by Sarah Cooksley, via Liverpool Resisters, August 16, 2018
Over the past few years, many parents have begun to take note that the BBC is becoming ever more blatant with publicising and encouraging the transgender ideology amongst children. Where has this come from, and why?
In January 2012, the BBC funded a Trans Camp, directed by All About Trans. There was considerable input from the CEO of Mermaids, Susie Green.
In 2013, All About Trans met with the BBC Editorial Policy Department. These meetings were described as “interactions” and the result has been several programmes specifically geared towards young people.
All About Trans has several aims as a professional media organisation, but the first and foremost is to increase the public’s awareness of the existence of trans children.
A year after these “interactions”, CBBC produced a TV series entitled “My Life: I am Leo”. Leo, aged 13, “always knew I was really a boy” because girls wear dresses and have long hair, whereas boys wear different things and have short hair.
CBBC is a BBC channel aimed at children aged 6-12 years old. The documentary has been shown several times since it first aired in November 2014.
There is a distinct bias in this programme, as outlined in the link above. The programme offers very little evidence to show that there are other options for children who feel “different” from other children of their sex. Gender questioning or gender non-conforming children come away from watching this documentary thinking they “must” be transgender, too. It explains gender norms as true and immutable, rather than stereotypes and social constructs that have no basis in biology and scientific fact.
Also in 2014, BBC Radio 4 produced “Just a Girl”. Mark Davies Markham acted as stenographer for Susie Green and Mermaids. The programme encourages the use of puberty blocking drugs, which are always used off-label without any clinical evidence of efficacy. This, clearly, is a dangerously biased opinion being presented as fact.
Another Leo, aged 10, was interviewed by BBC Radio 4 in 2016. The programme highlights a family that – over the course of a few short months – helped their child “transition” from female to male. The child is described as having interests outside of society’s gender expectations for girls: not liking princesses, not playing with dolls, had more male friends and role models. Leo doesn’t have any strong dysphoric feelings about his body, but his parents are putting him onto a medical pathway anyway.
Also in 2016, Victoria Derbyshire presented a programme entitled “I don’t want to grow a beard”. It is uncritical in its approach to investigating the dramatic rise of transgender children under the age of 10. Why are these young children unhappy with their bodies?
In 2017, BBC Look North featured an 8 year old boy who is confused about his sex. He thinks he has to choose between being a boy and loving dancing. He is quoted as saying:
My mind pulls me to one side and my other mind is pulling me to one side. The one on the left is saying be a boy and the other one is saying be a girl. I don’t know which one to pick.
November 2017 saw an episode presented by Louis Theroux entitled Transgender Kids. The claim: “pioneering medical professionals help children who say they were born in the wrong body” in order to transition “at ever younger ages”.
It would appear, from these productions, that the BBC is glamourising transgenderism for children – telling them that any confusion can be easily swept away with the magic of changing clothing and hairstyles, using different pronouns and taking a few pills.
Research shows that approximately 80% of gender non-conforming children will grow out of it before puberty. The programmes mentioned above rely on gender stereotypes that somehow “prove” that they are transgender. They minimise the harms of transitioning and peddle the ideology of being “born in the wrong body” which has no basis in fact. The stark realities of transitioning such as amputation of healthy body parts, sterility and loss of sexual function have no mention.
Of course, when reading about the negative sides of transitioning, one might think, “Hang on, these programmes were for and about children, weren’t they? Discussing surgical procedures and sexual function wouldn’t be appropriate!” And I would agree. But if the truth is inappropriate to bring up in a children’s programme, is it acceptable instead to peddle comfortable lies? Of course not!
The BBC’s Children in Need funds many different projects. The following table shows the amount given to various projects last year:
There is obviously a significant amount of money being funnelled into pushing the transgender agenda into public consciousness via children’s charities.
The message to teenagers, on radio and online, is similarly on-script:
iPlayer radio Advice
Newsbeat: transgender terminology
BBC Taster: Transgender
These sites link to sites such as Mermaids and GIRES to go to for more information and support, and in return Mermaids recommends BBC programmes such as ‘I am Leo’ to the young people consulting their site. It’s all very cosy and circular. Teenagers get enough encouragement and support for trans identities from social media today without having the BBC reinforcing it too. The BBC should be aware of the impact of social contagion. 1
Parents who question the transgender ideology are told they are wrong, backwards, bigoted and even abusive. Children and teenagers are increasingly dependent on the internet for their emotional support, and are told by strangers to eschew parental influence and turn to their “rainbow family” for support instead.
Children in Need supports Allsorts Youth Project, whose Trans Inclusion Schools Toolkit states, “Pupils and students have the right to access the toilet that corresponds to their gender identity” and “no pupil or student should be required to use [single stall toilets]” thus disregarding the need for female students to have access to single sex facilities in school. This guidance completely flies in the face of recent investigations by the BBC itself:
“In September 2015, a BBC investigation revealed there were 5,500 sexual offences recorded in UK schools between 2011 and 2014. Among these were nearly 4,000 alleged physical sexual assaults and more than 600 rapes, figures from Freedom of Information requests showed.”
The BBC’s Children in Need financially supports other organisations such as Gendered Intelligence, whose sexual health booklet for transgender teens states “A woman is still a woman, even if she enjoys getting blow jobs. A man is still a man, even if he likes getting penetrated vaginally.”
Educate and Celebrate, an organisation that trains schools on becoming LGBT+ friendly, provide resources that introduce the idea to very young children that they may need to medically alter their bodies to “match” their personalities. Educate and Celebrate is funded by BBC’s Children in Need:
What is the basic message being told to gender questioning and non-conforming children? They are told they have been born in the wrong bodies. We are our bodies. Our brains, our limbs, our skeletons, our endocrine systems, our reproductive systems, and so on and so on – all of these join together to form our selves. If we are telling our children that their bodies are “wrong”, we are telling them that they are wrong. In any other context, this would be classed as emotional abuse.
Parents of children with gender dysphoria want to help their children, but they often don’t agree that medicalisation is the answer. A “watchful waiting” approach has traditionally been the solution to helping children through turbulent teen years, but current thinking is now comparing that to “conversion therapy.”
Why is the BBC complicit in this one-sided representation of transgender children? Why is there no discussion of the reality of medical transition and the impacts this will have on young people? The real discussions are not taking place.
The BBC has a responsibility to report the full breadth and scope of the transgender issue, but is instead sugar-coating it to make it palatable for parents and children alike.
Perhaps this bias comes from the fact that 2% of BBC employees are transgender themselves – more than four times the national average.
There is a clear trend in the BBC, with an undoubtable focus on transgender issues and as shown here, in transgender children.
Children deserve to be loved and cared for regardless of their so-called gender identity. They don’t need to be told they are wrong for liking different toys or wearing different clothes to the ones society imposes upon them. Gender expectations constantly change over time and space. There is no scientific reasoning behind being “born in the wrong body”.
Our children deserve better than what the BBC is telling them.
With thanks to @AlfredBelpaire and @cwknews on Twitter for their original research.
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
Lords, MPs, and leading LGBT+ campaigners have signed an open letter condemning anti-trans media coverage in the UK, saying hostility has led to a “significant decline in the mental health of many trans people.”
The letter is signed by MPs including Jo Swinson, the Liberal Democrats’ deputy leader, and ex-shadow secretary for women and equalities, Sarah Champion. It demands that British media revise their coverage of trans issues.
The document, published by PinkNews in full below, calls on the media to look at the detrimental impact anti-trans coverage has on the mental health of trans people, urging publications to apologise for the psychological damage caused over the past year.
Other people among the 41 signatories are Lib Dem peer Liz Barker, Labour peer Lord Cashman and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.
It’s also backed by Susie Green, CEO of Mermaids UK, Jay Stewart, founder of Gendered Intelligence, Christine Burns, author of Trans Britain: Our Journey from the Shadows, and trans campaigners and non-binary film makers Owl and Fox Fisher.
The open letter was organised by Helen Belcher, chair of the LGBT Consortium and co-founder of Trans Media Watch.
Belcher told PinkNews: “We have just had a relentless series of scare stories around trans people…that narrative largely goes unchallenged.”
“I wanted to show that there are people in influential positions who didn’t share that view.”
Belcher continued: “For my own mental health, I felt as though I needed to do something.
“It was something to do, which I thought would benefit myself, benefit trans people at large, and actually would benefit the media and society to get a few facts out rather than all this fear-mongering.”
The publication of the letter comes ahead of the end of the public consultation on Friday (October 19) on the government’s proposed reforms to the Gender Recognition Act.
The government has previously said it wants to de-medicalise the process to legally change genders.
This means it could introduce a self-identification system, which is used in other countries like the Republic of Ireland, Norway and Denmark.
Currently, trans people have to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate—after being medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria and proving that they have lived in their “acquired gender” for at least two years—in order to legally change gender.
Trans campaigners have criticised the process for being overly bureaucratic, intrusive and dehumanising.
