Which gender are you?

[semper occultus]

How is that "left"?

...as in they've left Planet Earth...

[jakell]

‘Transabled’: A New Group Emerges That Wants To Be Medically Disabled
"Doctors urged to amputate healthy limbs"

When many of us thought we had seen and heard it all, now comes an emerging group of individuals known as the ‘transabled.’ They are physically healthy people who desire to be disabled in some way. Each person possessing this very strong urge to be incapacitated or mutilated in a particular manner has a different vision for their future.

Some of these folks want to be paralyzed, others want to be blind. There are people who now seek to have a perfectly healthy limb surgically removed. Some desire to have their leg or arm amputated, others just a foot or hand. There are additional types of disabling and self-mutilation which are too unspeakable to mention in this article. The common denominator among them all is that they ardently seek to become ‘transabled’.

It’s clear that each person who harbors such strong desires is suffering from various psychological problems and/or emotional imbalances. There often seems to be haunting memories from childhood which have fueled this highly abnormal desire to be disabled or mutilated.

Of course, there are those who simply want the attention that comes with being severely disabled. Wanting to be served by others all the time reveals a mental condition which should not be indulged, however. The constant outpouring of sympathy, which is often evoked from a loss of limb or function, can even be addictive for some.

Here’s how one author described this unique psychological condition.

“He said being ‘transabled’ is not a lifestyle choice but is ‘very much a deep felt need to become this way because their bodies are wrong.’

‘So people for example want amputations, or they want to be paralyzed or they want to be blind or deaf. And that misalignment can be very distressing for people.'”

There are now various mental health professionals throughout society who feel that prospective ‘transableds’ ought to be accommodated. Because of the duration of time that they have harbored such a highly consequential desire, some feel that they should be allowed to have their wishes to come true. In other words, they should be enabled and supported by the medical system.


Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/transabled-a- ... z3tIUxSrM0

Disgusting. As much as I hate the right wing, some of this bizarre new left is just in outer space to me. I am happy trans issues are finally being addressed. And Blacklivesmatter is addressing the fact the majority of the two dozen trans people killed this year have been in black communities.

How is that "left"?

Politically. it's not.

8bitagent's observation is looking in the right direction though IMO. This sort of distortion can be said to arise from over-inflated Leftist ideologies, the sort of thing that has been left unchecked (and often supported) over the last few years. It's quite evident that, in a particular environment, a degree of victim status when played correctly can increase one's prominence, it's only to be expected that some folks will notice this and run with it.

These sacred cows (of the Left) were bound to mutate. I'm quite pleased to note that, in several threads now, RI is starting to at least mention this.

[brainpanhandler]

My contention is that the latest wave of feminism is mostly overshoot, and that it is now damaging relationships between men and women.

So if the hiring/promotion rules were lifted everything would be fine from here on out?

Sexism has been conquered in a few short generations?

Like racism isn't really a problem anymore. I hear people say that too.

FFS, talk about strawmen!

I could say the same thing!

To wit: "The narrative that every human problem is misogyny and only misogyny"

Please calm down Slomo. I have carefully read everything you have put in this thread.

This is a real question: "So if the hiring/promotion rules were lifted everything would be fine from here on out? "

I've never said that specific instances of misogyny do not exist. In fact, I've repeatedly admitted the opposite: it can be found (although with lower frequency now than 50 years ago).

I heard that. I did not mean to suggest by failing to acknowledge that that I had not.

My main contentions have been,throughout this thread, that (1) the totalizing narrative (everything is misogyny, PW's position, which she absolutely has strongly implied even though she claims she has not) has no basis in reality

I haven't heard Willow claim that. Can you point me to where she has strongly implied that?

(2) that feminism in the 21st Century has overshot its goal. Maybe not completely, not in every area, but taken as a whole it has.

"...taken as a whole it has." I'm supposed to accept that sort of claim, in the same reply where you rail about a lack of specific evidence to support views different than yours. I don't claim to be in possession of the truth. Nor indeed do I necessarily believe there is any immutable truth to be found, but I generally prefer your stated desire to use real world data to back up truth claims.

