At the risk of sounding paranoid, I feel like the trans stuff is the least of our worries... if the elites of the culture (academics, politicians, megacorporations) can get us all to spout such an obvious lie as "Transwomen are women", they can get us to say ANYTHING.

I think this may be one of the hidden goals of this whole fascist movement- to force us all to pay lip service to obvious lies.

[–] Lipsy i/just/can't 16 points

Interesting that the article author thinks this stuff was barely even a blip on the radar in the late '90's...as though nobody then could have seen what was coming in a couple decades.

The thing is, Janice Raymond laid it ALL out—the medicalization of "male" and "female", the incursions of men into womanhood and their dicks into women's spaces—in The Transsexual Empire, written in 1979.

It blew up after the gay marriage fight was won

[–] Lipsy i/just/can't 2 points

Oh hey excellent point. That makes a ton of sense.

I'm sure lots of TRA types are on a lifelong mission to aVeNgE tHeMsElVeS upon society for dating to rubber-stamp, especially, Lesbian relationships and marriages.

The media, academia and other cultural institutions ceaselessly promote trans ideology.

But why?

They don't comment on who is behind it or the reason for it.

I don't know if it is primarily money with pharma or med, or personal agenda with likes of Pritzker, I always here Soros' name.

I personally think it’s because TIMs are wildly overrepresented in tech (for a host of reasons), and big tech currently commands an enormous amount of power.

Yes, totally true in tech and social media (so reddit, twitter, wikipedia is all affected). But academia? Journalism?

[–] Riothamus scrote 4 points Edited

Pushing trans ideology via academic donations and well-paid Useful Idiots is a surprisingly cost-effective means of dividing the working classes and suppressing the formation of class consciousness.

[–] ProMoleratWaxer #1 Worst Poster 9 points

The same reason they promote diet culture, "grindset", self made millionaire books, makeup, plastic surgery, erasure of any non-aspiring bangmaid women, erasure of visible non-reproductive couplings. Pay money, at least try to appear as if you want to produce children and "if you try hard/pay more you can be anything!" is the basic exploitative model of most things.

Also TIMs are the quite good workhorses for a company:

  • averagely undesirable /appear delusional so sexual harrassment is less of an issue as it can be covered up easier
  • Don't have children so no maternity leave, no issues with childcare, no issues with menstruation/gestation
  • die before retirement has to be paid
  • You can have a male making all the women uncomfortable and unable to organise against the opposite sex effectively
  • Tend to be misogynistic and ally with male coworkers on account
  • Gender quota met with a 100% male workforce

die before retirement has to be paid


Gender quota met with a 100% male workforce

Maybe it was someone here who said her boyfriend's tech company was thrilled when someone went MTF because their demographics changed with no effort.

But still, why academia? Why all at once?

[–] Archie 4 points Edited

I would be wary with any claim about Soros. He's been a target for far-right conspiracy theorists for decades because he backs humanitarian NGOs who help developing countries and refugees, so he represents everything they think is a danger to them.

Not that he couldn't be involved of course, but I'd be very careful who is saying that and what evidence supports it.

It's a matter of fact that Open Society Foundations has given a lot of money to advance transgenderism: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants/past?filter_keyword=trans

It's also true that Soros' name is often evoked for antisemitism. I think this is actually an example of how nutjobs on the right, and the reaction to them on the left --making the influence of billionaires a conspiracy theory-- helps to uphold the status quo.

I noticed that as well. Very much naming no names here, or even exploring who that 18% are, beyond the assumption that they are the elite because of the speed it's going into law. Why the reticence to explore?

Typically, non-binary characters in TV shows and movies possess far greater moral authority than heterosexual or homosexual ones.

Italics mine.

Where do they find writers this ignorant of the subject they are covering?

" Unless this fantasy is seriously challenged it is only a matter of time before the trans view of the world becomes the norm."

This is totally scary.

I mean...yes. But also no. It will never be the norm that men start wanting to have sex with ugly mentally ill men in dresses. Even woke bro Willie types have zero interest in dating much less having sex with TIMs. No one actually believes TWAW and that will never change. I agree that the fantasy needs to be challenged because forcing people to pretend they believe this bullshit is corrosive in and of itself, not to mention the massive detrimental effect the movement is having on girls and women. But the trans view of the world will never be the norm.

[–] MiMi2013 10 points Edited

It's so the 99% 'know their place'.

That's there's not even a pretense of equality before the law any more ; there's the wealthy and powerful, whose daughters are protected, and there's the rest of us, whose daughters can be forced to parade in the nude for the amusement of any boy or man sociopathic enough to pretend to be a "trans woman"(who by definition are male), and hence in dire need of access to the girl's showers and restrooms .

It's to terrorize the absolute poorest and least powerful of us , knowing our wives, sisters, daughters, OURSELVES, can be locked behind bars in a small room with a fully intact, violent, entitled man.

That's the ultimate reason. It's the TRUE reason known ony to a very few people so wealthy and so powerful that their names generally don't make the news very often. The wealthy and powerful ones in the media and in politics that are below them may think they're pushing an enlightened and compassionate stance : But that's the reality behind the 'fluff pieces'.

It's psychological and sometimes physical torture of the poor and powerless especially (and that includes even people who are [globally speaking] comparatively well off).

The thing is the "rich and wealthy"'s daughter's aren't protected. They are being surrendered to this ideology just like everyone else's. Look at the Ivy League, exclusive prep schools, media & entertainment -- children across the the wealth and privilege spectrum are transing at a ridiculous clip. The only places where it hasn't taken hold are in conservative religious communities.

