Anti-vaccination, women’s right and trans - an analogy?

[RealityHasALiberalBias]

A few weeks ago there was a thread asking for historical analogies to the trans activist phenomenon.

This morning, it occurred to me that there are parallels with the anti-vaccination movement. I am unfortunately very familiar with this movement as my sister is a fervent anti-vaxer.

The anti-vax movement has gained traction because of the modern, Western privilege of living in prosperous times where we don’t suffer regular epidemics of dangerous infectious diseases. This is largely as a result of decades of vaccination programmes. But the programmes are a victim of their own success - now that the current generation of parents has no memory or experience of these diseases, many of them see the vaccinations as unnecessary and / or dangerous.

Feminism has a very long way to go, but perhaps the current genderism is as result of femisms successes to date? Privileged, middle class young people who have not (yet) experienced the restrictions and dangers of the patriarchy widen the definition of trans to include anyone who doesn’t dress like Barbie or GI Joe. They see single sex safe spaces as wholly unnecessary, because they are privileged enough never to have needed them.

Like the anti-vax movement, there is a large number of well-meaning but misinformed people who sort-of subscribe to the ideology, while a small number of zealots with extreme views fan the flames online and in the media.

Like the anti-vax movement, science is of no concern whatsoever, except where a dodgy paper appears to bolster their position.

Like the anti-vax movement (and also climate deniers), the TRAs are able to influence the media to a degree completely out of proportion to their numbers, making the ideology seem far more widespread than it is.

Like the anti-vax movement, children are likely to be the most damaged victims of the craze.

Thoughts? I suppose the hope is that, like the anti-vax movement, the whole thing will blow over and be left to the cranks after a few years. Though of course there is still a lot of work to be done to restore vaccination rates to their previous levels.

Pratchet I don’t. But perhaps I would if I had your definition of feminist.

You said it was about threats of violence.

I said it was about actively promoting a particular type of ideology re trans rights.

The ideology of TRA is a particular set of beliefs. If people promote them, especially if they are goady then they will be likely be seen as a TRA...

Just like with MRAs...

Well, perhaps the ability to think critically is one of those things you need to have yourself in order to recognise it in others.

Perhaps.
But if it’s about assessing evidence I honestly think it will be difficult to defend an antivax position- and I think anecdotal evidence is still evidence but at a very early stage. To the mother here whose child regressed- I’m so sorry. I’m honestly not wanting to criticise you.
Understanding analogy without thinking it is strawmanning or sealioning etc I think is a problem on this board. (It’s true I only vaguely understand what sealioning is). I don’t think this shows real critical thinking.

Will be interesting to see if op comes back and what they make of the opposite of what they thought being often expressed here

Critical thinking isn't really 'assessing evidence', or just 'assessing evidence'. Most of the feminists here are incredibly able to drill down into the bones of a argument or a methodology, and find the glitches, presumption and flaws.

Will be interesting to see if op comes back and what they make of the opposite of what they thought being often expressed here

Hiya!

I’ve spent ten years arguing about vaccination with my sister. She does not understand what critical thinking is, but she sure as hell thinks she does it.

What I’m thinking is, I should have known better than to start this thread.

As you were.

What does that mean reality? You and I both agree and disagree (I think) I hope you don’t mean that it’s better not to show there are grey areas where people on both sides might meet.

No, I mean that I know perfectly well that anti-vaccination is a hot button topic, having been in the middle of a “debate” for ten years. So I should have realised that it was stupid to start this thread expecting it to be anything other than a bunfight, however much I may privately see parallels between these issues.

I see no bunfight - I see 'I want to talk about vaccination so long as my views aren't questioned'.

This is what I see from transactivism too, and it worries me that that side won.

Seriously, suggesting that anyone questioning your view is bunfighting is really not good. Can't you see you're using the same tactics?

I’m not using any tactics, and I didn’t say anyone questioning my view is bunfighting. It was a stupid thread to start. I did not intend for it to become a discussion about vaccination, but obviously it was going to and I should have realised that.

Also, for what it’s worth, I don’t see pro-vaccinationists OR transactivists as having “won”.

Pro vaccinationists have definitely won.

You don't have to respond to the arguments for and against. I didn't. I referenced the parallels. I hoped you might respond.

You aren't consciously using tactics but you are using tactics. You've dismissed everything that's been said as bunfighting on a stupid thread. That's a tactic.

Pratchet, you're right, I know nothing about the particular person in question. What I know is that there has not been one single documented case of vaccines causing neurological symptoms of that permanence and magnitude. Many people think there's a connection because of the general timing of the appearance of symptoms, but studies have all (so far) shown that vaccines are not the cause. The cause may be unknown, but research does not show any of the markers you would expect if a vaccine caused the problem. (For instance, the massive vaccine-induced but unregulated immune response you'd have to see that affected the neurons.)

So, though I know nothing about the young man involved, I do know that it's beyond unlikely that his body did react that way and yet all the doctors missed it.

