To what extent are we allowed to discuss parallels between cults and gender ideology?

[WitchyWitcherson]

Although harrowing and upsetting, I find cult documentaries fascinating. There are a couple that stand out to me as having really strong parallels to gender ideological beliefs.

Notably (on Netflix if anyone else wants to watch them!):

• Docs on Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints (FLDS) such as Keep Sweet. The phrase and purpose of "Keep Sweet" as used by the Jeffs patriarchs has a lot of similarities with the "Be Kind" narrative that has been peddled to keep people from questioning things.
• The Programme: Cons, Cults and Kidnappings - Episode 2 in particular on vulnerability of desperate parents to looking for easy solutions, then subsequent denial/minimisation of the damages done to their children.
• Twin Flames: They coerce people into medical transition because of a belief in a male or female spirit.

Anyway, these parallels to me are stark, but over the years I've noticed post deletions where people describe gender ideology as cult-like (incidentally in the "The Programme" doc, there was an online forum for parents with kids in the 'school' that deleted all posts criticising the programme...! Talk about more parallels...). So I ask... to what extent are we allowed to discuss these parallels without posts being deleted?

To caveat: I understand not all trans-identified people have homogenous beliefs on sex and gender, and I'm not saying all trans-identified people are part of some cult conspiracy, just that there are aspects to gender ideology and some of the people who are proponents of said ideology adhering to similar behaviours to people who are within cults (shutting down discussion, holding onto beliefs in the face of clear facts and harms, claiming special/"other" status, offering a solution to people's suffering etc. etc.).

Interesting. Bump.

Yes, thank you for the suggestions. This has occurred to me as well.

Double bump!

I guess we'll see if this gets deleted - I've tried to keep it respectful and factual as I think it's important to discuss. But happy for the respectful, factual discussion to happen here (Keep Sweet, ladies!) 😜

"to what extent are we allowed to discuss these parallels without posts being deleted?"

My guess would be that they have to be perceived to be supported statements and not personal attacks. It doesnt mean everyone has to agree with your comparison, but your comparison has to have some sort of rational reasoning.

Tbh I doubt many of these posts will get deleted anyway.

Also... any more documentary recommenations very much appreciated!

Agree! I don't wish to attack anyone, I just think it's an interesting parallel to draw. Happy for people to tell me I'm talking rubbish, but there's just so many parallels I've noticed that I don't think we can ignore some more of the cult-like aspects of GI.

I totally agree and you’ve presented it in a way that should allow us to discuss it. So I really hope it doesn’t get deleted!

Take your best guess as to why the people mentioning this for years have been banned and all threads and posts deleted.

Okay well discuss them. I can't see any one stopping you. What features do you think they share with cults?

Yes, I think the way detransitioners are often cast out of their communities for wrongthink feels cult-like.

I think everyone hear should privately consider how they treat people who disagree with them on this issue before they respond. I think they should compare that to some of these points of cults.

This would be a great opportunity for reflection and growth.

OP has posted the parallels in her post and yes, we are being stopped from discussing it as the posts are usually deleted . Did you even read the OP?

Are they though? Postd where you academically compare the trans movement to cults? Or do they get deleted when you attack trans people?

Do you know the difference?

Jeffrey Marsh encouraging kids to go 'no-contact' with their parents is similar to Disconnection in the Scientologists, I reckon

Well, you accuse us of attacking trans people all the time so why aren’t all the posts on this board deleted?

Sarah Mittermaier (who used to post online as Eliza Mondegreen) has researched and written extensively about this issue:

https://genspect.substack.com/p/gender-as-a-body-modification-youth

Small sample:

“Often, young people will disclose that a loved one is hesitant about their decision to transition but that this family member is loving, just ill-informed, or that they just need more time to come to terms with this new information. In almost every case, community members will urge the young person to cut off anyone who is not in lockstep support of their transition.

I want to be really clear about this: No healthy, open, supportive community seeks to terrify and control and isolate its members like this. These are the marks of a manipulative group exercising destructive influence over its most vulnerable members. And it doesn’t stop there.”

Some of the ones I report are deleted. Many are not. That's my point... the only ones that are ever deleted have personal attacks so obvious, the moderators cant allow it to stand and still act as if they guidelines mean anything. You have to say something really quite extreme about trans people for that post to be deleted. Far worse than you could ever say about a racial group, for instance.

Comparing some of the movement to how cults operate will not get you deleted. You will have to say considerably more than that.

Nope. It’s the C word that gets them deleted. It’s well known on this board.

Yeah, no..its the blatant personal attacks that would put the website in violation of the guidelines provided by the Internet Police that each country has. To some very limited extent, you can't allow discrimination against groups of people. The mods here have to have some restrictions on what their members can say.

That's why if you really think something should be deleted, you report it on a different site.

We used to get deletions for this sort of speech/thought 'crime' but not any more. I have also discussed one of the recent Netflix documentaries on another thread ( 'False Prophet'). And yes, the parallels are very stark. Group Think and faith based positions are incredibly powerful motivators.

As those of us who have been posting here for years know, OP, certain people do not want others to see the comparison stand. Expect a lot of DARVO and projection if your OP is allowed to continue.

With respect, those of us who have been here a while have seen many posts mentioning that c word deleted. Posts by respected, articulate users who were quite definitely talking about an ideology rather than named individuals.

Did you know the word "peak" used to warrant deletion? Again, talking about a concept (a moment of realisation) rather than any kind of personal slagging off.

Okay I'm not sure all posters agree that it is still like that, even if it was in the past. It definitely isnt like that now.

"Originally a comment by Artymorty at Miscellany Room 8.

Per the New York Times:

"Experts said that young people increasingly have the language and social acceptance to explore their gender identities"

This drives me crazy. What kind of “experts”? The journalistic principle in play should be to weigh the testimony of “experts” against the possibility of influence by a religious belief system that’s applying pressure on the debate.

If you’re talking about any other religious belief — say, Scientology — it becomes very clear that there’s two kinds of “experts” about it: believers themselves, and those who look at the belief system from the outside."

Continues here-
www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2022/guest-post-what-kind-of-experts/

It only changed in the last year or two