all 18 comments

[–]BEB[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am NOT endorsing this book because I only just read about it, have no idea who the author is, don't know the publisher, and don't know what's actually in the book. In fact, I have only read the book description on the publisher's website.

However, if the description is accurate, this book might help inform the un or barely-aware about the global push to institute gender ideology over biological sex, the transitioning of children, the money trail, etc.

So I hope that the book is well-written and researched and is not the work of a crackpot.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

This book definitely does not seem either feminist or critical of the concept of gender, meaning sexist stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. On the contrary, it sounds like it's clearly anti-feminist, homophobic and also against sex education. I've highlighted passages from the publisher's description linked to in the OP that I find telling - and alarming:

In his debut book, Nebraskan author Scott Howard exposes the actors financing the institutionalization of transgenderism. Behind the medical research into gender transitioning of children, ubiquitous pride parades, and Drag Queen Story Hours is a lot of money. Sex education, the homosexual and feminist precursor projects, and the global propaganda are all pushed and paid for by very wealthy and well-connected people with motive and will. Howard demonstrates that the transgender phenomenon is far from the “grass-roots movement” some of its advocates would have the public believe.

Impeccably sourced and researched, The Transgender-Industrial Complex pulls the mask off the complex network of influential groups responsible for this inhuman project. Howard takes a deep dive into the murky depths of the Big Money behind Big Gay, exposing how the concept gained such recognition as well as the goals of the people behind it. At once wide-ranging and specific, advanced and accessible, The Transgender-Industrial Complex is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand why every institution with power, and a great many without, are uniform in their inversion of reality, their religion of lies, and their commitment to all that is ugly, broken, and foul.

Antelope Hill is proud to present it’s first original work: Scott Howard’s The Transgender-Industrial Complex.

The last line is highlighted coz I find it worrying that a book publisher doesn't know the difference between, and proper usage of, its and it's.

The only reviews I've found for this book so far are on far right, blatantly anti-Semitic websites; one is a white pride website.

According to an odious review by Eric Striker on a site called National Justice, a main thesis of the book is that today's transgender craze is all the fault of Jews, who've been "breaking down gender" for more than 600 years - and in the present day

have used their money to fund phony science, corrupt law, judges and politicians, disseminate disinformation, and organize often thuggish and violent activism to force mostly English-speaking liberal democracies to seriously debate whether men can get pregnant or children should be allowed to choose to take drugs and have irreversible "gender affirmation surgeries."

Some other excerpts from this review - which has been reprinted on several far right, anti-Semitic sites - that I found disturbing:

The history of transgenderism as we know it is believed to have originated in Jewish circles in early 20th century Germany, but Howard's research shows that references to breaking down gender in Jewish circles go back to the 14th century, almost hundreds of years years before Martha Baer, a B'nai B'rith member in Germany, became the world's first "sex-change" operation recipient. There is an interesting anecdote where a Jew involved in gender ideology converted to Catholicism and exposed the movement as an attempt to provoke moral chaos in European host societies. Magnus Hirschfeld is generally credited with creating the ideological rationale for "Trans" and "queerness" more broadly, but it was a Hirschfeld adept named Henry Gerber who imported the bizarre doctrine to the United States via "The Society for Human Rights" in Chicago.

Disagreeing with the concept of transgenderism or what the gender ideology does to those who subscribe to it is forbidden in American society. Howard explains the mechanism for this censorship, listing the small group of wealthy people -- most of them Jews -- who have created carrots and sticks in academia, the press and the culture at large for aspiring professionals to defy their own two eyes and embrace the 21st century's Lysenkoist crusade.

Just recently, the largest study ever conducted on transsexuals found that rather than being a biological flaw for man to correct through drugs and surgery, the lifestyle and practice of wanting to change your sex is merely a type of aggressive autism with psychiatric co-morbidities such as schizophrenia.

Conservative examinations of the transgender issue rarely provide a why for the what, but Howard pulls no punches in describing the impulse behind the neo-liberal transsexual push: powerful Jews believe traditional concepts of masculinity and femininity along with the normal family are philosophical categories and social assumptions Fascism swims in -- thus they must be destroyed to preserve the power of the ruling class.

By deconstructing nature, our morality breaks down and we are more likely to embrace obscene and discordant unnatural behavior across the board. This makes populations weak and defenseless.

Sorry, but I can't share OP's hope that this book

wakes up the normies!

