Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Trans Rights: There's little point in arguing facts. This is not about facts.

153 replies

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 21:45

My background is in psychoanalysis and psychodynamic theory, and while, granted, to every person with a hammer, every problem is a nail, I do believe that there's a psychoanalytic approach to the trans rights debate that explains the level of energy in perceived attacks against the TR movement, and the need to mobilise to silence any question that they are right and their opponents are wrong. And when you see it this way, you begin to understand why arguing facts is pointless and doesn't work - why no matter what logic is brought into the debate, the resistance remains, and in fact increases, along with a certain sense of hysteria.

I work regularly with clients who are in problematic relationships with others. I note often that these relationships are defined by a dynamic that is so powerful that it runs the risk of destroying everything else - namely, a "fight to the death". But a fight about what? And against what?

The fight, in one form or another, is typically an existential fight where the party is 'hooked into' their perceived opponent: they believe they are fighting for their very existence; they need a hook to hang this on to; and one of the strongest and most destructive hooks is envy.

From a psychoanalytic perspective, there are many men out there who envy women to the point of hatred. At its most extreme - and there is nothing more extreme than a dysfunctional relationship with woman, i.e. "mother" - the envy goes so deep that, theoretically, there is an unconscious desire to 'consume' the other. In this case, for someone to consume "woman". The theory goes that by becoming her, she no longer exists, the protagonist takes her place, vengeance is exacted, and pain assuaged.

In other words, this is theoretically an unconscious drive to take womanhood and motherhood over, and to have a new ruler in her place. To obliterate anything to do with woman by overlaying something that looks like her, but is a facsimile of her. This might explain why there is so much new language around reproduction and menstruation - the one thing where a man may feel that he is shut out.

I understand that to many people this is foreign. But I've lived, eaten, and breathed the world of the unconscious for years, and it has offered an enlightening perspective on several radical movements going on right now (each with a different, but linked, explanation). And I thought I'd offer it here, because I'm not political, but I am deeply interested in the motivations of a person's psyche, and well versed in subtexts that operate therein.

So: facts are irrelevant. This isn't factual. It is emotional and psychological ... and for the most part unconscious, which means it is very hard to get to, because you are attacking a person's deeply entrenched defences - and those defences are there for good reason: to hold back childhood pain and devastation. I write this final sentence as a reason, and not an excuse, for what's happening. Because another piece of the puzzle here is a prevailing inability to take responsibility for one's past, and therefore one's present actions.

Individually and collectively, we are reaping what our forebears sowed.

OP posts:
Apollo440 · 24/06/2020 21:54

Ok if I accept that it explains a lot but what about the countless hangers on who support this nonsense. Why (for instance) would Daniel Radcliffe be immune to reason? Surely we keep trying until the penny drops? Why are they so invested?

Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 21:54

There are hardly any trans women though. So are you saying this hatred of women is coming from another group in society then?

But yes, the basis of patriarchy has always been the desire of men to control women because women can get pregnant and men can’t.

I assume the purpose when they use trans arguments is to cause some kind of confusion over the basic fact that women gestate babies so they can push through surrogacy, trafficking, prostitution and removal of children from women.

I think the jealousy over not being able to get pregnant is a pretty conscious one. Most men just keep quiet about it.

CaraDune · 24/06/2020 22:01

Well, up to a point lord copper...

This explains why, psychologically, TRAs are so batshit. It doesn't explain why other people feel compelled to go along with them.

It's not people's inner feelings that worry me? You (generic you) feel like you have an internal feminine essence? Fine, crack on.

It's the practical consequences that worry me. Do we put male rapists in female prisons, purely on the say so of the rapists? Do we allow people with male bodies to compete in women's sports? Do we ban women from setting up rape support services which are female only?

I know the TRA answer to these questions - a blanket "yes".

This answer to my mind is clearly wrong.

What I want to know is why otherwise sane people in power - politicians, the judiciary, the police, medics, sports governing bodies - are all going along with this batshit crazy view (rather than saying "these people are crazy - let's by all means try to show them kindness, but at the same time say 'no' firmly to their batshit demands.")

I'm sure your analysis of why TRAs are batshit is right - but for me the really interesting question is why the grown up sane people are going along with it.

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:03

@Apollo440

Ok if I accept that it explains a lot but what about the countless hangers on who support this nonsense. Why (for instance) would Daniel Radcliffe be immune to reason? Surely we keep trying until the penny drops? Why are they so invested?
Because it becomes what is known as a "collective complex" - it is an autonomous (i.e. separate from the conscious mind) dysfunction that is viral in nature. It infects the susceptible, which are often those who feel a strong need to fall in with the crowd, or to be pure or right, or good.
OP posts:
BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:05

@Stripesgalore

There are hardly any trans women though. So are you saying this hatred of women is coming from another group in society then?

