Gender stuff gone mad ....

Ultimately this is pushed on us by the UN, and other institutions.

It's a world wide indoctrination not only the west.

Can you imagine how difficult it is for African nations or India to get there heads around this ideology, yet alone implement it?

We might force a few little changes here in the UK, but ultimately it is going to be very hard, as there is a lot of money behind this.

The question is, who is putting up all this money and why?

There has to be an endgame in all of this, but nobody seems to know what it is. I suspect it has something to do with pushing women back into the rigid gender roles from which we were escaping, but I think there is more to it than that. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I find it all deeply unsettling.

Doodledog

It's not just about trans issues, although the banned game fell into that category. It is imposing any set of values on others, which is inevitably going to alienate those who don't share those values, and is even more foolish in a charity with a global reach dealing with countries that have actively oppositional social systems from one another.

The relief of poverty and prevention of famine is Oxfam's remit, not imposing contentious views onto either their supporters or their beneficiaries.

👍👍

What will be decided upon to replace these expressions?

Mother nature
Mother earth
Mother country
Mother tongue

There are occasions when I can't quite believe we have reached this point of no return... crossing the Rubicon it seems.

I agree about Oxfam. They have a 94 page document explaining the ideology and how the word 'mother' is not acceptable. None of it makes sense. The only reason can be that there is a transactivist in the marketing/pr department and people on the whole don't like objecting to 'progressive' movements. But of course they should.

When we've discussed the changes to (and mangling of) the language on here, we've been told quite forcefully that mothers can still be 'mothers'. That using terms like 'birth givers' is just bringing in new and additional words to describe people who think they are men but are giving birth with their female bodies, and don't want to identify as a mother, yet it seems that this is not, in fact, the case. Surprise surprise.

Dd ..... I'm not a conspiracy theorist either.
Far far from it.

I can tell you what little I know, no doubt you already are aware.

ESG and the like are corporate credit social systems, financed by leading hedgefunds such as Blackrock ect.,

The hedgefunds refund or subsidize any company or charity that sign up to these CCSS.
So when say, Oxfam or NatWest loose money from customers boycotting them, it means nothing, as they will get their losses covered.
Moreover they will be offered better rates when borrowing or other financial rewards.

The UN has a list of 17 sustainable goals it aims to achieve by 2030.

One of which is Diversity Equality etc.,

They have taken one view on how diversity & equality will be explored.
Practically no facts were taken into account when they embarked on this journey.

The DSM changed the name from Transgender Disorder to Transgender Dysmorphia to enable people to get the surgery and hormones paid for by insurance companies. Almost in tandem with UN but I couldn't say it was on the request of UN or their advisors.

But I agree with you,Dd the above explainations don't seem to completely answer the questions why.

Disagree with me as much as you care to, but without going into more detail, I'm of the opinion that it has something to do with breaking down normal society until people have nothing to rely on but the state.
No truth, no family, no religion, no science, no freedom.

Sounds bleak, and dystopian, and possibly (to those who just jog along in their lane) unlikely.

I would suggest reading (if you haven't already) Miriam Grossman (child and teen psychiatrist), or Jennifer Lahl.
Both have a background in the subject.
Be aware that they both have had some youtube and podcasts cancelled or edited, but the books are available in full.

Be aware that they have had youtube and podcasts cancelled
Re reading my last sentence leaves me aghast at my casual acceptance that anyone can have their words cancelled in this day and age!

As for the word mothers, they work on the adage of slowly slowly catch a monkey

It is truly Orwellian.

I don't know what to say to all that, really. I have seen articles about the UN Agenda for 2030, but there are definitely other less frightening ways to look at it than that to believe it is designed to destroy society as we know it.

I don't know the answers, but as you say, the transgender lobby is global (at least in 'first world' countries with 'western' values) and it's not a grass roots thing. It is also targeted at children, which is further evidence of there being something behind it - children across the world wouldn't spontaneously start saying they are 'in the wrong body' - something is happening to make them even start to think something like that. I am more likely to believe that it is a push from the pharmaceutical industry - there is a lot of money to be made from medical/hormonal 'treatments', and when they get patients young they have them for life.

