Homophobia Transphobia And Mens Behaviour Change Work: Fill & Download for Free

“Niche Transgender Ideology” is a newspaper headline.Pursuing Google down the rabbit hole, I haven’t found any indication that the term goes any deeper than that. It’s a very “niche” term! :D'Niche' transgender ideology 'corrosive' to society, says reportThe Telegraph UK - Camilla Tominey · June 30, 2020Study by Civitas think tank claims state has been too willing to “coalesce behind the demands of a tiny transgender community” Transgender ideology is leaving a “corrosive impact" on society, according to a new study calling for the scrapping of gender recognition reforms. …Okay, weird. “Corrosive” is rather melodramatic!As you’ll see below, “niche” more correctly describes the author of the study, rather than the transgender people she opposes. Transgender people are no longer “niche”, which is part of the whole point in having transgender rights.A “niche” is an uncomfortable place to live, if we’re not allowed out.This article is about trying to push transgender people back into a “niche”, and is the product of a reactionary branch of feminism, called “gender critical feminism”, which is allied to social conservative and Christian Right organisations.The “corrosive ideology” that the article complains about, is simply the existence of transgender people in public, whereas this “gender critical feminism” really is an ideology.IDEOLOGY | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionaryideology /ˌaɪ.diˈɒl.ə.dʒi/ nouna set of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party, or organization is basedTransgender people are not a “party” or “organization”. We’re not a “political system”; we’re not an “ideology”; we’re simply people, and we have all sorts of different beliefs.First step to understanding anything weird in the news, is to evaluate sources.The publisher of this headline, The Telegraph UK is known colloquially as “The Torygraph”. It’s the same right-wing conservative newspaper that brought us these beauties:Promoting pro-Kremlin articles supplied by a Russian state-funded publication, Rossiyskaya Gazeta, and a pro-Beijing China controlled supplement named (ironically) “China Watch”, both of which have attracted considerable criticism.“Traditional Chinese medicine ‘helps fight coronavirus”."conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth"."global warming causes about as much damage as benefits". o.OThe article author, Camilla Tominey:refers to trans women as “men”.writes regularly to defend transphobia as justified and harmless.wrote an Islamophobic article slandering Ahammed Hussain, accusing him of links to terrorism and antisemitism, for which the paper later printed an extensive apology and retraction, paying Hussain an undisclosed amount in damages.wrote an op-ed defending whiteness, claiming that there were not enough white women on Meghan Markle’s 15 ‘forces for change’ Vogue cover. She even started her article with the words, “May I make the following remarks without being accused of racism …”. O.OThese are not comprehensive lists. There is no way I’m going to pay for content from “The Torygraph”, and no, I’m not going to promote links to Camilla’s articles, so my apologies in advance that I haven’t referenced a few portions of this post.If you don’t want to go all the way down the rabbit hole, feel free to skip to my TL;DR below.The author of the “study” referenced by the article, Joanna Williams, has a professional background as an English lecturer and writer. She publicly endorses the political hate group LGB Alliance in glowing terms, a group which openly opposes Stonewall and Pink News, but has friendly links to Christian Right conservative organisations, including Center for Bioethics and Culture Network (CBC), the Heritage Foundation, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), North Carolina Family Policy Council, Novae Terrae, and ‘Public Discourse’ the journal of the Witherspoon Institute.Here’s how LGB Alliance describes themselves:►https://lgballiance.org.uk/“We believe that attempts to introduce confusion between biological sex and the notion of gender are harming LGB people.”►https://lgballiance.org.uk/about/"In our view, current gender ideologies are psuedo-scientific and present a threat to people whose sexual orientation is towards the same sex ...""To protect children and young people from being taught unscientific gender doctrines ... [and] promote respectful freedom of speech and informed dialog.""... parts of the left have shamefully abandoned any commitment to women's rights and the rights of people who define themselves in terms of same-sex sexual orientation."Referring to the experiences and needs of transgender people as “confusion” and “a threat” and “unscientific gender doctrines”, are very old conservative tricks. These closely resemble the tactics employed to endorse homophobia last century.These are not the opinions of the broader LGB population, let alone the LGBT population. These are the niche viewpoints of a small band of very noisy activists who are determined to attack transgender individuals and transgender rights. They created the LGB Alliance specifically because transphobia and working against transgender rights, was not welcomed by their peers in LGBT organisations.“The 'LGB Alliance' is a hate group. It was set up purely to agitate against the rights and dignity of trans people and to drive them from the LGBTQ movement.”— Owen Jones, Guardian columnist“The UK government is using LBG Alliance as cover for anti-trans laws …LGB Alliance is tiny, fringe, and as noted above, associated with right-wing hate groups that oppose LGBTQ rights in general. They do not represent LGBTQ people.”— James Finn, gay activist►https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/04/03/lgb-alliance-neo-nazi-homophobia-spinster-death-head-charity-commission/More than 17,000 people have signed a petition trying to stop the group gaining charity status on the grounds that it is a “transphobic hate group”.►https://www.change.org/p/charity-commission-stop-anti-trans-group-the-lgb-alliance-gaining-charity-status?use_react=falseStop LGB Alliance Gaining Charity Status32,145 have signed. Let’s get to 35,000!As a CIS lesbian I stand with the trans community as others do in the LGBTQ community.Please sign and share this petition.Weirdly, the LGB Alliance has come under fire for being homophobic and biphobic, as well as transphobic.Here’s Dr Williams’ published bio. She is not a scientist at all, and she doesn’t work in any field that seeks to understand or help transgender people. “Corrosive” is her word for describing the needs of transgender people, and does a great job of setting the tone for her piece.