Trans activism, transhumanising, economic transition. Proxies for vision & the lost soul of politics
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 07. 2024
- Three “trans” issues seem to be proxies for vision in contemporary politics, feeding the sense of despair and disillusion.
Trans activism, which is not the same as trans pathology.
Transhumanising, the techno-utopian dream of tomorrow.
Transitioning the economy, moving from extractive consumption.
All three are about qualities of relationship:
- to our bodies
- to our minds
- to the rest of the natural world.
And I wonder if all three are missing a common element: an understanding of soul.
I draw on thoughts made by Rowan Williams at the Realisation Festival 2024.
My previous thoughts on disillusionment in politics can be found on this channel, too, looking at Plato on beauty, Aristotle on ethics, Jesus on being in the world but not of it, Dante on civilisational decline, Blake on abstraction, and Barfield on literalism. - Zábava
An enlightening series of talks. Thank you Mark.
(As a transwoman myself, I thank you for your respectful handling of this matter.)
What I heard you say was that deconstructivism, materialism, and the perennial resource question (how to use and distribute resources) are driving the current period of unease, and might be properly amended by taking a more holistic and human-centered (spiritual) approach to each.
I could not agree more.
Nice! Yes, disillusionment hence these transitions. Might psychological dislocation, and the profound feeling of no longer belonging anywhere with anyone be another factor in these psycho/social phenomena?
Amazing analysis!
Thankyou Mark
Bravo. Great talk on Blake today too.
Jesus loves trans folk and listens to our prayers
A soul transforms the translated. This transverse gives birth becoming transparent. This transaction is a transgression to those who cannot see what is translucent. We/i cannot give this message without transcending.
What is this “SOUL” of which you speak? 🤔
Not even wrong.
What is a woman?
An adult human female. But if you ask "trans" activists, you'll get an incoherent rambling response predicated on validating and perpetuating sexist stereotypes and regressive notions.
A featherless biped.
Do you use any of the following (somewhat euphemistic) terms?
• gay
• homophobia/homophobe
• transphobia/transphobe
• trans-sexual
• transgender
• Intersex
• cis gender
• sex worker
• African-American
• capitalism/capitalist
• any gender-specific pronoun other than he/she, him/her or his/her
Then CONGRATULATIONS - you are (either knowingly or unwittingly) a silly shill for the loony left!
Hard to define but it’s one of those “you know it when you see it” type things.
@favouriteboy19 hard to define loool. Is that you Keir Starmer?
the idea that trans activism isn't to do with a soulful life is utterly absurd to anyone who knows it from the inside. on the surface we are forced to beg and plead for the most basic kind of human dignity, but what few cis people (even allies) know is that we are deeply spiritual people generally. trans women especially tend to be much more concerned with matters of the heart & soul & seek through our activism to show the weaknesses & faults in modern western civilization so it can be POSSIBLE for us to have a soulful life, which is extremely difficult in a world where people scream slurs at you the moment you step outside your door & your government complicity allow your sisters to be used as sex slaves in men's prisons. your understanding of what trans activism is comes from the perspevtive of mainstream newsmedia which has never understood or even really wanted to understand us on our own terms and presents us in a way that is easily understood by those who have no stake in our strife and only have the most vapid surface level understanding of the issues we talk about in cis company. it has always been about spiritual liberation to us, but we have more pressing, literally life-or-death issues we are forced to deal with first. I did hope you wouldn't fall into the trap of using us as a pawn with which to make a point without boiling us down to the media's corrupted & only half-true perspective on us but it seems that even the kind & intelligent are not immune to propaganda. we as a community remember when we were considered shamans & prophets by wider society and know in our hearts that we are spiritual beings with an outsider perspective on issues so many get so distracted by as to forget the inherent androgeny of the divine and of all creation. there is an outer temple teaching and an inner, and a lack of knowledge of the inner teaching doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, though that is the perspective you would develop if you only know our ideas through people who are not us. excellent insights overall but it is sad to see the perpetuation of an image the media has constructed for us with the specific intent to downplay what is most meaningful to us to stoke flames of a "culture" war that they themselves declared on us and in which we are forced to play on their terms or face yet worse ridicule than what we already face on a daily basis
Material rights are based on physical reality, not internal feelings. A male, is still male no matter how he "feels inside". Demanding that males should be allowed access to female-only spaces and activities is unreasonable, it undermines all female sex-based rights and protections. It is a demand that claiming to be "trans" should force society to grant the privilege of having their physical sex ignored regarding matters of sex-based rights, spaces and activities - a profoundly narcissistic demand, which is also deeply misogynistic as it posits male feelings matter more than the material rights and reality of any and all females. Of course more and more "trans" activists have started making the outlandish claim that humans can change sex as well, which is pure nonsense.
The complete rejection of any exploratory therapy, Jungian analysis etc., maintaining it has nothing to do with mental health, but then completely contradicting that by going on about "validating" people being a matter of life and death is one of the cornerstone issues here, coupled with pervasive emotional immaturity.