But yes, the basis of patriarchy has always been the desire of men to control women because women can get pregnant and men can’t.

I assume the purpose when they use trans arguments is to cause some kind of confusion over the basic fact that women gestate babies so they can push through surrogacy, trafficking, prostitution and removal of children from women.

I think the jealousy over not being able to get pregnant is a pretty conscious one. Most men just keep quiet about it.

I'm not sure that envy is entirely conscious. They may feel like "Oh, I wish I could do that!" but may not be aware of a murderous motivation that lies deeper.

There is a reason psychoanalysis is not widely accepted: our defence mechanisms defend against looking at the very worst in us.

OP posts:
Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 22:10

I appreciate someone with a background in psychoanalysis starting a thread and offering opinions is.

The question is though, what do we do about? What emotionally or psychologically do we need to give to men to get them to leave us alone?

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:11

@CaraDune

Well, up to a point lord copper...

This explains why, psychologically, TRAs are so batshit. It doesn't explain why other people feel compelled to go along with them.

It's not people's inner feelings that worry me? You (generic you) feel like you have an internal feminine essence? Fine, crack on.

It's the practical consequences that worry me. Do we put male rapists in female prisons, purely on the say so of the rapists? Do we allow people with male bodies to compete in women's sports? Do we ban women from setting up rape support services which are female only?

I know the TRA answer to these questions - a blanket "yes".

This answer to my mind is clearly wrong.

What I want to know is why otherwise sane people in power - politicians, the judiciary, the police, medics, sports governing bodies - are all going along with this batshit crazy view (rather than saying "these people are crazy - let's by all means try to show them kindness, but at the same time say 'no' firmly to their batshit demands.")

I'm sure your analysis of why TRAs are batshit is right - but for me the really interesting question is why the grown up sane people are going along with it.

If you look up "collective complex" then you'll get an idea of what's going on.
OP posts:
BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:12

@Stripesgalore

I appreciate someone with a background in psychoanalysis starting a thread and offering opinions is.

The question is though, what do we do about? What emotionally or psychologically do we need to give to men to get them to leave us alone?

Ah, well that's where it gets a little shitty: we can only really change ourselves. So we do our best to stay immune and speak truth to power - but to try to dismantle the crowd directly is to become identified with it, and therefore to become it.
OP posts:
Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 22:12

I mean, men being envious as fuck of women has been going on for thousands of years, and we were just getting a few rights in the last hundred years. So something must have worked to get them to back off. So what in psychoanalytic terms do we have to do to get them to back off?

NonnyMouse1337 · 24/06/2020 22:12

I think Ray Blanchard mentioned something along these lines? The rage and irrational anger of such males stems from deep envy of women. Any reminder that they will never truly be women is a trigger for this rage.

It doesn't explain why loads of people are going along with the increasingly absurd demands and threats.

I personally don't seek to have reasoned discussions with Trans Privilege Activists. I know they are immune to facts. I focus my energy on the general public and politicians, the vast majority of whom have not swallowed the idiotic mantra that trans women are literally women. Once they are aware of the facts and realities involved in transgenderism, they are less inclined to agree to the concept of self-id and public policy that admits males into single-sex spaces reserved for women.

Justhadathought · 24/06/2020 22:16

From a psychoanalytic perspective, there are many men out there who envy women to the point of hatred. At its most extreme - and there is nothing more extreme than a dysfunctional relationship with woman, i.e. "mother" - the envy goes so deep that, theoretically, there is an unconscious desire to 'consume' the other. In this case, for someone to consume "woman". The theory goes that by becoming her, she no longer exists, the protagonist takes her place, vengeance is exacted, and pain assuaged

Do you think/have you observed that many gay men/trans identified men, in particular, have exceptionally closely identified, yet simultaneously repellant relationships with their mothers/the feminine? In Jungian terms - they are 'anima possessed'?

MindTheMinotaur · 24/06/2020 22:16

That's very interesting Bipsychle. You say appeals to facts and reason don't work. What do you think is a useful approach? Is there one?

MindTheMinotaur · 24/06/2020 22:19

Sorry, cross posted with stripesgalore

Justhadathought · 24/06/2020 22:19

I mean, men being envious as fuck of women has been going on for thousands of years, and we were just getting a few rights in the last hundred years. So something must have worked to get them to back off. So what in psychoanalytic terms do we have to do to get them to back off

It goes the other way too...that women can become identified with masculinity, and envy males.

Xanthangum · 24/06/2020 22:20

Yes I get that this might be the explanation for individuals like Dawn Butler or Jo Swinson.

But there are lots of institutions - NHS, civil service, Police and lots of private companies - where people are fearful of speaking out. How does this explain institutional capture?

