Impact of transgender organisations - who is behind them and how have they become so influential?

[theendisnotnigh]

Looking at the Times article about the government telling the UN that the phrase pregnant people should be used instead of pregnant women . Where has the government got their mandate from from to make these massive changes?
When is some investigative journalist going to take a look behind the scenes at who these massively influential transgender groups are? (Gendered Intelligence, GIRES etc).
How have this tiny percentage of the population had such a significant response? The groups are feted by government, the Dept for Education, the NHS fund and actively promote them.
We know that they have used tactics of threats and intimidation to very successfully silence democratic debate and discussion. We know that they have gained access to politicians (Maris Miller etc) in ways that other political groups can't do. So who are they? Are they funded by the Drugs companies (who have much to gain from the lifelong medication of transgender children to adults).
We know that they are active in schools, local authorities, workplaces. What are their qualifications for changing schools? Do their staff going into schools have DBS checks? Do they work directly with children and young people? Why are the DfE , NHS promoting political activist groups to train educators and health professionals - normally schools are very careful about giving political interest groups direct access in this way?

I think we need to be asking questions of the government about what checks and balances they have made before recommending these groups and why they are getting such preferential treatment? What other massive social change in history has taken place behind closed doors and with active government involvement?

And thank you, theend. I hope you're right. In my dd's case it's clearly a matter of social contagion. She has made no announcement in RL, to my knowledge - it's all online. I'm taking the approach that she can dress as she likes, style her hair as she likes, have a girlfriend if she ever wants one, and I won't bat an eyelid because I never would have done - but I refuse to accept that any of those things mean she is 'really a boy'. I rather cravenly avoid pronouns as far as possible, and the pet name I've used for her happens to be gender-neutral, so I call her that. Anything short of agreeing that she is a boy is abusive and transphobic in her eyes, but it's the best I can do. If she persists into adulthood I'd probably start respecting names and pronouns and calling her my 'son', but I think I could never support her starting on T or resorting to surgery.

Anyway, I won't derail further, and generally prefer to keep the fact that I've got skin in it out of the picture. It doesn't help my clarity of mind, and clarity is what's needed here.

differenteverytime All the best to you and your daughter. I'm glad that you were able to enter the trans parenting fray prepared, at least. I'm also very grateful that MN has allowed discussion. They almost certainly get a lot of flak for it.

DJBaggySmalls very glad to see you still on here as 'smalls'. I initially wondered whether you'd changed your username slightly but DJBaggySmallpox's posts don't sound like you at all.

differenteverytime

Yeah, I can get outraged and infuriated by what this ideology means. My rationality kicks in when I’m talking about it. It has too.

But there is a very special reaction reserved in my heart for what it does to parents. (And rationality isn’t it.)

Differenteverytime oh, that revisionism makes me so angry! If they really wanted to get picky about it, a Black lesbian allegedly threw the first punch at the Stonewall riots, but hell, she's just a lesbian, so they wouldn't talk about her. (And I have noticed those that do, try to talk about her as if she was a trans man - because she was a butch - which is even worse than not talking about her at all.)

But I was talking about Stonewall, the UK LGBT+ rights organisation, which has recently been comprehensively commandeered by trans rights activists, and sidelined lesbians. It was always bankrolled and - to a much lesser extent - controlled by rich young white gay men, but not like it is now. I was involved in Stonewall in the early days, wouldn't touch it with a bargepole now.

Ah, I see, Archery - I'm very far from well informed on Stonewall. So the trans revisionism is about the riots, then - not the organisation? In that case I confused two entities, one named after the other, that are both being commandeered by transactivism.

Oh Different - I feel so much, and yet know there is nothing more that I can do than give virtual support.

My kids are younger, both boys, but also both prime for this - the 7 year old already very emo, over-thinking everything, gentle, and dyspraxic so would be a prime target for these tumblerites. The youngest - a stubborn fantasist, who's announced he's a girl, he's a cat, he's a member of an alien race who was born in the woods - I don't worry about him, but I worry about 'well-meaning' people listening to him and running with things out of my control.