The letter in full
We strongly condemn the way the British media has given significant coverage to small groups who wish to push organisations to break existing law with regards to trans people. The Equality Act protects trans people from discrimination and automatic exclusion from same sex spaces, yet over recent days, weeks and months, the media has given significant space to activists who wish to roll back trans people’s existing rights.
This coverage has often conflated trans women and girls with sex offenders, implied that all trans women and girls are threats, and has usually been insufficiently challenged. The reality is that trans people are far more likely to be targets of violence than other women. Isolated extreme and abhorrent cases cannot be extrapolated to infer the behaviour of all trans people. Those countries where gender recognition is operated on an administrative rather than a quasi-judicial process also do not provide any evidence to support the assertion that trans people are a threat or misuse the process to cause harm to others.
The relentlessness of the hostility across the media and the media’s inability to adequately challenge the false claims put forward have led to a significant decline in the mental health of many trans people. Reports of suicides of trans people are on the increase. Free speech does not give free reign to cause people harm.
We call on the British media to revise the way they cover trans stories, to look at the reality faced by trans people rather than focus on extreme theories which have no basis in fact, and to apologise for the significant emotional and mental stress they have caused to trans people over the past year.
Helen Belcher – Chair, LGBT Consortium
Dr MJ Barker
Michelle Brewer – Barrister, Garden Court Chambers
Baroness Brinton – President of the Liberal Democrats
Christine Burns MBE
Baroness Burt of Solihull – Women’s Spokesperson, Liberal Democrats
Lord Carlile of Berriew
Prof Brian Cathcart – School of Journalism, Kingston University
Dr Louise Chambers – Lecturer, Goldsmiths College, University of London
Sarah Champion MP – former Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities
Dominic Davies – Pink Therapy UK
Martha Dunkley – ClinicQ
Fox and Owl Fisher – filmmakers, My Genderation
Kate Green MP – former Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
Susie Green – CEO, Mermaids UK
Dr Adrian Harrop
Prof Sally Hines – School of Sociology, Leeds University
Jennie Kermode – Chair, Trans Media Watch
Fiyaz Mughal – TellMama
Claire McCann – Barrister, Cloisters Chambers
Monty Moncrieff MBE – CEO, London Friend
Layla Moran MP
Prof Surya Munro – School of Human and Health Sciences, Huddersfield University
Nik Noone – CEO, Galop
Prof Julian Petley – Professor of Journalism, Brunel University
Tris Reid-Smith – Owner, Gay Star News
Linda Riley – Publisher, DIVA Magazine
Paul Roberts OBE – CEO, LGBT Consortium
Cat Smith MP – Shadow Secretary of State for Young People
Dame Caroline Spelman MP
Jay Stewart MBE – CEO, Gendered Intelligence
Jo Swinson MP – Deputy Leader, Liberal Democrats
Dr Damian Tambini FRSA – London School of Economics
Dr Ben Vincent – Chair, GIRES
Dr Paul Wragg – School of Law, Leeds University
Dr Tray Yeadon-Lee – School of Human and Health Sciences, Huddersfield University
I couldn’t get past the first few words of that BBC report:
“More than 300 transgender children a year …..”
The blasé assumption that these children ARE transgender. I cannot see how prepubescents can possibly decide what sexuality they are. As for feeling different and uncomfortable etc., those are normal feelings that most kids and indeed most adults feel most of the time. But if a child identifies with some label being pushed through the media then you have to ask if the child fully understands the label and, more to the point, what the child associates with the label e.g. if some prepubescent children decides they are gay, are they genuinely going to grow up gay or is it just that the media portrays gays as having lots of fun, a warm camaraderie, and generally a much more appealing life than most others?
The BBC is at the forefront of cultural Marxism in the uk they contribute considerable towards the Globalist goals of destroying family, religion and natural bisexual relationships by their constant propaganda of anti nationality and pro multiculturalism a good Marxist resource
I think the label “cultural Marxism” is a complete misnomer. What it designates – usually the gobbledegook accumulating around various cultural products (TV programmes, films, pop music etc.) is something that Marx would never have acknowledged. To him it would be like saying, “Let’s not have a revolution. Let’s just talk about this tune everyone’s whistling”.
As for that other bugbear of the right – multiculturalism – we live in a multicutural world anyway although ironically the various cultures are merging together under the force of capitalist consumerism. Of course it benefits the ruling class as always to divide and rule. And I suspect that all this guff about childhood sexual orientation is just another method of causing divisions at a more fundamental level.
So you are arguing, it seems to me, that those who see the Capitalist class behind globalisation which is to say the establishment of a world wide capitalist system, are wrong and that in fact imperialism is a Marxist project, with Marxist aims.
Is that right?
Or are you simply employing slogans that you barely understand because they have an educated ring about them?
And you have learned that if you blame Marxists nobody in authority minds what you say, you having indicated that you are on the right side, along with the fascists who came up with the term in the first place. Although, in case you didn’t know what they meant by Cultural Marxist was Jewish.
See my comments below. The rate of gayness has probably not changed since before the television era. The notion that lifestyle ads sell beer is supportable. But orientation? Not a shred of evidence.
Biological basis for gender dysphoria
Australian scientists believe they have made a major breakthrough to one day proving there is a genetic link to being transgender.
Scientists from Melbourne’s Hudson Institute took DNA samples from 724 people over 15 years, 342 of them were men, and 380 transwomen (male-to-female transgender people).
Focusing on 12 genes that produce and process sex hormones testosterone and estrogen, the study showed there were “small but significant differences in the genetic makeup” between men and transwomen.
“We think that when it comes to gender identity – that is what you think you’re a male or a female – that the sex hormones have a role,” lead researcher Professor Vincent Harley told SBS News.
“Based on these variants that are over-represented in trans-people, we would suggest that the masculinising pathways are reduced and the de-feminising pathways are also reduced.”
Biological basis for gender dysphoria
The results reveal a potential biological basis for gender dysphoria, the stress felt by someone who identifies with a sex they weren’t assigned at birth. It is estimated to affect anywhere between 0.1 to one per cent of Australians.
A possible role, but far from proven – with Professor Harley saying this study is being seen as that all-important first step.
“We know so little about what makes us feel male or female and our gender identity,” he explained.
“We don’t know what part of the brain participates; you know what region in the brain or what processes it participates yet. So we’re a long way away from that.”
“We think that when it comes to gender identity – that is what you think you’re a male or a female – that the sex hormones have a role,” is sciency bafflegab for ‘we don’t have a fucking clue but will speculate anyway’. Or in other words, a statistical correlation does not equate with a biological causation.
The BBC is beyond the pale. Blatant social engineering, bias and government propaganda. Made me laugh/incandescent with anger to hear Kirsty Wark describe RT as a ‘state-sponsored’ propaganda outlet – WTF is the BBC? Injury to that insult is the £150 a year I’m forced to pay towards her over inflated wages. Now that is redolent of state control!
Thanks for posting this Vaska. The ‘trans’ ideology is being aggressively promoted here in the US too.
Here it isn’t just through Public Broadcasting – our BBC – but also through the commercial press, public schools and universities.
People who question the ethics of physically maiming children in the interest of humoring kids with some confusion about who they are are denounced as bigots and haters. Women who don’t want men to join them in the women’s restrooms and locker rooms are derided as Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists, who … something or other.
This propaganda has been effective. Tens of thousands of children have been started on HRT by mentally infirm parents. This is Munchausen syndrome by proxy, pure and simple.
Why all the misinformed anti-science hysteria? Simply stating the existence of medical options, that some people – but not all – have chosen, does not equate to forcing young vulnerable children involuntarily into “amputation” of working body parts, nor is making such information available “encouraging the transgender ideology amongst children”. Do we speak of cancer treatment as an “ideology”? No. So why pick on transgender and gender non-conforming people, who are part of the intersex spectrum, where multiple complex interactions between genes, hormones, anatomical morphology and the environment all play a part? Get over it.
And please ffs stop obsessing over non issues like access to segregated public toilets – why go to all the effort of gender reassignment when anyone can simply dress up to commit violent crime in a segregated public toilet? Attacking trans and intersex people will not reduce such crime; surely there are far more pressing issues to pay attention to? http://www.isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex
“multiple complex interactions between genes, hormones, anatomical morphology and the environment all play a part”.
Not sure how this categorical statement squares with Psychology Today’s statement that “The cause of gender dysphoria is unknown but hormonal influences in the womb are suspected to be involved.”
That aside, you’ve omitted another crucial factor (and arguably, in my opinion, the second most important consideration after anatomical morphology) in someone having feelings of gender dysmorphia and that is state of mind. That should be the first avenue explored thoroughly and discounted before consideration is given to medicinal therapeutic treatments or, ultimately, surgery.
…Sorry, ‘gender dysphoria’ not ‘gender dysmorphia’.
My statement “multiple complex interactions…” is not “categorical” … you do understand English, no? Plus I included the word “hormone” which accords perfectly well with the Psychology Today’s statement you quote.
And guideline for access to medical interventions exactly as you describe are routinely followed now, in the UK, by medical professional care givers – I fail to see your point?