The whole "trans" perspective is very left-hemisphere dominated, refuses to see our bodies as complex wholes and thinks that altering some small detail can fundamentally change that complex whole. The way things are understood is very black and white, and very all or nothing coupled with the inability to actually define things with specifics, while simultaneously accusing others of doing all the things they themselves, the activists, are guilty of, really the amount of projection I've seen over these past years is off the charts.
@@ambientjohnny
sex:
gender; the BINARY state of being either male or female in most species of metazoans. In humans, each cell nucleus contains 23 pairs of chromosomes, a total of 46 chromosomes. The first 22 pairs are called autosomes. Autosomes are homologous chromosomes, that is, chromosomes that contain the same genes (regions of DNA) in the same order along their chromosomal arms. The 23rd pair of chromosomes are called allosomes (sex chromosomes). These allosomes consist of two X chromosomes in most all females, and an X chromosome and a Y chromosome in most all males. Females, therefore, have 23 homologous chromosome pairs, whereas males have 22. The X and Y chromosomes have small regions of homology called pseudoautosomal regions. The X chromosome is always present as the 23rd chromosome in the ovum, while either an X or Y chromosome may be present in an individual spermatozoon cell gamete. Rare chromosomal anomalies include X (Turner syndrome); XXY (Klinefelter syndrome); XYY; and XXX. In such cases, the sex of the human is still either male or female, because one’s sex/gender is determined primarily by the gametes produced (see below).
An extremely minute percentage of humans are either (anatomical) hermaphrodites or of indeterminate sex (or to be more accurate, disordered sex). That does not negate the incontrovertible FACT that there are but two sexes/genders. In order for reproduction to take place, there is the requirement of a female ovum and a male sperm to unite, and because the entire purpose of the gender/sex dichotomy of most species of animals is to enable procreation, the sexual identity of an individual is best classified according to the gametes produced by the individual in question. There is no third gamete. Cf. “gender”. Both terms (“gender” and “sex”) originate from Latin words: “genus” (meaning “begin”; “birth”; “kind”; “race”; “gender”) and “sexus” (meaning “sex”; “division”; “gender”).
If the reader is curious to know the reason for this term being included in the glossary of “F.I.S.H” (apart from the fact that it is actually used in a handful of chapters), it is because, in recent times, LEFTISTS have been desperately trying to change the meaning of the words “sex” and “gender”, in order to serve their immensely-nefarious agenda to destroy civil society with their hateful, wicked, immoral ideologies, especially by promoting the nonsensical idea that a person is able to transition from one gender to the other.
♂️♀️♂️♀️♂️♀️♂️♀️♂️♀️
gender:
sex; the BINARY state of being either male or female, and because the entire purpose of the gender/sex division in most species of animal life is to facilitate procreation, the sexual identity of an individual is best classified according to the gametes produced by the person in question. There is no extant third gamete. Therefore, even if a human being possessed a male reproductive system (or, at a minimum, produced spermatazoa, despite not having a complete reproductive system [in other words, a man without a distinguishable penis]), yet was superlatively feminine in every other possible way, he would be required to mate with a biological female in order to reproduce (and, as explained in Chapter 27, marriage is a societal obligation for the vast majority of humans).
An extremely minute percentage of humans are either “intersex” (typically referring to those persons who are anatomical hermaphrodites) or of indeterminate gender (that is, not easily determined by a cursory inspection of the external genitalia), but that does not negate the incontrovertible scientific fact that every human belongs to one of only two genders. As far as we know, there has never existed a single human being with the ability to BOTH conceive a child in “his/her” womb and, simultaneously, successfully inseminate a woman (or in more disturbing terms, for a hermaphrodite to inseminate ‘him/herself’). And even if such an individual has existed, that person would be a combination of BOTH male and female, and not some imaginary, novel third gender. In those rare cases in which a human is born without gonads, the other characteristics of sex/gender would be taken into consideration - firstly, the allosomes (sex chromosomes) found in the DNA of every cell, and then, any extant genitalia, since even those females who have experienced the misfortune of being born without ovaries, for instance, usually have their remaining sex organs intact).
Cf. “sex”. Both terms (“gender” and “sex”) originate from Latin words: “genus” (meaning “begin”; “birth”; “kind”; “race”; “gender”) and “sexus” (meaning “sex”; “division”; “gender”). So, essentially, the only significant distinction between the two terms is that the etymology of “gender” pertains to the beginning of things, as can be plainly seen by the other English words that originate from “genus”, such as “generic”, “genetic”, and “generate”, whilst “sex” is a scrupulously-literal translation of the Latin cognate “sexus”.
The mere fact that the word “genitals” (referring to reproductive organs) is very closely related to the Latin “genus”, is further evidence of the assertion that the term “gender” refers to the binary division of human (and of course, many non-human) sexual identity, and NOT to any taxonomy based on emotion, feelings, psychology, or any other non-biological categorization schema.
