"You don't care about children!" & "Moral panic"

[SpicyMoth]

JKR retweeted something from TheAmazingAtheist being pro gender ideology.
I remember hearing of him before but remembered him being more "Anti-Social Justice Warrior" in terms of views so I was confused & looked into him more to try and make sense of it.

This took me down the rabbit hole of a subreddit called BreadTube, here is rule 2 of the sub;

" 2. Posts should be against the prevailing winds of the internet
BreadTube exists to promote content that goes squarely against mainstream political discourse, which tends to be pro-establishment (liberal or conservative), pro-capitalist, and pro-authoritarian. If a video could get uncontroversial primetime space on any mainstream outlet, it probably does not belong here."

So, me thinking "That seems a reasonable rule, maybe this is a place for actual discourse?" I delve a bit deeper and start looking at what people have posted.
Good grief was I wrong...
One of the top rated posts was a thread linking to this video; e
I'm not super far into the video, but what this woman is saying is just... Coming across as really quite patronising - As if by virtue of not agreeing with her, you're stupid and bigoted.

A lot of other posts seem to be specifically about this topic, and I've noticed a wave online of TRA's using this argument as well;
Basically saying that "Thinking of the children" is the argument being used today w/ gender ideology, and it's the same as the argument that homophobes used to use against gay people/gay rights.
That because people did this in the past and used that excuse for being against homosexuality, that it's happening again with trans people.

Now obviously we know that these two things are not the same at all, who you love has absolutely nothing in common at all with taking irreversible hormones and having surgeries performed on minors (That there is literal proof and evidence of in the form of detransitioner's).

But how do we escape this "Boy who cried wolf" situation that we're in?

Because it very much seems to echo that old children's story... Homophobes didn't like gay people so they lied and said "Oh but think of the children!" when there was never any threat. Then they did it with legalising gay marriage, again still no threat.

Now there's an actual threat to children's safety, and we're told we're lying. That we don't care about children. That we're hateful and phobic.
Meanwhile the number of destransitioner's is growing ever still, and despite this fact, despite the fact that they are living proof of the harm ideology can do, we're still lying and bigoted and we never really cared about kids...

Do they actually not believe us when we tell them our concerns, or are they just refusing to listen?
How do you even combat this?
How can there ever be any meaningful conversation when everything is taken in bad faith?
How can we show that we actually do care about the children in a way that would get through?
How can we show them that homosexuality and trans ideology truly are not the same thing? - Who you love vs. physically altering your body are literal worlds apart from one another, It seems completely mad to me to even compare them...

Something that should be remembered is that The Amazing Atheist has a Dolcett (snuff and cannibalism) fetish, and groomed a schizophrenic, extremely mentally ill girl into transitioning and roleplaying this fetish with him. He used to post pictures of himself in little girl panties, and his sex toys, including knives and horse dildos, and all of this is public and archived. Essential reading, his own words: <a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20170316233734/encyclopediadramatica.se/TheAmazingAtheist/tth" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20170316233734/encyclopediadramatica.se/TheAmazingAtheist/tth

Sometimes I really wish I hadnt looked at threads 😳

Good god, don't know how I managed to miss all that! 😬

Didn't know much about him, I just recognised the name from years ago, did some light googling, and fell into a "BreadTube" rabbit hole that sucked all my remaining hope for discourse on the trans topic into the ether :')

It's just another dog whistle trope. When JK Rowling originally published her eminently reasonable piece that got her into so much trouble, I read a TRA who'd gone through it line by line, saying she really means...

So I guess there's no way to speak about this really... Well... At all?
At least not without being taken as coming from a place of bad faith rather than genuine concern?

Not a scooby why my post was deleted, it was truthful!

WPATH and it's adherents spell it all out themselves!

I think an issue is they way concern for children has been, and continues to be, worded.

Saying:

“transitioning is harmful to children’s developing bodies and i’m concerned”

is far different than:

Transpeople are harmful and dangerous to children.

The latter paints an entire community as paedophiles and predators, that’s often a step too far into prejudice for a lot of people.

I’ve said this before but the hyperbole and aggression around the subject makes people who are tentative in exploring how they feel about it really turn off.

I’d gratefully have a genuine and open conversation about any part of the subject but dissent or disagreement on this board is met with such a force it makes any kind of coming together impossible, it’s very sad.

