The "trans" cult comes with a built-in reaction to any and all disagreement as "hate." Biology is hate. Parental concern is hate. Resistance to surgery is hate.
Any pushback, however logical, however well-intended, is "transphobia." Kids whose parents don't "affirm" their new "gender identities" are to be hated as "transphobes" and escaped, sometimes with the help of mesmerized state agencies who regard any and all claims of "trans" as legitimate.
Affirming agencies like WPATH are now embracing the "eunuch identity" as warmly as the two actual sexes, and acceptance of pedophilia is on the way.
We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons. And many medical and psychiatric professionals who ought to know better have accepted the "civil rights" view of "trans" instead of allowing themselves to see the sickness.
At least Goth produced some really great music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4Xu2mx66Cg; "trans" has produced nothing whatever of any value, unless you count the removal of some really shallow and stupid kids from the gene pool.
Paternal authority: I also remember 𝑀𝑦 𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑆𝑜𝑛𝑠 with a tall widower dad played by Fred MacMurray whose rapport with his boys was anything but authoritative.
But distrust of authority is everywhere now, in the winter of the Fourth Turning. I fear Spring may never come again.
"We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons. And many medical and psychiatric professionals who ought to know better have accepted the "civil rights" view of "trans" instead of allowing themselves to see the sickness."
In what sense? What are the "wrong reasons"?
As a bigot who opposes trans for several reasons, let me defend bigotry. There is "normal" and there is "perverted". That's not bigotry - that is fact. Do whatever you want in the bedroom, but specific things are normal, and others are not.
There is a "ladder of acceptance" for behavior: Punishment/banning, tolerance, acceptance, promotion. Starting in the 1970s, society as a whole move from punishment to tolerance for gay relations. In the 1990s, such activity moved to acceptance. Today, we are full into promotion, where those who do NORMAL heterosexual relations are in the position of having to justify normality.
With trans, the process is accelerating. As recently as 2010 or so, it was punishment, and the movement along the ladder has been rocket-fueled - now many schools are full into promotion, with GSA clubs which promote the lifestyle as "edgy" and "brave".
There is a reason for the word "perverse" - it implies that there is a damaging quality to an activity. This is absolutely the case with trans - taking powerful drugs that have no place in the body of the wrong sex can have life-long consequences. The use of moral language is long-overdue with trans. It's not a "this or that" choice. It's the choice to damage your body and future prospects to get back at your parents.
Since gay folks have decided to help the trans, I now blame them. Gay is the new or renewed perversion.
I scarcely know where to begin. Let's start with your Fallacy of Polysemy, on the word normal.
black hair is "normal"; most of the world's population is black-haired
To have two legs is "normal"; fewer means an accident, amputation, or deformity.
You are using gay in the latter sense when it belongs in the former. This is an extremely fundamental failure of logic.
Not sure where you get the idea that a plurality of gays side with "trans." Most of us are sick of them, revile them, don't want them in our public places.
But we are in agreement about the harm of "trans." However given that much of science and academia have been "captured" by the civil rights view, and ignoring the role of social contagion in its immense growth (not to mention the enormous profitability of "affirmation"), we have our work cut out for us fighting it.
A parent whose child announces a new "gender identity" should see its smartphone splintered, its computer moved where a parent can watch, and grounded until 18. Zero tolerance.
Why aren't gays and lesbians more vocal in their rejections of "trans" though? I have several lesbian friends (who reassure me that my cross-sex ideating ex-husband was incorrect in his claim that I'm actually a lesbian, after he fathered our 2 sons and he clearly did not understand the female process of giving birth, tho he was there both times) who have said they "have to tolerate" men who claim to be lesbian in their social groups, originated for and by lesbians. One of these friends told me the man who imposes himself on a hiking group of same sex attracted women is constantly contacting them regarding his "suicide thoughts" and invites himself to stay over at one of their homes. When I asked why they can't just ghost him from their notices for hikes, she said they are all afraid of the TRAs he might set upon them. I, the flaming straight ex-wife, want to do a seminar for these women.
I don't know why you think gays are promoting the trans movement. Most gay men I know oppose transgenderism. The idiots in the media and politics have tried to create a "LGBTQ+ community" which is as fictional as most other "facts" promoted by those people. I think it's defamatory to link gay and "trans/queer" together, because it leads to the mistaken notion that they are "allies." Obviously there are some clueless gay people who spout the nonsense, but there are many more heterosexuals on that bandwagon. Most thoughtful gay men realize the trans movement is undoing decades of progress for the gay rights movement.
I understand why you blame gays for the trans catastrophe. Any group that allows itself to be associated with the castration of mentally ill children deserves to be held in contempt. But please stop using the sophomoric LGB or LGBTQ acronyms. Those are fictional creations of the feverish minds of political consultants and the media that have little to do with reality. I am a gay man and I repeatedly and publicly repudiate transexual ideology. Many other prominent gay men publicly repudiate it too. https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/22/dave-rubin-says-trans-movement-is-more-anti-gay-than-any-other-group/
It seems unfair to argue with anyone who would cite a risible publication like The Atlantic, but nothing in the world is due SOLELY to any one thing. The primary or original cause of the trans catastrophe was the Civil Rights Act that encouraged politicians (mostly Democrats) to pander to various "victim" groups who would vote for them in exchange for their pandering. This will continue ad infinitum until the Civil Rights Act is repealed. https://www.amazon.com/Origins-Woke-Corporate-Identity-Politics/dp/0063237210
Even the article you cited (risible as it may be) discussed the discomfort gay people felt with about being linked to a trans "caboose." I concur that gays and lesbians have allowed themselves to be used by unscrupulous politicians to advance a destructive political agenda that will inevitably undermine the advances they made in the past.
Despite the abuse I suffered (now confirmed in my data of 55 other trans widows) I remain the eternal optimist. I tell random mothers of new babies I encounter to protect their child from these lies (their eyes go wide, in my too "progressive" town, but they listen, don't yell or attack me) as he or she grows up. I also talk to random seatmates on trains, buses, etc, and find that if they don't have multi-color hair, they agree with me. So many have thanked me for stating normal, logical, scientific facts. I tell them to pass it on. Recent polling has found that those who don't support "pronouns" in schools have increased from 54% to 58% of Americans. Long road ahead, keep on truckin'
"We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons."
Well said! This is a painful part of the current mess we are in.
It was interesting dealing with the culture of parental authority in the privileged town in which my kids grew up in the 1990s and 2000s.
Parents had too much $. Many parents were doing drugs. Birthday parties ended up being a completion to outdo the last one.
I told my kids one very simple truth "You are a homeless person living in my house by my good graces. As long as you understand that, we'll be good". It had an element of jest. My wife thought that was a bit brutal. Other parents raised their eyes when I told them.
