Social movements attract extremists, so they become the problem for everyone. It's up to these groups to police their own, which often doesn't happen in the name of being inclusive and not wanting to chase off potential allies.
I saw this twenty years ago when I was on a Usenet group for the childfree-by-choice and the bane of our discuss…
Social movements attract extremists, so they become the problem for everyone. It's up to these groups to police their own, which often doesn't happen in the name of being inclusive and not wanting to chase off potential allies.
I saw this twenty years ago when I was on a Usenet group for the childfree-by-choice and the bane of our discussions were the child-haters - the ones who couldn't just leave it at, "I don't like children and I'm not having my own," but really spilled their bile about their fellow young human beings all over. To be fair, we as a group were critical of parents, lax discipline, strollers the size of Sherman tanks, and some bitched about 'stork parking' (spots closer to a store entrance for pregnant mothers) but there was also plenty of folks talking about how much they loved their nieces and nephews. But as the group grew and other CBCs found us the extremists grew, and a friend and I got sick of it. I stuck around for a year long than I should have, but when I found a non-CBC person who'd checked out the group after hearing me talk about it reference something hateful someone said I found I was ashamed to be hanging around with 'those people' and I quietly went away, as did my friend.
Black Lives Matter has to deal with black racists and bigots (I was reading James Baldwin's 1962 New Yorker article over the weekend, "Region of my Mind" in which he breaks bread with Elijah Muhammed and the Nation gang and it's....uh...racist and unscientific :) ), feminism has a misandry problem, and the Regressive Left has a white racism problem (they hate white people).
Last weekend I watched Trans Mission, a documentary someone here had recommended (I think it was here) and it was quite good, about the rush for hormone blockers & surgical procedures for children and young people. And when the Menno video "Y Chromosome" (a hilarious parody of YMCA) trended on Twitter last week, I got to wondering what 'sissy porn/sissy hypno' was and now I'm sorry I asked :(
When the trans movement gets tired enough of the hostility, most of which, I'm convinced, comes discourtesy of their extremists rather than genuine transphobia, they'll do something about it.
Just as civil rights movements need to confront their racists, feminists need to confront their misandrists, and the left needs to get over its fairly bizarre self-racism.
"Just as civil rights movements need to confront their racists, feminists need to confront their misandrists, and the left needs to get over its fairly bizarre self-racism."
Yep, so true. There's a real tendency within all of these movements to close ranks and do the whole "see no/hear no" routine when "one of their own" is doing something obviously wrong. And anybody who does speak up is a "pick me girl" or a "tool of white supremacy" or "truscum" or whatever.
In fact, it's interesting how viciously these groups attack people within them who hold the "wrong opinions." Spending as much time as I do mired in these kinds of debates, I do see trans people speaking up, but it's all too rare. Largely, I suspect, because of how especially vicious trans people are online when they're on the attack.
Bill Maher likes to say the left eats its own and he's largely right. The right doesn't tolerate dissent within its ranks either but it's much better at shutting it down (helps to have all those guns;/) Yes, I think there are plenty of transpeople who want to speak up more but are afraid to; hmmmm, maybe it's time for me to start researching how non-insane transpeople can reclaim their power ;)
I think it's going to take direct pressure, as it took with civil rights. I'm sure you read about Netflix. The "non-binary" must be creating tons of conflict in workplaces; I'd like to see pronouncements like the removal of preferred pronouns from company email ("you're here to work, not to project your gender identity"); let them howl.
And we need a lot more medical pushback. Doctors and counselors are cowed by the "trans" and a lot of people smart and educated enough to know better are playing along with the absurdity that is "non-binary" and the dissociation of dysphoria and "trans" identity.
I wonder what it's going to take. This isn't like bell-bottom jeans or spikey hair.
I think pronouns ARE needed when it's not clear. In fact, I just pulled out an old Medium article & have been reworking it for LinkedIn; it's a very real observation that the people who need to use them the most, don't. That the ones who are clearly male or female use them, but the ones who are questionable are pronoun-less.
