.

Please note that I see both MM and EP as victims here but, again, I passionately wish they would stop posting photos of their mastectomies on Instagram.

From the article:

"I don’t think we need additional protections for free speech in the university. Free speech is pretty alive and well."

...says a man who is allowed to speak out freely against perceived "transphobia" and whose voice has been elevated by this appointment. Of course his free speech is alive and well.

What a spectacular lack of self-awareness.

I’ve also just read the article originally mentioned. This stood out…

“Of course there’s protests about certain people speaking and there has been historically, about figures as diverse as David Icke and Enoch Powell, and that’s right,” he said.

It surely not a coincidence that he mentions David Icke and Enoch Powell in an interview where the next immediate comparator is Dr Stock. At the very least planting an association. What an utter asshole.

“There’s a way of thinking historically about cycles of fear and phobias. So it’s very striking to me the way in which gay men in the 1950s and also the 1980s were vilified as a threat to children, as treacherous, as deceitful. We can see the same kind of recycling of fear at the moment, in very, very similar terms. So I think in a way history can help us think through, what is it about these particular moments of fear and why?

Here is the straw man argument that the "febrile issue" is exclusively about accusations of transwomen as threats to children and thus allowing the framing to be one of ‘culture war’, which simultaneously wholly and neatly side steps any safeguard concerns for women’s single sex spaces, the issue of women’s sports, intimate care, short lists etc. So, not only an utter asshole, but a misogynistic one.

I saw that too. I couldn’t believe that it merited half of the front page, along with a huge photo, given current world events.

I think ultimately few people will forgo doing something that benefits them, for the sake of a wider societal good. In the article Elliot talks about a never ending quest for love - this (this being rapid transition, seeking a community that only validates, never questions) to me seems like just another stage of that quest.

But yes, the Page article reads like a textbook tale of sexed abuse + homophobia --> transition, with reclassification of innocuous childhood events (standing up to urinate - I did this!) as signposts of a transgender identity.

Since the new professor is so keen on things recycling in history, I hope he notices that PIE is now being recycled as MAP, rather than only taking the bits of history that he (falsely) believes support his case.

And was it really feminists and ordinary women who were objecting to gay rights, back whenever? Or might it be that if he bothered to scratch the surface, he’d know immediately that something very different is happening this time round?

Elliot would make a convincing ten year old boy

Page being a whisker over 5 foot tall is going to make it difficult to get male roles that aren't in some way 'special'. Pity.

I haven't waded through the interview word for word , but I think Page's conversion from gay to straight goes unremarked. The wording suggests that, rather than 'transing the gay away ', becoming trans was an upgrade on being gay.

But you can still find sympathy for her personal backstory

Yes. The exploitation and abuse is sickening. And I’m not asking for Page to break systems. I’m suggesting that they can avoid seeking external validation of their medical choices by not posting those photos on Instagram. Which feels as though Page is perpetuating, if that’s the right word, self hatred in vulnerable autistic girls.

Yes, it's all hugely unsatisfactory. But you can still find sympathy for her personal backstory.

How many people genuinely break systems and years of abuse? Not many.

I saw Guardian mentioned and came to see the thread thinking it’d be about Page being on the front page of the Saturday edition and the magazine cover.

Now I hear it had this dick of a misogynistic academic interviewed as well. I’ve held on buying the weekend paper (after stopping my donations) thinking there’d been some slight balancing. Clearly not. So that’s it, no more Guardian for our household. Sad to see it’s loss of journalistic integrity.

My heart would go out to Page except that Page has gone to posting smiling topless photos of themselves post double mastectomy and it’s obvious that Page is now on testosterone.

So instead of campaigning for girls and women’s safety after experiencing sexual abuse, Page is actively contributing to a new generation of young girls and women hating their female bodies and believing that they’ll be special and happy if they cut off body parts. Breathtaking narcissism IMO.

I haven't seen Juno but I did watch The Umbrella Academy. Page's character was 'transitioned' with her (this consisted of the character having a haircut and saying she was a he) and the other characters duly offered up the standard phrases of affirmation.

It was an odd intrusion through the fourth wall, making a character act out the life of the actor rather than vice-versa. While Page's character was central to the plot, her transition to a him wasn't.

I can't ever enjoy the film Juno as I once did. My heart really goes out to Elliott. And we're still expected to accept trans as benign, positive, risk free, true freedom? It's none of these things.

In fairness I did hear him on R4 saying K Stock should be permitted to speak. Although he sounds like a complete tit in every other respect.

Yes, we only ever hear about the downsides of American laws here - gun rights and abortion restrictions. But the First Amendment is a thing of beauty. It goes much broader than freedom of speech, as we would think of it.