On Mermaids having to listen to Cass: “ This is so blatant and evil I have no idea why decent human beings let this happen.”

[Zahariel]

Cross posting is poor form.

but.

the responses to Mermaids having to listen to Cass on trans Reddit is just staggering and I think an important window into the minds of the people furthest in on this delusion.

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1gb26kv/charity_commission_is_instructing_mermaids_and/

“Cass and her supporters need to feck right off already. I'm sick of it being peddled around to try to legitimise crap, especially when it's been widely debunked by the rest of the world and professionals within the UK too. They keep LYING and pretending like it's "soo scientific" when it simply isn't and i'm sick of the lies and i'm sick of the British public slurping those lies up off the boots of the red tories.”

This chimes with my own experience. I was good friends at University with a now famous trans activist, who although suffering with fragile mental health showed absolutely no signs of being likely to adopt the ‘ True Belief’. ( All this was fifty years ago). He , for so he identified at that time , was actually quite straight laced about LGB topics.

Now she claims that she started to transition at University. Not if the pictures in my album aren’t fake.

And another eye opener

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1gbq8gm/i_think_they_are_trying_to_redefine_being_trans/

In general, to all the comments saying “don’t read Reddit”

I get it and agree. BUT.

reading the worst examples of these people really gives shape to what this conflict is all about. I think it’s a window into the pyche, the severe mental illnesses and delusions of these people.

and I mean general delusions not just the delusion of changing sex! Complete detachment from reality

Certainly is. The first few comments are all about autism.
It makes me so sad that some autistic people (like my daughter) are conflating an understanding of what it means to "be" male or female with an understanding of which sex-based stereotypes "fit" or "don't fit" for them. Dr Az speaks about this brilliantly in his Benjamin Boyce interview.

Christ. I didn’t see it but the highest rated comment on there is:

”Yeah, this is why I'm not getting my autism or mental illnesses diagnosed”

that IS FUCKING MENTAL?!?!

I’ll agree that being Irish I’m still quite culturally Catholic despite being an atheist - it’s feckin hard to avoid here especially if you’re of a certain age (as I am) 🤷‍♀️

I had no idea that Cartesian Dualism is considered heresy by the Church. Every day is a school day on MN 😊

I’ll agree that being Irish I’m still quite culturally Catholic despite being an atheist

I'm still quite culturally protestant, despite being an atheist. I still have lots of shared values with what I learned from my Sunday school days. I was also in Crusaders during my secondary school years, despite not being Baptist. Lots of my friends were there.

On balance though, I'm clearly a massive heretic by pretty much all Christian standards with my ghost (dualism) belief, my enjoyment of music and Christmas celebration (I'd have been a terrible puritan)... and lack of belief in god to name but a few things.

Christ. I didn’t see it but the highest rated comment on there is:
”Yeah, this is why I'm not getting my autism or mental illnesses diagnosed”
that IS FUCKING MENTAL?!?!

The crossover between autism and gender identity belief is huge. I don't have anything to base it on but from my own experience (which admittedly could be biased, given my research focus on autism and gender identity conflation to support my daughter) it seems to be way higher than the 35% of referrals mentioned in by Cass or the 48% from the research done by two Tavistock clinicians. Given only 1% of the population is autistic, according to the National Autism Society, it's a massive red flag that this is a vulnerable population.

Good. At least you suspect that you are wrong.

The only thing men across all religions and political ideologies have in common is their belief in their right to male supremacy.

Doesn't really matter what the reasoning or ideology behind it is.

An atheist who has chosen the difficult path of going against the dominant, "normal", commonly-held belief of a Creator is LESS likely to believe in other baseless hypotheses.

I don't think this is true, as the various humanist organisations have proven.

• The American Humanist Association removed an award from Richard Dawkins because he spoke against gender identity theory in the same way he speaks against religion.
• Humanists UK opposed the clarification of sex in the Equality Act. Many notable British humanists such as Professor Alice Roberts have a belief in gender identity theory.
• Meanwhile Camp Quest, a secular US-based summer camp for young people, allows mixed-sex cabins and encourages parents to talk to their children about "The Gender Unicorn" so they are prepared for camp. I believe the UK branch has also introduced some gender policies but I can't find their website if they have one.

Were atheism any kind of inoculation against believing in nonsense, the major humanist organisations would never have given gender identity theory the time of day.

Some people naturally incline towards zealotry. Those people, in the absence of God, will find something else to be zealous about. And the ones who believe themselves "rational" are dangerous, because they're convinced they reached their position through objective scientific fact. Slavery, misogyny, lobotomies and concentration camps are all good examples of things that were "justified" by "science and reason".

