3 questions for GC women

[ChirpyFinch]

As the title says, three questions for the women in this chat.

1. Do you think the majority of people are gender critical, and why/why not?

2. Globally, the right wing is more vocally gender critical than the left. They are also far more likely to be regressive on a range of women’s issues like abortion and anti-gay. Why do you think they agree with GCs on this one issue but disagree on so much else (if you think they do?)

3. How many trans people do you estimate there are globally?

Sorry @RickyBobbysKFC not Rufus. @EveSix?

I'm guessing you only get so many deletions within a certain time span before you automatically get banned?

I don't see rock cakes being an offensive topic so I guess it more of a "talking in the wrong tone of voice" crime.

Oh. Well, I did not know that.

It's interesting, though, that as 'paraphilia' replaced 'perversions', the word 'paraphilia' has become to be perceived in the same way as the word 'perversion'.

It's almost as though just changing the word doesn't change the thing it applies to.

@HeadTerf and @Omlettes have a deletion each, but I can't remember what those posts were.

Oddly, my recipe seems to be back - I'm sure that was one of the vanished yesterday. And of course there are dozens of cake and biscuit posts left untouched, so it's horribly inconsistent modding.

Enforce the 'no diversions' rule or don't (preferably don't, because that's what human conversations do), but don't pick on a few people.

Chilling.

I suspect that's the intention. Prob not of MN, but of the monitors who deem us worthy of subduing. It must be so difficult, being afraid of women talking.

I note the OP didn't reappear last night.

If cake recipes are bad faith why is starting a conversation in a snippy tone and then not returning ok? I'm genuinely lost.

Which is partly why I am disturbed by the current theory that belief in gender does require such demonstration.

Yes, I know other religious people who are disturbed by the pressure they feel to back up their beliefs with evidence now that 'belief' is under the microscope.

I take it that you don't think that something that could lead autistic people (and people who are suffering from psychological issues or MH illness, people who've been emotionally or sexually abused) to have extreme body modifications with all the poor psychological, social and medical outcomes we're all aware of is a good thin? You don't really think that that mutilation should proceed without other less damaging interventions or without evidence that it works, do you?

There's growing evidence that a great many things we thought just happened randomly are actually hard-wired and genetic.

A tendency to authoritarianism, for example:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000y7sq

And possibly also a tendency to religion: The God Gene:
https://www.nature.com/articles/ng1204-1241

Yes, this. But they don't automatically inform you of deletions. So unless you go back through all your conversations looking for deletions, the axe can fall very suddenly.

The religion I belong to abandoned the requirement for male circumcision that some of its founders (I'm being very mature and nor referring to them as male members) grew up with two thousand years ago, specifically to make the point that bodily change is not needed to demonstrate spiritual change.

So no, I'm not in favour of people doing damage to their bodies because of a feeling. Particularly if it's a feeling based on the rejection of and denial of science.

Authoritarianism is a whole other thing,

Your post inspired a 10-minute trawl on t'internet to work out whether 'lysenkoist' was an interesting typo or a thing. And he was was thing, and a very useful one, I suspect, to know about:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko#:~:text=Lysenko%20forced%20farmers%20to%20plant,and%20exacerbated%20the%20food%20shortages.

According to Wikipedia (I know, I know) his insistence that seeds be sown very close together to ensure better crops led to Russian famine.

Which is why we need evidence, proper quality, peer-reviewed and test-driven evidence, to be sure that something that starts as a belief is actually a good thing in practice.

He also has something of Simon McBurney about him, don't you think?

Try telling the women of Afghanistan that.

I think we both know that I'm not just talking about body modification. That's just the most extreme, though not the most pernicious, manifestation of gender ideological belief. The denial of the reality of sex is more dangerous on a societal level.

I've been talking this morning to a lesbian friend who has family in Belfast and Co Antrim and she/s concerned about the number of evangelical churches moving into NI. People go to the US to be trained, then come back and build huge US-style churches and housing communities that, among other things, welcome trans people — not because they love transpeople, but because they dislike them less than they like lesbians and gay men. If anyone in the Ballymena area is reading, perhaps you can confirm that the evangelicals there are buying up loads of property, including pubs, as part of their mission?

This is the one I hear mentioned most:
https://www.gpastures.co.uk

How does the young person in question feel about this though.

@CautiousLurker and her friend are devastated, consider it tragic etc. But surely the person whose feelings are key in this debate are those of the young person in question (not clear whether they are NB or a trans man hence using non gendered language)?

We await an answer to your question with eagerness!

It has been asked before.

Just like many of those who accuse posters of not allowing alternative opinions seem to be inclined to pepper their posts with name calling and sentences of shame!

But (some of) those posters also dislike having this pointed out. They dislike having it pointed out that their own points assume a position of moral judgement while declaring everyone is silencing them. The hypocrisy is clear once you sort through the emoting. Because to them, they are only posting what the righteously believe and any challenge is unsafe and abuse.

And Some of those posters thrive on being told they have again shamed a whole group of people using false or misapplied evidence and adherence to empty mantras.

Still the accusations of silencing continue with one hand, with the other hand dishing out shame, sometimes using slurs they deny are slurs. The cycle is self fulfilling. They post, people react to the shaming and then the poster claims to be silenced.

Plus ca change

Indeed Helleofabore.

What should be celebrated about a young female person who has potentially shortened, certainly limited their life with this treatment?

Do you believe that these side effects can be dismissed as just gender affirming care? And that the ramifications are clearly understood by a teenager?

The other point that I think is often glossed over is that 'delusion' is a fairly common occurence.

Accepting without question that someone is actually the opposite sex because this is how they say they feel seems somewhat jarring when we think about people who think they are Jesus Christ, or anorexics who think they are fat, or any number of other ideas/feelings that don't correspond to material reality.

Why is this particular delusion 'affirmed' and other delusions dealt with differently?

A man is not a woman, even if he truly thinks he is.

What about the effects of refusing gender affirming care, and indeed of family etc refusing the acknowledge a young person’s gender identity - associated suicide risk etc?

My question though related to the fact that the response was unequivocally ‘how tragic’, ‘how devastating’ to @CautiousLurker’s post, relating primarily to how she and the young person’s parent felt. But no consideration at all was given to the mental health and overall impact on the young person in question.

That's terrible. How's your friend doing?

Reading this, I thought it was 2021 again! The debate has moved on hugely in the past couple of years. Might be time to catch up? Very few people now argue that so called trans health care has anything to do with suicide rates.

Very few people now argue that so called trans health care has anything to do with suicide rates.

Apart from the demonstrated increase in risk after medical/surgical transition.

Excuse me?!

I’m talking about lack of access to healthcare and affirmation- ie the opposite to what has happened in this case from the NHS at least.