I have followed your work for a while and I literally agree with you on every single point you make. I think your analysis of the phenomenon of “trans” is spot-on, and I cannot wait to buy your book when it comes out!
Along with George Sand and George Elliot, Gertrude Stein stepped out of the narrow confines of a cultural identity for women with thousands of other women who took on a superficial male identity to present their writing or art to the public. Thinking of how children react to being presented with the transgender fable young kids also, on their own, have no trouble making up completely fictional characters and identities. Many have invisible friends who they regularly hold conversations with and who they consider close friends and confidantes, so it's no stretch for some children to easily accept the idea of fictional characters inside themselves. They are easy targets for the transgender propaganda. This bogus idea has already had it's day in the Seventies and Eighties in the form of the "multiple personality" fad, which was sometimes used by men like "The Hillside Strangler, " Thomas Huskey and Billy Harris to evade responsibility for their crimes. Many psychologists and psychiatrists wholly endorsed this fraudulent fantasy. Along comes the transgender sex fetish so much more destructive than previous psychological fads as it delegitimatizes women's integrity as a sex and destroys the lives of children who are ensnared in trans ideology. For years or decades, the stage has been set for the introduction of "transwomen" by grotesque drag impersonations of women as dehumanized "breeders, bleeders and b*tches." Portrayed as harmless, fun stereotypes drag queens slid into the cultural landscape on vehicles like Ru Paul's Drag Races and in smoke filled clubs catering to gay men as strip clubs catered to straight men.
Yes, Gertrude Stein as well! Great example. It's challenging that so many leftists can't see the similarities of things like multiple personality and satanic panic. The idea is introduced and then used as an explanation of disparate symptoms.
I love “sex rejection”! And “sex denial(ism)”! But I think “opposite sex ideation” or “cross sex ideation” is better than “trans ideation”, because then we can completely avoid paying lip service to “trans”, at all! Although of course it doesn’t work with people who claim that they are “non-binary”, or something else, though. And I understand what you mean by “trans ideation”, in the sense of them falling deeply, madly in love with the idea of themselves as being this invented thing called “trans”! It’s a bit tricky, because ideally, I think the less we use, and validate, words like “trans”, and “gender”, the better! But every now and then, you have to describe what these people believe in, from the outside. Oh well… I just try to put stuff in QUOTES, and replace “gender” with “sex”, as much as possible. Oh.. and I fucking despise “gender distress”, as the proposed new “GC acceptable” replacement for “gender dypshoria / incongruence”, so bleeping much. Exactly because of this!! It is lazy, it is sloppy, it further buys into and pushes for the mainstream narrative, and it is COMPLETELY goddamn unnecessary, and easily avoidable!! The less we give these people, the better. Hence my language suggestions. And I am also fully aware that, occasionally, I may also accidentally use language that is not fully optimal, when there are in fact better possible words and phrases to use instead!! I think we should all keep learning from each other, and suggesting new terms to each other, in order to help each other sharpen our collective vocabulary. At least us hardliners, who recognize this as being ultimately a fight against linguistic reframing / manipulation, that has actively put the scales of unreality over people’s eyes, that is!!
And yeah… Anyone who still unironically talks about “gender dysphoria” truly does not get it yet. But then again, neither did I, for the longest time. Hope such people will keep reading and thinking. 🙂
Is there a book coming out? I loved this but I want more, and mainly more on the idea of trans children. How the idea of trans children was created and pushed by adults to justify their own choices, I think it's the most important topic in this debate.
I really appreciate the thought that you put in to keeping things clear. No fluff. No obfuscation. No intention of just nodding along to ‘settled science’ that lives in the fantastical rather than reality.
Also the idea of ‘you tell me what you think I believe and then I’ll tell you if you’re correct’ is beneficial to the debate, when we can actually get the activist to engage, which is nigh on impossible. Engaging threatens their worldview. Whodda thunk!!??
You’re doing great work and I’ll be looking for your book when that hits. Thanks, Amy.
The issue of the "label which serves as an organizing principle" is very important. I have been trying to understand that for some time. Some men "have sex with men" while other men are "homosexual". When you are "homosexual", it changes your approach to many things.
Once a person adopts a label, it is very hard to change. It is only changed from the inside. So, if your child says "I am really the other sex", under no circumstances should you affirm or agree with this statement. You should push back and delay the self-identification as long as possible. Any doubt will delay the self-labeling.
Let be known that Amy Sousa puts no effort into providing any consideration or valid refutation of existing historical concepts such as “tritiya prakriti” or “two-spirit” individuals. Her idea of embodiment tosses the realities of neuroanatomy, its link to mental wellbeing, and neurobiological findings that haven’t been debunked even if they haven’t been replicated (the political imposition that defunds any possible grants which would allow further research prevents this from happening, even if the anti-trans cult cries that the research is inherently political).
