Tell me you don't know what a cult is...

[Seethlaw]

... without telling me you don't know what a cult is.

I grew up in a cult-ish church. It had some very unpleasant aspects to it indeed. The very concept of the GC movement as a cult utterly baffles me, and irritates me quite a bit, I must admit.

Where is our Leader? Some say JKR is that, even though she obviously didn't create the movement, since she joined it after it already existed. Okay, but then where is the cult of personality? Where is the hanging onto her every word? Where is the compulsory study of her life? Where is the regular and compulsory show of support of her as our leader?

What are the specific beliefs that random people outside the movement don't believe? "Men can't become women and vice versa" is not such a belief, since loads of people who would never call themselves GC also believe it. So what are our specific beliefs?

What is the rite of entry into the movement? How does one know that they themselves or someone else is a member of the movement?

Where are the big gatherings where the leaders speak The Word? Where are the regular gatherings where the members reinforce each other's beliefs?

What are the demands made of the members? Where are the compulsory meetings? Where are the financial requirements? Where are the specific behaviours we have to adhere to?

Where are the punishments for leaving the group? How do you even know you've left at all? And where are the stories of abuse and control told by the former members?

I could go on forever.

Accusing GC people of belonging to a cult is just as ridiculous and offensive as claiming, for example, that there's a trans genocide going on. It's deliberately appropriating the real suffering of other people to make a completely false and unsupportable point because there's no actual valid point to make. It's utterly reprehensible and shameful.

Some TRAs believe that people can change 'sex'. It's that positions that necessitated the muddying of the water around what sex means. I also think that many people who initially said "transwomen are women" did so more as a kind of courtesy, without necessarily giving it much thought. Hardline TRAs meant "literally women, no different from any other woman", most other people didn't.

my understanding is that the TRA approach is rather more focused on the socio-philosophical question of what is a woman,

If that were the case, you'd expect them to be rather more adept at answering the question "what is a woman?". I do think lots of them just hoped no-one would ask.

This is a good point.

One of the real problems here was the decision by Stonewall to lump everyone from old skool transsexuals, cross dressers, teenage transitioners and agp middle aged men into the same group. And to not even consider the existence of detransitioners and regretters and what the implications of this were.

Cass pointed out that even within trans identifying children there is a multi cohort of vulnerable groups - autistic kids, sexually abused kids, gay kids either with homophobic parents or internalised homophobia, kids with parents who use their children for their own identity etc etc and this means they have very complex and differing needs which aren't visible.

And when we have a story on the news about teenage girls transitioning we have the lazy journalism of ringing up the easiest male activist who happens to be on speed dial as if this is representative.

Lumping everyone together means the demands and views of only the dominant group get airing.

Obviously, human can't change sex and - at least, I assume to be the case - TRAs don't believe that either.

Oh dear 🤣 fancy having no idea what nonsense TRAs spout. They absolutely DO believe humans can change sex. In fact, I was reading a Reddit thread the other day that was full of trans people saying sex is fluid and gender is immutable.

I, as most of us can, can only speak from my own experience. I am 'broadly GC' whatever that means (thanks Lady Di). I have points of agreement and points of disagreement with others on this board, around key ideas and high profile people. I've never felt unable to articulate these disagreements. Sure, sometimes the responses are 'robust', but I don't see that kind of challenge and pushback as a negative. I'm sure others do, but to me at least, that's a 'them problem'.

I see JKR as a gender realist, straight talking, feminist, who is passionate in her genuine desire to empower women. I see her in much the same way as the wonderful, intelligent women here on this board. She's not our ideological leader at all but more simply one of us. What stands her out is her ability to reach millions of people at the stroke of her keyboard. She has nothing to prove or require from anybody. TRAs imagine we folloe her as some sort of hypnotic cult leader bit that could not be further than the truth.

Excellent, chapeau!

The extreme views of some GC people

What extreme views of which 'GC' people?

I don't call myself GC so I'm interested in who you are talking about here.

Well no, not really. No sex realist is going to adopt any TRA arguments because none of them make any sense. And we’re not going to adopt any of their insults or tactics because… well we’re not violent.

There are some cult-like aspects to transactivism, for example the ever-changing language that marks you as being a member. For example the invented offence of adding a gap into the word “transwoman” which had to be changed (and the change cultishly followed) because that allowed men to pretend trans is an adjective. Also adherence to obviously false mantras, such as TWAW and so on. Even the celebrities who’ve bought in know to chant that one, every single time the topic comes up.

There is no obvious leader however, so that aspect is out, but there is a concerted effort to vilify parents who might interfere with the group think. That is a very destructive part of the ideology.

And of course, the obvious fact of people being brought to believe something that is so obviously untrue. In reality, everyone knows men are not women. Those who say otherwise are lying.

Remember when they collectively threw a fit about their silly term “womxn” and pretended the “terfs” invented it, causing several virtue signalling companies who had used it to issue grovelling apologies and promises to do better?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-56251452

Sometimes is difficult to the ball not the man. And i know i can come across as mean, hardlined and uncaring. Probably signs to others of a cult.

I have so much sympathy for children and vulnerable people caught up in this. And I wouldnt want to hurt them more than they already are. I suspect, other than the adult AGP, most are trying to solve other problems.

But how is it possible to get rid of this and not talk about individuals?

For example. I can see Ellen Page is in a lot of pain, but shes also a poster girl for transitioning. How many girls see her and think that transitioning is the answer? How many girls has Ellen Page introduced to transitioning?

Vulnerable people can be abusive too. Or be so self centred they dont think or care about anyone else.

My focus is on safeguarding and that means nobody conceal their sex and no-one breaks the rules.

TRA does the opposite. Its always has reasons why a person can conceal their sex or break the rules.

My experience is that some trans people and allies display cult-like behaviour, and some (like Seethlaw) are prepared to countenance changing their views. One of the characteristics of cults is the requirement to adhere to a very rigid set of dogmas, and to question these is to find oneself an outcast. A particular rigid dogma that I have personally fallen foul of is the absolute requirement for "good" people to use "preferred pronouns". Before I had even thought through my understanding of sex and gender, I struggled with calling my son "Rose" (not his actual choice of name) and referring to him as "she", "herself" etc. For this terrible behaviour (I should have bowed to the dogma that preferred pronouns are compulsory, and any use of traditional sex-based pronouns or deadnaming requires apology) I have been cut off. Even a family member who does use preferred pronouns has been cut off, apparently partly for not condemning me enough.

["Deadnaming" is an interesting choice of gender identity jargon, by the way, as to me it implies death of the old self and rebirth as the new trans self, with parallels to religious conversion but a much stronger rejection of the old self than I have come across in Christian circles, because the name change seems to be required. Maybe the name changes for monks and nuns are comparable, but I haven't come across nuns or monks kicking up a fuss about the use of their old names; similarly with change of surname on marriage.]

Now my son appears to be resisting this cutting off, and is keeping open a tenuous line of communication, so he seems not to be a fully paid up member of what I do see as at least having some of the typical characteristics of a cult.