Hi, all. I noticed people were asking for and giving each other advice in the comments last week, and wanted to give you an opportunity to do that here.
Also, drop me a line if you’re in LA and interested in meeting up tomorrow early evening for gender heretic hangout. Please write “LA hang” in the subject line.
Does anyone have advice for how to discuss trans issues with well-meaning but not fully informed family or friends (w/o sounding conspiratorial or condescending)?
I live in a progressive state/city and the politics of “trans rights” are exactly what one would expect. I suspect the majority of folks aren’t well-informed on the merits and minutiae of trans healthcare, but rather identify as supporters of the LGBTQ+ community and view any modicum of concern r/t trans issues as rooted in bigotry and transphobia. It’s challenging to air concerns (when the topic is brought up) without having others view you as a transphobe / conspiracy theorist on the issue.
I’m a gay man whose politics on most issues fit neatly in the center left. I firmly believe in equal rights for trans adults in terms of housing, employment, broad anti-discrimination protections, and access to medical care. I don’t think the rights & safety of women and trans people are in tension, save for a few noteworthy areas (sports, certain sex-segregated spaces, etc.). So I think people are surprised when I voice concerns about the negative ramifications of trans activism for LGB people, the reality of biological sex differences, or pretty much every aspect of trans / gender stuff as it relates to minors (ex: I don’t think any of this stuff needs to be taught in schools, and I do think parents should be able to opt out of much of these lessons; I don’t think kids should be getting medical treatment; I don’t think ROGD should be dismissed out of hand; etc etc).
Basically wondering if anyone has figured out how to talk about these things (from the perspective of someone with my views) in a way that people are receptive to?
I’ve had a bit of success on this. My daughter, now 19, declared about five years ago that she’s a boy and that she needed hormones and surgery to be her true self. I’m quiet and usually anonymous about this because I’m trying to keep my relationship with her.
And like you, I tend to align centre-left on many issues, although that has changed with all this, yoo boy.
The trick is to come up with a few simple and solid talking points. You’ve listed some great ones above. (One of mine, for example, kids are getting a message that girls are supposed to act and dress a certain way, and if they don’t, they’re really boys. It’s regressive.”
Then use a simple opener. I use lines like “I think what a lot of people don’t realize is that...” or “I’ve read/thought a lot about this, and I have concerns about x”.
If I were you, I would use something like, I think people expect me to agree with all this because I’m gay, but it’s not that simple...”
This is key: say one or two things. Then stop. Give the other person a chance to respond or take it in, or whatever. Otherwise, you seem like a crazy person. The person you are talking to may change the subject, but at least you planted a little seed, right?
I’ve had some success talking to some teachers, a paediatrician, co-workers, a school principal, and the receptionist at my dentist office. It’s not a lot, but it makes me feel good. And I tell myself that I’m working my way up to longer and more difficult conversations.
You may also want to look up this book, I think it’s called How to have impossible conversations.” It’s pretty good.
Ditto on the need to keep it brief to avoid sounding like a conspiracy theorist! I try to educate people on the European countries that are dialing back youth transition. It takes the conversation out of the American right vs. left framework.
This is all really good advice. I have learned the hard way the importance of your comment, “This is key: say one or two things. Then stop. Give the other person a chance to respond or take it in, or whatever.”
Yes! It’s so hard when those of us who have been steeped in it know SO many reasons why it’s a problem and we have to really restrain ourselves to not go on a rant about all of them. But this is definitely a “less is more” situation.
And be aware there are levels of consciousness in getting through to someone. You might think you got through only to have them regress a week later. And then something comes at them a few months later from a different source and they write to you out of the blue and say 'now I think I get it!' It takes time to change our ways of thinking, especially when we're surrounded by liberal or conservative environment, where everyone else is saying the exact opposite. Even I, as a liberal parent of a trans identified child, have had levels of awareness hit me multiple times and I think back to a year ago and wonder how I could have been so uninformed.
I beg to differ re women's and trans rights NOT being in tension. I am reading Ute Heggen's book on being a grass widow and was shocked that as far back as her divorce--late 90's, I think--her transwoman husband (besides not paying child support and letting her foot the bill--outrageous) was actually the head of his company and claimed it was woman-owned so he got special contracts and financial rewards. And the UK's Women's Fiction prize is including transwomen as equally deserving as biological women. I'm sorry but they are not. They have no idea what it is to be a woman, obviously, or they wouldn't be stealing what little has been carved out to mitigate the extreme discrimination every biological woman has experienced her entire life. There are tremendous tensions and they're only going to get worse. Now California wants transwomen to have the right to get a uterus transplant on demand and for the state (and eventually the federal government) to pay for it to the tune of $300,000. And I'll bet the taxpayer will have to pay for all the follow-up care for complications and an eventual "birth" (I really doubt men are capable of deal with childbirth so I guess it's C-sections for them, if they manage to carry to term, which would REALLY surprise me, and of course all the prenatal care). And on and on. How many biological women can do the same? My SIL had uterine cancer at 18 so couldn't have kids. She never had this option. Why are transwomen so fucking important that the state feels compelled to give them whatever the hell they want? The federal government should recover the funds Ute Heggen's ex stole from other contractors from him. And he should also pay her the child support he owes her, with interest, compounded annually. It's going to continue in every sphere where there are career advantages or financial rewards given to women to compensate (a tiny amount, frankly) for a lifetime of discrimination. They are going to go to transwomen. Who are in actual fact men.
Kudos to you for even trying. Maybe being male you'll get better reception. If you do, I want to hear about it!!!
Good luck on convincing them of anything. They'll just call you "hateful" and a "transphobe". I have yet to have a reasonable conversation with any pro-trans "rights" person.
A beautiful statement of righteous fury, in the lineage of Germain Greer. All that you state is why it is so terribly difficult to remain calm and diplomatic when trying to open the door the tiniest of cracks. I’m grateful to Connor, and anyone, who is willing to give it a try--that keeps me in there trying, too. Meanwhile, thanks for putting it out there just as you see it. We need that too!
Thanks. Hadn't seen it but of course have read her, including her lit crit which is thought-provoking and pretty relevant to the trans ideology debate! One prescient woman.
Maybe female teams just need to do a little harmless hazing and castrate the transwomen before the game begins. That would definitely even things out if they did it right before the match. Team bonding, don't you know? The transwomen can use old-fashioned sanitary napkins (what a euphemism) to catch the blood. If they're REAL women that shouldn't be a problem.
I don't think being "nice" is an answer. I don't. It's time to push back and push back hard. If we are "nice" (and I am not sure how it is for males--maybe there's room for them to be tolerance and "nice"), we will get run over.
I would take away all electronics from my kid and monitor them when they're doing school work. No phones outside the house. No phones in their bedrooms. They can talk on a landline forever and a day. Stop giving teens so much freedom. They go to school, then they come home and do their homework, then they join the family for a meal, then they do more homework or relax reading or maybe watching TV with the rest of the family. Big houses are really bad for families. I know lots of people who bought McMansions and each kid has a little wing to themselves. They grow up not knowing how to share, having hostile relationships with one another, and not respecting their parents, quite frankly. For what? So the neighbors will think their parents are "successful"? I do not understand why kids have to have their own phone. If the schools are so inept that they are in danger at school, homeschool. I know, lots of people say they "can't" do that. I did. On less than low wages as a single mother with no help from the kid's father. I was abused as a kid and I was not about to allow emotional abuse to go on at my kid's school, plus he was way ahead of his peers and was bored out of his gourd. You have 18-20 years. And then you no longer have a say. All you can do is watch and figure out how to deal with your breaking parent heart until the day you die. There's no do-overs in this game. Parenting is NOT for the faint of heart. Accept that fact and deal with it as individualistically as you can. Do not apologize. These are YOUR children. They do NOT belong to the schools or the healthcare system or the cops. Do NOT give them away until they have the tools to protect themselves. Then support their independence (if you can). There's no guarantee how it'll end up, no matter when you had your kids. And expose them to as many different realities as possible. One reason this generation is so vulnerable is they are so insulated.
I think you've been misinformed about what you're saying specifically about California. I live here, I've heard nothing about this, and I have just scoured the news, and there is nothing at all about the governor or state legislatures putting forth any kind of bill regarding uterine transplants for trans people nor proposing that it be taxpayer-funded. Now I will fully concede that if there were a place where that kind of thing would happen, it would be California. But I genuinely cannot see it happening unless the same procedure was mandated to be fully covered for natal females, as well. Infertility affects so many women, and this is something I can actually see women from the left and the right agreeing on pretty easily, and getting rightly pissed about if transwomen were able to have access to the procedure but biological women were not.
Sorry. I must have gone from that story to another related one because it doesn't mention California specifically. But this is what I read. There are TONS of stories online about this, mostly in reaction to the AMA's stupid advocacy for uterine transplantation in transwomen to help them be emotionally healthy. Good luck with THAT. Also, in looking for the story re CA wanting to subsidize these surgeries ($300,000 a pop) was a story about Palms Springs deciding to give anyone "who identifies" as trans or binary a $900 universal income stipend to make up for economic discrimination on the job front. Now all the homeless are going to trans identify. I'm Jesus. I think I'm owed something too. (NOT.) The AMA is completely captured. The US healthcare system has a bigger budget than the entire military. And that's saying a lot. That's the real reason we have such bad inflation. It is the main reason my auto insurance increased 40% year to date (the other being mechanics raised their rates so much) so I took off the medical.