I'd also argue that in the UK at least, belief in a Creator is not particularly the "norm". Just under half of British people believe, according to the 2022 World Values Survey, and the majority of those do not consider God important in their lives - meaning a lot of them are deists, wishful thinkers or people who haven't thought about it since childhood. They're unlikely to be the sort who make atheism a "difficult" path. Having been both an atheist and a practicing Christian in the UK, I would consider atheism to be significantly easier and much less against the grain.

This is fundamentally the Christian position. Matter is by nature inseparable from form, whether you are a rhododendron, a porcupine, or a person. Form is closest to something like mathematics, matter is substance, but the idea of substance without form is a kind of abstraction, a mental taking apart of something which isn't separable in reality.

Reverse engineering is certainly something that happens.

But I don't understand how you think a person's belief in science modes, which are limited to empirical subjects, is inherently incompatible with metaphysical thinking. That's like saying empiricism invalidates mathematics, how could it?

One of the basic statements that most modern humanists groups have signed on to is this, from the International and Humanist Ethics Union:

Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality.

What you will notice about this is that it is essentially a faith statement, at least as much, if not more so, than many traditional religions, because it makes this statement without grounding it in any kind of underlying reality. Why do humans have a responsibility to give meaning to their own lives? What could that possibly even mean in a thought system based on empiricism? What's irresponsible about declaring everything meaningless and doing what you want?What are "human" values? Be Kind, or Might Makes Right?

There is plenty of fuzzy thinking to be had in humanism, and it's really common for it's moral arguments to just be whatever happens to be the ideology of the moment.

r/truscum is the only decent trans sub on there. They are not into trans trenders and at all - and are generally quite fed up of TRA excesses.

I have been down the online TRA rabbit holes a few times. Invariably the same names pop up and you start to get a picture of them. They almost always are young adults. They almost always live with their parents. There often will be a failed post high school education situation. They seem to hate their parents for not dancing to their tune enough and not understanding them enough. They don’t work or only work part time. They have a nihilistic view of the world and their future. They almost all have an alphabet soup of physical and mental ailments, which they proudly display on their handles. I suspect self-diagnosis is a big thing. More often than not, they still mask in public and this is a deep part of their identity which they can’t bear to have mocked. They are all tiresome bores and see people not giving them and their ideas the time of day as hatred and bigotry.

I think some of these people will escape into more normal lives but not many- maybe the ones lucky enough to have parents who kick them out and force them out of their spirals of doom. I think if they are still wallowing about at 25, it will be all over red rover for their chance of having a meaningful life.

r/detrans is still there (somehow). The stories there are truly heartbreaking.

Mathematics and religion aren’t the same sort of thing. Mathematics doesn’t require belief without evidence. It’s a different type of logical construct from religion in that doesn’t require gaps in logic to be filled in with assertions and assumptions, unless very tightly defined within the logical structure. It’s constantly tested against reality and supports a consistent view of the world. It predicts and explains phenomena in a way religion does not. (Whether mathematics is a real “thing” or an artefact of the human mind is a different issue. My own view is towards the latter, and that this limits our version of reality to what our brains can model).

Science itself requires metaphysical thinking. We look for the origins of the universe and have our own version of the creation myth - the Big Bang. People accept this, but they don’t “believe” in it. It’s a working hypothesis that happens to fit the facts as we currently understand them. I don’t think that people’s understanding and use of science and scientific thinking precludes their ability or inclination towards metaphysical thought. In fact the one may support the other, depending on their personality. Most of the time people’s empirical practice and metaphysical thought exist on parallel paths because human minds are complicated and messy. We pick ideas and beliefs that appeal to us as individuals, to make sense of the world.

AliasGrace in theory they're not directly pandering to men - they're insisting that because some women with PCOS identify as men or as non binary, it is essential to remove any factual statement that only women have PCOS.

In theory that's supposedly what it's meant to be about, that's the line that's read out. That's what's told to us.

But seriously, it's laughable that transmen are behind this determination to destroy women centred language and the actual word women in connection to human biology.

Destroying that connection between "woman" and biological reality is what makes the space for the "TWAW" lie. It benefits transwomen for that reason, that's the goal.

Most transmen with PCOS really don't mind women saying it's a woman's health issue, how many flipping Transmen with PCOS are even on Reddit 🤣 I mean, the place is overwhelmed with people with a penis it's really not a welcoming place for any females.....

I'm not sure.

I don't disagree that in the end this stuff usually isn't really about transmen.

However - in a lot of cases I've found transmen can be heavily involved with language policing behaviour within organizations, shaming people who say things they don't like, and trying to enforce new social norms.

Which is funny, because there these people are doing things the way women typically socially bully others for status and compliance, while the transwomen who want to be bullies do it by shouting and physical intimidation, like men.