My kids would also use the "but so and so gets to do" when I told them they couldn't do something. My response, "I call the parents and see whether they'll adopt you".
They at times would in jest say "I'm gonna call the police on you". I responded with "Just so you're clear, they take you away, not me".
I also cut off the competition on spending for birthdays and what clothes they could buy. My wife (I was married to a woman then) started having them complain about where she would buy clothes for them. I made it simple. We gave them a budget of $200 every six months for clothes and anything else. Everything else they need to pay for themselves. They could decide how they wanted to spend it. Their friend parents asked how I got away with that. I asked them why I couldn't.
I also didn't tell my kids they had to go to high school. I did say that if they wanted to drop out, they would need to get a job and pay me rent.
One teacher in my daughter's Junior High told her she should drop out of Spanish because she wasn't doing well. My daughter tried to use this as justification for her dropping Spanish. I hauled the teacher in front of the school principal. I told the principal that no teacher should ever be telling my kids whether they should take a class. The only thing they should be doing is working with me to help the kid succeed. The principal was on my side. The principal faced pressure from parents to make sure their kids got good grades. The principal and I agree that was just setting kids up for failure. Grades in junior high don't count to anything in the long run. They just teach the kids how the world works before they get to high school and college. Now of course high school and colleges are trying to drop grades.
Same with paying for college. I told my kids I would pay for college if they maintained a "b" average. If they fell below a "b", they would owe me the money back. I also did not pay for an incidentals (e.g. drinking) at college. My kids got jobs to pay for.
It's not hard to have parental authority. Just have to do it. My kids today (in their 30s) view they were lucky and still are to have me as their dad. Even though I'm actively gay now.
I didn't have to deal with the trans issue. I don't think it would be as complicated as people seem to suggest. Its no different than dealing with drinking, dropping out, etc. If my kid comes to me and says they want to be the opposite sex and change their name and pronoun, I would respond with "Oh really? Tell me more about what's going on with you". I would also be clear on the implications of that both in their school, ability to participate in sports, go to the bathroom, date, have kids, etc. It will totally change their life. I would make sure they had all the facts.
I guess it was easy for me to have that perspective. I knew I was attracted to guys in my teens. I got married to a woman because I didn't want my sexuality to define how I lived my life. I'm actively gay today but not a fan of much of the gay culture. Too many gays tend to play victim to society. That doesn't help them.
The bottom line lesson for parents to teach their kids is to never play victim. They are not victims of peer pressure to conform to gender norms. They are not a victim of gender dysphoria they may have. The norms and gender dysphoria are real parts of living. You can decide how you want to respond to them. Choose wisely because it will have significant effects on the rest of your life.
Botton line, I don't have empathy for people who are trying to figure out how to "regain their parental authority". You never lost it. You just chose not to act on it.
Ugh. Perverse and perverted are not synonyms. And, there's a strong pushback from many LGBs concerning the Trans movement, especially youth medical interventions. A Trans is not gay, and vice versa. Many gays are very glad they were not subjected to the extremism encouraged now. They are happy to be men and women, albeit attracted differently.
I hear that about how gay/lesbian do not support trans. However, I don't see that in public. In public, there is no separation between gay/lesbian and trans. That's why I more and more question gay/lesbian, and call those identities part of the trannie delusional system.
You are undoubtedly on the right track. The authority of fathers has been under attack for at least 100 years and their ability to regain that authority is compromised and not even desired by most of them (even as they live out their frustrated lives).
In defense of parents-parents can try to instill authority all they like--if they taught their kids to listen to what teachers and doctors and (thought to be reliable) newspapers say, and the kids are in school 8 or more hours a day, for years and years...if they are taught not to think certain things because they will harm others (the list changes so frequently that they are likely afraid to think without looking around to make sure that what they want to say is approved already)...young people are getting brainwashed by those who were supposed to teach them about logic, facts, all that. Kids are taught to trust Wikipedia in some schools. It's nonsense on this topic.
If instead of saying "because I said so," which, if transfered to someone unreliable like a demagogue is a prescription for disaster, one says, "because it is wrong, for these reasons" or because it is incorrect. because it is not how the world is, not how biology works--one is insisting upon reality. Directly. But I don't think it matters. If either worked it would be great.
I think they are giddy with the feeling that they have escaped reality and everything that they fear about growing up. I think they are being told by those they were taught to respect that what they believe is true. They've got the ticket as Ritchie says in "The Lost Boys" (thank you for being in that fantastic documentary, glad it is short enough that people will more easily find time to watch it!!).
That's a big difference with Goth. You didn't have US major medical societies out there saying that getting piercings and tattoos were the most constructive way to approach impending adulthood. They have authorities, doctors, etc., who are falsely saying that they are following science and external reality.
It takes a lot of sophistication for anyone, including a young person who will be thrown out of their community if their thoughts waver, to step back and examine the evidence. Many adults can't seem to grasp it either. It's utterly insane that the lies have gotten so far and lasted so long.
It would end tomorrow if the media or medical journals would step up.
Excellent post, I totally agree with all of it! Unfortunately, the media and medical associations now ARE the the Punks, Goths and Non-Binaries who have never grown up.
It's completely unclear why these institutions think they should throw away all of the ways of doing things, which gave them legitimacy and authority in the first place, to misrepresent and/or explicitly lie about the evidence and to encourage these young people to have these medical interventions. In one talk I saw the speaker said it's because they don't actually care about this population, that's why these young people are getting such garbage care.
My impression is that the majority of woke activists do "care" in an abstract kind of way about all of the victim classes they think they are helping. Some of the gender activists appear to be too narcissistic to care about anybody, and some of the gender treatment professionals are probably in it for the money, but most of the young activists are very emotionally involved in "caring" about certain victims.
What is happening is that woke ideologues, who are mostly under 30 years old, have taken over the healthcare associations, the psychology departments and the medical schools. Many of the older liberal/radicals who worked in those places have fostered this, and they are now allowing the young people to tell them what to think and do. Clinical research is no longer happening as such, and clinical practice is being warped into ideological practice in all of the healthcare professions.
This past month I have been spending my "free time" seeking online courses that I can use to meet my continuing education requirement for licensure renewal, which happens biannually. Two years ago I was easily able to find courses that were free of ideological corruption. (I didn't know at the time that there was such a thing). This year, it was very difficult to find the kind of peer reviewed articles and clinical presentations that have been normal in my profession for the past century or more.
Some gems I encountered in the classes I took this week included:
A middle aged psychologist from California taught her live audience of mental health professionals that, "We know now. of course, that there are certain things we should not say. One of those is 'master bedroom.' We don't say that because some people have said that certain groups could be offended by that."
