Hitchhiker's Guide (Part IV): Other Tactics & Who's Behind Gender Identity's Rapid Ascent
There is swift and massive punishment for anyone who so much as questions Gender Identity Ideology. For expressing gender critical views—even just saying things like “sex is binary and immutable”, people have been:
Fired from jobs, denied contract renewals, and put on lists that prevent them from being hired. See M.K. Fain, Sasha White, Maya Forstater—some of the many women who’ve gone public about being sacked for gender critical statements made on their own time. See John Kluge, who lost his job as a music teacher in an Indiana high school, because he would not use wrong-sex pronouns for students. (Kluge held onto his job for a while by using last names for all students and avoiding pronouns altogether, but trans-identifying students insisted on his ouster. A parent of one of the students labeled the teacher’s failure to use students’ first names and pronouns “bullying.”) See Colin Wright, who has a PhD in evolutionary biology, but cannot find a job in his field and has been told by people who would like to hire him that HR departments won’t let them. See Birdy Rose and Jess de Wahls, artists whose livelihoods have been targeted by gender identity mobs with slanderous bullying campaigns. Many people fired for their gender critical beliefs are not sharing their stories publicly in order to protect themselves and their families from further punishment. The gender ideology group Stonewall sought to have black lesbian attorney Allison Bailey fired from her law firm, but she is fighting back with a lawsuit.
Harassed and hounded at their jobs, some to the point of leaving for their personal safety and sanity. See academics Kathleen Stock and Jo Phoenix. See this article about 200 academics sharing similar stories of harassment and death threats for holding gender critical views. See Rosie Kay who resigned from the dance company she founded after dancers learned of her gender critical views, and persuaded the Board to launch an investigation of Kay and otherwise make the job she loved intolerable.
Expelled from university degree programs after completing years of course work, without warning or opportunity to appeal. See the story of this man, who was training to be a psychologist (after years of working to protect abused children as an attorney) and who on his own time opposed a proposed ban on psychotherapy for gender dysphoric people. This woman faced potential denial of her law degree and the stress of a lengthy investigation for stating gender critical views as part of a classroom discussion.
Been bullied by fellow high school students to the point of not returning to school.
Banned from speaking on any topic anywhere, i.e. been “deplatformed.” Anti-war legend Cindy Sheehan was canceled as a speaker at an anti-war event after she defended a friend who was smeared as a gender critic. Helen Steele was forced out of a protest walk and camping event hosted by the Land Justice Movement—a group she helped found—because of her critical stance on gender identity laws. Dr. Devin Buckley was disinvited from speaking at Harvard about poetry and philosophy because of her views on Gender Identity. Of course, in addition to being attacked when they want to speak on other subjects, gender critics are blocked from speaking about Gender Identity Ideology itself as well. Hundreds of lawyers sought to exclude gender critics from the stage at an event discussing gender policies, for example.
Shunned by publishers and booksellers. It is very hard to find a publisher for a book that challenges Gender Identity Ideology. Even credentialed journalists like Helen Joyce and Abigail Shrier faced rejection after rejection, until they finally found willing publishers. Each has faced roadblock after roadblock in seeking to publicize their books, such as: eager book reviewers being blocked by their bosses from reviewing the book, being shut out by reporters and TV programs that usually feature authors like them, Amazon refusing to run the publisher’s ads for Shrier’s book, Target pulling Shrier’s book from the shelves after pressure from gender ideologues, and GoFundMe canceling an account raising money to put up billboards advertising Shrier’s book. Gillian Philip was summarily fired from her job as a writer of children’s literature, after she posted #IStandWithJKRowling on her Twitter account, prompting a mob attack against her. Children’s author Rachel Rooney found her new book “ghosted” (not publicized, not reviewed) and experienced other attacks prompting her to announce her forthcoming retirement from writing books.
Shunned by news outlets and other article-publishing venues. Those seeking to publish articles expressing gender critical views face a shut-out from nearly all mainstream and left-leaning outlets. Even the famous highly credentialed trans-identifying gender surgeon Dr. Marci Bowers was rejected by the New York Times when Bowers submitted an article warning that healthcare providers are acting recklessly regarding trans-identifying children.
Subjected to de-publication of scientific studies due to complaints from gender ideologues. Brown University Professor Lisa Littman published a peer-reviewed article regarding what she had dubbed “rapid onset gender dysphoria” in young people, especially girls. Pressured by gender ideologues, the journal rescinded the article and subjected it to an extraordinary investigation, above and beyond the peer review process it had already undergone. Eventually, the journal re-published the article with a bogus “correction”. Littman lost a consulting job and ended up leaving Brown.
Blocked from doing research on detransitioning.
Stripped of parental custody of one’s child. See this chilling example.
Suspended from social media. Vast numbers of people have been suspended and banned from Twitter, for supposedly violating hate and violence standards. Their only crime has been stating gender critical views. Meghan Murphy was shut down after she tweeted “Yeeah it’s him” when asked if Jonathan/Jessica Yaniv was the person bringing Human Rights charges against female beauticians who wouldn’t wax his scrotum in their homes. The author of this report was suspended from Twitter for accurately stating that Dr. Rachel Levine is a man, and that it is outrageous that his appointment is being celebrated as a first for females. Evolutionary biologist Colin Wright posted a graph on Instagram detailing male physical advantage in sports which was summarily removed as “hate speech” without opportunity for appeal.
Other social media giants are suppressing the speech of those critical of Gender Identity Ideology, as well. In 2020, without warning, reddit shut down the r/GenderCritical forum which meant the instant loss of seven years of content for its 65,000 subscribers. The forum had had more than 27,000 daily active users and hosted a valuable list of resources and organizations for gender critics. The moderators had carefully monitored the site and did not tolerate any postings that were hateful or violent. There was no opportunity for appeal.
Subjected to police interrogation and the threat of incarceration. See “Case Studies” on the website FairCop. See Ceri Black and Marion Millar.
Stripped of funding for refusing to open single sex spaces up to men.
Kicked out of restaurants and bars for having gender critical views.
Dropped from organizations. See the story of Milli Hill, a bestselling author and the founder of the Positive Birth Movement, a grassroots network of support groups for pregnant women. She was disowned by the organization Birthrights and faced on-line mobs urging people to not buy her books and otherwise attacking her as an evil bigot. Hill is guilty of using the term “women” instead of “birthing people,” and saying that only women give birth.
Been disbelieved about being raped by a man while in a women’s hospital ward because everyone insisted no men were present, a policy enforced upon nurses and staff with respect to trans-identifying males placed in women’s wards. In the linked case, the rape victim was only able to get her crime handled by police after a year of struggle when footage from hospital cameras proved the rape occurred.
Threatened with rape, dismemberment, other violence, and death. Here’s a partial list of the thousands of creepy messages sent to J.K. Rowling when she defended gender critics and use of the “woman.” Gender critics regularly receive these sorts of threats.