Doctors are less cowed by trans than excited about the new permanent, lifelong patients they'll have, assuming they don't kill themselves first because someone pointed out women don't have dicks. I think the lawyers will cure the doctors, eventually. Esp when malpractice insurance skyrockets for any medical professional treating 'transgenderism'.
" That the ones who are clearly male or female use them, but the ones who are questionable are pronoun-less."
Ummm, who are you talking about? A short-haired girl who shared a womb with a male fraternal twin? A long-haired boy with feminine features? I am missing something here. I've probably met fewer than a dozen people in my life whose biological gender was not immediately obvious, one of whom walked past a construction site and got wolf-whistles then took off his shirt and walked past in the other direction. Hilarity, I have no doubt, ensued.
But I reject the entire "nonbinary" thing piecemeal, the claim of intermediate gender, as 100.00% attention-seeking and I offer as evidence that they never shut up about it. Those who would stand outside the polarity of gender altogether I would not consider falling under that word, But I categorically reject gender as a continuum. And if the context is psychology there are as many genders as people.
I'm talking about any one who doesn't 'look' either male or female; at the current moment, we're mostly dressing & looking the way a particular gender is 'expected' to look and I'm not convinced it's all socialization. I don't run into too many non-obvious myself, in person, but I might if I worked in an office still & had to go downtown every day. I've seen more non-binaries, or just genderfluids on the street, and while it was obvious to me which gender they were born, I don't necessarily know what pronouns they might prefer. In my article, which I published yesterday on LinkedIn, I referenced two women, one on LinkedIn, one in a Linkedin training video, who looked like mens (I'd say pretty intentionally) and with female names. And no pronouns. They really need to put them up there. While the video gal didn't need to state her preference in her video, I looked up her LI profile and sure enough, no pronouns.
A friend who'd read my article commented that the pronoun-less might be trying to create intentional discomfort, which is possible, but in my world, I just want drama-free interactions. The genderfluid, like transactivists, seem to think fear and discomfort will make us like and accept them better, or something.
Except we are talking about third-person pronouns, as always, which we don't use when talking to the people in question. So the whole pronoun thing strikes me as much attention-starved ado about nothing.
I want drama-free interactions too. That's why I would go out of my way to have no interactions with the NB. Because "my gender identity" this and "my gender identity" that would get old after two or three million times.
"Social movements attract extremists, so they become the problem for everyone. It's up to these groups to police their own, which often doesn't happen in the name of being inclusive and not wanting to chase off potential allies."
And all of these extremists regard anyone not a member of their enclave as an enemy, no matter how supportive. I made a minor quibble on Medium, I forget what it was, but it was nothing remotely even like "a trans woman is still biologically a man," but the person I was responding to said I was "incredibly transphobic," not just "transphobic" but "incredibly."
On the Washington Post blog where I wrote for so long ... in the last few years before I got off there were three women, one of whom I was friends with, another who missed no opportunity to bait me .. who would turn any topic, no matter how "incredibly" remote, into bitter screeds about how unfair women have it, never with a reference to anything tangible like wages but always attitudes mostly imagined, and the more I or anyone tried to show we were on their side the more we were attacked for not understanding.
I could name a few more instances, but do I need to? At least with the RKBA people there is a range of viewpoints, a few will agree to things like background checks, but it seems like the "trans" crowd is the worst. And probably the most irresponsible.
I think there are just a fuckuva lot of people out there with serious mental illness/ailments and a big pack of them are Millennials & Gen Z, who *have* gotten royally screwed in so many ways...but then again we were in the Reagan era, and the boomers by the Vietnam War before that, so la plus ca change. Yes, they are all incredibly overreactive to everything ;) I pushed back on a now ex-friend who de-friended me on Facebook over being a TERF (i.e., level-headed feminist who knows the diff between boys and girls) when she called me transphobic. "Do you even know that that means?" I asked. "I'm not afraid of transpeople. I criticize them which they often richly deserve. But that doesn't make me transphobic, anymore than my regular criticism of Donald Trump makes me Trumpphobic. I'm not worried about *him* ambushing me in an alley either."
