"They should be expected to curtail their [public] behavior" is a large part of what is missing from society today. Once upon a time, we knew that there are behaviors that belong only to the private, not the public sphere -- not only fringe behaviors, but also those that are natural and essential (e.g. defecation), and those that are good and honorable (e.g. those that, in the right circumstances, lead to the creation of children and families). This loss of a sense of privacy -- call it by the old-fashioned term, modesty -- is destructive of both individuals and society. That those to whom we have traditionally entrusted our children (e.g. teachers, librarians) are now on the forefront of the movement to expose even the youngest to everything they once protected them from, is unspeakably tragic.
right?! exactly. it definitely comes off more like narcissistic psychopathy. if one is 'turned on' by whatever kink, when did it become socially acceptable to go around broadcasting it and demanding some sort of celebration of it. how is it different then say, wearing sexy costumes or S & M gear in inappropriate settings, like at your job or your kids' school events?
its really not the same as trans either is it? somebody who cross-dresses & identifies as a different gender, is not necessarily displaying a 'kink'.
I find it beyond ironic that this ideological mindset that supposedly is all about 'equity & inclusion' is also promoting extreme gender stereotyping. its such a massive step backwards in the area of respecting individual differences. our wide variety of talents and interests, our huge variations in body types and physical abilities, are not and should not be separated by gender. what the heck was the point of the entire feminist movement, if not THAT?!
little Johnny is quiet, nurturing and prefers cooking over sports. oh, he must be 'trans', so virtue-signaling mom now dresses him in ultra-girly clothes and gets tons of attentions on MSM. what if it turns out that Johnny is just a child displaying his natural temperament and is actually a heterosexual male (because why wouldn't he be???) what did his mother just do to him?! I'm sorry but how is this scenario NOT Munchhausen's By Proxy?
"Autoandrophilia enables people to experience mental shifts into a masculine headspace in response to stimuli that reinforce their sense of masculinity or manhood….Initially, autoandrophilic mental shifts tend to be short-lived. They often first arise through crossdressing, being “one of the guys,” or imagining being a boy—all of which may lead to feeling confident, strong, or self-assured.”
This whole thing is just so super regressive and in my opinion, purposefully confusing so that it's harder to reject. As a tomboy growing up I listened to predominantly classic rock and metal music (and still do) because these raw, powerful kind of songs most strongly resonate with me. Being more so on the masculine side of the music genre spectrum, I only could talk about my musical tastes with the guys in my classes because no other female classmates I knew enjoyed listening to this music the way I did, and I dressed almost 100% in jeans, band t-shirts and hoodies. I never once questioned if I was a boy or wanted to become one, but based on the above, was I "one of the guys" while entering into a "masculine headspace"? Or was I (and still am) merely enjoying rockin' songs that make me feel powerful?
Of course as an adult I know that my more masculine interests and hobbies do not make me any less of a woman or a sign that I deep down long to become a man, but if this whole autoandrophilia idea and these regressive gender stereotypes were slapped in my face hard as a teenager, would I suddenly have started questioning myself otherwise? There's a very strong chance that it may have done so.
I totally relate to that. same here (though I'm sure I am quite a bit older than you). I too was a tomboy and seriously into metal bands, hung out with hotrod & motorcycle guys and only dressed 'girly' when I had to (but it likely still involved studded leather and patched jean jackets... woman's fashion back in the '80's - ugh! Madonna, oh no thanks!)
the gender stereotypes are exactly what gals like US were/are rebelling against. but never did I ever for one second think I was anything but heterosexual. (Heather related much the same, as a woman in a traditionally 'male' field.)
this 'masculine headspace' sounds like a big load of crap to me. every human being has masculine and feminine attributes. it serves no one well to delineate them to such extremes.
Your comment resonates with me, Warrior Mom. I've played bass / sax in a few bands, some all female (Raw Honey!), others mixed, while in others being the sole female. As a teen discovering my voice, and being privy to internal discussions between 'dudes' who perhaps forgot I was in the room, taught me that men and women approach / perceive so many topics differently. In our grand Venn diagram, we spoke music similarly, but there were many domains in which we did not intersect - even though we were (oh my!) dressed similarly. That was perfectly fine as I had no interest in adopting their model, nor they mine. And betwixt us all, we combined our individual flavors to create an interesting soundscape. Not sure where that paradigm would land today. What labels would have been foisted upon me for being so non-conformist. I shudder. That said, perhaps the narcissistic steam can be taken out of these folks by simply normalizing one's clothing choices. Turn of the last century, women wearing pants was frowned upon - now it's common. Once clothing choice becomes a non-issue, they'll probably create something else to put the spotlight back on themselves, because the issue is not what they think it is.
