Listen now | Not to be confused with MomTok, the Hulu series about hot Mormon moms gone wild on TikTok. That one can't be enjoyed without video but ours can! So, you've made the right choice.
I'm not sure about the applicability of just trying to "change hearts and minds", as your guest says. It seems to me that if that were effective, it would have worked with her own daughter.
At the very least, we can't employ the "change hearts and minds" as our only strategy. We are dealing, of course, with the cultish character of indoctrinated minds most often.
We have to also prevent the "trans" activist voices from being the only voices heard whenever possible.
So very grateful for you both - for your writing, for your speaking, for your speaking out. I feel both less alone, as a Mom, and less crazy, as a Democrat, and friend. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I share your frustration with the media, and write a lot of never-acknowledged letters trying to get the liberal media to listen to me, and to consider multiple perspectives in their reporting. Just today, David Remnick stopped his interview with Atul Gawande with something like: "wait, I can't be an objective journalist anymore, this is just awful and outrageous!!!" (about the decimation of USAID). I agree with him, completely. And, where is the "down tools right now, let's be outraged" during his numerous interviews about transing kids?
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful comment, Suzanne. I once put David Remnick next to George Clooney on my list of top 3 most desirable men in America, but how the mighty have fallen, lol! A friend of mine thinks he's been cowed into submission by his young adult kids, who she says are also in publishing. If true, it's a bizarre family tyranny that I've also seen first-hand with my daughter's former psychiatrist. He literally asked permission of his son, a therapist-in-training, before he'd put his own name on an op ed that was mildly critical of automatic trans-affirmation; and he admitted this to me without shame! I often think we moms are the only ones willing to be consistent and firm in this area (though there are absolutely some dads with spines too, like my friend ML). Anyway, keep writing those letters, and thanks for your friendship!
One of the worst aspects of modern parenting is wanting your child's approval, by treating them as a peer. It never works. Like the old guy in the nightclub who wants to hang out with teenagers, it isn't respected and it can feel invasive.
I hope you release the entire transcript--I am more of a reader than a listener.
I always look forward to comments on Substacks by Hippiesq.
I haven't found a way to get through to my progressive friends. One, sort of.
We all know what stands in the way: the media they consume, the culture they inhabit (blue zone), tribalism, polarization--and mostly (IMO) people they know who are trans, or rather, parents that are supporting their newly authentic opposite-sex pronoun young adult children.
It’s funny: whenever I listen back to an episode I imagine how embarrassed I would be to see the transcript! I edit out more of my ‘uhs’ and ‘you knows’ than I leave in, but enough remain to desecrate a written artifact! This episode in particular would lose 90% of its appeal, I think (you’ve got to hear William’s song!), but I also think you can get the transcript of any episode, because I know Substack produces them without my asking. I’ll figure out where to find it and get back to you.
Here's what I learned from Substack support:'The transcript feature is available on the web version of your publication, appearing as a button under the byline. For audio posts, transcripts are automatically generated. The transcript feature isn't available on the Substack app or in email.' I did find the button, next to the share button. I hope that helps.
What a wonderful, thought-provoking discussion! I hope you might put out a transcript of this. There is so much food for thought here, it’s hard to get it all in one go. And now, please forgive me for a long response—in my defense, I can only say that you certainly provoked a lot of thinking by me!
First, for the record: There is one heart and mind I know personally that Hippiesq directly changed, or at least H opened the door to it. H & I had lunch together (and I hope and trust not for the last time). We took a selfie, which I sent, together with H’s essay on celebrities: https://substack.com/home/post/p-158085137, to a friend who is a mom. That friend has not confronted this personally, but as a mom, I could see from her response that both the photo and H’s essay made it more personal and touched her heart. I don’t see her often, but when I do, I hope there will be an opportunity to talk a little more about this in a way we haven’t been able to in the past.
About the whole issue of changing hearts and minds—when H said this (and I agree completely with H’s and your analysis here)—I thought, yes, that is it exactly! I was reminded of a documentary about the Vietnam war called “Hearts and Minds.” The title was based on a quote from LBJ: "the ultimate victory will depend on the hearts and minds of the people who actually live out there," and the hope for the documentary was to change hearts and minds toward the end of stopping the war.