Pushed, punched or otherwise physically assaulted. See the embedded video here of a woman attempting to hold a sign defending female-only spaces. At 18 seconds into this 2nd video (the one beneath “here’s some first person reportage”), one can glimpse an elderly gender critical woman in a pink hat being shoved hard by someone twice her size. The screaming mob was protesting the fact that women were holding a conference in Seattle to discuss gender identity’s impact on women’s rights. Body guards were needed to escort speakers to and from the event. In this 3rd video a peaceful protester has his sign grabbed and destroyed as he defends comedian Dave Chappelle, the crowd is then warned that “he has a weapon” as he walks away holding the stick that once held his sign, and people scream at him, including one person who shouts “Repent motherf***er over and over. (See the latter portions of this video to hear how this encounter was completely misrepresented in the mainstream media.) While the man whose sign was destroyed was not physically assaulted himself, the information on him is included here as context for this video showing his friend sustaining serious injury to his head at the same event. Finally, see Maria MacLaughlin’s account and videos pertaining to gender ideologues who assaulted her.
Denied the ability to have a bank account.
Blocked from raising money through crowdfunding in order to defend against attacks. Note that after the bank summarily shut down a gender critical feminist group’s account in the Netherlands, an event linked to in the last bullet, the group opened a GoFundMe page to raise money to sue the bank. GoFundMe shut down that page.
Blocked from using Paypal to secure donations. Gendermapper’s invaluable website was shut down temporarily when Paypal suspended their account. Gendermapper staff had to scramble for a different way to collect donations in order to reopen the site.
Denied the opportunity to have information tables at events. The Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine was refused the opportunity to share its thoughtful science-based analyses as an exhibitor at the national conference of the American Academy of Pediatrics. SEGM is an international consortium of more than 100 clinicians and researchers. This censorship is consistent with broad suppression of gender critical ideas within the medical profession. “There’s no room for dissent,” says prominent gender surgeon Dr. Marci Bowers. “There are definitely people who are trying to keep out anyone who doesn’t absolutely buy the party line that everything should be affirming.”
This is by no means a complete list. Links provided here are the tip of the iceberg and give only a small flavor of what’s going on. The breadth of the suppression is staggering.
Every corner from which a challenge to Gender Ideology could emerge is censored—systematically and thoroughly. Take the medical/scientific realm, as just one example. Doctors are reprimanded by their employers for trying to draw management attention to severe harm done to children. Gender clinicians have resigned in protest because their concerns about children have been ignored. Those who want to study, publish, hand out scientific papers at medical conferences or in any way produce or share data that might challenge Gender Identity orthodoxy are all silenced. Psychologists who want to explore childhood trauma as a possible cause of a child rejecting his or her sex face censure and even criminal sanctions for doing so, in many jurisdictions.
The chilling effect on free speech from all of this is monumental. People are terrified to speak up because they can’t afford to lose their jobs and they don’t want to suffer the other punishments meted out by Gender Identity mobs. Young people struggling to get by financially are especially afraid to go public with their gender critical positions.
Meanwhile progressives as a whole are absolutely silent about the McCarthy-like censorship all around us. In fact, they’re applauding and perpetrating it.
Don’t think for a second that the black, indigenous and DSD (intersex) communities hijacked by gender ideologues are given some special dispensation to speak.
DSD activist Clare Graham has been kicked off Twitter.
When Saba Malik, a woman of color, spoke at a conference in Seattle in 2020 she faced a shrieking mob outside, people inside the event who attempted to prevent her and others from speaking, and death threats.
Maori activist Michelle Uriarau asks “What kind of movement needs to send death and rape threats to women?” When “indigenous women and black women and women of color, we stand up and go, ‘hang on, wait a minute’,…when we speak out about this…..about our concerns about the gender identity movement, we get shut down like you wouldn’t believe,” Uriarau says.
Native American activist Cherry Smiley notes that “Indigenous women who don’t say and do what white people want us to say and do, are being silenced. I’ve personally experienced online harassment, been denied opportunities, kicked off stages and out of conferences, threatened with police, threatened by men, and so much more, often by academics and activists, because I have different beliefs and different political analyses of an issue—gender—that impacts everyone. The message this sends is that indigenous women are only welcome to speak if we say what you want us to say.”
Even trans-identifying people are attacked and censored if they disagree with the dominant Gender Identity Ideology positions and agenda.
Defining defense of sex-based rights and biological reality as hatred and violence discourages challenges to Gender Identity Ideology by cancelling gender critical voices. This ensures that most people hear only gender ideologues’ version of the “facts.” It also enables gender ideologues to pad hate crime statistics. They can claim that hatred and violence against trans people is on the rise. This, they say, demonstrates the need for everyone to rally around the Gender Identity agenda to counter all the “haters” out there. But much of the so-called hateful and violent behavior they decry isn’t hateful or violent in the slightest.
Here's a recent example of how this sleight of hand works. The Stamford Advocate newspaper cited a report by GLSEN—a Gender Identity Ideology-promoting organization—as evidence that “more inclusive” policies are needed in Connecticut schools. According to the report, the vast majority of trans-identifying children hear “anti-LGBTQ” remarks and experience “victimization.” But the GLSEN report defines failing to force other students to forfeit sex-based rights as anti-LGBTQ and discriminatory! And the number one example of so-called “anti-LGBTQ Discrimination Most Commonly Reported in Connecticut Schools” listed in the report, is being prevented from using the locker room that “aligns with gender.” As is standard in the incoherent irrational ideology of Gender Identity, the reasoning is circular in the extreme. “We’ve got to gut sex-based rights so trans-identifying kids don’t experience anti-LGBTQ discrimination!” they declare. And the evidence to support this declaration consists of pointing to the fact that some schools have not gutted sex-based rights.
Similarly, as mentioned previously, teens staying at youth shelters include individuals with parents who have never engaged in abuse of any sort, and who desperately want their children home. The definition of “abuse” used to prevent parents from removing children from shelters has been expanded to include failing to affirm a child’s newly announced gender identity. Gender ideologues point to the number of trans and nonbinary children at shelters to bolster the impression that the world is teeming with anti-trans bigotry.
The authoritarian suppression of speech is getting worse by the day. Bills were introduced in Canada in 2020 and 2021 which would use prohibitions on “hate speech” to engage in massive censorship. One of the bills went so far as to empower people who fear that another person will commit a hate crime in the future to get a court injunction against them. The bills are expected to be reintroduced and to progress with a re-elected Liberal government. Proponents of these bills include gender ideologue Morgane Oger who led the charge to defund the Vancouver Rape Shelter for sticking with its women-only policy. Oger has explicitly called for government censorship of Feminist Current which presents well-reasoned responses to Oger’s positions. As one author put it, “What better way to silence one’s opposition than to have the government censor their publication.” Reading the actual language of the proposed bills and seeing the suppression happening already, it is not an exaggeration to say that gender critical feminism may soon be criminalized in Canada and beyond.