But then there is the misogyny aspect of it all - maybe that has accelerated it rather than trigger it in the first place, but the fact that this has happened at the same time as the push to stop abortion, contraception and women's rights in general seems too much of a coincidence. Women's groups are no longer for women only - we can't meet as women, whether in feminist groups or more traditional ones such as the WI (as we have seen even lesbians are told to be more adventurous and have sex with men), and groups like Guiding now say that single-sex tents are not allowed at camps. 'Woman-face' is considered acceptable whilst 'blackface' is not, professional sport is no longer a serious option for women, and research data into areas that could benefit women is now pointless, as figures are skewed by those 'identifying as' women, regardless of their actual sex. There are no safe spaces for women to change or be in a safe state of undress without the fear of men being around. The restrictions that this has put on women in general and some religious women in particular is marked, and plays right into the hands of those who would like to see us back in the kitchen and dependent on men.

I agree Doodledog. I feel it all deeply worrying.

yes, and it has come hot on the heels of the very successful '#metoo' movement. Patriarchy isn't a myth..somehow whenever women start to get control of their own destinies and not dependent on men...things happen. Do you remember how Women's Studies suddenly got dropped from academia in the early 90's to be taken over by Gender Studies and Queer Theory controlled increasingly by gay men and women who wanted to be men....
I remember in the heyday of the Women's movement we had Feminist Book Fairs I went and had stalls at three of them..London, Amsterdam, Barcelona...and then the complaint that 'feminism; was white, elitist, that the next feminist book fair would have to be in a third world country...and there you go, there weren't any more. guilt tripped out. stalls had been run by women and small presses with very small funds, couldn't afford to travel worldwide etc etc...so a glorious meet-up and exchange of art and idea..crushed. That seemed very contrived to me.
and this feels the same, suddenly we are made to 'be kind' to include men in our women's spaces...in fact now punished for not.
We must stand together. And support everyone that is daring to put their heads above the parapet. The grass roots aren't really aware of what is happening. The Guardian, my go-to paper for decades, has become so captured, I no longer subscribe. Is this because of its American interests? I think misogyny is ready to raise its head with very little provocation and women being uppity easily tips it. And men do gather and do have power.

I agree with all of that, Treelover. I no longer subscribe to The Guardian either, and am fed up with being told that the feminism I believe in (which has never depended on theory, just support for women) is somehow inferior as it is not 'intersectional', for which read 'includes men'.

The whole 'Be kind' movement may as well be called 'Be quiet' and it is only ever said to women. It's depressing, and is worse for having women in support of it all.

Doodledog

I agree with all of that, Treelover. I no longer subscribe to The Guardian either, and am fed up with being told that the feminism I believe in (which has never depended on theory, just support for women) is somehow inferior as it is not 'intersectional', for which read 'includes men'.

The whole 'Be kind' movement may as well be called 'Be quiet' and it is only ever said to women. It's depressing, and is worse for having women in support of it all.

Well said DD.

I too have unsubscribed to The Guardian for the same reason. I used to think it was fairly balanced, but if you are in the comments section and don't adhere to the 'narrative' then it's quite likely your comment will be removed, however civilly and reasonably you express it.

I don't know why many businesses, banks, public services, charities and various organisations are so eager to sign up to this. I certainly understand the principle of human rights and inclusivity, but this is beyond my comprehension. That the simple, immutable, fact of biology can be turned on its head, denied - and people punished for expressing their belief in it, is beyond my comprehension.

I don't believe in conspiracy theories, either, but something is happening to the collective 'rational' mind when men in possession of a penis wearing a dress and sporting a bit of lippy can insist that said penis can also be a female sex organ which allows them to then be women... and anyone who refuses to accept this belief can be no-platformed, cancelled, sacked, and vilified for being transphobic.

Sex is a biological reality, gender is a social and cultural construct which, like all constructs, can change over time. And this one certainly has because activists now insist that gender identity is the reality, and biological sex is a construct!
TRAs have managed to convince powerful sectors of our society to accede their demands.

I don't know where this leaves your non-activist transwomen, or women. And what about men... are they being informed that a vagina is also a male sex organ, or that a biological woman with boobs and a vagina are men just as much as they are?