We've really got to start pushing back on the extremism and the language. I've begun mentioning on Twitter sometimes the penchant for overstating harm. Another thing we need to push back on is their obsession with alleged trans suicide. Everything you say or do might make, like, millions of transpeople commit suicide or something. Fact is fucking everyone is suicidal in the US and has been for thirty years; and there's little evidence that turning trans solves that problem, and may in fact make it MORE likely to happen.
At some point ("homophobia?") the suffix came to mean hatred, not fear. Ailurophobia is fear of cats, not hatred of them. Don't succumb to the ridiculous argument that the basis of hatred is fear, that is weak tea.
The correct suffix is -misia, as in homomisia, which I insist on using and which is gaining ground. I don't use "transmisia" much because I don't think it's as prevalent as the former, much though the "trans" people like to (love to) think of themselves as hated and oppressed. The suffix is more familiar as a prefix; misanthropy, misogyny, etc.
I don't think that many people are transmisic so much as sick and tired of what is so obviously a destructive fad. Being hectored over pronouns gets old fast and having to stay atop dozens and dozens of phony subgenders and infragenders is ridiculous.
As for suicide, the ones who react to affirmation pressures by the radicals and screw up their health with hormones or even get pieces they were born with hacked off, then later realize it was just a phase they were going through, have extraordinarily high suicide rates.
Suppose there was a way to commit suicide without cutting one's own flesh or something kinetic like going off a bridge or blowing one's brains out, just take a pill and go to sleep ... we'd have a very steep population drop.
I don't know, not with you on the basis of hatred being fear. 'Phobia' has always meant fear - it comes from the Greek word phobos, from the Greek god of fear and panic, Phobos. But you're right, -phobia has come to mean in SJ circles anyway, to include hatred. And not all dislike of certain aspects is a phobia; my ex thought homosexual sex was 'icky' but didn't have a problem making a gay guy his son's godfather.
As for -misia, I've never heard of it and it sounds too much like the academic jargonbabble beloved by SJWs who love big impressive words because they obscure the fact that they really don't know how they think or feel about their subjects. So maybe I'll wait for that one to become more commonly known.
Many have noted that the way to get rid of Donald Trump is to not pay attention to him - attention is the oxygen supply of the gross narcissist. That's what the trans movement wants - more attention. It would starve their gross narcissism, too.
Well if you've followed my writing on here at all you know of my contempt for jargon-babble and my passion for precision. The latter is at the level of obsession-compulsion and I have to actively repress the urge to make small corrections. The singular they drives me absolutely bonkers.
Admittedly the -misia prefix is not as well-known as -phobia but I never liked "homophobia" because it seems to parody murderous hatred as equivalent to the 50s ad of a woman standing on a chair going "Eeek! A mouse!"
I think that postmodernism sought legitimacy in educated-sounding nonsense and the "trans" movement does the same, and both are equally intellectually barren.
"Phobia" means fear, often irrational (agora- claustro-, ailuri- ...) sometimes not so irrational (arachno-, acro- ...) and in general Greek roots are not as well-known as Latin ones. I've never retreated from resisting "evolving language" BS and I resist wrong use of -phobia. And the SJWs and way too self-policingly conformist to learn "transmisia." All the more reason to use it.
I wish we were all (including me) precise and unambiguous, but we are not. Often purposefully.
A meme floating around social media (How social media works):
Me: I prefer mangos to oranges.
Random person: So basically, what you are saying is that you hate oranges. You also failed to mention pineapples, bananas and grapefruits. Educate yourself. I'm literally shaking.
In his state of the union address, the president FAILED to mention the contribution of left-handed genderqueer humyns!!! I am shaking with rage!! /s
The less time I spend on social media the better is my mood. I've pretty much gotten off all discussion platforms except this one. Facebook for the messenger, Twitter for very short snide posts, no Instagram, Reddit, or TikTok, not once.
Agreed on the mood. I do find that I get depressed if I spend too much time online. I'm only on LinkedIn (for my biz). And I've pulled back massively on the time I spend on substack. I want a real life with real people. That said, I have met funny and interesting people online and have enjoyed the exchanges.