►https://joannawilliams.org/about/Dr Joanna Williams is Head of Education and Culture at Policy Exchange. She is an author, commentator and the associate editor of Spiked.Joanna began her career teaching English in secondary schools and Further Education. She started working as a lecturer in Higher Education and Academic Practice at the University of Kent in 2007. She was Director of Kent’s Centre for the Study of Higher Education until 2016.The referenced “study” by Joanna Williams is not a study at all, but an opinion piece dressed up as a literature review, using this paragraph as it’s foundational premise:“Whereas the gay rights movement was about demanding more freedom from the state for people to determine their sex lives unconstrained by the law, the transgender movement demands the opposite: it calls for recognition and protection from the state in the form of intervention to regulate the behaviour of those outside of the identity group.”Ahem, what is marriage equality, if not “recognition from the state”? What are discrimination protections for sexual orientation, if not “protection from the state”? Then you have legislation to prevent harassment and hate crimes in relation to sexual orientation, that too, is “protection from the state” for LGB people. Yes, protection from discrimination, harassment, and hate crimes, certainly are a “form of intervention to regulate the behaviour of those outside of the identity group.”Most LGB people, and indeed most LGBT people, prefer a different kind of message:“A world so hateful, some would rather die than be who they areAnd a certificate on paper Isn't gonna solve it all,But it's a damn good place to start”— Macklemore, Same LoveGovernment intervention has made it possible for LGB folks to thrive and survive, because these are the same interventions that straight cisgender people enjoy. Gay, trans, queer, or straight, we all need recognition from the state, and we all need protection from the state.In particular, Joanna Williams’ literature review seeks to deny transgender children the rights to change of name, change of pronouns, change of school uniform, access to safe bathrooms, access to medical care. She seeks to marginalise gender identity by making it illegal for teachers to talk about it alongside sexual orientation.“It is unusual … for a revolution to callfor fewer rights for people, not more.”― Cassandra ClareTL;DR: The LGB Alliance political group that is behind this article and “study”, is not here to represent either LGB or LGBT people; they are not here to help; they are here to loudly promote a niche, reactionary, conservative, and corrosive, transgender critical ideology.They are here to attack transgender children, because our children are vulnerable.►https://www.change.org/p/charity-commission-stop-anti-trans-group-the-lgb-alliance-gaining-charity-status?use_react=falseStop LGB Alliance Gaining Charity StatusPlease sign and share this petition.Hate carries a human cost.Naomi Lauren's answer to Were J.K. Rowling's comments transphobic?Naomi Lauren's answer to Can you debunk "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria" (ROGD)?Is “gender critical feminism” a new term for you?If so, I highly recommend this article by Judith Butler, a feminist with far stronger credentials than the author of that “study”.►https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times

No. This dumpster fire of a guideline is based on a disgusting ideology that aims towards social engineering instead of psychological support. This guideline can be summarised approximately in the terms “men would be so much better if they were women and Feminists”. How a psychological association can publish guidelines for clinical psychologists which are based on sociology instead of psychology is beyond me. Nor is it excusable that it explicitly states that psychologists have a duty to be activists. Big, very big no-no.The field of psychology should aim to elucidate the mental workings of humans, and in its applied form of clinical psychology how to psychologically support someone for them to improve on their life.While medical doctors have to swear the Hippocratic Oath to not do harm (which can become a problem with modern medicine due to physiological constraints), psychologists are not beheld to that standard. A standard which would be grossly violated once political ideologies are inserted into the treatment as it requires mentally pressing the patients into a particular predefined shape. Which is conditioning, not psychological support. However, the APA itself has a guideline for ethical conduct, might be interesting to have a look at that.https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/With their own words, these principles are merely vague guidelines, not standards, “to guide and inspire psychologists toward the very highest ethical ideals”. As they “do not represent obligations and should not form the basis for imposing sanctions”, they are pretty much meaningless. We can look at some of them nonetheless and how they just violated their own ethical principles.Principle A: Beneficence and NonmaleficenceThe summary of the first principle is practically the patient-related part of the Hippocratic oath. Interestingly, it also states the following: “Because psychologists' scientific and professional judgments and actions may affect the lives of others, they are alert to and guard against personal, financial, social, organizational, or political factors that might lead to misuse of their influence.” Which is rather amusing as they themselves just violated their own first principle by introducing intersectional Feminist bullshit into their new guidelines for the psychological practice with boys and men.Principle B: Fidelity and ResponsibilityWhich they just violated as well in multiple ways. This principle states that they should be aware of their power over their patients lives and as such have to act responsibly “and seek to manage conflicts of interest that could lead to exploitation or harm.” Introducing ideology into your treatment practices is inherently a conflict of interest. And just to show how oblivious the APA is to the clusterfuck they just created, they also explicitly state that psychologists following the APA’s ethical guidelines “are concerned about the ethical compliance of their colleagues' scientific and professional conduct.” They just created a paradox.Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and DignityThis one is very spicy. In its essence, this one is a pretty good guideline and one particular section should be cited unabridged. “Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status, and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices.”That is just fancy talk for treating your patient as an individual and to help your patient to improve their life by mentally adapting to their environment instead of pressing them in the shape the psychologist deems to be the ideal state. Which is a good segway into the shit they wrote in their new guideline.https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guidelines.pdfThe Definitions section on page 2 f. is quite interesting in that regard, as it is soaked with social justice buzzwords. My favourite excerpt:“Privilege refers to unearned sources of social status, power, and institutionalized advantage experienced by individuals by virtue of their culturally valued and dominant social identities (e.g., White, Christian, male, and middle/upper class).”Yes, they didn’t even start presenting their guidelines and you can already apprehend what an utter dumpster fire the rest of it will be. And indeed, it dances limbo under these already subsurface located expectations. They use viable data and interpret it through an intersectional Feminist lens with all the ideological baggage that comes with that. If they use viable data at all instead of simply referencing ideological publications from the field of sociology which has jack to do with clinical psychology.Guideline 1 is based on the post-modernist theory of social constructivism, which was already discredited numerous times by behavioural psychologists who actually work scientifically. They even have the very nerve to reference people like Michael Messner and Michael Kimmel, both sociologists of the Feminist school and also nonsensical male-bashing shitshows like the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory. Very little actual psychology in the first guideline, good start A”P”A. It can be summarised with “masculinity is whatever you want it to be”, while ironically they make clear that they have a very strict framework of masculinity they perceive as harmful.Guideline 2 establishes the progressive stack, the intersectional privilege hierarchy. And it states that male patients should be made aware about their ranking in the progressive stack and among others their racial identity. Because that is the duty of the clinical psychologist, telling you that you’re a victim and that you don’t have any control over your life, good lord. And while it does contain one or two kernels of truth, it also contains some comedy gold for the more cynical minded people among us: “Psychologists also strive to reduce and counter the damaging effects of microaggressions by teaching boys and men from historically marginalized backgrounds skills to cope with racism, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, ageism, ableism, and other forms of discrimination.” We got a microaggression here, quick, call the micropolice to put the microoffender into a microjail!Guideline 3 establishes the Feminist lens, the existence of the Patriarchy and how the Patriarchy hurts men, too. They even DARE to reference the Duluth model, the single code of conduct for law enforcement that in less than two decades brought more men to the brink of suicide than the whole field of clinical psychology probably prevented in its whole time of existence. I’m done. Even if later in these guidelines they accurately predicted the second coming of Jesus Christ, it wouldn’t redeem what they already wrote there. I’m out, life is too short and reading any more of this heap of malevolent garbage will just make me seek psychological treatment and this document has just successfully convinced me that this field has absolutely nothing to offer to men except to exacerbate their existing problems. And just reading the headlines of the remaining guidelines, of which most sound like they might even tackle some actual issues (I’m sure they manage to screw those up too), reading through the last one will almost certainly make me want to injure myself. “Psychologists understand and strive to change institutional, cultural, and systemic problems that affect boys and men through advocacy, prevention and education.” Truly baffling.

Not collectively but please take a break and thing deeply before diving into the liberal cesspool. Here are some things I have noticed about the typical liberal mentality which will demonstrate why.They preach acceptance and tolerance of other people and their opinions, but try to ban, block and silence anyone who disagrees with them.Projection is their number one game. Accuse others of what they do themselves using made up, political words like racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, misogyny, xenophobia etc etc even when there isn’t any.They preach feel good, sweet, cute concepts like “live and let others live”, inclusion and openness but put a brazen display of trying to have power and control over other people. Just look at how feminists try to put all sorts of straight jackets on the behaviour of men using words like toxic masculinity.The first thing liberals target is the law, they try to change it to suit their needs.It sounds strange but liberal feminism is aligned to Islam. Feminists love the hijab, the burqa and tout it as symbols of empowerment and choice.They are the number one minority appeasers. Liberals have tapped 100% every minority, victimised people, lumped them into groups and have used them to further their agenda(whatever that is).They are against traditional marriages and families(because it is excludes their LGBTQ victim group) and support gender fluidity(even in young kids).All rules for thee, but not for me - liberal mantra. They never ever follow the rules they themselves have set for other people. Hypocrisy at its peak.Mob justice is the best justice- another liberal mantra. Try it out yourself and see how it feels.No wonder there is so much resentment against these people.