I can relate all too well with the meme and writing above... Allow me to share a SparkNotes version of my story so you may truly understand my perspective. I was raised in an extremely Christain home, was forced to attend church every Sunday and was enrolled in Christain schools for my entire academic career up until high school. The reason I broke away from the faith especially in academic settings was that I was beginning to discover my true identity, and what I found was that it was nothing like how I was raised. After years of self-exploration, I realized that I am a pansexual person, who uses she/they pronouns. My Christain family did not understand and reacted similarly to the meme above. After shoving religion with hateful innuendos towards my identity down my throat, I finally spit it up, and my surrounding indoctrinated family members could not fathom why I would do such a thing. Both with my old, religious family, friends, and peers, I learned something many queer people know all too well: There is no hate like Christain love. Luckily, my family is very tight knit, so they accustomed themselves to my differences, allowing our relationship to remain close. It is nice that my family still loves me, but religion never truly leaves your bias, and it is shown when they say that "they love me but do not support me in my 'lifestyle'." It is crazy how some people treat queer individuals as criminals, while they are just trying to live their damn life.
I am sorry you had to deal with that side of things. I am glad a middle ground was achieved for you - in my experience the deeply religious do not tend to be so accommodating to those who do not fit the expected mold. I agree, there is no hate like christian love.
But whenever they tell me "Oh we love you anyway, you know "love the sinner but hate the sin" I always do my best to remember to answer back with "Yeah, thanks, I do that too - you know, love the believer but hate the belief."
Thanks for sharing and bringing your experience and perspectives forward, it is not always an easy thing to do. I appreciate you doing so!
I almost think putting it back into children’s eyes and say “stop being mean” is the basis. That is bullying is always wrong and as a corollary watch out for bullies who claim they are being bullied because their bullying is being called out.
PITT - your patience is legendary! I applaud you. You appear to be committed to a process that I like to employ, as well. I've had people ask me before, when I engage in debate with one form of bigot or another, why I bother, because everyone knows you're not going to change their mind. My answer, and it sounds like yours, too, is that I'm not trying to change the mind of the person I'm debating. I'm in it for the sake of those readers who might not have made up their minds about what they believe, and I trust that having the debate to follow will give them a place to start. They can see the side rooted in bigotry, and they can see the side rooted in empathy, equity, and inclusiveness, and make up their mind. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, and so it is easy for me to hope most people who are new to the subject will land on the side of respect rather than bigotry.
That & another advantage of the way PITT responds to Kat is to set an example for the rest of us to respond to such obstinate people & give ideas for arguments, again for the purpose of influencing those open to rationality.
OMG precisely this! You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into - but you can hopefully provide the reason, facts, and evidence for the next person who sees it. I like to think of it as casting seeds of hope, as little kernels of facts, data, and perspective.
I too, start with Hanlon's razor, and very much share the same hopes and purpose that you have shared here. Thank you very much for your efforts, for sharing this with me! :)
Because they will be picked up by others who come by to read, and see for themselves. Maybe they read an article I link, maybe the read the study, or maybe they do not but they think to themselves "Wow, I wouldn't want to be in the same boat as that angry person!" - or maybe none of that happens, until they come face to face with a trans person. Maybe they came out to them, or maybe the bump into a situation where they recognize a trans person is being harassed or something, and they remember what they read, and they choose to do something different. They choose to help. Maybe it is a parent who decides not to kick out their kid for being trans, or accepts that their kid is dating a trans person. Maybe a parent picks up their phone and calls their kid for the first time in years? Who knows?
I am thankful that you and all the other folks who chose to comment, have done so. It really does make a big difference, particularly in the face of people like Kat and their behavior. Truly, thank you!
Okay, for all those reading, there is a reason why I have left Kat's comments here unmoderated no matter how offensive or insulting as they are.
1. Observe how Kat is preconditioned to ignore facts. Kat goes so far as to make the completely unsubstantiated claim that the entire medical and scientific communities are corrupt and are being taking in a "for profit enterprise" of sorts. No evidence is provided to support this claim.
2. This conveniently renders any peer-reviewed, reproducable study or statistic impotent, as Kat will just claim it is fake. This highlights the predisposition to deny facts.
3. Kat, when pushed or challenged, shifts the burden of proof, created strawmen, and engages in fallacious argumentative tactics instead of engaging with the substance of the point being made. This then inevitably devolves into insults and personal attacks. This is not the sign of someone with a rational position, evidence, open mind, or good faith - this is what an indoctrinated person, a fervent believer, looks like.
4. Kat unravels the longer and further this goes on. I try to remain on point and provide a fact-check to all the claims; however, as time goes on, there are so many and repeated so frequently, I just chose to ignore the substance and point out why the argument is flawed. Notice how this seems to have ended the conversation. I wonder why?
5. As much as I deplore this behavior, I felt that as others engaged (good on you!), this stood as a fine example not only of building a community among and for ourselves, but how we can pull together and advocate for equality for all. It stands as a prime example of what someone who is so consumed by fear and hate that they not only cannot help themselves but to engage in this behavior, but they cannot stop themselves either.