The same instructor, in response to a workshop participant's question: "When should we confront clients about their racism?" said, "If they make a racist remark once I let it go, but if it happens again, I say something about it."
In a research article, the authors freely violated the most basic rule that research subjects have to be randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups. This maneuver is done so that the treatment and non-treatment groups start out roughly equal with respect to what is being studied, e.g., level of depression. Differences in outcomes between the groups are then more likely to be the result of the treatment than to pre-existing differences between the groups. In the study I was reading about, the researchers created one group out of people who expressed interest in getting therapy for their depression, and another out of people who declined to join. The results were that the therapy group mostly showed improvements in mood, while the untreated one did not. The authors felt fine about saying that their study shows their therapy program is an effective treatment for depression. They said they expected criticism on the grounds that the two groups of subjects may have differed before the treatment they were given, but the authors dismissed that valid criticism on the grounds that they weren't following guidelines for evidence-based therapy research.
One of my favorites was, "As postmodern therapists we know that the future is socially constructed, and clients can create their own narratives about how it will go."
Fantastic article (and thanks for Colin for publishing it.)
FWIW, I would like to offer a slightly different perspective from a family affected by ROGD. My husband and I are absolutely on the same page about not using male pronouns for our FtM daughter. Same goes for her chosen male name.
I would say we are a united front when dealing with her. We decided early on there would be no big conversations, ultimatums or grand pronouncements unless my husband and I are both there.
But behind the scenes, we are dealing with this in completely different ways. I am in the parent support groups (and yes, it’s almost all moms), and online forums, reading and learning and making connections. Also strategizing.
He deals with what’s in front of him, as I’ve come to put it. He asks questions about her life (she’s 20) and is kind and inquiring, without being a doormat.
Basically, I tell him about things I find outline, if I think it’s important for him to know.
This difference probably has to do with our personalities. But it is helpful. He’s not filling his head with the toxic garbage that is also in the online world. He’s there for support in the moment, for both me and my daughter.
I completely agree with every word of your article, Dr. Burgo! I am a colleague living in Portland, and one of my specialties is providing psychological services to police officers. About 25 years ago, an officer told me he had come to the conclusion that Portland is a haven for "people with authority issues."
Looking back on my own participation in the massive antiwar demonstrations of the Sixties and Seventies, it is clear to me that much of my rage at the time was literally focused on my parents, teachers and other authorities that I deemed "oppressive."
The main difference I see between then and now is that the adults in charge pretty much did hold the line when the revolution went too far. So did we, for that matter. I recall that my circle of friends, all SDS members, were shocked when a group of our activist leaders announced that they were taking the revolution in a violent direction. We had an agitated series of conversations about it, in which we talked about our fears, moral conflicts, and our unwillingness to sacrifice our graduate school and career plans. And none of us did--it was the end of SDS for most of us.
The authority of parents and other authority figures has been undermined for a few generations now in our culture. We can see how many Americans are literally not even growing up anymore. At the same time that young people reject parental authority, they live out a prolonged childhood in their parents' basements. Parents who have rejected adulthood and authority roles their whole lives identify too much with adolescent rebellion.
Decades ago, a friend of mine had a poster on his office wall that said, "To punish me for my contempt for authority, Fate turned me into one." Quote attributed to Albert Einstein, whose portrait was on the poster.
Excellent piece, I'll need to check out Gidget now! One thing I'd push back on is that, while it's understandable for parents to sometimes pull out the "because I said so" in desperation at not being able to get their point across, it's ultimately to be avoided. I don't think my parents ever did that with me or my brother, and I'm glad they didn't because it would likely have made me lose a certain amount of respect for them. Given that kids are naturally higher in reactance, it would not surprise me if that were a common response to being told "because I told you" which needs to be overcome in due course. As best portrayed in Matilda, such justifications are rife for abuse, and to me an elder worth respecting is one who can articulate why what they're saying is worth following. And if you can't, then work on it while also giving your kids the liberty to learn firsthand the lessons you failed to communicate verbally. Obviously with something as dire as medical transition, that's not really an option, but my hope is that with more competent parenting that kids will not be so psychologically disregulated as to be susceptible to gender ideology.
And that brings me to another point: competent elders. Most elders give advice based on their own lives, which in the past was fine since society wasn't changing at such a rapid pace as to make their advice obsolete. But given how many elders continued to, for example, go on and on about getting a college degree because of what amounted to "that's what I did" or "that's what everyone else is doing to get a good life," it just doesn't inspire the same level of confidence when elders basically recite what they did instead of tailoring their advice to the circumstances present for that kid. This is only one example, but it's a major one that we're all having to grapple with now. So in a way, I'm saying that the loss of respect for elders is warranted in a lot of cases, and my hope is that people will be a little bit more thoughtful when advising the youth in their lives going forwards.
"Authoritative parenting" has been the style recommended since I was in college (Sixties). This means that that parents explain rules to kids on an age-appropriate basis. Two year olds get a lot less explanation than 16 year olds. Adolescents need to learn how to be responsibly independent, and it is normal for them to pushback. Pushback should never result in them feeling that parents have no boundaries. Parental authority means that the final decision is made by the parent, and it is because the parents have a better concept of what is in a child's best interests than the child does. Even when the parent is wrong, the mutual understanding that the parent provides the safety of limits is more important than mistaken judgments on daily matters. "Authoritarian parenting" means that explanations are not necessarily offered for parental decisions. This does not necessarily imply destructiveness on the part of the parent. Strict parents who prioritize their childrens' well being over their own ego needs generally raise healthy children who felt safe and cared about. Abusive and negligent parenting happens in homes that are authoritarian and in homes that are permissive. In these cases the parent is prioritizing his/her self interest, e.g., to be liked, to be "right," to fit in with the kids' subculture, to have a weaker person to oppress, or to be able to hang out on social media all day and ignore the kids altogether.
I suppose I should've explicitly mentioned, though it could be tacitly assumed, that of course you won't be able to treat a young child the same as when they're older. I have no issue with authoritative parenting as long as you have a parent who is willing to take responsibility for when they're wrong. If they don't, as the kids become privy to the fallibility of their parents, they won't have much reason to continue to believe that their parents have a better concept of the best interest of the child. I'd say that my parents practiced authoritative parenting, but I was also given the room to criticize them in ways that, on occasion, would make them change their behavior or give me more liberty.
Refusing to take responsibility and admitting to being wrong is basically a very weak, self-centered behavior. I would see this as a parent (or spouse) prioritizing their need for ego security over the needs of the child. I'm happy to hear that your parents delivered such a good balance of structure and freedom for you. I wish they all would.
Yes, while I've made my reservations clear, I've been trying to be better about expressing my appreciation for them as I've come to realize how lucky I was.