I don’t think many people say that transpeople are a danger to children

“transitioning is harmful to children’s developing bodies and i’m concerned

i do see a lot of this

People who say “won’t somebody think of the children!” in a mocking way seem to be people who see the idea of children (and also women) as so undeserving of rights that it can only be explained as a cover for bigotry.

Sweeping generalisation I know, but reading some posts just on here there’s such an underlying current of “you can’t believe that because who would?” to them and it’s clear it comes from their own lack of respect for women and kids.

it amazes me how often posters rock up here (a site for parents, made up mainly of mothers and with many people who have worked in education for years) and think concern for kids is a sham.

I would disagree. I see, often, “I don’t want TW in the <<insert almost any place>> with my child.

The absolute inference that TW (particularly) as a group are inherently dangerous for children to be around. Some are, but these blanket statements or inferences are often too far for many people.

I would disagree. I see, often, “I don’t want TW in the <<insert almost any place>> with my child

Yeah see i don’t reckon thats right at all

most posters seem to have an issue with males in female single sex places…not male single sex places

and you said that posters think transpeople are a danger…now you’ve changed it to TW and I still think that the vast majority of people on here don’t think all transwomen are a danger to children

but yes we may well have to agree to disagree here

Well, crikey.

It’s not a ‘Boy Who Cried Wolf’ situation.

There was a Wolf last time (NAMBLA & PIE amongst many others) and there is a slightly different Wolf this time.

Average gays, lesbians and bisexual people were never the problem, the problem has always been the sneaky predators who ride on the coat tails of legitimate movements.

Have a read of this thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4747859-scotland-pie-and-lgb-research-thread?page=1

Compare what was happening then to some of the weird stuff happening now, eg the paedoacademic who was briefly on the board at Mermaids Jacob Breslow (despite having masturbation smith children with ‘cumming on a shoe’)

Most posters here recognise and acknowledge sex. "Trans" people who are male pose the same kind of risk as other men, and should be treated as such. This is basic safeguarding.

That's a fair point, I hadn't considered NAMBLA as I just don't associate it with homosexuality at all.
In my mind it's very much a paedophile thing, and the gay thing is secondary. Regardless of sexuality they'd likely still be a pedo, y'know?
Maybe that's wrong, but open to have my mind changed!

"Average gays, lesbians and bisexual people were never the problem, the problem has always been the sneaky predators who ride on the coat tails of legitimate movements."

I wholeheartedly agree!
But how do you get that across when it's by default assumed that that's not what you mean when you say that?
Is there any way to at all?
It just always seems like wilful misinterpretation :/

+1
Still, we need to know what we're up against I suppose. Shame the mind bleach isn't provided free of charge though.

PinkyU, I think there’s probably a miscommunication here. I don’t want TW in the women’s changing rooms because I don’t want ANY MALE over about 7 years old in the women’s changing room. I’m also aware that there are probably a lot more predatory males than there are TW, so unfortunately, any male entering the women’s changing room, is, on balance, most likely to be a predator. This doesn’t mean I believe all TW are predators. Do you see the nuance?
Added to that, the probability of a girl being attacked may be low, but the repercussions are far to great for it to be a risk worth taking

The fundamentalist right in America loves to claim 'think of the children' when they are implementing regressive laws (e.g the Don't Say Gay bills being implemented in Florida right now) but will they put in place gun control laws to reduce school shootings? Will they hell.

The issue with 'think of the children' style arguments is the implication that the other side isn't. The vast, vast majority of people whether they are trans rights activists, gender critical, or somewhere in between care about children.

@TraumatisedGooner " (e.g the Don't Say Gay bills being implemented in Florida right now) "

Have you read the bill, yourself, in toto?
What does it say, precisely?
Cheers!

The pale underbelly gets to be a bit much sometimes, so brain bleach free of charge, my friend.

Both sides may be thinking of the children, but there is the question of which side is correct, or to what degree people are correct.

You can "care" but be very wrong to want to give experimental drugs to children on limited evidence.

I think this is the bill.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/PDF

It begins:

An act relating to parental rights in education; amending s. 1001.42, F.S.; requiring district school boards to adopt procedures that comport with certain provisions of law for notifying a student's parent of specified information

A quick skim read indicates that its main aim is to stop schools from transing children without their parents' knowledge (although it doesn't mention this explicitly) and the prohibition of inappropriate teaching about gender identity and sexual orientation to very young children. Although there may be more to it than that. Perhaps @TraumatisedGooner can explain.