Maybe you're right. It was on MSN's news feed. A lot of their stuff is click bait. But I know Israel is either there or pretty close to creating a synthetic uterus. Their birth rate is not sustainable and people are leaving the country. They also have a huge machine that makes steaks to order. Both of those I know to be true. This is the next step for pandering to this particular flavor of mental illness, however. It's what they call transhumanism. It's not just about helping the blind to see and the lame to walk. It is coming. Do a search on the subject. There are lots of stories. This is not the one I originally saw, but in a quick search just now I found it. It's an opinion piece in reference to an AMA Journal of Medical Ethics peer-reviewed article which advocates for subsidizing uterine transplants for transwomen on the basis that it is necessary for their mental health. Apparently the first successful transplant was in Sweden in 2013. I think the U.K. had their first one in 2019? I'm not sure about successful transplants into men yet. I hope men are not capable of carrying to term and giving birth because I don't think their brains are up to the task of raising children from conception on. They are good at fathering--some of them--but mothering is a whole different ball of wax. Apparently they are using cadaver uteri. Anyone who thinks you can "rent" a uterus without repercussions would apparently think you can do this without long-term side effects, especially for the child. Men don't appear to understand that a lot happens between mother and fetus from conception to birth. It blows me away. Oops. Sorry, but here's the article I read a few days ago: https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/transphobes-will-have-no-arguments-left-american-medical-association-says-uterus-transplants-for-transgender-women-should-be-taxpayer-funded/ss-AA1fITMq#image=2 I truly am sorry I am not mistaken. It's a terrible idea and it makes me madder than I think anything else related to trans ideology has because any children they might be able to give birth to are going to be so royally screwed on so many levels. I love California and lived there for 20 years but I do think they need a serious reality readjustment. I have also heard as recently as yesterday that there are some speculating that SF is one of the Great Reset's targets (for a 15-minute city) and that's why all these large companies are pulling out. Of course, most of the homeless are not from San Francisco (or possibly even California). This is in context of Lahaina. The discussion is buried in this substack interview. https://reinettesenumsfoghornexpress.substack.com/p/where-the-land-was-zapped-matt-roeske
You should have voted Reinette Senum into the governorship. Seriously. Newsom is eye candy but there's something wrong with that dude.
Oooof. I am also in your shoes. I have started giving my progressive resume to some folks before I say anything, which probably makes it worse lol. "So, let me just say I've been progressive all my adult life, volunteered at Planned Parenthood, marched for gay marriage, so no one is more surprised than I am to find myslef skeptical about blah, blah, blah." I have a soon-to-be-18-year-old who identies as MTF, and my husband and I are both deeply concerned and deeply skeptical. We DO know others like us, but it is a minefield.
I used to give my progressive résumé, but I quickly found out they don’t care. Our school system didn’t care how I voted, or about my core liberal belief systems, they only cared that they needed to “affirm” my daughter as a boy. They were not interested in any history (political, or personal) at all.
Hi, Connor: I share your frustration with how hard it is to have a conversation about this with so many well-meaning, but uninformed, liberal friends (I am a old lesbian and Democrat in a bright blue area). I find I have to step into it with all the diplomacy I can muster. One thing I found that worked with some: to confirm that this isn’t really about trans people, who deserve all the basic protections from discrimination we all have, but rather about gender identity activism, which has taken a very wrong turn. I will then given an example that I hope connects (for many in my set, it’s what Martina N says about Title IX; from there I move, if I see an opening, to rushed medicalization of children and young people who are in many cases lesbian, gay, and/or autistic).
I was also surprised, in a good way, at the positive reception many friends and acquaintances had when I sent them this (it was written my my spouse, which I think helped, as they know and trust her judgment about schools): https://intrepidednews.com/gender-identity-ideology/
Hope this might help. It is really tough to have these conversations, but always heartening when a breakthrough is made. That keeps me going, along with knowing how necessary it is to educate folks about what they don’t even know they don’t know.
Thank you for the link. I make a point of letting people know that heterosexual males w/ an "erotic fixation" are the "nuclear reactor" of the 'trans' movement--as Helen Joyce explains in this interview (link herewith). I am tired of gays and lesbians being scapegoated for the utter insanity of the 'born in the wrong body' nonsense and the other fetishistic excesses of AGPs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xUrtNW6Fzo&t=664s
And that not only women's and LGB's sex-based rights are supplanted by 'gender identity' being enshrined in law but so-called sex non-conforming minors (and others) are being 'sex-lobotomized' by the promotion of this pernicious 'trans' ideology/movement.
I also sometimes include this article written before the rebranding to 'transgender' as it gives an historical perspective and talks about some of the women married to these men. It was written by Amy Bloom and first published in 'The Atlantic' in April, 2002 and I offer it for critique and educational purposes.
Thank you again Susan and thank you Lisa and all who made suggestions about how to broach this topic w/ those who may not fully understand its implications for minors and for women's and LGB's sex-based rights.
T. Lister: thank YOU for the intelligent comments and links. That particular Joyce interview is among the very best, I thought. I am glad to be reminded of it. The Bloom article is new to me, and I look forward to reading it.
Oh, that is so nice of you to say. She worked really hard on it, both in content and tone. We both hope so much that it will be helpful to people to get the word out.
Frustrating about the paywall. This is new. Josie has another article, on child development, which I believe will post at OESIS tomorrow. We are not sure how to handle the paywall issue going forward, but if you see it there and would like to get it, let us know, and we’ll see what we can do!
Also, FYI, we spotted today that, in trying to transfer the first article to her blog, she made an error in the transfer. She has corrected it, so if you return to the link, you should find a “clean” text.
I think this interview is essential to understand the dynamics around trans ideology. I highly recommend everyone watch it in its entirety. Mattias Desmet talks about mass formation hypnosis and analyzes why it happens and how the population divides into three camps--the first third is totally hypnotized and cannot hear anything you say, the second 40-60% do not want to make waves, want to be liked, will not fight against it and that's probably most of the people you know who are refusing to listen. The last group are the solution and quite frankly that is us. It's not about finding the right thing to say. It's just to speak quietly, calmly, and persistently about your concerns. Don't put a lot of emotional energy into it. Just keep speaking out. Eventually the larger, second group will start changing their focus. They aren't truly hypnotized. If you do NOT do this, the consequences are dire. He warns it can become a totalitarian phenomenon and totalitarian regimes, he points out I thought rather well, always self-destruct by eating their own. The first group they will go after are the people who refuse to go along. That's us. You saw that in the COVID thing when people started talking about putting the unvaccinated into camps, and worse. He said the totalitarian regimes eventually go after their kids (or that's what I heard) and he points out how Stalin had 50% of his own party killed for various reasons or no reason because he had to keep this mass formation hypnosis phenomenon going. And Hitler had plans, had it not fallen apart when it did, of killing everyone who had either a lung or heart condition to keep his hold on power. So if we do not speak out, this dynamic will become far more serious (and illogical). The reason people are vulnerable to this is because they had free-floating loneliness, meaninglessness, and anxiety in their lives (before the COVID pandemic), according to Desmet. So they glom onto whatever major social bonding event they can find. He's talking about COVID but I think this talk fit so well in addressing the dynamic of the trans phenomenon. I highly recommend you watch this. And try not to invest huge amounts of emotional energy in your discussions with others about it; you'll wear yourself out. You need to keep speaking out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VJ1QQHrV_0
Here's an example of how transwomen (aka men) are erasing women from Genevieve Gluck. https://genevievegluck.substack.com/p/norway-transgender-doctor-whose-license This story also reveals some of the questionable politicization they have been effecting in both medical and psychological fields. And due to what Mattias Desmet calls mass formation hypnosis in pushing the trans ideology and the concommitant silencing of feminist voices. Norway has been especially bad, even though I know they were far more advanced than the US in pushing feminist concerns in the 70's and 80's. Of course they are more homogeneous than we are and as a result of their experience in WWII more likely to conform to groupthink. If you haven't followed Desmet, you might watch this YouTube. If involves the mindlessness of most to follow the COVID propaganda but is also involved in the mindless manner in which so many follow the transgender ideology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VJ1QQHrV_0
Lots of great information is now available online regarding trans ideology and how this belief system affects children, women’s rights, gay and lesbian rights, sports, prisons, safeguarding the vulnerable, etc. Much more so than the 3+ years ago when we started this nausea inducing journey.
Things have settled into “a new normal”. By most measures our daughter seems to be doing well. Who knows if she’ll desist. As a practical matter, what does that explicitly mean? Does she have to reject trans ideology? Or just stop pretending she’s not a girl?
Now, the hardest part for me personally has been losing my tribe.
This whole reality-denying nonsense has had a profound silencing effect on dissenters from the left. We are the apostate. Those of us who have voted in lockstep for Democrats for decades and declared loudly and proudly that we are liberals and still hold classical liberal values now have no home; it is unexpectedly disorienting and profoundly painful. We fear social ostracization, and saying we don’t (or shouldn’t) care doesn’t make us any less lonely.
