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.

I have vaccinated all my kids but I think it's a calculated risk. I don't think anti vaxxers claims and worries should be dismissed. Especially when it comes to new vaccinations.

I think comparing TRA ideology to homopathy is a better analogy. Nothing but dodgy science, anecdotal 'evidence' and belief. And it has been funded by government despite it being batshit

I've been reminded of the homeopathy discussions I've had, not usually on MN but on a German parenting site, by the 'transwomen are women" mantra.
Lots of people saying how it doesn't matter if the claims homeopathy supporters are making are scientifically valid or not because it doesn't harm anyone, it's not my money they are spending and it upsets people to be told that there is no evidence for homeopathy to work beyond the placebo effect. And I always tried to explain, and failed usually, that if we never challenge peoples opinions despite the evidence against these opinions, then we eventually get to a point where we have to except anything people believe, even if it does us harm, and here we are "transwomen are women" and "sex is a social construct", challenging this now makes us biggots, supposedly.

think comparing TRA ideology to homopathy is a better analogy. Nothing but dodgy science, anecdotal 'evidence' and belief. And it has been funded by government despite it being batshit

This is what I mean.

You are talking about thousands of parents who have seen their child regress, combined with a momentous and unprecented rise in immune conditions, combined with an inability to explain this momentous and unprecedented rise. The only thing that is 'known' about this momentous and unprecedented rise is that it is not caused by vaccines.

Dismissal, scorn and insults simply don't cut it. The reason this 'story' has not gone away is quite simple: parents continue to talk about what is happening to their children. They are the only people talking about it because it is verboten for health professionals to do so.

Sounds like ROGD?

This is how debate is squashed on vaccines and this is the way we are going with transgenderism.

My point throughout the whole thing is not to debate vaccination, it is to say we can't be complacent. People can be silenced, debate can be squashed, funding will be withdrawn, parents can be ignored, well funded lobby groups can have their way. We might think this is crazy and will pass away. But it might not pass away. It might not ever pass away.

You are talking about thousands of parents who have seen their child regress, combined with a momentous and unprecented rise in immune conditions, combined with an inability to explain this momentous and unprecedented rise. The only thing that is 'known' about this momentous and unprecedented rise is that it is not caused by vaccines.

I don’t think this is critical analysis. I think this is pure emotion TBH. It’s the other side of the coin to the problematic anxiety doctors have. Everyone should be aware that there are many things that are not known. Science is an ongoing process of enquiry. Parents may want answers and doctors may want to be ‘the authority’ but we should be getting away from this problematic dynamic.

It's not critical analysis: it is descriptive. Not sure which bit you disagree with?

That it is a meaningful engagement with the topic of vaccination risk.

Are you saying that thousands of parents haven't said this, or that there has not been a momentous and unprecedented rise in immune disorders, or that there is no explanation for the rise. Which bit do you disagree with. Sorry I don't get what you mean.

No, I’m saying those points are not meaningful beyond explaining how anti-vaxx engagement is problematic in combination with medical/public health anxiety and ‘special status’ feelings.

Tbh there's no point in the vax debate here but you have described as 'emotional' a laying out of facts. In exactly the same way that women who are concerned about self ID who lay out the facts of mal violence are accused of being hysterical.

It’s the interpretation of the meaning of those facts that is emotional. That’s my point.

They don't seek to explain parental engagement. They're just facts that are of public concern that shouldn't be dismissed as emotional, batshit etc.

It was you who interpreted them as emotional. I laid them out as facts as a way of showing that it doesn't matter how much you think something out to be a matter of public concern, and talked about, and debated, and no matter how many people want to talk about them, with medical professionals and politicians, you CAN be silenced, for ever.

1. Seen regression, well that matters if there is some indication vaccinations may have triggered regression. This is one area which has been well studied and described so there are specific situations where science can show the mechanism, where science can show there is no relationship and a vanishingly small number of things where the relationship is not direct but it is not known whether vax may be a factor. Many people however claim ‘my child had the vaccination and then xyz happened’ as proof of causation when credible science has debunked this.

1. The rise in immune disorders. This is one of the things where there may be an indirect relationship. We don’t really understand much at all about what causes immune disorders. The level of meaning attributed to vaccinations is out of all proportion.

1. Not caused doesn’t mean isn’t one factors. It is simply something that everyone has to accept. We can’t know everything. Many groups like to use immune disorders to ‘prove’ GMO is bad, pesticides are bad, vaccines are bad. Every group feels that their special interest is The Cause. It is highly likely that there will not be one cause that is The Cause go immune disorders though and that’s why we are having difficulty understanding them.

Offred we could take to to the vax board but what I'm saying is: this debate has been successfully silenced, to the point where a mother can come on here say : this happened to my child : and some random who knows nothing about the case, or the child, or the medical history, can reply with impunity : no it didn't. Ask any politician or doctor about that, with no particular knowledge of vaccinations even, and they will say: that did not happen. That is where debate is on vax and we could be heading there with trans.

No, silenced would be not being able to say. Silenced is not having someone disagree with your claim.

It might be fair to say ‘you don’t know why I make that claim or even what my claim is so don’t assume’

But people are free to not take up vaccinations. The uk hasn’t legislated to ban this or stop people talking about it. When people talk about it the police don’t come and arrest them for their views etc etc

Part of the reason people immediately retreat into uncritically picking a side is because of the problematic dynamic IMO. It is both sides that are making it this way.

The emotions are high on both sides. On both sides they are understandable. The science side frequently dismisses the anti vax side as emotional and will not accept they also have both a massive problem re emotion and IMO it is the science side’s duty to fix this problem of mistrust because they are the representative authority. That’s where we agree.

Bear in mind what's already come my way, emotional, batshit, dead children etc.

Yes we can disagree here. But try to raise it in the doctor's office, your MP surgery, your community health board, a vaccine advisory group, an ante natal class .. you will be shut down anywhere and everywhere. There is no debate around public policy - which is fixed.

The science side can only fix it by listening, which it will not do.

None of us here thinks that a mother's brain leaks out on the floor of the delivery suite leaving them stupid and dimwitted. I have no idea why so many women, on this issue specifically, talk as if that were true.

I have rejected certain offers re public health policies, hospital policies etc. I did not take up the offer of the swine flu vaccine when I was pg.

I have not had any problems with doing that. I don’t expect to change the public health policy. I articulate why I am making my decision about myself and this is accepted. Sometimes I have to do this repeatedly with different HCPs. This is not a real problem to me because a. They can’t make me and b. I don’t mind reassuring them or them disagreeing with my personal analysis.

Also, sometimes they offer new information for me to consider and this may change my own analysis, which is actually something I like to happen.

I’ve also gone onto multi disciplinary scrutiny groups as a representative of service users and made those points re changing the way health services communicate with people and in certain public health campaigns this has resulted in changes.

Your post is about changes in communication. How can we make people accept this.

By changing the way we communicate with them and by becoming a patient representative IMO.

And if you want making your own group of like-minded people.