I eschewed debt and never got a 4-year degree (I have an AA and an AS) so I don't have a posse of intellectual friends. So I do enjoy the access to and conversation with people who "play in the field of ideas." Not too many of those in my visceral arena.
I had to log on to like your comment for this: “…academic jargonbabble beloved by SJWs who love big impressive words because they obscure the fact that they really don't know how they think or feel about their subjects.” So apt.
The way to get rid of Donald Trump is to re-empower the working class. Like maybe not make them pay for rich people's student loans. Maybe not ship all of their jobs offshore. Stop slanting policy toward the rich in general would be a good idea.
And there is also this (in terms of getting rid of Trump): https://criticaltherapyantidote.org/2022/08/08/freud-explains-cancel-culture/ I know Freud's theories have been discredited but I still thought this article was spot on. Just drop Freud's nomenclature and go with the behavioral dynamics and it works.
Freud's views on how our psychology works is one of many, and none of them tell the 'whole story', they're just different ways of viewing the brain, all of them valid, IMO. Freud's view is very early, arguably a pioneer (although I could make a case for the Buddha as the earliest psychology pioneer). Much of what Freud taught has been discredited, as you point out, but I still keep an open mind on the id/ego/superego piece.
That's a very good article and one I'm going to pass on to a friend I just saw last night after being separated for three years by the pandemic (and life). He got a degree in 'community psychology' which I never heard of before, I wonder if it's a new field, but it seems to be about social justice, which has introduced some 'woke' ideas into him but he's not woke-crazy so far as I can tell.
He sent me an article yesterday he wants me to read, and I will likely send him this one because I pushed back somewhat on his 'woke' views the other night - we got into a private Facebook argument and then he called me to work it out like grownups did back in days of yore before we all got so divided and caught up for two hours and then he came over last night to watch bad movies, drink highballs and enjoy a gummy :) Hey, it's the only way to watch the Giant Spider Invasion (1975) and Sharktopus (2010)!
I ran across an old note to myself on article ideas...putting this one nearer the top on my list of things to write about...how to talk to wokies based on my experience arguing with Christian fundamentalists back when I lived in the States (and was younger and had time for this shit). One thing I learned back in the day was don't argue on their turf (the Bible) which you will never know as well as them. Force them onto yours (scientific/historical evidence) and hold their feet to the fire on the facts.
With the wokies, their Bible is social justice critical theories, and peer-reviewed research and evidence is their weak spot, particularly science. They'll be better-versed on history than Christian fundies but it will still be contaminated by their biases (who knew wokies had biases...:) )
Follow on - also, woke infused therapy is just another example of experts shooting themselves in the foot, and the hand, and the head. I mean, how long before people just give up on experts altogether and revert to superstition or other belief systems? Do they really think they can play these head games with their "lessers" and get away with it scot free? Just because someone is not an expert in whatever or has a lesser IQ does not make them stupid. Their scorn is their demise.
Yes. Behavioral pattens stay the same regardless of labels. Who would have thunk in the 60s that boomer's kids and grandkids (and some boomers themselves) would turn into the very religous fundies they pilloried at that time? If they could only see themselves objectively. Self-righteousness is an eternal element of the psyche, apparently.
The reason I follow what is happening in therapy is because I am an adult survivor. And I am super worried about vulnerable people entering therapy only to be white-shamed. Jesus. I mean these people are already f'd up and have low self-esteem and hate themselves because they have been shamed to hell and back and now you are going to tell them they carry the original sin of whiteness as well - one that has NO redemption? It won't end well. Some of these therapists are going to drive people to suicide. And it's so avoidable. Sigh...
Sadly, people in deep mental trouble will find any disagreement, no matter how polite and logical to be bullying. But then they may be disingenuously claiming that as a defense mechanism which is a form of bullying you into silence.
Mental illness leading to suicide is worse than cancer. You can't treat it with surgery - lobotomies were a horrible attempt. None of us wish to contribute to that, but silence can also be an enabler. The mental health community is now afraid to call it when they see it, so it spreads like a cancer.