Incoherence, Lies and Manipulation
A Thoroughly Irrational Ideology
What’s happening as the result of Gender Identity Ideology throughout the world is shocking. What makes the devastation even more shocking is the abject irrationality that underpins it.
It is patently absurd to change the definitions of words like “man”, “woman”, “male” and “female” in a way that robs them of all meaning. The following back-and-forth based on discussions with trans-identifying males (TIMs) illustrates the point:
TIM: I am a woman.
Me: But you have a male body. How can you be a woman?
TIM: I identify as a woman; therefore I am a woman.
Me: What is that thing you are identifying as? What is a “woman?”
TIM: A woman is any person who identifies as a woman.
Me: So, you are a woman because you identify as a person who identifies as a woman? This all seems rather circular to me. Doesn’t a definition based in objective reality—sexual anatomy—make more sense?
TIM Possible Response #1: You are a hateful bigot, and I won’t talk to you anymore.
TIM Possible Response #2: I’ve always been a woman because I’ve always been drawn to female things. I wanted to put on make-up. I didn’t want to play soccer with the boys.
Me: I’ve never owned or worn make-up outside of theatrical productions, and I would have loved to play soccer. Does that mean I’m not a woman? Sounds like you are identifying with a sexist stereotype.
TIM: You are a hateful bigot, and I won’t talk to you anymore.
Take any other mammalian species—bears for instance. Biologists and others can discuss and study these creatures, using clear terms like “male” and “female.” A “boar” is an adult male bear, which means he was born with male reproductive anatomy. He remains a boar whether or not his reproductive anatomy is functional and remains intact, and whether or not he impregnates a female. A “sow” is an adult female bear, which means she was born with female reproductive organs. She remains a female regardless of the state of her reproductive anatomy and whether she ever has cubs. Occasionally bears are born with ambiguous genitals. But rare bear “DSDs” don’t lead to bizarre declarations that sex in bears is a spectrum. They don’t render it wrong to refer to male and female bears as males and females, boars and sows.
An essential objective science-based lexicon of words exists for bears, all other mammals, and all other animals as well. But not for humans if gender ideologues have their way.
In Gender Identity land, the meaning of the words “male”, “female” “woman” and “man” shift according to individuals’ feelings. A person born with testicles and a penis, who has fathered children, is a “woman”, if he “identifies” as one. A person who has just given birth and is nursing her newborn infant is a “man” if she says so.
For all other animals we can have clear science-based discussions about mating, reproductive roles of each sex, and the quintessential female nature of gestating and suckling the next generation. But for humans, we are required to say that both men and women have babies and nurse them. We are required to say that there are female penises and male vaginas.
This is insane. It also represents yet another example of human beings seeing ourselves as separate from the rest of nature—exceptional, detached from our bodies and detached from our environment. It is the same exceptionalism and science denialism that has led to the ecological crises that now threaten all species.
The contortions people go through to find a way to validate trans-identifiers’ self-perceptions are ridiculous. “I know trans people who feel very deeply that they are the other sex,” people note. “Surely there must be something to what they’re saying. Who are we to question someone’s self-perception anyway? They’re the ones in their bodies. Only they can know what’s going on internally for them; there could well be some biological feature that we can’t experience or see, but they do.” Or as one trans-identifying male said to me, “You can’t prove that I don’t have a condition that makes me a woman.”
This is all nonsense. What trans-identifiers are claiming is a definitional impossibility. It is an impossibility as a matter of basic logic. Why? Because a person’s sex is defined by which primary sex organ (ovaries or testicles) they had at birth. It’s not defined by something elsewhere in the body. A person can long to be a woman, but if their body is male, they ARE male. The idea of a sexed soul hovering above the body is a religious belief, which people must be free to have. But as to other people being required to share and promote that belief? No.
Asking others to agree that a female-bodied person is actually a male-bodied person is asking them to deny material reality. A blue-eyed person who wishes they had brown eyes is not a brown-eyed person in the wrong body. They are a blue-eyed person who wishes they had brown eyes. Someone who is 4 foot 5 is not a 6-foot person trapped in a short body; they are a short person. Someone who has lived for 58 years is not a 9-year-old and should not be welcomed into grade school sports on the basis of identifying as an age they are not. An anorexic girl who is dangerously thin is not fat even though she identifies as such. For some things, one must recognize physical reality, and all the internal wishing and feeling and believing in the world does not alter that physical reality.
The irrationality of arguing that we must accept someone’s self-declaration as to sex because we can’t disprove it (when we clearly can because their body is either male or female) is generally topped off with pleas for compassion. “He really feels like a woman, so why not honor his feelings; why not call him a woman as a matter of courtesy and compassion.” No. Agreeing that a man is a woman, destroys the word “woman”. It accepts the core of Gender Ideology: a redefinition of essential words like “woman” and “man.” It leads inexorably to erasure of sex-based language and rights. In addition, it is not compassionate to go along with a lie, especially if a young person is considering invasive medicalization, with dire lifelong implications. Finally, we must consider all the people who deserve compassion, not just trans-identifying individuals. Acquiescing in the charade of calling men women, and women men, reflects a stunning lack of compassion for those whose rights, boundaries, positions, careers, and more are stolen as a result.
Everywhere you turn in Gender Identity Ideology, irrationality abounds:
Why is it described as liberating to tie a boy’s freedom to wear dresses and play with dolls to his declaring himself something other than a boy? Or to tie a girl’s freedom to be herself to denying the sex of her body?
Why are women in birthing and lactation groups spending time helping males figure out how to simulate birth and nursing experiences for themselves?
Why are people not pointing out the insanity of men buying sanitary pads, and learning what materials to pour on them that most look like blood?
Why are people selling “packers” for little girls, fake penises to put in their underwear so they look like they’ve got male anatomy?
Why are girls being given free binders and praised for wearing them?
Why are 13-year-olds cutting off their breasts as adults around them applaud.
Why is Ellen/Elliot Page’s decision to denounce and maim her female body held up as courageous and empowering?
How can anyone fail to notice the stench of misogyny inherent in trans-identifying men lecturing women (whom they call “cis women”) about what it means to be a woman? Particularly men like Andrea Chu who says that femaleness is defined by self-negation… “in which the self is sacrificed to make room for the desires of another. Barest essentials are an open mouth, an expectant ***hole, blank, blank eyes.” How can it be that women who point out on social media that Chu is a man will be banned, de-platformed, doxxed and stalked for telling the truth? They will be denounced as cruel and bigoted. And Chu will be seen as having been victimized, even as he issues his next incredibly obnoxious statements about women?
How can something so irrational have taken over our laws, institutions, schools and mindsets?
Incoherence as a Weapon
The incoherence of Gender Identity narratives is actually central to how this ideology has spread so far, so fast.