every word, so true. how have we gotten to a place where if one is displaying ANY interest or characteristic of the opposite gender, that means you must secretly (or not secretly) want to BE that gender? in the 80's, I was a stage lighting operator for club bands on the southside of Chicago & NW Indiana (the club scene was amazing at the time). it was so unusual to see a woman doing this, everyone assumed I must be sleeping with one of the band members. (usually not, lol but I did end up meeting & marrying my first husband, lead vocals in a metal band.) I would get harassed & sometimes a bouncer would be assigned to stand next to me.
being labeled a non-conformist in any way seems almost dangerous these days. I can barely wrap my head around it. but things come full circle: my 17 yr old is waving his freak flag, with hair down to his waist, baggy pants and goofy hats. I tell him, 'go for it'; his appearance is not a battle I will ever choose. having a healthy mind and body and being accountable for yourself are what matters. he KNOWS where I stand on all the current insanity, he knows why I reject most things mainstream (be it media, sick care system, politics...)
Phil Illy is sick, pitiable, but also threatens a civil and safe society. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, must be a duck. He has set himself up to be treated like a duck.
I used to have a male friend (he has since dropped away from our group of friends) who had a what I wanna call a lipstick fetish; always wanted whatever woman he dated to wear dark or bold lipstick. he later confessed to a few of us that he also liked to cross-dress and wear lipstick himself. this is a heterosexual man who's been married twice (no kids). come to find out that his older sisters used to 'dress him up' like a girl when they were kids. how this type of thing in childhood transfers to being something that's a 'turn on', I have no idea. I do believe that a few of us (all woman, none of his male friends) knowing about it is what caused him to no longer maintain any friendships with us. sense of shame over it? idk.
As a 70yo gay man, all that I can say is that every one of us creates our culture around us. Accept me, hate me or ignore me but my world is as much about me as any of you. Younger folks than me might find my attitudes more conservative than they expect but I am at the least the sum of my experiences. Even so I can't get behind some of the stuff that I "should". I knew trannies in the Biblical sense and they are not the ones I will die in the trenches for. The culture has gone insane. It doesn't seem to have caught up between the village rumor mill and the interscat. If only everyone was as securely retired as I am there wouldn't be as much importance about what other people think.
absolutely we all create our culture around us! at our age, Kelly, you've experienced the full spectrum of cultural attitudes towards gays. when we were teens, a school teacher would get fired for just the rumor of being gay. now it seems like some degree of gender-bending is almost a requirement! and I honestly cannot keep track of it all.
I grew up with two, close male friends who are gay. late '70's, early '80's, there was still a lot stigma (or whatever you want to call it). the one I am still close with (we are both almost 63) is a gay man who is completely comfortable in his skin. he thinks this 'trans kids' stuff is insane but we have a mutual female friend who is preaching the Woke religion and using the fact that HE knew he was 'different' at a young age, to justify it. our gay friend is a talented hair/cosmetic stylist who dabbled in drag back in the '80's & approached it as a artistic performance outlet, not an identity or lifestyle. he's a gay MAN and I'm confident that he would not have appreciated some adult telling him, when he was still a child, that he needed drugs/surgery to become a woman to 'affirm' his feelings of being 'different'.
what's really confusing to me is this insistence that one is some kind of 'whatever-phobe' if you say 'whoa, wait a minute' to the medical alteration of kids who 'feel different' or are having a difficult puberty, etc. where does this whole ideology leave the gay community, when it seems like these people insist that they speak for EVERYONE who is not heterosexual. seems to me that they definitely don't speak for gays who are OUR generation. what do you think, Kelly? doesn't the current, almost militant, ideology actually conflict with whatever social gains that gays have made?
I'm not quite sure what you mean. yes, we are the product of our individual experiences. people react to bullying in different ways. for some, it makes them stronger, for others, it damages them.
what I was asking was if you believe that the trans ideologues do or should, be considered part of the larger gay community? or if they run counter
I can't speak for every gay or bisexual person of course. But a lot of the ones I do know share my disdain for transsexuals. The autogynephilic men should have stayed in the closet and the young women who can't deal with their nature and think that they would be better men than women have definitely lost the plot. Not to mention that this 57 genders nonsense and specious claims of "non-binaryness" are less-than-subtle attacks on every gay person at ease with his or her sexuality. The Nashville shooter's manifesto has just been released. Read it if you can and tell me this should be "celebrated"
thank you Kelly. yes that's what I asked. your opinion is near identical to my friend of 4 decades. couple years ago when it first started being talked about (to my knowledge anyway) about these moms cross-dressing their 8 yr olds, my friend practically went on a rant at a dinner party over it. these people are displaying mental illnesses and those that insist on 'celebrating' it are in some kind of mass psychosis. it doesn't seem to be about 'acceptance', it seems to be about militancy aimed at further polarizing our society (like we need any help with that!) Homosexual is not mental illness and it shouldn't be lumped in with this stuff.