This is very well put. I believe that much of the war on women is also a war on the poor and what we used to refer to as the working class.

For example, outlawing abortion hurts women of all classes, but it hurts poor women more, and it does not leave working-class men unscathed. Those of them who are good men, dedicated to helping support their families, are far more compliant workers willing to take shit from the boss after learning their wife is pregnant with yet another child they cannot comfortably afford.

The elite war on biological sex

Transgender ideology is relentlessly promoted by the elites – despite huge opposition from ordinary people.

For thousands of years, the biological distinction between male and female was considered a simple fact of life. But no more. According to a survey by pollsters Rasmussen Reports, a significant minority of Americans reject the claim that male and female are the only two genders.

While 75 per cent of those polled agree that there are only two genders, 18 per cent disagree. Eighteen per cent may be a clear minority, but as a proportion of Americans it is still a substantial number of people.

Moreover, this minority view has considerable influence over public life and government policy. In the US, people can change the gender identity on their passports without documentation; male-born transgender athletes are now allowed to compete in girls’ and women’s sports; and schools constantly expose children to transgender ideology. And all of this is taking place in spite of popular opposition.

Today’s political and cultural elites are not only indifferent to the views of the majority on sex and gender – they consider these views to be ignorant and prejudiced. Indeed, these elites believe they have a duty to educate and ‘raise the awareness’ of their culturally illiterate inferiors.

The media, academia and other cultural institutions ceaselessly promote trans ideology. In Western societies, celebrities, media stars and commentators possess a monopoly over how gender is framed. HBO’s highly publicised Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts is a case in point. Because of her views on sex and gender, Harry Potter creator JK Rowling was infamously excluded from the show, appearing only in a few snippets of archive footage. This effectively told the world that Rowling’s views on sex are unacceptable. The Harry Potter cast members were also mobilised to promote the message that if you love Harry Potter then you should take a stand against Rowling’s views.

In recent years trans ideology has been all over our TV screens. Indeed, as one commentator at Salon recently boasted, ‘2021 was an extraordinary year of making the non-binary ordinary… More inclusive… pop culture led the charge in busting the gender binary.’

The non-binary identity, in particular, is today celebrated as a cultural ideal. Typically, non-binary characters in TV shows and movies possess far greater moral authority than heterosexual or homosexual ones. Netflix’s Sex Education is paradigmatic in this respect. In the third series, we’re introduced to Cal, a non-binary student, whose dramatic struggle for recognition is meant to show that traditional ideas of gender have a harmful impact on young people. And so Sex Education sets about discrediting conventional notions about sex and gender.

Or take the non-binary character Taylor Mason (played by Asia Kate Dillon who also identifies as non-binary in real life) in Billions. Mason personifies the cultural elite’s fantasy of a non-binary person. She is the most nuanced, multi-dimensional and sensitive person in the series. She is smart and intelligent, while the other characters are extraordinarily shallow and their relationships are dysfunctional.

This cultural valorisation of non-binary and trans identities has played a significant role in altering many people’s perception of biological sex. And it has had a particularly pronounced effect on young people. At school they are encouraged to view their gender as fluid. And in our culture more broadly, young people are routinely invited to disregard the sex they were ‘assigned at birth’ when constructing their identities.

That our cultural oligarchy has so speedily and so willingly traded in the scientifically validated view of biological sex for a non-binary, genderfluid fantasy speaks profoundly to its lack of moral foundation. Unless this fantasy is seriously challenged it is only a matter of time before the trans view of the world becomes the norm.

Back in 1997, when the first Harry Potter novel was published, the ideas promoted by the trans lobby had hardly any influence on society. In a very short period, however, that has all changed. Views that would once have been dismissed as a symptom of biological illiteracy have gained significant support among the upper echelons of society and have been thoroughly internalised by the cultural elites.

It is not too late to stop this descent into the mire of identity confusion. The vast majority of people are concerned about the corrosive impact of trans ideology. The problem is that they lack a means to express their concerns. Helping this majority find its voice is one of the most important challenges of our time.

Cited survey: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/public_surveys/most_americans_side_with_j_k_rowling_only_two_genders

A bit off topic but I don't really get Spiked! Is it a conservative magazine? I read across political spectrum but like to know where the source leans. I looked up their About once and it wasn't too clear. Is Brendan O'Neil a conservative talking head or more a free speech advocate for all like the Triggernometry guys?

[–] Lipsy i/just/can't 8 points Edited

Ahhaha i'm glad you asked, because it's one of those "I couldn't make this shit up if I tried" kinda things.

According to Wikipedia and other sources, Spiked-online was born as a resurrected version—porting over the enfie management/editorial group and most of the writers, apparently—of Living Marxism, the official periodical of the UK Communist Party (yes, really!), which was sued out of existence for libel[§]. It's hilarious because, apparently, spiked is now seen as part of the vanguard of British libertarianism 😂

It's horseshoe theory in a case study, really: The actual real-world manifestations of communism, fascism, and libertarianism rlly aren't all that different.

(Libertarianism isn't really a thing, anws—because whenever "libertarians" encounter a situation where their freedom to swing their fist comes into conflict with someone else's freedom to have their nose in that place, they mysteriously alws seem to side with themselves. Coincidence?? Put another way, "libertarian" really means "libertarian for me, fascist for thee"—really not all that different in from how communism actually works in the real world, with the central planners just taking the place of the libertarians.)


NB that little happy-ass political analysis isn't meant to apply to this article specifically. 😂


[§]: rlly not all that surprising because UK libel laws are BATSHIT INSANE in their over-inclusivity and consequent dampening of free speech against anyone rich and/or connected enough to mount a libel suit.