It sounds superficial compared to what our kids are going through, and our kids remain our number one concern. I’m only writing this so other parents experiencing this will feel less alone. Recently, I read two authors who helped me voice these feelings. Maybe their writings will be helpful to you too.
Monica Harris’ article “Medium Censored My Article Defending the Rights of Women and Lesbians“ on Reality’s Last Stand spoke clearly to the phenomenon of losing one’s tribe.
Stella Morabito was interviewed on Jennifer Bilek’s substack “Defeating “Transgenderism” and Tyranny“ about her book, “The Weaponization of Loneliness” talks to the workings of propaganda.
My high school graduating class was 1984. Many teachers thought it would be clever if we read George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984”.
I could handle being politically homeless if it didn't mean losing my family as well. I am completely out of step with almost all my relatives (and my husband's too) on this one issue especially but also on the whole progressive agenda. If I were to say, on one of those rare occasions when I talk to any of them (including my daughter), "Well, you know, I don't consider these laws to be anti-trans but rather pro-children and pro-women," they would dismiss me as hopelessly right-wing and transphobic. By keeping my mouth shut and not challenging their beliefs and framing, I'm allowing them to remain blissfully ignorant of what's really going on. But I know that anything I say will just make things worse.
I listened to a bit of another interview w/ Morabito (link below) and it was a bit concerning.
What I heard concerned me as it sounded like another attack on same-sex marriage and LGBs. I don't understand how a same-sex couple's marriage takes anything away from an opposite couple's marriage. It is not the fault of same-sex marriage that a heterosexual marriage fails or that some people choose not to get married. I should have thought that the stability afforded by marriage and having another person who loves you to navigate the difficulties of life would be a reason to favor it. The stability it offers is a benefit to society as a whole and is an antidote to individual loneliness--something that Morabito seems concerned about.
In the interview Morabito goes on about how marriage itself will be ended and that all that will remain will be a civil contract. But marriage is a civil contract under which the parties to it have a bundle of rights and responsibilities. A marriage can be performed in a church but it is still a civil contract.
So why do some conservatives and esp. some religious people have such an issue w/ two people who make a commitment to one another? Why is having a devoted bond to one another problematical? It can't just be about children. Some gays and lesbians have children and some heterosexual couples cannot have children or choose not to have them and we don't consider their marriages less valid.
To be fair, I did not listen to the whole interview, so perhaps I missed something that would counter my impression. But that topic is not for this thread. I only mention it b/c of J. Bilek's interview w/ Morabito referenced above.
Interesting. I didn’t do that deep a dive into her work. What spoke to me In that one interview was the idea of loneliness (social isolation/ostracization) being weaponized. I’m becoming more and more curious about how Soviet era controlled of their people.
I agree Laura as loneliness and isolation can make humans more vulnerable to fear and manipulation imo. I do know that the 'trans' agenda advanced not only by the forced-teaming of the T and then Q onto the LGB but by lobbying and getting legislation passed by stealth. The strategy and tactics are set forth in the Dentons Law Firm document.
One strategy is to attach 'gender identity' legis. to other legislation that is more popular. This happened in Ireland when voters thought they were voting for same-sex marriage only and 'gender identity' self-id got attached to it and was passed w/ same-sex marriage much to the anger of those voters who realized they had been duped after the vote. And the 'trans' movement has quite wealthy men funding it and when money talks integrity walks. Dentons doc at the link also focussed on minors. https://gendercriticalwoman.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/iglyo_v3-1-2.pdf
Lisa, I want to thank you for opening up comments like this. Of many wonderful things you have accomplished with your Substack is gathering a community of really wonderful people with enormous insight and caring.
Thank you Lisa, for opening the comments section for folks. I recently read a NYTimes food article that casually mentions anal sex. Bear with me, I have two daughters ages 12 and now 16 who were isolated during the pandemic, the older one was exposed to a group of girls (and one boy) who professed they were trans, and the younger one gained weight during the pandemic then became anorexic after being teased upon returning to in-person school. The older daughter “came out” in a scripted letter to us saying she was trans and wanted to cut off her breasts and please look at the cited resources including GLAAD and the Human Rights Project and now a year and a half after that the twelve year old (who still consumes TONS of influencer content--really, both girls are on unlimited social media/forums, etc., on the internet) is seeming to be trying to get on the trans train now too.
My issue in bringing up the NYTimes food article about Ozempic and psyllium and the little addition to the food article about anal sex, is that I feel our families are just inundated with sexual content and innuendo and that such content can spring up in some rather unexpected places, like an NYTimes food article. What is going on?
I skimmed this article when it came out, and (I realize now) didn’t make it down to the anal sex reference. I agree with you that the reference is inappropriate.
Unfortunately, these sorts of references are added in the name of “inclusion”. A reader with a rainbow flag emoji next to his name praised the reporter for including gay men in the article.
I agree with you that our culture has become so sexually explicit. I think this is bad for boys and girls. As to what to do about it, I wish I knew.
Agree it’s about “inclusion” and also wonder if that’s why our teens and preteens who want to be a part of all the inclusivity are adopting some of this ideology.
It’s so nuts that you want to read a FOOD article in my beloved New York Times and it ends up being about “bottoms” and anal sex. Color me shocked.
Well, sorry to expound so fully on it here. (My souse, co-workers, and my 16 yo are OVER me talking about it). I think the reason I’m talking about it so much, is because if we don’t HIGHLIGHT when things like this are in our faces, it may become completely a part of just the way we do things and I think that is a fall from quality and high standards, especially in a food article in the New York Times. The journalist, Priya Krishna, is covering for Sam Sifton this week and I just can’t bear to read her coverage of Peppery Eggs and summer peach desserts in the NYTimes Cooking emailed newsletters in case I’m sprung upon again with something bedroomy instead of foody, lol.
What happened to privacy and a sense of decency? People--including LGBs--are sick to the back teeth of Pride and being in people's face w/ this stuff. Is it that this generation grew up sharing so much and putting their business online that they lost all sense of boundaries and appropriateness? (rhetorical)
Yes to all of this! Why anybody thinks this is a good idea is well beyond my comprehension. Except where required for clear public health and medical reasons (and in that case, only in articles and publications geared to that), things that happen in the bedroom should stay in the bedroom.
What exactly was the reference? I'm not giving the NYT a penny. But I am curious how anal sex is related to eating. Oh, but maybe I do. I hope I do not. How about that?
I also don't give the NYT a penny, but my library does, so here you go:
Alex Hall, who lives in Chicago, co-founded the website The Bottoms Digest to provide recipes and tips aimed at improving digestion for people preparing to have anal sex. Those on the receiving end, known as bottoms, often try to clear their digestive tracts before sex.
Because of a scarcity of sexual education for L.G.B.T.Q. people, he said, many turn to unhealthy behaviors to prepare for anal sex. "There has been a long-running joke for decades to not eat before you bottom," said Mr. Hall, 30. He tried several fiber supplements that are advertised to gay men, but they were riddled with additives.
"Then I started looking at the big bottles of psyllium husk with the ugliest marketing," he said. "They had three times the amount of pills in them. I started buying that, and I noticed quicker and better results."
He posts links to various items on his site, and "it is always the psyllium husks that sells higher than anything I recommend: lube, nondairy milk, sex toys. It is always the fiber."
Well, they could always pretend they want a colonoscopy. That wasn't as bad as I thought. But not appropriate in a paper all ages read. When I was in fifth grade, we had to bring in an article from the paper every week. I pity Elementary School teachers. Americans do need more fiber, but fruit is a great way to get it. Okay, I'll shut up.
Yes, very off-topic but it's always bothered me to see people with low-fiber diets using high-fiber supplements. Eating more fruit and veg and whole grains would probably cost less.
Have I missed something? Why do some folks not like the NYTimes? Is it because of Haberman? Other particular instances or is it basically pervasive, whatever the problem is?
I guess the Times isn't all that irksome. They've been slow to question the gender orthodoxy, or any orthodoxy, but probably not much worse than most other outlets. I mainly figure if I can get it for "free" (i.e. through paying property taxes) I don't need my own subscription.
All of the Wider Lens podcasts are good but this one I thought was particularly interesting. Ms Abbruzzese demonstrates the mismatch between the cohort studied in the Dutch Protocol and subsequent generations of trans people. We've been watching Dopesick and there's a parallel misuse of scientific studies in the opioid crisis.
I hope I can be forgiven for posting links to Erin Reed, but it's a good way to keep up with what activists are doing and thinking....and Reed is a pretty clear writer, though sins of omissions/commissions abound. Anyway, here is this from her latest:
"California Republicans To Try Anti-Trans Ballot Initiatives - Prop 8 All Over Again?"
"Gender affirming care is associated with a 73% reduction in suicidality and over 50 studies assembled by Cornell University show its benefits. "
That is the Tordoff study which Jesse Singal critques....and you should read it because that study is widely touted (Reed, of course, says nothing about the big shortcomings of that Tordoff study):
"Researchers Found Puberty Blockers And Hormones Didn’t Improve Trans Kids’ Mental Health At Their Clinic. Then They Published A Study Claiming The Opposite. (Updated)
I’m glad you’ve raised “science” and “studies” because I think this can be tricky. When someone declares, “the science is settled” how do you refute that in a credible way?
