Professor WGA and Friends Guide to Science - How to counter the TransEthics, TransLifeLife and hack writers in the Rat King

[WeaponsGradeAutism]

Inspired by Buffalo Bill and his cringe humor, why don't we go ahead and bring in some Maslow?

https://m.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a motivational theory in psychology comprising a five tier model of human needs, often depicted as hierarchical levels within a pyramid.

Maslow (1943, 1954) stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs and that some needs take precedence over others. Our most basic need is for physical survival, and this will be the first thing that motivates our behaviour. Once that level is fulfilled the next level up is what motivates us, and so on.

This five stage model can be divided into deficiency needs and growth needs. The first four levels are often refered to as deficiency needs, and the top level is known as growth or being needs.

 

[AnOminous]

Lolcows are notable for having their Maslow's hierarchy completely ass backwards, where asspats are more important than food and shelter. See, e.g., Potato Phil.

 

[Slippery Bogle]

Inspired by Buffalo Bill and his cringe humor, why don't we go ahead and bring in some Maslow?

View attachment 246771

https://m.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

Well, my thoughts on this are not very charitable. I think most of the autogynophilic toons who seems to be the ones to act out have a truncated Maslow pyramid. They just have the two first layers in mind. Its pretty weak in the belongingness and intimacy because I dont think they relate to others as people, only as providers of things they need or want. Which would fit as well with being narcissists. I think that's why they don't get at all the idea of boundaries. Most normal folks understand that heteros are repulsed by the idea of intercourse with the same sex and its the opposite for gays. That's is pretty much a non-negotiable for most people and everybody gets along if nobody try to groom, shame or manipulate you into something that disgusts you. Its pretty much a universal human understanding among decent people of pretty much any religions or political views. But what the toons internet brigades do? Respect people? Of course not. Lesbians tell them no, we dont want your dicks. What toons do? Massive lesbians shaming campaigns.

There was a time where pervs of all shapes and colors understood that their special tastes were things that repulse most others people and you had to be at least private and polite about it and not plaster them everywhere on the net to convince others to like it. You kept the sex and pervy books in the special cabinet as to not be found by your visiting 12 years old nephews and nieces. Because that is what decent people do when they have considerations for others. Now every self-absorbed, self-promoting snowflakes think he is so edgy by grossing out the populace and try to have you validate the flavor of the month perversion. Oldschool gays and lesbians fought for the right to a private life, not to shovel down your throat their lifestyle. And critically, you did not target kids and teens at the time they figure on their own their sexuality. Sex education was about risks prevention for STDs and pregnancy not on how to dilate your anus, because anal sex is one of the most risky thing you can do in term of disease transmission. That's a pretty long rant just to say the vocal toons are mostly a sick bunch of narcissists who give no shit to what not morally impaired folks believe which is DO NO HARM.

Mayo clinic definition of narcissistic disorder: ``Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism.``

 

[AnOminous]

Most normal folks understand that heteros are repulsed by the idea of intercourse with the same sex and its the opposite for gays. That's is pretty much a non-negotiable for most people and everybody gets along if nobody try to groom, shame or manipulate you into something that disgusts you. Its pretty much a universal human understanding among decent people of pretty much any religions or political views. But what the toons internet brigades do? Respect people? Of course not. Lesbians tell them no, we dont want your dicks. What toons do? Massive lesbians shaming campaigns.

I haven't seen it again, but I read in some pop sci magazine fairly recently that sexual attraction actually partly disables the region of the brain that ordinarily causes disgust. Disgust at things like contacting the bodily fluids or blood or waste or potentially infectious organic material of any kind is a natural self-protection mechanism. However, sex involves contact with all this kind of stuff, so there has to be a mechanism to turn off disgust to make it palatable.

So people are generally disgusted by sex, but not when it's something they're actually attracted to, like their own preferred gender or fetishes or whatever.

At some point in human growth, people's sexual preferences become more or less fixed, so yelling at them for having them is stupid, which is why stupid people like troons are the kind of people who constantly shame people for being normal, while at the same time flaunting the most disgusting, creepy practices imaginable.

 

[Jan_Hus]

Maslows is why we have things like free breakfast for all students and free/reduced lunch for those who need it. It's literally impossible to do anything without basic needs being fulfilled.

 

[WeaponsGradeAutism]

Maslows is why we have things like free breakfast for all students and free/reduced lunch for those who need it. It's literally impossible to do anything without basic needs being fulfilled.

It's basically a Human Need Hierarchy. No food, no energy. No energy, no production. Inability to work/produce, inability to socialize/procreate normally.