Her nonsensical analogies might be useful for those unfamiliar with the subject at hand— being gender identity. But some people can read between the lines and see that she’s failing to respond appropriately to everything that’s been suggested to her.
Amy Sousa really just doesn’t get it. It’s pathetic that some people might think so.
Might I add, for this idea of embodiment to gain traction, it would be critical for people to forget everything we currently know about the Universe at large, which could never happen.
A comment rich in irony. I’d put more effort into responding, maybe, if I hadn’t interacted with another user that had a username with a similar structure as yours only to find out it was a bot/troll. Ha. I wasn’t used to the bots/trolls of Substack, but I’m glad to be familiar with them now.
Also: coming into Amy's thread and talking ABOUT her, not TO her.
Already this dude is showing himself unworthy of consideration, from the sheer rudeness of that misogyny. He doesn't respect her enough to actually *address* her.
Who are “trans people”? You mean transvestites? You mean autogynephiles? You mean people who are mentally disturbed and deluded into thinking they’re the opposite sex? You mean vulnerable children who are being preyed upon by a cult?
What’s funny is that if you bothered to research the community itself, you’d understand the persistence of gender dysphoria. Those tired accusations against the community doesn’t account for every trans person. Repeating bvllshit doesn’t make it true.
Then get psychological help. If you have "gender dysphoria" -- itself a bogus condition -- but if you think you have it, then get help. Quit trying to force your beliefs on everyone else and insisting on turning society upside-down.
There is no "historical concept" of the "two-spirit" nonsense. There are no written records of Indians from before about 1800. This is just another fable put out by the gender woosters.
Bravo! This is such a coherent piece of writing that summarizes so much of what is going on right now.
I have followed your work for a while and I literally agree with you on every single point you make. I think your analysis of the phenomenon of “trans” is spot-on, and I cannot wait to buy your book when it comes out!
Thank you!!!
Along with George Sand and George Elliot, Gertrude Stein stepped out of the narrow confines of a cultural identity for women with thousands of other women who took on a superficial male identity to present their writing or art to the public. Thinking of how children react to being presented with the transgender fable young kids also, on their own, have no trouble making up completely fictional characters and identities. Many have invisible friends who they regularly hold conversations with and who they consider close friends and confidantes, so it's no stretch for some children to easily accept the idea of fictional characters inside themselves. They are easy targets for the transgender propaganda. This bogus idea has already had it's day in the Seventies and Eighties in the form of the "multiple personality" fad, which was sometimes used by men like "The Hillside Strangler, " Thomas Huskey and Billy Harris to evade responsibility for their crimes. Many psychologists and psychiatrists wholly endorsed this fraudulent fantasy. Along comes the transgender sex fetish so much more destructive than previous psychological fads as it delegitimatizes women's integrity as a sex and destroys the lives of children who are ensnared in trans ideology. For years or decades, the stage has been set for the introduction of "transwomen" by grotesque drag impersonations of women as dehumanized "breeders, bleeders and b*tches." Portrayed as harmless, fun stereotypes drag queens slid into the cultural landscape on vehicles like Ru Paul's Drag Races and in smoke filled clubs catering to gay men as strip clubs catered to straight men.
Yes, Gertrude Stein as well! Great example. It's challenging that so many leftists can't see the similarities of things like multiple personality and satanic panic. The idea is introduced and then used as an explanation of disparate symptoms.
I love “sex rejection”! And “sex denial(ism)”! But I think “opposite sex ideation” or “cross sex ideation” is better than “trans ideation”, because then we can completely avoid paying lip service to “trans”, at all! Although of course it doesn’t work with people who claim that they are “non-binary”, or something else, though. And I understand what you mean by “trans ideation”, in the sense of them falling deeply, madly in love with the idea of themselves as being this invented thing called “trans”! It’s a bit tricky, because ideally, I think the less we use, and validate, words like “trans”, and “gender”, the better! But every now and then, you have to describe what these people believe in, from the outside. Oh well… I just try to put stuff in QUOTES, and replace “gender” with “sex”, as much as possible. Oh.. and I fucking despise “gender distress”, as the proposed new “GC acceptable” replacement for “gender dypshoria / incongruence”, so bleeping much. Exactly because of this!! It is lazy, it is sloppy, it further buys into and pushes for the mainstream narrative, and it is COMPLETELY goddamn unnecessary, and easily avoidable!! The less we give these people, the better. Hence my language suggestions. And I am also fully aware that, occasionally, I may also accidentally use language that is not fully optimal, when there are in fact better possible words and phrases to use instead!! I think we should all keep learning from each other, and suggesting new terms to each other, in order to help each other sharpen our collective vocabulary. At least us hardliners, who recognize this as being ultimately a fight against linguistic reframing / manipulation, that has actively put the scales of unreality over people’s eyes, that is!!