It's a good idea to give your parents credit while they are still here. My parents have been gone for a long time, but I am still learning to appreciate wisdom they offered that I dismissed 50 or more years ago.
The answer to this mess is NOT to reassert the authority of men over their wives or female partners and children, i.e. to reinforce male supremacy or yes, patriarchy. Rather, we should ask why is it that so many girls (it is mostly girls) are running away from womanhood into the arms of a cult-like highly profitable industry that promotes extreme body modification, sex denialism and the false promise of “gender affirmation”? Perhaps it is because women and girls are still deemed “lesser”, as sex objects and subordinates with less power and opportunity in the world than males, while the myth is that we are all equal now. The irony is that transgenderism disappears the category of sex so we can’t even discuss these continuing gaps between our rhetoric and reality of continued social and economic inequality between the sexes and continued widespread existence of male violence against women. If you are unhappy, its just that you were born in the “wrong” body, aren’t really female,and you can just take hormones and undergo surgeries and “fix” it. An individual medicalized “solution” to a comtinuing social problem.
Somehow, society as a whole has lost the ability to explain why being a NORMAL adult has advantages. Somehow, society as a whole has pathologized puberty. Perhaps it is the internet, in which every bad thing gets publicity.
There is a strain of "Peter Pan", in that children do not seem to want to grow up. There is seemingly a horror of normal heterosexual sex, which is a messy sloppy affair in which people express their animal natures. There is a failure to connect the REALITY of sex to the production of babies.
I am trying to understand why girls in particular "hate their breasts" and other manifestations of their womanly nature and power. Yes, men notice breasts. OK, what's the issue? No, rape is NOT COMMON - that may be part of the problem - the over-emphasis on rape, and the OVEREMPHASIS of the "life-long" consequences may be part of the problem.
There's an interesting case RIGHT NOW going on. A basketball player for U of I (my alma mater) was charged with a sexual crime. I was concerned.
Now we learn that 1) the incident happened in a bar 2) no one knew about the incident at the time of its occurrence 3) it took less than 30 seconds 4) it is a "he said she said" situation.
Hopefully, he will be exonerated from this what seems like fake charge. Young men are targets - high profile, with lots of money from the NIL situation. Will this derail his career? Hopefully not.
And that's part of the problem. My wife says "I've been kissed against my will by surprise. It didn't kill me. If I really dislike it, I would slap the guy".
Clearly some kinds of rape (violent stranger rape) is outside of acceptable, just as any assault is. No one should be allowed to rape others. But most "sexual assault" is not this kind of thing. Violent rape is very uncommon. What is more common is normal sex which is misinterpreted as "rape" - drunken sex in which both parties remove their clothing voluntarily is now considered rape by the male. That's a very contemporary change in views.
In today's world, the notion that "permanent harm" occurs due to a kiss or a pat on the butt is common. When society pathologizes this, it creates a new victim class.
If you get kissed by some person, either go with it or slap the crap out of the guy. Don't be a victim. But actual rape is wrong.
A lot of women tell me that they slap men, for various reasons. I call that abuse. Many such women get beaten up or even killed for slapping men, which is the difference between abusive men and abusive women. What women do to men doesn't usually result in a hospitalization. It's still abuse, and a provocation to response in kind.
If you haven't already, I'd suggest reading Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage." I think it gives a better explanation for why so many girls are finding this appealing than "patriarchy" seeing as there's been a concerted effort for a decade (or more in some places) to hold up women and femininity at the expense of masculinity, often by associating healthy masculine behavior with its extreme presentations and then denoting the whole thing as "toxic." We're already seeing a growing movement of women resonating with the writings of Louise Perry about how womanhood really is best experienced by most in a way that is somewhat more traditional. And then there was the Barbie movie, which many interpreted as a satire of modern feminism — itself an indication that the tides are changing.
A certain percentage of females wanting to live as men are butch lesbians who have lived in masculine roles for years before transitioning. This is actually an issue for the lesbian community, at least for the lesbian women who preferred butch lesbians, i.e., women. The adolescent girls who are more or less in the midrange of femininity or above it, and who say they want to be boys, mostly seem to have low self esteem and general identity confusion. I don't follow your reasoning when you suggest that girls would find it desirable to become men because women and femininity have been held up at the expense of masculinity. Girls who become trans men have completely rejected their femininity.
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. Most of what I said had nothing to do with why girls are wanting to transition to being boys. Rather, it was just a rebuttal to Ann's presupposition that male supremacy and patriarchy are still dominant forces in the west, which she then used to attempt to explain why girls might be wanting to transition to being boys.
There is no "public face" of gays and lesbians. That is like taking about the "public face" of white people or Asians. Anyway, you are factually incorrect about gay organizations not taking a public stand. See for example https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/about
Personally I don't care what you think, but your over-generalizations undercut your arguments and make a mockery of the attempts to stop the mutilation of children. In your own way you are contributing to the trans madness by making it so easy to dismiss our pro-reality arguments as unhinged.
As a trans widow (you have my memoir, Joe!) I must remark that my former husband's rebellion against our traditional marriage, and against me as the mother of our 2 sons, was extreme. I felt that he substituted me for his abusive father, who beat him with a belt when he was young, and his mother, who didn't (or couldn't) prevent it.
I think this modern cultural depiction of the buffoon father is in itself a parental rebellion--as in centuries past the husband and father was always the “Head of the Household”; the authority figure of a family; that the father ruled over the wife and children.
Then came a cultural shift and the father became diminished as an authority figure.
There seems more emphasis now of parents being in a marriage that’s based on partnerships, rather than one head of the household.
I do though wish more fathers would stand up against trans ideology and its intrusion into family life. I suppose it’s all down to the individual fathers to work that one out!
Really insightful piece. I think that the readers would be interested in the outcome of his daughter and his perspective on prominent detransitioners. Great harm is being perpetrated on extremely confused young people and the "therapies" often leave great irreversible damage on the vulnerable young people. It is so very sad to see this happening in some of our best Children's Hospitals.
The "trans" cult comes with a built-in reaction to any and all disagreement as "hate." Biology is hate. Parental concern is hate. Resistance to surgery is hate.
Any pushback, however logical, however well-intended, is "transphobia." Kids whose parents don't "affirm" their new "gender identities" are to be hated as "transphobes" and escaped, sometimes with the help of mesmerized state agencies who regard any and all claims of "trans" as legitimate.
Affirming agencies like WPATH are now embracing the "eunuch identity" as warmly as the two actual sexes, and acceptance of pedophilia is on the way.
We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons. And many medical and psychiatric professionals who ought to know better have accepted the "civil rights" view of "trans" instead of allowing themselves to see the sickness.
At least Goth produced some really great music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4Xu2mx66Cg; "trans" has produced nothing whatever of any value, unless you count the removal of some really shallow and stupid kids from the gene pool.