Failing to define key words. Failing to lay out rational arguments with points that flow logically from one to another. Peppering discussions with blatant internal inconsistencies. Relying heavily on “word salads”—dense jumbles of words that leave readers wondering what was said. All of this adds up to confusion. Unable to truly grasp the basic tenets of Gender Identity Ideology most people attribute their incomprehension to their own inadequacies rather than abysmal written and verbal communications from gender ideologues.
Combine the impenetrable density of the Gender Identity narrative with terms like “trans women” and “trans men”, and here’s what you get: most people have no idea whatsoever as to what is going on. They don’t realize that the trans-identifying people going into women’s locker rooms, calling themselves “trans women”, are actually men. They may assume they’re gender-nonconforming women, or women with some sort of intersex condition. Ditto regarding women who say they’re men, and the ludicrous argument that we must all now consider birthing and nursing to be male functions. Most people aren’t fully grasping what gender ideologues are saying.
Take this sentence from a recent news article about a state law that keeps female-only sports female-only:
“‘I ask that you read this bill and recognize the threat to privacy and lack of legal protection potentially facing female athletes,’ Andrew Coleman, a transgender man…said.”
How many people reading this would understand that: i) Coleman is a woman who believes herself to be a man, and ii) she’s maligning a bill that defends female athletes? When Coleman talks about “female athletes” losing privacy and legal protections, she’s actually referring to male athletes who are insisting they should be allowed to compete in women-only sports and invade the privacy of women athletes by showering with them in their locker rooms. In other words, Coleman is a woman who is throwing other women under the bus. But the layers of deception imposed by Gender Identity Ideology are so dense that average Americans will have no clue as to who is the aggressor denying other people’s rights here, and who is under attack.
Confused as to what is going on, average people just check out of the Gender Identity debate.
If someone objects to the erasure of sex-based rights, they assume that person is talking nonsense. “Gender identity is different from sex,” they point out, having heard that from gender ideologues. Asked to explain what that means, and what “gender” is, these trans allies can’t answer.
And for good reason. Gender Identity Ideology narratives start by asserting that everyone has a “gender identity”, ignoring countless people who don’t. They then explain that gender identity is innate and immutable, and therefore must never ever be questioned. A short while later they describe gender identity as dynamic and talk about gender fluid people which directly contradicts the immutability claim. Gender ideologues talk about gender this and gender that, gender identities and gender expression, but they almost never define gender.
If you search long and hard you might eventually find a definition buried in some Gender Ideology group’s materials. But that definition is always circular. Gender is a feeling about gender. Gender identity is identifying as a gender. In other words, the central word for this ideology is never defined except in a circular manner!
Into this mix of unfounded assertions, inconsistencies and terms that are never adequately defined, the Gender narrative adds this declaration: Gender is not the same as sex.
But explore that assertion for a moment. The terms used for “gender identities” include the very same terms used for the sexes: man, woman, boy, girl, male and female. Many gender ideologues and allies use “gender” as a synonym for “sex”, interchanging the terms at will. Broader society does this too. And whether there’s a distinction between gender and sex or not, gender identity supposedly determines what sex you are.
The book It Feels Good To Be Yourself, which is read to grade school children, explains how things work. When a young boy declares his gender identity to be “girl”, the family understands that the doctor who observed his sex at birth was wrong. The boy is a girl, and always has been. Because of that, pesky sex-based policies that apply to boys no longer apply. He can use the girl’s bathroom, play on the female-only team, etc. Actually, calling him “he” would never be tolerated. Everyone is required to say “she” is a girl. (See this video at 11:18.) Moreover, if the male in the book has gender “affirmation” surgery, it will be his sex organs that are cut.
In fact, many gender ideologues are now being more open about their attacks on sex. The ACLU is one example. It has intervened in a lawsuit brought by women incarcerated in California who object to men being placed in female-only prisons. (They are represented by Women’s Liberation Front, WoLF.) In its motion to intervene, the ACLU denies the allegation that human beings are “sexually dimorphic, divided into males and females each with reproductive systems, hormones and chromosomes that result in significant differences between men and women.”
In short, it really doesn’t matter whether this word they never define – “gender”—is the same thing as “sex” or not. Gender Identity Ideology is all about gutting the definitions of the sexes, gutting sex-based rights, and steering people to get surgeries on their sex organs.
But gender critics seldom are given a chance to explain any of this to well-intentioned “trans allies” who have absorbed the mantras without understanding the implications. Primed to view all gender critics as bigots, they dismiss complaints about sex-based rights and language as misinformed.
Confusion over sex versus gender is just one example of incoherence enabling the Gender Identity agenda to move forward. Here’s another, previously alluded to in the discussion on the hijacking of indigenous struggles. Gender ideologues and allies deliver lengthy soliloquies about so-called “third genders” in indigenous cultures and then seamlessly shift to assertions that everyone must embrace the gender identity agenda. Point 1 (“third genders” in some cultures) does not logically lead to Point 2 (everyone must support the Gender Identity agenda), but that lack of logic is masked by the Word Salad nature of the presentation. And lo and behold, people who know very little about Gender Identity Ideology insist that those opposing it are ignoring the wisdom of indigenous cultures.
Similarly, the Gender Identity narrative talks at length about various DSDs, pointing out that there are people with chromosomes that don’t match a strict XX and XY dichotomy, and that there are people with ambiguous genitalia, and so on and so forth. The bogus concept of a sex spectrum is introduced at some point, along with the assertion that, of course, therefore everyone must agree to people self-identifying into whatever sex they want. That conclusion does not flow logically from the discussion of DSDs. And if the steps for getting from Point 1 to the conclusion were laid out, they would be readily exposed as ridiculous. So, they’re not laid out. And average people absorb only the “take away” point: we need to support the Gender Identity agenda because it has some sort of scientific basis.
Keep it vague. Say a lot of words. Be incoherent and inconsistent. Make it difficult to follow. This approach has worked very well for gender ideologues.
Lies and Manipulations
Smokescreens, incoherence and word salads are accompanied by additional sophist techniques: lies (the bigger the better) and manipulations. We mentioned the phenomenon of declaring falsehoods to be truths, with respect to claims that trans-identifying children will kill themselves if they are not affirmed. False information is used to fuel emotional manipulation.
Gender ideologues rely on an even bigger lie as part of their manipulation game plan. They maintain that there’s an epidemic of violence against trans- and nonbinary-identifying people. They push this narrative over and over again. A review of actual murder data reveals, however, that i) referenced murder victims include people who are not trans- or nonbinary- identifying, ii) there is no evidence of anti-trans/nonbinary hate whatsoever in many, if not most of the cases. In fact, many murders happen because someone is in the wrong place at the wrong time. They’re visiting friends when an armed robbery happens, for example. Nonetheless, gender ideologues hold these murdered individuals up as examples of hate crime victims, and iii) in most cases, it’s not even clear that the murderer knew about the gender identity of the victim. Despite all this, even counting every last person who can possibly be counted, even including victims from around the world rather than from just one country, the total number of deaths of people who identify as trans or non-binary—each death a tragedy—the total still doesn’t even vaguely approach epidemic levels. In fact, compared to other demographics the numbers are quite low. Referring to an epidemic of violence against trans and nonbinary people is simply put, not based in reality. Various reviews of murder data have made this clear, including the author’s review of U.S. data for 2016 through 2019.