Or is it that women have become so powerful - too powerful for a lot of men - and their misogyny has not been able to prevent women - 'feminazis' - from taking control of areas that were always their domain, so the novel way to eradicate them wimmin and their power... is to eradicate women altogether which they can't do, physically, so declare themselves women if and when they feel like it and then, poof!, there's no such category as women! And our power, out control over our lives, is lost.

But it’s so puzzling because I’m sure the vast majority of men don’t believe the hogwash either. They don’t believe a man in a dress and a bit of lippy is suddenly a woman. That’s why I find it difficult to apply the word misogyny to men in general. These particular men maybe, or probably are misogynistic because they’re seemingly trying to eradicate women, biological women. But I do feel it’s very misogynistic to call women who are pregnant or have delivered a baby people who chest feed or whatever other insulting label they can think of to describe normal women who are pregnant or post natal. Nor do I wish to be called a natal woman because I am simply a woman. I certainly think cis woman is insulting too.

Or is it that women have become so powerful - too powerful for a lot of men - and their misogyny has not been able to prevent women - 'feminazis' - from taking control of areas that were always their domain, so the novel way to eradicate them wimmin and their power... is to eradicate women altogether which they can't do, physically, so declare themselves women if and when they feel like it and then, poof!, there's no such category as women! And our power, our control over our lives, is lost.

I think this is driving a lot of it. Some men are threatened by strong women, and others genuinely believe that there are 'male' and 'female' roles that shouldn't be messed with.

I also think that as maddie says, a lot of men aren't buying it, but it doesn't affect them so they don't get as annoyed about it as women do. Sport was a turning point for a lot of men, as they could see that it is blatantly obviously unfair, and can imagine how they would feel. The more 'day to day' stuff, such as lesbian dating nights, or men invading the WI doesn't happen in the world of an average man. Mr Dog is reasonable aware of the issues as he is married to me , but I don't think even he 'gets' it in the way that women do. I don't think all men are misogynists, not at all, but it is more akin to 'good men doing nothing' - not so much even turning a blind eye - they just don't see a lot of the issues. I don't understand women supporting it though - that doesn't compute with me at all.

I hope and believe, maddyone, that the vast majority of men don't believe the hogwash, as you succinctly put it.

maddyone

But it’s so puzzling because I’m sure the vast majority of men don’t believe the hogwash either. They don’t believe a man in a dress and a bit of lippy is suddenly a woman. That’s why I find it difficult to apply the word misogyny to men in general. These particular men maybe, or probably are misogynistic because they’re seemingly trying to eradicate women, biological women. But I do feel it’s very misogynistic to call women who are pregnant or have delivered a baby people who chest feed or whatever other insulting label they can think of to describe normal women who are pregnant or post natal. Nor do I wish to be called a natal woman because I am simply a woman. I certainly think cis woman is insulting too.

I hear you maddyone.

If the vast majority of men don't believe the BS either - why are they signing up to it? Or are they, like us, also being silenced?

And neither do I like being referred to as a natal / cis woman. And you know what? It's their terminology, and I'm not going to use it.

As far as I am concerned, a transwoman is a transwoman - whatever that means to them... they can dress and do as they please if it makes them happy and they should be given the same rights and protections as any other demographic - as transwomen. And I'm sure on some levels, our interests, aims, achievements, hobbies, etc will coincide as we are all human beings, but they are still not women. And I will not be silenced with the 'no debate'. dictum.. the sheer arrogance for a man with a penis to declare that he is in fact a woman and I should not have the right to challenge that assumption because he says so is mind-boggling.

BigBertha1

I was just writing a letter which i find the need to do very rarely and I started dear Sir or Madam in the usual way and just stopped to think for a mo. Perhaps I should use 'To whom it may concern'. I don't know at all what would be the right address.

I often don't put any greeting on my letters. Especially as so many corporations these days don't give you an actual named person to write to. I also address envelopes with just a name and no title.

https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202308/medium-901497-img-20230828-152607531.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202308/medium-627698-img-20230828-152418115-hdr.jpg https://www.gransnet.com/uploads/talk/202308/medium-514284-img-20230828-151432312.jpg

Here are some photos of pages in a book 'True You - A Gender Journey', which is for 4-8 yr olds.

It is pushing very young children to believe that they can identify differently from their real sex.
That could be fine if it wasn't likely to result in them reaching puberty believing that they need to have puberty blockers, breast binders and surgery to maintain their chosen 'gender'.