6. Finally, there are a great many points here that I will use for future content creation. Kat has provided me a great library of TERF talking points and arguing methods that I can expose and deconstruct in a future series of article. We can all observe, learn, and become better advocates because of Kat's efforts. In a way, Kat has been a helpful resource in this, and has inadvertently made our arguments for us, our methods better, but most importantly, it stands as a harsh and ugly reminder that (hopefully) steels our resolve and brings us closer together as one.
And to Kat: Thanks for proving everything I have written on my substack to date.
Yeah, I wonder if she has not made a sort of template that they just copy and paste, and maybe tweak a bit.
If I have to give a repetitive answer to a troll, like I started to do towards the end of my discussion with Kat, I will do the same. Particularly if we are just going to be repetitive, as I will stop engaging with the substance and just point out why the argument holds no weight. Otherwise I try to make a good faith effort.
For the record, this is the second time I have given a serious effort to reach Kat. I do not think I will be so generous the next time.
IKR? And they have the gall to consider themselves a "feminist" - or at least I assume they do so, as they seem to relish in the TERF moniker.
There is no gender equality without trans inclusion, imho.
It seems as though being right is what matters to them, and they are fundamentally closed to anything that goes against their world view, or offends their sensibilities. I am sorry they unloaded on you like that. Normally I would not let that stay up like that -.-
So many outstanding references provided here. I wish parents who have questions would find this and work through their fears with the love of their child as a guiding principle.
I'm thankful that I'm in a mental state most of the time where questions about being trans is a load I can pick up. There was one time a woman who was doing my makeup, paused, had the I have a question I want to ask but don't want to cause a fess face. I asked her if she had a question and that I have spoken at Q/As before. She was worried about her 14y kid telling her they might be trans. We spent 15min going over my struggles and what I thought were good first steps for the both of them. She was mostly worried about how others would treat her kid along with her pushing them one way or the other. Therapy, trying names/pronouns, and clothes are a great testing ground for self realization. Even with all the hate it makes people look into it and I do see other parents opening themselves up to growth.
Thanks Robin! This really means a lot to me, I hope that it helps some parents or families find a path forward, one based on facts, not fears. Every child is worthy of love, no matter if they fall under the LGBTQIA+ flag or not.
The "wrong body" metaphor is just that - a metaphor to help others understand the transgender experience. It's not meant to be taken literally. Gender identity is a complex, innate sense of self, supported by neurological and psychological research.
The path forward, as evidenced by scientific studies and empirical data, is to embrace one's self for who and what they are, because attempts to change one's gender identity is fraught with failure and ends up very poorly for the trans person. If I have a choice of listening to a bunch of science deniers, or medical experts who follow individualized and personalized evidence based medicine, I am going to go with the experts on this one. Go where the science and data lead, not where the fear and prejudice point. As I said, facts, not fear.
Gender-affirming care is not about "mutilation" but about providing individualized, evidence-based treatment. For minors, it often starts with social transition and reversible interventions, guided by mental health professionals, doctors, and families - most notably only with parental consent.
Your claims about pedophilia and mutilation are unfounded and harmful. There's no credible evidence linking gender-affirming care or transgender identities to pedophilia. Such accusations are serious and should not be made without proof. Hitchen's razor applies here.
Love for our children should be unconditional, and not predicated on their being cisgender. We should not teach our children to deny who they are simply to fit into a world view that doesn't offend someone's sensibilities. I think the immoral act is to deny your child the freedom, love, acceptance, and care they need to be themselves.
I am just going to start listing off all the logical fallacies and misrepresentations you are making, because you refuse to engage on substance.
Your argument relies on several logical fallacies that undermine its validity:
-Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as the 'transgender' experience") in your premise, without providing evidence.
-False dichotomy: You present a simplistic either/or view of gender identity and medical care, ignoring the complexity of the issue.
-Ad hominem: Attacking the morality of those who disagree with you ("You are immoral") rather than addressing their arguments.
-Appeal to emotion: Using emotionally charged language like "evil" and "insane" to sway opinion rather than presenting logical arguments.
-Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about all transgender healthcare based on limited or misrepresented information.
-Strawman argument: Misrepresenting the opposing view (e.g., suggesting that accepting transgender identities means supporting "child mutilation") to make it easier to attack.
Your misrepresentations include:
-Characterizing gender-affirming care as "mutilation and sterilization," which misrepresents the nature, intent, and outcomes of these medical procedures.
-Claiming there is "no science or data" to support transgender healthcare, ignoring the substantial body of research in this field.
-Asserting that "cisgender" doesn't exist, which contradicts the established use of this term in gender studies and psychology.
A productive discussion on this complex topic requires engaging with the actual scientific evidence and ethical considerations, rather than relying on emotional appeals and misrepresentations. Your argument fails to address the nuanced realities of gender identity and the carefully considered medical practices in transgender healthcare.
You can prove or disprove another person's experience? Amazing!
How do you do that? Do you have some cool powers, or new technology that can objectively prove what another experiences? That would be Nobel Prize worthy stuff!
A metaphor is not an excuse or used to excuse something, it is a means to help others empathize with another's experience. We use them all the time, in most everything we write, read, watch, or listen to. Nice attempt to make a strawman, too bad it is not what I said.