yes I heard about the 'manifesto' (haven't read it), a few pages were 'leaked' by an alt media person & the 'authorities' are up in arms over it (the leak, not the contents!). the suppression of it is proof positive that the MSM is protecting a narrative and NOT interested in exploring the very real issues. these folks are drugged up and their minds are fucked with. how is it surprising that they can have violent mental breakdowns? but of course 'they/them' say its all from how horribly these folks are treated. well sorry/not sorry - if someone acts like a violent asshole, then that's how they get treated. we don't care about their sex life or whatever.
its my opinion that these folks are suffering from medical metabolic issues from toxic exposure, no different than my son with autism. he wasn't 'born that way', he was poisoned (and I have lab test proof of it). then you have this near-violent push to glamorize it... yikes!
my friend had a person in his circle (since deceased), a gay man who lived as a woman & was in a long-term relationship with another gay man. everybody knew he was a dude, nobody cared. no idea if he said he was trans but I kind of doubt it; never did anything medical to himself. the last thing this person wanted was to draw extra attention to himself. he lived a quiet life. the fact that these so-called 'trans activists' are the furthest thing from just 'wanting to live in society without prejudice', says a lot to me.
Sorry to be so long in replying. Been quite a day. I am intrigued that you can point to something that made your son autistic. I have been on the spectrum for as long as I remember. I was considered a "high function Aspie" until the designation became non PC. I have struggled to hide it well enough to fit in all my life with limited success. Much to the surprise of everyone that knew me well, I managed to keep a job long enough to retire with a pension. It was a near thing nearly to the very end. I can work with people. I can play nicely, but I can't stand to share my space. I became a believer in Christ in my 50's but could not stand even a small church for very long. My take on autism may be unique as am I myself. From the inside I see it a bit different. Did a vax cause your son's problems? I have taken many vaccinations since I got the Polio sugar cube in the 1950's but I am REALLY hesitant to take any more.
Illy attending Genspect in a vivid blue dress is similar, imo, to males who try and get on as volunteers in domestic violence shelters. He may not have any nefarious intentions, but he obviously has a need for attention. Does his presence help the goals of Genspect? My lay opinion is No!
My first exposure to a cross dresser was an eye opener, and I think I contrast people like Illy with the young man I came to know when he sought mental health service at the clinic where I worked. I did his intake prior to an appointment with the elderly psychiatrist. The young man, who presented as a Southern “good old boy” told his story: As a member of the armed services with a duty post in Viet Nam, he happened to pick up a magazine in which there was an article about a cross dresser. He described having periodic overwhelming urges to dress as a woman, and he would indulge the urge, which was overwhelming, in his mother’s closet. For many years, he thought he was the only person in the world with the urge to cross dress, and only upon discovering the article did he learn he was not the only one. Say what you will about old doctors, I was thoroughly taken by the compassion and honesty displayed by the doctor. He did not advise therapy. He did not prescribe any antipsychotic medication. What he did suggest was for the young man to go to a large city, perhaps New Orleans, and find a club or such where he would find others like him, indulge his fetish (if that’s what it was), and return home to live his “normal” life between indulgences. This man, Illy who parades around seeking attention seems like a fake, and is a mockery to the real people with real issues that interfere with their lives.
In a perfect world, with perfect knowledge, we'd have no problem distinguishing the "eccentric but harmless" from the "dangerous". Since we don't have that, as a society we are forced to make choices where we limit the rights of some to engage in behavior-out-of-the ordinary to reduce the risk and cognitive load to the majority of the populace. For example, some people would ban ordinary people walking around town with AR-15s slung over their shoulders, while others see that as a perfectly harmless (even patriotic) activity.
This seems unfair and kinda sucks, but as Thomas Sowell said "There are no solutions, only tradeoffs".
As alluded to in this post, we need to question what "must" be accepted, and why. Why must anyone accept anything? Yes, accept speed limit laws, even if you don't like them. Respect other people's right to exist, same as yours. But accept them into your heart or your mind? That's a personal choice, and NO one has any businesses making claims on what one must accept.
Does everyone have a right to be a Catholic? Of course. Should everyone WANT to be a Catholic? No. Does everyone have to like and respect Catholicism? No. Replace Catholicism with Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Rotarian or Shriner, and it all still works the same. Replace it with gay, lesbian, trans and it STILL works out same.
It is absurd to think that anyone can be forced to accept anything. If you hold a gun to my head, I'll say that I accept whatever it is you tell me to accept. But now you have to continue to hold that gun to my head, because the moment you pull it away...