You seem to be trying to set your self up as some sort of genital morphology gatekeeper? What business is it of yours? Do you have a professional role to perform? Do you have any idea how repulsive and ridiculous such immature concerns with the genitalia of people you haven’t and never will meet are?
Get to your point, please? What exactly are your objections to proposal that sex – and therefore gender expression – is not a rigid biological binary? And that assignment errors at birth are sometimes made because legally and culturally a binary choice has to be made? And that legitimate routes in a civilised just society should be made available so that those very few indeed people who wish can change their binary designation legally and under full medical supervision – without suffering persecution from the baying crowds of bigots who deny biological reality?
Are you trying to protect some who regret changing designation? Is this based on hearsay from e.g. “Miroslav Djordjevic of the Belgrade Centre for Genital Reconstructive Surgery in 2014 … who carried out seven reversals that year…”
Instead I invite you to celebrate the vast majority that are very happy, and haven’t committed suicide “the transgender population represents about 0.3% i.e. 700,000 American adults”.
And “3,250 operations to help people physically confirm their genders in 2016 — a 19% increase compared to the previous year in the US.”
“Do you have any idea how repulsive and ridiculous such immature concerns with the genitalia of people you haven’t and never will meet are?”
Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.
I do not intend to indulge you in any further exchanges on this subject beyond this post. I find your baseless inferences insulting in the extreme. I must however make the following points:
My previous comments consisted of two objective but important observations which I considered had been overlooked in your original remarks ie. that even medical science is unable to identify the causes of gender dysphoria, and that psychological assessment is an important part of the gender dysphoria assessment process. I am not clear as to why you have taken such offence at these uncontroversial observations which did not imply that I have no understanding or acceptance of people who are genuinely affected by it.
You presented your list of ’causes’ in a finite form. To be non-exclusive you should have written “…where multiple complex interactions INCLUDING THOSE between genes, hormones, anatomical morphology and the environment all play a part?”
Yes, you mention ‘hormones’ but my point is that your list of other causes conflicts with the Psychology Today statement that “the cause of gender dysphoria is unknown”.
With regard to your offensive comments about ‘immature concerns with genitalia’, presumably you are alluding to my view that anatomical morphology should be the first issue considered by physicians in the process of establishing a cause for the gender dysphoria in individual subjects. The NHS guidelines on gender dysphoria state that ‘it may be the result of rare conditions such as intersex conditions which cause babies to be born with the genitalia of both sexes (ambiguous genitalia)’. This is a condition which a child or their parents may not be aware that the child is affected by so it has to be discounted as a possible reason for the gender dysphoria. Clearly a physical cause such as this is easier to identify at the outset than subjecting the affected person to weeks of unnecessary other tests and/or counselling, and ultimately possibly gender reassignment surgery. Hence my logical reason for saying it should be the first consideration.
The overall tone of your comments suggests to me that you consider me wrong to suggest that gender dysphoria may be anything other than ‘a biological reality’ (to use your description). This conflicts with Psychology Today and the NHS guidelines, both of which describe the assessment process for gender dysphoria which primarily comprises considerations of a psychological nature. And, yes, I do sympathise with those significant numbers of people of all ages who regret undergoing a physical gender change. For some reason, which eludes me, you seem to have a problem with that, and even wish to deny that such people exist. Why that should be, only you know.
Starting with his condescending put down “Why all the misinformed anti-science hysteria?” then descending downhill from there I find it mildly amusing to note that this sort of argument is much used by the professional skeptics community. From the Psychology Today article link I posted earlier it seems that psychologists have no consensus regarding the causes of gender dysphoria, but people still find it comforting to assert that science confirms their POV. Ok, then.
Just because aetiology is uncertain or even unknown does not diminish the claim that gender dysphoria is ‘a biological reality’ @JudyJ just as much as is the emergent property of psychology is a “biological reality’
As you write yourself: “The NHS guidelines on gender dysphoria state that ‘it may be the result of rare conditions such as intersex conditions which cause babies to be born with the genitalia of both sexes (ambiguous genitalia)’.”
Claiming gender dysphoria is ‘a biological reality’ it does not “…conflict with Psychology Today and the NHS guidelines, both of which describe the assessment process for gender dysphoria which primarily comprises considerations of a psychological nature.”
“primarily” because the aetiology is unknown
Er, primarily because there’s a bleed through in language describing gender dysphoria? From ResearchGate
Medical differentials with potential behavioral manifestations https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5481953_Medical_differentials_with_potential_behavioral_manifestations
Er. primarily because you believe being transgender is all in the mind, and post links hidden behind a paywall mistakenly thinking they support such (one-sided) opinions !
The idea that here is a “bleed through” in language (nature vs nurture) does not conflict with my statement ” “primarily” because the aetiology is unknown ” since all that’s happening is people are trying to describe the unknown !
Meanwhile transgender people exist – whatever the aetiology – get over it.
Er, no, and please don’t assume you know what I believe or ‘feel threatened by’. You don’t need to go ‘behind the paywall’ to see based on the abstract and other links I posted that psychologists have already determined that gender perceptions are based on a complex mix of psychology, neurological and other biological factors.
Astonishing! Why are ‘Off Guardian’ readers so threatened by the existence of transgender people, when according to the NHS they’re just a sub set of intersex conditions? Perhaps this research explains:-
“Across the three studies, they found that, in general, participants reported liking gender conforming and cisgender individuals more than transgender and gender nonconforming individuals (e.g., masculine women, feminine men). Participants also viewed transgender and gender nonconforming individuals as more threatening to the boundaries defining what it means to be a man or a woman (i.e., greater distinctiveness threat). However, it was gender-conforming transgender individuals (i.e., feminine transgender women, or masculine transgender men) who were viewed as being the most threatening towards gender boundaries. As Broussard put it, “it is likely that conforming transgender individuals (because they can ‘pass’ as their authentic gender) are especially threatening because they provide some evidence that there are more than two binary genders, or that [one’s] binary gender can be changed.” ”
Odd that research that confirms your views are based on self reported perceptions of gender. GIGO applies to psychology as well 🙂
“Simply stating the existence of medical options, that some people – but not all – have chosen….”
“some people” being the adults.
“…..does not equate to forcing young vulnerable children involuntarily into “amputation” of working body parts…..”
Well actually it does if the adults are making the decisions for the children.
“…..nor is making such information available “encouraging the transgender ideology amongst children”…..”
Well again, it actually does if the children, being prepubescent, have no idea of their sexuality and are getting all this curious polysyllabic waffle.
“Do we speak of cancer treatment as an “ideology”? No. So why pick on transgender and gender non-conforming people, who are part of the intersex spectrum….”
The transgender issue is related to cancer treatment????!!!! And note that you have a tendency to talk about “people” without drawing the vital distinction that the people concerned are prepubescents.
INTERSEX is ‘not’ Transgender.
I had two friends born with intersex children when I had my Son. Both of them were assigned boy, though it was clear as a baby that one was definitely a girl, and grew up with body dysmorphia and serious psychological problems from the drugs he was forced to take. He joined the Army to try and reinforce his masculinity… but then we and they moved house and we lost touch.
The fact is that children under eight are not obsessed with their ‘sexuality’ – adults are.
It is adults who promote this agenda and cause confusion in children, who are quite happy to be whatever they are.
It is adults who propagate racism, bigotry, greed. hatred and difference, Children are totally unaware.
It is adults who set the agenda for Education, TV content and Advertising. Not children.
Time now for Adults to take responsibility for the mess they are creating, and stop driving the agenda to ‘pervert’ our children.
The use of children to substitute for our own unlived life is our dream – not theirs. The use of children as victims by which to leverage power is pour ‘power struggle’ not theirs.
The denials we are unaware of may often manifest through our children – in fact family exclusions persist in embodying their patterns down through families, and collective denial and exclusion persists in embodying through society at large.
The unseen power of denial is that it operates as shadow power, but in the projection of shadows that we then suffer, fight or seek to deny, we miss the opportunity to recognize and reintegrate and therefore undo the pattern that was unconscious to a conscious capacity for choice.
Children (young beings), are highly aware in terms we may have covered over and ‘forget’ in the mask of an adaptation to conflicted self and world.
The ability to discern neediness or manipulative intent in others from an extension of true appreciation is always with us – but often overridden by social conditionings of a fearful (denial based assertion of self protection) society.
Neediness in extremis is desperate and overlooks and subordinates everything and everyone to a means of support, validation or ‘self-reinforcement’.
A true self-sufficiency is a truly connected relational awareness and not an ‘autonomous’ defence or denial of others.
Modelling an honesty of being is the contextual field of any educative intent or activity. ‘Do as I say, not as I do’ is teaching that self-deceit is the way to live in the world’. But self denial under persistent ongoing conflict teach sacrifice and suffering as ‘adult life’ so why should they want ‘in’?
The idea that joy can be got from others is the reversal of the extension of our wholeness of being TO our relationships.
Neediness or a sense of self-lack is so ‘normal’ as to be invisible, and yet it covers over or diverts from true need.
