And another video promoted on the Inclusive Education site: Trans 101; here's a few tasty tidbits, that show that what I document in my essay is THE message, not a couple of outliers. Most of us are taught the idea that people are born a boy, or a girl and we're expected to act a certain way based on what's between our legs. But that actually isn't true for everyone. It totally ignores the huge and amazing world of people who're trans and gender diverse". COME ON, it totally ignores that stereotypes are stupid and you should ignore them and not take drugs. Also "When you're talking about gender and bodies, talk about what you actually mean, people who have uteruses, instead of women...." and "Learning this stuff, so you can be more informed is a pretty awesome thing to do". Sigh. Find the video on this page (https://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/supporting-lgbtqia-students/build-understanding-of-key-concepts-and-terms/) of the Ministry of Education Inclusive Education website
'They' use psychological warfare and mind control to break the strongest bonds that exist in humanity: the bond between men and women, and the bond between a mother and her child. If 'they' can successfully break these bonds 'they' will have full control over our minds.
Hi, it seems as if there may be a slight attack on celibates. Is this the intention? I can say from my perspective I never encouraged people to take hormones and-or change their biology to the opposite gender.
Is there also, I wonder, a kind of disembodiment? The mantra “it’s not what’s between your legs, it’s what’s between your ears that matters” (or similar) is certainly intuitively appealing. Perhaps that fits in with your category of “intelligent”?
Yes, definitely disembodied vibes. Appealing to lots of kids feeling normal teenage weirdness about out of control bodies, but probably especially appealing to kids who have experienced trauma/abuse. A kind of religious rebirth as well.
Exceptional documentation of how ideology got packaged as education. The breakdown of those four messaging strategies is really damning, especially message 3 about how rejecting stereotypes somehow requires rejecting biological sex itslef. I've seen similar materials floating around school systems elsewhere and parents are often clueless becuase this stuff looks so professionally produced and "progressive". The stat about NZ having 6.9x the puberty blocker rate compared to England/Wales is wild.
A perfect summary of the messages being given to our children, starting with three year olds. There are hundreds of picture books that tout these messages and the former RSE guide advised teaching 5 year olds that everyone has a gender identity. By the time sexual reproduction is taught at the age of 10-11, kids are so thoroughly indoctrinated that it is unsurprising to them that reproductive diagrams don’t have male or female labels (Navigating the Journey from SWA.)
You are correct that the curriculum is only part of the picture. NZ schools are still awash with transgender beliefs in library books, resources published by InsideOut and others, resources retained on the MOE website, and true believer teachers.
Thanks RGE. Yes, I keep discovering new websites. For example I just came across the School Pride Week Aotearoa website. Among its recommended activities for primary school children is the "Breaking The Norms" colouring book which includes lots of made up shit, a recasting of interesting women, political movements and feminists as something to do with gender identity and, to top it off, has a Kinky Boots picture to colour in.
You used a teleological accounting of sex (which is not teleological), and provided no basis for your "organized around" framing rather than the trait-cluster analysis that's been the standard one for decades including in medical literature. You ignored that the "thousands of differences" are almost uniformly directed in unison (over time) by how sex hormone ratios cause gene expression and protein coding across a shared genome (one X is all that's needed to make either male or female phenotype). Finally, you did not explain how or why medical and surgical transition is insufficient to change sex, even if only those who fully transition have a strong claim to have done so.
You also tried to hand-wave away intersex conditions under the logically incoherent "exceptions prove the rule" type of rhetoric. However, because sterile and infertile and VSD (variations of sexual development) persons still get sorted into a sex category you cannot make the "they can't say they changed sex if they don't make the other gamete" argument. Getting to a female or male phenotype, but sterile, is far more than enough to have changed sex, especially given the proportionally large importance of transcriptome versus genome in this context. And while those VSD conditions are not gotchas that merely destabilize the category, they DO explain precisely why sex is highly and effectively mutable and how fragile the low sexual dimorphism in humans is. They also provide insight into just how and why transsexuality and homosexuality occur, understanding the brain is fragile in this context and not just the genitals or chromosomes.