I have no concern with the guy in the post. He apparently isn't holding a gun to anyone's head. But there are those who do, metaphorically speaking. I don't care how liberal or conservative they profess to be, they are my enemy. I reject them.
I see a bloke in a dress. It causes me no confusion at all. This is akin to cosplaying Spiderman at Comicon; I expect it in the space it occurs in. If Genspect were saying "No men in dresses" at their conferences, they'd be being hypocritical. I'm getting the pearl-clutching vibe we've seen in all the "Violence in x, y, or z" hooplas of the the past from this post. The research sends the Mary Whithouse types packing everytime, I suspect it would here. Bloke in a Dress=Lass in Suit and Tie; if you think there is some meaningful difference I have to suspect the problem is you; not the bloke or the lass.
except he's NOT Spiderman at Comicon, unless said cosplayer does so on the job, in the grocery store, etc. he's a hetero man who apparently cross-dresses all the time and felt the need to write a 600 page book full of mental gymnastics to describe it. its those mental gymnastics that Heather takes issue with. his need to draw even MORE attention to himself, brought him to a informational & support event for families of those with gender dysphoria. he doesn't seem to have gender dysphoria; he seems to be plugging a book.
"Genspect envisions a world in which “people are free to present and express themselves in a manner that is healthy, safe and not constrained by gender stereotypes.”"
Their conference; their rules. Your house; your rules. A public space? Depends on the local community what the local community would find acceptable. Current climate you might find yourself in the minority in a small town. A bloke in a dress is making a spectacle of himself; but what exactly is he doing to harm you? He's just different and you are just bigoted.
I don't recall anyone accusing the man of 'harming' anyone.
tossing around the label of 'bigot' whenever ANYTHING is thoughtfully criticized, is disingenuous, at best. and its also part of the actual problem.
this dude can do whatever the heck he wants. he obviously doesn't care about the opinions of others regarding it. I don't care one way or the other and it doesn't sound like Heather cares either. if other's don't 'like' it or find it inappropriate, and say so, that makes them bigots?
if someone walked into a church service and started screaming obscenities, and people complained, would that make them 'bigots'?
please rethink your flippant use of the term bigot. or don't. I don't care. it certainly doesn't 'harm' me or anyone. its just an inaccurate label in this context.
I am in both ‘camps’ over Phil Illy at the Genspect conference. I was not there but still I find his sensory-loaded presence and associated meanings intriguing, like an art form. It has made me look, and consider further ideas and messages on both sides (within the same camp) and so I hope Phil Illy will bring good. I believe that he wants to.
I think ‘queer theory’ started as more of an interesting art form than a doctrine, and so I am also cautious. I also tend to be untrusting of exhibitions of supposed ‘femininity’, usually from women. I prefer a more ‘functional’ presentation for myself. However, it is important to remember that clothing and outer appearance are also forms of creative expression. I don’t believe Phil Illy was ‘getting off’ at the conference.
Phil Illy brings a hypothesis to the table that seems like it could contribute to understanding the dangerous social contagion and medicalisation of Trans. So why have I have not yet been drawn to reading his book?
As well as my (above) bias, the last Darkhorse podcast helped me to clarify that this is because I agree (with Heather and Brett) that latching on to another / alternative diagnosis is so unhelpful. Why are people looking for diagnosis and medicalisation - to anchor themselves, through categorisation, to help them in areas where they feel ‘blind’?
I share other’s concerns about paving the way for transhumanism, though we are already integrated with technology in many ways. I advocate, through my work as an Occupational Therapist, for increased embodied, sensory-motor experiences, largely as an antidote to this - while constantly aware of the struggles of getting enough of this for myself and my own family!
Autism may be a useful shorthand through which to understand clusters of difficulties, but it is being overused in ways that are damaging, while the underlying individual difficulties impacting on limitations in functional participation in daily activities, in my experience, are often not addressed, leaving those with these clusters of difficulties vulnerable to medicalisation.
As well as medicalising gender non-conformity, many children and young people now get concurrent ASD and ADHD diagnoses. Pharmacological doors are ‘kindly’ held open.
Addressing functional participation challenges within the context of, and with increased awareness of, our sensorily hyper-novel environments, I believe, should be the focus in responding to rising diagnoses (as well as considering other hyper-novel factors).
I have heard Phil Illy talk, and his character seems open to exploration. I would like to understand more about what he does, rather than just who he is. I am also really hoping that discussion and debate will continue going forward. Maybe I (and others) should read Phil Illy’s book before making further judgement?!