Wholeness of being is not the result of all the King’s Horses and all the King’s men – or indeed State mandates and interventions. A true self acceptance is often found after intense and futile attempts to be what we are NOT. This is part of our attempt to be what we think ‘survives’ as acceptable to parents, peers and society. To stand in our own light is not gotten from the contrast with the darkness in others – but from the willingness to see, receive and share it with others. But first we may have to recognize our shadow as our shadow. No one can change what they are unwilling to own, and changing things outside our self is often the attempt to escape what we are unwilling or unready to face.
If we open to responsibility rather than in evading or redistributing blame, we become aware of what we think, accept and act from and therefore teach – and learn. Children do not learn everything they are ‘taught’ and as soon as they wake to choice, they start to teach and learn as part of their own growing responsibility. Many flip from their own parenting to do the opposite, but this is not really a change in the underlying pattern.
My issues in ‘gender’ orientation are entirely aligned with supporting freedom of informed choice and not at all in support of enforced thought, speech or ‘choice’.
It you @binra – and practically everyone who’s posted here including the author of the article – who’s promoting “enforced thought, speech or ‘choice” in your straw-person monologue above. As Psychology Today reports:-
“Finally, it is important to emphasize that the connection between a transgender individual’s gender expression is not responsible for eliciting the prejudice of others. Rather, transprejudice stems from an internal process in which the person holding the prejudice experiences a threat to an aspect of their own identity, and thus lashes out against trans individuals as a means of trying to reaffirm the boundaries surrounding important aspects how they define their identity – in this case, their gender.”
I don’t get your point at all Nat. I am not at issue with people NOT conforming to stereotype of social norms. I don’t conform to such norms either – being engaged in releasing socially acquired and fearfully defined identity for the relational being in which love identifies truly.
I see the political USE of the transgender issue as taking power by stealth; a proxy attack on traditional cultural values and upon freedom of speech and association.
Social engineering works political agenda in the guise of victimism. Take people as you find them and become aware of prejudice when it is triggered in ourselves or in the company we are engaged in, so as not to deny in others the freedom you or I want for ourselves. I see the ‘law’ against hate-crime as being no less hateful than its targets – particularly in its incitement to mob vitriol.
Nothing so blind and unfeeling as self-righteousness, and no one is so easy to induce to engage in hate as those who are fearful and , conflicted and confused. Now they have self-certainty by joining in hate!
Or become a target by refusing…
According to @JudyJ “The NHS guidelines on gender dysphoria state that ‘it may be the result of rare conditions such as intersex conditions which cause babies to be born with the genitalia of both sexes (ambiguous genitalia)’.”
Simply answering children’s questions is not in and of itself “driving the agenda to ‘pervert’ our children”. As you say, its adults – like you – that hold these sorts of hysterical misunderstandings, as you write your self: “The fact is that children under eight are not obsessed with their ‘sexuality’ – adults are.”
Dr. Cary Gabriel Costello is a sociologist, scaler of boundary walls, and an intersex gender transitioner. “I believe we must consider trans issues to be our issues. Firstly, because the portion of the intersex community that gender transitions is much higher than the proportion of nonintersex people who gender transition. There are a lot of intersex trans folks–like myself, like my spouse–who are active in the intersex community.”
How do you publish a controversial article like this and somehow avoid the controversy of mentioning Zionism?
Bluntly, there seems hardly any point in posing the question if there is a conscious effort to ignore the answer.
Perhaps ‘Zionism’ is not the most helpful term for a power that seems like Jewish power – but it manipulates Jews and uses them and the Jewish identity. Whereas national power factions can capture and gain influence over key spheres of influence, international factions or alliances that are not only concentrated in political process but also in a broad spectrum of influence, can both self-protect and further their own purposes in ways that undermine or subvert any due process of communication.
If people accept their government and mainstream media for information, they will believe all kinds of stories that are designed to shape their perceptions and reactions to support the power class that effectively dictates the narrative in which decisions are taken.
One of the symptoms of a blind egotism, is the drive to raise an image of the ‘enemy’ and kill them – and this works also for disease vectors. It also sets up the ‘Protective’ symbol of anti-evil that NOT complying with or NOT conforming to invites or attracts association with evil and thus denial and attack for being a ‘denier’ of the ‘true cause’.
For a top down terrorism to operate it has to assign victims, affect and elicit sympathy, and direct accusation and hatred to the assigned perpetrator as a righteous justification of vengeance in attacking or denying them.
This pattern of wanting and focusing in grievance, pain, limitation or loss as a means to get power is pervasive to the masking of our truly human presence beneath asserted presentations of learned defence and masking offence. The mask as protector becomes as one with our self and defended with all the resources of our self. Everyone has their own version at some level of what is seen in the world – but it may seem relatively innocent and harmless as well as so habitually normal as to be invisible and unnoticed.
Succumbing to the illusion of power in the world is always associated with powerlessness – of a sense of lack that seeks to become ‘more than’, to ‘outdo’ and assert grandiosity and defend the image as itself – against the true but un-recognized presence of a rejected self.
Awake to the power of illusion is recognition and alignment in true purpose or law of Mind that experience reflects. For thought can reflect truly shared being or it can block awareness of the true in conflicted and mis-taken identity.
In our time we meet ‘phishing’ as the intent to pass of the false as true – by inducement to fantasy of self-specialness or shock-threat of loss demanding immediate and overriding protective action. Once reacted from as true, the bait is taken and the trap is effected as a misidentification, running as real – and this of course can be used to induce the target to give power away under the belief they are gaining protection or limiting loss.
While we yet run under the masked or mistaken identification, we will align with the false power and defend against the true under a reversal of perception. We thus willingly support that which is against our true Good while reinforcing fear of embracing or sharing in our Good – because it seems to threaten to take away even the little that we have. No one wants to lose, and in having accepted a self-specialness (in both negative and positive terms), such ‘self’ operates the overriding defence against fear of total loss – but does so in the mask of power struggle – such that someone else’s loss, is my survival, gain or protection from exposure.
The nature of persistent incoherent experience can be assigned to ‘others’ or external agencies, as a way to persist in personification of struggle as the emotionally charged attempt to vindicate a narrative identity over an unsupporting, rejecting, depriving, denying or abandoning and treacherous betrayal of a Reality as given focus in hatred of a life and world unworthy of our self-in-image and personified in those we project and perceive such unworthiness upon.
But of course Reality is not personal subjection over or under – so much as ‘What Is – as it is’, and not stories we want to be true. In accepting self-in-image in place of a true reception and extension of being, we effect the “unsupporting, rejecting, depriving, denying or abandoning and treacherous betrayal of Reality”. But ‘God is not mocked’. That is Reality is not changed of its true nature by our temporary acceptance of a false. But the Law of sowing and reaping operates a negative return – not as punishment but as the just measure of giving and receiving. To go forth and multiply error is to create a world of conflict, powerlessness and debt, by giving power to powerlessness for the mask of survival in its terms.
But if the foundation or basis from which such a perception and engagement of self and world is untrue, then all of what follows logically from its premise is likewise untrue. Recognition of illusion as illusion is a true accounting. If this persists instead of opening curiosity and desire for what is true, then there are further layers to the illusion that are believed to get something we want and curiosity is therefore aroused as to the beliefs that have been taken on that would account for our behaviour and experience.
The ‘overriding call to war and defence’ operates the denial of curiosity and true enquiry – such as to frame it only in terms of the defence, and that is to weaponise and marketise everything that moves.
For Life is a true Movement of being but image and concept are static – no matter how much life we give them, how animated their shifting forms seem to be, or how much we believe and suffer them true.
The development of the segregative self as a world of division over which to rule or judge reality, is an alloy of the love of what we truly are and the fear we made in self-specialness – as if to be apart from and in judgement over – and thus to open the experience of being subjected and driven by our own misplaced allegiance. The recognition of the true from the false is the awakening to the freedom to choose one and let the other go. But first we have to be re-minded or shown what our own mind has become master of confusing. So it is not our acquired thinking that decides what is true from what is false – but the self-honesty to pausing, resting or putting aside the attempt to ‘think about’ instead of feel and know our existence here and now.
For what is in accord with who and what you truly are is not conflicted in you. And what is out of accord is discordant. While this is simplicity itself, the overlaying of a complex defence mechanism in thought, that invokes emotional and physical reinforcement, is as a ‘shout’ over what seems a still small voice until the willingness to hear it grows by appreciation.
The ‘ego’ is the intent to take over or usurp the true functions of being to its own personal control. But true control is knowing where and how to be within all that is here as an alignment in unified purpose.
Domination is an externalised attempt to unify by subjection. But has no seeming of power without the subjected, and so can never be whole as an enforcement of parts by partiality.
A fascinating response, thank you. I recognise the truth of what you are writing. I’m not a writer/academic/journalist, just a humble IT bloke who spends his life behind a computer reading an awful lot online of what others write, comments like yours are helping to educate me, having dropped out of academia for all but technical training in my job which helps me earn a living but doesn’t otherwise float my boat intellectually. Please point me in the direction I need to go to discover more about the themes you’ve written about, I am truly fascinated by these sorts of ideas. Many thanks.