The lie about trans murder rates is circulated because it pulls on the heartstrings. It is attached to an unstated irrational argument that goes like this: i) trans and nonbinary people face epidemic rates of murder and other violence (not true), ii) anyone who questions Gender Identity Ideology and anyone who opposes its agenda (such as opening up women’s spaces to trans-identifying men) makes trans and nonbinary people unsafe, iii) gender critics are responsible for the deaths of trans and nonbinary people and should be silenced, and iv) the Gender Identity agenda must be implemented in order to protect trans and nonbinary people from more violence.
In other words, the lie is coupled with standard illogical “reasoning.” In reality, whatever violence there is against trans and nonbinary people, is not perpetrated by gender critical people. Nor does our defense of sex-based rights and language endanger trans and nonbinary-identifying people. There is also no evidence that the people who do harm trans and nonbinary people oppose the Gender Ideology agenda; some of them probably support it.
Gender ideologues are very good at creating situations and then blaming gender critics for those situations. If a left-leaning gender critic attempts to speak at any left-wing forum, a mob is organized to block them. If they submit articles to left-wing or mainstream publications, they are rejected. Many left-wing gender critics have therefore appeared on conservative news programs and in other conservative forums, and they have published articles on conservative sites. Without doing so, they would not be heard at all. Appearing and publishing in those conservative venues, also enables them to reach sectors of the population that need to be reached.
And what do gender ideologues do with the fact that gender critics have appeared and published in conservative forums? They use that fact to declare those critics to be right wingers. Having blocked any other options, they denounce people for going where they must go to be heard. This all fits well with their strategy of pretending that only right-wingers question Gender Identity Ideology.
The realm of sports is one in which gender ideologues pull out all the stops in terms of lies and manipulation. First, they scream from the rooftops that anti-trans people are proposing legislation to ban trans-identifying people from participating in sports. Then they claim that these terrible people want athletes to be subjected to genital inspections.
“Florida’s new ban on transgender students in sports would allow schools to subject minors to genital inspections,” blares a Hill.com headline. “The Texas House passes HB25, banning trans kids from sports and inviting scrutiny and inspection into the bodies of all young athletes…This is all so cruel” tweets the ACLU’s Chase Strangio, using the hashtag LetKidsPlay. A Texas Tribune article on the Texas bill features a photo of “LGBTQ supporters and activists” holding candles and signs that say “#LetKidsPlay”, and the article otherwise adheres to the gender ideologues’ narrative.
But the bills don’t “ban trans kids from sports.” No one is calling for that. Trans-identifying people must simply play with the team that correlates with their sex, like everyone else. People are defending female-only sports from male incursion. And if it is sometimes necessary to verify an athlete’s sex, that is the direct result of the Gender Identity crowd pushing more and more men into women’s sports. The sex of a person showing up for the team was rarely, if ever, a problem before Gender Identity Ideology arrived. It is hugely manipulative to create a situation—men seeking entry into women-only sports—and then blame those defending women’s rights for the consequences of that reality.
The Texas bill says that people need to compete in accordance with their biological sex “as correctly stated on” their official birth certificate.” Because gender ideologues have already gotten laws passed allowing people to alter the sex on their birth certificates, the law clarifies that “correctly state” refers to the sex entered on or near the time of the person’s birth, or the sex on a birth certificate that was modified to correct clerical errors (as opposed to reflect a person’s belief that they’re a different sex.)
The Florida bill says that if there is a dispute about a student’s sex, it is to be resolved by the student’s personal health care provider, signing a statement verifying their sex. The provider—someone who already needs to know a child’s sex in order to properly care for them in their practice as a matter of basic medical ethics, and who may well have cared for the child since birth—“may verify the student’s biological sex, as part of a routine sports physical examination”—which is generally required each year for children to enroll in sports—relying on one or more of the following: reproductive anatomy, genetic makeup or normal endogenously produced testosterone levels. This is a very different situation from the one conjured up by the Chase Strangios of the world in which children are forced to show their genitals to coaches or other people.
Here’s another example of the manipulative nature of gender ideologues’ arguments. Those opposing gender ideology have been accused of trying to sterilize trans-identifying people. No justice-minded person could support this. And, of course, gender critics are demanding nothing of the sort.
We are standing up against men being allowed in women’s spaces and sports. Some gender critics are willing to compromise on this. If a trans-identifying person has gone through medical transition, i.e. if a man has had his penis removed or altered, they’re willing to call that person a woman and let them in the women’s locker rooms, etc. (This author does not agree with this approach.) Since medical transition can lead to infertility, gender ideologues use the compromise position of those gender critics to claim that those challenging Gender Ideology are calling for sterilization!
This stuff is so twisted, that you can’t make it up. Nothing a fiction author could come up with can match the manipulative behavior of gender ideologues.
Their claims about sterilization are particularly disingenuous given the fact that gender critics oppose the medicalization of children in part because it can sterilize them. Our concern for those children and their fundamental human right to not be sterilized is dismissed by gender ideologues. We are told that sterilizing children is not a big deal. They can adopt. If they start puberty blockage later than usual, maybe they’ve got some eggs or sperm mature enough for freezing. We are also told that by defending children’s fertility, we are treating reproduction as something everyone should be pressured to engage in—which of course is not the case. As noted earlier, parents have even been accused of selfishly wanting grandchildren when they question the medical transitioning of their children.
Here’s one last example of the gender ideologues’ manipulative tactics. Quite regularly they use loaded language to imply that gender critics stand for things we don’t stand for. Gender ideologues will talk about how important it is for people to be free to be gender nonconforming, all in an extremely righteous tone, and with wording that strongly implies that gender critics don’t agree. Innuendo is a powerful thing, especially if it is used, as it is in this case, over and over again, and those smeared are prevented from defending ourselves.
According to gender ideologues, critics are all about forcing people into sexist stereotypes and gender conformity. This is the opposite of reality. Many have been fighting sexist stereotypes their whole lives. Many are gender nonconforming themselves. Gender critics are fighting Gender Ideology because it reinforces sexist stereotypes.
Big Pharma, Big Money, Big Power
Somehow Gender Identity Ideology has managed to accomplish in a matter of years the sorts of sweeping changes other movements have taken decades or even centuries to achieve. Long before most people in the U.S. were even aware of concepts like transgenderism and non-binary people, 25 states had already passed laws allowing anyone to change the sex marker on their birth certificate without surgery or a court order. Executive Orders had been put in place giving the nebulous concept of gender identity preemptive power over sex, instantly crippling sex-based programs and stymying enforcement of sex-based rights. Schools across the United States and beyond had begun teaching Gender Identity Ideology. And so much more.