Paternal authority: I also remember 𝑀𝑦 𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑆𝑜𝑛𝑠 with a tall widower dad played by Fred MacMurray whose rapport with his boys was anything but authoritative.
But distrust of authority is everywhere now, in the winter of the Fourth Turning. I fear Spring may never come again.
"We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons. And many medical and psychiatric professionals who ought to know better have accepted the "civil rights" view of "trans" instead of allowing themselves to see the sickness."
In what sense? What are the "wrong reasons"?
As a bigot who opposes trans for several reasons, let me defend bigotry. There is "normal" and there is "perverted". That's not bigotry - that is fact. Do whatever you want in the bedroom, but specific things are normal, and others are not.
There is a "ladder of acceptance" for behavior: Punishment/banning, tolerance, acceptance, promotion. Starting in the 1970s, society as a whole move from punishment to tolerance for gay relations. In the 1990s, such activity moved to acceptance. Today, we are full into promotion, where those who do NORMAL heterosexual relations are in the position of having to justify normality.
With trans, the process is accelerating. As recently as 2010 or so, it was punishment, and the movement along the ladder has been rocket-fueled - now many schools are full into promotion, with GSA clubs which promote the lifestyle as "edgy" and "brave".
There is a reason for the word "perverse" - it implies that there is a damaging quality to an activity. This is absolutely the case with trans - taking powerful drugs that have no place in the body of the wrong sex can have life-long consequences. The use of moral language is long-overdue with trans. It's not a "this or that" choice. It's the choice to damage your body and future prospects to get back at your parents.
Since gay folks have decided to help the trans, I now blame them. Gay is the new or renewed perversion.
I scarcely know where to begin. Let's start with your Fallacy of Polysemy, on the word normal.
black hair is "normal"; most of the world's population is black-haired
To have two legs is "normal"; fewer means an accident, amputation, or deformity.
You are using gay in the latter sense when it belongs in the former. This is an extremely fundamental failure of logic.
Not sure where you get the idea that a plurality of gays side with "trans." Most of us are sick of them, revile them, don't want them in our public places.
But we are in agreement about the harm of "trans." However given that much of science and academia have been "captured" by the civil rights view, and ignoring the role of social contagion in its immense growth (not to mention the enormous profitability of "affirmation"), we have our work cut out for us fighting it.
A parent whose child announces a new "gender identity" should see its smartphone splintered, its computer moved where a parent can watch, and grounded until 18. Zero tolerance.
Why aren't gays and lesbians more vocal in their rejections of "trans" though? I have several lesbian friends (who reassure me that my cross-sex ideating ex-husband was incorrect in his claim that I'm actually a lesbian, after he fathered our 2 sons and he clearly did not understand the female process of giving birth, tho he was there both times) who have said they "have to tolerate" men who claim to be lesbian in their social groups, originated for and by lesbians. One of these friends told me the man who imposes himself on a hiking group of same sex attracted women is constantly contacting them regarding his "suicide thoughts" and invites himself to stay over at one of their homes. When I asked why they can't just ghost him from their notices for hikes, she said they are all afraid of the TRAs he might set upon them. I, the flaming straight ex-wife, want to do a seminar for these women.
I don't know why you think gays are promoting the trans movement. Most gay men I know oppose transgenderism. The idiots in the media and politics have tried to create a "LGBTQ+ community" which is as fictional as most other "facts" promoted by those people. I think it's defamatory to link gay and "trans/queer" together, because it leads to the mistaken notion that they are "allies." Obviously there are some clueless gay people who spout the nonsense, but there are many more heterosexuals on that bandwagon. Most thoughtful gay men realize the trans movement is undoing decades of progress for the gay rights movement.
Several LGB organizations oppose trannies. WoLF does.
Many gay men say they oppose trannie shit. But that's done in private.
Because every LGB organization is completely in favor of all trannie crap.
https://reports.hrc.org/an-epidemic-of-violence-2023?_ga=2.37377891.277185485.1705875530-272774847.1705875530
I understand why you blame gays for the trans catastrophe. Any group that allows itself to be associated with the castration of mentally ill children deserves to be held in contempt. But please stop using the sophomoric LGB or LGBTQ acronyms. Those are fictional creations of the feverish minds of political consultants and the media that have little to do with reality. I am a gay man and I repeatedly and publicly repudiate transexual ideology. Many other prominent gay men publicly repudiate it too. https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/22/dave-rubin-says-trans-movement-is-more-anti-gay-than-any-other-group/
You again confuse "your view" with the "public promotion of trans". We are in the position today that we are SOLELY DUE to gay/lesbian promotion.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/l-g-b-t/623604/
It seems unfair to argue with anyone who would cite a risible publication like The Atlantic, but nothing in the world is due SOLELY to any one thing. The primary or original cause of the trans catastrophe was the Civil Rights Act that encouraged politicians (mostly Democrats) to pander to various "victim" groups who would vote for them in exchange for their pandering. This will continue ad infinitum until the Civil Rights Act is repealed. https://www.amazon.com/Origins-Woke-Corporate-Identity-Politics/dp/0063237210
Even the article you cited (risible as it may be) discussed the discomfort gay people felt with about being linked to a trans "caboose." I concur that gays and lesbians have allowed themselves to be used by unscrupulous politicians to advance a destructive political agenda that will inevitably undermine the advances they made in the past.
Despite the abuse I suffered (now confirmed in my data of 55 other trans widows) I remain the eternal optimist. I tell random mothers of new babies I encounter to protect their child from these lies (their eyes go wide, in my too "progressive" town, but they listen, don't yell or attack me) as he or she grows up. I also talk to random seatmates on trains, buses, etc, and find that if they don't have multi-color hair, they agree with me. So many have thanked me for stating normal, logical, scientific facts. I tell them to pass it on. Recent polling has found that those who don't support "pronouns" in schools have increased from 54% to 58% of Americans. Long road ahead, keep on truckin'
Yes, look out for the "False construct of childhood" leading to open pedophilia.
"We who believe in biology and who recognize the depravity of "trans" find ourselves in the uncomfortable company of bigots who oppose it for all the wrong reasons."
Well said! This is a painful part of the current mess we are in.
It was interesting dealing with the culture of parental authority in the privileged town in which my kids grew up in the 1990s and 2000s.
Parents had too much $. Many parents were doing drugs. Birthday parties ended up being a completion to outdo the last one.
I told my kids one very simple truth "You are a homeless person living in my house by my good graces. As long as you understand that, we'll be good". It had an element of jest. My wife thought that was a bit brutal. Other parents raised their eyes when I told them.
My kids would also use the "but so and so gets to do" when I told them they couldn't do something. My response, "I call the parents and see whether they'll adopt you".