What struck me about the phrase as I listened to this moving, smart discussion is that the order of the change is suggested in the title: if we are unable to change hearts, we are much less likely to change minds. This actually helps to clarify for me, as I continue in my small way to engage people online and off, to go first for the heart, in any way I can.
Now, a footnote on the EOs. As all the people in my sphere are liberals and self-described progressives, I stay away from the EOs (for all the reasons you both discussed). Beyond that, though, I do think those of us who are able to see past who is putting them out and assess them on their face, I early on became very concerned that, at the same time, “our side” was under-recognizing the potential for and impact of overreach in implementation. My background is partly in health care, including public health. The current administration’s overreach in implementing the relevant EOs in that area is indefensible, with vast repercussions that are ongoing, including affecting impoverished communities here and around the world. For that reason, and also for the reasons Glenna, H and others have set forth, my personal view—which no one is required to share!—is that the EOs are of little use, and largely counterproductive, toward making the change we need.
That said, I do think we have many tools in the toolbox, thanks to the persistent hard work and tremendous courage of so many. In addition to the incredible detransitioners (who, I agree, are having to carry way too much of the burden) and you moms!! (same is true for you), I think the 27 by 2027 campaign that Jamie Reed and the LGB Courage Coalition are pursuing at the state legislature level is incredibly powerful and useful. As one small thing our household can do, we donate to that. Also, to the extent I can, I circulate videos of testimony both online and off. Jamie’s latest video at the Wisconsin legislature is incredibly powerful, and it is getting a lot of note.
But of course, the key is for all these efforts to be seen outside the usual circles, which remains ridiculously hard. I agree completely that this is one of many areas where breakthroughs in the wall of silence in the liberal-leaning press remain essential to pursue. The other thing I think we need to do more of is mobilization at the state and local level that engages the “grassroots” and is aimed directly at our Democratic electeds. There are a number of groups pursuing that, and I am hopeful we will see more.
Thank you again, for a vibrant discussion, and also just for being you.❤️
Your points are important. It's true, and I often struggle with this because I tend to lean on logic more than emotion in my arguments (that's what being a litigator for a long time does to you - or maybe I was always that way), that people are more swayed by their emotional response to an argument than the mental aspects of it. I will try to keep that in mind.
As for LGB Courage Coalition, we cannot promote them enough. They are doing vital work, and, like detransitioners, I think they have a better chance of getting society to listen than people like me. Jamie Reed's words always feel so profound, sincere and true (and her admission that she was once a "true believer" makes her the perfect person to speak out on the harms being done). I can only hope legislators have the same reaction I do when I listen to her speak.
How to reach those who don't want to hear from us - that's the big question. On that point, thank you for sharing your story about the one person who may have been swayed to see things from another point of view. I so enjoyed our lunch and the selfie seemed to capture our good time and connection, so I'm glad it was put to good use!
This may be a war that is won by thousands of small battles, and you are certainly one of the warriors who will make it happen.
> "This rollback includes removing lessons on so-called gender identity, a vague, unfalsifiable feeling of one's gender, a term that is left undefined, from schools ..."
Pretty solid essay and interview that covers far more ground than can be addressed in a single comment. But that "rollback" is, arguably, the crux of the matter, and a worthy objective.
However, as I think we've discussed, I kinda think that many who support that objective are missing a bet by not "steelmaning" the concept of gender identity. As mentioned, I think Kathleen Stock in her Material Girls does yeoman's work in her promotion of the "identification model" for it. Although I think she drops the ball by not defining gender itself in the first place.