This book is not a wacky one-off, there are lots of them for very young children - complete with lists of further resources for the enthusiastic teacher or librarian.

.

[some men] genuinely believe that there are 'male' and 'female' roles that shouldn't be messed with.

And one of them is Matt Walsh who did make the film 'What Is a Woman?' but who is no real friend to women because of his support of stereotyped roles.

I no longer teach so I don’t really know what is happening in schools, but I know what is being reported as happening in schools and if it’s as reported, I find it very worrying and I wonder how this ideology has got such a foothold in our schools. Is our Education Dept asleep on the job? Or taken over by loons? Why aren’t parents being heard?

FarNorth

^[some men] genuinely believe that there are 'male' and 'female' roles that shouldn't be messed with.^

And one of them is Matt Walsh who did make the film 'What Is a Woman?' but who is no real friend to women because of his support of stereotyped roles.

And one of them is Matt Walsh who did make the film 'What Is a Woman?' but who is no real friend to women because of his support of stereotyped roles.

Maybe it's the insistence, historically, on these strict stereotypical roles that has led to this whole gender-identity crisis - apart from those that are genuinely suffering from some form of BDD?

I'm fairly sure that many women and men have interests, goals and ambitions, feelings, etc, that are not typical to their biological sex. Perhaps if they, we, had just been free to express ourselves as we felt without the confinement of having to 'conform' one way or another, this 'identity' dilemma might not have reached such cataclysmic proportions?

Can a child of 2 years really know that it is in the wrong body when it has no real conception of what that means, intellectually and realistically in the adult world?

The straight answer to that Dickens is no. Neither can a child of 4,6, 8, or 10 in my opinion. I don’t understand how teachers can teach some of the stuff that is allegedly being taught in primary schools now. I guess it’s all about keeping your head down and doing as you’re told.

You do often hear/see people saying that it's not safe for teaching staff to speak up.
But how can they live with what they're supporting, if they genuinely have concerns but go along with it anyway?

I can't help thinking that the cognitive dissonance required to say that so-called 'gender' is optional, and to teach children about 100 genders (or whatever it is) must be suffered by politicians as well as educators.

I just can't believe that intelligent people can actually believe that you can change sex, or that you are 'assigned' a sex at birth rather than being born male or female, yet they are falling over themselves to not only claim to believe it, but to tell others that we should believe it too, on pain of sanctions.

I do understand that if your job is at risk if you argue with the ideology you (generic) might grit your teeth and go along with it rather than be ostracised - people have to pay the bills. But the unions have bought into this too, and lecturing staff can't expect support from UCU if they are penalised for honesty. I assume the same is true of teachers and their unions. Politicians have come out with the most ridiculous statements, such as men can have cervixes and that 'what is a woman?' is a complex question. I don't believe that functioning adult men can believe this. They have wives and daughters, for heavens' sake. The women going along with it make me actually despair.

I agree that it is difficult to grasp how they can live with seeing the results of this nonsense - children suffering MH trauma, detransitioning young adults, desperate parents, and colleagues being persecuted for saying that the emperor has no clothes. That is a terrible example to set - and it is worse when set by people whose role it is to be trusted to decide on rules (or laws in the case of politicians) and to explain the reasons for them to others.

What can be done about it? Politicians should have the courage of their convictions, and should be legally protected from persecution on conscientious grounds. It is, arguably, more difficult for teaching staff, as schools are discrete institutions which need consistency to be fair to pupils. Heads should take personal responsibility, and IMO there should be a compulsory policy statement issued to parents (as with anti-bullying policies) who can then decide whether to send their children to schools where they will be taught belief over science and risk having their own views rubbished by people parroting 'guidelines' issued by pressure groups such as Stonewall. Teaching staff could also decide whether they want to work under the cosh of trans ideology before accepting a job. That wouldn't solve the whole problem, but would be a step in the right direction, I think.

I dont know what to say to all that ...

I would have said the same thing a few years ago Dd

I’m aware of a diversity for in a large public body that asks the gender of babies. The person I know, refused to use the section and named sex as male.

Thanks to doodle/dickens/far north maddy and others for keeping this issue alive on gransnet