TRAs, Cults and top down social conditioning.

[TinyRick]

Interesting essay written by MtT Jenn Smith.

Excerpt -
"Anybody suggesting transgender persons born male are not in fact “real women” and even “female,” are called transphobic (including lesbians). That such an attack would come from within a community whose entire existence was based upon fighting for the right to sexual orientation is not only bizarre, it almost seems like a deliberate attempt to fracture the community from within.

As mentioned earlier, it would be easy to laugh this stuff off if it were not for the fact that government, Hollywood, mainstream media, and almost every institution of power is promoting this insanity. This fact should be a red flag for everybody. Why, when trans persons comprise such a tiny minority, is there such a sudden and urgent rush across most of the Western world to push the trans agenda?"

I found it interesting that the movement uses similar techniques to successful cults.

I follow and have civil discussions with some lovely ladies from the states, they are all for forced birth which I disagree with. On this issue we are united, one issue can make strange bedfellows.

Rad fems tend to be left thinking but not on this issue as they see through it.

I doubt @RadFemCrone would dox anyone. She doesn't mince about though and won't pussyfoot around the issue.

I have seen quite a few of the people I follow falling out with each other recently. @GabeBlessing is usually on the same page but has been arguing for the lady brain / innate behaviour recently which is not a feminist opinion.

It is important on Twitter to follow a large selection of people with differing opinions, particularly if they are willing to discus and engage. I think you have to make a conscious effort not to end up in an echo chamber. If you select people who are willing to engage then you learn something about their opinions and it helps form your own arguments.

I follow several transsexuals, some detransitioners and some people struggling with disphoria, it is informative.

I follow several transsexuals, some detransitioners and some people struggling with disphoria, it is informative.

Can I ask what, if any, conclusion this has lead you to?

I think that trasitioning helps some, though a lot of the older transexuals are still unhappy in their bodies. The disphoric ones who are really keen to transition seem to be swallowed by the cult, unable to accept that they are butch girls or young women that don't have to fit a steretype. There are a few gay young men who look very feminine and pass easily, they genuinely find life easier as women, life as males is difficult for them.

The main thing I have had confirmed is that trans is a huge umbrella. The girls transitioning and the young, feminine gay men are nothing like each other. The agp men should not be anywhere near either groups.

If that could be acknowledged, define the various T's in the T that would be really helpful as the agp's would stand out. They are hiding behind the sad and the disillusioned, the genuinely disphoric.

What strikes me is that a lot of the youth seem to think they are doing something bold and anti establishment, but it's not, this is state sanctioned.

The bold anti establishment thing to do is to question it.

I am so saddened by the loss of lesbian identity, they are hounded at every turn. There are no spaces for them, they have been colonised and young lesbians trans or are "educated" to accept male lesbians.

It's a mess, picking apart the T's would really help, even if that meant more letters in the alphabet soup or ideally, separating the T from LGB. T is not a sexual orientation, quite the opposite as it is often homophobic.

Sorry if that's rambly

Sorry if that's rambly

Not at all. It completely mirrors my conclusions.

I keep coming back to Ockham's razor, the simpler explanation is usually the best. Women are1) adult human razores or women are 2) blah blah blah long winded explanation that veers from woo feeling in the head to borrowing an intersex persons lived history.

One thing I have learned is that men do not have our backs, these laws largely effect women, men are mostly in positions of power. Look at Justin Trudea, can't wait to give away women and girl's rights and empty their words of meaning. Fucker.

Females! Not razores, though that would be cool

One thing I have learned is that men do not have our backs, these laws largely effect women,

Completely agree. It's so depressing. I did think that when the ideology started to erase sexual orientation, men, gay or otherwise might get a bit up in arms.

But, not so much. Because, it doesn't bother them.

It's usually straight men, trying to get lesbians to sleep with them. So other men aren't nearly so much of a target, despite the fact, that technically, they should be.

Yeh, the gay men who transition don't seem to be the bullying sort. The bullies are agp men and they are bullying wome, because they can. Everyone turns a blind eye, because they always do.

Yes, we agree on that one too. I do wonder whether the gay trans-women don't make a fuss, because privately they realise that they will be able to reap the benefits, despite not being massively active in trying to get them.

Or whether they are still trying to stay under the radar in the hope that any backlash will pass them by.

I don't think they will reap benefits- not overall. And I see alot of older transsexuals aware of this/scared of this.

Thinking of older transexuals who would have been those we 'politely' let use female facilities and called she (not saying this is right). I can't think of my words this morning .... And I don't think they are scared of loosing these either, but perhaps the backlash against them, being tied into the APG groups. If 'living as a woman' was helping their genuine dysphoria then I don't think the likes of ajex Drummond & Danielle muscato being a woman would help with that.