Maybe you -- and/or Jenny -- might want interview Stock on the concept? 🙂
But nice to see you "decloaking" a bit, even if there are some "unfortunate" or unwarranted connotations to the name 🙂:
I love this episode so much. I was so afraid that you guys would criticize Crazy Ex-Girlfriend and say something about Rachel Bloom being a TRA, and it would have ruined such a fun show for me. And, Jenny, you might have just convinced me to finally watch Emilia Perez. I have been avoiding it. I have to say, I was both tearing up and yelling into the void every time you mentioned that only heart and mind will get us out of this mess. How many of us have been pouring so many hours of heart and mind into trying to enlighten people? What more will it take? And, to continue bouncing around from one thought to another, I love the new music. For some reason, I couldn’t stop picturing it as a 70s era James Bond theme song with opening credits showing ridiculously dressed AGPs being outsmarted by TERF spies.
I love the new music. For some reason, I couldn’t stop picturing it as a 70s era James Bond theme song with opening credits showing ridiculously dressed AGPs being outsmarted by TERF spies.
Great episode! I dispute that people who transition gender are of higher than average intelligence. Dogmatic people who can reliably regurgitate what they are taught can be high academic achievers in systems which prize that dogmatic regurgitation.
As for changing hearts and minds, the understanding which works for me is that the gender industry engineers the consent of gender non-conforming individuals for their own punishment. We would never allow these kinds of treatments for people that are not transgender. It is therefore the negation of gay and lesbian liberation, not progress from it.
I'd say: some are and some aren't, but the college-age trans-ID males seem to be remarkably uniform in their very high IQs. I'm suddenly wondering if this is a pattern that informs why health research in general favors men as subjects.... because markers found in female cohorts are too varied while males offer more straightforward pattern recognition?
Intelligence quotient is a social construct. It measures intelligence as defined by people who consider themselves intelligent. Originally, IQ tests were designed to screen out educationally sub-normal individuals, not to create a hierarchy for geniuses.
I've known some very high IQ people - including a proud Mensa member - who were very easily fooled. One of them phoned me up in a panic because he believed a member of the Royal Family had died and British subjects weren't being told. It wasn't true; he'd read it on social media and spiralled out of control. His belief in his own high intelligence led him to conclude that his paranoid thoughts must be true.
I'm quoting something, and a Google search says it may be Ralph Waldo Emerson, but I confess that I heard it on All in the Family, said by someone who was considered "special" or "slow." That person indicated that "each person is my superior in that I may learn from them." (He probably said each "man" but I'm not going there!)
I agree that intelligence is varied and complex and has so many components. There is artistic intelligence and philosophical and/or logical intelligence and mechanical intelligence and emotional intelligence. I could go on and on. People can be smart in some ways and stupid in others, and most are a combination.
When I noted that it seems like a pattern that the detransitioners I hear from, as well as the transitioned people I hear from, are all apparently intelligent, I'm going by their ability to articulate what happened to them, their insight into what happened to them and why (societal influences, personal vulnerabilities, etc.), as well as the fact that the majority do seem to be academically gifted, and a large number of them are also very artistic. Of course, they all probably lack a certain type of intelligence that allowed them to fall into this mess (the vulnerability they share, although that varies as well).
IQ tests only measure a very narrow subset of types of intelligence, and, even then, probably aren't 100% accurate.
I guess my point in bringing it up was to say that it takes a certain ability to manipulate facts and reality to convince oneself that transition is a good idea and that it is necessary to achieve happiness. In a weird way, it's both a strength and a weakness to be able to convince yourself of anything. I think that discussion followed Jenny's mention of Gurwinder (or maybe it preceded it?), who does a great job of explaining how an otherwise "intelligent" person can manipulate facts to support bad ideas.
I do think it's helpful to know that those who will consider self-harm as a way to achieve happiness and success in life are often, in other areas of life, high achieving. It's also helpful to consider the vulnerabilities of such people (a certain type of gullibility, if you will). By realizing these things, we may be better able to help such people come to terms with, and live in peace with, their bodies.
I agree. My impression is that detransitioners and those who have lived with gender transition for a long time tend to be much more insightful than relatively new converts to transgender ideology.
I disagree with Gurwinder that the easily fooled can be highly intelligent. I believe that is a post-hoc rationalisation that people who consider themselves highly intelligent make after discovering they have been fooled. That includes people who fool themselves. What I see is arrogance and hubris in people who have been told they are highly intelligent, and believe it, precisely because they are easily fooled.