Changes like this don’t usually arise from grassroots organizing and struggle—not that fast. Not that systematically.
To understand Gender Ideology’s rapid ascent, we need to look at Big Money: The Big Money that is spent pushing this ideology. The Big Money that is made as Gender Ideology takes hold.
The Money to Be Made.
Each person who goes down the gender affirmation medical path represents big earnings for doctors, the facilities that employ them, and the pharmaceutical industry.
On the chemical side of things, there are puberty blockers and wrong-sex hormones. Transitioners can be on blockers for years, and then they become lifelong patients tethered to the medical establishment for ongoing wrong-sex hormone prescriptions. In 2019, the global market value for gender affirmation hormone therapies was estimated at $21.8 billion and expected to grow by nearly 8% per year.
Then there’s the money to be made through surgery. There are the gender “affirmation” surgeries themselves, often complex endeavors that include multiple operations and multispecialty medical teams. And there are the corrective surgeries and other health care necessitated when complications arise. Urinary problems are very common, and multiple surgeries may be needed to try to address them. Jazz Jennings was rushed back into the operating room four days after surgery, when according to news coverage “the whole thing had split open”—presumably referring to Jazz’s new fake vagina—causing “crazy pain.”
What do health professionals, their employers and pharmaceutical companies make off people undergoing “gender affirmation” medical care? It’s difficult to assess how much profit is made on giving children puberty blockers, but without insurance, these can cost a child and his or her family from $4000 to $25,000 per year. Described as inexpensive compared to other drugs, the price for wrong-sex hormones varies by delivery method and by specific hormone from as low as $20 per month for oral estrogen to $300 to $350 per month for testosterone gels. These will be taken over the entire course of a person’s life. The earlier people are put on them, the larger the profits will be for the pharmaceutical companies.
As for surgeries, price tags reported for various surgeries include: $9000 to $10,000 for “chest reconstructions” i.e. mastectomies, $50,000 to $60,000 for metoidioplasty (a type of “bottom surgery”), $50,000 to $300,000 for phalloplasty, $10,000 for hysterectomies, $5000 to $10,000 for breast augmentation, $3000 to $40,000 for facial feminization, $30,000 to $50,000 for vaginoplasties, $4000 to $5000 for labioplasties; and $4000 to $6000 for orchiectomies. This is not a complete list of surgeries people undergo to try to look like the other sex or to look like neither sex. (“Sex nullification” surgery is reportedly increasing in popularity.) Notice that doing just 50 operations a year that each cost $50,000 delivers $2.5 million to a medical facility.
Barely into adulthood, this person had already had over $600,000 worth of surgeries. These included planned surgeries plus unexpected ones needed to try to correct complications.
In 2019 the market value estimate for gender affirmation surgeries in the U.S. was $267 million, and expected to grow at a compound rate of 14.4% per year to 2027. There were approximately 11,000 gender affirmation surgeries in 2019, which was 10 to 15% more than the previous year, and increasing numbers of surgeries were expected to drive the future increase in profits and market value.
It is anticipated that the global market value of gender surgeries will exceed $1.5 billion by 2026. It will enjoy a compound annual growth rate of 24.5% from 2020 to 2026.
It is striking that even as other plastic surgeries were done less frequently during the pandemic, gender identity surgeries rose in frequency in the U.S.. Mastectomies done as part of “gender affirmation” have steadily risen for several years, for example. Even as other areas of health care saw drastic reductions in usage during the pandemic, the removal of healthy breasts continued to go up and up.
In short, medically “affirming” gender identities is big business. As more and more young people sign up for life-long medicalization, subjecting their bodies to puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormones and surgeries, the profits raked in by the pharmaceutical and medical industries are growing exponentially. As discussed earlier in this report, we are in the midst of astronomical growth in the number of children identifying as trans and nonbinary. The number of clinics providing gender affirmation is skyrocketing.
Big Money Backers.
This brings us to the other topic we need to discuss here: the Big Money that is pushing Gender Identity Ideology. Wealthy individuals, big corporations, and governments influenced by them have poured massive assets into making sure this toxic ideology spreads and its agenda is implemented.
A report based on foundation surveys reveals that U.S. funding for trans issues increased more than eightfold between 2004 and 2013, reaching $8.3 million in 2013. Open Society Foundation ($3.1 million), Arcus Foundation ($2.8 million), Anonymous ($2.3 million) and Tawani Foundation ($1.3 million) topped the list of donors for domestic and global trans issues for the period of 2011-2013. Funding went overwhelmingly to advocacy organizations. Other big funders included foundations like Tides that funnel money from anonymous sources, corporate foundations like Levi Strauss, and others. The top 25 list includes at least two foundations that purport to serve women (the New York Women’s Foundation and Global Fund for Women) illustrating another way in which Gender Ideology’s hitchhike on feminism harms the cause: it diverts funding from measures that advance the struggle against sexism to those that undercut that struggle.
Another report covering transgender group funding for 2017 and 2018 lists the top five donors as Gilead Sciences (an American biopharmaceutical corporation, $6.1 million), Arcus Foundation ($4.8 million), Tawani Foundation ($4.6 million), Gill Foundation ($3.1 million) and Borealis Philanthropy ($2.9 million.) The Borealis Philanthropy, like Tides (which gave $1.7 million during the 2017 to 2018 time period), is a philanthropic intermediary. It shows up as a top recipient of funding as well as a donor because of this status. According to the report, transgender funding in the U.S. rose steadily from $9 million in 2014 to $28.6 million in 2018.
It is difficult to find reports tracking overall foundation funding after that year. Occasional postings can be found about particular grants, such as one posted in June of 2021 by Borealis Philanthropy announcing that it had awarded $1.88 million in grants to 56 trans-led organizations across the U.S.
The partial foundation data we’ve been discussing is only a tiny slice of the Big Money advancing Gender Identity Ideology. There are also donations from individuals and entities that aren’t reflected in data gleaned from foundation surveys. There’s government funding and the pressure exerted by governments as the result of corporate and big donor control over governments. California’s Governor announced in July of 2021 that the Transgender Wellness and Equity Fund will receive $13 million, for example. Within weeks of entering the White House President Joe Biden issued a Memorandum directing U.S. agencies engaged abroad to consider using “the full range of diplomatic and assistance tools and as appropriate, financial sanctions, visa restrictions, and other actions,” to pressure foreign governments on LGBTQI+ issues. (This is a prime example of the regressive Gender Identity Ideology hitching a ride on progressive Sexual Orientation issues. As written, the U.S. can and will deny funds and engage in other financial pressure if a nation defends women’s sex-based rights.) And let’s not forget perhaps the biggest monetary boost to Gender Identity Ideology of all, corporate investments in entities and technologies that advance that agenda.