A couple of thoughts:
1) I think pointing out that many studies about satisfaction/improvement are self-reported may get people thinking. I saw someone on Twitter respond to this once by saying, if you asked me how smoking was going 3 years in, when I was 19, I would have said “great!”
2) I think Genspect has some materials about how the regret really sets in about 7 to 10 years (?) after transition. I think that something like, “That’s what the studies say now. It will be interesting to see if that changes over time, as these kids get older.”
I wish I were the sort of person who could smartly explain why these studies are flawed. But I cannot. I sputter and I get mad. And then I just sound crazy.
OMG. “I sputter and I get mad. And I just sound crazy.” Me too sister. Me too! I wish I had the gift of verbally taking down an opponent, but I don’t. ( except DAYS later, alone, in the middle of the night - it's brilliant...)
There was an interesting point brought up in A Wider Lens interview with Zhenya Abbruzzese (episode 118), about the disparity between self-reported satisfaction and objective evaluation of functioning. So, while a subject may report they have no regrets about their surgeries/medicalization, they also report that they are unable to live independently, hold down a job, or maintain a relationship.
I ask people why do they think that after doing systematic reviews the U.K., Sweden, and Finland have stopped 'transitioning' minors except under strict clinical protocols--I think Norway has as well. And that the Cass Review re England's gender clinic, The Tavistock GIDS, is closing as not 'fit for purpose' and that presumably now psychotherapy will be the first-line treatment for youth w/ gender distress. I saw an excellent interview w/ Hannah Barnes, author of the recent book, 'Time to Think' about what went on at The Tavistock GIDS.
I was one of the people who asked for advice in the previous thread. Just wanted to thank you for allowing me to ask the question! The answers I got were super helpful. I did end up talking with the principal but unfortunately for now the books will remain in the classroom. I am glad that I spoke up though. Staying silent would have killed me! I used a lot of the talking points mentioned in the comments. Thanks again everyone!
This warms my heart. Good for you that took a lot of courage. I was hoping for some good news today.
I had the unfortunate event of my “friend” taking my 16-year-old daughter to register for junior year of high school this week without telling me and she was able to request they change her records from her legal name to her boy's name pseudonym.
I live in Oregon. I was so discouraged bc legally my daughter can change all records, report cards, and documents without my permission but the registrar was concerned and they made it very clear they would NOT change my daughter’s name without my written permission. Good thing my “friend” told me she did that or I wouldn't have known bc I spent last school year keeping my daughters legal officially on all school documents.
I can't tell you the relief I felt yesterday when I called the school register and they were concerned that a different parent tried to facilitate this name change without my permission and they went out of their way to reassure me they would NOT comply with the name change request. I didn't think I had a chance bc of the Oregon laws. But sometimes principals, & school counselors take mothers seriously.
Good luck and bravo for being brave and courageous. I almost didn't call bc I knew the law was not on my side but little school districts don't always agree with the Department of Education guidelines.
If parents speak out a lot of the veteran teachers are just concerned about these inappropriate materials and new school recommendations…they just need need a parent to talk to and more often than not they are grateful to express their concerns with a parent.
Julie Bindel recommended this article on what’s happening in Canada as the most thoroughgoing she has seen. I didn’t see in it overall stats, but there is, for example, a link to numbers in British Columbia, so thought I’d send it on in case you haven’t seen it.
I'm in a back and forth about affirmation with the dean of my daughter's new school (she just entered their freshman class, and is being fully affirmed as a boy) and am trying to decide how to respond to what I perceive as an escalation in our dialogue. Responding to my politely worded concerns about gender ideology being taught as fact rather than as a belief system, the dean wrote:
"We aim to ensure that all of our students feel belonging at <SCHOOL NAME>. As experienced educators, we know that meeting our students where they are, promoting anti-discrimination, and affirming their identity and identity journey are best practices. Research shows that trans, non-binary, and LGBTQIA+ youth are at the highest risk of anxiety, depression, and suicide (see: NIH study, statistics from Trevor Project, U.S. National Survey, Guardian report). Protective factors include positive self-esteem, school belonging, family support, and peer support (see: U.S. Department of Education recommendations, APA recommendations, CDC study, mental health research study). As the statistics show, we are informed by research that using someone’s pronouns and honoring their identity is a form of suicide prevention. It’s worth reiterating that, as minors, students cannot pursue hormone treatment or medical transition without parental permission and oversight."
The dean's response is probably not surprising to anyone who has tried to make their concerns heard in a very progressive high school in a very progressive city but in conversations prior to this email exchange I had felt seen and heard. Would anyone like to offer suggestions for how to respond in a way that addresses the misinformation while also not escalating things further? I feel it is important to address the fact that she brought up suicide risk.
First, regarding the research showing increased mental health problems: yes, absolutely. Find ways to agree with what you can agree on.
Second, I would point out that these "protective factors" - positive self-esteem, school belonging, family support, and peer support - do not equate affirmation or promotion of various sexual and gender identities. There are many things that the school can and should do to increase their self-esteem and help them feel supported, such as: helping them discover and hone their talents in sports/music/art/math/topic of interest; promote social cohesion by having various clubs/trips/events, etc. etc. etc. I would point out that when kids focus on their immutable personal characteristics, it's actually not helpful to their mental health. I'm sure there are studies out there that show that people who are more outwardly focused tend to be happier and healthier.
Finally, the suicide stuff. I can't remember now where I saw this, but probably somewhere in Jesse Singal's writings - there are very compelling articles and studies that show very clearly that affirmation or lack thereof does not affect suicide rates. Some children who were affirmed from childhood ended up committing suicide while on hormones or puberty blockers. Some children who were not affirmed also ended up committing suicide. This is horrifically tragic, but there just isn't a causation here at all.
Gender a Wider Lens had a conversation with a principal of a school/care facility for girls with serious challenges, and he ended up going from full affirmation to no affirmation after seeing a girl detransition after finishing school and realizing this can in fact be a passing fad or a coping mechanism. He says that his students got better once they didn't have to worry about their identities all the time because the school simply said "we're just going to keep calling you by your legal name and sex-based pronouns". I thought it was a very powerful conversation.
Thanks very much for taking the time to share your thoughts. I listen to just about every GAWL interview so I'm familiar with the episode you're referring to. It was a powerful conversation and alas I don't think it would resonate at my daughter's school. On suicide, today I was digging around on Reality's Last Stand and found this one by Leor Sapir that is higher level / more digestible than Jesse Singal's more detailed analysis: https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/pediatric-gender-medicine-and-the
I love Leor Sapir, but I would imagine your school would not like his tone which is very openly "anti-woke". I find Jesse Singal's articles to strike a much more neutral tone, though I agree that they are much less digestible than Sapir. But, for example, while Sapir agrees that the Heritage Foundation study isn't good, he doesn't explain why, whereas he does so for Turban's studies. Sapir definitely has a political side, it what I'm trying to say, I guess.
Thanks very much for these two links. It's perhaps a measure of how much I have moved to the right that I didn't catch Sapir's omission re: the Heritage Foundation Study. I agree it's worth a shot to share Cantor's debunking.
Thanks very much for taking the time to share your suggestions and these articles. I wasn't aware of Dr. Erica Anderson (despite living in her neck of the woods.) From your post, I take it that you have consulted both Dr. Anderson and Laura Edwards-Leeper?
Does anyone have advice for how to discuss trans issues with well-meaning but not fully informed family or friends (w/o sounding conspiratorial or condescending)?
I live in a progressive state/city and the politics of “trans rights” are exactly what one would expect. I suspect the majority of folks aren’t well-informed on the merits and minutiae of trans healthcare, but rather identify as supporters of the LGBTQ+ community and view any modicum of concern r/t trans issues as rooted in bigotry and transphobia. It’s challenging to air concerns (when the topic is brought up) without having others view you as a transphobe / conspiracy theorist on the issue.
I’m a gay man whose politics on most issues fit neatly in the center left. I firmly believe in equal rights for trans adults in terms of housing, employment, broad anti-discrimination protections, and access to medical care. I don’t think the rights & safety of women and trans people are in tension, save for a few noteworthy areas (sports, certain sex-segregated spaces, etc.). So I think people are surprised when I voice concerns about the negative ramifications of trans activism for LGB people, the reality of biological sex differences, or pretty much every aspect of trans / gender stuff as it relates to minors (ex: I don’t think any of this stuff needs to be taught in schools, and I do think parents should be able to opt out of much of these lessons; I don’t think kids should be getting medical treatment; I don’t think ROGD should be dismissed out of hand; etc etc).
Basically wondering if anyone has figured out how to talk about these things (from the perspective of someone with my views) in a way that people are receptive to?
I’ve had a bit of success on this. My daughter, now 19, declared about five years ago that she’s a boy and that she needed hormones and surgery to be her true self. I’m quiet and usually anonymous about this because I’m trying to keep my relationship with her.
And like you, I tend to align centre-left on many issues, although that has changed with all this, yoo boy.
The trick is to come up with a few simple and solid talking points. You’ve listed some great ones above. (One of mine, for example, kids are getting a message that girls are supposed to act and dress a certain way, and if they don’t, they’re really boys. It’s regressive.”
Then use a simple opener. I use lines like “I think what a lot of people don’t realize is that...” or “I’ve read/thought a lot about this, and I have concerns about x”.
If I were you, I would use something like, I think people expect me to agree with all this because I’m gay, but it’s not that simple...”