Somewhere in this chain, the Rat King Squad is neglecting the basic steps. For example, Spud can't even feed himself properly, but HAS to get a poorly done tattoo. The question is now... What makes a Rat King member different than a transgender person who does succeed in life.

Sometimes, it could be as simple as someone needing to reconnect their needs.

 

[Slippery Bogle]

The question is now... What makes a Rat King member different than a transgender person who does succeed in life.

Sometimes, it could be as simple as someone needing to reconnect their needs.

To see a pattern, comparison groups are needed. First I think autogynophiles and homosexual transgenders have to be treated separately because they really are different (anyway if we assume Blanchard typology works). By the way, Michael Bailey books The Man Who Would Be Queen is available for free in pdf. Then high profile trans like say the Wachowski, Julia Serano, Lynn Conway, Anne Lawrence, Bruce Jenner can be compared to Rat Kings. My first guess would be that the saving grace of some of these guys are work ethics and highly marketable skills (lots of trans in IT). Even if you are not the nicest person on the planet, if you got good impulse control and can afford a comfortable life, you have lot more opportunity to retain a partner which will bring a stabilizing influence in your life. If you got no talent and no work discipline, you are out of luck.

 

[Scratch This Nut]

I don't know as much about this as I really should but this is a very good thread. Thing is that some ot the people cited here fall into the camp of treating the crazies like Phil and Stefonknee as normal examples of trans people and treating them all as invalid. Calling those people out and questioning if they're legitimate or not doesn't make you a bigot. I said it before, but I feel really bad for actual transgender people because nobody seems to know what that means anymore.

 

[Wallace]

To see a pattern, comparison groups are needed. First I think autogynophiles and homosexual transgenders have to be treated separately because they really are different (anyway if we assume Blanchard typology works). By the way, Michael Bailey books The Man Who Would Be Queen is available for free in pdf. Then high profile trans like say the Wachowski, Julia Serano, Lynn Conway, Anne Lawrence, Bruce Jenner can be compared to Rat Kings. My first guess would be that the saving grace of some of these guys are work ethics and highly marketable skills (lots of trans in IT). Even if you are not the nicest person on the planet, if you got good impulse control and can afford a comfortable life, you have lot more opportunity to retain a partner which will bring a stabilizing influence in your life. If you got no talent and no work discipline, you are out of luck.

Narcissism and impulse control are not things you see together often, especially when you add estrogen to the mix. Comparing a Rat King member to a normal transgender person, the former has a lot of other personality problems acting against them, along with an environment that exacerbates them. Any dysphoia is far more likely a symptom rather than a cause.

 

[Slippery Bogle]

I am not sure if it was said earlier, Lynn Conway had the most hands in getting Kenneth Zucker sacked . From her page:

``[*Note: Zucker's carefully-built facade as a 'scientific authority' was deconstructed in 2011-12 by the Ph.D. research of Y. Gavriel ('Gavi') Ansara and his faculty advisor Peter Hegarty in their quantitative empirical study "Cisgenderism in psychology: pathologising and misgendering children from 1999 to 2008", published in the journal Psychology & Sexuality. Ansara and Hegarty's investigation documented that authors from mental health professions were significantly more trans-pathologising than authors from other professions, and identified Zucker as the leader of an 'invisible college' of group-think researchers who collectively-exploited such pathologising language to impose their discriminatory gender ideology on scientific thought about children's genders. In 2012, Ansara won the American Psychological Association's Transgender Research Award for this research.]``

That sounds pretty bad, right?

The Ansara and Hegarty's paper is not behind a paywall and can be find here. It would be really nice if somebody else than me would have a crack at it. The abstract:

Spoiler: abstract

So they did a literature review, put the papers in some sort of ``words blender`` and came to the conclusion that Zucker and authors with similar views were using more clinical vocabulary (which they would because they are practicing clinical psychologists) than others people. They call the clinical vocabulary ``pathologising``. All the evidences they had against Zucker is that he used words to write about his patients that the trannies don't like. There were no clinical studies, absolutely no hard data to prove Dr. Zucker treatments were harmful or that he is a bad person. The allegations against Zucker have been proven false.


For people so concerned about the prejudice of words, they used the expression ''invisible college'', almost like some sort of ''Mwahahahah'' evil cabal. This is disingenuous. There is no big secret, nothing nefarious. In very specialized fields, there are always networks of specialists more or less connected who collaborate and exchange a lot. That's how it works. And just by the number of published papers and years of experience, Zucker and associates would weight a lot.

