Matt Walsh thinks gender ideology has now been defeated in the USA - is he right?

[bluefingertips]

Basically he thinks that making congress bathrooms single sex is a sign that the debate has been won. That Senators are now prepared to speak out on this issue in a way they wouldn't have three years ago.

He thinks the argument have been won and its just a matter of hoovering out the last remains of GI from other institutions in the USA.

Do you think he is right and if so, will this have a ripple affect elsewhere in the world?

There is an element present in the US discourse that I just don't think is present in the UK and it does come down to the role of Christianity in the "culture wars." Progressives and liberals enrobed themselves in Stephen Colbert's statement "Reality has a liberal bias" and since have dug themselves deeper and deeper into a tribalism that refuses to bear any association with conservatives, with so many unspoken rules and coding (liking or saying such-and-such means you're xyz) that you can't really have a conversation or express a nuanced position with many. In the mainstream media environment which paints a picture where only conservative publications give airtime to sex realists—whether they're feminists or not—of course simply believing that biological sex is real will get you "cancelled." I said just that on FB years ago and had people who knew me well lamenting that I'd become a right-wing conservative Christian, just from that. There's also not really a leftist radical feminism to speak of like there is in the UK and elsewhere—it's very much liberal choice feminism: sex work is work, trans women are women. Etc. Many conservatives that recognize biological sex do, at least to an extent, approve of gender roles and think they're Biblically mandated—they just don't want people to adopt cross-sex gender roles! It's a moral affront to them if a man wears a dress and makeup. I don't care if he does—just don't say that makes him female! However, oftentimes in the US sex realism gets bundled with approving of traditional gender roles.

I'm a Christian and think that Christianity is the last group left that people will openly disparage, mock and discriminate against.

I had this at work in a DEI session I had to attend where people openly admitted they viewed Christians as weirdos they didn't understand. It was an all white professional group and the assumption was we all thought the same.

I had never shared my faith at work because, well because it's not relevant to my job, so it was a bit awkward when I said I was Catholic. It wasn't awkward because they'd disparaged my protected group though it was awkward because I'd outed myself as a weirdo to them. It would have been less awkward if I'd outed myself as a furry I think. That would have got me kudos with them but being a Christian was like saying: yes I am the type of person you all hate. Awks.

Tbh I'm quite prepared for Christianity to be dismissed and ridiculed if people want. As long as the free speech runs equally in all directions.

It's up to Christians to make the case for our faith, which we tend to do badly, and to accept other people don't share it.

That's all I'm asking of the gender ideologues too. Make your case and accept it if people think you're a loon.

It's up to Christians to make the case for our faith, which we tend to do badly, and to accept other people don't share it.

That's all I'm asking of the gender ideologues too. Make your case and accept it if people think you're a loon.

If it helps to know @MalagaNights I don't think you're a loon for believing in god.

People believe all sorts of things that I don't. Given there's a lot of evidence that the world is a globe, I'm happy to admit that I would see a flat earther as a loon. However, there's no evidence that god does or doesn't exist, just as there is no evidence that everyone does or doesn't have a gender identity.

I'll admit that it baffles me that people believe something so strongly that I don't think is real, but nobody is a loon for believing in either of these things IMO. They just happen to believe something that I don't. As long as they don't try and force/shame me into believing it too, all good..

FWIW I think it's a shame that Christianity is seen as fair game for riducule. It's not something I think I've seen directly but as it doesn't impact me, perhaps I've just not noticed it when it's been happening. I had one colleague who described god as "Father Christmas for grown ups" when talking to me privately, but he knew I was an atheist. We had another colleague who is a Catholic, so I asked him if he would ever say that to him. The answer was no.

I think believing in God is very rational and I think even people without faith can benefit from exploration about what that means and why people believe, without having faith themselves.

It would be great if everyone was respectful but we can't legislate or even require that.

And I wouldn't want to.

I want the right to have my beliefs and for others to have theirs and the right not to have others beliefs imposed on you.

You'd think we could all agree that...

@annejumps Yes, its really easy to spot UK TRAs that have gained all their 'knowledge' from US TRA sources as they spout the line you have just described, not realising that it does not translate to the UK scene.