This is key: say one or two things. Then stop. Give the other person a chance to respond or take it in, or whatever. Otherwise, you seem like a crazy person. The person you are talking to may change the subject, but at least you planted a little seed, right?
I’ve had some success talking to some teachers, a paediatrician, co-workers, a school principal, and the receptionist at my dentist office. It’s not a lot, but it makes me feel good. And I tell myself that I’m working my way up to longer and more difficult conversations.
You may also want to look up this book, I think it’s called How to have impossible conversations.” It’s pretty good.
Good luck!
Ditto on the need to keep it brief to avoid sounding like a conspiracy theorist! I try to educate people on the European countries that are dialing back youth transition. It takes the conversation out of the American right vs. left framework.
This is all really good advice. I have learned the hard way the importance of your comment, “This is key: say one or two things. Then stop. Give the other person a chance to respond or take it in, or whatever.”
Yes! It’s so hard when those of us who have been steeped in it know SO many reasons why it’s a problem and we have to really restrain ourselves to not go on a rant about all of them. But this is definitely a “less is more” situation.
They knew the score back in 1954.
https://youtu.be/EABKxvdoM58?si=8bZ14cqA_rTgrDnQ&t=479
And be aware there are levels of consciousness in getting through to someone. You might think you got through only to have them regress a week later. And then something comes at them a few months later from a different source and they write to you out of the blue and say 'now I think I get it!' It takes time to change our ways of thinking, especially when we're surrounded by liberal or conservative environment, where everyone else is saying the exact opposite. Even I, as a liberal parent of a trans identified child, have had levels of awareness hit me multiple times and I think back to a year ago and wonder how I could have been so uninformed.
Some good suggestions, thank you.
I beg to differ re women's and trans rights NOT being in tension. I am reading Ute Heggen's book on being a grass widow and was shocked that as far back as her divorce--late 90's, I think--her transwoman husband (besides not paying child support and letting her foot the bill--outrageous) was actually the head of his company and claimed it was woman-owned so he got special contracts and financial rewards. And the UK's Women's Fiction prize is including transwomen as equally deserving as biological women. I'm sorry but they are not. They have no idea what it is to be a woman, obviously, or they wouldn't be stealing what little has been carved out to mitigate the extreme discrimination every biological woman has experienced her entire life. There are tremendous tensions and they're only going to get worse. Now California wants transwomen to have the right to get a uterus transplant on demand and for the state (and eventually the federal government) to pay for it to the tune of $300,000. And I'll bet the taxpayer will have to pay for all the follow-up care for complications and an eventual "birth" (I really doubt men are capable of deal with childbirth so I guess it's C-sections for them, if they manage to carry to term, which would REALLY surprise me, and of course all the prenatal care). And on and on. How many biological women can do the same? My SIL had uterine cancer at 18 so couldn't have kids. She never had this option. Why are transwomen so fucking important that the state feels compelled to give them whatever the hell they want? The federal government should recover the funds Ute Heggen's ex stole from other contractors from him. And he should also pay her the child support he owes her, with interest, compounded annually. It's going to continue in every sphere where there are career advantages or financial rewards given to women to compensate (a tiny amount, frankly) for a lifetime of discrimination. They are going to go to transwomen. Who are in actual fact men.
Kudos to you for even trying. Maybe being male you'll get better reception. If you do, I want to hear about it!!!
Good luck on convincing them of anything. They'll just call you "hateful" and a "transphobe". I have yet to have a reasonable conversation with any pro-trans "rights" person.
A beautiful statement of righteous fury, in the lineage of Germain Greer. All that you state is why it is so terribly difficult to remain calm and diplomatic when trying to open the door the tiniest of cracks. I’m grateful to Connor, and anyone, who is willing to give it a try--that keeps me in there trying, too. Meanwhile, thanks for putting it out there just as you see it. We need that too!
Nosey, to your point on career advantages, if you haven’t seen it, I think you’ll appreciate this, by Kathleen Stock: https://t.co/rU3e7al6t7
Thanks. Hadn't seen it but of course have read her, including her lit crit which is thought-provoking and pretty relevant to the trans ideology debate! One prescient woman.
Maybe female teams just need to do a little harmless hazing and castrate the transwomen before the game begins. That would definitely even things out if they did it right before the match. Team bonding, don't you know? The transwomen can use old-fashioned sanitary napkins (what a euphemism) to catch the blood. If they're REAL women that shouldn't be a problem.
I don't think being "nice" is an answer. I don't. It's time to push back and push back hard. If we are "nice" (and I am not sure how it is for males--maybe there's room for them to be tolerance and "nice"), we will get run over.
I would take away all electronics from my kid and monitor them when they're doing school work. No phones outside the house. No phones in their bedrooms. They can talk on a landline forever and a day. Stop giving teens so much freedom. They go to school, then they come home and do their homework, then they join the family for a meal, then they do more homework or relax reading or maybe watching TV with the rest of the family. Big houses are really bad for families. I know lots of people who bought McMansions and each kid has a little wing to themselves. They grow up not knowing how to share, having hostile relationships with one another, and not respecting their parents, quite frankly. For what? So the neighbors will think their parents are "successful"? I do not understand why kids have to have their own phone. If the schools are so inept that they are in danger at school, homeschool. I know, lots of people say they "can't" do that. I did. On less than low wages as a single mother with no help from the kid's father. I was abused as a kid and I was not about to allow emotional abuse to go on at my kid's school, plus he was way ahead of his peers and was bored out of his gourd. You have 18-20 years. And then you no longer have a say. All you can do is watch and figure out how to deal with your breaking parent heart until the day you die. There's no do-overs in this game. Parenting is NOT for the faint of heart. Accept that fact and deal with it as individualistically as you can. Do not apologize. These are YOUR children. They do NOT belong to the schools or the healthcare system or the cops. Do NOT give them away until they have the tools to protect themselves. Then support their independence (if you can). There's no guarantee how it'll end up, no matter when you had your kids. And expose them to as many different realities as possible. One reason this generation is so vulnerable is they are so insulated.
I think you've been misinformed about what you're saying specifically about California. I live here, I've heard nothing about this, and I have just scoured the news, and there is nothing at all about the governor or state legislatures putting forth any kind of bill regarding uterine transplants for trans people nor proposing that it be taxpayer-funded. Now I will fully concede that if there were a place where that kind of thing would happen, it would be California. But I genuinely cannot see it happening unless the same procedure was mandated to be fully covered for natal females, as well. Infertility affects so many women, and this is something I can actually see women from the left and the right agreeing on pretty easily, and getting rightly pissed about if transwomen were able to have access to the procedure but biological women were not.
Sorry. I must have gone from that story to another related one because it doesn't mention California specifically. But this is what I read. There are TONS of stories online about this, mostly in reaction to the AMA's stupid advocacy for uterine transplantation in transwomen to help them be emotionally healthy. Good luck with THAT. Also, in looking for the story re CA wanting to subsidize these surgeries ($300,000 a pop) was a story about Palms Springs deciding to give anyone "who identifies" as trans or binary a $900 universal income stipend to make up for economic discrimination on the job front. Now all the homeless are going to trans identify. I'm Jesus. I think I'm owed something too. (NOT.) The AMA is completely captured. The US healthcare system has a bigger budget than the entire military. And that's saying a lot. That's the real reason we have such bad inflation. It is the main reason my auto insurance increased 40% year to date (the other being mechanics raised their rates so much) so I took off the medical.
Maybe you're right. It was on MSN's news feed. A lot of their stuff is click bait. But I know Israel is either there or pretty close to creating a synthetic uterus. Their birth rate is not sustainable and people are leaving the country. They also have a huge machine that makes steaks to order. Both of those I know to be true. This is the next step for pandering to this particular flavor of mental illness, however. It's what they call transhumanism. It's not just about helping the blind to see and the lame to walk. It is coming. Do a search on the subject. There are lots of stories. This is not the one I originally saw, but in a quick search just now I found it. It's an opinion piece in reference to an AMA Journal of Medical Ethics peer-reviewed article which advocates for subsidizing uterine transplants for transwomen on the basis that it is necessary for their mental health. Apparently the first successful transplant was in Sweden in 2013. I think the U.K. had their first one in 2019? I'm not sure about successful transplants into men yet. I hope men are not capable of carrying to term and giving birth because I don't think their brains are up to the task of raising children from conception on. They are good at fathering--some of them--but mothering is a whole different ball of wax. Apparently they are using cadaver uteri. Anyone who thinks you can "rent" a uterus without repercussions would apparently think you can do this without long-term side effects, especially for the child. Men don't appear to understand that a lot happens between mother and fetus from conception to birth. It blows me away. Oops. Sorry, but here's the article I read a few days ago: https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/transphobes-will-have-no-arguments-left-american-medical-association-says-uterus-transplants-for-transgender-women-should-be-taxpayer-funded/ss-AA1fITMq#image=2 I truly am sorry I am not mistaken. It's a terrible idea and it makes me madder than I think anything else related to trans ideology has because any children they might be able to give birth to are going to be so royally screwed on so many levels. I love California and lived there for 20 years but I do think they need a serious reality readjustment. I have also heard as recently as yesterday that there are some speculating that SF is one of the Great Reset's targets (for a 15-minute city) and that's why all these large companies are pulling out. Of course, most of the homeless are not from San Francisco (or possibly even California). This is in context of Lahaina. The discussion is buried in this substack interview. https://reinettesenumsfoghornexpress.substack.com/p/where-the-land-was-zapped-matt-roeske
You should have voted Reinette Senum into the governorship. Seriously. Newsom is eye candy but there's something wrong with that dude.