People can and do change sex, literally, because sex as it is actually classified is mutable. In humans, specifically due to medicine. I feel like it's been valuable to make these arguments and seed them all over these GC/Anti-Trans threads precisely because the pro-trans left remains mired in Butlerian googoo and the reactionary right has seized on that to fill the gap with the (poor) arguments that Colin Wright has been trying to spread from the Manhattan Institute.
Sex is functionally binary, empirical, non-teleological, and mutable. It is not easily mutable and not by mere declaration, but it is with medicine (i.e. long term hormone therapy resulting in major phenotypic sex changes, plus sex reassignment surgery).
Gosh Kristin, I was doing other stuff for a few days. Kia ora, hello, hope you are having a nice day. You have made a lengthy set of declarations. I find them contradictory and confusing but I will do my best to respond. This will be in several parts.
Fair. I apologize. I really do. That was untoward. I don't think that my claims are contradictory, and I apologize if any are confusing. This is is an iterative process of learning how to best convey my arguments, and I suppose I am also primed for righteous indignation due to my interactions with most GCs.
And, more broadly, in a constant state of tension due to the nascent fascistic destruction of the liberal democracy I am so deeply wedded to, in the U.S.
Really, I am sorry and I appreciate your replies, in advance.
Thanks for coming back to me, Kristin, Apology accepted.. I too am horrified by Trump and what is happening in the US. I am really dismayed that many outspoken on the left (I am strongly politically left and consider trans rights activism to be regressive) have, in their haste to be on the 'right side of history' abandoned science and adopted a gender faith. This may or may not apply to where you are coming from. And so to your arguments...
Firstly, I would just say, that there seems to be an assumption among many (possibly you?) and it is a tenet of gender ideology that believing in immutable sex, somehow denies the human rights of trans and non binary people. I support trans human rights but disagree with gender ideology (some trans people disagree with it too, fully aware they are not the opposite sex). Also I think I find your argument confusing because, in part, you have redefined sex to mean something new, and then of course, my arguments about sex can be rebutted because we are talking about two different things entirely.
And another video promoted on the Inclusive Education site: Trans 101; here's a few tasty tidbits, that show that what I document in my essay is THE message, not a couple of outliers. Most of us are taught the idea that people are born a boy, or a girl and we're expected to act a certain way based on what's between our legs. But that actually isn't true for everyone. It totally ignores the huge and amazing world of people who're trans and gender diverse". COME ON, it totally ignores that stereotypes are stupid and you should ignore them and not take drugs. Also "When you're talking about gender and bodies, talk about what you actually mean, people who have uteruses, instead of women...." and "Learning this stuff, so you can be more informed is a pretty awesome thing to do". Sigh. Find the video on this page (https://inclusive.tki.org.nz/guides/supporting-lgbtqia-students/build-understanding-of-key-concepts-and-terms/) of the Ministry of Education Inclusive Education website
'They' use psychological warfare and mind control to break the strongest bonds that exist in humanity: the bond between men and women, and the bond between a mother and her child. If 'they' can successfully break these bonds 'they' will have full control over our minds.
Hi, it seems as if there may be a slight attack on celibates. Is this the intention? I can say from my perspective I never encouraged people to take hormones and-or change their biology to the opposite gender.
A failed society. A failed education system. A failed parentage.
Cannot pass the blame but to themselves.
No solutions available within box. Got to get out of box system and start accepting responsibilities...
Is there also, I wonder, a kind of disembodiment? The mantra “it’s not what’s between your legs, it’s what’s between your ears that matters” (or similar) is certainly intuitively appealing. Perhaps that fits in with your category of “intelligent”?
Yes, definitely disembodied vibes. Appealing to lots of kids feeling normal teenage weirdness about out of control bodies, but probably especially appealing to kids who have experienced trauma/abuse. A kind of religious rebirth as well.
I found the British psychoanalyst’s explanation interesting too: it is the new goth.
Thanks, Garwhoungle.
Worrying that the guidance changes but the ideologues are still pushing the cult!
Have cross posted
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/the-jungle-book-theres-teeth-in-the
Dusty
Exceptional documentation of how ideology got packaged as education. The breakdown of those four messaging strategies is really damning, especially message 3 about how rejecting stereotypes somehow requires rejecting biological sex itslef. I've seen similar materials floating around school systems elsewhere and parents are often clueless becuase this stuff looks so professionally produced and "progressive". The stat about NZ having 6.9x the puberty blocker rate compared to England/Wales is wild.