The rest of your comment is all opinion and inflammatory rhetoric, dogma, and baseless claims. Keep repeating the mantras like a good cultist, you are a wonderful indoctrinated foot soldier, Kat.
Your comparison to lobotomies is inaccurate and misleading. Unlike lobotomies, which quickly fell out of favor due to lack of reproducible evidence, gender-affirming care has a long history of effectiveness supported by ongoing research.
Conversely, gender affirming care has a long history of being highly effective, with an extraordinarily low detransition rate (3.3%). That said, it's crucial to note that detransition doesn't always indicate regret or medical error. Many who detransition cite external pressures such as discrimination or lack of support. Furthermore, another study reports even lower detransition rates of 2.2% for transgender women and 1.3% for transgender men. These figures are far from the "scandal" you're predicting.
The inconvenient truth is that gender-affirming care continues to be supported by a growing body of evidence and medical consensus. While all medical treatments should be subject to ongoing scrutiny and improvement, comparing this to lobotomies is an unfounded and alarmist claim that doesn't align with the current scientific understanding and consensus.
Repeating the same nonsense over and over does not make it any more true.
Ah yes, surely the person defending modern scientific medical standards is the "brainwashed idealogue" not the person claiming those standards are "worse than lobotomies", that makes total sense /s
So what you are saying is there is no possible amount or type of scientific evidence that gender affirming care saves lives and us medically necessary that could possibly convince you to overturn your beliefs? No conceivable means of proof could convince you that this is the case? What could possibly change your mind, if you believe that any medical organization with a peer-reviewed study supporting it must in-fact be lying?
Hey look, if I was "playing bad argument bingo", I won!
- False equivalence: Comparing gender-affirming care to lobotomies ignores significant differences in scientific basis, methodology, and outcomes. [^1]
- Ad hominem: Attacking the morality and intelligence of those who disagree with you ("you're too dumb to see it") rather than addressing their arguments.
- Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about transgender identities and care based on limited or misrepresented information.
- Begging the question: Assuming your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'transition'") in your premises without providing evidence.
- False dichotomy: Presenting a simplistic binary view of gender and transition, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science. [^1]
- Appeal to emotion: Using emotionally charged language ("mutilation," "scammed") to sway opinion rather than presenting logical arguments.
- Strawman argument: Misrepresenting the opposing view (e.g., suggesting that accepting transgender identities means supporting pedophilia) to make it easier to attack.
Your misrepresentations include:
- Claiming gender-affirming care leads to "normalization of pedophilia," which is an unfounded and harmful assertion.
- Misrepresenting the history of lobotomies. While they were indeed practiced for decades, their decline was due to growing evidence of ineffectiveness and harm, unlike gender-affirming care which continues to be supported by ongoing research.
- Oversimplifying complex issues of gender identity and transition, ignoring the nuanced understanding in current medical and psychological research.
and my copy/paste closing:
Your argument fails to engage with the actual scientific evidence and ethical considerations in transgender healthcare. Instead, it relies on emotional appeals, misrepresentations, and logical fallacies. A productive discussion on this complex topic requires a more nuanced and evidence-based approach.
Whatever you need to believe in order to feel better about yourself Kat. I hope you can look yourself in the mirror and find forgiveness for yourself, find a path of redemption for when you do, and ultimately be at peace. I wish nothing but the best for you.
You’re choosing to ignore the science but have no problem espousing hysterical right wing media talking points. You are no more right today than you were yesterday or the days before.
Kat is ruining people's days, every day with her bigotry. She doesn't just spout it from her own page, she actively searches for trans people and their allies and goes to their comments to call them disgusting, moronic, and child abusers because she is so, so afraid of her own gender identity that all she can do to avoid those thoughts is constantly bully and attack other people.
I don't want to read her mind-numbingly stupid hate speech on my beloved Substack every damn day. How is this ok??
Yes, you are saying what we are all thinking inside. I am with you 100%
I tried to outline my reasoning for not moderating here in my own comment section *this time* - it stands to serve as an example - this is what a TERF believes, this is the mentality we are dealing with, and this is what it looks like when they spin out, particularly when faced with facts. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like to the outside observer.
This is what we must learn to identify even in its more subtle forms, and this is what we must learn to stand against. With compassion, love, empathy as our strength, our unity and resolve, armed with facts and science, I feel we can learn from this and stand tall, proud, and stronger together!
But remember, if she is ruining your day, then she wins :)
Your responses are beautiful and your patience is impressive. I don't disagree with your approach at all for as long as Kat is here, actively hurting people. Leaving her comments up lets Substack and everyone know exactly who she is.
And also, I look forward to the day when she isn't hurting anyone I care about anymore!
Hi Kat, just so you are aware, your argument contains several logical fallacies and misrepresentations that undermine its validity:
Hasty generalization: You make broad claims about complex legal and psychological concepts without providing sufficient evidence.
Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'gender identity'") in your premises without providing evidence.
False dichotomy: You present a simplistic binary view of sex and gender, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science.
Ad hominem: Labeling those who disagree with you as "mentally ill" attacks character rather than addressing arguments.
Appeal to nature: Claiming immutability of sex doesn't address the validity of gender identity or the ethics of gender-affirming care.
Your misrepresentations include:
Oversimplifying the legal concept of hate speech. While "hate speech" isn't a legal term in U.S. law, speech that incites violence or discrimination is often restricted.