Or I would, if I was in the UK. I actually thank my lucky stars that I live in other places (we move around a lot) - places 20 years behind the UK in some ways, where there is still a lot of boys are boys and girls are girls, but with a common sense that means that they can cope with the occasional non-conformer, and the worst I have to deal with is letting the older one know that it's OK to wear a pink t-shirt if he likes, or making sure the younger one's teachers know that they should double check anything he says with me rather than taking it as gospel!

Honestly, I don't think conspiracy theories are needed. White men have decided this is something they want, and they get it. Exactly as it always has been.

spag

It’s frightening that it’s come to this. That you are glad that your children will not be staying in a place long enough to be ‘got at’ by the ideology.

It’s frightening that it’s come to this. That you are glad that your children will not be staying in a place long enough to be ‘got at’ by the ideology.

Isn't it!

I don't think it would have been an issue at my kids tiny village infant school in the UK a few years ago - but all it would take was one professional caught up in all this. One other parent who's child was, and who brought it into the school like a social contagion, and my kids could so easily be caught up in it, and me demonised for trying to let them just be kids.

And that’s the truth. It only takes one kid. Because the Internet will do the rest.

Honestly, I don't think conspiracy theories are needed. White men have decided this is something they want, and they get it.

Agreed. And they’re still complaining that mean feminists are bullying them, same as they ever did.

www.ibtimes.co.uk/50-children-week-some-young-four-are-being-referred-gender-reassignment-specialists-1644123

From today's media. Reported by The Mirror. Picked up by Business Times

Honestly, I don't think conspiracy theories are needed. It's only "conspiracy theory" because it's not reported in the mainstream media, they're hardly going to do that are they.
Is it too heinous a crime to even consider. The thing is, most people won't consider these things because their whole world, life as they know it, all the authorities and organisation they trust will just crumble. It is understandably frightening.

Conspiracy theory is misleading. Patriarchy by its very nature oppresses women. They don’t sit there taking minutes about how to oppress women. It’s not a tick list.

Whilst there will be a cohort of men who are delighted that this is happening, and want to push it, it’s not some secret society that is deciding to fuck women off.

It is, basically men, who constitute the patriarchy. And yes, some of their agenda, will absolutely be dissing women (MRAs). But it’s the rest of the cohort. Who may not have a ‘secret society’. Because they don’t need to. They can do this all in plain sight. Because it’s completely normal.

Regarding conspiracy theories, is it so inconceivable that something/someone may want to do us harm without advertising the fact?
There is a definite plan here, i think the plan is bigger than to oppress women.

Missymoo100

What do you think it is? Some kind of social engineering?

I agree with the "perfect storm" theory-

• Piggybacking on the LGB movement- gay rights have progressed incredibly quickly over the last 20 years. When I was at secondary school (1990s) there was probably a fairly even split in opinion between those who passionately defended gay rights and those who were openly, offensively, violently homophobic. But even the defence was from a "they can't help how they are" perspective, and there was not one single openly gay pupil in my school of 1,200+. To go from that to gay marriage being legal in 20 years is an astonishingly fast social change, especially when you compare it with the progress of feminism over tens of decades. That in itself has opened people's minds to the possibility that previously strongly-held convictions could be morally unacceptable. And adding T onto the end of LGB encourages people not to think too hard about whether they are actually the same issue.

• At the same time, that battle hasn't actually been won in lots of places, and lots of hearts and minds, and the trans option gives an alternative. Why be a still-tricky gay person when you could be a lovely trans unicorn? More worryingly, why watch your child be a still-tricky gay person, when he or she could be a lovely trans unicorn?

• Feminism, especially the kind that isn't interested in protecting men's feelings, has never been popular, and is very easy to demonise.

• Social media has made the explosion of grassroots movements, from 0-60 in a very short space of time, very easy. Not to mention the blurring of fact, opinion, and total bollocks.

• I'd add to this that the trans/non-binary emphasis on self-expression, identity and appearance over content plays perfectly with the social-media-obsessed zeitgeist. But I'm a bitter gen-Xer, wtf do I know.

• Finally, the porny, fetishised aspects make it exciting and dangerous as well as politically correct. A win-win for many. The conservative but sex-obsessed tabloids love the former, and the liberal left loves the latter.

