My second Olaf's sentiments. I admire your strength for tackling this Pandora's box. It all seems so bloody senseless that we're spending huge amounts of mental capital on this arena when much larger problems loom. Idiocies is like this can actually swing the current election while matters of genocide and ecological devastation get pushed to background.
Well said. And I'm glad to see more people are finally willing to have this discussion. You write with courage and eloquence - both are admirable as you "attempt to navigate the trans-agenda".
But I find it tedious that you felt it necessary to include some obligatory, sexist, and racist bashing of white men. Perhaps a little self-deprecating "white guilt" in your writing calms the would-be haters who dislike that you dare approach this subject. I cannot think of any other reason to have included this sentence: "there are indeed very few who are not oppressed, and those, of course, are the oppressors—for the most part, and by many different accounts, white, western men."
"for the most part"
Really? Perhaps you and I have read different versions of human history.
An honest accounting of history includes a long list of oppressors who were not white. (.e.g, Qin Shi Huang, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Kim Jong-il, Muammar Gaddafi, Yahya Khan, etc) And many terrible dictators who were not men! (e.g., Wu Zetian, Catherine the Great, Mary I, Ranavalona I, Isabella I of Castile, Cixi, Indira Gandhi, Cleopatra VII, Elizabeth Bathory, etc.) It turns out, treating other humans like dirt is not unique to one race or sex. Not even close!
And perhaps more to my point, only in countries ruled predominantly by "white" people (ugh, I hate having to use such language, but you initiated it) you will observe that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and people of various gender identities are provided equal treatment and/or explicit protections under the law. In fact - I challenge you - list all the countries ruled by "white" people that *prohibit* same-sex marriage. You'll find that list is EMPTY, save for a few soviet exceptions.
Your point is well taken, David, and a second commenter (privately, as have been most comments on this piece—kudos to you for commenting publicly!) also made the same point. If we focus on oppression in general, you are absolutely right. But I am talking specifically here about corporate oppression. Look at who is at the head of the vast majority of corporations in the world, and you'll see it is white men. The trans-agenda is propagated by the corporate world, by business, by profit. Maybe the skin colour doesn't matter, I don't know, but I'll hold to men. Women are rarely, if ever the oppressors. Women's spaces are being invaded by non-women. I find that deeply concerning. I can only imagine how many women feel about it. The ones I talk to feel deeply violated, spiritually, mentally and often physically.
You said: "Women's spaces are being invaded by non-women."
"non-women"? Is this Newspeak? What year is it? 1984 or 2024?
Also: when you write "white men" I think you've misspelled "social democrats".
And YES, I find it deeply disturbing that men are invading the safe spaces of women and girls. (I have 2 daughters and I care deeply about this issue.) But let's be precise: the "trans-agenda" is propagated by 3rd-wave feminists, auto gynephiles, left-leaning sheeple who subscribe to the most polarizing and radical opinions out of fear of appearing (in scary voice) "republican", and corporate actors who perceive Pride activism as a marketing ploy.
So, I'd encourage you to look carefully at the first people to speak out against the radical trans activists — you'll find they're mostly "white" and mostly male (Caitlyn Jenner, Piers Morgan, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Matt Wallace, Chris Ruffo, Ron Desantis, Chris Elston, and this Canadian man who was sent to prison for "misgendering" his child [https://tnc.news/2023/08/11/bc-father-wins-appeal/]) with a few notable female exceptions (Kellie-Jay Keen, Abigail Shrier, Janice Fiamengo, Riley Gaines, J.K. Rowling).
Hey, I commend you for writing this piece in the first place. And I suspect you're on the verge of two next hurdles in your thinking on the topic: 1) you'll eventually just write the word "men" instead of "non-women"; and 2) you'll eventually figure out that intersectionality (an invention of "progressives") is the core of the trans agenda (not "white men").
Tobias, I will recommend a video/interview for you to watch/listen to. Very few people I interact with would, I think, appreciate it. But I think you will, certainly. It's pretty heady - but cuts to the root of the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM
David, I think you missed the irony in the phrase "non-women" :/
Also, I think you are muddling two issues here. The voice of the 'transgender activist' is for the most part the voice of men—men of various shades, it is true, but largely white men. That it is also (white) men that speak out against it—and actually not the majority, again just the voices we are more likely to hear/to listen to—is beside the point. It doesn't change or undermine what I have written. Both may be true.
Well said. there is a fantastic podcast that looks at all sides of this issue with JK Rowling and Trans activists called The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling which I recommend to everyone
Thanks for the recommendation, Murray. JK has had to put up with a lot of animosity and abuse in her recent life. She seems to be a very strong, clear-minded woman to stay as dignified as she is through all that.
Thanks Tobias this is a well written and thought provoking article. Not many can write/challenge whilst not causing offense.
People need to be open and aware of a larger agenda and be able to express/challenge their views. One example why am I seeing so many people/friends dying young or being diagnosed with cancer is it me that's just getting older? or something else at play?
Thanks Chris. I sense that the article still does offend some people (one at least has let me know). I do try to be fair, and open, but this is such a contentious topic (actually two topics: trans and pharma) that it is actually very difficult not to upset people when expressing one's thoughts, in whatever way.
My second Olaf's sentiments. I admire your strength for tackling this Pandora's box. It all seems so bloody senseless that we're spending huge amounts of mental capital on this arena when much larger problems loom. Idiocies is like this can actually swing the current election while matters of genocide and ecological devastation get pushed to background.