Conflating sex and gender, which are distinct concepts in modern scientific understanding.
Characterizing gender-affirming care as "chasing an unobtainable goal," which misrepresents the intent and outcomes of these treatments.
I have these on copy/paste now, it is like clockwork. Even this bit:
A productive discussion on these complex topics requires engaging with the nuanced scientific understanding of sex, gender, and identity, rather than relying on oversimplifications and logical fallacies. Your argument fails to address the actual evidence and ethical considerations involved in these issues.
I cite my sources to be both transparent and accountable. Everyone can see where I get my data from and what the science says. This way no one has to take my word for you it, they can see for themselves! Feel free to dive into the research and prove me a wrong.
You claim I am am immoral, but the immoral thing to do is to deny your kid the room to safely explore their gender and/or sexuality as they grow and mature, to be free to be themselves, and to be loved and accepted, supported and cared for, simply for being themselves. I advocate and want these things for all kids. To give them the respect they deserve and to do so with safety, dignity, and compassion. The immoral thing is to gaslight your child and to deny them these opportunities and the care they need/deserve, to isolate them and harangue them, and to neglect them and their mental and physical health. "Gender critical" ideologues such as yourself advocate for deny all these things, and engaging in these deplorable practices and behaviors.
I will never pretend that I did not support gender affirming care - even if it is proven to be totally unfounded. That would be dishonest. Furthermore, my position will not change due to some lawsuits. My position will change only when science has gained compelling new insight and understanding that convinces me to change base on what we have learned.
I stand by my position, which aligns with current scientific consensus. I am not making unfounded claims like 'there is no such thing as trans' or 'none of this is real.' The reality is that scientific evidence and consensus supports the existence of transgender identities and gender affirming care, and does not support the claims, beliefs, and ideology that deny the existence of transgender people or the "gender critical" ideology.
Yeah, I know. I feel bad for them, so I figure if I can give them a well reasoned answer, at least someone listened to them, you know?
If anything, it just inspires me to write more articles/essays, do more fact-check/debunking pieces, and spread a bit more facts and truth out there. Hopefully one of these nuggets will be read by someone and not fall into the confirmation bias echo chamber, or maybe feel that there are people out there who care and support them, and makes a better choice today.
Sure you are, or you wouldn’t be here name calling, spreading lies, citing to bogus articles. Your opioid and cigarette study comparisons are straw man arguments that have zero relevance to trans studies.
In all honesty, Kay-El, Kat has somehow managed to say one true thing here: Kat does not appear to have a phobia. Fevered-pitch bigotry is often perceived as a phobia, but a phobia is a pathological fear, about which a person has no choice. Kat has a choice. Kat does not have to be a hateful bigotry fueled by junk-science bullshit. Kat could choose to be a curious, respectful, empathic person, but for some reason has chosen the hateful junk-science bullshit path. It would be humorous if it weren't so hateful destructive.
So we are going to cry "John Money" and spout conspiracy theories? Make unfounded and inflammatory personal attacks and claims?
Do you realize that trans people are Money's victims, not his creations?
Do you realize that his deplorable experiment only proves what trans people have been saying all along, that one's gender identity is innate and not changeable? It is kind of strange you would resort to this kind of self-own.
Trans rights and women's rights are not mutually exclusive. Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It is not pie.
As for everything else you said here, it is just noise with out evidence and reads as a denial of reality. The more you say these things, the more you write personal attacks and insults and make wild and unfounded claims, the more you appear as someone who has lost touch with reality and is becoming unhinged. This undermines any credibility you may have had.
Again, more baseless accusations. If you want me to take you seriously, then provide evidence to back up your claims.
You are just spouting a bunch talking points that have been thoroughly debunked, refuted, redacted, or disproven. Over and over again, like a mantra - something irrational and indoctrinated people do. Like cultists.
You see, indoctrinated people are preconditioned to dismiss facts.
I will change my view if new information comes along that effectively contradicts my beliefs.
This is why I follow the science, cite my sources, and so on. I go where the science and data lead. I go with facts, nor fear.
![People with Inconvenient Truths about Transphobes [PITT]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_36,h_36,c_fill,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep,g_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F704ba0db-3e10-4112-9364-c2f224d0cfae_500x500.png)
I can relate all too well with the meme and writing above... Allow me to share a SparkNotes version of my story so you may truly understand my perspective. I was raised in an extremely Christain home, was forced to attend church every Sunday and was enrolled in Christain schools for my entire academic career up until high school. The reason I broke away from the faith especially in academic settings was that I was beginning to discover my true identity, and what I found was that it was nothing like how I was raised. After years of self-exploration, I realized that I am a pansexual person, who uses she/they pronouns. My Christain family did not understand and reacted similarly to the meme above. After shoving religion with hateful innuendos towards my identity down my throat, I finally spit it up, and my surrounding indoctrinated family members could not fathom why I would do such a thing. Both with my old, religious family, friends, and peers, I learned something many queer people know all too well: There is no hate like Christain love. Luckily, my family is very tight knit, so they accustomed themselves to my differences, allowing our relationship to remain close. It is nice that my family still loves me, but religion never truly leaves your bias, and it is shown when they say that "they love me but do not support me in my 'lifestyle'." It is crazy how some people treat queer individuals as criminals, while they are just trying to live their damn life.