Social movements attract extremists, so they become the problem for everyone. It's up to these groups to police their own, which often doesn't happen in the name of being inclusive and not wanting to chase off potential allies.
I saw this twenty years ago when I was on a Usenet group for the childfree-by-choice and the bane of our discussions were the child-haters - the ones who couldn't just leave it at, "I don't like children and I'm not having my own," but really spilled their bile about their fellow young human beings all over. To be fair, we as a group were critical of parents, lax discipline, strollers the size of Sherman tanks, and some bitched about 'stork parking' (spots closer to a store entrance for pregnant mothers) but there was also plenty of folks talking about how much they loved their nieces and nephews. But as the group grew and other CBCs found us the extremists grew, and a friend and I got sick of it. I stuck around for a year long than I should have, but when I found a non-CBC person who'd checked out the group after hearing me talk about it reference something hateful someone said I found I was ashamed to be hanging around with 'those people' and I quietly went away, as did my friend.
Black Lives Matter has to deal with black racists and bigots (I was reading James Baldwin's 1962 New Yorker article over the weekend, "Region of my Mind" in which he breaks bread with Elijah Muhammed and the Nation gang and it's....uh...racist and unscientific :) ), feminism has a misandry problem, and the Regressive Left has a white racism problem (they hate white people).
Last weekend I watched Trans Mission, a documentary someone here had recommended (I think it was here) and it was quite good, about the rush for hormone blockers & surgical procedures for children and young people. And when the Menno video "Y Chromosome" (a hilarious parody of YMCA) trended on Twitter last week, I got to wondering what 'sissy porn/sissy hypno' was and now I'm sorry I asked :(
When the trans movement gets tired enough of the hostility, most of which, I'm convinced, comes discourtesy of their extremists rather than genuine transphobia, they'll do something about it.
Just as civil rights movements need to confront their racists, feminists need to confront their misandrists, and the left needs to get over its fairly bizarre self-racism.
"Just as civil rights movements need to confront their racists, feminists need to confront their misandrists, and the left needs to get over its fairly bizarre self-racism."
Yep, so true. There's a real tendency within all of these movements to close ranks and do the whole "see no/hear no" routine when "one of their own" is doing something obviously wrong. And anybody who does speak up is a "pick me girl" or a "tool of white supremacy" or "truscum" or whatever.
In fact, it's interesting how viciously these groups attack people within them who hold the "wrong opinions." Spending as much time as I do mired in these kinds of debates, I do see trans people speaking up, but it's all too rare. Largely, I suspect, because of how especially vicious trans people are online when they're on the attack.
Bill Maher likes to say the left eats its own and he's largely right. The right doesn't tolerate dissent within its ranks either but it's much better at shutting it down (helps to have all those guns;/) Yes, I think there are plenty of transpeople who want to speak up more but are afraid to; hmmmm, maybe it's time for me to start researching how non-insane transpeople can reclaim their power ;)
I think it's going to take direct pressure, as it took with civil rights. I'm sure you read about Netflix. The "non-binary" must be creating tons of conflict in workplaces; I'd like to see pronouncements like the removal of preferred pronouns from company email ("you're here to work, not to project your gender identity"); let them howl.
And we need a lot more medical pushback. Doctors and counselors are cowed by the "trans" and a lot of people smart and educated enough to know better are playing along with the absurdity that is "non-binary" and the dissociation of dysphoria and "trans" identity.
I wonder what it's going to take. This isn't like bell-bottom jeans or spikey hair.
I think pronouns ARE needed when it's not clear. In fact, I just pulled out an old Medium article & have been reworking it for LinkedIn; it's a very real observation that the people who need to use them the most, don't. That the ones who are clearly male or female use them, but the ones who are questionable are pronoun-less.
Doctors are less cowed by trans than excited about the new permanent, lifelong patients they'll have, assuming they don't kill themselves first because someone pointed out women don't have dicks. I think the lawyers will cure the doctors, eventually. Esp when malpractice insurance skyrockets for any medical professional treating 'transgenderism'.