Your are welcome. A recognition of resonance is a felt quality rather than just an agreement of self reinforcement.
So as a just and humble man, you have no need to limit yourself in definitions that do not serve you.
While I picked up more than I realised from a state education, my sense of learning was awakened outside of any formal or institutional setting. Learning in life of life.
I pointed out the direction – did you notice?
Following and aligning in the felt quality of true a recognition – which is not simply parsing information but an active listening and looking within at the same time as engaging in our relations, our world, our ‘ordinary’. This is aligning in joy rather than under joyless definitions and that is the other facet; to notice the definitions you accept and act out as if true so as to reevaluate if they truly serve you. And also to be curious about the definitions that must be active to result in the experience that you have which of course may be unwatched or unconscious ‘habit’ of old programs that no longer serve, and run within nested programs. But no one can change what they are are unwilling to own – and our psychological defences are ‘hidden’ ways of not knowing what we did not want to know or own.
I ‘lost’ my first response somehow but perhaps that prepared the way for this one.
Everything in the world is a teacher for the willingness to learn, and the purpose we hold is the determiner of what we learn. I like the idea of learning as a transformed and more aligned perception – as a learning result from which to act or live, rather than stuffing our mind as if to build a structure to reach to somewhere else or become something else. So may use the term ‘unlearning for what they thought they knew – as the re-opening of a channel of two way communication, receiving and giving.
Your need is not a an actual lack, but a true desire that unfolds fulfilment by being accepted, recognised and lived.
Humility is often mistaken for self belittling or self denial, but arrogance is as blind in self assertions of lack of worthiness as it is in self-inflation.
A just measure includes GIGO – ‘garbage in garbage out’. But what we choose to give focus to and accept sets the measure of our perception and response.
I wrote here of foundational or contextual aspects and not the specific themes being lived out collectively. If there are specific areas of interest you have to ask specific questions. As I indicated, it isn’t just information to ‘find’ but the resonance of an inner questioning of what seems real from a quality of felt existence rather than just thinking some more in the frame of a believed existence.
In some sense my ‘identity conflict’ opened an opportunity of healing or reintegration, rather than a search for self-reinforcement from a sense of lack, denial or grievance – but of course I felt and can feel the negative emotional states, but I have much less willingness to invest in them as a result of valuing conscious appreciation.
The ideas of ‘sovereignty’, and of ‘family’ may be associated with a breakdown in communication, but I feel for the redeeming of what had become adulterated, corrupted or usurped of its true function and meaning. This uncovering of a true sense of life is within me and not a demand upon others to change to fit my idea of what should be. Change generates its own ‘demands’ in terms of consequences that cannot be forever evaded or dis-owned.
But are these conditions ultimately inflicted upon us or set up by our ‘conditional demand’ identity complex?
Perhaps it would help if instead of asking the author to write “a controversial article and somehow avoid the controversy of mentioning Zionism?” you wrote a comment explaining your POV? We’d be interested 🙂
manfromatlan, I defer to Maggie below if you seek elaboration.
Hi, FS, and a very excellent comment it is too. From my deep diving into various psychological and occult movements concur with the assessment of them being mind control psyops.
My response to a Jewish supremacist on a discussion website in 2009:
Or in other word’s, “Portnoy’s Penis” 🙂
Here is a snippet:-), explaining the bones of what you /we all need to know..
Of course this is only the tip of the iceberg… What we really want to know is – WHO GAINS!
That answer is for another post….
It is well worth your time to open the link and read the whole article.
As such we can deduce that the Third World War has been a quiet war with the battle lines drawn between the Financial Elite and the Global Populations. The following report highlights the agenda to disturb the natural hormonal balance of humanity via chemical disruption of the endocrine system in order fixed sexuality be undermined.
Creating Homosexuality and Confused Gender
There exists a group of chemicals which to science are known as endocrine disruptors, these chemicals have been mapped and carefully selected to perform a dark and sinister agenda, they are quite literally bringing about the biological destruction of humanity, with the main intent to disrupt the male hormone function to satisfy the eugenics and technotronic program.
These ubiquitous chemicals, which are found in a host of products from tap water, cans of beer, plastics, condoms (birth pill), ,processed food, female sanitary implements, cosmetics, has the end result of changing human DNA and turning humanity into diseased mutants for the profit and benefit of the pharmaceutical corporations, corporations that ultimately are owned by the private central banking system.
Even worse, these chemicals cause numerous diseases and conditions from prostate cancer, fibroids, diabetes, ADHD, bipolar disorder, breast cancer, heart disease, birth defects, early puberty, PCOS, impotence, undescended testicles, and obesity.
The best way to cleanse your water supply is through the installation of an electro osmosis mechanism in your home. This will remove almost all damaging chemistry aimed at disrupting your endocrine system, this includes fluorides and chlorine.
Obesity is caused by the oestrogens in the release of insulin. Furthermore, these chemicals are changing people’s sexual orientation and gender identity ‘in the womb’ hence the increase in homosexuality.
This is for the benefit of the Population Control Eugenicists who wish to increase homosexuality in order to decrease certain ethnic groups of the world’s population. In particular.
We are looking at a massive industry through the supply of the chemicals to change males into transgender females with a continued need for the Pharmaceutical Corporations synthetic hormone medications.
The twisted chemistry began as a corporate agenda under the Eugenics programmes through medications with the introduction by Eli Lilley of Diethylstilbestrol (DES) a synthetic oestrogen.
From 1947 to 1971, doctors prescribed DES, a synthetic oestrogen, to millions of pregnant women to prevent miscarriage. Some early scientific studies questioned the drug’s usefulness, finding it to be Carcinogenic to laboratory animals and ineffective in preventing miscarriage, and by 1970 doctors had identified a rare form of vaginal cancer in some young women exposed in utero to DES.
Epigenetic’s is a process by which multi-generational effects of a condition, through the changes to DNA, are passed to the offspring, DES acted in this manner.
The molecular structure of DES is found in Soy and Bisphenol A.
Soy is found in almost all processed foods and is fed to farm animals. Soy blocks testosterone in the brain of a male child in the womb, the child though physically male, will therefore be attracted to males. The opposite effect happens in females, with the brain allowing testosterone into the brain from which the female will be attracted to females. This is the mechanic going on within children who are gender confused, based on physical body not matching the innate chemistry coming from the brain.
Bisphenol A is pasted on the walls of all tinned foods, it is found in your petrol and supermarket receipts, it is in all plastics and also found in paper money. The hand sanitisers promoted in the hospitals and corporate organisations enhance the absorption of bisphenol A by 100 percent, not such a benevolent agenda as you are led to believe?
The sex industry is also a major player in the transfer of Bisphenol A, sex toys and lubes are laced with the chemical with the intent to disrupt the hormonal balance of those using and as an epigenetic condition to be passed on to future offspring.<<<
It is vital that WE educate ourselves if we are to stave off what ‘they’ have in store for us.
Please – open the links I have posted and ‘follow the money’.
Another Frankfurt School Dr. Evil alum,Theodor Adorno (1903-1969) concurred in 1938, commenting on his Radio Research Project. Adorno wrote that listeners to Radio programs “fluctuate between comprehensive forgetting and sudden dives into recognition. They listen automictically and dissociate what they hear … They are not childlike, but they are childish; their primitivism is not that of the undeveloped, but that of the forcibly retarded.” The project’s findings, published in 1939, backed up Adorno’s thesis of “enforced retardation” and serve as a brainwasher’s handbook.
It was obvious from even the earliest clinical studies of Television that viewers, over a relatively short period of time, ‘entered into a trance-like state of semi-awareness’, characterized by a fixed stare.
The longer one watched, the more pronounced the stare.
In such a condition of twilight-like semi-awareness, they were susceptible to messages both contained in the programs themselves and through transference in the advertising. They were being brainwashed…
Fred Emery’s report in 1975 on neurological studies illustrated that repeated television viewing “shuts down the central nervous system of man.”
Adorno found the prospects of television absolutely lizard lip-licking. In 1944, he wrote:
“Television aims at the synthesis of Radio and Film … but its consequences are enormous and promise to intensify the impoverishment of aesthetic matter, so drastically that by tomorrow, the thinly veiled identity of all industrial culture products can come triumphantly out in the open, derisively fulfilling the Wagnerian dream of Gesamtkunstwerk — the fusion of all arts in one work.”
Lewin’s claim to fame was Group Think, or group dynamics. He was the inventor of sensitivity training, or attack training. In other words, you gather a group of people, assign a group leader, identify the ‘stronger-willed’ people in the group and hammer them into silence or submission through ostracism and shaming.
BRAINWASHING – How the British use the Media for Mass Psychological Warfare:
The structure of human consciousness is the ‘template’ from which all else follows.
Within a split and divided mind is a world of manipulative entanglement, limitation and loss.