"They should be expected to curtail their [public] behavior" is a large part of what is missing from society today. Once upon a time, we knew that there are behaviors that belong only to the private, not the public sphere -- not only fringe behaviors, but also those that are natural and essential (e.g. defecation), and those that are good and honorable (e.g. those that, in the right circumstances, lead to the creation of children and families). This loss of a sense of privacy -- call it by the old-fashioned term, modesty -- is destructive of both individuals and society. That those to whom we have traditionally entrusted our children (e.g. teachers, librarians) are now on the forefront of the movement to expose even the youngest to everything they once protected them from, is unspeakably tragic.
Why does a private fetish need to be public? Do you need that much attention.
right?! exactly. it definitely comes off more like narcissistic psychopathy. if one is 'turned on' by whatever kink, when did it become socially acceptable to go around broadcasting it and demanding some sort of celebration of it. how is it different then say, wearing sexy costumes or S & M gear in inappropriate settings, like at your job or your kids' school events?
its really not the same as trans either is it? somebody who cross-dresses & identifies as a different gender, is not necessarily displaying a 'kink'.
I find it beyond ironic that this ideological mindset that supposedly is all about 'equity & inclusion' is also promoting extreme gender stereotyping. its such a massive step backwards in the area of respecting individual differences. our wide variety of talents and interests, our huge variations in body types and physical abilities, are not and should not be separated by gender. what the heck was the point of the entire feminist movement, if not THAT?!
little Johnny is quiet, nurturing and prefers cooking over sports. oh, he must be 'trans', so virtue-signaling mom now dresses him in ultra-girly clothes and gets tons of attentions on MSM. what if it turns out that Johnny is just a child displaying his natural temperament and is actually a heterosexual male (because why wouldn't he be???) what did his mother just do to him?! I'm sorry but how is this scenario NOT Munchhausen's By Proxy?
"Autoandrophilia enables people to experience mental shifts into a masculine headspace in response to stimuli that reinforce their sense of masculinity or manhood….Initially, autoandrophilic mental shifts tend to be short-lived. They often first arise through crossdressing, being “one of the guys,” or imagining being a boy—all of which may lead to feeling confident, strong, or self-assured.”
This whole thing is just so super regressive and in my opinion, purposefully confusing so that it's harder to reject. As a tomboy growing up I listened to predominantly classic rock and metal music (and still do) because these raw, powerful kind of songs most strongly resonate with me. Being more so on the masculine side of the music genre spectrum, I only could talk about my musical tastes with the guys in my classes because no other female classmates I knew enjoyed listening to this music the way I did, and I dressed almost 100% in jeans, band t-shirts and hoodies. I never once questioned if I was a boy or wanted to become one, but based on the above, was I "one of the guys" while entering into a "masculine headspace"? Or was I (and still am) merely enjoying rockin' songs that make me feel powerful?
Of course as an adult I know that my more masculine interests and hobbies do not make me any less of a woman or a sign that I deep down long to become a man, but if this whole autoandrophilia idea and these regressive gender stereotypes were slapped in my face hard as a teenager, would I suddenly have started questioning myself otherwise? There's a very strong chance that it may have done so.
I totally relate to that. same here (though I'm sure I am quite a bit older than you). I too was a tomboy and seriously into metal bands, hung out with hotrod & motorcycle guys and only dressed 'girly' when I had to (but it likely still involved studded leather and patched jean jackets... woman's fashion back in the '80's - ugh! Madonna, oh no thanks!)
the gender stereotypes are exactly what gals like US were/are rebelling against. but never did I ever for one second think I was anything but heterosexual. (Heather related much the same, as a woman in a traditionally 'male' field.)
this 'masculine headspace' sounds like a big load of crap to me. every human being has masculine and feminine attributes. it serves no one well to delineate them to such extremes.
Your comment resonates with me, Warrior Mom. I've played bass / sax in a few bands, some all female (Raw Honey!), others mixed, while in others being the sole female. As a teen discovering my voice, and being privy to internal discussions between 'dudes' who perhaps forgot I was in the room, taught me that men and women approach / perceive so many topics differently. In our grand Venn diagram, we spoke music similarly, but there were many domains in which we did not intersect - even though we were (oh my!) dressed similarly. That was perfectly fine as I had no interest in adopting their model, nor they mine. And betwixt us all, we combined our individual flavors to create an interesting soundscape. Not sure where that paradigm would land today. What labels would have been foisted upon me for being so non-conformist. I shudder. That said, perhaps the narcissistic steam can be taken out of these folks by simply normalizing one's clothing choices. Turn of the last century, women wearing pants was frowned upon - now it's common. Once clothing choice becomes a non-issue, they'll probably create something else to put the spotlight back on themselves, because the issue is not what they think it is.
