Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
morethanafortnight · 24/06/2020 22:46

Who created this? Was it the feminist movement in the 70's? Maybe.

So you are edging towards blaming women then.

TorkTorkBam · 24/06/2020 22:47

Mishal Hussein's interview of Fox Fisher this morning (R4 6.55am) was a good example of how to deal with the missionaries I think.

TheChampagneGalop · 24/06/2020 22:51

Who knows what created this? Was it the feminist movement in the 70s? Maybe.

What did the feminist movement create?

Stripesgalore · 24/06/2020 22:54

The 1970s movement created a whole bunch of lesbian relationships, divorces and happy single women.

This has disturbed men greatly.

Melia100 · 24/06/2020 22:55

Yes, I agree that it can be expressed as a collective complex.

I agree there is no logical way to appeal to a TRA or someone in the grip of genderism.

I agree that the only way out of the grip of a religious mania is to do the inner work.

I agree there's a real psychic malevolence. I agree it's contagious.

But then what? How - other than resolving our own individual complexes and continuing to hold to reality-based factual argument - do we move on from this woman-hating moment in time?

picklemewalnuts · 24/06/2020 22:59

We do as torktorkbam says, talk to a lot of agnostics. Sunlight.

And lots of grey rock.

Melia100 · 24/06/2020 23:03

And lots of grey rock

It does feel very much like having to entertain the ravings of an abusive spouse, only the social and cultural world is the spouse, and you can't actually get away ever.

Melia100 · 24/06/2020 23:06

I do think that those of us who had practice going against the crowd prior to this were innoculated, in some ways, from the worst of this new religion.

The Jesus and Mo thread got me remembering being out of step with others like me over Charlie Hebdo - being alone in my friendship group in defending their right to free speech, condemning their murders without the 'but'....and the more people practice thinking for themselves on issues, I suppose the more they are able to resist and be stable in themselves on other issues.

Not sure where that thought is going, honestly.

Goosefoot · 24/06/2020 23:09

I think as far as combating this the thing we have to look at is how do you produce people who have a certain amount of ability to be self-perceptive or to stand apart and look at their own psychological processes? People who find it harder to hide themselves from themselves?

When I have heard of men who have overcome this kind of feeling once they started down that road, often it's been because as they went on they found they could see that they were trying to tell themselves a sort of story. (Obviously if you have a social consensus that it is impossible to change sex that may also help.)

BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 23:10

From a psychoanalytic point of view, no one is devoid of the need to take responsibility. That's why a psychoanalytic explanation is entertained ... up to the point where we have to look at our individual and collective roles. And that's why it's also ultimately dismissed. And that, I'm suggesting, is why we are finding this impossible to "win". Because it isn't about winning. If we want to prevail, it won't be because we win this battle. It'll be because we see so much more to it, and then step out of it in some way. We divert it.

Like all good Jungian quandaries, we can't escape paradox.

A psychological approach is neither popular nor simple.

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 24/06/2020 23:11

Who knows what created this? Was it the feminist movement in the 70s?

The feminist movement was born from a reaction to inequality and male violence against women.
You may as well claim that modern child abuse is a reaction to safeguarding.

Goosefoot · 24/06/2020 23:12

@Stripesgalore

‘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.

Yes. And as soon as men or women talk about their collective experience, or write a book about it, or a myth, you have gender. Trying to abolish it just means it goes underground. I've wondered if this isn't a factor in the rise of gender ideology.
BiPsychle · 24/06/2020 23:16

@Thelnebriati

Who knows what created this? Was it the feminist movement in the 70s?

The feminist movement was born from a reaction to inequality and male violence against women.
You may as well claim that modern child abuse is a reaction to safeguarding.

My comment above stands. The resolution lies not in blame but in shifting perspective. This doesn't make much sense unless you take a psychoanalytic approach - and that can feel like a foreign language.
OP posts:
Goosefoot · 24/06/2020 23:19

@Melia100

Yes, I agree that it can be expressed as a collective complex.

I agree there is no logical way to appeal to a TRA or someone in the grip of genderism.

I agree that the only way out of the grip of a religious mania is to do the inner work.

I agree there's a real psychic malevolence. I agree it's contagious.

But then what? How - other than resolving our own individual complexes and continuing to hold to reality-based factual argument - do we move on from this woman-hating moment in time?

I think we need to ask, what is it about the psychology of a person in 2020 makes them susceptible to this thinking.

I read, as a teenager, a novel based on a sort of Jungian understanding of sex/gender that I always think about in relation to this. It a mid-80s novel though it's largely set before WWII. One of the things the main character deals with is integration of his anima, and he does some odd things like dress up as a woman in his room, trying to look like a film star.

There's never any sense though that he should either destroy the inner woman or let it consume him - it's about a search for wholeness.

dayoftheclownfish · 24/06/2020 23:21

Very interesting thoughts on this thread. I have also wondered whether some of this is generational. Why are millennials so susceptible whereas Xers and boomers seem to be more sceptical? Is it just about people in their forties having had children or is it something specific about coming of age in the new millennium and being digital natives? I also wonder about child-rearing practices in the early 2000s.

EyesOpening · 24/06/2020 23:25

I don't claim to understand a word of what's been said on this thread but when you say "And when you see it this way, you begin to understand why arguing facts is pointless and doesn't work" I would think that what most people are doing, is not trying to convince the person they're arguing with, necessarily but those other people watching the argument

BelleHathor · 24/06/2020 23:40

Great thread reminded me of this quote about ideological subversion by a KGB defector in 1980s:
“Exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information, the facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures, even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it, until he receives a kick in his fat bottom. When a military boot crashes his balls, then he will understand, but not before that. That’s the tragic situation of demoralization.”– Yuri Bezmenov
m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1EA2ohrt5Q

RedToothBrush · 25/06/2020 00:03

Hmm.