You do not know that. You have been told that and because you respect the source, you believe it. Some people listen to mothers: doctors are not always their biggest fans.

Robert Fletcher
Hannah Poling

Pratchet, if you or anyone else has any questions about vaccines your GP or practice nurse will be happy to answer them. The NHS runs a huge public information campaign with the scientifically known fact explained.

What do you think scientists and researchers should have done to engage with the public that they haven’t done? How do you have a ‘debate’ when he collateral damage while it’s being sorted out will be many more preventable cases of illness and, yes, desths?

Another parallel I can see with the trans movement is Pomo hyper-individualism. Vaccination works on a population level so it relies on people understanding that while they’re certainly protecting their own child, they’re all the more so protecting a vulnerable child or person in the community, and the community as a whole. And giving a shit about other people. The trans movement, like the anti vaxxers, is all about me, my identity, what I think (who cares about science?) and who I am (who cares about the rest of the community?).

Pratchett, you speak for you, but more eloquently

Like the anti-vax movement (and also climate deniers), the TRAs are able to influence the media to a degree completely out of proportion to their numbers

Could you point me, OP, to one, just one, mainstream media article or programme in the last ten years that promotes non-vaccination?

Quixote there have been a lot of pay-outs for vaccine damage. The USA, UK and Ireland, to name but a few, have funds set aside for it.

And I don't think that anyone vaccinates their child to protect other children.

For me, this conversation is about the parallels and the biggest parallel I see is the move to shut down questioning and debate. A variety of tactics are used:
Appeal to authority
Refusal to engage
Ad hominem attacks
Deflection and dismissal
Constant references to dead children
Huge amounts of money backing those who want all questioning to stop

Whatever side you lie with on either issue, these parallels obtain, and with the vaccination issue, the side that wanted to suppress debate did win. It is a warning for feminists.

Oh I forgot one: defunding research

Wasn't there a quote from a TRA on another thread, condemning Mumsnet as not only GC, but anti-vax?? So they see some congruence there too - perhaps an outrageous freedom of speech parallel, which they resent, and want suppressed. So they appear to see the presence of any antivax perspectives on this board as 'proof' of mumsnet's perfidy.

I'm sorry, I can't find the thread which quoted the TRA. I thought it was bizarre to see 'anti-vax' thrown in by them, as seemingly a worse insult than TERF, but Pratchet's posts offer a 'translation'.

I've seen the anti vax insult from TRA also and I did interpret it as a 'pro pharma/anti free speech/mothers and women are stupid' sort of catchall attack.

Weeeelllll, I don’t think that it is true that doctors ‘want to suppress debate’. I don’t think there is really such a thing as a ‘pro vaccination’ side either. Vaccination is a public health policy which is slightly different.

When something is a public health policy then it is so because there is evidence to support it being so; a risk/benefit analysis which at a population level supports vaccination.

Many things in medicine involve experimentation on the general public as clinical trials can’t expose all risks.

As I said upthread doctors see the worst consequences of things and it often makes them feel very anxious because they take their duty of care very seriously. Doctors who are approaching retirement age now were trained prior to the principle re informed consent where the ethos that the patient’s views were irrelevant to the care was ubiquitous.

When my parents were training the idea that doctors should discuss treatment with patients was laughable.

When my sister was training there was a big focus on comm skills and so this is improving slowly but still, the medical training and junior doctor posts usually give all doctors some trauma and anxiety and a HUGE fear of patients suffering adverse effects and it being their fault. The profession is still very hierarchical too which encourages status beliefs.

I think the responsibility is on the doctors to help patients make an informed choice and to keep their own anxieties in check. A lot of doctors who don’t do that actually don’t because they care for the patients but this just results in emotional arguments where each side entrenches as the enemy.

A lot of times patients actually fear doctors because they are afraid they are going to ‘do things to’ them. A lot of patients have had experiences of doctors telling them off or worse.

There is a cycle of mutual mistrust.

It is not correct to say that vaccines cannot cause damage. People can and do have adverse reactions to vaccines, there is no evidence of any connection between vaccine and autism though, not all anti-vaxxers believe the stuff about ASD and MMR either, but we actually know quite a lot about the particular risks regarding all the different childhood vaccines, the time frames post administration etc (because the vaccines have been in use for a long time) and I do think that doctors are motivated to obscure them because many more people, on reading the information, would choose not to subject their own DC to those risks and would instead choose to take their chances with the diseases.

I read those risks before I decided re vaccination for my children and my decision was that I felt the benefits of having the vaccines outweighed the evidenced risks which, although they can be really scary things, are actually rare and some are also risks of the diseases.

I think a doctor’s role where someone chooses not to follow advice is to make sure that they have made an informed decision.

I don’t think that being anti or pro vaccination can tell you anything much regarding critical thinking. Some anti-vaxxers are just anti-authority and some pro vaxxers are just pro-authority.

(It’s the same thing re informed choice for following advice too btw)