Frack's reference post

[FrackOff]

Hi All
I have been asked in various threads for references. I am starting a new thread as I've lost track of all the conversations. I wasn't going to bother as people usually don't want to read them but since one or two have said they really do want to read them with an open mind, here are a few.

Reidar Schei Jessen & Katrina Roen (2019) Balancing in the margins
of gender: exploring psychologists’ meaning-making in their work with gender non- conforming youth seeking puberty suppression, Psychology & Sexuality, 10:2, 119-131, DOI: 10.1080/19419899.2019.1568290

ABSTRACT
The past 15 years have seen the growth of puberty suppression as the prevailing approach to supporting gender non-conforming children and youth. Puberty suppression is considered to provide time for weighing up the pros and cons of medical transition. Research based on binary under- standings of gender has demonstrated that a carefully selected group of gender non-conforming youth benefit from physical treatment and gender transition, but the research that details how psychologists can best support young people during this time is limited. This is the gap addressed by the current research. The purpose of the present study is to explore the meaning-making framework within which some clinical psychologists and gender non-conforming youth approach discussions of puberty suppression. Five semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinical psychologists working with gender non-conforming youth. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. The results indicate that there is pressure on gender non- conforming youth, often coming from families, friends and mass media, to buy into heteronormative and binary discourses regarding gender and what constitutes a good life. The results also indicate that the participants deploy affirmative and exploratory therapeutic strategies in their work, in order to enable gender non-conforming youth to make informed decisions regarding puberty suppression. Participants emphasized the importance of therapeutic approaches that explore non-binary gender discourses, alongside the use of puberty suppression and other medical interventions that enable clients to fit more with gender norms. The therapeutic balance between affirmation and exploration may shed light on how both research within the binary tradition and critics of binary assumptions are in danger of oversimplifying the process of gender identity development. This research highlights the importance of understanding the complex negotiation of gender discourses that are in tension with one another.

Its really useless asking Frack questions. Either too busy or word salad regurgitated.
All I asked was puberty blockers for children yes or no?
Too difficult?

No no, a list from Frack would be ideal. Hopefully as much detail as possible.
I need to know what is considered feminine/masculine. What If I’m trans but had no idea.? A check list would be handy.

FrackOff

@Datun I don't see the point

Now, you see Frack, I knew you would say that.

Because you absolutely, categorically, unequivocally, do see the point.

So let's get this discussion, at least off first base, where it's been languishing.

Let's have the list. Just give it a go.

Foucault? Deeply problematic. His ‘theories’ have muddied the debate about feminism for so long and produced deep division. They had added no certainty to discourse and denies the idea of power and dominance which are a reality.

Foucault? Nah, mate.

I'll go again:

why are puberty blockers in minors fine but surgery in adults not?

Frack?

Why?

Good question, Lang. How many times will the question be ignored?

Heteronormativity is not just about sexual orientation. It is the pressure to conform within a patriarchal system.

Heteronormativity is only about sexual orientation. It is the pressure for people to conform, in our patriarchal society, to the heterosexual standard, refusing to acknowledge the existence of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. It exists because patriarchy requires men to oppress/own women, and women to be subordinate to men and heterosexual relationships are one of the main sites where this can happen.

This includes:

- being heterosexual

True.

- not being transgender

Not true. Heteronormativity has nothing to do with trans. The requirement for people to take part in heterosexual relations has zero connection with the fact that it's not possible for people to change sex. Heteronormativity is yet another piece of poltical analysis that the trans movement has appropriated (how colonialist) to serve their interests and undermine those of the group whose ideas they are using, in this case lesbian, gay and bisexual people .

but also,
- sticking to stereotyped sex roles

That's sexism and misogyny, not heteronormativity.

It gives rise to
-sexism
-male domination over women
-an attachment to the heterosexual nuclear family as the capitalist mode of production

Well that's a neat trick isn't it? Redefine heteronomativity to include the idea that it's not possible to change sex, accuse feminist women who argue this point, of "heteronormativity" (the new improved version), then blame us for men's oppression of women.

Do you think radical feminists are "heteronormative" (your version) Frack?

I'd have thought the height of heteronormativity was requiring lesbian women to accept dick in lesbian relationships, but then I haven't read those wikipedia links, and I don't plant to either.

Can I just politely say to people whose major concerns are 'fucking with heteronormativity, which I have now detached from any meaningful definition of heteronormativity by conflating gender and sexual orientation', fuck off ?

Is that OK ?