Not sure I entirely agree.

The rise of trans activism has to be seen in the context of the wider rise of authoritarianism.

Thus has occurred at the point where the post ww2 settlement has in effect 'run out'. This settlement was founded in the Liberal idea of balancing interests of various groups (especially when there were competing conflicts of interests) and the establishment of human rights.

Brexit fits into thus because people had a growing distain for what they thought 'Human rights' and 'workers rights' were. The desire to leave the EU and the European Courts was, in part, due to a desire to leave the ECHR (except most people including the then Home Secretary and later PM didn't know the difference).

You have to look a little about why this was happening. Why had people given up on human rights and workers rights? Especially those who theoretically needed them most - the poorest and most vulnerable.

And there's your issue. Despite what the law said, cuts to legal aid and to criminal defence lawyers in effect mean that if you are really poor you don't share in this idea of justice being equal because you cant enforce the law or defend yourself in court properly.

Instead you had this gap where the middle classes think the law works and they believe in human and workers rights but these laws only really serve them and don't serve those who need them most.

In other words, it's about the affects of austerity and the growing divide between the haves and have not.

In this gap and as there is a reordering of power resulting from it, there is a power vacuum into which you get alsorts of groups coming in to take advantage of the situation.

All over the place you see examples of how ideology over logic and practical ideas taking over. Remain v Leave exemplified it perfectly. With a rush of people running in to exploit the lack of plan for their own ends by denying what was said pre referendum and instead saying that people had really thought X instead (eg saying we wouldn't leave the customs Union or single market but then saying that was the plan all along and everyone knew that).

It's about how institutions have become saturated by people who don't have much life experience or familiarity with real issues and instead have nice insulated lives and degrees. And take for granted what these rights were all about and why they were ever needed in the first place.

It's also at a time when people are lacking direction and purpose and have a generational feeling they have lost control of their futures to this Brexit ideology. There's a need to 'believe in something' and have some cause to fight. Every generation has a 'cause'. We just sit at a point where we not only have a generational fracture but also a deep political one, so people are looking for things to believe in and logic and reason doesn't feature because the whole point us its about building a new vision and getting rid of the old rules which provide stability and 'reason'. Its idealism is blinded to how you never can break from material reality.

Our last generational shift manifested in a cultural boom and the importance of music and art to that sense of collective identity. This generation shift seems to be focusing on politics and public displays of political belief.

So we have this battle on going on in which the trans debate is but one part.

When you have a rise in authoritarianism you ALWAYS have a strengthening of white male elite power and a weakening of power of those at the bottom of the pile: women and children and you always get people (particularly men but not exclusive to) trying to exploit that situation to their own ends.

Political instability also drives the extremes as the 'moderators' lose control of the role they play in balancing issues.

We are where we are because liberals (small l - the ones who believe in free speech and democracy) forgot what the post war settlement was about and what its aims and ambitions were and no longer could sell the idea of it to the population (hence the vote to leave the EU which was very much an institution built on that foundation stone).

Whilst I agree to a point about how it's men having real hatred about women, you can look at the issue without asking the 'but why now?' question too. You also have these economic strands running through everything - from austerity to old fashioned stereotypes of men being providers and women's rights (as part of the liberal Post war movement) meaning there were less opportunities for men who didn't play the game and conform to that role. (there is a loss of identity and purpose creeping in here and building resentment for women, particularly educated and older women in positions of authority)

This whole dynamic of generational shift, loss of traditional identity, loss of hope and looking for a new vision combined with economic fragility and inequality plays a huge part in the whole thing...

Thelnebriati · 25/06/2020 00:04

I did not write about blame.

The most dangerous time for a woman is when she is leaving an abusive relationship. Its also very common for abusers to paint themselves as the victim, its called DARVO - Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.

Its interesting that we can see parallels with the feminist movement being attacked and dismantled today, apparently in response to women building resources for themselves and gaining some equality in law.

FlibbertyGiblets · 25/06/2020 00:09

What form does the hysteria take, you made a ref in your OP. And (forgive me, am no academic) who is hysterical. Sorry to be thick, it is late and I am hot.

FantaOra · 25/06/2020 00:11

Goosefoot

Was that Daniel Martin by John Fowles?

Goosefoot · 25/06/2020 01:05

@FantaOra

Goosefoot

Was that Daniel Martin by John Fowles?

No - What's Bred In the Bone - Robertson Davies.
Agrona · 25/06/2020 01:06

Red, thank you for your intelligent and insightful analysis.

Goosefoot · 25/06/2020 01:11

RedToothBrush

I have been thinking something that is similar when considering the alternate views of racism in marxist analysis and that of black conservatives. The marxists of course are looking at these structural and sociological forces, while the conservatives are talking about things like the breakdown of the family, disempowerment of individuals.

While they tend to attack each other's explanations, I'm increasingly inclined to think they are both right. It really is about power structures. And it really is about how the psychological scaffolding of individuals plays out.

But that suggests they must be connected in some way, the way the human mind is structured and the way a society is structured, they interact. What's needed is something like a unifying theory.

SuperLoudPoppingAction · 25/06/2020 01:15

Mary Daly is a good link between the apparent urge to destroy women and the sorts of subconscious drives psychoanalysis examines.

A bit better of a feminist than Jung.

I do also like a bit of Marilyn Frye (on separatism and power discussed parasitism in a useful way).

Those two strands mixed with Gail dines' feminist take on neoliberal individualism sum it up for me.

That or just backlash but Susan faludi might disagree.