I am sorry you had to deal with that side of things. I am glad a middle ground was achieved for you - in my experience the deeply religious do not tend to be so accommodating to those who do not fit the expected mold. I agree, there is no hate like christian love.
But whenever they tell me "Oh we love you anyway, you know "love the sinner but hate the sin" I always do my best to remember to answer back with "Yeah, thanks, I do that too - you know, love the believer but hate the belief."
Thanks for sharing and bringing your experience and perspectives forward, it is not always an easy thing to do. I appreciate you doing so!
This is so obvious it's amazing it has to
be said.
But only if you know how to love other people. It's something not everyone learns, sadly.
I almost think putting it back into children’s eyes and say “stop being mean” is the basis. That is bullying is always wrong and as a corollary watch out for bullies who claim they are being bullied because their bullying is being called out.
PITT - your patience is legendary! I applaud you. You appear to be committed to a process that I like to employ, as well. I've had people ask me before, when I engage in debate with one form of bigot or another, why I bother, because everyone knows you're not going to change their mind. My answer, and it sounds like yours, too, is that I'm not trying to change the mind of the person I'm debating. I'm in it for the sake of those readers who might not have made up their minds about what they believe, and I trust that having the debate to follow will give them a place to start. They can see the side rooted in bigotry, and they can see the side rooted in empathy, equity, and inclusiveness, and make up their mind. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, and so it is easy for me to hope most people who are new to the subject will land on the side of respect rather than bigotry.
That & another advantage of the way PITT responds to Kat is to set an example for the rest of us to respond to such obstinate people & give ideas for arguments, again for the purpose of influencing those open to rationality.
OMG precisely this! You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into - but you can hopefully provide the reason, facts, and evidence for the next person who sees it. I like to think of it as casting seeds of hope, as little kernels of facts, data, and perspective.
I too, start with Hanlon's razor, and very much share the same hopes and purpose that you have shared here. Thank you very much for your efforts, for sharing this with me! :)
Because they will be picked up by others who come by to read, and see for themselves. Maybe they read an article I link, maybe the read the study, or maybe they do not but they think to themselves "Wow, I wouldn't want to be in the same boat as that angry person!" - or maybe none of that happens, until they come face to face with a trans person. Maybe they came out to them, or maybe the bump into a situation where they recognize a trans person is being harassed or something, and they remember what they read, and they choose to do something different. They choose to help. Maybe it is a parent who decides not to kick out their kid for being trans, or accepts that their kid is dating a trans person. Maybe a parent picks up their phone and calls their kid for the first time in years? Who knows?
I am thankful that you and all the other folks who chose to comment, have done so. It really does make a big difference, particularly in the face of people like Kat and their behavior. Truly, thank you!
Okay, for all those reading, there is a reason why I have left Kat's comments here unmoderated no matter how offensive or insulting as they are.
1. Observe how Kat is preconditioned to ignore facts. Kat goes so far as to make the completely unsubstantiated claim that the entire medical and scientific communities are corrupt and are being taking in a "for profit enterprise" of sorts. No evidence is provided to support this claim.
2. This conveniently renders any peer-reviewed, reproducable study or statistic impotent, as Kat will just claim it is fake. This highlights the predisposition to deny facts.
3. Kat, when pushed or challenged, shifts the burden of proof, created strawmen, and engages in fallacious argumentative tactics instead of engaging with the substance of the point being made. This then inevitably devolves into insults and personal attacks. This is not the sign of someone with a rational position, evidence, open mind, or good faith - this is what an indoctrinated person, a fervent believer, looks like.
4. Kat unravels the longer and further this goes on. I try to remain on point and provide a fact-check to all the claims; however, as time goes on, there are so many and repeated so frequently, I just chose to ignore the substance and point out why the argument is flawed. Notice how this seems to have ended the conversation. I wonder why?
5. As much as I deplore this behavior, I felt that as others engaged (good on you!), this stood as a fine example not only of building a community among and for ourselves, but how we can pull together and advocate for equality for all. It stands as a prime example of what someone who is so consumed by fear and hate that they not only cannot help themselves but to engage in this behavior, but they cannot stop themselves either.
6. Finally, there are a great many points here that I will use for future content creation. Kat has provided me a great library of TERF talking points and arguing methods that I can expose and deconstruct in a future series of article. We can all observe, learn, and become better advocates because of Kat's efforts. In a way, Kat has been a helpful resource in this, and has inadvertently made our arguments for us, our methods better, but most importantly, it stands as a harsh and ugly reminder that (hopefully) steels our resolve and brings us closer together as one.
And to Kat: Thanks for proving everything I have written on my substack to date.
I could not have written satire this good.
Yeah, I wonder if she has not made a sort of template that they just copy and paste, and maybe tweak a bit.
If I have to give a repetitive answer to a troll, like I started to do towards the end of my discussion with Kat, I will do the same. Particularly if we are just going to be repetitive, as I will stop engaging with the substance and just point out why the argument holds no weight. Otherwise I try to make a good faith effort.