A perfect summary of the messages being given to our children, starting with three year olds. There are hundreds of picture books that tout these messages and the former RSE guide advised teaching 5 year olds that everyone has a gender identity. By the time sexual reproduction is taught at the age of 10-11, kids are so thoroughly indoctrinated that it is unsurprising to them that reproductive diagrams don’t have male or female labels (Navigating the Journey from SWA.)
You are correct that the curriculum is only part of the picture. NZ schools are still awash with transgender beliefs in library books, resources published by InsideOut and others, resources retained on the MOE website, and true believer teachers.
Thanks RGE. Yes, I keep discovering new websites. For example I just came across the School Pride Week Aotearoa website. Among its recommended activities for primary school children is the "Breaking The Norms" colouring book which includes lots of made up shit, a recasting of interesting women, political movements and feminists as something to do with gender identity and, to top it off, has a Kinky Boots picture to colour in.
You used a teleological accounting of sex (which is not teleological), and provided no basis for your "organized around" framing rather than the trait-cluster analysis that's been the standard one for decades including in medical literature. You ignored that the "thousands of differences" are almost uniformly directed in unison (over time) by how sex hormone ratios cause gene expression and protein coding across a shared genome (one X is all that's needed to make either male or female phenotype). Finally, you did not explain how or why medical and surgical transition is insufficient to change sex, even if only those who fully transition have a strong claim to have done so.
You also tried to hand-wave away intersex conditions under the logically incoherent "exceptions prove the rule" type of rhetoric. However, because sterile and infertile and VSD (variations of sexual development) persons still get sorted into a sex category you cannot make the "they can't say they changed sex if they don't make the other gamete" argument. Getting to a female or male phenotype, but sterile, is far more than enough to have changed sex, especially given the proportionally large importance of transcriptome versus genome in this context. And while those VSD conditions are not gotchas that merely destabilize the category, they DO explain precisely why sex is highly and effectively mutable and how fragile the low sexual dimorphism in humans is. They also provide insight into just how and why transsexuality and homosexuality occur, understanding the brain is fragile in this context and not just the genitals or chromosomes.
People can and do change sex, literally, because sex as it is actually classified is mutable. In humans, specifically due to medicine. I feel like it's been valuable to make these arguments and seed them all over these GC/Anti-Trans threads precisely because the pro-trans left remains mired in Butlerian googoo and the reactionary right has seized on that to fill the gap with the (poor) arguments that Colin Wright has been trying to spread from the Manhattan Institute.
Sex is functionally binary, empirical, non-teleological, and mutable. It is not easily mutable and not by mere declaration, but it is with medicine (i.e. long term hormone therapy resulting in major phenotypic sex changes, plus sex reassignment surgery).
Gosh Kristin, I was doing other stuff for a few days. Kia ora, hello, hope you are having a nice day. You have made a lengthy set of declarations. I find them contradictory and confusing but I will do my best to respond. This will be in several parts.
Fair. I apologize. I really do. That was untoward. I don't think that my claims are contradictory, and I apologize if any are confusing. This is is an iterative process of learning how to best convey my arguments, and I suppose I am also primed for righteous indignation due to my interactions with most GCs.
And, more broadly, in a constant state of tension due to the nascent fascistic destruction of the liberal democracy I am so deeply wedded to, in the U.S.
Really, I am sorry and I appreciate your replies, in advance.
Thanks for coming back to me, Kristin, Apology accepted.. I too am horrified by Trump and what is happening in the US. I am really dismayed that many outspoken on the left (I am strongly politically left and consider trans rights activism to be regressive) have, in their haste to be on the 'right side of history' abandoned science and adopted a gender faith. This may or may not apply to where you are coming from. And so to your arguments...
Firstly, I would just say, that there seems to be an assumption among many (possibly you?) and it is a tenet of gender ideology that believing in immutable sex, somehow denies the human rights of trans and non binary people. I support trans human rights but disagree with gender ideology (some trans people disagree with it too, fully aware they are not the opposite sex). Also I think I find your argument confusing because, in part, you have redefined sex to mean something new, and then of course, my arguments about sex can be rebutted because we are talking about two different things entirely.