Contrarily to Zucker, who was known to spent 6 days a week at the gender clinic, Ansara is not a practicing clinical psychologist. From his bio, he sounds like an activist with a Ph.D. His adviser Peter Hegarty, does not appear either to be a clinical psychologist but is more or less strictly an academic ``social psychologist``. I may be wrong...but these dudes have never spent one minute in a mental health clinic dealing with suffering people and trying to help them. That`s the big scientific guns who were behind the ``exposure`` of Ken Zucker.

 

[Wallace]

That paper consists of doing a literature search of references to transgender, dysphoria, etc. and seeing how often non-cisgender is presented as "pathology", i.e. a sickness or deviant. Since this happened so often in the ten year span before the American Psychiatric Association issued its statement on discrimination in transpeople by psychologists, the last ten years of research are hereby deemed problematic and invalid.

TL;DR: Waaaaaaahh!!

To claim that this is PhD level research is laughable, I could write a much better paper in a week. Just search PubMed for dysphoria or transgender, pull a hundred or so papers, then search for whatever is offense this week.

 

[AnOminous]

I may be wrong...but these dudes have never spent one minute in a mental health clinic dealing with suffering people and trying to help them. That`s the big scientific guns who were behind the ``exposure`` of Ken Zucker.

So pretty much two complete nobodies REEEEEEEing at it.

 

[WeaponsGradeAutism]

So pretty much two complete nobodies REEEEEEEing at it.

REEEEEEE with a PhD slapped on the end. And you wonder why I rebel, lol.

 

[multiverse]

"reflects or contrasts with the zeitgeist of American Psychological Association’s recent non-discrimination statement on ‘transgender’ and ‘gender variant’ individuals"

-> do the clinical words used by doctors violate the GHOST OF FEELINGS? This is what this PhD paper is on.

"Articles by members of an ‘invisible college'"

-> deep state did tranny 9/11

The paper starts off by cherry picking from the APA's resolution on Transgender issues and extrapolating from them, but here's the whole resolution so we can see what we're working with.

I picked out the ones most likely to be used by troons in future (and perhaps they'll get to them later in the paper, I'm live-blogging my read thru)

"Appropriately identified" means adult patients have been observed to suffer from persistent gender dysphoria and nothing short of surgical intervention will assuage their anxiety. And personally I'm o the fence that this particular delusion should be catered to. We don't approve amputations for apotemnophiliacs. In fact, out of the list of paraphilia, there's only 2 which now have medical backing: Autoandrophilia and Autogynephilia.

Back to the paper:

"Parlee [1996] found that psychologists failed to identify participants’ genders on participants’ own terms, remaining limited to theories and terms that view external classifications as more authoritative than self-designations"​

Parlee found that patients weren't allowed to drive the treatment process, and that psychologists trusted their training rather than taking their patients' words as gospel. The DSM wasn't instantly re-written by transwomen. Clutch your pearls, y'all.

"More recently, other authors have addressed erasure (Namaste, 2000), maligning language (Winters, 200 and pathologising (Namaste, 2000; Serano, 2007; Winters, 200 of participants’ genders. Namaste’s (2000) social critique was informed by qualitative interviews she conducted for community outreach projects; her text provides detailed narratives that were absent from official agency reports. Serano (2007) also critiqued cissexism, traditionalsexism, oppositionalsexism, effemimania and ungendering in psychomedical literature on ‘trans and gender variant’ individuals. Both authors echoed Parlee’s (1996) view that psychological literature omits people’s experiences ‘as they are lived and socially organised’ (Namaste, 2000, p. 65)"​

There are a lot of studies on how therapists' notes hurt trans feelings. They feel medical notes don't tell the "lived trans experience" - but they're medical notes, not a biography. This is like saying that the medical literature on the high rate of heart disease and diabetes among African Americans is racist because it doesn't allow for the "lived black experience" of trans fat filled cooking.

"Some authors have critiqued psychological research for similar problems, including the failure to respect children’s own gender designations(e.g., Winters, 200. The recognition of children’s own genders is essential both to APA’s desired leadership role in ending discrimination (APA, 200 and to APA’s stated goal of ‘objectivity in scientific reporting’ 1 through ‘reducing bias in language’ (APA, n.d.)"​

Unless children are allowed to completely drive their psychological treatment paradigm, the APA violates their goal of "reducing bias via language". Removing biased language is very different than demanding a diagnosis you want, and calling someone a bigot if the diagnosis you desire isn't granted.