every word, so true. how have we gotten to a place where if one is displaying ANY interest or characteristic of the opposite gender, that means you must secretly (or not secretly) want to BE that gender? in the 80's, I was a stage lighting operator for club bands on the southside of Chicago & NW Indiana (the club scene was amazing at the time). it was so unusual to see a woman doing this, everyone assumed I must be sleeping with one of the band members. (usually not, lol but I did end up meeting & marrying my first husband, lead vocals in a metal band.) I would get harassed & sometimes a bouncer would be assigned to stand next to me.
being labeled a non-conformist in any way seems almost dangerous these days. I can barely wrap my head around it. but things come full circle: my 17 yr old is waving his freak flag, with hair down to his waist, baggy pants and goofy hats. I tell him, 'go for it'; his appearance is not a battle I will ever choose. having a healthy mind and body and being accountable for yourself are what matters. he KNOWS where I stand on all the current insanity, he knows why I reject most things mainstream (be it media, sick care system, politics...)
Phil Illy is sick, pitiable, but also threatens a civil and safe society. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, must be a duck. He has set himself up to be treated like a duck.
I used to have a male friend (he has since dropped away from our group of friends) who had a what I wanna call a lipstick fetish; always wanted whatever woman he dated to wear dark or bold lipstick. he later confessed to a few of us that he also liked to cross-dress and wear lipstick himself. this is a heterosexual man who's been married twice (no kids). come to find out that his older sisters used to 'dress him up' like a girl when they were kids. how this type of thing in childhood transfers to being something that's a 'turn on', I have no idea. I do believe that a few of us (all woman, none of his male friends) knowing about it is what caused him to no longer maintain any friendships with us. sense of shame over it? idk.
As a 70yo gay man, all that I can say is that every one of us creates our culture around us. Accept me, hate me or ignore me but my world is as much about me as any of you. Younger folks than me might find my attitudes more conservative than they expect but I am at the least the sum of my experiences. Even so I can't get behind some of the stuff that I "should". I knew trannies in the Biblical sense and they are not the ones I will die in the trenches for. The culture has gone insane. It doesn't seem to have caught up between the village rumor mill and the interscat. If only everyone was as securely retired as I am there wouldn't be as much importance about what other people think.
absolutely we all create our culture around us! at our age, Kelly, you've experienced the full spectrum of cultural attitudes towards gays. when we were teens, a school teacher would get fired for just the rumor of being gay. now it seems like some degree of gender-bending is almost a requirement! and I honestly cannot keep track of it all.
I grew up with two, close male friends who are gay. late '70's, early '80's, there was still a lot stigma (or whatever you want to call it). the one I am still close with (we are both almost 63) is a gay man who is completely comfortable in his skin. he thinks this 'trans kids' stuff is insane but we have a mutual female friend who is preaching the Woke religion and using the fact that HE knew he was 'different' at a young age, to justify it. our gay friend is a talented hair/cosmetic stylist who dabbled in drag back in the '80's & approached it as a artistic performance outlet, not an identity or lifestyle. he's a gay MAN and I'm confident that he would not have appreciated some adult telling him, when he was still a child, that he needed drugs/surgery to become a woman to 'affirm' his feelings of being 'different'.
what's really confusing to me is this insistence that one is some kind of 'whatever-phobe' if you say 'whoa, wait a minute' to the medical alteration of kids who 'feel different' or are having a difficult puberty, etc. where does this whole ideology leave the gay community, when it seems like these people insist that they speak for EVERYONE who is not heterosexual. seems to me that they definitely don't speak for gays who are OUR generation. what do you think, Kelly? doesn't the current, almost militant, ideology actually conflict with whatever social gains that gays have made?
I hate to be a hater, but I can't believe that bullying did not make us what we are.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. yes, we are the product of our individual experiences. people react to bullying in different ways. for some, it makes them stronger, for others, it damages them.
what I was asking was if you believe that the trans ideologues do or should, be considered part of the larger gay community? or if they run counter
I can't speak for every gay or bisexual person of course. But a lot of the ones I do know share my disdain for transsexuals. The autogynephilic men should have stayed in the closet and the young women who can't deal with their nature and think that they would be better men than women have definitely lost the plot. Not to mention that this 57 genders nonsense and specious claims of "non-binaryness" are less-than-subtle attacks on every gay person at ease with his or her sexuality. The Nashville shooter's manifesto has just been released. Read it if you can and tell me this should be "celebrated"
thank you Kelly. yes that's what I asked. your opinion is near identical to my friend of 4 decades. couple years ago when it first started being talked about (to my knowledge anyway) about these moms cross-dressing their 8 yr olds, my friend practically went on a rant at a dinner party over it. these people are displaying mental illnesses and those that insist on 'celebrating' it are in some kind of mass psychosis. it doesn't seem to be about 'acceptance', it seems to be about militancy aimed at further polarizing our society (like we need any help with that!) Homosexual is not mental illness and it shouldn't be lumped in with this stuff.