Oooof. I am also in your shoes. I have started giving my progressive resume to some folks before I say anything, which probably makes it worse lol. "So, let me just say I've been progressive all my adult life, volunteered at Planned Parenthood, marched for gay marriage, so no one is more surprised than I am to find myslef skeptical about blah, blah, blah." I have a soon-to-be-18-year-old who identies as MTF, and my husband and I are both deeply concerned and deeply skeptical. We DO know others like us, but it is a minefield.
I used to give my progressive résumé, but I quickly found out they don’t care. Our school system didn’t care how I voted, or about my core liberal belief systems, they only cared that they needed to “affirm” my daughter as a boy. They were not interested in any history (political, or personal) at all.
Hi, Connor: I share your frustration with how hard it is to have a conversation about this with so many well-meaning, but uninformed, liberal friends (I am a old lesbian and Democrat in a bright blue area). I find I have to step into it with all the diplomacy I can muster. One thing I found that worked with some: to confirm that this isn’t really about trans people, who deserve all the basic protections from discrimination we all have, but rather about gender identity activism, which has taken a very wrong turn. I will then given an example that I hope connects (for many in my set, it’s what Martina N says about Title IX; from there I move, if I see an opening, to rushed medicalization of children and young people who are in many cases lesbian, gay, and/or autistic).
I was also surprised, in a good way, at the positive reception many friends and acquaintances had when I sent them this (it was written my my spouse, which I think helped, as they know and trust her judgment about schools): https://intrepidednews.com/gender-identity-ideology/
Hope this might help. It is really tough to have these conversations, but always heartening when a breakthrough is made. That keeps me going, along with knowing how necessary it is to educate folks about what they don’t even know they don’t know.
Thanks so much for the link to your spouse's article.
That was an excellent article!
Thank you for the link. I make a point of letting people know that heterosexual males w/ an "erotic fixation" are the "nuclear reactor" of the 'trans' movement--as Helen Joyce explains in this interview (link herewith). I am tired of gays and lesbians being scapegoated for the utter insanity of the 'born in the wrong body' nonsense and the other fetishistic excesses of AGPs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xUrtNW6Fzo&t=664s
And that not only women's and LGB's sex-based rights are supplanted by 'gender identity' being enshrined in law but so-called sex non-conforming minors (and others) are being 'sex-lobotomized' by the promotion of this pernicious 'trans' ideology/movement.
I also sometimes include this article written before the rebranding to 'transgender' as it gives an historical perspective and talks about some of the women married to these men. It was written by Amy Bloom and first published in 'The Atlantic' in April, 2002 and I offer it for critique and educational purposes.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BkIQTu7BV2nifZ3sbSFpS7spWb9od3YU/view
Thank you again Susan and thank you Lisa and all who made suggestions about how to broach this topic w/ those who may not fully understand its implications for minors and for women's and LGB's sex-based rights.
T. Lister: thank YOU for the intelligent comments and links. That particular Joyce interview is among the very best, I thought. I am glad to be reminded of it. The Bloom article is new to me, and I look forward to reading it.
Thank you so much for sharing Josie's article. It is the best re: schools that I've come across.
Oh, that is so nice of you to say. She worked really hard on it, both in content and tone. We both hope so much that it will be helpful to people to get the word out.
Hi Susan, I returned to Josie's article today and found I could no longer read it in full. Is it possible to get an evergreen link for this thread?
Here you go, now on Josie’s blog: https://www.josieholford.com/do-no-harm-navigating-gender-identity-in-school/
Frustrating about the paywall. This is new. Josie has another article, on child development, which I believe will post at OESIS tomorrow. We are not sure how to handle the paywall issue going forward, but if you see it there and would like to get it, let us know, and we’ll see what we can do!
Thank you so much!
Hi, there! Wanted to let you know Josie’s new article is up. While the paywall is still in place, you can read it in full here, if of interest: https://www.josieholford.com/operation-pied-piper-lessons-from-history-on-child-trauma-and-resilience/
Also, FYI, we spotted today that, in trying to transfer the first article to her blog, she made an error in the transfer. She has corrected it, so if you return to the link, you should find a “clean” text.
We are working on a way to get it to you. Stay tuned! And so pleased it is useful to you. Means so much!
I think this interview is essential to understand the dynamics around trans ideology. I highly recommend everyone watch it in its entirety. Mattias Desmet talks about mass formation hypnosis and analyzes why it happens and how the population divides into three camps--the first third is totally hypnotized and cannot hear anything you say, the second 40-60% do not want to make waves, want to be liked, will not fight against it and that's probably most of the people you know who are refusing to listen. The last group are the solution and quite frankly that is us. It's not about finding the right thing to say. It's just to speak quietly, calmly, and persistently about your concerns. Don't put a lot of emotional energy into it. Just keep speaking out. Eventually the larger, second group will start changing their focus. They aren't truly hypnotized. If you do NOT do this, the consequences are dire. He warns it can become a totalitarian phenomenon and totalitarian regimes, he points out I thought rather well, always self-destruct by eating their own. The first group they will go after are the people who refuse to go along. That's us. You saw that in the COVID thing when people started talking about putting the unvaccinated into camps, and worse. He said the totalitarian regimes eventually go after their kids (or that's what I heard) and he points out how Stalin had 50% of his own party killed for various reasons or no reason because he had to keep this mass formation hypnosis phenomenon going. And Hitler had plans, had it not fallen apart when it did, of killing everyone who had either a lung or heart condition to keep his hold on power. So if we do not speak out, this dynamic will become far more serious (and illogical). The reason people are vulnerable to this is because they had free-floating loneliness, meaninglessness, and anxiety in their lives (before the COVID pandemic), according to Desmet. So they glom onto whatever major social bonding event they can find. He's talking about COVID but I think this talk fit so well in addressing the dynamic of the trans phenomenon. I highly recommend you watch this. And try not to invest huge amounts of emotional energy in your discussions with others about it; you'll wear yourself out. You need to keep speaking out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VJ1QQHrV_0
Here's an example of how transwomen (aka men) are erasing women from Genevieve Gluck. https://genevievegluck.substack.com/p/norway-transgender-doctor-whose-license This story also reveals some of the questionable politicization they have been effecting in both medical and psychological fields. And due to what Mattias Desmet calls mass formation hypnosis in pushing the trans ideology and the concommitant silencing of feminist voices. Norway has been especially bad, even though I know they were far more advanced than the US in pushing feminist concerns in the 70's and 80's. Of course they are more homogeneous than we are and as a result of their experience in WWII more likely to conform to groupthink. If you haven't followed Desmet, you might watch this YouTube. If involves the mindlessness of most to follow the COVID propaganda but is also involved in the mindless manner in which so many follow the transgender ideology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VJ1QQHrV_0
Lots of great information is now available online regarding trans ideology and how this belief system affects children, women’s rights, gay and lesbian rights, sports, prisons, safeguarding the vulnerable, etc. Much more so than the 3+ years ago when we started this nausea inducing journey.
Things have settled into “a new normal”. By most measures our daughter seems to be doing well. Who knows if she’ll desist. As a practical matter, what does that explicitly mean? Does she have to reject trans ideology? Or just stop pretending she’s not a girl?
Now, the hardest part for me personally has been losing my tribe.
This whole reality-denying nonsense has had a profound silencing effect on dissenters from the left. We are the apostate. Those of us who have voted in lockstep for Democrats for decades and declared loudly and proudly that we are liberals and still hold classical liberal values now have no home; it is unexpectedly disorienting and profoundly painful. We fear social ostracization, and saying we don’t (or shouldn’t) care doesn’t make us any less lonely.
It sounds superficial compared to what our kids are going through, and our kids remain our number one concern. I’m only writing this so other parents experiencing this will feel less alone. Recently, I read two authors who helped me voice these feelings. Maybe their writings will be helpful to you too.
Monica Harris’ article “Medium Censored My Article Defending the Rights of Women and Lesbians“ on Reality’s Last Stand spoke clearly to the phenomenon of losing one’s tribe.
Stella Morabito was interviewed on Jennifer Bilek’s substack “Defeating “Transgenderism” and Tyranny“ about her book, “The Weaponization of Loneliness” talks to the workings of propaganda.
My high school graduating class was 1984. Many teachers thought it would be clever if we read George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984”.
Life feels Orwellian now.
I could handle being politically homeless if it didn't mean losing my family as well. I am completely out of step with almost all my relatives (and my husband's too) on this one issue especially but also on the whole progressive agenda. If I were to say, on one of those rare occasions when I talk to any of them (including my daughter), "Well, you know, I don't consider these laws to be anti-trans but rather pro-children and pro-women," they would dismiss me as hopelessly right-wing and transphobic. By keeping my mouth shut and not challenging their beliefs and framing, I'm allowing them to remain blissfully ignorant of what's really going on. But I know that anything I say will just make things worse.