@MalagaNights The people who slag Christians in the way you have described are displaying the same lazy mindset TRAs do. Like TRAs they just parrot the same lines as each other, lines they just uncritically copy from their social groups. The way the skeptic/ atheist/ humanist communities embraced GI tells you all you need to know about how these are social groups based on shared beliefs (and actually that belief is primarily in their self-view as being cleverer than people with supernatural beliefs) rather than a shared commitment to intellectual rigour, critical analysis and evidence based scientific approaches to knowledge. Having moved in skeptic/ humanist circles I lost respect for them and was not that surprised that they fell and worshipped at the Trans altar even if I was angry at their enormous hypocrisy (and for some perhaps, cowardice) in doing so.

I'm not religious but religion is a key interest of mine and I have friends across different religions. Once you know and like and respect religious people, its not really possible to deride people for being religious in the way your co-workers did.

I wonder does this phrase work for the trans person in woke spaces to shut people up given that, for some people, having ‘oppression points’ seems to also confer worthiness and clout 🤔

In my experience this kind of thing is extremely effective in those kinds of gatherings.

I had this at work in a DEI session I had to attend where people openly admitted they viewed Christians as weirdos they didn't understand. It was an all white professional group and the assumption was we all thought the same.

I had a similar experience in a DEI workshop in my last workplace. When we got on to trans issues, the woman who had been hired to run the workshop said that Catholics needed to "check their thinking." I was totally shocked, not so much that she thought that, but that she said it out loud.

But it was notable, I thought, that she didn't say anything about Muslims, or Jews, or even Baptists (who are very often black here.)

@bluefingertips Like TRAs they just parrot the same lines as each other, lines they just uncritically copy from their social groups.

I think there's a tendency for all of us to do that - I've certainly found myself doing it, and my wife challenged me on that very point today! It's a good thing if we recognise it any time we do it. Real in depth discussion is something of an antidote. So I appreciate actual engagement from trans allies on here, when it happens. It's usually easy to tell the difference quite quickly!

I don't think gender ideology is over in the States, but the fight is entering a new stage. Even more than Trump the TAs should be worried about the Repub senators and representatives who are aiming to pass laws. Nancy Mace is not alone. They have the votes to do this.

E.G It is just announced that a new bill in the Senate being proposed.

GOP senators announce 'STOP Act' to penalize doctors for child sex change procedures

WASHINGTON (TNND) — Sens. Roger Marshall, R- Kan., and Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., on Wednesday announced the proposal of a measure which would penalize doctors who perform sex change procedures on children.
The “STOP Act,” or Safeguarding The Overall Protection of Minors Act, would fine doctors at least $100,000 if they provide minors with sex-altering surgeries or medications. The senators said they expect to release the proposal within two weeks.

https://foxchattanooga.com/news/nation-world/gop-senators-announce-stop-act-to-penalize-sex-change-procedures-for-children-roger-marshall-tommy-tuberville-transgender-lgbtq-gender-affirming-care-alabama-kansas

As quite a few Dems claim there are no child surgeries in the States [investigation revealed actually around 14,000 were performed] this bill is going to be interesting as it will get open discussion of what is going on.

Who was running the workshop?

Would fining doctors even work? There's always going to be some rich guy who'll pay a fine.

It was a woman they had hired, she had a business running programs like that for differernt organizations.

GOP senators announce 'STOP Act' to penalize doctors for child sex change procedures

I don't know about the USA be we in the UK are very critical of countries which practice Female Genital Mutilation - in societies where they would argue it's traditional. So we should at least be examining why genital surgery is happening in the Western world.

Yes, this could be interesting.

Though, over the past few years I've seen some footage from inquiries in the US into things like men in women's sports. Where for example some defenders of this make idiots of themselves because they make it clear they think that there is zero difference between male and female performance.

But these seem to have no effect on the Democrats who support this stuff.

I suppose I am wondering, how many people are still unaware that these things like child surgeries are going on?

In any case, I think this would be a great bill but I also think TRAs and Democrats - and I am sorry to say, especially women who are Democrats - will freak out, and use it as "proof" that Repiblicans are transphobic.