yes I heard about the 'manifesto' (haven't read it), a few pages were 'leaked' by an alt media person & the 'authorities' are up in arms over it (the leak, not the contents!). the suppression of it is proof positive that the MSM is protecting a narrative and NOT interested in exploring the very real issues. these folks are drugged up and their minds are fucked with. how is it surprising that they can have violent mental breakdowns? but of course 'they/them' say its all from how horribly these folks are treated. well sorry/not sorry - if someone acts like a violent asshole, then that's how they get treated. we don't care about their sex life or whatever.
its my opinion that these folks are suffering from medical metabolic issues from toxic exposure, no different than my son with autism. he wasn't 'born that way', he was poisoned (and I have lab test proof of it). then you have this near-violent push to glamorize it... yikes!
my friend had a person in his circle (since deceased), a gay man who lived as a woman & was in a long-term relationship with another gay man. everybody knew he was a dude, nobody cared. no idea if he said he was trans but I kind of doubt it; never did anything medical to himself. the last thing this person wanted was to draw extra attention to himself. he lived a quiet life. the fact that these so-called 'trans activists' are the furthest thing from just 'wanting to live in society without prejudice', says a lot to me.
Sorry to be so long in replying. Been quite a day. I am intrigued that you can point to something that made your son autistic. I have been on the spectrum for as long as I remember. I was considered a "high function Aspie" until the designation became non PC. I have struggled to hide it well enough to fit in all my life with limited success. Much to the surprise of everyone that knew me well, I managed to keep a job long enough to retire with a pension. It was a near thing nearly to the very end. I can work with people. I can play nicely, but I can't stand to share my space. I became a believer in Christ in my 50's but could not stand even a small church for very long. My take on autism may be unique as am I myself. From the inside I see it a bit different. Did a vax cause your son's problems? I have taken many vaccinations since I got the Polio sugar cube in the 1950's but I am REALLY hesitant to take any more.
Illy attending Genspect in a vivid blue dress is similar, imo, to males who try and get on as volunteers in domestic violence shelters. He may not have any nefarious intentions, but he obviously has a need for attention. Does his presence help the goals of Genspect? My lay opinion is No!
Such a reasoned and rational person you are.
My first exposure to a cross dresser was an eye opener, and I think I contrast people like Illy with the young man I came to know when he sought mental health service at the clinic where I worked. I did his intake prior to an appointment with the elderly psychiatrist. The young man, who presented as a Southern “good old boy” told his story: As a member of the armed services with a duty post in Viet Nam, he happened to pick up a magazine in which there was an article about a cross dresser. He described having periodic overwhelming urges to dress as a woman, and he would indulge the urge, which was overwhelming, in his mother’s closet. For many years, he thought he was the only person in the world with the urge to cross dress, and only upon discovering the article did he learn he was not the only one. Say what you will about old doctors, I was thoroughly taken by the compassion and honesty displayed by the doctor. He did not advise therapy. He did not prescribe any antipsychotic medication. What he did suggest was for the young man to go to a large city, perhaps New Orleans, and find a club or such where he would find others like him, indulge his fetish (if that’s what it was), and return home to live his “normal” life between indulgences. This man, Illy who parades around seeking attention seems like a fake, and is a mockery to the real people with real issues that interfere with their lives.
In a perfect world, with perfect knowledge, we'd have no problem distinguishing the "eccentric but harmless" from the "dangerous". Since we don't have that, as a society we are forced to make choices where we limit the rights of some to engage in behavior-out-of-the ordinary to reduce the risk and cognitive load to the majority of the populace. For example, some people would ban ordinary people walking around town with AR-15s slung over their shoulders, while others see that as a perfectly harmless (even patriotic) activity.
This seems unfair and kinda sucks, but as Thomas Sowell said "There are no solutions, only tradeoffs".
As alluded to in this post, we need to question what "must" be accepted, and why. Why must anyone accept anything? Yes, accept speed limit laws, even if you don't like them. Respect other people's right to exist, same as yours. But accept them into your heart or your mind? That's a personal choice, and NO one has any businesses making claims on what one must accept.
Does everyone have a right to be a Catholic? Of course. Should everyone WANT to be a Catholic? No. Does everyone have to like and respect Catholicism? No. Replace Catholicism with Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Rotarian or Shriner, and it all still works the same. Replace it with gay, lesbian, trans and it STILL works out same.
It is absurd to think that anyone can be forced to accept anything. If you hold a gun to my head, I'll say that I accept whatever it is you tell me to accept. But now you have to continue to hold that gun to my head, because the moment you pull it away...