Back in the early 2000's, there was a very capable software developer called Hans Reiser who released a filesystem which had significant technical advantages. I used it myself. Then his wife asked him for a divorce. He strangled her and buried her in a shallow grave near their house. He made up a story about his wife leaving the country, but the police didn't believe him. Hans was convicted of murder and is serving 15 to life in a California secure hospital, having been denied parole at the last attempt.
So, people can be highly technically skilled and believe they are very intelligent, while also being very, very stupid and sometimes dangerous too.
No doubt there are transgender savants. Composer Walter/Wendy Carlos was the first I encountered. There is likely to be an overlap between autism, technical excellence and gender incongruity because of over-valued ideas about identity without the development of a mature social awareness.
The idea I dispute is that transgender people in general are more intelligent than average. In my experience, they may do well in the education system, but if they had one attribute in common it would be lack of insight into their own identity issues.
"more intelligent than the average" still seems rather moot. Particularly given that, as some wag noted, half the population is below average intelligence ... 😉🙂
And given the ubiquity of beliefs in sky daddies of one sort or another, "insight into identity issues" is apparently not a strong suit of humanity in general. Or of America in particular -- apropos of which, you might also do a review 😉🙂 .of "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire":
I would distinguish the transhumanism of useful body modification - for example, a person who cannot walk due to a spinal injury receives a computer implant to co-ordinate their leg muscles - with the religious belief in eternal life supposedly achieved via science fiction technologies, and events such as 'The Singularity' which are always just a few years away.
You are 100% correct that "We would never allow these kinds of treatments for people that are not [what is being called] transgender." We are holding their lives to a different, lower standard, where they don't deserve to have healthy functional bodies or to be at home in their bodies. This is, in some ways, a form of discrimination against either non-conforming individuals or those with the other kinds of issues that make them vulnerable enough to lead them to choose transition.
Yes, the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations,’ to borrow another line from George W Bush — wait, what’s happening here??! — also relevant to conversations about DEI.
I fully agree. It would be possible to construct a Foucauldian argument that social control of gender incongruence represented cruel and unusual punishment.
I understand that there are some lawsuits pending on consumer protection grounds in the USA; on the basis that the gender treatments were deficient. This pre-supposes that there could be a 'correct' way to remove the genitals of a mentally ill person who agrees to it.
If 'progressive' lawyer organisations like the ACLU, Liberty and the Haldane Society weren't stuffed with amoral psychopaths using 'human rights' as a cover, a cruel and unusual punishment case is exactly what they should be bringing against the gender industry.
I wonder if these lawyer organisations are set up precisely to ward against natural justice breaking out, by controlling the progressive legal narrative and coralling left-wing support into certain positions on the issues of the day.
I haven't trusted the ACLU since I saw Danny Kaye's movie about the Skokie incident. They've made my point for me again by defending the right of men to be housed in women's prisons.
Can't wait to listen. I love your work and the musings/music of all the substackers you mention. Hhhmmm... me thinks substack is a community. Fabulous!
Great show
Great comment!😊 Thank you.
We are the same age. hearts snd minds? A new free to be you and me. Sesame street.
Thanks, Jenny.
I'm not sure about the applicability of just trying to "change hearts and minds", as your guest says. It seems to me that if that were effective, it would have worked with her own daughter.
At the very least, we can't employ the "change hearts and minds" as our only strategy. We are dealing, of course, with the cultish character of indoctrinated minds most often.
We have to also prevent the "trans" activist voices from being the only voices heard whenever possible.
So very grateful for you both - for your writing, for your speaking, for your speaking out. I feel both less alone, as a Mom, and less crazy, as a Democrat, and friend. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I share your frustration with the media, and write a lot of never-acknowledged letters trying to get the liberal media to listen to me, and to consider multiple perspectives in their reporting. Just today, David Remnick stopped his interview with Atul Gawande with something like: "wait, I can't be an objective journalist anymore, this is just awful and outrageous!!!" (about the decimation of USAID). I agree with him, completely. And, where is the "down tools right now, let's be outraged" during his numerous interviews about transing kids?