They at times would in jest say "I'm gonna call the police on you". I responded with "Just so you're clear, they take you away, not me".
I also cut off the competition on spending for birthdays and what clothes they could buy. My wife (I was married to a woman then) started having them complain about where she would buy clothes for them. I made it simple. We gave them a budget of $200 every six months for clothes and anything else. Everything else they need to pay for themselves. They could decide how they wanted to spend it. Their friend parents asked how I got away with that. I asked them why I couldn't.
I also didn't tell my kids they had to go to high school. I did say that if they wanted to drop out, they would need to get a job and pay me rent.
One teacher in my daughter's Junior High told her she should drop out of Spanish because she wasn't doing well. My daughter tried to use this as justification for her dropping Spanish. I hauled the teacher in front of the school principal. I told the principal that no teacher should ever be telling my kids whether they should take a class. The only thing they should be doing is working with me to help the kid succeed. The principal was on my side. The principal faced pressure from parents to make sure their kids got good grades. The principal and I agree that was just setting kids up for failure. Grades in junior high don't count to anything in the long run. They just teach the kids how the world works before they get to high school and college. Now of course high school and colleges are trying to drop grades.
Same with paying for college. I told my kids I would pay for college if they maintained a "b" average. If they fell below a "b", they would owe me the money back. I also did not pay for an incidentals (e.g. drinking) at college. My kids got jobs to pay for.
It's not hard to have parental authority. Just have to do it. My kids today (in their 30s) view they were lucky and still are to have me as their dad. Even though I'm actively gay now.
I didn't have to deal with the trans issue. I don't think it would be as complicated as people seem to suggest. Its no different than dealing with drinking, dropping out, etc. If my kid comes to me and says they want to be the opposite sex and change their name and pronoun, I would respond with "Oh really? Tell me more about what's going on with you". I would also be clear on the implications of that both in their school, ability to participate in sports, go to the bathroom, date, have kids, etc. It will totally change their life. I would make sure they had all the facts.
I guess it was easy for me to have that perspective. I knew I was attracted to guys in my teens. I got married to a woman because I didn't want my sexuality to define how I lived my life. I'm actively gay today but not a fan of much of the gay culture. Too many gays tend to play victim to society. That doesn't help them.
The bottom line lesson for parents to teach their kids is to never play victim. They are not victims of peer pressure to conform to gender norms. They are not a victim of gender dysphoria they may have. The norms and gender dysphoria are real parts of living. You can decide how you want to respond to them. Choose wisely because it will have significant effects on the rest of your life.
Botton line, I don't have empathy for people who are trying to figure out how to "regain their parental authority". You never lost it. You just chose not to act on it.
Ugh. Perverse and perverted are not synonyms. And, there's a strong pushback from many LGBs concerning the Trans movement, especially youth medical interventions. A Trans is not gay, and vice versa. Many gays are very glad they were not subjected to the extremism encouraged now. They are happy to be men and women, albeit attracted differently.
I hear that about how gay/lesbian do not support trans. However, I don't see that in public. In public, there is no separation between gay/lesbian and trans. That's why I more and more question gay/lesbian, and call those identities part of the trannie delusional system.
Are you talking about people who are under 25 or so? Most of those people are not gay at all, they are just experimenting.
Interesting tie into fathers.
You are undoubtedly on the right track. The authority of fathers has been under attack for at least 100 years and their ability to regain that authority is compromised and not even desired by most of them (even as they live out their frustrated lives).
In defense of parents-parents can try to instill authority all they like--if they taught their kids to listen to what teachers and doctors and (thought to be reliable) newspapers say, and the kids are in school 8 or more hours a day, for years and years...if they are taught not to think certain things because they will harm others (the list changes so frequently that they are likely afraid to think without looking around to make sure that what they want to say is approved already)...young people are getting brainwashed by those who were supposed to teach them about logic, facts, all that. Kids are taught to trust Wikipedia in some schools. It's nonsense on this topic.
If instead of saying "because I said so," which, if transfered to someone unreliable like a demagogue is a prescription for disaster, one says, "because it is wrong, for these reasons" or because it is incorrect. because it is not how the world is, not how biology works--one is insisting upon reality. Directly. But I don't think it matters. If either worked it would be great.
I think they are giddy with the feeling that they have escaped reality and everything that they fear about growing up. I think they are being told by those they were taught to respect that what they believe is true. They've got the ticket as Ritchie says in "The Lost Boys" (thank you for being in that fantastic documentary, glad it is short enough that people will more easily find time to watch it!!).
That's a big difference with Goth. You didn't have US major medical societies out there saying that getting piercings and tattoos were the most constructive way to approach impending adulthood. They have authorities, doctors, etc., who are falsely saying that they are following science and external reality.
It takes a lot of sophistication for anyone, including a young person who will be thrown out of their community if their thoughts waver, to step back and examine the evidence. Many adults can't seem to grasp it either. It's utterly insane that the lies have gotten so far and lasted so long.
It would end tomorrow if the media or medical journals would step up.
Excellent post, I totally agree with all of it! Unfortunately, the media and medical associations now ARE the the Punks, Goths and Non-Binaries who have never grown up.
It's completely unclear why these institutions think they should throw away all of the ways of doing things, which gave them legitimacy and authority in the first place, to misrepresent and/or explicitly lie about the evidence and to encourage these young people to have these medical interventions. In one talk I saw the speaker said it's because they don't actually care about this population, that's why these young people are getting such garbage care.
My impression is that the majority of woke activists do "care" in an abstract kind of way about all of the victim classes they think they are helping. Some of the gender activists appear to be too narcissistic to care about anybody, and some of the gender treatment professionals are probably in it for the money, but most of the young activists are very emotionally involved in "caring" about certain victims.
What is happening is that woke ideologues, who are mostly under 30 years old, have taken over the healthcare associations, the psychology departments and the medical schools. Many of the older liberal/radicals who worked in those places have fostered this, and they are now allowing the young people to tell them what to think and do. Clinical research is no longer happening as such, and clinical practice is being warped into ideological practice in all of the healthcare professions.
This past month I have been spending my "free time" seeking online courses that I can use to meet my continuing education requirement for licensure renewal, which happens biannually. Two years ago I was easily able to find courses that were free of ideological corruption. (I didn't know at the time that there was such a thing). This year, it was very difficult to find the kind of peer reviewed articles and clinical presentations that have been normal in my profession for the past century or more.
Some gems I encountered in the classes I took this week included:
A middle aged psychologist from California taught her live audience of mental health professionals that, "We know now. of course, that there are certain things we should not say. One of those is 'master bedroom.' We don't say that because some people have said that certain groups could be offended by that."