Dances · 24/06/2020 22:20

Critical mass will happen eventually

Gibbonsgibbonsgibbons · 24/06/2020 22:25

This explains why, psychologically, TRAs are so batshit. It doesn't explain why other people feel compelled to go along with them.
This is the part that makes me want to tear my hair out - to an extent I can understand the individually personally invested batshit but it’s the behaviour of the sheeple /

the susceptible, which are often those who feel a strong need to fall in with the crowd, or to be pure or right, or good.
that just baffles me.

morethanafortnight · 24/06/2020 22:27

Individually and collectively, we are reaping what our forebears sowed.

Are you suggesting that it is the fault of the 'mother' figure, and by extension, all women?

TorkTorkBam · 24/06/2020 22:27

I agree it isn't about facts because the facts are clearly against them. A bit like flat earthers.

I know there is no point trying to argue them out of their delusions any more than there is a point in trying to argue my mum out of thinking the devil is real and moves amongst us horns and all.

I strongly believe the way to go is to talk to the agnostics and those who just never even think about it.

The sterilising effect of sunlight then stops the zealots getting into power. The zealots will still be zealots though, which is OK so long as they have no power to impose their religion on anyone else.

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:27

@Justhadathought

From a psychoanalytic perspective, there are many men out there who envy women to the point of hatred. At its most extreme - and there is nothing more extreme than a dysfunctional relationship with woman, i.e. "mother" - the envy goes so deep that, theoretically, there is an unconscious desire to 'consume' the other. In this case, for someone to consume "woman". The theory goes that by becoming her, she no longer exists, the protagonist takes her place, vengeance is exacted, and pain assuaged

Do you think/have you observed that many gay men/trans identified men, in particular, have exceptionally closely identified, yet simultaneously repellant relationships with their mothers/the feminine? In Jungian terms - they are 'anima possessed'?

My stance is primarily Jungian, and, yes, they are theoretically anima possessed.
OP posts:
BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:28

@TorkTorkBam

I agree it isn't about facts because the facts are clearly against them. A bit like flat earthers.

I know there is no point trying to argue them out of their delusions any more than there is a point in trying to argue my mum out of thinking the devil is real and moves amongst us horns and all.

I strongly believe the way to go is to talk to the agnostics and those who just never even think about it.

The sterilising effect of sunlight then stops the zealots getting into power. The zealots will still be zealots though, which is OK so long as they have no power to impose their religion on anyone else.

I agree. There is little other way. No direct confrontation is possible - not on a collective scale and not when they are 'activated'.
OP posts:
BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:32

@morethanafortnight

Individually and collectively, we are reaping what our forebears sowed.

Are you suggesting that it is the fault of the 'mother' figure, and by extension, all women?

No. I'm not putting the responsibility at any group's feet apart from "all of us". We are all responsible for this - and this is where psychoanalysis gets inconvenient. If we go back through history, we see that each and all of us are affected by our parents, and their parents, and by history, and collective experiences. So, for example, I have a problem with my own mother. However, she was deeply impacted by her parents, and also by her experience of war. She responded - but mainly reacted - to that. We are all responding and reacting all the time.

Who knows what created this? Was it the feminist movement in the 70s? Maybe. That's not to say that the 70s movement is to blame. It's cause and effect. But I do believe that there is a dynamic that is eternal and will never be stilled between male and female. It's just how we deal with it.

OP posts:
Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 22:35

I don’t want to tAke this thread on a massive tangent, but I have recently started internal family systems therapy.

I have found I do have male parts which have nothing to do with gender stereotypes. This has given me more sympathy for people who say they are non binary.

What still eludes me is why the inner workings of people’s minds are being confused with their actual physical bodies, and why so many people are going along with it.

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 22:40

@Stripesgalore

I don’t want to tAke this thread on a massive tangent, but I have recently started internal family systems therapy.

I have found I do have male parts which have nothing to do with gender stereotypes. This has given me more sympathy for people who say they are non binary.

What still eludes me is why the inner workings of people’s minds are being confused with their actual physical bodies, and why so many people are going along with it.

I believe our bodies are extensions of our psyches, so it would stand to reason that this movement, like others, would express itself physically too. Men have always dressed as women - take Shakespeare as an example. But whereas with Shakespeare women were already subordinate societally and politically, here the energy is different because women are freer, so the force is no longer benign, or comical, or "just the way we do things". It is malevolent, and overpowering, and, as with Shakespeare, not at all tolerant of a real woman's voice.
OP posts:
Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 22:43

‘But I do believe that there is a dynamic that is eternal and will never be stilled between male and female. It's just how we deal with it.’

This massively resonates with me. It’s why I don’t believe in gender abolition. Women are always going to have to come together as a group to defend our rights because we are physically different and that will not go away. As soon as we come together as a social group, social gender then exists.