" That the ones who are clearly male or female use them, but the ones who are questionable are pronoun-less."
Ummm, who are you talking about? A short-haired girl who shared a womb with a male fraternal twin? A long-haired boy with feminine features? I am missing something here. I've probably met fewer than a dozen people in my life whose biological gender was not immediately obvious, one of whom walked past a construction site and got wolf-whistles then took off his shirt and walked past in the other direction. Hilarity, I have no doubt, ensued.
But I reject the entire "nonbinary" thing piecemeal, the claim of intermediate gender, as 100.00% attention-seeking and I offer as evidence that they never shut up about it. Those who would stand outside the polarity of gender altogether I would not consider falling under that word, But I categorically reject gender as a continuum. And if the context is psychology there are as many genders as people.
I'm talking about any one who doesn't 'look' either male or female; at the current moment, we're mostly dressing & looking the way a particular gender is 'expected' to look and I'm not convinced it's all socialization. I don't run into too many non-obvious myself, in person, but I might if I worked in an office still & had to go downtown every day. I've seen more non-binaries, or just genderfluids on the street, and while it was obvious to me which gender they were born, I don't necessarily know what pronouns they might prefer. In my article, which I published yesterday on LinkedIn, I referenced two women, one on LinkedIn, one in a Linkedin training video, who looked like mens (I'd say pretty intentionally) and with female names. And no pronouns. They really need to put them up there. While the video gal didn't need to state her preference in her video, I looked up her LI profile and sure enough, no pronouns.
A friend who'd read my article commented that the pronoun-less might be trying to create intentional discomfort, which is possible, but in my world, I just want drama-free interactions. The genderfluid, like transactivists, seem to think fear and discomfort will make us like and accept them better, or something.
Except we are talking about third-person pronouns, as always, which we don't use when talking to the people in question. So the whole pronoun thing strikes me as much attention-starved ado about nothing.
I want drama-free interactions too. That's why I would go out of my way to have no interactions with the NB. Because "my gender identity" this and "my gender identity" that would get old after two or three million times.
"Social movements attract extremists, so they become the problem for everyone. It's up to these groups to police their own, which often doesn't happen in the name of being inclusive and not wanting to chase off potential allies."
And all of these extremists regard anyone not a member of their enclave as an enemy, no matter how supportive. I made a minor quibble on Medium, I forget what it was, but it was nothing remotely even like "a trans woman is still biologically a man," but the person I was responding to said I was "incredibly transphobic," not just "transphobic" but "incredibly."
On the Washington Post blog where I wrote for so long ... in the last few years before I got off there were three women, one of whom I was friends with, another who missed no opportunity to bait me .. who would turn any topic, no matter how "incredibly" remote, into bitter screeds about how unfair women have it, never with a reference to anything tangible like wages but always attitudes mostly imagined, and the more I or anyone tried to show we were on their side the more we were attacked for not understanding.
I could name a few more instances, but do I need to? At least with the RKBA people there is a range of viewpoints, a few will agree to things like background checks, but it seems like the "trans" crowd is the worst. And probably the most irresponsible.
I think there are just a fuckuva lot of people out there with serious mental illness/ailments and a big pack of them are Millennials & Gen Z, who *have* gotten royally screwed in so many ways...but then again we were in the Reagan era, and the boomers by the Vietnam War before that, so la plus ca change. Yes, they are all incredibly overreactive to everything ;) I pushed back on a now ex-friend who de-friended me on Facebook over being a TERF (i.e., level-headed feminist who knows the diff between boys and girls) when she called me transphobic. "Do you even know that that means?" I asked. "I'm not afraid of transpeople. I criticize them which they often richly deserve. But that doesn't make me transphobic, anymore than my regular criticism of Donald Trump makes me Trumpphobic. I'm not worried about *him* ambushing me in an alley either."