Many of the biggest individual funders of Gender Ideology have made their money and continue to expand it in Big Pharma (which as noted above profits mightily from Gender Ideology) and Big Tech (which plays a huge role in priming kids for medicalization, and which suppresses all dissenting voices.) They have been described by author Jennifer Bilek as “exceedingly rich, white men with enormous cultural influence.” Jon Stryker who founded the Arcus Foundation is a billionaire who inherited money made in surgical supplies and software. Martine Rothblatt’s 2019 pay package as a biopharma CEO was $45.65 million. (Martine is a man who says he’s a woman.)
Bilek uses Jennifer Pritzker as a case study to illustrate the myriad ways in which billionaire gender ideologues have advanced their ideology so quickly. Pritzker is a man who declared himself a woman at age 63. He and his siblings were valued at $29 billion in 2018 and are heavily invested in the medical industrial complex. Pritzker owns Squadron Capital, a medical technologies acquisitions company. He serves on an influential committee at a major medical school, gave huge donations to start and expand a children’s gender clinic, funded a chair of transgender studies at a major university, otherwise strongly influences academic institutions, and otherwise uses his wealth to advance his private ideology and financial holdings. Pritzker and his Tawani Foundation even provide funding to WPATH, the body that establishes so-called “Standards of Care” relied upon by gender identity health care providers around the world.
Pritzker’s siblings amplify his impact with their own donations and investments. The Pritzkers are also major players in electoral politics. Sister Penny helped to elect Barack Obama, and served as Obama’s Secretary of Commerce, promoting Gender Ideology and orchestrating a White House meeting on trans issues. Cousin J.B. Pritzker is Governor of Illinois and has adopted various policies promoting Gender Identity Ideology. Read Bilek’s account for details of all this. Note that Jennifer Pritzker has traditionally been a Republican. He donated to Trump in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020.
What does Big Money do for Gender Ideology? It:
Invests in gender identity technologies and products and in promotion of these.
Buys gender ideologues seats on boards and committees that influence medical schools, medical research, and medical practices.
Helps elect government officials who will do their bidding, and secures positions within their Administrations.
Creates and enriches Gender Ideology Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs), enabling them to push the Gender Ideology agenda, drowning out the voices of opponents.
Buys control over the news media and the messages it delivers. Most news outlets regurgitate information handed to them by gender ideologues without any meaningful attempt to assess accuracy or talk to those with differing perspectives. Outlets often labeled as left-leaning, like Democracy Now and Common Dreams, regularly describe opposition to Gender Identity as “right-wing”, completely ignoring vast numbers of left-wing opponents, including individuals who have contacted them requesting an opportunity to share information. They use gender ideologues’ framing of the issues, describing those who defend women’s and gay rights as opposing rights for trans-identifying people.
Most left-leaning news outlets regularly disseminate inaccurate information such as by declaring that states are banning trans kids from sports even though those states are i) simply requiring that trans-identifying individuals, like all others, participate on teams associated with their sex, and ii) women’s teams welcome the participation of trans-identifying women, i.e. women who believe themselves to be men. Coverage of a new Florida law related to gender identity education in public schools is typically misleading. By calling it the “Don’t say gay” law, news outlets completely misrepresent the actual content of the legislation. Moreover, parental concerns that produced the new law revolve around the imposition of gender identity beliefs on small children, and schools intentionally keeping parents in the dark about their children “transitioning”, rather than some sort of backlash against gay rights. As usual, gender ideologues are hitchhiking on gay rights to escape fact-based debate, despite the fact that their ideology dramatically undercuts those rights.
Buys influence over associations that establish transgender Standards of Care relied upon by doctors and other health care providers. Every member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) committee that worked on its Standards of Care had significant conflicts of interest. WPATH is heavily influenced by gender identity organizations and Big Pharma, as is apparent from the absence of an evidentiary basis for its medicalization-promoting “standards”, the prizes it awards to Gender Identity-promoting entities, and its cancellation at the request of gender identity activists of highly credential speakers who challenge Gender Ideology.
It co-opts other important organizations, turning them from adversaries to cheerleaders, and riding to victory on their reputations. This is the hitchhiking discussed above in this report.
Planned Parenthood is a prime example. This organization used to prioritize women and girls. It provided health care to them and also to boys and men, enabling people to control their reproductive destiny, avoid health problems like cancer, and get basic medical care.
In early 2017, the President of Planned Parenthood, which was reportedly facing financial challenges, issued a joint message with David Karp, CEO of Tumblr urging other Big Tech companies to “team up” with Planned Parenthood. Karp joined the board of Planned Parenthood. (Tumblr plays a major role in steering children, especial girls, towards trans identification.)
That same year Planned Parenthood announced that it would now provide gender reassignment health care.
Planned Parenthood is listed as one of the top ten recipients of foundation funding for transgender communities for the two year period of 2017-2018. It has received funding from Jon Stryker’s Arcus Foundation, for example.
Since 2017, Planned Parenthood has expanded “gender affirmation” services by leaps and bounds. Its 2016-2017 annual report announced that services were now available for transgender patients, noting that 17 states had Planned Parenthood health centers that provided hormone therapy. By 2017-2018, hormone therapy was available in 21 states. The next year (2018-2019), Planned Parenthood offered transgender care in 31 states. As of 2020, it was declaring itself the second largest provider of “gender affirming hormone care” in the U.S. and boasting 200 health centers in 31 states providing hormone therapy to transgender patients. “When we last talked, we had 3300 unique gender affirming care patients…” said a Planned Parenthood Patient Care Navigator regarding their state when interviewed for a Planned Parenthood update. “[N]ow, just a few months later, we have 4,700!” Planned Parenthood has announced that further expansion of “gender affirmation” services is forthcoming. At this writing, the organization does not provide gender identity care to minors, but it does refer minors to other providers, and has hinted that expansion to encompass children may be coming next.
Planned Parenthood has largely erased the word “woman” from its websites, added in pages with pictures of smiling trans- and nonbinary-identifying people obviously pleased to have transitioned with Planned Parenthood’s help. It has purged leaders who aren’t in tune with the new Gender Identity spin.
A whistleblower who strongly supports Planned Parenthood’s core mission has shared concerns about its gender affirmation policies. She says the organization rubber stamps medical transitions for large numbers of young women, some of whom arrive together in groups. And that serious mental health problems are common but never addressed. The “trans identifying kids are cash cows, and they are kept on the hook for the foreseeable future in terms of follow-up appointments, bloodwork, meetings, etc…” she notes.
The ACLU is another good example. This organization used to take a principled stand in defense of civil liberties. Now it fights against public access to government documents, and it opposes the civil rights of girls and women. (As noted elsewhere in this report it represented males who displaced girls in high school track meets, and it represents male prisoners who want to be housed in women’s prisons.) Attorney Chase Strangio (a trans-identifying female) regularly uses Twitter to attack gender critics, promote Gender Ideology, and call for banning books and for other suppression of free speech. (This is Strangio’s right, but it does not reflect well upon the ACLU that these are the views of one of its lead attorneys.)