Thank you for your kind and thoughtful comment, Suzanne. I once put David Remnick next to George Clooney on my list of top 3 most desirable men in America, but how the mighty have fallen, lol! A friend of mine thinks he's been cowed into submission by his young adult kids, who she says are also in publishing. If true, it's a bizarre family tyranny that I've also seen first-hand with my daughter's former psychiatrist. He literally asked permission of his son, a therapist-in-training, before he'd put his own name on an op ed that was mildly critical of automatic trans-affirmation; and he admitted this to me without shame! I often think we moms are the only ones willing to be consistent and firm in this area (though there are absolutely some dads with spines too, like my friend ML). Anyway, keep writing those letters, and thanks for your friendship!
One of the worst aspects of modern parenting is wanting your child's approval, by treating them as a peer. It never works. Like the old guy in the nightclub who wants to hang out with teenagers, it isn't respected and it can feel invasive.
I hope you release the entire transcript--I am more of a reader than a listener.
I always look forward to comments on Substacks by Hippiesq.
I haven't found a way to get through to my progressive friends. One, sort of.
We all know what stands in the way: the media they consume, the culture they inhabit (blue zone), tribalism, polarization--and mostly (IMO) people they know who are trans, or rather, parents that are supporting their newly authentic opposite-sex pronoun young adult children.
It’s funny: whenever I listen back to an episode I imagine how embarrassed I would be to see the transcript! I edit out more of my ‘uhs’ and ‘you knows’ than I leave in, but enough remain to desecrate a written artifact! This episode in particular would lose 90% of its appeal, I think (you’ve got to hear William’s song!), but I also think you can get the transcript of any episode, because I know Substack produces them without my asking. I’ll figure out where to find it and get back to you.
Here's what I learned from Substack support:'The transcript feature is available on the web version of your publication, appearing as a button under the byline. For audio posts, transcripts are automatically generated. The transcript feature isn't available on the Substack app or in email.' I did find the button, next to the share button. I hope that helps.
What a wonderful, thought-provoking discussion! I hope you might put out a transcript of this. There is so much food for thought here, it’s hard to get it all in one go. And now, please forgive me for a long response—in my defense, I can only say that you certainly provoked a lot of thinking by me!
First, for the record: There is one heart and mind I know personally that Hippiesq directly changed, or at least H opened the door to it. H & I had lunch together (and I hope and trust not for the last time). We took a selfie, which I sent, together with H’s essay on celebrities: https://substack.com/home/post/p-158085137, to a friend who is a mom. That friend has not confronted this personally, but as a mom, I could see from her response that both the photo and H’s essay made it more personal and touched her heart. I don’t see her often, but when I do, I hope there will be an opportunity to talk a little more about this in a way we haven’t been able to in the past.
About the whole issue of changing hearts and minds—when H said this (and I agree completely with H’s and your analysis here)—I thought, yes, that is it exactly! I was reminded of a documentary about the Vietnam war called “Hearts and Minds.” The title was based on a quote from LBJ: "the ultimate victory will depend on the hearts and minds of the people who actually live out there," and the hope for the documentary was to change hearts and minds toward the end of stopping the war.
What struck me about the phrase as I listened to this moving, smart discussion is that the order of the change is suggested in the title: if we are unable to change hearts, we are much less likely to change minds. This actually helps to clarify for me, as I continue in my small way to engage people online and off, to go first for the heart, in any way I can.
Now, a footnote on the EOs. As all the people in my sphere are liberals and self-described progressives, I stay away from the EOs (for all the reasons you both discussed). Beyond that, though, I do think those of us who are able to see past who is putting them out and assess them on their face, I early on became very concerned that, at the same time, “our side” was under-recognizing the potential for and impact of overreach in implementation. My background is partly in health care, including public health. The current administration’s overreach in implementing the relevant EOs in that area is indefensible, with vast repercussions that are ongoing, including affecting impoverished communities here and around the world. For that reason, and also for the reasons Glenna, H and others have set forth, my personal view—which no one is required to share!—is that the EOs are of little use, and largely counterproductive, toward making the change we need.