Yes. This. 👆🏻((HUGS))
I listened to a bit of another interview w/ Morabito (link below) and it was a bit concerning.
What I heard concerned me as it sounded like another attack on same-sex marriage and LGBs. I don't understand how a same-sex couple's marriage takes anything away from an opposite couple's marriage. It is not the fault of same-sex marriage that a heterosexual marriage fails or that some people choose not to get married. I should have thought that the stability afforded by marriage and having another person who loves you to navigate the difficulties of life would be a reason to favor it. The stability it offers is a benefit to society as a whole and is an antidote to individual loneliness--something that Morabito seems concerned about.
In the interview Morabito goes on about how marriage itself will be ended and that all that will remain will be a civil contract. But marriage is a civil contract under which the parties to it have a bundle of rights and responsibilities. A marriage can be performed in a church but it is still a civil contract.
So why do some conservatives and esp. some religious people have such an issue w/ two people who make a commitment to one another? Why is having a devoted bond to one another problematical? It can't just be about children. Some gays and lesbians have children and some heterosexual couples cannot have children or choose not to have them and we don't consider their marriages less valid.
To be fair, I did not listen to the whole interview, so perhaps I missed something that would counter my impression. But that topic is not for this thread. I only mention it b/c of J. Bilek's interview w/ Morabito referenced above.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPS5A074hqA
Interesting. I didn’t do that deep a dive into her work. What spoke to me In that one interview was the idea of loneliness (social isolation/ostracization) being weaponized. I’m becoming more and more curious about how Soviet era controlled of their people.
I agree Laura as loneliness and isolation can make humans more vulnerable to fear and manipulation imo. I do know that the 'trans' agenda advanced not only by the forced-teaming of the T and then Q onto the LGB but by lobbying and getting legislation passed by stealth. The strategy and tactics are set forth in the Dentons Law Firm document.
One strategy is to attach 'gender identity' legis. to other legislation that is more popular. This happened in Ireland when voters thought they were voting for same-sex marriage only and 'gender identity' self-id got attached to it and was passed w/ same-sex marriage much to the anger of those voters who realized they had been duped after the vote. And the 'trans' movement has quite wealthy men funding it and when money talks integrity walks. Dentons doc at the link also focussed on minors. https://gendercriticalwoman.files.wordpress.com/2020/07/iglyo_v3-1-2.pdf
Lisa, I want to thank you for opening up comments like this. Of many wonderful things you have accomplished with your Substack is gathering a community of really wonderful people with enormous insight and caring.
Hello,
Thank you Lisa, for opening the comments section for folks. I recently read a NYTimes food article that casually mentions anal sex. Bear with me, I have two daughters ages 12 and now 16 who were isolated during the pandemic, the older one was exposed to a group of girls (and one boy) who professed they were trans, and the younger one gained weight during the pandemic then became anorexic after being teased upon returning to in-person school. The older daughter “came out” in a scripted letter to us saying she was trans and wanted to cut off her breasts and please look at the cited resources including GLAAD and the Human Rights Project and now a year and a half after that the twelve year old (who still consumes TONS of influencer content--really, both girls are on unlimited social media/forums, etc., on the internet) is seeming to be trying to get on the trans train now too.
My issue in bringing up the NYTimes food article about Ozempic and psyllium and the little addition to the food article about anal sex, is that I feel our families are just inundated with sexual content and innuendo and that such content can spring up in some rather unexpected places, like an NYTimes food article. What is going on?
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/dining/psyllium-husks.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
Please feel free to have a look (unless I guess if there’s a paywall :(
I skimmed this article when it came out, and (I realize now) didn’t make it down to the anal sex reference. I agree with you that the reference is inappropriate.
Unfortunately, these sorts of references are added in the name of “inclusion”. A reader with a rainbow flag emoji next to his name praised the reporter for including gay men in the article.
I agree with you that our culture has become so sexually explicit. I think this is bad for boys and girls. As to what to do about it, I wish I knew.
Agree it’s about “inclusion” and also wonder if that’s why our teens and preteens who want to be a part of all the inclusivity are adopting some of this ideology.
It’s so nuts that you want to read a FOOD article in my beloved New York Times and it ends up being about “bottoms” and anal sex. Color me shocked.
Well, sorry to expound so fully on it here. (My souse, co-workers, and my 16 yo are OVER me talking about it). I think the reason I’m talking about it so much, is because if we don’t HIGHLIGHT when things like this are in our faces, it may become completely a part of just the way we do things and I think that is a fall from quality and high standards, especially in a food article in the New York Times. The journalist, Priya Krishna, is covering for Sam Sifton this week and I just can’t bear to read her coverage of Peppery Eggs and summer peach desserts in the NYTimes Cooking emailed newsletters in case I’m sprung upon again with something bedroomy instead of foody, lol.
What happened to privacy and a sense of decency? People--including LGBs--are sick to the back teeth of Pride and being in people's face w/ this stuff. Is it that this generation grew up sharing so much and putting their business online that they lost all sense of boundaries and appropriateness? (rhetorical)
T. Lister: I think you’ll appreciate this, from Helen Joyce, if you haven’t seen it, proving once again that great minds think alike: https://twitter.com/TalkTV/status/1693913901648220174
I had not seen it but Joyce is spot on.
Yes I did.
Yes to all of this! Why anybody thinks this is a good idea is well beyond my comprehension. Except where required for clear public health and medical reasons (and in that case, only in articles and publications geared to that), things that happen in the bedroom should stay in the bedroom.
What exactly was the reference? I'm not giving the NYT a penny. But I am curious how anal sex is related to eating. Oh, but maybe I do. I hope I do not. How about that?
I also don't give the NYT a penny, but my library does, so here you go:
Alex Hall, who lives in Chicago, co-founded the website The Bottoms Digest to provide recipes and tips aimed at improving digestion for people preparing to have anal sex. Those on the receiving end, known as bottoms, often try to clear their digestive tracts before sex.
Because of a scarcity of sexual education for L.G.B.T.Q. people, he said, many turn to unhealthy behaviors to prepare for anal sex. "There has been a long-running joke for decades to not eat before you bottom," said Mr. Hall, 30. He tried several fiber supplements that are advertised to gay men, but they were riddled with additives.
"Then I started looking at the big bottles of psyllium husk with the ugliest marketing," he said. "They had three times the amount of pills in them. I started buying that, and I noticed quicker and better results."
He posts links to various items on his site, and "it is always the psyllium husks that sells higher than anything I recommend: lube, nondairy milk, sex toys. It is always the fiber."
Well, they could always pretend they want a colonoscopy. That wasn't as bad as I thought. But not appropriate in a paper all ages read. When I was in fifth grade, we had to bring in an article from the paper every week. I pity Elementary School teachers. Americans do need more fiber, but fruit is a great way to get it. Okay, I'll shut up.
Yes, very off-topic but it's always bothered me to see people with low-fiber diets using high-fiber supplements. Eating more fruit and veg and whole grains would probably cost less.
Have I missed something? Why do some folks not like the NYTimes? Is it because of Haberman? Other particular instances or is it basically pervasive, whatever the problem is?
I guess the Times isn't all that irksome. They've been slow to question the gender orthodoxy, or any orthodoxy, but probably not much worse than most other outlets. I mainly figure if I can get it for "free" (i.e. through paying property taxes) I don't need my own subscription.
All of the Wider Lens podcasts are good but this one I thought was particularly interesting. Ms Abbruzzese demonstrates the mismatch between the cohort studied in the Dutch Protocol and subsequent generations of trans people. We've been watching Dopesick and there's a parallel misuse of scientific studies in the opioid crisis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhLA02Dtupc&list=PLngVCeAoK6vudCwfy0R2Rvg_SH2QxBJTu&index=1
I hope I can be forgiven for posting links to Erin Reed, but it's a good way to keep up with what activists are doing and thinking....and Reed is a pretty clear writer, though sins of omissions/commissions abound. Anyway, here is this from her latest:
"California Republicans To Try Anti-Trans Ballot Initiatives - Prop 8 All Over Again?"
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/california-republicans-to-try-anti
The article includes this:
"Gender affirming care is associated with a 73% reduction in suicidality and over 50 studies assembled by Cornell University show its benefits. "
That is the Tordoff study which Jesse Singal critques....and you should read it because that study is widely touted (Reed, of course, says nothing about the big shortcomings of that Tordoff study):
"Researchers Found Puberty Blockers And Hormones Didn’t Improve Trans Kids’ Mental Health At Their Clinic. Then They Published A Study Claiming The Opposite. (Updated)
A critique of Tordoff et al. (2022)"
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/researchers-found-puberty-blockers
Thoughts?????????????????????
I’m glad you’ve raised “science” and “studies” because I think this can be tricky. When someone declares, “the science is settled” how do you refute that in a credible way?
A couple of thoughts:
1) I think pointing out that many studies about satisfaction/improvement are self-reported may get people thinking. I saw someone on Twitter respond to this once by saying, if you asked me how smoking was going 3 years in, when I was 19, I would have said “great!”
2) I think Genspect has some materials about how the regret really sets in about 7 to 10 years (?) after transition. I think that something like, “That’s what the studies say now. It will be interesting to see if that changes over time, as these kids get older.”
I wish I were the sort of person who could smartly explain why these studies are flawed. But I cannot. I sputter and I get mad. And then I just sound crazy.