The template is like the idea of the Matrix, and the idea of a priesthood or indeed moneylenders ‘guarding’ the Temple is part OF the template. The archetypes of emergence from and the setting of ‘order OVER perceived and believed chaos as an order that yet hearkens back to a lost or ‘Golden Age’ – and seeks to regain it, are deeply ‘conditioned’ learnings of a pre verbal consciousness – just as the replication of this in each life is experienced as the compulsion to dissociate into masking persona. Indeed without the development and adaptation of the personality construct, the human or virtual reality experience could not be participated in. But that is not to say the Template is true, and a different sense of self and world come from a true foundation.
I write this sketch to underscore that whatever humans have endeavoured, has been FROM predicates of self definition relative to world that inevitably or logically unfold that idea. We learn by what we teach and while we teach division, we learn it as the development of a fragmenting self and world under a narrative identity that seeks to ‘order’ its own chaos.
The moral sense in truth is firstly our own integrity or thought, word and experience, and through that the discernment of truth in others. (To thine own self be true..). A unified or integrated coherence of meaning is then embodied in the acts and expressions of its shared appreciation.
The loss of awareness of integrity to guilt and shame led to the hiding of guilt and of fear of penalty, in fig leaf thinking – that is in the emperor’s new clothes of presentations and assertions of forms and behaviours INSTEAD of a true relation lived, shared and rested in. The moral corruptions of ‘self-righteous’ judgements according to blind laws and rules that have no awareness of anything true because the true has to be defended AGAINST to keep the fig-leaved mask intact.
There are no universal ‘moral rules’ that can replace the law of love, but there is intent that is recognised to block awareness of true integrity, and trap us in guilt, conflict and lies – if it is given allegiance by acting from it.
And there is an inner awareness that has never left it Source and yet cannot leave you – regardless what you think to have done, become or failed to be or do. However this awareness is ruled out by fear of truth, because truth or honesty of being is associated with exposure in guilt and penalty of pain and loss.
It is further ruled out by the attempt to redistribute blame away from self onto others and world and Life and the force of the ‘morally justified’ hate brought to bear in the sense of escaping disempowerment in a sense of protection, order and capacity to persist in such a life without any conscious awareness of hidden or denied consequence AS genuine feedback to our own current state.
What if evil is an experience-outcome of a false identification and not an actual presence or power capable of acting alone?
Why did Jesus warn ‘Resist ye not evil?
It is not that there are not genuine issues to address in all that you posted, but who is without sin, let them stand forth as the first to throw the stone. Of course there is no one who WANTS to kill the sinner that is not seeking to ‘escape’ their own sin.
A RELATIVE innocence is still defined in the framing of guilt.
The inner Awareness that has never left its Source is also the translation and reintegration of what we have ‘made’ into terms that love can accept and understand.
Look to ‘sweep’ your inner ‘template’ or indeed ‘Temple’ (devotions) of what has no true belonging in who you now feel and know yourself to be. The restoring of an integrity of being is a different perspective on human error.
You’re completely misreading Adorno’s tone and intent here. The phrase “to intensify the impoverishment of aesthetic matter” is the dead give-away of what Adorno’s attitude towards and his judgment of the new medium actually was.
Maggie, I agree with Vaska. It seems you are completely misreading and misunderstanding Adorno. He was EXTREMELY critical of the role of Television and other popular culture in brainwashing and dumbing the masses and impoverishing the spirit, yet you present it as if he was supporting it.
Dan, if you read some of Adorno’s early essays on music, especially jazz, then you go hmm. On the one hand he was right in saying popular culture could dumb down the masses, as you look at the latest manufactured (and talentless) pop star climb the charts. On the other hand popular culture can inspire mass movements as well, so maybe it’s a matter of discernment?
So while I appreciate that Adorno warned us of the dangers of oh, one type of fascism, I note he and his fellow psychologists wrote the blueprint for another type of fascism? Just saying 🙂
I clicked on the link to the BBC’s one-sided representation of transgender children and while I was glancing through the article I noticed a link at the side to an obituary of Denis Norden which I read. In the midst of this Brave New World we’re entering, it cheered me up.
Humour may yet save us all.
Among the barrage of fake news we can at least assume that Denis Norden really has died.
A Psychology Today article
The Gender Reassignment Controversy
Nigel Barber Ph.D.
Mar 16, 2018
blockquote>These differences may be shaped by how children are raised but gender reassignment, even early in life, is difficult, and problematic. Reassignment in adulthood is even more difficult..
The first effort at reassignment, by John Money, involved David Reimer whose penis was accidentally damaged at eight months due to a botched circumcision.
The Money Perspective
Money believed that while children are mostly born with unambiguous genitalia, their gender identity is neutral. He felt that which gender a child identifies with is determined primarily by how parents treat it and that parental views are shaped by the appearance of the genitals.
Accordingly, Money advised the parents to have the child surgically altered to resemble a female and raise it as “Brenda.” For many years, Money claimed that the reassignment had been a complete success. Such was his influence as a well-known Johns Hopkins gender researcher that his views came to be widely accepted by scholars and the general public.
Unfortunately for Brenda, the outcome was far from happy. When he was fourteen, Reimer began the process of reassignment to being a male. As an adult, he married a woman but depression, and drug abuse, ensued, culminating in suicide at the age of thirty-eight (1).
Money’s ideas about gender identity were forcefully challenged by Paul McHugh (2), a leading psychiatrist at the same institution as Money. The brunt of this challenge came from analysis of gender reassignment cases in terms of both motivation and outcomes.
Money dined out for decades on this one case and he grossly misrepresented it. Such is the power of ego and faith, and gender biology is even more susceptible to these.
The University of Toronto professor (and later Ontario Deputy Minister of Education) Ben Levin who introduced the failed 2010 sex ed curriculum was convicted of three counts of possessing child porn https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/former-ontario-education-deputy-minister-pleads-guilty-to-three-child-porn-charges
I remember the controversy at the time when Muslim parents in Toronto protested the curriculum and thought they were being reactionary.
Now eight years later I see the advocacy directed at children and go hmm.
Seems to be a long term plan: Please stop breeding so we can justify increases in compliant slave workers from elsewhere
I used to laugh at that kind of comment. Now I don’t. I wouldn’t put anything past our lords and masters. As I mentioned above, this transgender issue may be another case of divide-and-rule sown at an early stage. Also another case of mind bending to confuse and disorientate.
As you set or accept your purpose, so is your lord or master.
The fixation upon deceit as if we are not complicit is itself a deceit is it not?
That others can believe and behave manipulatively – that is exploitively toward others is not a rule that say “Thou Must Do Likewise!”. But of course if you break with a habit addiction, you may seem to ‘threaten’ those who persist in the identity habit.
It’s all very well to sit as if on some fence and describe the world – but are we ‘seeing’ only what our mind dictates or lets us see?
The identity in ‘control’ runs deep, as both a power of protection from fear (of loss of self possession) and as the idea of judgement upon and power over others, and world – in the extension of the same judgement upon our self.
We CAN be very wrong in our judgement and never wholly right.
From the Corporation that brought you Jim’ll Fix It…
Jim was one of their biggest fixers.
After a bit more reflection, I realised with a chill that Jim may have been one of their smaller fixers.
A couple of links which might be of interest:
A documentary shown on RT entitled “I want my sex back” featuring three middle-aged people who, having undergone sex changes years previously, realised that – for them – they had made a mistake and were now questioning whether sufficient counselling and psychological assessment is carried out before carrying out sex change operations. Their basic contention was that they thought a sex change would resolve the doubts they had at a young age about their birth gender but after having the operation they found that they still had the psychological challenges and insecurities that led to them having the operation. It makes for very interesting and enlightening viewing.
An article on the refusal of Bath Spa University to provide a researcher with funding to look into the number of people who regret undergoing transgender surgery. There are a number of articles on line about this.
When are medical science and the BBC going to help people like Bob Dylan, who has said he was born of the wrong parents?
The Chinese Cultural Revolution reached directly to the young as a way to undermine and eradicate the old.
I don’t see this issue as primarily for children or about children but targeting the family and the remnants of any traditional cultural identity.
It should be noted that many who once showed some independence of thought are now doing or saying what they are told.
Who or what is the primary social engineering agenda that operates internationally through various sectors of influence -some of which are under the banner of aid, medication, education, infrastructural developments, and confer ‘rights’ that actually deny natural rights – ie free speech in questioning, criticising and calling those entrusted with power to account. This is via the cultivation and use of victimism. Unless the use of victimism can be called out, identified and left without support, there will be no freedom, no waking to a true self-responsibility and passive compliance to becoming slaves under those we will not be allowed to speak of.
In this respect Jordan Peterson is holding a true witness to true human right by exercising it – regardless whether we agree with his style, opinion or apparent political stance. There are some lines that cannot be crossed without a total abnegation of integrity. Is your mind, your own? I tell you that what we take for freedom is slavery and what we fear and avoid as slavery is freedom – but under the spell of the belief our thinking IS our own and that we ARE as we think and the world IS as we engage in – are we framed in thinking that is somewhat like the small print of contractual agreements. Such is the nature of deceits.