I'm not quite sure, I know it's not the threat to them it is to us, but I don't think it's going to be a windfall for them either.

I expect the conspiracy behind it all is nothing more than plain old make supremacy. This is the 'cause' they are using to strip us of hardwon rights and when this hugely disadvantages women they will reap the benefits as allways. When the extremes of males coopting womenhood come to light and those fighting against this have greater numbers, and the law suits from detrans come in they will blame the nasty trans people and pat women on the head by restoring a fraction of the protections we had previously and expect us to be greatful for it. Which is expect many will, and say how great the male protectors are. Slight of hand. And in the middle of it all those with dysphoria will be blamed and it will put real life everyday acceptance back for them also, just the scapegoats.

If the lawsuits do come in and get publicised and if people start to backtrack when find out what they have exposed themselves to, I bet you any money women will be blamed.

"If women didn't make so many objections, if they didn't complain about their so-called rights, none of this would have happened. If women had just let trans people be, they wouldn't have to be so aggressive, they wouldn't have to fight, and threaten and go so spectacularly off the deep end. They should have just STFU."

Betcha.

Females! Not razores, though that would be cool

If we were adult human razors, I bet they'd be less keen to take their penises into our spaces.

I'm guessing that RadFemCrone is her twitter name? I'll have to look her up.

I just found it weird that the past couple of Jenn Smith videos/articles that have been shared in the GC spaces I frequent, none of that has been flagged.

Disappointing if true ( and I am more to believe RadFem in all of that)

But, the article is backed up with a lot of evidence in the way of references.

I do think that Jenn has found something here.

How does anyone know if the people Jenn is accusing of attacking him are who they say they are?

Not that I want to continue the conspiracy theory theme but if a mtt goes after trans ideology isn't it likely that the trans community would like to find a way to discredit him? Wouldn't pretending to be a rad fem and accusing him be an easy way to do so and break supportive links.

I find it strange I can't find the threads that show what either side is claiming.

Gonegonegone

It wouldn't at all surprise me. They are highly efficient, highly organised.

It's a great article and thoroughly researched. I think the spat is because Jen has been acting erratically, accusing people of doxing her etc and over reacting to perceived slights where none were intended.

Maybe they have experienced problems and that has made them paranoid, they have lashed out at the wrong people. That is my understanding of it, doesn't invalidate a good article, the two events are separate.

If anything it shows the genuine fear that people have when they speak against accepted dogma.

I don't see anything wrong with it. If you question the validity of transsexuals then you shouldn't care if people call you transphobic.

Dina I don't care if I'm called transphobic. I would care if anything was actually done to harm me because some people think their belief system justifies it.

Transphobic has become a meaningless word. It now means disagreeing with a trans person.

That article is excellent and very scary. Ive not heard of them before but would like to read anything else they have written.

Anyway... ignoring the suspected derail...

BrandNewHouse The thing (one of the things) is that people who use the word Orwellian are written off as being nutty.

I think it's worse than that. Amongst lefties at least, "Orwellian" pops up fairly frequently, but apply it to the most obvious thing actually happening - the trans agenda - and the same people will seem blind to it. In my circle of aquaintance (anecdata I know!) those who seemed the most critical thinking, and who seemed to join the most dots in general, are the most rabid about it all. It's all so... counter-intuitive. It's definitely ideology first, make the facts fit later, rather than the other way around.

Also, as a general thing, I think "conspiracy theory" is a way to disparage the truth. (Arghh what do I sound like?! ) Obviously there's tons of bollocks, probably the majority. But there is stuff that comes out years after the fact... and we know the media manipulate people, and so on... Thinking "hmm - this doesn't add up, all is not as it seems" is a far cry from the type of theorist who thinks it's a conspiracy dreamt up by Putin and the Abominable Snowman whilst playing golf in area 51 - but both types are lumped together.

Thinking "hmm - this doesn't add up, all is not as it seems" is a far cry from the type of theorist who thinks it's a conspiracy dreamt up by Putin and the Abominable Snowman whilst playing golf in area 51 - but both types are lumped together.

YY. I find it infuriating. It's usually people who have swallowed an enormous amount of nonsense that come out with that too.

Amongst lefties at least, "Orwellian" pops up fairly frequently, but apply it to the most obvious thing actually happening - the trans agenda - and the same people will seem blind to it.

And yes to this too. I've had arguments with self proclaimed Marxists about it. But it's so obvious an example! They can disagree fine, but it's like they have a blind spot where trans issues are concerned. It's like they were beamed down into earth in the last few years and have missed the historical context where women are not men and biological sex is a thing. It's bizarre.

Onto earth not into earth!