Suzanne Moore Mermaids article

[Feministwoman]

Spot on.

suzannemoore.substack.com/p/mermaids-i-dont-feel-vindicated

"This misogyny, has been dependent on useful idiots and useful brands and a whole host of dumb ‘academics’. I don’t feel vindicated. I feel violent. You, any of you, could have known this: you could have thought, you could have read, you could have stopped for one second caring about what is fashionable and thought instead about what is right."

Yeah.

That.

That's about where I am.

There was a thread yesterday on MN where an OP was asking advice on their child having chosen an identity she hadn't realised was porn related. One poster shared a post about how their own child was abused online and ended up in serious long term trouble through this; on the same thread is another poster saying "ignore the hysterics OP". The usual sexpositivecoolandgroovy nutjobbery.

Those at this point still willing to believe the never ending wide eyed 'whoops' or 'it's complicated' are getting to the point of having to realise their own hands are not clean.

One of the comments on that article talks about hosts and parasites. Scarily accurate.

Yeah, I think she is still one of the useful misogynistic idiots that Suzanne was referring to. Hopefully when she grows up she will be horrified at what she enabled.

I'm trying to explain this article to a friend who doesn't get it.

I kinda do but can't articulate it to her. Could someone help?

My head is mushy.

Ha! I'm wondering whether my inner rage is clouding my ability to actually form a coherent sentence!

I'm getting it's about safeguarding, about how the lines have been consistently blurred by men (again). How women (again) have been telling people about this, and we've been largely ignored (again). The idiocy and virtual signalling demonstrated by celebrities and companies who support charities such as mermaids, even children in need for fucks sake! We have sex theory discussions now eroding the very boundaries we put in place to protect kids. We are medicalising, pathologising and mutilating kids bodies when teenage years are supposed to be confusing. And under all of this, women keep repeating ourselves, and we are ignored, demonised, stalked, losing our jobs and credibility. So yes, women are very fucking angry!

I feel im missing the crux somehow?

Does your friend understand the issues with gender ideology?

In some ways the article starts from a place of already understanding the problem. So if it is a new topic for your friend, something more basic might be worth reading first.

@MangyInseam

Maybe I don't get it? I understand there are 3 main theories of gender ideology. How does this intersect with this article?

@MangyInseam

I'm assuming you're referring to gender inequality and why this needs to be protected? How does this intersect with the kids?

What I am asking is really what your friend finds difficult to understand, specifically.

@MangyInseam

Ah I see - she finds the article hard to read as it doesn't feel competent to her. She's uncertain what point the author is trying to make?

She then later counteracts the article by stating that theres plenty of medical evidence to show hormone blockers are not dangerous and that their effects are indeed reversible?

The latter really shocked me. I can't help but feel this is exactly the type of shit mermaids etc would spout. But obviously I don't want to say this to her. I've send her lots of information to repute her claim.

Sorry should read coherent and not competent

She then later counteracts the article by stating that theres plenty of medical evidence to show hormone blockers are not dangerous and that their effects are indeed reversible?
Ask to see it.

@Sparklybutold What doesn’t your friend understand? Suzanne’s writing is very clear. I don’t understand why you’re acting as an intermediary between your friend and the people on this thread.

I'm not sure I believe that your friend does not understand it. I think she just does not want to hear what the article says. Possibly she has been complicit in the damage being done to our kids and does not want to have to face that fact so is pretending the article is 'not coherent'. The fact that she believes mermaid's false news about puberty blockers suggests she's been well and truly captured by the ideology.

Puberty blockers aren’t reversible. If you start them at, say, 12 and stop them at 16, you won‘t be able to make up for the lack of growth of your primary sex organs. Which is not what you want if you desist and not what you want if you want to proceed to surgery (see Jazz Jenning’s issues with their OP). Obviously, if you stop at 13 instead that impact will be less severe, but not absent.
More importantly, by preventing puberty, you are typically robbed of your chance to desist - as puberty is very, very often the trigger for ‚trans‘ teenagers to reconcile themselves with their own biological sex (see Rupert Everett‘s account on the matter, but there are also statistics on this).
I very much doubt that most child- transitioners will not regret later in live that they gave up on their chance to get adult- grown genitals (be it to keep them or to operate them), and with that a chance for a fulfilling sex-life.
As a child this won‘t be a priority, but adults should know better. That the adults driving this ignore it is astounding and very much suggests that they have other priorities than the best outcome for the kid in question.

I’ve always found it incredible how many people aren’t able to explain why they support gender ideology; I wish I could have a fiver for everyone who has told me how complicated it is. They can never explain, either, why a “trans child” “gets it”, but I, an adult, don’t. It’s left me wondering at times if a “trans child “ really has extraordinary levels of grasping complex issues - or whether believers get to the end of trying to argue with reason and logic and realise that in actual fact none of it makes sense. Unfortunately instead of admitting this, they either get angry and claim you’re “transphobic” for questioning the magic, or they hurriedly brush you aside with the “complicated” line. Then they never bring up the subject again.

Either way, it’s very telling. On the upside, it brings you into contact with people who are more honest about what they think and who can see here the glaring red flag issues of safeguarding women and children, which is what Suzanne’s article is very clearly about.

“It’s complicated” either means they genuinely believe gender identity must be a ‘thing’ but they feel unqualified to explain it. Or, more often, that they’ve already tried to explain it and realised the whole theory is full of holes. They can’t admit that so pretend the fault isn’t the ideology, but the non-believer.

It’s all a question of faith and very much like the emperor’s new clothes. How can they disbelieve if others are believing?

I don't think it will be easy for any TV station to have Watson interviewed or featured on any show in the future, without being deluged with complaints from victims of paedophilia.

The 8 x Harry Potter films are likely to be her only remaining public presence and I'm rather hoping that digital editing technology will enable her representation in both visual and audio to-be-removed and replaced by an AI-generated character, or with another actress seamlessly added into each scene. So we can have all 8 movies with Hermione Grainger, just not Hermione played by E. Watson.

Would Warner Bros do such a thing? Oh yes, its new CEO David Zaslav I don't reckon would hesitate to commission the work if JKR requested it. And I suspect a substantial percentage of the buying public would re-buy HP boxsets in Blu-Ray with E. Watson digitally edited-out of every scene.

If I were you, I would ask her to provide you links to that evidence. Because we have seen much of it and it doesn’t ever prove it.

Bone density is an easy place to start. There is one study that some extremist trans activists have posted here that they fail to read properly, which points out bone density in females is never regained. This is also well known from the Lupron cases.

There has been some recent cases of brain swelling as well. They are not hard to find on search engines.

There are plenty more but, maybe your friend doesn’t understand the impact just the bone density issue alone has on people’s lives and the potential to shorten lives. Or maybe they just haven’t looked further than the calming statements they like to read.

Evidence produced by whom? With what agenda? With what politically motivated bias?

Honestly at this point I am out of all patience. Suzanne nailed it: anyone at this point who hasn't yet admitted to smelling the coffee is either extremely stupid or has skin in the game themselves in some way that means they can't face it. And at this point they are becoming actively culpable of enabling.

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee

I think for her to even start contemplating the truth is emotionally painful owing to her own personal situation with a trans brother

@Helleofabore yeah I've asked her to provide 'evidence' and posted lots of info for her abouts serious side effects of meds like lupron

Then Sparkly, your friend is probably not going to change their mind. Some people will ignore evidence because others have told them it is not definitive or not the same. Whatever. They just will hold their line.

Michael Biggs' recent piece about the history of puberty blockers is a good place to start: www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0092623X.2022.2121238?needAccess=true