Even worse, feminism is becoming increasingly toxic, and it's not hard to find examples of toxic manhating in the feminist canon

I'll go looking for it. I'm curious. If you find a moment and a bit of patience you could point me in the right direction.

[Luther Blissett]

Why is it that when we talk about gender equality, one of the first things that anti-feminists will mention is something that, in the end, desires to put women in physical danger? How about working for no combat for any gender? Why is violent death a factor in equality debates?

[tapitsbo]

Your pacifism makes you an outlier, Luther Blisset. I admire it personally but I encounter bloodsoaked desires for revenge much more frequently, on the left as well as right, to say nothing of the war-apologist "centre".

I'm thinking of feminists who have told me "all men in the Middle East should be killed", etc. (you'll notice I'm reaching here outside the more commonly deployed genocide fantasies)

Or people who are "anti-violence" but want political dissenters starved to death, etc. (this is what the ruling corporate powers already do)

Maybe people here have heard me repeat these anecdotes before. I return to them because they are stories about my interactions with leftist standard-bearers that leave me scratching my head to this day.

Before people start feigning incomprehension at what I am saying, I think that certain forces at play, often culminating in violence, that provide a context to politics. One of these forces is the stalemate provoked by a lack of willingness to communicate between parties who find their differences entirely incommensurable. This context can be smiled/imagined away but has a way of reasserting itself. If we were TRULY to do away with this coercive force/violence, there would need to be massive changes in terms of people's ability to tolerate difference - right now the dreams of most positions on the political spectrum are wrapped up with seizing the reins of these coercive forces, although this may be presented in sugarcoated terms that obscure the nature of the beast.

[guruilla]

I think that certain forces at play, often culminating in violence, that provide a context to politics. One of these forces is the stalemate provoked by a lack of willingness to communicate between parties who find their differences entirely incommensurable.

This future-echoes what I had wanted to post today. Two of the strongest voices at this thread, and forum, are in apparently incommensurable disgreement:

I was programmed with feminist ideology from a very young age, and it almost destroyed my life; subsequently, I've worked for over a decade to undo the damage. I'm relatively old, but every younger generation of men is waking up earlier. Men in their 20s and 30s, who have been raised under feminist ideology from their mothers or even grandmothers, are increasingly rejecting it as anti-male and ultimately anti-human.

The war on the female body is not new, it has existed as long as the patriarchy and will continue to convolute through various permutations coinciding with technological advances and cultural changes. A hundred years ago, women diagnosed as hysterics were treated with stimulation to climax by their doctors, once a week. Others were treated with clitorectomies. The single underlying force in all of this is control of female sexuality.

And yet. I agree with both of these viewpoints. How is it so? More to the point, why is it that, if I can allow for a wide enough description of the state of things, others can't, with the result that a division, instead of being understood and healed, gets deeper, wider, and more fraught?

I think it comes down to psychology. Without a strong psychological component to analyzing and discussing these phenomena, without factoring unconscious trauma (and the unconscious, period), the warring factions will never realize that they are connected beneath the surface, reflecting each other's shadows, and locked into an attraction-repulsion dynamic that benefits only those who stand outside the ring of fire, and who thrive on keeping that battle raging. In the present model, those who have fully declared war on female sexuality are the same suspects who have used (& even created) "feminism" to maintain that war. (Edward Bernays was a "feminist" pioneer when they wanted to sell cigarettes to women; even earlier, feminism was a way to get women in the workplace when men were getting killed in world wars. These are more than just nuances.)

My point is that the smartest people at this forum are being played. Because, those who don't understand and apply psychology, are forever having it used against them.

[Edit: posted at 2:37 pm, for the Kubrickon readers]

[tapitsbo]

Plus one man's wide description may be another woman's razor-thin divisive scalpel...