Well said, Daniel. But then....perhaps it is a distraction by design :/
Hello Tobias,
Well said. And I'm glad to see more people are finally willing to have this discussion. You write with courage and eloquence - both are admirable as you "attempt to navigate the trans-agenda".
But I find it tedious that you felt it necessary to include some obligatory, sexist, and racist bashing of white men. Perhaps a little self-deprecating "white guilt" in your writing calms the would-be haters who dislike that you dare approach this subject. I cannot think of any other reason to have included this sentence: "there are indeed very few who are not oppressed, and those, of course, are the oppressors—for the most part, and by many different accounts, white, western men."
"for the most part"
Really? Perhaps you and I have read different versions of human history.
An honest accounting of history includes a long list of oppressors who were not white. (.e.g, Qin Shi Huang, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Kim Jong-il, Muammar Gaddafi, Yahya Khan, etc) And many terrible dictators who were not men! (e.g., Wu Zetian, Catherine the Great, Mary I, Ranavalona I, Isabella I of Castile, Cixi, Indira Gandhi, Cleopatra VII, Elizabeth Bathory, etc.) It turns out, treating other humans like dirt is not unique to one race or sex. Not even close!
And perhaps more to my point, only in countries ruled predominantly by "white" people (ugh, I hate having to use such language, but you initiated it) you will observe that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and people of various gender identities are provided equal treatment and/or explicit protections under the law. In fact - I challenge you - list all the countries ruled by "white" people that *prohibit* same-sex marriage. You'll find that list is EMPTY, save for a few soviet exceptions.
Your point is well taken, David, and a second commenter (privately, as have been most comments on this piece—kudos to you for commenting publicly!) also made the same point. If we focus on oppression in general, you are absolutely right. But I am talking specifically here about corporate oppression. Look at who is at the head of the vast majority of corporations in the world, and you'll see it is white men. The trans-agenda is propagated by the corporate world, by business, by profit. Maybe the skin colour doesn't matter, I don't know, but I'll hold to men. Women are rarely, if ever the oppressors. Women's spaces are being invaded by non-women. I find that deeply concerning. I can only imagine how many women feel about it. The ones I talk to feel deeply violated, spiritually, mentally and often physically.
You said: "Women's spaces are being invaded by non-women."
"non-women"? Is this Newspeak? What year is it? 1984 or 2024?
Also: when you write "white men" I think you've misspelled "social democrats".
And YES, I find it deeply disturbing that men are invading the safe spaces of women and girls. (I have 2 daughters and I care deeply about this issue.) But let's be precise: the "trans-agenda" is propagated by 3rd-wave feminists, auto gynephiles, left-leaning sheeple who subscribe to the most polarizing and radical opinions out of fear of appearing (in scary voice) "republican", and corporate actors who perceive Pride activism as a marketing ploy.
So, I'd encourage you to look carefully at the first people to speak out against the radical trans activists — you'll find they're mostly "white" and mostly male (Caitlyn Jenner, Piers Morgan, Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Matt Wallace, Chris Ruffo, Ron Desantis, Chris Elston, and this Canadian man who was sent to prison for "misgendering" his child [https://tnc.news/2023/08/11/bc-father-wins-appeal/]) with a few notable female exceptions (Kellie-Jay Keen, Abigail Shrier, Janice Fiamengo, Riley Gaines, J.K. Rowling).
Hey, I commend you for writing this piece in the first place. And I suspect you're on the verge of two next hurdles in your thinking on the topic: 1) you'll eventually just write the word "men" instead of "non-women"; and 2) you'll eventually figure out that intersectionality (an invention of "progressives") is the core of the trans agenda (not "white men").
Tobias, I will recommend a video/interview for you to watch/listen to. Very few people I interact with would, I think, appreciate it. But I think you will, certainly. It's pretty heady - but cuts to the root of the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM
David, I think you missed the irony in the phrase "non-women" :/
Also, I think you are muddling two issues here. The voice of the 'transgender activist' is for the most part the voice of men—men of various shades, it is true, but largely white men. That it is also (white) men that speak out against it—and actually not the majority, again just the voices we are more likely to hear/to listen to—is beside the point. It doesn't change or undermine what I have written. Both may be true.
Well said. there is a fantastic podcast that looks at all sides of this issue with JK Rowling and Trans activists called The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling which I recommend to everyone
Thanks for the recommendation, Murray. JK has had to put up with a lot of animosity and abuse in her recent life. She seems to be a very strong, clear-minded woman to stay as dignified as she is through all that.
Here's a link to the podcast Murray mentioned, for anyone interested. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-witch-trials-of-j-k-rowling/id1671691064
The longest TL;DR I read this year. Without much ado, I can confirm, Tobias, that you are not alone with such views and thoughts...
I'm honoured you took the time, Sheryar. Thank you. And good to hear others share these concerns.
Thanks Tobias this is a well written and thought provoking article. Not many can write/challenge whilst not causing offense.
People need to be open and aware of a larger agenda and be able to express/challenge their views. One example why am I seeing so many people/friends dying young or being diagnosed with cancer is it me that's just getting older? or something else at play?
Thanks Chris. I sense that the article still does offend some people (one at least has let me know). I do try to be fair, and open, but this is such a contentious topic (actually two topics: trans and pharma) that it is actually very difficult not to upset people when expressing one's thoughts, in whatever way.
Thank you. Same puzzles/struggle here. You found clear and balanced words, as always.
Thanks Olaf, that means a lot.