Jon Stryker’s Arcus Foundation has been giving grants to the ACLU for gender identity advocacy for years. In 2021, it announced a $15 million grant. The ACLU is even naming the new LGBTQ project it is launching with that money the “Jon L. Stryker and Slobodan Randjelović LGBTQ & HIV Project.” (Randjelovic is Stryker’s partner.)
Jennifer Pritzker’s Tawani Foundation has also been funding the ACLU. In 2021 it announced that the foundation will donate “$101,000 and additional six-figure future support to the ACLU.”
It buys advice from world experts on how to manipulate public discourse and control policymakers and it funds implementation of strategies based on that advice. A 2019 document developed by the world’s largest law firm (Denton’s), gender ideologues, and the foundation of a global news and information services company (Thomson Reuters) is instructive. The document explicitly advises a strategy of hitchhiking on other causes, i.e. of “tying your campaign to more popular reform. In Ireland, Denmark and Norway, changes to the law on legal gender recognition were put through at the same time as other more popular reforms such as marriage equality legislation,” the document notes. “This provided a veil of protection, particularly in Ireland, where marriage equality was strongly supported, but gender identity remained a more difficult issue to win public support for.” The document stresses that it is important to not seek media coverage and exposure, because “the general public is not well informed about trans issues, and therefore misinterpretation can arise.” In other words, if the general public finds out what’s being pushed through, they will recognize it for what it is, and halt it. So, keep things hidden. (President Biden’s sweeping Executive Orders on his first day in office adhere to this strategy perfectly. Polls show that a whopping 66.93% of likely U.S. voters oppose the placement of trans-identifying male sex offenders and domestic abusers in women’s prisons, for example, but Biden required the Federal Bureau of Prisons to place them there. By issuing an Executive Order he avoided the messy business of an open democratic process in Congress.)
The Denton document notes that it is critical to not talk about the details of medical transitions when advocating policy changes related to gaining legal recognition as a different sex. Apparently, most people don’t think children should chemically or surgically alter their healthy bodies. They are more likely to endorse policies that enable children to be legally recognized as a different sex, if they’re not thinking about what might happen to those children medically as a result.
For a more recent example of the slick public relations advice Big Money buys for Gender Ideology pushers, see “Messaging Guide. Transgender Youth and the Freedom to Be Ourselves. Building Our Choir with a Race Class Gender Narrative.”
Earlier we looked at how suppression of dissenting voices allows Gender Identity Ideology to spread. That suppression has been particularly effective in preventing any public discussion of the Big Money forces behind this ideology. Jennifer Bilek, whose data is cited above, has been deplatformed for her gender critical views. The results of her research don’t appear in mainstream or left publications. The GenderMapper website which delves into Big Money connections to Gender Identity’s spread was offline for a while recently after gender ideologues succeeded in canceling its Paypal account. The Left Forum canceled a panel on the topic of who’s funding Gender Identity Ideology when gender ideologues demanded that they do so.
In one of her reviews of transitioners’ tales about their medical journeys, youtuber Exulansic asks an excellent question regarding an “unexpected” complication necessitating more surgery. “Why are they telling this person that it’s rare when it appears to be not only common, but universal?.....It’s extremely predictable, not to mention extremely profitable, for the doctors that inflict this problem and then say, ‘Oh it isn’t me. It’s just a complication.’ ” She continues with an observation that needs to be proclaimed from the rooftops: “This is Big Tobacco of our generation. They know that they are creating lifelong dependents. That is why they are targeting teenagers.”
A Broader End Game? Some maintain that there’s a bigger end game here than simply creating lots of pharma-dependent people and promoting massively profitable gender identity surgeries. Many promoting Gender Identity Ideology are also promoting things like surrogacy (women being hired to gestate a baby for others to raise), womb transplants, and replacing the word “prostitution” with “sex work” while protecting pimps and those who use prostitutes.
Like Gender Identity Ideology, these all advance a mindset in which a person’s body is considered separate from, and less important than their “identity.” In this mindset, human bodies are treated as commodities. Enslaving them periodically to another person for whatever degrading and/or violent sexual abuse they wish to inflict, well, that’s just a normal economic option that some “choose” to exercise. And the multi-billion-dollar pornography industry is a business like any other, the expansion of which should be celebrated. Renting one’s uterus out for others to use for their offspring is another normal and even admirable arrangement that society should applaud.
The buying and selling of new sexual body parts to replace the healthy ones we don’t like feeds into the buying and selling of other body parts. “Being yourself” by replacing other healthy body parts with “better” ones is a logical extension of transgenderism.
Gender Identity Ideology is intertwined with and sets the stage for transhumanism, which entails much more than Big Money interests profiting from selling body parts to those seeking self-fulfillment through surgery. Transhumanism promises to transform what it means to be human and to make possible through “human augmentation” and other technology far greater control over individuals. Major proponents of Gender Identity Ideology are key players in the transhumanist realm.
As author Libby Emmons explains:
The ongoing effort to change language, and redefine ‘male’ and ‘female’ so they refer to something other than sexual dimorphism, is designed to establish a Cartesian mind-body dualism in which the mind can dominate body to such an extent that personal subjectivity can decisively contradict biological reality. Transgender practice is the ultimate biohack. The claim that one has been born into the ‘wrong’ body is a total rejection of mind-body unification, and a statement that mind and body can be so disparate that the body must be thoroughly altered to match the mind’s perception of how it ought to be…..
Transgender speech codes demand that we renounce our bodies’ basis in biology, and instead consider them constructs of arbitrary (and somehow unjust) societal expectations. We are not to think about ‘mother’ and ‘father’ as reproductive terms, but as culturally specified relationships. This aggressive effort to change and police the use of language, and to redefine terms like ‘male’ and ‘female’ to deny the sexual difference characteristic of all mammals, is designed to uncouple mind from body and humans from evolutionary and reproductive logic. Instead, an ideology of emotion is to be given dominion over biological reality…..
But concerns we perceive to be on the fringes of culture, or esoteric and only vaguely relevant to some distant future, are in fact part of a giant ideological redefinition of humanity. If we do not attend to these debates and their implications, we are going to awaken one day to find that developments have overtaken us, that it’s too late, and that our bodies are of no importance. What we forget is that the mind must serve the humanity of the body—in suffering, joy, pleasure, pain, tickles, itches, even death. Without that submission, the mind is nothing but ego, without any checks on its power or influence. To be a mind without a body is to have no relationship to the physical world, and no stake in it. If we perceive ourselves and others to be disembodied minds piloting meat machines—bodies of mere matter that do not matter—what horror will we be capable of inflicting on the bodies of others? When we renounce our humanity, we forget what it means to inflict pain and to suffer.
These topics are beyond the scope of this report but must be explored.
You have reached the end of Part IV of Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Transgender Galaxy. Why We Must Opposed Gender Identity Ideology. To move on to Part V, click HERE.
To go to PART I which contains the full Table of Contents at the end, click here.