OMG. “I sputter and I get mad. And I just sound crazy.” Me too sister. Me too! I wish I had the gift of verbally taking down an opponent, but I don’t. ( except DAYS later, alone, in the middle of the night - it's brilliant...)
There was an interesting point brought up in A Wider Lens interview with Zhenya Abbruzzese (episode 118), about the disparity between self-reported satisfaction and objective evaluation of functioning. So, while a subject may report they have no regrets about their surgeries/medicalization, they also report that they are unable to live independently, hold down a job, or maintain a relationship.
I ask people why do they think that after doing systematic reviews the U.K., Sweden, and Finland have stopped 'transitioning' minors except under strict clinical protocols--I think Norway has as well. And that the Cass Review re England's gender clinic, The Tavistock GIDS, is closing as not 'fit for purpose' and that presumably now psychotherapy will be the first-line treatment for youth w/ gender distress. I saw an excellent interview w/ Hannah Barnes, author of the recent book, 'Time to Think' about what went on at The Tavistock GIDS.
A link to a clip of that interview w/ Hannah Barnes on Triggernometry is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMGgCC44sS8
That was a fantastic interview. She is so level-headed and clear. Thank so much for flagging it!
I read Jesse's critique and excellent analysis and of course the 'gender borg' will not mention the myriad problems w/ that study.
I was one of the people who asked for advice in the previous thread. Just wanted to thank you for allowing me to ask the question! The answers I got were super helpful. I did end up talking with the principal but unfortunately for now the books will remain in the classroom. I am glad that I spoke up though. Staying silent would have killed me! I used a lot of the talking points mentioned in the comments. Thanks again everyone!
This warms my heart. Good for you that took a lot of courage. I was hoping for some good news today.
I had the unfortunate event of my “friend” taking my 16-year-old daughter to register for junior year of high school this week without telling me and she was able to request they change her records from her legal name to her boy's name pseudonym.
I live in Oregon. I was so discouraged bc legally my daughter can change all records, report cards, and documents without my permission but the registrar was concerned and they made it very clear they would NOT change my daughter’s name without my written permission. Good thing my “friend” told me she did that or I wouldn't have known bc I spent last school year keeping my daughters legal officially on all school documents.
I can't tell you the relief I felt yesterday when I called the school register and they were concerned that a different parent tried to facilitate this name change without my permission and they went out of their way to reassure me they would NOT comply with the name change request. I didn't think I had a chance bc of the Oregon laws. But sometimes principals, & school counselors take mothers seriously.
Good luck and bravo for being brave and courageous. I almost didn't call bc I knew the law was not on my side but little school districts don't always agree with the Department of Education guidelines.
If parents speak out a lot of the veteran teachers are just concerned about these inappropriate materials and new school recommendations…they just need need a parent to talk to and more often than not they are grateful to express their concerns with a parent.
❤️
I have to give credit to Katie Parker! She goes into detail about how to facilitate conversations at schools.
Does anyone have any ideas on how to pin down how many minors are having surgery in Canada?
Julie Bindel recommended this article on what’s happening in Canada as the most thoroughgoing she has seen. I didn’t see in it overall stats, but there is, for example, a link to numbers in British Columbia, so thought I’d send it on in case you haven’t seen it.
https://quillette.com/2023/08/21/when-trans-activism-becomes-government-policy/ forgot the link! Here it is.
Here is the link I forgot to include. A link to a clip of that interview w/ Hannah Barnes on Triggernometry is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMGgCC44sS8
I'm in a back and forth about affirmation with the dean of my daughter's new school (she just entered their freshman class, and is being fully affirmed as a boy) and am trying to decide how to respond to what I perceive as an escalation in our dialogue. Responding to my politely worded concerns about gender ideology being taught as fact rather than as a belief system, the dean wrote:
"We aim to ensure that all of our students feel belonging at <SCHOOL NAME>. As experienced educators, we know that meeting our students where they are, promoting anti-discrimination, and affirming their identity and identity journey are best practices. Research shows that trans, non-binary, and LGBTQIA+ youth are at the highest risk of anxiety, depression, and suicide (see: NIH study, statistics from Trevor Project, U.S. National Survey, Guardian report). Protective factors include positive self-esteem, school belonging, family support, and peer support (see: U.S. Department of Education recommendations, APA recommendations, CDC study, mental health research study). As the statistics show, we are informed by research that using someone’s pronouns and honoring their identity is a form of suicide prevention. It’s worth reiterating that, as minors, students cannot pursue hormone treatment or medical transition without parental permission and oversight."
The dean's response is probably not surprising to anyone who has tried to make their concerns heard in a very progressive high school in a very progressive city but in conversations prior to this email exchange I had felt seen and heard. Would anyone like to offer suggestions for how to respond in a way that addresses the misinformation while also not escalating things further? I feel it is important to address the fact that she brought up suicide risk.
Links to "studies" she cited:
NIH study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32345113/
statistics from Trevor Project: https://www.thetrevorproject.org/resources/article/facts-about-lgbtq-youth-suicide/
U.S. National Survey: https://www.thetrevorproject.org/research-briefs/2022-u-s-national-survey-on-lgbtq-youth-mental-health-by-state-dec-2022/
Guardian report: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/16/us-trans-non-binary-youth-suicide-mental-health
Links to what she referred to as "protective factors"
U.S. Department of Education recommendations: https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ed-factsheet-transgender-202106.pdf
APA recommendations: https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/programs/safe-supportive/lgbt/risk-factors.pdf
CDC study: https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/disparities/protective-factors-for-lgbtq-youth.htm
mental health research study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44184-023-00029-8.epdf
I would suggest a couple of points:
First, regarding the research showing increased mental health problems: yes, absolutely. Find ways to agree with what you can agree on.
Second, I would point out that these "protective factors" - positive self-esteem, school belonging, family support, and peer support - do not equate affirmation or promotion of various sexual and gender identities. There are many things that the school can and should do to increase their self-esteem and help them feel supported, such as: helping them discover and hone their talents in sports/music/art/math/topic of interest; promote social cohesion by having various clubs/trips/events, etc. etc. etc. I would point out that when kids focus on their immutable personal characteristics, it's actually not helpful to their mental health. I'm sure there are studies out there that show that people who are more outwardly focused tend to be happier and healthier.
Finally, the suicide stuff. I can't remember now where I saw this, but probably somewhere in Jesse Singal's writings - there are very compelling articles and studies that show very clearly that affirmation or lack thereof does not affect suicide rates. Some children who were affirmed from childhood ended up committing suicide while on hormones or puberty blockers. Some children who were not affirmed also ended up committing suicide. This is horrifically tragic, but there just isn't a causation here at all.
Gender a Wider Lens had a conversation with a principal of a school/care facility for girls with serious challenges, and he ended up going from full affirmation to no affirmation after seeing a girl detransition after finishing school and realizing this can in fact be a passing fad or a coping mechanism. He says that his students got better once they didn't have to worry about their identities all the time because the school simply said "we're just going to keep calling you by your legal name and sex-based pronouns". I thought it was a very powerful conversation.
Thanks very much for taking the time to share your thoughts. I listen to just about every GAWL interview so I'm familiar with the episode you're referring to. It was a powerful conversation and alas I don't think it would resonate at my daughter's school. On suicide, today I was digging around on Reality's Last Stand and found this one by Leor Sapir that is higher level / more digestible than Jesse Singal's more detailed analysis: https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/pediatric-gender-medicine-and-the
I love Leor Sapir, but I would imagine your school would not like his tone which is very openly "anti-woke". I find Jesse Singal's articles to strike a much more neutral tone, though I agree that they are much less digestible than Sapir. But, for example, while Sapir agrees that the Heritage Foundation study isn't good, he doesn't explain why, whereas he does so for Turban's studies. Sapir definitely has a political side, it what I'm trying to say, I guess.
Do you think your school's admins would be willing to read Cantor's debunking of the APA recommendations? https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/SexualOrientation/IESOGI/Other/Rebekah_Murphy_20191214_JamesCantor-fact-checking_AAP-Policy.pdf
This article summarizes his points, and #4-6 seem especially relevant: https://adflegal.org/article/psychologist-dr-james-cantor-details-harms-transitioning-kids
Thanks very much for these two links. It's perhaps a measure of how much I have moved to the right that I didn't catch Sapir's omission re: the Heritage Foundation Study. I agree it's worth a shot to share Cantor's debunking.
Thanks very much for taking the time to share your suggestions and these articles. I wasn't aware of Dr. Erica Anderson (despite living in her neck of the woods.) From your post, I take it that you have consulted both Dr. Anderson and Laura Edwards-Leeper?
FYI, in case you haven’t seen this, it’s an excellent interview with Erica Anderson. I appreciate Anderson’s ability to talk through all the issues calmly, but with absolutely clarity, and thought it a useful model for how to talk about these issues myself. https://www.foxnews.com/media/transgender-psychologist-hubris-blame-harmful-industry-standards-treatment-minors
Absolutely. Anderson Cooper, where are you?
And where is Rachel Maddow?
This came out recently re parents and schools. https://www.thedistancemag.com/p/emotional-extortion-emails-the-courage
I'm in LA. The "drop me a line" link doesn't seem to work. @BelissaCohen