For the record, this is the second time I have given a serious effort to reach Kat. I do not think I will be so generous the next time.
IKR? And they have the gall to consider themselves a "feminist" - or at least I assume they do so, as they seem to relish in the TERF moniker.
There is no gender equality without trans inclusion, imho.
It seems as though being right is what matters to them, and they are fundamentally closed to anything that goes against their world view, or offends their sensibilities. I am sorry they unloaded on you like that. Normally I would not let that stay up like that -.-
It is not right, and it is not fair.
You are most welcome, thank you for your understanding!
And a Union Trade Worker? That sounds interesting, what trade? Also, if you rather not say here, we can take this to chat/email instead :)
So many outstanding references provided here. I wish parents who have questions would find this and work through their fears with the love of their child as a guiding principle.
I'm thankful that I'm in a mental state most of the time where questions about being trans is a load I can pick up. There was one time a woman who was doing my makeup, paused, had the I have a question I want to ask but don't want to cause a fess face. I asked her if she had a question and that I have spoken at Q/As before. She was worried about her 14y kid telling her they might be trans. We spent 15min going over my struggles and what I thought were good first steps for the both of them. She was mostly worried about how others would treat her kid along with her pushing them one way or the other. Therapy, trying names/pronouns, and clothes are a great testing ground for self realization. Even with all the hate it makes people look into it and I do see other parents opening themselves up to growth.
Thanks Robin! This really means a lot to me, I hope that it helps some parents or families find a path forward, one based on facts, not fears. Every child is worthy of love, no matter if they fall under the LGBTQIA+ flag or not.
The "wrong body" metaphor is just that - a metaphor to help others understand the transgender experience. It's not meant to be taken literally. Gender identity is a complex, innate sense of self, supported by neurological and psychological research.
The path forward, as evidenced by scientific studies and empirical data, is to embrace one's self for who and what they are, because attempts to change one's gender identity is fraught with failure and ends up very poorly for the trans person. If I have a choice of listening to a bunch of science deniers, or medical experts who follow individualized and personalized evidence based medicine, I am going to go with the experts on this one. Go where the science and data lead, not where the fear and prejudice point. As I said, facts, not fear.
Gender-affirming care is not about "mutilation" but about providing individualized, evidence-based treatment. For minors, it often starts with social transition and reversible interventions, guided by mental health professionals, doctors, and families - most notably only with parental consent.
Your claims about pedophilia and mutilation are unfounded and harmful. There's no credible evidence linking gender-affirming care or transgender identities to pedophilia. Such accusations are serious and should not be made without proof. Hitchen's razor applies here.
Love for our children should be unconditional, and not predicated on their being cisgender. We should not teach our children to deny who they are simply to fit into a world view that doesn't offend someone's sensibilities. I think the immoral act is to deny your child the freedom, love, acceptance, and care they need to be themselves.
Would you go along with the Cass Review’s recommendations?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Review#Recommendations
All of them? No, definitely not.
Which recommendations would you not go along with?
I am just going to start listing off all the logical fallacies and misrepresentations you are making, because you refuse to engage on substance.
Your argument relies on several logical fallacies that undermine its validity:
-Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as the 'transgender' experience") in your premise, without providing evidence.
-False dichotomy: You present a simplistic either/or view of gender identity and medical care, ignoring the complexity of the issue.
-Ad hominem: Attacking the morality of those who disagree with you ("You are immoral") rather than addressing their arguments.
-Appeal to emotion: Using emotionally charged language like "evil" and "insane" to sway opinion rather than presenting logical arguments.
-Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about all transgender healthcare based on limited or misrepresented information.
-Strawman argument: Misrepresenting the opposing view (e.g., suggesting that accepting transgender identities means supporting "child mutilation") to make it easier to attack.
Your misrepresentations include:
-Characterizing gender-affirming care as "mutilation and sterilization," which misrepresents the nature, intent, and outcomes of these medical procedures.
-Claiming there is "no science or data" to support transgender healthcare, ignoring the substantial body of research in this field.
-Asserting that "cisgender" doesn't exist, which contradicts the established use of this term in gender studies and psychology.
A productive discussion on this complex topic requires engaging with the actual scientific evidence and ethical considerations, rather than relying on emotional appeals and misrepresentations. Your argument fails to address the nuanced realities of gender identity and the carefully considered medical practices in transgender healthcare.
Damn, they just keep adding up! We should make a bingo card and check them off. Kat has hit almost all of the well-known fallacies already.
You can prove or disprove another person's experience? Amazing!
How do you do that? Do you have some cool powers, or new technology that can objectively prove what another experiences? That would be Nobel Prize worthy stuff!
A metaphor is not an excuse or used to excuse something, it is a means to help others empathize with another's experience. We use them all the time, in most everything we write, read, watch, or listen to. Nice attempt to make a strawman, too bad it is not what I said.
The rest of your comment is all opinion and inflammatory rhetoric, dogma, and baseless claims. Keep repeating the mantras like a good cultist, you are a wonderful indoctrinated foot soldier, Kat.
Your comparison to lobotomies is inaccurate and misleading. Unlike lobotomies, which quickly fell out of favor due to lack of reproducible evidence, gender-affirming care has a long history of effectiveness supported by ongoing research.