We've really got to start pushing back on the extremism and the language. I've begun mentioning on Twitter sometimes the penchant for overstating harm. Another thing we need to push back on is their obsession with alleged trans suicide. Everything you say or do might make, like, millions of transpeople commit suicide or something. Fact is fucking everyone is suicidal in the US and has been for thirty years; and there's little evidence that turning trans solves that problem, and may in fact make it MORE likely to happen.
At some point ("homophobia?") the suffix came to mean hatred, not fear. Ailurophobia is fear of cats, not hatred of them. Don't succumb to the ridiculous argument that the basis of hatred is fear, that is weak tea.
The correct suffix is -misia, as in homomisia, which I insist on using and which is gaining ground. I don't use "transmisia" much because I don't think it's as prevalent as the former, much though the "trans" people like to (love to) think of themselves as hated and oppressed. The suffix is more familiar as a prefix; misanthropy, misogyny, etc.
I don't think that many people are transmisic so much as sick and tired of what is so obviously a destructive fad. Being hectored over pronouns gets old fast and having to stay atop dozens and dozens of phony subgenders and infragenders is ridiculous.
As for suicide, the ones who react to affirmation pressures by the radicals and screw up their health with hormones or even get pieces they were born with hacked off, then later realize it was just a phase they were going through, have extraordinarily high suicide rates.
Suppose there was a way to commit suicide without cutting one's own flesh or something kinetic like going off a bridge or blowing one's brains out, just take a pill and go to sleep ... we'd have a very steep population drop.
I don't know, not with you on the basis of hatred being fear. 'Phobia' has always meant fear - it comes from the Greek word phobos, from the Greek god of fear and panic, Phobos. But you're right, -phobia has come to mean in SJ circles anyway, to include hatred. And not all dislike of certain aspects is a phobia; my ex thought homosexual sex was 'icky' but didn't have a problem making a gay guy his son's godfather.
As for -misia, I've never heard of it and it sounds too much like the academic jargonbabble beloved by SJWs who love big impressive words because they obscure the fact that they really don't know how they think or feel about their subjects. So maybe I'll wait for that one to become more commonly known.
Many have noted that the way to get rid of Donald Trump is to not pay attention to him - attention is the oxygen supply of the gross narcissist. That's what the trans movement wants - more attention. It would starve their gross narcissism, too.
Well if you've followed my writing on here at all you know of my contempt for jargon-babble and my passion for precision. The latter is at the level of obsession-compulsion and I have to actively repress the urge to make small corrections. The singular they drives me absolutely bonkers.
Admittedly the -misia prefix is not as well-known as -phobia but I never liked "homophobia" because it seems to parody murderous hatred as equivalent to the 50s ad of a woman standing on a chair going "Eeek! A mouse!"
I think that postmodernism sought legitimacy in educated-sounding nonsense and the "trans" movement does the same, and both are equally intellectually barren.
"Phobia" means fear, often irrational (agora- claustro-, ailuri- ...) sometimes not so irrational (arachno-, acro- ...) and in general Greek roots are not as well-known as Latin ones. I've never retreated from resisting "evolving language" BS and I resist wrong use of -phobia. And the SJWs and way too self-policingly conformist to learn "transmisia." All the more reason to use it.
I wish we were all (including me) precise and unambiguous, but we are not. Often purposefully.
A meme floating around social media (How social media works):
Me: I prefer mangos to oranges.
Random person: So basically, what you are saying is that you hate oranges. You also failed to mention pineapples, bananas and grapefruits. Educate yourself. I'm literally shaking.
In his state of the union address, the president FAILED to mention the contribution of left-handed genderqueer humyns!!! I am shaking with rage!! /s
The less time I spend on social media the better is my mood. I've pretty much gotten off all discussion platforms except this one. Facebook for the messenger, Twitter for very short snide posts, no Instagram, Reddit, or TikTok, not once.
Agreed on the mood. I do find that I get depressed if I spend too much time online. I'm only on LinkedIn (for my biz). And I've pulled back massively on the time I spend on substack. I want a real life with real people. That said, I have met funny and interesting people online and have enjoyed the exchanges.