"Between 1980 and the present, various psychological approaches have been proposed to ‘treat’ children classified as having a ‘GIDC’ (Bryant, 2006). Currently, Zucker and Bradley’s (1995) version of this model is the most widely used approach to these children in psychology. This approach involves behavioural modification techniques and aversive conditioning to ‘fix’ genders that do not match children and adolescents’ external gender assignments (Spiegel, 2008; Zucker & Bradley, 1995)..."​

A bunch of lines are cut out to make the therapy appear to be about punishing and torturing a small child. And these excerpts are NOT Zucker's - they're quoting a different paper from 2008, which describes Zucker's work brutally. It took me a couple read-throughs to figure out these weren't from the 1996 paper at all. They're doing their utmost to position Zucker's work as "reparative therapy", and have changed all the pronouns. They do not say whether the child desisted in their gender identity as female, nor do they describe other issue the child may have had. Autism and OCD are often co-morbid with gender identity issues; when your kid gets into obsessive patterns, it IS best to force them to branch out, lest they set rigid, lifetime rules for themselves as children that they can never break as the get older. You don't let your kid with OCD wash their hands as many times as they want, because they'll hurt themselves.

- will finish reading later -

 

[Slippery Bogle]

And personally I'm o the fence that this particular delusion should be catered to. We don't approve amputations for apotemnophiliacs. ....

Autism and OCD are often co-morbid with gender identity issues; when your kid gets into obsessive patterns, it IS best to force them to branch out, lest they set rigid, lifetime rules for themselves as children that they can never break as the get older. You don't let your kid with OCD wash their hands as many times as they want, because they'll hurt themselves.

I think this is at the heart of the debate. It assumes that it is better to feed people delusions rather than confronting them to reality and helping them coping with it. This will not end well. And this will cut treatment options for parents to help the kid adjust socially. The best this will accomplish is that the 'freaky trans kid' will be politely ostracized instead of receiving negative feedback which would have help him to adjust his behavior and be accepted in the long run. The worst will be huge buyer remorses once the negative effects of hormone treatment and surgery starts kicking in.

 

[multiverse]

I found the Spegiel article on the child Bradley's development - it's not even a published paper, it's a fucking NPR article they quoted in a doctoral "research" paper.

Part of the issue with the kid was that Bradley couldn't picture what masculinity even is; this is the kind of issue Dr. Zucker would try to get at the root of:

Verses a different kid on Oakland, whose therapist instantly told his parents there's not a damn thing wrong:

Well you don't "cure" a kid of being different or gay. Dr. Ehrensaft. But you don't discourage therapy for a 3 year old who obsessively fusses with a t-shirt in secret for months and becomes hysterical over it. That's an unhealthy obsession. That's something that needs to be unwound.

Of course the Oakland doctor convinced the parents to let little "Jona" live fully as a girl. What Dr. Zucker did was break kids out of their obsessive patterns; confirm that there's no such thing as biologically being born in the wrong body; and point out that lifelong hormones treatments and surgeries are serious shit that kids cannot understand the scope of.

 

[AnOminous]

REEEEEEE REEEEEEE don't abuse them by putting them in therapy! Just chop their cocks off and permanently mutilate them instead!

 

[Frank_Jaeger]

Um sorry sweeties but the scientific consensus supports sex being a spectrum and not a rigid binary system and has for decades now. Actual biologist know science is weird and there's more to it than what you learned in 6th grade. You may think you got chromosomes and genitals all figured out but the truth is you know nothing Jon Snow and need to educate yourselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...ature-sex-redefined-we-have-never-been-binary

 

[Scratch This Nut]

Um sorry sweeties but the scientific consensus supports sex being a spectrum and not a rigid binary system and has for decades now. Actual biologist know science is weird and there's more to it than what you learned in 6th grade. You may think you got chromosomes and genitals all figured out but the truth is you know nothing Jon Snow and need to educate yourselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...ature-sex-redefined-we-have-never-been-binary

Okay, lose the attitude and show us some actual scientific papers that have nothing to do with the guardian.

REEEEEEE REEEEEEE don't abuse them by putting them in therapy! Just chop their cocks off and permanently mutilate them instead!

Pretty sure no doctor worth their salt would suggest that be the first act. It's mostly dumb parents. Doesn't "transitioning" for a kid just mean a haircut and some new clothes?

 

[Frank_Jaeger]

Okay, lose the attitude and show us some actual scientific papers that have nothing to do with the guardian.


Pretty sure no doctor with their salt would suggest that be the first act. It's mostly dumb parents. Doesn't "transitioning" for a kid just mean a haircut and some new clothes?

https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

Nature is a highly respected publication, you know, and includes the citations in the article. Have fun!