Interesting read about the Chalmers clinic (Edinburgh i think) which they say is refusing surgical referrals for people under 25. Good news. All the good outcomes for surgery innthe past are based on evidence in caseloads aged over 25 because nobody in their right mind used to think surgery earlier than that could possibly be a good idea

Whilst I think most Christians would claim it is the case, it cannot be as per current scientific understanding of how the brain works. In CofE Protestantism, the relationship with God is a true free will choice. But if the soul is tied to the body, that choice is not possible. The human brain is deterministic and true free will cannot exist, therefore it is impossible to freely choose to have a relationship with God unless a form of dualism exists.

I think you would struggle to show empirically that the processes in brain are deterministic and don't allow real choice.

(Not to mention the weeds we could get into over what counts as a choice. And of course an important part of the Christian theology around that tells us that many, even most, of our choices aren't entirely free, because of the fall.)

Re the comparison with religion, I've touched a little on this with reference to extremism in my post at 8.01am here:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5185250-lgb-alliance-conference-disrupted-by-tras?page=23

Its a lengthy post so I won't repeat it.

But the observation is about the concept of 'sacred beliefs'.

The use of the word sacred immediately lends you to thinking about religion but the concept is applicable to all ideas of morality regardless of the presence of faith. It is a effect a social article of faith in terms of what your absoluete priority in life is. Your hill to die on so to speak.

The observation with studies on this, is that extremist behaviour is more likely to occur in close knit closed communities and that people are more likely to act against their own self interest, no matter the cost or consequence, when it comes to a sacred belief.

In the case of a mother, this might be the instinct to protect her child (and this might also help to explain why MN is so at odds with other places online); "humans don’t deliberate about their sacred values: We just act on them.”

So logic and reason are not a great counter weight to emotion and belief. You have to make appeals to emotion on a different level.

The article I reference on that thread has a comment of what researchers came to in conclusion:
“The lesson … is don’t try to undermine their values,” Atran says. “Try to show them there are other ways of committing to their values.”

I think this is a really important observation. For those trying hardest to push trans militancy the greatest thread comes from those trying to show an alternative path whilst being accepting of difference.

That leaves the Cass Review and the LGB Alliance as noteable conflict points - both are trying this line in different ways. Saying you don't have to change pronouns or undergo medicalisation to be accepted for who you are and you can just wear a dress if you are male or you can do 'boys activities', then is seen through the lens of being radical and at odds with the sacred value that it is possible to not only change gender but sex.

It also explains why suggestions of a third way, often go down like a cup of cold sick. The more rational dogooder allies will eventually get to this place as a 'reasonable compromise' and are somewhat bewildered when gender skeptics aren't necessarily adverse to this concept. And are even more bewildered when this just isn't acceptable to the more militant trans activists.

The whole 'Be Kind' ethos is seeped in being a social version of a non-religious morality which is a 'sacred value'. Which is also why even the most rational often 'just do it' without thinking about what they are doing and the impact of it. As said above: "humans don’t deliberate about their sacred values: We just act on them.”

🎯

The way to get people to start to think when they are 'Be Kind' champions is, especially if you know them, ask them why they think so badly of you that you aren't kind? Why do they think that being kind isn't also central to your own morality?

One of the questions that I grappled with over the years, was if I wasn't affirming, did this make me an inherently bad person. Why didn't I want to 'be kind'.

I started to realise that being kind shouldn't be a blanket thing where you do what you are told to think.

To be trully kind, you have to have your mind open. You have to consider if something necessarily is in the best interests of ALL people. The second you start to see how there might be even a single exception to that rule, then you start to have to analysis. If one person is negatively impacted, are they alone in that? How widespread is it? And would they benefit from another cause of action? And then from there, how many others might well benefit from a different cause of action?

Being Kind might therefore be, to go counter to your initial instinct.

And my biggest issue here is the 'denial of truth'. As soon as you hit narratives of the denial of truth - which actively includes pronouns you have a problem.

No one can avoid hard reality. The bottomline remains that you change change sex, no matter what you do. Therefore there will always be difficult issues within that problem.

Inconvient truths which make good things look not quite as rosy are the very things you should talk about most. Why? Because without seeing problems and difficulties you have no hope of fixing them.

We can't 'fix' someones sex by changing it. Fudging a solution together is just that - a fudge. by not talking about the fudge we don't find better solutions because we eliminate the concept that there might be a better way to do things, we have not yet considered.

The 'Fait accompli'* *of 'Be Kind' is precisely its weakness and its downfall.

Its forgetting to have that moment of self reflection, and your 'are we the baddies' moment which everyone really should do regularly as a matter of frankly humility and being open to new considerations.