I eschewed debt and never got a 4-year degree (I have an AA and an AS) so I don't have a posse of intellectual friends. So I do enjoy the access to and conversation with people who "play in the field of ideas." Not too many of those in my visceral arena.
I had to log on to like your comment for this: “…academic jargonbabble beloved by SJWs who love big impressive words because they obscure the fact that they really don't know how they think or feel about their subjects.” So apt.
The way to get rid of Donald Trump is to re-empower the working class. Like maybe not make them pay for rich people's student loans. Maybe not ship all of their jobs offshore. Stop slanting policy toward the rich in general would be a good idea.
And there is also this (in terms of getting rid of Trump): https://criticaltherapyantidote.org/2022/08/08/freud-explains-cancel-culture/ I know Freud's theories have been discredited but I still thought this article was spot on. Just drop Freud's nomenclature and go with the behavioral dynamics and it works.
Freud's views on how our psychology works is one of many, and none of them tell the 'whole story', they're just different ways of viewing the brain, all of them valid, IMO. Freud's view is very early, arguably a pioneer (although I could make a case for the Buddha as the earliest psychology pioneer). Much of what Freud taught has been discredited, as you point out, but I still keep an open mind on the id/ego/superego piece.
That's a very good article and one I'm going to pass on to a friend I just saw last night after being separated for three years by the pandemic (and life). He got a degree in 'community psychology' which I never heard of before, I wonder if it's a new field, but it seems to be about social justice, which has introduced some 'woke' ideas into him but he's not woke-crazy so far as I can tell.
He sent me an article yesterday he wants me to read, and I will likely send him this one because I pushed back somewhat on his 'woke' views the other night - we got into a private Facebook argument and then he called me to work it out like grownups did back in days of yore before we all got so divided and caught up for two hours and then he came over last night to watch bad movies, drink highballs and enjoy a gummy :) Hey, it's the only way to watch the Giant Spider Invasion (1975) and Sharktopus (2010)!
I ran across an old note to myself on article ideas...putting this one nearer the top on my list of things to write about...how to talk to wokies based on my experience arguing with Christian fundamentalists back when I lived in the States (and was younger and had time for this shit). One thing I learned back in the day was don't argue on their turf (the Bible) which you will never know as well as them. Force them onto yours (scientific/historical evidence) and hold their feet to the fire on the facts.
With the wokies, their Bible is social justice critical theories, and peer-reviewed research and evidence is their weak spot, particularly science. They'll be better-versed on history than Christian fundies but it will still be contaminated by their biases (who knew wokies had biases...:) )
Follow on - also, woke infused therapy is just another example of experts shooting themselves in the foot, and the hand, and the head. I mean, how long before people just give up on experts altogether and revert to superstition or other belief systems? Do they really think they can play these head games with their "lessers" and get away with it scot free? Just because someone is not an expert in whatever or has a lesser IQ does not make them stupid. Their scorn is their demise.
Yes. Behavioral pattens stay the same regardless of labels. Who would have thunk in the 60s that boomer's kids and grandkids (and some boomers themselves) would turn into the very religous fundies they pilloried at that time? If they could only see themselves objectively. Self-righteousness is an eternal element of the psyche, apparently.
The reason I follow what is happening in therapy is because I am an adult survivor. And I am super worried about vulnerable people entering therapy only to be white-shamed. Jesus. I mean these people are already f'd up and have low self-esteem and hate themselves because they have been shamed to hell and back and now you are going to tell them they carry the original sin of whiteness as well - one that has NO redemption? It won't end well. Some of these therapists are going to drive people to suicide. And it's so avoidable. Sigh...
Sadly, people in deep mental trouble will find any disagreement, no matter how polite and logical to be bullying. But then they may be disingenuously claiming that as a defense mechanism which is a form of bullying you into silence.
Mental illness leading to suicide is worse than cancer. You can't treat it with surgery - lobotomies were a horrible attempt. None of us wish to contribute to that, but silence can also be an enabler. The mental health community is now afraid to call it when they see it, so it spreads like a cancer.
My comment elsewhere in this commentary could properly go here.