If the reader is curious to know why this term is included in the glossary of “F.I.S.H” (apart from the fact that it is actually used in a handful of chapters), it is because leftists have been desperately trying to change the meaning of the word of late, in order to serve their immensely-perverse agenda to destroy civil society with their hateful, wicked, sinful, OBJECTIVELY-IMMORAL doctrines.
Until relatively recently, the word “gender” has ALWAYS been used in the etymologically-accurate sense of the term. And even in the former case (where the word has been used to denote something other than the sexual binary taxonomy), predominantly in those places where leftist ideologues comprise a significant portion of the population - mainly Anglophone countries at present, although by the time you are reading this document, probably every nation on earth, with the exception of Islamic lands. See also “leftism”.
Ultimately, the term “gender” is not absolutely synonymous with the word “sex” (otherwise, why would progenitors of the Latin tongue have coined two distinct words for two slightly divergent concepts), but it most definitely does not refer to the notion or notions invented by leftists (those who adhere to adharma), especially the idea that “sex” refers to a binary division of human biology and/or anatomy, whereas “gender” refers to how one identifies according to societal norms in regard to sexual roles. For example, most all leftist ideologues define “woman” as “someone who identifies as a woman”, which is a wholly circular definition.
Those of us who stand for dharma (righteousness) must push-back with all our might against the adulteration of the language.
If you are truly wise and intelligent, you would surely have recognized several amazing secrets contained within the body of this treatise, “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”. However, perhaps the most secretive secret of all, shall forthwith be revealed:
It is IMPOSSIBLE for a human being to change his or her sex/gender! (You are implored to keep this secret - do not tell a soul!!!)
For example, a man who castrates himself and wears a skirt or a dress, is simply a mutilated, transvestinal male - not a woman, nor is he a female. Similarly, a woman who attaches an appendage resembling a phallus to her crotch and dons a pair of pantaloons, is merely a transvestinal woman with a fake penis between her thighs, and not a man, nor a male, in any accurate sense of the terms.
Actually, I would contend that any “man” who excises his reproductive organs was always a dickless “man”, metaphorically speaking.
N.B. Even though the glossary entries “gender” and “sex” are worded somewhat differently, they could easily have EITHER been interchangeable, or else worded identically, since, in practice, they possess the same meaning.
Even when the term “gender” (or any non-English cognate of the word) is used in grammar, it indicates whether a particular noun or pronoun is masculine, feminine or neuter, although most nouns in the English language do not have a gender (neuters).
My perspective is limited, for sure, but comes with a long history in gay politics, which I fear is consuming itself. That said, I live and learn, so thanks.
@@ambientjohnny Well said.
@@ambientjohnny I won't try to argue with you or change your mind about anything as it's clear that you have a strong opinion and are likely to stick to it. We all feel that way about things sometimes. Anyway, I don't know whether you know any trans people yourself, but I'm a trans woman and I just wanted to offer you something in good faith to consider. I won't check back here for any reply, but I hope you will take this as it's intended - as something to reflect on rather than react against. It's this: Most trans folk are not 'demanding' anything. We're not trying to force people to change how they think, or speak. That's all a bit sensationalist, really. We're not some kind of threat. No, what most of us care about is something different. We want to be safe. Safe to live our life out in the open. Safe to go about our day. Safe to work and love and go to church and have a completely mundane life like anyone else. That's all, really. Hardly dangerous, am I? In fact I'm quite old fashioned. Things can go one of two ways, I believe. Either society will slowly, steadily move toward a place where we can live and let live again in the good old fashioned way, or this hysteria that has been whipped up in the last decade or so can reach it's dangerous conclusion and people like myself will be the victims of the mob. All this chatter and debate is just opening the way for disaster. So, the voices that tell you to be angry and fearful - don't listen to them. Love your neighbour. God bless
You should interview an actual trans person if you want to talk about trans activism. You're the one using a group of human beings as a proxy for your political agenda. You referring to being trans as a "pathology" is also disturbing. You are an openly gay man; do you consider homosexuality to be a pathology as well?
If anyone is interested in an informed take on the trans experience, I recommend the YT channel of Simon de Voil. He is a trans man who is also a minister specializing in Celtic Christianity. I'd like to hear what Mark Vernon thinks of people like him, but that depends on if Mr. Vernon is actually interested in treating trans people like human beings instead of gossiping about them behind their backs.
I'm very disappointed in you, Mr. Vernon. You should pray on this issue, and consider if you are actually following Christ's path of love towards all your brethren.
Apologies for any offence. I hear you.
I dont think Mark said that being trans IS a pathology, he said “the trans pathology” in my mind referring to the theme or subject of “gender dysphoria” as in the psychological view of it vs the “activism” view of it. I don’t see Mark trying to make any political statements here or his personal view of trans people, but more his breakdown of the themes around the dialog and the language and framing of ideas. Of corse I was quite curious to know listening to this what he thinks, I have trans friends and would be disappointed if he was making some prejudicial comments. But I dont hear anything like that in this video.
You hear me right. Thanks. There is much hurt around.
Please get help.