This thread is grossly unfair to Jesse Singal. Before Singal came along, was anyone else critiquing youth gender medicine in major mainstream publications whose readership was fully captured by the gender identity hoax? If Singal has changed his views and is now more critical of the trans establishment, that's a sign of intellectual integrity.
This thread is grossly unfair to Jesse Singal. Before Singal came along, was anyone else critiquing youth gender medicine in major mainstream publications whose readership was fully captured by the gender identity hoax? If Singal has changed his views and is now more critical of the trans establishment, that's a sign of intellectual integrity.
Critiques by feminist women were absolutely shut out of mainstream publications, that’s true. Part of Jesse’s entre into those publications came via stragetically placed kicks in the teeth of feminist critics to signal that he was acceptable, not a “bigot” like those awful women. He and Katie continually offer up those kicks pretty freely on BARpod and not even strategically: just for laffs.
If your view of this media landscape is that it all makes Jesse Singal a hero, well, okay. I’m not stopping you from tying his scarf to your jousting lance. I just have watched it all unfold and felt otherwise.
Two things - first, on Jesse Singal, if he was wrong before, there is nothing wrong with pointing that out. I can understand the frustration of those who have been arguing against these things for many years and felt undermined. However, I have tremendous respect for someone who is willing to admit they were wrong and have since changed their position. Thus, if he openly admits that he was wrong, I think that’s great!
Second. On this article, UB has made so many good points but I will discuss just one, the burden of proof. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” The claim that someone was born with -or acquired at a young age - a condition whereby they must chemically and surgically alter their body to appear the opposite sex in ways that will have serious, irreversible effects from sterilization to sexual dysfunction to the need to rely on synthetic hormones for life, not to mention all the likely health impacts such as likelihood of incontinence and bowel issues, increased chance of stroke, heart attack, cancer, etc., in order to ever have a reasonably happy or peaceful existence is EXTRAORDINARY. It requires extraordinary proof and, to date, there is none.
When the entire premise of the need for treatment is based on an unfalsifiable claim, how do we even prove it? I think the best we can do is to limit these “treatments” to adults who can understand the risks AND not lie to those adults that this is medically necessary. We have no way of knowing that these interventions are medically necessary. We should not cover these “treatments” with health insurance either. Rather, like any cosmetic treatments, people who can afford them and think they may benefit and understand all the risks and lack of proof of benefit, are free to do what they want on their own dime.
Examples? This is the first I've heard that Jesse got into The Atlantic and other similar publications through "stragetically placed kicks in the teeth of feminist critics to signal that he was acceptable, not a 'bigot' like those awful women."
He has done it repeatedly: talked about gender affirming care OF COURSE being necessary and life saving for some kids and only meanie weanies think otherwise; OF COURSE preferred pronouns are just decent and only meanie weanies think otherwise; OF COURSE adults should be given access to this medically necessary care and it’s nobody’s business and only meanie weanies think otherwise.
Who has been in the opposite corner of all of those positions since the late 70s? It’s been a central part of Jesse Singal’s self-positioning that’s he not a bigoted anti-trans extremist like the bad prudey old radfems. Have you only become aware of him recently?
I've been following Singal for quite a while now. I'm familiar with the criticism he receives from Team Trans. Until I read the comments here, though, I wasn't aware he had critics on the other side. That's why I'm inquiring about it. I wish I'd known about this a few weeks ago when Blocked and Reported had an "ask us anything" edition of their Substack. I'm interested in how he'd respond.
I wouldn't say he has organized "critics". It's not like radfems are writing publications demanding he never be published again, TRA style. I want to be clear about that because so often the framing is "oh yes, all the crazies hate me, that just shows you what a reasonable soul I am". There is absolutely no equivalence, no radfems are organizing posses to get him (or ever have done so).
I am saying I and other women have noticed that he used criticizing feminist women as a shield for himself: "I am criticizing trans stuff, yes, but not like the Bad Mean Women of Terflandia". And then as it gets safer to say more critical stuff he's just sort of edged his way along into the terrain they were on the whole time, without EVER crediting them or saying "oh actually, they were right all along and it was sort of shitty of me to cast so many aspersions on them in order to clear a little pathway of respectability for myself."