Conversely, gender affirming care has a long history of being highly effective, with an extraordinarily low detransition rate (3.3%). That said, it's crucial to note that detransition doesn't always indicate regret or medical error. Many who detransition cite external pressures such as discrimination or lack of support. Furthermore, another study reports even lower detransition rates of 2.2% for transgender women and 1.3% for transgender men. These figures are far from the "scandal" you're predicting.
The inconvenient truth is that gender-affirming care continues to be supported by a growing body of evidence and medical consensus. While all medical treatments should be subject to ongoing scrutiny and improvement, comparing this to lobotomies is an unfounded and alarmist claim that doesn't align with the current scientific understanding and consensus.
Repeating the same nonsense over and over does not make it any more true.
Ah yes, surely the person defending modern scientific medical standards is the "brainwashed idealogue" not the person claiming those standards are "worse than lobotomies", that makes total sense /s
So what you are saying is there is no possible amount or type of scientific evidence that gender affirming care saves lives and us medically necessary that could possibly convince you to overturn your beliefs? No conceivable means of proof could convince you that this is the case? What could possibly change your mind, if you believe that any medical organization with a peer-reviewed study supporting it must in-fact be lying?
Hey look, if I was "playing bad argument bingo", I won!
- False equivalence: Comparing gender-affirming care to lobotomies ignores significant differences in scientific basis, methodology, and outcomes. [^1]
- Ad hominem: Attacking the morality and intelligence of those who disagree with you ("you're too dumb to see it") rather than addressing their arguments.
- Hasty generalization: Making broad claims about transgender identities and care based on limited or misrepresented information.
- Begging the question: Assuming your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'transition'") in your premises without providing evidence.
- False dichotomy: Presenting a simplistic binary view of gender and transition, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science. [^1]
- Appeal to emotion: Using emotionally charged language ("mutilation," "scammed") to sway opinion rather than presenting logical arguments.
- Strawman argument: Misrepresenting the opposing view (e.g., suggesting that accepting transgender identities means supporting pedophilia) to make it easier to attack.
Your misrepresentations include:
- Claiming gender-affirming care leads to "normalization of pedophilia," which is an unfounded and harmful assertion.
- Misrepresenting the history of lobotomies. While they were indeed practiced for decades, their decline was due to growing evidence of ineffectiveness and harm, unlike gender-affirming care which continues to be supported by ongoing research.
- Oversimplifying complex issues of gender identity and transition, ignoring the nuanced understanding in current medical and psychological research.
and my copy/paste closing:
Your argument fails to engage with the actual scientific evidence and ethical considerations in transgender healthcare. Instead, it relies on emotional appeals, misrepresentations, and logical fallacies. A productive discussion on this complex topic requires a more nuanced and evidence-based approach.
Wow, what projection, hubris, and sophistry!
Whatever you need to believe in order to feel better about yourself Kat. I hope you can look yourself in the mirror and find forgiveness for yourself, find a path of redemption for when you do, and ultimately be at peace. I wish nothing but the best for you.
You’re choosing to ignore the science but have no problem espousing hysterical right wing media talking points. You are no more right today than you were yesterday or the days before.
@Substack HOW IS THIS NOT HATE SPEECH!!?
Kat is ruining people's days, every day with her bigotry. She doesn't just spout it from her own page, she actively searches for trans people and their allies and goes to their comments to call them disgusting, moronic, and child abusers because she is so, so afraid of her own gender identity that all she can do to avoid those thoughts is constantly bully and attack other people.
I don't want to read her mind-numbingly stupid hate speech on my beloved Substack every damn day. How is this ok??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24WYoGQhiBs SCNR.
This made me LOL - thank you!
Unfortunately, Substack doesn't have a problem with hate speech. They're fine with it.
Yes, you are saying what we are all thinking inside. I am with you 100%
I tried to outline my reasoning for not moderating here in my own comment section *this time* - it stands to serve as an example - this is what a TERF believes, this is the mentality we are dealing with, and this is what it looks like when they spin out, particularly when faced with facts. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like to the outside observer.
This is what we must learn to identify even in its more subtle forms, and this is what we must learn to stand against. With compassion, love, empathy as our strength, our unity and resolve, armed with facts and science, I feel we can learn from this and stand tall, proud, and stronger together!
But remember, if she is ruining your day, then she wins :)
Love conquers all <3
Your responses are beautiful and your patience is impressive. I don't disagree with your approach at all for as long as Kat is here, actively hurting people. Leaving her comments up lets Substack and everyone know exactly who she is.
And also, I look forward to the day when she isn't hurting anyone I care about anymore!
You and me both, Allyson, you and me both <3
Hi Kat, just so you are aware, your argument contains several logical fallacies and misrepresentations that undermine its validity:
Hasty generalization: You make broad claims about complex legal and psychological concepts without providing sufficient evidence.
Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'gender identity'") in your premises without providing evidence.
False dichotomy: You present a simplistic binary view of sex and gender, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science.
Ad hominem: Labeling those who disagree with you as "mentally ill" attacks character rather than addressing arguments.
Appeal to nature: Claiming immutability of sex doesn't address the validity of gender identity or the ethics of gender-affirming care.