That said, I do think we have many tools in the toolbox, thanks to the persistent hard work and tremendous courage of so many. In addition to the incredible detransitioners (who, I agree, are having to carry way too much of the burden) and you moms!! (same is true for you), I think the 27 by 2027 campaign that Jamie Reed and the LGB Courage Coalition are pursuing at the state legislature level is incredibly powerful and useful. As one small thing our household can do, we donate to that. Also, to the extent I can, I circulate videos of testimony both online and off. Jamie’s latest video at the Wisconsin legislature is incredibly powerful, and it is getting a lot of note.
But of course, the key is for all these efforts to be seen outside the usual circles, which remains ridiculously hard. I agree completely that this is one of many areas where breakthroughs in the wall of silence in the liberal-leaning press remain essential to pursue. The other thing I think we need to do more of is mobilization at the state and local level that engages the “grassroots” and is aimed directly at our Democratic electeds. There are a number of groups pursuing that, and I am hopeful we will see more.
Thank you again, for a vibrant discussion, and also just for being you.❤️
Your points are important. It's true, and I often struggle with this because I tend to lean on logic more than emotion in my arguments (that's what being a litigator for a long time does to you - or maybe I was always that way), that people are more swayed by their emotional response to an argument than the mental aspects of it. I will try to keep that in mind.
As for LGB Courage Coalition, we cannot promote them enough. They are doing vital work, and, like detransitioners, I think they have a better chance of getting society to listen than people like me. Jamie Reed's words always feel so profound, sincere and true (and her admission that she was once a "true believer" makes her the perfect person to speak out on the harms being done). I can only hope legislators have the same reaction I do when I listen to her speak.
How to reach those who don't want to hear from us - that's the big question. On that point, thank you for sharing your story about the one person who may have been swayed to see things from another point of view. I so enjoyed our lunch and the selfie seemed to capture our good time and connection, so I'm glad it was put to good use!
This may be a war that is won by thousands of small battles, and you are certainly one of the warriors who will make it happen.
> "This rollback includes removing lessons on so-called gender identity, a vague, unfalsifiable feeling of one's gender, a term that is left undefined, from schools ..."
Pretty solid essay and interview that covers far more ground than can be addressed in a single comment. But that "rollback" is, arguably, the crux of the matter, and a worthy objective.
However, as I think we've discussed, I kinda think that many who support that objective are missing a bet by not "steelmaning" the concept of gender identity. As mentioned, I think Kathleen Stock in her Material Girls does yeoman's work in her promotion of the "identification model" for it. Although I think she drops the ball by not defining gender itself in the first place.
Maybe you -- and/or Jenny -- might want interview Stock on the concept? 🙂
But nice to see you "decloaking" a bit, even if there are some "unfortunate" or unwarranted connotations to the name 🙂:
https://bbc.com/news/world-53588201
Lucky! I want to have lunch with Susan!
Thank you for another of your always thoughtful and insightful comments, Susan. Regarding a transcript, please see my reply to Melissa below. ❤️
I love this episode so much. I was so afraid that you guys would criticize Crazy Ex-Girlfriend and say something about Rachel Bloom being a TRA, and it would have ruined such a fun show for me. And, Jenny, you might have just convinced me to finally watch Emilia Perez. I have been avoiding it. I have to say, I was both tearing up and yelling into the void every time you mentioned that only heart and mind will get us out of this mess. How many of us have been pouring so many hours of heart and mind into trying to enlighten people? What more will it take? And, to continue bouncing around from one thought to another, I love the new music. For some reason, I couldn’t stop picturing it as a 70s era James Bond theme song with opening credits showing ridiculously dressed AGPs being outsmarted by TERF spies.
I love that comment so much! And I hope William gets video inspo from your last point — I’d watch it again and again!