And yeah… Anyone who still unironically talks about “gender dysphoria” truly does not get it yet. But then again, neither did I, for the longest time. Hope such people will keep reading and thinking. 🙂
Ok. Yes. I agree. Opposite sex ideation from now on.
1000% This is the clearest, best laid-out and most logical breakdown of this situation I have ever seen. I will be sharing widely. Thank you!
I appreciate the shares! Thank you!
Is there a book coming out? I loved this but I want more, and mainly more on the idea of trans children. How the idea of trans children was created and pushed by adults to justify their own choices, I think it's the most important topic in this debate.
Yes, trying to finish by end of this year! I need cheerleaders. It’s been challenging.
GOOOOOOOOOoooooooOoooOOOO AMY!!!!!!!!!
I really appreciate the thought that you put in to keeping things clear. No fluff. No obfuscation. No intention of just nodding along to ‘settled science’ that lives in the fantastical rather than reality.
Also the idea of ‘you tell me what you think I believe and then I’ll tell you if you’re correct’ is beneficial to the debate, when we can actually get the activist to engage, which is nigh on impossible. Engaging threatens their worldview. Whodda thunk!!??
You’re doing great work and I’ll be looking for your book when that hits. Thanks, Amy.
Thank you, working on it, hopefully by end of this year!
How can I reach you for an interview for a national media outlet? russ@russjones.me?
aesousa@gmail.com is the best place to reach me.
The issue of the "label which serves as an organizing principle" is very important. I have been trying to understand that for some time. Some men "have sex with men" while other men are "homosexual". When you are "homosexual", it changes your approach to many things.
Once a person adopts a label, it is very hard to change. It is only changed from the inside. So, if your child says "I am really the other sex", under no circumstances should you affirm or agree with this statement. You should push back and delay the self-identification as long as possible. Any doubt will delay the self-labeling.
I always felt that "trans people" are kinda like those famous actors who play the character of "themselves" in commercials.
Let be known that Amy Sousa puts no effort into providing any consideration or valid refutation of existing historical concepts such as “tritiya prakriti” or “two-spirit” individuals. Her idea of embodiment tosses the realities of neuroanatomy, its link to mental wellbeing, and neurobiological findings that haven’t been debunked even if they haven’t been replicated (the political imposition that defunds any possible grants which would allow further research prevents this from happening, even if the anti-trans cult cries that the research is inherently political).
Her nonsensical analogies might be useful for those unfamiliar with the subject at hand— being gender identity. But some people can read between the lines and see that she’s failing to respond appropriately to everything that’s been suggested to her.
Amy Sousa really just doesn’t get it. It’s pathetic that some people might think so.
Might I add, for this idea of embodiment to gain traction, it would be critical for people to forget everything we currently know about the Universe at large, which could never happen.
Do you have any actual arguments?
Trans lunatics do not make arguments. They simply bully. This worked until about 4 years ago. Now it does not work.
A comment rich in irony. I’d put more effort into responding, maybe, if I hadn’t interacted with another user that had a username with a similar structure as yours only to find out it was a bot/troll. Ha. I wasn’t used to the bots/trolls of Substack, but I’m glad to be familiar with them now.
Still waiting for actual arguments.
You yourself had the opportunity to enlighten the class and squandered it. 😉
So you don't have any, got it.
Not sure what you mean. Lots of content you could’ve responded to but failed to do so. Your comments from that point on remain asinine accordingly.
Quote: “to forget everything we currently know about the Universe at large, which could never happen.”
WTF does that even mean??
Also: coming into Amy's thread and talking ABOUT her, not TO her.
Already this dude is showing himself unworthy of consideration, from the sheer rudeness of that misogyny. He doesn't respect her enough to actually *address* her.
What do you think you’re viewing when you watch Amy talk her bvllshit? You think she’s talking to trans people and seeking further understanding?
"further understanding" - the trans lunatics understand nothing. They are possessed by a psychotic delusion.
Who are “trans people”? You mean transvestites? You mean autogynephiles? You mean people who are mentally disturbed and deluded into thinking they’re the opposite sex? You mean vulnerable children who are being preyed upon by a cult?
What’s funny is that if you bothered to research the community itself, you’d understand the persistence of gender dysphoria. Those tired accusations against the community doesn’t account for every trans person. Repeating bvllshit doesn’t make it true.
Then get psychological help. If you have "gender dysphoria" -- itself a bogus condition -- but if you think you have it, then get help. Quit trying to force your beliefs on everyone else and insisting on turning society upside-down.
Speaking of an "idea of embodiment" as though every single human being is some nebulous spirit just bumping about in the ether 😂
Does everyone else decide what you wear and eat and when you can go to the bathroom? It sounds like it.
Nope.
And what does that have to do with anything?
And you’re answering for Jo. You’ve really lost your mind.
And you’re brilliant, Adan!
There is no "historical concept" of the "two-spirit" nonsense. There are no written records of Indians from before about 1800. This is just another fable put out by the gender woosters.