[battleshipkropotkin]

It haven't been able to check out all 34 pages of this thread, but I took the poll.
I am one of the Alchemical Androgynes.
I am a transwoman in transition, but a rather large and ugly one, so realistically, I am like some baffling mythological beast that people see out in the wild but just can't wrap their heads around so they pretend it's not there. Are there any other trans Riggies (haven't read the whole thread) out there?

I started reading Jeff's blog around Katrina and was on the first discussion board, too. I've never posted a whole lot, but I check the board regularly, especially when Strange Things happen. I really value the insight and intelligence of the community. cheers!

[Heaven Swan]

http://4thwavenow.com/2015/12/04/parent ... therapist/


Parents, keep listening to your gut—not the gender therapist

Posted on December 4, 2015

A few months ago, my teenage daughter stopped trying to “pass” as male. She dropped the self-defined-as-male uniform, the stereotyped swagger and the fake-deepened voice and just—moved on. Her fervent desire to be seen and treated as a boy faded away, just as other formerly unshakable ideas and urges had in the past. And our relationship has never been better.

Although I’ve allowed myself to exhale, just a little, she will remain at risk, because every sector of society—the media, the government, the schools, medicine and psychology–is now saturated with the message that trans is real; trans is good; and if you’re a “gender nonconforming” girl, you just might actually be a boy.

What did I, and the other adults who love her, do? It hasn’t been easy. In fact, for a time it was a living hell, a purgatory of slammed doors, stony silence, yelling matches, and mostly—waiting.

There was no magic answer. We rode it out. I learned something about keeping my mouth shut. About saying my piece and then leaving it be. About living with uncertainty. We didn’t cater to demands for instant gratification. We paid for and encouraged activities that would get her out into nature and off the Internet. Mostly, we waited.

We drew a clear line in the sand: There would be no money to pay for a gender therapist, testosterone, or a binder. If she wanted to pursue those things at the age of medical majority, that would be her choice—and it would be on her dime. Not always successfully, we tried to calmly and sparingly convey the message that however she dressed, whatever interests she pursued, she was a female—perhaps an unusual one, but a young woman nevertheless, who might someday become a role model to show other girls just how amazing and truly expansive a woman can be.

Like many who read this blog, I phoned gender therapists during the weeks after her announcement that she was trans. Without even meeting my child in the flesh, all four of these therapists talked to me like this trans thing was a done deal. I wrote about one of those conversations here. One very friendly therapist, who identifies as FTM and whose website stressed “his” commitment to “informed consent,” assured me that there was no need for my daughter to first experience a sexual or romantic relationship before deciding whether she was trans. “Most of the young people just skip that step now,” the therapist said.

Skip that step? I thought back to my own adolescence. I didn’t even begin to have a clear idea of who I was, as a sexual being, until after I’d had more than one relationship. It took years for me to come to know my body’s nuances and intricacies, its capacity for pleasure, how I might feel in relation to another.

This same therapist signed my kid up for a “trans teen” support group scheduled for the following week—again, without ever having met her. “There’s nothing you or I can do about your daughter being trans,” said another therapist… on the phone, without having met my kid. Yet another therapist refused to talk to me at all; insisted she’d have to have a private appointment with my kid first.

Contrary to the myth promulgated by the transition promoters, at least in the United States, there is no slow and careful assessment of these kids who profess to be trans. The trend is to kick out the gatekeepers, and move towards a simple model of “informed consent”: If you say you’re trans, you are–no matter how young and no matter when you “realized” you were trans.

Article continues at.:
http://4thwavenow.com/2015/12/04/parent ... therapist/

[minime]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Luther Blissett]

Since everyone who has mentioned it somehow appears to work in a post-sexist workplace, I feel obliged to mention that my university is sexist as hell. Top-heavy with men in administrative roles wielding way more power than the deans, suppressed adjuncts, a board consisting of about 80% old rich white men, sex abuse scandals, conspiracies and coverups, coddling treatment of rapists done to protect the public relations, funding, and enrollment numbers of the university, young women dissuaded from reporting rapes, the elimination of our crucial counseling office that would help adjudicate these reports, HR, equality, and diversity offices that exist to protect the university, a system that does not promote women's athletics even though the women's teams consistently make it further into national championships year-in, year-out, egregious unreported-rape numbers, some entire colleges with zero (not kidding) full professorships for women, etc. I've form 990'ed the hell out of this place and almost all the top earners are men.