🙏
I love the new music. For some reason, I couldn’t stop picturing it as a 70s era James Bond theme song with opening credits showing ridiculously dressed AGPs being outsmarted by TERF spies.
That's exactly the effect I was trying to achieve. Thank you.
Doctor No (to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones)?
Great episode! I dispute that people who transition gender are of higher than average intelligence. Dogmatic people who can reliably regurgitate what they are taught can be high academic achievers in systems which prize that dogmatic regurgitation.
As for changing hearts and minds, the understanding which works for me is that the gender industry engineers the consent of gender non-conforming individuals for their own punishment. We would never allow these kinds of treatments for people that are not transgender. It is therefore the negation of gay and lesbian liberation, not progress from it.
What they are is statistically more likely to have personality disorders.
I'd say: some are and some aren't, but the college-age trans-ID males seem to be remarkably uniform in their very high IQs. I'm suddenly wondering if this is a pattern that informs why health research in general favors men as subjects.... because markers found in female cohorts are too varied while males offer more straightforward pattern recognition?
Intelligence quotient is a social construct. It measures intelligence as defined by people who consider themselves intelligent. Originally, IQ tests were designed to screen out educationally sub-normal individuals, not to create a hierarchy for geniuses.
I've known some very high IQ people - including a proud Mensa member - who were very easily fooled. One of them phoned me up in a panic because he believed a member of the Royal Family had died and British subjects weren't being told. It wasn't true; he'd read it on social media and spiralled out of control. His belief in his own high intelligence led him to conclude that his paranoid thoughts must be true.
I'm quoting something, and a Google search says it may be Ralph Waldo Emerson, but I confess that I heard it on All in the Family, said by someone who was considered "special" or "slow." That person indicated that "each person is my superior in that I may learn from them." (He probably said each "man" but I'm not going there!)
I agree that intelligence is varied and complex and has so many components. There is artistic intelligence and philosophical and/or logical intelligence and mechanical intelligence and emotional intelligence. I could go on and on. People can be smart in some ways and stupid in others, and most are a combination.
When I noted that it seems like a pattern that the detransitioners I hear from, as well as the transitioned people I hear from, are all apparently intelligent, I'm going by their ability to articulate what happened to them, their insight into what happened to them and why (societal influences, personal vulnerabilities, etc.), as well as the fact that the majority do seem to be academically gifted, and a large number of them are also very artistic. Of course, they all probably lack a certain type of intelligence that allowed them to fall into this mess (the vulnerability they share, although that varies as well).
IQ tests only measure a very narrow subset of types of intelligence, and, even then, probably aren't 100% accurate.
I guess my point in bringing it up was to say that it takes a certain ability to manipulate facts and reality to convince oneself that transition is a good idea and that it is necessary to achieve happiness. In a weird way, it's both a strength and a weakness to be able to convince yourself of anything. I think that discussion followed Jenny's mention of Gurwinder (or maybe it preceded it?), who does a great job of explaining how an otherwise "intelligent" person can manipulate facts to support bad ideas.
I do think it's helpful to know that those who will consider self-harm as a way to achieve happiness and success in life are often, in other areas of life, high achieving. It's also helpful to consider the vulnerabilities of such people (a certain type of gullibility, if you will). By realizing these things, we may be better able to help such people come to terms with, and live in peace with, their bodies.
I agree. My impression is that detransitioners and those who have lived with gender transition for a long time tend to be much more insightful than relatively new converts to transgender ideology.
I disagree with Gurwinder that the easily fooled can be highly intelligent. I believe that is a post-hoc rationalisation that people who consider themselves highly intelligent make after discovering they have been fooled. That includes people who fool themselves. What I see is arrogance and hubris in people who have been told they are highly intelligent, and believe it, precisely because they are easily fooled.
Back in the early 2000's, there was a very capable software developer called Hans Reiser who released a filesystem which had significant technical advantages. I used it myself. Then his wife asked him for a divorce. He strangled her and buried her in a shallow grave near their house. He made up a story about his wife leaving the country, but the police didn't believe him. Hans was convicted of murder and is serving 15 to life in a California secure hospital, having been denied parole at the last attempt.