In the US trans supporters will simultaneously say that of course surgeries aren't being performed on minors AND that surgeries MUST be allowed to continue to take place. The denial is much deeper than in the UK it seems, I think because the donors (Tim Gill, Stryker Corp, the Pritzkers, etc.) are more powerful here.

The surgeries are all over the media. There's an entire TV show about one victim of this ideology. This individual had their life invaded by tv cameras at, I believe, the tender age of 8 or so. They can't pretend genital removal didn't happen in the USA on those under the age of 18. It's there, recorded for all time.

Matt Walsh is a deeply sexist individual, just as sexist as the TRA crowd. The only difference is that MW wants us breeding and breastfeeding and tied to the kitchen sinks. TRAs want to replace us.

@annejumps you're right about how feminism in the US is only 3rd Wave and the way everything is coded.
And I have to say the assumption was always that gay people, reasonable people , kind people are Democrats. Meaning I'm somehow anti-gay, unreasonable and unkind. It was pretty smug. It wasn't until now that I can be an out conservative and socially acceptable in lesbian circles.
And frankly I don't find that to be healthy, no one group has possession of the Truth. whether conservative or liberal.
Was that the same in UK feminist circles, where everyone was left, until recently?
I think it may take a decade for the Democrats to find new people, new donors and sort themselves out.

It's odd, isn't it, how one political side is seen as the goodies and the other as the baddies? I mean, Hitler was a horror of epic proportions, but let's not pretend that Stalin was a sweet wee cuddle bug. Two sides of the same coin, both mass murderers, perpetrators of some of the worst human behaviour in the last century.
It seems that all dictators are extremists. Whichever side of the political spectrum, they're extremists. I find neither flavour palatable.

I think he’s wrong, GI will continue to fester however Trump (whatever you think of him) winning will make it permissible for individuals to publicly cite concerns about GI. I think Trump will be one of the contributing nails in an extremely slow lowered coffin. The one good thing he’s done in his life, at least it’s a biggie.

Coming back to the title of this thread if I may: I have not read all posts on this.
Has the ideology been defeated? I suggest not defeated but weakening. In today's Times James Marriott makes the case that in UK many were not really convinced but just went along out of niceness often to younger colleagues.

In today's Times James Marriott makes the case that in UK many were not really convinced but just went along out of niceness often to younger colleagues.

I think it was worse than that - organisations were captured by Stonewall etc. and people weren't allowed to say that TW were not W but had to keep schtum about it, even though privately that's what we thought. Now at least we can begin to say "well I don't agree with the statement TWaW".

@Peregrina it wasn't even that long ago we weren't allowed to say "transwomen are men" on Mumsnet, Twitter or elsewhere.

Many suffered permanent and termporary bans & deletions for doing so.
(actually I had a deletion on another thread yesterday for saying somethinhg similar.)

But we persisited and eventually things started to change.

RobinEllacotStrike

Agreed. I have had deletions and had a warning the other day. Yet I am very careful in what I post.

Menno did an interesting video the other day, about the change of tactic being employed (by the media? by the "community"? Not sure) now that there's a regime change on the way.

What Menno calls the "reasonable trans person" is being given airtime, lots of airtime it seems. Caitlyn Jenner, Buck Angel and Blair White, etc are getting a lot of publicity now, according to his video. They all SOUND reasonable and accept they haven't changed sex, but of course they still want exceptions made for them. Just not for the others...

There's no going back as far as I can see. We can't leave the door ajar.

On Matt Walsh, I've just watched part of a recent video where he is talking about 'Karens' after yet another 'Karen' shaming video has gone viral. Its really interesting watching these Right Wing, usually male, commentators talk about these issues. Because they are quite happy to call out racism ( as MW does in this video by calling the term Karen a racist term against whites) but never call out sexism / misogyny. In this video he repeated talks about, and condemns, the way middle aged white women, as he describes them, are being slurred. But he won't call this sexist or misogynistic (or ageist) but will call it racist.

I guess they spend so much time making content where they ' destroy woke feminists' that they can't bring themselves to overtly acknowledge sexism or misogyny, even when they are clearly implicitly acknowledging it.