I've held only working class gigs before entering academia and it was no better at any of them. Always the same.

[Project Willow]

Why is it that when we talk about gender equality, one of the first things that anti-feminists will mention is something that, in the end, desires to put women in physical danger? How about working for no combat for any gender? Why is violent death a factor in equality debates?

Agreed. I was not at all happy to see women allowed into combat roles. I'm not certain there is a worse thing you can do to a human being than to coerce and manipulate them into killing or harming other human beings.

[Project Willow]

In the present model, those who have fully declared war on female sexuality are the same suspects who have used (& even created) "feminism" to maintain that war. (Edward Bernays was a "feminist" pioneer when they wanted to sell cigarettes to women; even earlier, feminism was a way to get women in the workplace when men were getting killed in world wars. These are more than just nuances.)

I’d like you to clarify these statements. How on earth does feminism contribute to rather than stand in opposition to the war on female sexuality? How have these “suspects” (men presumably) been responsible for feminism it self? Either that needs great qualification or you are suggesting that I and my sisters before me should have been happy being wholly dependent on a man, unable to vote, own property, get divorced, get an education, use our talents and our brains for anything else than serving a husband, and that my foremothers who fought and died so that future generations could live in greater freedom, who called themselves feminists, were really just manipulated by men all along. I don’t know anyone who could seriously argue something like that, so please explain.

My point is that the smartest people at this forum are being played. Because, those who don't understand and apply psychology, are forever having it used against them.

Did you just say that I'm ignorant of psychology and the techniques of manipulation?

Let me tell you a little something. Feminism was the very first lever I picked up that allowed me to begin to pry myself out of the clutches of abusers 30 years ago. It gave me names for my lived experiences, it was the key to opening the door to begin working on the trauma I experienced. It has informed and helped empower every step of my long journey out of the grips of the mind control network. It informs the practice of all of my caregivers (psychologists!) The Second Wave gave birth to the child abuse survivor movement, the consciousness raising meetings inspiring survivor support groups. Are you not aware that your whole concept of hidden trauma is based on literature created primarily by feminist scholars and clinicians? How can you mention it without thought referencing Judith Lewis Herman, or Alice Miller? Are these people upon whom the very formation of your own theories depend being played too? Are they pawns in some man's game?

Without feminism we wouldn't be talking about hidden trauma, abuse, trafficking, elite pedo networks, or mind control, we'd be talking about oedipal complexes.

As for "healing" the divide between the sexes, are you aware that we've already had a 147 page thread on misogyny on this board? http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... t=misogyny

There are men here who cannot even approach the subject of feminism without feeling hurt and getting defensive, who interpret critiques of culture and analyses of structural oppression as personal attacks. There are those who argue the oppression does not even exist, as if we live on a flat earth, and there is no racism. There are many issues contributing to these responses, not all of which can be appropriately addressed in a forum like this.

[minime]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[82_28]

Sorry, Willow. But nope. There is no war on female sexuality. In order to make my point I must resort to mansplaining, the very term itself is stupid. Calm the fuck down as I mansplain. We're all here together. It's not going to change. I have never done jack shit to harm females in particular, but I can indeed tell you a few stories of men I know who were harmed at a young age, but I won't. Your position is stupid insofar as tossing it all into an envelope and being the "czar" of all things abuse.

Sure, I'm trying to get a handle on this as well. However, we all have crosses to bear of some sort. None are more equal than the next. As a fellow human your position is ridiculous. For one, I have never done anything in spite to ANYONE ever. Has it been to me, a big strong privileged man? It sure has. Did I ask for this judgement? Nope. Do I feel slighted? To a degree, yes, I do. There are kind people everywhere. Do I know unkind people? Yes, yes I do. Do I forgive them all? Yes, yes I do.

Some people are just lame and can't help themselves. Just the truth.