So, people can be highly technically skilled and believe they are very intelligent, while also being very, very stupid and sometimes dangerous too.
Yes. One type of intelligence is not necessarily indicative of another.
> " I dispute that people who transition gender are of higher than average intelligence."
Some apparently are, some aren't. In the former case, you might read about transwoman and VLSI pioneer Lynn Conway:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Conway
No doubt there are transgender savants. Composer Walter/Wendy Carlos was the first I encountered. There is likely to be an overlap between autism, technical excellence and gender incongruity because of over-valued ideas about identity without the development of a mature social awareness.
The idea I dispute is that transgender people in general are more intelligent than average. In my experience, they may do well in the education system, but if they had one attribute in common it would be lack of insight into their own identity issues.
"more intelligent than the average" still seems rather moot. Particularly given that, as some wag noted, half the population is below average intelligence ... 😉🙂
And given the ubiquity of beliefs in sky daddies of one sort or another, "insight into identity issues" is apparently not a strong suit of humanity in general. Or of America in particular -- apropos of which, you might also do a review 😉🙂 .of "Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire":
https://www.amazon.ca/Fantasyland-America-Haywire-500-Year-History-ebook/dp/B004J4WNJE/ref=mp_s_a_1_1
Maybe some reason to argue that the dysphoric are just the proverbial canaries in the coal mine.
Thanks for the suggestion. If transgender people are canaries, the poison gas in the mine is transhumanism as a religion.
"transhumanism" seems a useful corollary, though your "as a religion" is an important caveat -- some merit in the concept:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism
Even some merit in the concept of "God", Laplace's assertion to the contrary notwithstanding 😉🙂
For example, Dawkins' The God Delusion spoke of this book by Princeton psychologist Julian Jaynes, not that I've ever read much about or in it:
"The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Consciousness_in_the_Breakdown_of_the_Bicameral_Mind
I would distinguish the transhumanism of useful body modification - for example, a person who cannot walk due to a spinal injury receives a computer implant to co-ordinate their leg muscles - with the religious belief in eternal life supposedly achieved via science fiction technologies, and events such as 'The Singularity' which are always just a few years away.
You are 100% correct that "We would never allow these kinds of treatments for people that are not [what is being called] transgender." We are holding their lives to a different, lower standard, where they don't deserve to have healthy functional bodies or to be at home in their bodies. This is, in some ways, a form of discrimination against either non-conforming individuals or those with the other kinds of issues that make them vulnerable enough to lead them to choose transition.
Yes, the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations,’ to borrow another line from George W Bush — wait, what’s happening here??! — also relevant to conversations about DEI.
The horror! Apostasy! Turning into a Republican before our very eyes! 😉🙂
Dubya didn't write his own speeches!
I fully agree. It would be possible to construct a Foucauldian argument that social control of gender incongruence represented cruel and unusual punishment.
I’d love to bring that class action lawsuit!!
I understand that there are some lawsuits pending on consumer protection grounds in the USA; on the basis that the gender treatments were deficient. This pre-supposes that there could be a 'correct' way to remove the genitals of a mentally ill person who agrees to it.
If 'progressive' lawyer organisations like the ACLU, Liberty and the Haldane Society weren't stuffed with amoral psychopaths using 'human rights' as a cover, a cruel and unusual punishment case is exactly what they should be bringing against the gender industry.
I wonder if these lawyer organisations are set up precisely to ward against natural justice breaking out, by controlling the progressive legal narrative and coralling left-wing support into certain positions on the issues of the day.
If I hadn't seen all the insanity of the last several years, I'd say you were being paranoid. I don't think you're being paranoid.
I haven't trusted the ACLU since I saw Danny Kaye's movie about the Skokie incident. They've made my point for me again by defending the right of men to be housed in women's prisons.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0083090
Can't wait to listen. I love your work and the musings/music of all the substackers you mention. Hhhmmm... me thinks substack is a community. Fabulous!
You write the best comments, LC. 🙏❤️