Your misrepresentations include:
Oversimplifying the legal concept of hate speech. While "hate speech" isn't a legal term in U.S. law, speech that incites violence or discrimination is often restricted.
Conflating sex and gender, which are distinct concepts in modern scientific understanding.
Characterizing gender-affirming care as "chasing an unobtainable goal," which misrepresents the intent and outcomes of these treatments.
I have these on copy/paste now, it is like clockwork. Even this bit:
A productive discussion on these complex topics requires engaging with the nuanced scientific understanding of sex, gender, and identity, rather than relying on oversimplifications and logical fallacies. Your argument fails to address the actual evidence and ethical considerations involved in these issues.
If you’d actually read the literature you’d have your questions answered. What are you afraid of?
Why do you need anyone to answer when you already know everything? So you can scream your hate? Lol.
I cite my sources to be both transparent and accountable. Everyone can see where I get my data from and what the science says. This way no one has to take my word for you it, they can see for themselves! Feel free to dive into the research and prove me a wrong.
You claim I am am immoral, but the immoral thing to do is to deny your kid the room to safely explore their gender and/or sexuality as they grow and mature, to be free to be themselves, and to be loved and accepted, supported and cared for, simply for being themselves. I advocate and want these things for all kids. To give them the respect they deserve and to do so with safety, dignity, and compassion. The immoral thing is to gaslight your child and to deny them these opportunities and the care they need/deserve, to isolate them and harangue them, and to neglect them and their mental and physical health. "Gender critical" ideologues such as yourself advocate for deny all these things, and engaging in these deplorable practices and behaviors.
I will never pretend that I did not support gender affirming care - even if it is proven to be totally unfounded. That would be dishonest. Furthermore, my position will not change due to some lawsuits. My position will change only when science has gained compelling new insight and understanding that convinces me to change base on what we have learned.
I stand by my position, which aligns with current scientific consensus. I am not making unfounded claims like 'there is no such thing as trans' or 'none of this is real.' The reality is that scientific evidence and consensus supports the existence of transgender identities and gender affirming care, and does not support the claims, beliefs, and ideology that deny the existence of transgender people or the "gender critical" ideology.
Beautiful handling of this Robin. Your patience in the face of unbelievable levels of stupidity, heartlessness, and self-hate is impressive.
If you meant this for Robin Taylor who commented earlier, I agree! He is a pretty cool guy :) <3
If you meant this comment for me, then thanks! I try my best, and appreciate the kind words and encouragement, it really does make a difference!
I’ve run into Kat before. She’s a TERF and cites to garbage media to prove what she thinks is the truth. No critical thinking, just phobia.
Yup, me too. Kat is dedicated to the practice of ignoring evidence in favor of bigotry.
Yeah, I know. I feel bad for them, so I figure if I can give them a well reasoned answer, at least someone listened to them, you know?
If anything, it just inspires me to write more articles/essays, do more fact-check/debunking pieces, and spread a bit more facts and truth out there. Hopefully one of these nuggets will be read by someone and not fall into the confirmation bias echo chamber, or maybe feel that there are people out there who care and support them, and makes a better choice today.
Your response was great. I doubt it will make a difference to her but it will to someone else and that’s what matters.
Hey, thanks for this! The encouragement and feedback really helps :)
Why won't you answer PITT's questions? It should be easy to do, if you have facts to back up your argument.
Sure you are, or you wouldn’t be here name calling, spreading lies, citing to bogus articles. Your opioid and cigarette study comparisons are straw man arguments that have zero relevance to trans studies.
In all honesty, Kay-El, Kat has somehow managed to say one true thing here: Kat does not appear to have a phobia. Fevered-pitch bigotry is often perceived as a phobia, but a phobia is a pathological fear, about which a person has no choice. Kat has a choice. Kat does not have to be a hateful bigotry fueled by junk-science bullshit. Kat could choose to be a curious, respectful, empathic person, but for some reason has chosen the hateful junk-science bullshit path. It would be humorous if it weren't so hateful destructive.
Hmmm, an excellent point. I stand corrected.
The only thing collapsing is you.
that's a weird thing to say
It is, isn't it?
So we are going to cry "John Money" and spout conspiracy theories? Make unfounded and inflammatory personal attacks and claims?
Do you realize that trans people are Money's victims, not his creations?
Do you realize that his deplorable experiment only proves what trans people have been saying all along, that one's gender identity is innate and not changeable? It is kind of strange you would resort to this kind of self-own.
Trans rights and women's rights are not mutually exclusive. Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. It is not pie.
As for everything else you said here, it is just noise with out evidence and reads as a denial of reality. The more you say these things, the more you write personal attacks and insults and make wild and unfounded claims, the more you appear as someone who has lost touch with reality and is becoming unhinged. This undermines any credibility you may have had.
Again, more baseless accusations. If you want me to take you seriously, then provide evidence to back up your claims.
You are just spouting a bunch talking points that have been thoroughly debunked, refuted, redacted, or disproven. Over and over again, like a mantra - something irrational and indoctrinated people do. Like cultists.
You see, indoctrinated people are preconditioned to dismiss facts.
I will change my view if new information comes along that effectively contradicts my beliefs.
This is why I follow the science, cite my sources, and so on. I go where the science and data lead. I go with facts, nor fear.