The issues that such a top down mimicry of grass roots activism chooses are not a result of compassionate embrace so much as proxies or trojans by which to enact disempowerment as the void in which to take it and enforce it on any who remain standing. It is a long term plan and in many ways simply operates the mechanism by which human thought is captured, framed and directed.
So my response here is not about those who are used for such purpose, but with the purpose that masks under ‘caring’ while framing anyone who does not comply with ‘caring’ as despicable and fed to the mob. The idea of domination by occupation is not where it’s at now. The idea is of broad spectrum dominance of every aspect of influence in society and it is not the USA that is being prepared to assume full spectrum dominance.
There is a parasite that lives part of its life cycle in rats, but must then continue its next cycle in cats, and so the parasite hacks the mind of the rat to associate cats with the pleasure principle instead of with threat. This reversal in our human consciousness is pervasive and unrecognized excepting to some extent in those who are realising that “Everything is BACKWARDS; everything is upside down! Doctors destroy health, Lawyers destroy justice, Universities destroy knowledge, Governments destroy freedom, Major media destroys information, And religions destroy spirituality”. ~ (Michael Ellner)
All the sideshows keep us engaged in diversion while being robbed of our consciousness – and yet oblivious to the fact.
The managed consciousness will have its fantasy of freedom, its substitutions for love, as rewards and privileges for compliance and deprivation and loss of validity for anything else. Perhaps like Orwell I need not place this in the future. He didn’t.
There is a saying of something like ‘abandon hope ye who enter here’. But I say look truly and fully on that which is meaningless and abandon it instead of succumbing to it. The DESIRE has to come first, not the ‘how’. Living desire is not reactive fear to a sense of threat, but a positive embrace of a true appreciation – shared.
Principalities are the nature of those succumbing to the illusion of power instead of abiding awake in the power of illusion. Watch the thought and emotional reactions – instead of letting them ‘think’ you without first checking in for true recognition.
I will meet you in willingness for relationship through whatever mutual willingness for communication at whatever level or manner is called for or brought forth in shared purpose. But an assertive imposition is no relationship – even if it funds me, gives me resources, privileges and a sense of being someone special. Thanks but no thanks.
Relationship is a dance and an art of approach and giving space, or willingness to recognize worthiness and the extension of it from the same place as is uncovered in me. The replacement of the living with machine thinking is a golem or automaton. If this is your accepted, then your handler calls you – or indeed culls you.
But if you choose to stand in the living, then your heart’s call is the capacity to hear a different voice and be moved and guided and supported in undoing the nightmare, one step at a time – but each step is a maximal step, because in a sense it is always the same willingness to listen in and uncover true as the basis for accepting thought and response – whatever forms the situation takes.
In some film where Richard Gere was being taught to dance, he was told, don’t move until you feel the movement. Of course this means being open to being moved and not just thinking about what ‘movement’ would be like.
Excellent. Thank you for that.
Brilliant perceptive post, thank you for that.
What exploding Neoliberalism wants is to commercialize sexuality and reproduction!
It’s not at all surprising. The UK moral and social landscape has undergone massive transformation in the past decade or two.
I’m all for equality, but this is nothing to do about equality, it’s all about pushing specific agendas and preferring certain groups over others.
Real socialism treats every one as equal, and gives them equal opportunities, and indeed these people profess to be socialists, however, they are anything but that. They are more accurately very dangerous idealogues and provocateurs and they use the media usch as the BBC and Guardian to get their way.
My reading on this is that they are in fact what’s best described as neo-Bolsheviks who are attempting to overthrow society and create a revolution, a century after their ilk did it in Russia with disastrous consequences. They are backed by the same people too, do I need to elaborate further? I think not.
The bolsheviks wanted an end to feudalism and the monarchy and implementing socialism they weren’t trying to teuren people gay or into transgenders
No need to elaborate further ? The people who backed the Bolsheviks are now changing boys into girls and vice versa ? Please Continue
Everything seems to be loaded against our kids in the UK – Modern day Pan European Genocide using social and financial weapons instead of guns and gas.
Pairing of same sex couples on a grand scale has the same result as forcing white kids to sleep in shop doorways.
The Kalergi plan at work?
Hard to know where to start. But surely pretending that there are not fundamental differences biologically between males and females of any species is absolutely ridiculous and flies in the face of mountains of evidence, including chromosomal, hormonal, epigenetic, and gene expression studies.
Having spent several years studying a small corner of these issues, I can say they are complex and none will likely fit anything but layered multifactorial processes.
I continue to be amazed at how many people seem to deny pleiotropism, heterogeneity, phenocopies and many other biological concepts readily ascertained in the plant and animal world.
I once had a post deleted from CiF because I said that every nucleated cell in the body is different systematically between males and females. No matter that I had cited the then recent paper in Nature Genetics showing this in human brain tissue.
The many unanswered questions leave open opportunities for the non-cognoscenti to insert their fervent data-free wishes. I am a harsh critic of the BBC but keep in mind that what is being addressed is the hurtful biases perhaps biologically based which damage those who are different. It has been a bad card to have been dealt to be gay, to be transgendered, and to gender misidentify. Taking a doctrinaire position on these matters because they are in opposition to a single individual’s personal experience seems foolhardy. But tolerance is the goal, which might well come before understanding. Why interfere with attempts to achieve it?
The real issue is that the promotion of transgenderism in mainstream culture in a sense represents a failure on our part to achieve real equality between all groups and real tolerance in society generally.
We can’t overcome social and cultural stereotypes (such as blue for boys and pink for girls) as companies continue to push these down our throats so instead of changing the stereotypes and giving more freedom to parents and children to choose what suits them, we instead brainwash families and force the children to change – physically and hormonally if need be – to conform to the stereotypes.
The BBC attitude seems to be no different from the attitude the Islamic Republic of Iran takes towards male homosexuals, in encouraging gay men to undergo sex reassignment surgery which the government there even subsidises.
This transgender brainwashing also has an additional benefit of silencing women on insisting on having some public space for themselves for their security.
We have to ask what is the hidden agenda behind transgenderism when it has the potential for setting back women’s rights and their participation in public arenas such as sport and particular sports like women’s mixed martial arts where there are already transgender female athletes.
There is a bigger picture both biologically and socially than to make this about women’s rights, although it surely encompasses them.
George: I would be genuinely interested if you could expound your view of the “bigger picture”, at least in brief. Also, I’d be similarly interested in following up your main comment. Could you please post a link or two for the lay reader? Many thanks.
I can try but anything feasible will be a simplification and will invite dispute but maybe that is a good thing. Reproduction is after all, the focal point of most evolutionary processes. Similarly, nothing in biology makes sense except in the context of evolution said ?Spencer. Sexes and separate chromosomal makeup for the sexes and sexes themselves antedate humans by millions of years.
All this must have had advantage for it to have developed, and for it to have been maintained. How it developed is hard to study. The capacity for two-parent contribution to the offspring increased diversity.
There is no design in Naure but it sure seems like there is, there has been so much time to carve and polish. If I had spent several lives I might be able to break 80 in golf even though I am a hacker.
The development of a human is super complex. The determination of external gender is tightly tied to internal gender but not synonymous with it. This means they can be dissociated, although Nature does not favour it. In fact it does in a way. Consider the large reproductive disadvantage of the gay male. Despite producing less offspring, the frequency of gay males is remarkably consistent among populations, implying this has some kind of advantage. Lots written about this paradox but my take is that gay males provide some kind of herd advantage through their capacity for nurture and family harmony but no one really knows why.
Many such processes leading to gender development have a default pathway leading to one phenotype or sex, and an active process leads to the other. And like all, there can be variation. Most of it is hard wired and very resistant to change. But as she so often does, Nature always allows for loopholes in her own hard wired imperative for diversity. So yes there are men who are bisexual, just not many, most being gay males often forced to feign a straight phenotype. Females are more adaptable.
Human history is a drop in the evolutionary bucket. So social phenomena of the last few hundred years have no influence on these matters. The comments on “promoting transgender” are just like what was said even a short generation ago about gay males. It even led to siblings forbidding their children to associate with their own gay brothers for fear it would make the child gay. Not a shred of evidence that orientation in the male can be so shifted. And the notion that giving a boy a unisex name or blue sheets could change his orientation is foolish.
The sexes are obviously complementary in the animal world. Vide the drab plumage of the female bird so she can be less visible on the nest. The same is surely true in the human but unfortunately many faced with this message find themselves unable to embrace it and demand the laws of nature be mis-copied. What is wrong with different but equal?
I have to run now and realize I have given you no links but if you give me a specific issue will find some for you, or expand.
It was Dobzhansky not Spencer.
The point I was making in my original comment was that the cultural stereotypes long associated with men and women or boys and girls, regardless of whether those cultural stereotypes were actually derived from or had anything to do with actual biological sex – after all, what is it about male biology determines that boys should prefer the colour blue over pink and what in female biology determines that girls should prefer pink over blue? – still persist in Western society because there are political, social and economic forces that benefit from their continued existence, even though they may be harmful to both men and women, and restrict opportunities for both men and women to make the best use of their abilities and talents.