Some of us have actual, material concerns, like trying to help our probably lesbian or gay, often autistic, gender non-conforming sons and daughters understand that they are perfect the way they are, and that their bodies do not need to be in the front line of 'queering the fucking discourse'.

Another term for heteronormativty before the trans activists got hold of it, was "compulsory heterosexuality" . Adrienne Rich, the feminist poet, coined the term:

Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence
<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20160213095421/people.terry.uga.edu/dawndba/4500compulsoryhet.htm" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20160213095421/people.terry.uga.edu/dawndba/4500compulsoryhet.htm

The question inevitably will arise: Are we then to condemn all heterosexual relationships, including those that are least oppressive? I believe this question, though often heartfelt, is the wrong question here. We have been stalled in a maze of false dichotomies that prevents our apprehending the institution as a whole: "good" versus "bad" marriages; "marriage for love" versus arranged marriage; "liberated" sex versus prostitution; heterosexual intercourse versus rape; Liebeschmerz versus humiliation and dependency. Within the institutiol1 exist, of course, qualitative differences of experience; but the absence of choice remains the great unacknowledged reality, and in the absence of choice, women will remain dependent on the chance or luck of particular relationships and will have no collective power to determine the meaning and place of sexuality in their lives. As we address the institution itself, moreover, we begin to perceive a history of female resistance that has never fully understood itself because it has been so fragmented, miscalled, erased. It will require a courageous grasp of the politics and economics, as well as the cultural propaganda, of heterosexuality to carry us beyond individual cases or diversified group situations into the complex kind of overview needed to undo the power men everywhere wield over women, power that has become a model for every other form of exploitation and illegitimate control.

Note Frack, that Rich names men's oppression of women as the original form of oppression, which all other oppression of groups by different men are modeled on.

Some of us have actual, material concerns, like trying to help our probably lesbian or gay, often autistic, gender non-conforming sons and daughters understand that they are perfect the way they are, and that their bodies do not need to be in the front line of 'queering the fucking discourse'.

Amen.

Some of us have actual, material concerns, like trying to help our probably lesbian or gay, often autistic, gender non-conforming sons and daughters understand that they are perfect the way they are, and that their bodies do not need to be in the front line of 'queering the fucking discourse'.

^^ this.

I do thank Frack for opening my eyes to this fact though - that all the social pressure we receive from those who support transition from minors is not to do with 'irrelevancies' like 'who is this population/how do they differ from earlier populations/can we treat them using data from earlier populations', but because they want our kids to be good little soldiers in their war against all that is not yet 'queered'.

It's 100% ideological, and the faux concern is a front.

Didn't think I could be more radicalized into a rad fem position in gender, but I just was.

*on gender

*in minors

My typing goes to shit when I'm angry.

Do you think "heteronormativity" is what gave rise to worldwide murderous male violence, Frack, right up to and including genocide and the use of nuclear weapons? Could you explain the mechanism at work?

but because they want our kids to be good little soldiers in their war against all that is not yet 'queered'

Encapsulates it perfectly. It’s scandalous.

Yes, it’s very clear from dealing with Frack that Queer Theory is a religion, hence her total inability to explain what she believes and why

Also regarding Frack’s apparent ignorance of Foucault’s paedophilia advocacy

He’s her great post modernist God. She’s seriously lacking in her background knowledge if she doesn’t know that:

In 1977 Foucault signed a petition to the French Parliament arguing for the abolition of all legislation regarding the age of consent, the effective legalisation of paedophilia. In 1978 Foucault participated in a radio broadcast which once again argued that age of consent legislation should be abolished and that children’s sexuality and supposed desire for sex with adults should be acknowledged

If she does know this and continues to venerate him, I can only assume that she just doesn’t think it’s very important

but because they want our kids to be good little soldiers in their war against all that is not yet 'queered'

And then MNHQ wonder why we get so angry with the people making that demand.

It's been nearly 3 years since I studied Foucault and his advocacy for removing age of consent laws was known and discussed then, so I'm not sure what's wrong with Frack's uni that this is apparently new information to her.

Nearly 30 years, rather.

I imagine too much talk of eugenics and Foucault on a thread about trans issues has the potential to be deletable. Not that Frack would ever stir such a pot then run, I'm sure.

In 1977 Foucault signed a petition to the French Parliament arguing for the abolition of all legislation regarding the age of consent,

Fucking hell. Exactly how common is paedophilia??

It seems like every other man is a fucking paedophile. What the fuck is wrong with them.

But it would be nice if Frack could explain why puberty blockers in minors are good but surgery in adults is bad. She could incorporate her understanding of Foucault's teaching in her response if she likes.

Frack?