The same instructor, in response to a workshop participant's question: "When should we confront clients about their racism?" said, "If they make a racist remark once I let it go, but if it happens again, I say something about it."
In a research article, the authors freely violated the most basic rule that research subjects have to be randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups. This maneuver is done so that the treatment and non-treatment groups start out roughly equal with respect to what is being studied, e.g., level of depression. Differences in outcomes between the groups are then more likely to be the result of the treatment than to pre-existing differences between the groups. In the study I was reading about, the researchers created one group out of people who expressed interest in getting therapy for their depression, and another out of people who declined to join. The results were that the therapy group mostly showed improvements in mood, while the untreated one did not. The authors felt fine about saying that their study shows their therapy program is an effective treatment for depression. They said they expected criticism on the grounds that the two groups of subjects may have differed before the treatment they were given, but the authors dismissed that valid criticism on the grounds that they weren't following guidelines for evidence-based therapy research.
One of my favorites was, "As postmodern therapists we know that the future is socially constructed, and clients can create their own narratives about how it will go."
Hi Joe,
Fantastic article (and thanks for Colin for publishing it.)
FWIW, I would like to offer a slightly different perspective from a family affected by ROGD. My husband and I are absolutely on the same page about not using male pronouns for our FtM daughter. Same goes for her chosen male name.
I would say we are a united front when dealing with her. We decided early on there would be no big conversations, ultimatums or grand pronouncements unless my husband and I are both there.
But behind the scenes, we are dealing with this in completely different ways. I am in the parent support groups (and yes, it’s almost all moms), and online forums, reading and learning and making connections. Also strategizing.
He deals with what’s in front of him, as I’ve come to put it. He asks questions about her life (she’s 20) and is kind and inquiring, without being a doormat.
Basically, I tell him about things I find outline, if I think it’s important for him to know.
This difference probably has to do with our personalities. But it is helpful. He’s not filling his head with the toxic garbage that is also in the online world. He’s there for support in the moment, for both me and my daughter.
And yes, I know how lucky we are.
On fathers being sidelined, you might be interested in this counter-example of a dad who seems to have a very effective way of communicating with his trans identified daughter. I wish I had started out with the same curiosity and tone. Worth a listen: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-witness-true-stories-of-children-and-gender-identity/id1560381887?i=1000584704375
I completely agree with every word of your article, Dr. Burgo! I am a colleague living in Portland, and one of my specialties is providing psychological services to police officers. About 25 years ago, an officer told me he had come to the conclusion that Portland is a haven for "people with authority issues."
Looking back on my own participation in the massive antiwar demonstrations of the Sixties and Seventies, it is clear to me that much of my rage at the time was literally focused on my parents, teachers and other authorities that I deemed "oppressive."
The main difference I see between then and now is that the adults in charge pretty much did hold the line when the revolution went too far. So did we, for that matter. I recall that my circle of friends, all SDS members, were shocked when a group of our activist leaders announced that they were taking the revolution in a violent direction. We had an agitated series of conversations about it, in which we talked about our fears, moral conflicts, and our unwillingness to sacrifice our graduate school and career plans. And none of us did--it was the end of SDS for most of us.
The authority of parents and other authority figures has been undermined for a few generations now in our culture. We can see how many Americans are literally not even growing up anymore. At the same time that young people reject parental authority, they live out a prolonged childhood in their parents' basements. Parents who have rejected adulthood and authority roles their whole lives identify too much with adolescent rebellion.
Decades ago, a friend of mine had a poster on his office wall that said, "To punish me for my contempt for authority, Fate turned me into one." Quote attributed to Albert Einstein, whose portrait was on the poster.
Excellent piece, I'll need to check out Gidget now! One thing I'd push back on is that, while it's understandable for parents to sometimes pull out the "because I said so" in desperation at not being able to get their point across, it's ultimately to be avoided. I don't think my parents ever did that with me or my brother, and I'm glad they didn't because it would likely have made me lose a certain amount of respect for them. Given that kids are naturally higher in reactance, it would not surprise me if that were a common response to being told "because I told you" which needs to be overcome in due course. As best portrayed in Matilda, such justifications are rife for abuse, and to me an elder worth respecting is one who can articulate why what they're saying is worth following. And if you can't, then work on it while also giving your kids the liberty to learn firsthand the lessons you failed to communicate verbally. Obviously with something as dire as medical transition, that's not really an option, but my hope is that with more competent parenting that kids will not be so psychologically disregulated as to be susceptible to gender ideology.
And that brings me to another point: competent elders. Most elders give advice based on their own lives, which in the past was fine since society wasn't changing at such a rapid pace as to make their advice obsolete. But given how many elders continued to, for example, go on and on about getting a college degree because of what amounted to "that's what I did" or "that's what everyone else is doing to get a good life," it just doesn't inspire the same level of confidence when elders basically recite what they did instead of tailoring their advice to the circumstances present for that kid. This is only one example, but it's a major one that we're all having to grapple with now. So in a way, I'm saying that the loss of respect for elders is warranted in a lot of cases, and my hope is that people will be a little bit more thoughtful when advising the youth in their lives going forwards.
"Authoritative parenting" has been the style recommended since I was in college (Sixties). This means that that parents explain rules to kids on an age-appropriate basis. Two year olds get a lot less explanation than 16 year olds. Adolescents need to learn how to be responsibly independent, and it is normal for them to pushback. Pushback should never result in them feeling that parents have no boundaries. Parental authority means that the final decision is made by the parent, and it is because the parents have a better concept of what is in a child's best interests than the child does. Even when the parent is wrong, the mutual understanding that the parent provides the safety of limits is more important than mistaken judgments on daily matters. "Authoritarian parenting" means that explanations are not necessarily offered for parental decisions. This does not necessarily imply destructiveness on the part of the parent. Strict parents who prioritize their childrens' well being over their own ego needs generally raise healthy children who felt safe and cared about. Abusive and negligent parenting happens in homes that are authoritarian and in homes that are permissive. In these cases the parent is prioritizing his/her self interest, e.g., to be liked, to be "right," to fit in with the kids' subculture, to have a weaker person to oppress, or to be able to hang out on social media all day and ignore the kids altogether.
I suppose I should've explicitly mentioned, though it could be tacitly assumed, that of course you won't be able to treat a young child the same as when they're older. I have no issue with authoritative parenting as long as you have a parent who is willing to take responsibility for when they're wrong. If they don't, as the kids become privy to the fallibility of their parents, they won't have much reason to continue to believe that their parents have a better concept of the best interest of the child. I'd say that my parents practiced authoritative parenting, but I was also given the room to criticize them in ways that, on occasion, would make them change their behavior or give me more liberty.