I don't think it's an active, conscious conspiracy. It just works for a lot of people, including men, and excluding women (see point 3) and gay people (see point 2), who aren't as important.

The idea of a conspiracy theory seems far fetched. But the idea that when a woman gets attacked in the street by a stranger, millions of people’s first questions are “what was she doing walking home alone?” And “what was she wearing?” And “well she was a prostitute...”, which seems like a mass delusion versus questions about curfews for the perpetrators, the idea of a conspiracy seems rather rational.

I'd also add, and expect to be shouted down, that the "I'm uniquely special and must be protected" mindset that seems to be pretty prevalent, is entirely consistent with an extremely aggressive stance against any challenge. See the Mumsnet favourite armchair diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

well I'm not sure of the cause but I have had a look into it and the main theories are;
we are on the verge of the collapse of our civilization and this is being now being fast tracked. I think because there is a desire to replace it with something else, most probably a global community with no borders.
This goal has been helped along by implementation of "Cultural Marxism",
The left have used political correctness as a social engineering tool, to make people docile and compliant.
I watched a YouTube video which was quite interesting a feminist called Camille Paglia- "this has happened before" she says that transgenderism is a precursor to collapse.

Big post and small apology - I'm sorry, I did make the post at the start of this thread.
But I think this is important. I believe we need to learn about propaganda, what it is and how it works. Especially how information affects us and how we react to it.

Look at how people have reacted to it.
No one has checked to see if the information is factual or not.
Some people reacted to one of the links, and decided all of the post could be discredited based on that.
Some people decided it wasn't very nice and were relieved when they thought it was someone else posting it.

People dont base their decisions on plain facts. We just dont see new information, fact check, and accept it.
We accept new information based on

• who told us first.
• how much do we like and trust that person.- how we feel about it.

If we dont like what we hear we assume its false or decide to dislike that person - we play shoot the messenger. Its dissonance reducing behaviour. If theres an implied threat behind the propaganda, the majority of people will go along with it for a quiet life, even if they wish they didnt have to. We can be persuaded to do that by the edge effect, we are gradually pushed in one direction step by step, often by the threat of worse consequenses if we dont comply.

The trans lobby is this effective partly because they have big funding, and partly because of human nature. And partly because they are extremely organised, backed and funded and we are not.

All we are asking for is common human decency, and that might be our strongest weapon. The stability of civilisation.
The people who have the power are the least fit to own it and they arent going to give it up.

Ooo DJBaggySmalls you are devious! Very true though, we are more likely to accept new information if it comes from a source we've trusted before and we often don't bother to fact check (I try to do it as much as I can but admit I sometimes get lazy and accept things on face value)

Hmm. I don't care for being part of a sociological experiment, frankly.

stealth/Zooey
I was going to ask the same question as to whether you were F&Z.

Was all a long time ago. sigh

On topic, I don't think conspiracy theories are helpful.

It's more a perfect storm.

Biggest influence is that T has hitched itself to LGB and no one wants to be seen to be anti-LGB. A masterstroke.

Sure, the big pharmaceutical companies aren't complaining.

But if we try and fight this by citing conspiracy theories we'll be written off as a tin hat brigade.

Applauds DJBaggySmalls

And they use these methods successfully in schools.
The DfE shockingly direct schools to specific organisations for 'policy advice' And of course what you find is a page inviting schools to contact them for 'support and advice'. Having looked at some of the training materials available they are of course full of the conflation of sex and gender, false statistics, especially about suicide and dreadful silencing techniques aimed at quashing any concerns.
And schools unwittingly accept this as 'expert advice' not the social engineering propaganda that it actually is - and then busily implement all the suggestions which is resulting in the needs of girls being completely ignored and sabotaged.
We really do need schools to wake up to what is happening and to go back to their duty of care to all children. At the moment what is happening in some schools is that they are actively and unwittingly promoting 'social contagion' because they are so uncritical of the trangender propaganda.

Hmm. I don't care for being part of a sociological experiment, frankly.

Same here. My response to that particular post was that it didn't seem relevant to the thread so didn't see the point in engaging with it.