So because these stereotypes continue to exist, society has taken a different path: if a girl dislikes girly things, is discontented because she is expected to like girly things, expresses a desire to play with or like the things that boys like, and sometimes wishes she could have been born a boy so she can play with the boys, we straight away decide she is suffering gender dysphoria, persuade her that that is what the problem is, and start her on a program resulting in invasive surgery that will turn her into a boy.
We do nothing to challenge or change the social / cultural stereotypes that restrict girls / women in what they can or can’t do, and which also restrict boys / men in what they can or can’t do.
Are we any better than those societies which deny the existence of homosexuality and which deal with homosexual men by forcing or persuading them to undergo male-to-female sexual reassignment surgery and treatments?
Conformity and compliance to social dictate, stereotype or social engineering is a choice not to use choice, except to ‘follow’ others – at least in expressed thought and behaviour.
Honouring being, is not a forced worship unto specified forms of presented behaviour.
And in a world-mind predicated on an image or form-based sense of self and reality, the sacrifice of being to forms made idol, is the nature of its/our conflict.
Do you be true to yourself in being? – or adopt the mask of survival in terms that the mask sets? – and sets to become your face, your mind and world?
This to me is the essence of what ‘giving unto Caesar and God as is truly due unto them’ is all about.
To that which is truly honouring – GIVE honour to know you have and share it. But to that which is blind to honour give nothing of your heart’s allegiance – or you give power to that which refuses to share it because it seeks or thinks it has it for itself.
The idea of demanding rights of a state or ‘higher power’ is different than asserting right to be seen or heard. The conferring of worldly power always has strings attached but to a sense of having been denied, that can so easily be overlooked in the taking of the bait of privilege or favour conferred.
The issue under much or all of our conflict IS identity conflict, that is first a split and divided self, that then perceives and reacts to a split and divided world. Natural divisions are not a loss of wholeness but an embrace of a richness of diversity of expression and experience. Unnatural divisions are a loss of wholeness to a split minded sense of alienation from (and fear of) our own being. Our ‘world’ then reflects our narrative justi-fictions for such a private reality experience AS defining our self. True identification is not a self construct asserted or demanding compliance, but is recognized in giving and receiving as one.
But our masking and coping adaptation to the human world IS a version of ‘self we make’ from acquired and inherited impressions, associations and communications. This ‘development’ is negatively driven as the need to survive a fearful and threatening sense of existence.
There are many factors as to why any one may not identify in their born gender or be able or willing to conform to social dictates, or peer pressure. Family dynamics are not only complex but intergenerational.
The state does not belong in the role of manually overriding and replacing family relations and nor does transglobal corporate social engineering. But where Corporate interjection undermines support for relational honouring by inducement to private gratification, the State moves in with ‘protective’ interjections to inaugurate a managed and ph/farmed humanity. IT gives validation of personhood subject to compliance, that extends privilege to indulge in private gratifications – while retaining the power to move the goal posts such as to be able to set up and bring down any such identification as part of an ever shifting strategy of maintaining the illusion of control.
Willingness to give honour and recognition for being that you would in truth receive, is the only way to have it. But not as an assertive demand fuelled by grievance. To have it, we must give it, and if we feel we are deprived and denied, we do not KNOW that we have/are love that gives, and so we seek it in substitutions that cannot fulfil because they are not true.
Most if not all stereotypes are true to a point. If you doubt this go to the source. So Chinese mock their own driving frailties, men mock their own multitasking deficiencies and Jews mock many things about themselves. It is just not palatable to hear it from others because such comments associate with prejudice.
There is very little forcing. The pendulum is swinging, perhaps too far but it is mostly well intentioned. Overcompensation is a ubiquitous phase in social change. It is important to call it out when it happens, as you have.
You may come to rue your choice of metaphors.
If Chinese mock their own driving frailties, and we were to apply the reasoning behind transgenderism’s targeting of children through BBC programs to that stereotype, then the Chinese would be advised to construct ever more railway lines for high-speed trains. Which they are already doing without much prompting from us …
Men mock their multi-tasking deficiencies so they are best advised to keep specialising in whatever it is they specialise in and just turn super-geeky.
Jewish people mock themselves so they should just … er …
Now Jen, most everything you do is based on your perceived probabilities of their impact. No one has suggested Chinese should not drive. Or men not multi-task, as if you could do that. Nothing prevents anyone from compensating or as often the case, overcompensating for their weaknesses. Similarly, most Western societies try hard to prevent discrimination based on things which are usually beyond the individual’s control, with a spectrum of success.
The transgender issue is a byproduct of frantic attempts to correct the injustices of the past. I see no wish to promote transgendered frequency, just a desire to improve recognition so that more children do not suffer in silence. Yes, some of it is OTT.
Finally you really would find interesting the long and sordid history of trying to influence orientation. Nothing helps or hinders that I can see and think about the implications if this were vulnerable to whim or fancy.
Nature does not know “internal gender” and “external gender”. In fact, nature does not know gender at all, which is a linguistic category subsequently turned into a metaphor and generalized to name the phenomenon in which different cultures create and maintain different regimes of what behaviour and appearance are “natural” and “proper” to the two sexes.
All nature and biology know, speaking of mammals in particular, are the two sexes our species comes in. [Intersex conditions are recognizable aberrations.]
This is not hair splitting or mere semantics as the terminology we use directs our thinking along certain lines and in certain directions, and it is crucial in this and other contexts to select the language that names reality as accurately as is humanly possible.
The nature of manifest nature is of a quality of communication that is always total – in terms of ever shifting charge relations within and embodied of a wholeness or totality. The manifestation is not the agency of communication so much as a vehicle of expression through which non-physical Self-Awareness opens experience of ‘all that is’ – as Self – but not as A self in terms of the dissociated and subjective ‘minding’ that forms the basis of what we take to be our unique and self-special nature – even in asserting its own insignificance.
The translation of ‘knowing of being’ to a virtual replication of a self-definitional reality-construct is like parenthood, both impossible and necessary, where the ‘child’ of a dissociated consciousness, becomes polarised against its own source-nature in being, as a defence of its own identification the idea of becoming ‘different’ than it is.
The conflict between a nested identity of personal, within a social ‘self-sense’ and actual relational being, is the primary conflict from which the sense of self arises as a ‘self-consciousness’, but as a ‘self-inhibiting’ mechanism interjecting or rather overlaying the unconflicted Self Awareness that simply Is Being.
The being does not fight back against the expression of a sense of self in oppositional freedom, but the sense of self in opposition interprets its experience through the developing consciousness of oppositional and polarising archetypes, and so it projects its own identifications of intent to possess, block, limit or force its self-experience onto its true nature and its relational co-creative beings – and engages in struggle to survive against externalised symptoms of unrecognised internal programming.
The mutually exclusive sense of self in polarity is the ‘separating’ or segregative force and desire to a creative agency. Never truly is there a ‘meeting’ or a unity experience but only the passing moment of the movement towards or away from an unachievable desire for unity – within the framework of the active mind of purpose. Power struggle is thus a futile and unending compulsion of a charge state of perpetual imbalance.
The reintegrative movement of being is of embrace and re-cognition from the ‘still point’ of which all charge relations are expressions OF.
Giving witness to the reintegrative movement is an expression of re-membering rather than dis-membering. Giving with-ness is not withdrawal of withholding and has a quality of communication that is ‘self-aware’.
The attempt to unify or empower dismembered fragments is of the nature of :
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king’s horses and all the king’s men
Couldn’t put Humpty together again.
The co-opting of the charge of a sense of self denied and deprived, by a manipulative self-positioning as a ‘handler’ or guide and support for ‘power and protection’, is the nature of the mis-identification FROM WHICH, a false sense of self is given power and protection at COST of true as the experience of the persistence of power struggle under threat.
Learning to discern the true from the false is the basis for a true choice through which freedom awakens from the ‘dream’ of its own blocked and denied nature.
This is generally abstractly sketched because every moment is a unique embodiment of its underlying pattern.
No. The most up to date science tells us that sex in humans lies on a spectrum – no matter how hard you try to convince your self that the world can be neatly divided up into black and white categories..
Which exposes this comment “[Intersex conditions are recognizable aberrations.]” for the pure bigotry it is
I did get notifications after all, sorry (wrong folder 🙂
Thank you for highlighting this. It’s terrifying what they are doing to children.
Children are vulnerable to propaganda. The BBC seems engaged in various forms of psychological conditioning. BTW, is your “Notify me of new comments via email” feature not working today?
Thank you for bringing this up. Is it part of the liberal agenda to promote identity politics, all the better to split a majority?
It seems to be part of the conservative power elites way of getting liberals to be associated with the made up issues and then tarnishing all liberal democratic politics with it.
They don’t just make it up as they go along you know.
I am waiting for the edifice to be brought down as Esther Rantzen is revealed to be a evil fairy godmother peddling kiddies and protecting the abusers via her child helpline. Any numbers on how many investigations, arrests, trials have originated from the calls made to that number by victims?