Refusing to take responsibility and admitting to being wrong is basically a very weak, self-centered behavior. I would see this as a parent (or spouse) prioritizing their need for ego security over the needs of the child. I'm happy to hear that your parents delivered such a good balance of structure and freedom for you. I wish they all would.
Yes, while I've made my reservations clear, I've been trying to be better about expressing my appreciation for them as I've come to realize how lucky I was.
It's a good idea to give your parents credit while they are still here. My parents have been gone for a long time, but I am still learning to appreciate wisdom they offered that I dismissed 50 or more years ago.
The answer to this mess is NOT to reassert the authority of men over their wives or female partners and children, i.e. to reinforce male supremacy or yes, patriarchy. Rather, we should ask why is it that so many girls (it is mostly girls) are running away from womanhood into the arms of a cult-like highly profitable industry that promotes extreme body modification, sex denialism and the false promise of “gender affirmation”? Perhaps it is because women and girls are still deemed “lesser”, as sex objects and subordinates with less power and opportunity in the world than males, while the myth is that we are all equal now. The irony is that transgenderism disappears the category of sex so we can’t even discuss these continuing gaps between our rhetoric and reality of continued social and economic inequality between the sexes and continued widespread existence of male violence against women. If you are unhappy, its just that you were born in the “wrong” body, aren’t really female,and you can just take hormones and undergo surgeries and “fix” it. An individual medicalized “solution” to a comtinuing social problem.
Somehow, society as a whole has lost the ability to explain why being a NORMAL adult has advantages. Somehow, society as a whole has pathologized puberty. Perhaps it is the internet, in which every bad thing gets publicity.
There is a strain of "Peter Pan", in that children do not seem to want to grow up. There is seemingly a horror of normal heterosexual sex, which is a messy sloppy affair in which people express their animal natures. There is a failure to connect the REALITY of sex to the production of babies.
I am trying to understand why girls in particular "hate their breasts" and other manifestations of their womanly nature and power. Yes, men notice breasts. OK, what's the issue? No, rape is NOT COMMON - that may be part of the problem - the over-emphasis on rape, and the OVEREMPHASIS of the "life-long" consequences may be part of the problem.
25% of women have experienced actual or attempted rape. 81% have experienced sexual harassment. That sounds pretty common to me.
There's an interesting case RIGHT NOW going on. A basketball player for U of I (my alma mater) was charged with a sexual crime. I was concerned.
Now we learn that 1) the incident happened in a bar 2) no one knew about the incident at the time of its occurrence 3) it took less than 30 seconds 4) it is a "he said she said" situation.
Hopefully, he will be exonerated from this what seems like fake charge. Young men are targets - high profile, with lots of money from the NIL situation. Will this derail his career? Hopefully not.
And that's part of the problem. My wife says "I've been kissed against my will by surprise. It didn't kill me. If I really dislike it, I would slap the guy".
Clearly some kinds of rape (violent stranger rape) is outside of acceptable, just as any assault is. No one should be allowed to rape others. But most "sexual assault" is not this kind of thing. Violent rape is very uncommon. What is more common is normal sex which is misinterpreted as "rape" - drunken sex in which both parties remove their clothing voluntarily is now considered rape by the male. That's a very contemporary change in views.
In today's world, the notion that "permanent harm" occurs due to a kiss or a pat on the butt is common. When society pathologizes this, it creates a new victim class.
If you get kissed by some person, either go with it or slap the crap out of the guy. Don't be a victim. But actual rape is wrong.
A lot of women tell me that they slap men, for various reasons. I call that abuse. Many such women get beaten up or even killed for slapping men, which is the difference between abusive men and abusive women. What women do to men doesn't usually result in a hospitalization. It's still abuse, and a provocation to response in kind.
If you haven't already, I'd suggest reading Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage." I think it gives a better explanation for why so many girls are finding this appealing than "patriarchy" seeing as there's been a concerted effort for a decade (or more in some places) to hold up women and femininity at the expense of masculinity, often by associating healthy masculine behavior with its extreme presentations and then denoting the whole thing as "toxic." We're already seeing a growing movement of women resonating with the writings of Louise Perry about how womanhood really is best experienced by most in a way that is somewhat more traditional. And then there was the Barbie movie, which many interpreted as a satire of modern feminism — itself an indication that the tides are changing.
A certain percentage of females wanting to live as men are butch lesbians who have lived in masculine roles for years before transitioning. This is actually an issue for the lesbian community, at least for the lesbian women who preferred butch lesbians, i.e., women. The adolescent girls who are more or less in the midrange of femininity or above it, and who say they want to be boys, mostly seem to have low self esteem and general identity confusion. I don't follow your reasoning when you suggest that girls would find it desirable to become men because women and femininity have been held up at the expense of masculinity. Girls who become trans men have completely rejected their femininity.
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. Most of what I said had nothing to do with why girls are wanting to transition to being boys. Rather, it was just a rebuttal to Ann's presupposition that male supremacy and patriarchy are still dominant forces in the west, which she then used to attempt to explain why girls might be wanting to transition to being boys.
Oh, okay, thanks for the clarification.
Good article. Thanks for putting this together and being upfront and honest. Good food for thought.
There is no "public face" of gays and lesbians. That is like taking about the "public face" of white people or Asians. Anyway, you are factually incorrect about gay organizations not taking a public stand. See for example https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/about
Personally I don't care what you think, but your over-generalizations undercut your arguments and make a mockery of the attempts to stop the mutilation of children. In your own way you are contributing to the trans madness by making it so easy to dismiss our pro-reality arguments as unhinged.
As a trans widow (you have my memoir, Joe!) I must remark that my former husband's rebellion against our traditional marriage, and against me as the mother of our 2 sons, was extreme. I felt that he substituted me for his abusive father, who beat him with a belt when he was young, and his mother, who didn't (or couldn't) prevent it.
I think this modern cultural depiction of the buffoon father is in itself a parental rebellion--as in centuries past the husband and father was always the “Head of the Household”; the authority figure of a family; that the father ruled over the wife and children.
Then came a cultural shift and the father became diminished as an authority figure.
There seems more emphasis now of parents being in a marriage that’s based on partnerships, rather than one head of the household.
I do though wish more fathers would stand up against trans ideology and its intrusion into family life. I suppose it’s all down to the individual fathers to work that one out!
An interesting piece - one minor point. Goth identity is not a 70s product and is distinctly representative of a strand of 80s sub-culture
Really insightful piece. I think that the readers would be interested in the outcome of his daughter and his perspective on prominent detransitioners. Great harm is being perpetrated on extremely confused young people and the "therapies" often leave great irreversible damage on the vulnerable young people. It is so very sad to see this happening in some of our best Children's Hospitals.
Because like so many other opinions, it does not get a voice. It doesn't help "the cause". These are traitors.