None of us are organizing flying monkey brigades about this. We just see it and give it a blue-pencilly look.
This thread is grossly unfair to Jesse Singal. Before Singal came along, was anyone else critiquing youth gender medicine in major mainstream publications whose readership was fully captured by the gender identity hoax? If Singal has changed his views and is now more critical of the trans establishment, that's a sign of intellectual integrity.
Critiques by feminist women were absolutely shut out of mainstream publications, that’s true. Part of Jesse’s entre into those publications came via stragetically placed kicks in the teeth of feminist critics to signal that he was acceptable, not a “bigot” like those awful women. He and Katie continually offer up those kicks pretty freely on BARpod and not even strategically: just for laffs.
If your view of this media landscape is that it all makes Jesse Singal a hero, well, okay. I’m not stopping you from tying his scarf to your jousting lance. I just have watched it all unfold and felt otherwise.
Two things - first, on Jesse Singal, if he was wrong before, there is nothing wrong with pointing that out. I can understand the frustration of those who have been arguing against these things for many years and felt undermined. However, I have tremendous respect for someone who is willing to admit they were wrong and have since changed their position. Thus, if he openly admits that he was wrong, I think that’s great!
Second. On this article, UB has made so many good points but I will discuss just one, the burden of proof. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” The claim that someone was born with -or acquired at a young age - a condition whereby they must chemically and surgically alter their body to appear the opposite sex in ways that will have serious, irreversible effects from sterilization to sexual dysfunction to the need to rely on synthetic hormones for life, not to mention all the likely health impacts such as likelihood of incontinence and bowel issues, increased chance of stroke, heart attack, cancer, etc., in order to ever have a reasonably happy or peaceful existence is EXTRAORDINARY. It requires extraordinary proof and, to date, there is none.
When the entire premise of the need for treatment is based on an unfalsifiable claim, how do we even prove it? I think the best we can do is to limit these “treatments” to adults who can understand the risks AND not lie to those adults that this is medically necessary. We have no way of knowing that these interventions are medically necessary. We should not cover these “treatments” with health insurance either. Rather, like any cosmetic treatments, people who can afford them and think they may benefit and understand all the risks and lack of proof of benefit, are free to do what they want on their own dime.
Examples? This is the first I've heard that Jesse got into The Atlantic and other similar publications through "stragetically placed kicks in the teeth of feminist critics to signal that he was acceptable, not a 'bigot' like those awful women."
Who are the women in question?
How did Jesse kick the in the teeth, so to speak?
He has done it repeatedly: talked about gender affirming care OF COURSE being necessary and life saving for some kids and only meanie weanies think otherwise; OF COURSE preferred pronouns are just decent and only meanie weanies think otherwise; OF COURSE adults should be given access to this medically necessary care and it’s nobody’s business and only meanie weanies think otherwise.
Who has been in the opposite corner of all of those positions since the late 70s? It’s been a central part of Jesse Singal’s self-positioning that’s he not a bigoted anti-trans extremist like the bad prudey old radfems. Have you only become aware of him recently?
I've been following Singal for quite a while now. I'm familiar with the criticism he receives from Team Trans. Until I read the comments here, though, I wasn't aware he had critics on the other side. That's why I'm inquiring about it. I wish I'd known about this a few weeks ago when Blocked and Reported had an "ask us anything" edition of their Substack. I'm interested in how he'd respond.
I wouldn't say he has organized "critics". It's not like radfems are writing publications demanding he never be published again, TRA style. I want to be clear about that because so often the framing is "oh yes, all the crazies hate me, that just shows you what a reasonable soul I am". There is absolutely no equivalence, no radfems are organizing posses to get him (or ever have done so).
I am saying I and other women have noticed that he used criticizing feminist women as a shield for himself: "I am criticizing trans stuff, yes, but not like the Bad Mean Women of Terflandia". And then as it gets safer to say more critical stuff he's just sort of edged his way along into the terrain they were on the whole time, without EVER crediting them or saying "oh actually, they were right all along and it was sort of shitty of me to cast so many aspersions on them in order to clear a little pathway of respectability for myself."
None of us are organizing flying monkey brigades about this. We just see it and give it a blue-pencilly look.