I have no concern with the guy in the post. He apparently isn't holding a gun to anyone's head. But there are those who do, metaphorically speaking. I don't care how liberal or conservative they profess to be, they are my enemy. I reject them.
I see a bloke in a dress. It causes me no confusion at all. This is akin to cosplaying Spiderman at Comicon; I expect it in the space it occurs in. If Genspect were saying "No men in dresses" at their conferences, they'd be being hypocritical. I'm getting the pearl-clutching vibe we've seen in all the "Violence in x, y, or z" hooplas of the the past from this post. The research sends the Mary Whithouse types packing everytime, I suspect it would here. Bloke in a Dress=Lass in Suit and Tie; if you think there is some meaningful difference I have to suspect the problem is you; not the bloke or the lass.
except he's NOT Spiderman at Comicon, unless said cosplayer does so on the job, in the grocery store, etc. he's a hetero man who apparently cross-dresses all the time and felt the need to write a 600 page book full of mental gymnastics to describe it. its those mental gymnastics that Heather takes issue with. his need to draw even MORE attention to himself, brought him to a informational & support event for families of those with gender dysphoria. he doesn't seem to have gender dysphoria; he seems to be plugging a book.
That’s my take on him also.
yup. self-promotion. click bait.
"Genspect envisions a world in which “people are free to present and express themselves in a manner that is healthy, safe and not constrained by gender stereotypes.”"
Their conference; their rules. Your house; your rules. A public space? Depends on the local community what the local community would find acceptable. Current climate you might find yourself in the minority in a small town. A bloke in a dress is making a spectacle of himself; but what exactly is he doing to harm you? He's just different and you are just bigoted.
I don't recall anyone accusing the man of 'harming' anyone.
tossing around the label of 'bigot' whenever ANYTHING is thoughtfully criticized, is disingenuous, at best. and its also part of the actual problem.
this dude can do whatever the heck he wants. he obviously doesn't care about the opinions of others regarding it. I don't care one way or the other and it doesn't sound like Heather cares either. if other's don't 'like' it or find it inappropriate, and say so, that makes them bigots?
if someone walked into a church service and started screaming obscenities, and people complained, would that make them 'bigots'?
please rethink your flippant use of the term bigot. or don't. I don't care. it certainly doesn't 'harm' me or anyone. its just an inaccurate label in this context.
Ick.
Men invading women’s spaces. Sounds like rape culture to me.
I am in both ‘camps’ over Phil Illy at the Genspect conference. I was not there but still I find his sensory-loaded presence and associated meanings intriguing, like an art form. It has made me look, and consider further ideas and messages on both sides (within the same camp) and so I hope Phil Illy will bring good. I believe that he wants to.
I think ‘queer theory’ started as more of an interesting art form than a doctrine, and so I am also cautious. I also tend to be untrusting of exhibitions of supposed ‘femininity’, usually from women. I prefer a more ‘functional’ presentation for myself. However, it is important to remember that clothing and outer appearance are also forms of creative expression. I don’t believe Phil Illy was ‘getting off’ at the conference.
Phil Illy brings a hypothesis to the table that seems like it could contribute to understanding the dangerous social contagion and medicalisation of Trans. So why have I have not yet been drawn to reading his book?
As well as my (above) bias, the last Darkhorse podcast helped me to clarify that this is because I agree (with Heather and Brett) that latching on to another / alternative diagnosis is so unhelpful. Why are people looking for diagnosis and medicalisation - to anchor themselves, through categorisation, to help them in areas where they feel ‘blind’?
I share other’s concerns about paving the way for transhumanism, though we are already integrated with technology in many ways. I advocate, through my work as an Occupational Therapist, for increased embodied, sensory-motor experiences, largely as an antidote to this - while constantly aware of the struggles of getting enough of this for myself and my own family!
Autism may be a useful shorthand through which to understand clusters of difficulties, but it is being overused in ways that are damaging, while the underlying individual difficulties impacting on limitations in functional participation in daily activities, in my experience, are often not addressed, leaving those with these clusters of difficulties vulnerable to medicalisation.
As well as medicalising gender non-conformity, many children and young people now get concurrent ASD and ADHD diagnoses. Pharmacological doors are ‘kindly’ held open.
Addressing functional participation challenges within the context of, and with increased awareness of, our sensorily hyper-novel environments, I believe, should be the focus in responding to rising diagnoses (as well as considering other hyper-novel factors).
I have heard Phil Illy talk, and his character seems open to exploration. I would like to understand more about what he does, rather than just who he is. I am also really hoping that discussion and debate will continue going forward. Maybe I (and others) should read Phil Illy’s book before making further judgement?!