Coz if if it does, it will likely also feed into and foster a lot of positions I and others here find reprehensible, such as Jew-hating and blaming, bashing gay rights ("Big Gay" - WTF?), maligning feminism and sex education for kids, spreading unsubstantiated harmful theories that demonize and further "other" people with autism and schizophrenia, and promoting "traditional concepts of masculinity and femininity along with the normal family."

Coda:why use the derogatory word "normie" when a non-pejorative term like "public," "general public" or "the rest of the world" would do just as well?

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Well it's straight up wrong because India has been doing forms srs for thousands of years. Are they going to say that's evidence the trans movement is an evil India conspiracy to get white men?

And if you want to look at Jewish history there's even a passage in the bible banning males with mutilated genitals because likely such things were being done in Middle Eastern religions as well thousands of years ago.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well it's straight up wrong because India has been doing forms srs for thousands of years.

What? Can you explain what you mean please.

And if you want to look at Jewish history there's even a passage in the bible banning males with mutilated genitals

Can you please tell us what book, chapter and verse you mean. Thanks.

Men have been castrating other males in many cultures going back many millennia. Hence the eunuchs serving in court in imperial China, the millions of black African males enslaved by the Arab and Ottoman slavers as soon as they were taken into captivity, the castrati in Italy whose balls were cut off so they could sing certain parts in opera... And male circumcision has been a thing for many, many thousands of years as well.

But I don't these practices are anything like what today would be called "SRS" - are they?

[–]lefterfield 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

bible banning males with mutilated genitals

They were banned from serving as priests, they could still be Christians. But yes, it was because there were other religions that had castration or some other genital mutilation as part of their religious rites.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Sorry, I still don't understand. The post I questioned said

And if you want to look at Jewish history there's even a passage in the bible banning males with mutilated genitals

The post made no mention of Christians, or priests. I assumed the poster was speaking of Jews, coz that's the people the poster named and Jews were around for thousands of years before Christianity came along.

I simply asked said poster to share the specific book, chapter and verse in the bible

banning males with mutilated genitals

Coz I don't understand here what the poster I was responding to meant by "mutilated genitals" or "banning" - or what were these males were supposedly banned from.

[–]lefterfield 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I just corrected the part about what was meant by "banning them." I'm not sure it's ever made clear in the biblical passage what kind of genital mutilation happened. But banning referred to them being forbidden to become priests (Jewish priests - it's from the old testament, that was my mistake). I'm also not sure why the poster brought it up, as that doesn't seem like a clear connection to why genital mutilation is done today. I think it's conflating a couple different issues and mixing modern ideas with ancient sensibilities.

As far as which passage, I couldn't tell you offhand. It's been a while since I read that text specifically.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks for answering. I'm pretty familiar with both the OT and NT, but I'm still mystified about the issue and passage being referred to here. Oh well.

[–]lefterfield 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Deuteronomy 23:1. They couldn't enter the assembly of the Lord. There's some debate about whether that means they couldn't hold high office, couldn't take an Israelite wife, couldn't participate in public festivals, or were denied civil rights. I did a little googling, but I couldn't really find decent sources on it. The explanation I remember learning at one time was more like the first interpretation - no high office/honors. It was either because of the association with other religious sects of the time or notions of purity/wholeness.

But anyway... long way off from the anti-Semitism you were talking about. Genital mutilation has certainly been done for thousands of years, but not always for the same reasons and interpreted differently depending on culture. The author wasn't speaking solely about genital mutilation, so it's quite a tangent to make this connection. I only commented cause I remembered that line myself, I had no idea what the OP meant. Still confused, really. But at least I found the passage!

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks!

[–]Cicerosolo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Everyone uses normie, nobody cares. But I agree with you. Blaming it on Big J will immediately destroy this book's credibility and damage the movement

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Everyone uses normie, nobody cares.

Everyone in your circle or crowd, perhaps. But the people you associate with aren't the whole world.

I care. So do a lot of others who've worked for decades for human rights, acceptance and fair treatment of persons with disabilities that put them/us outside "the norm," including neurological conditions like autism and Tourette's, and intellectual impairments like Down's syndrome and dementia.

[–]eddyelric 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is disappointing. Another pro-white-male, anti-everyone-else conspiracy crap. Surely OP couldn't find more balanced perspectives?

I might pirate this book to read it for myself, but I can't in good conscience recommend something like this.

[–]SharpTomorrow 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not the normies that needs convincing, most of the normies don't fall for that id crap. It's the so called "libfems" who endorsed gender theory despite claiming they were "feminists".

[–]our_team_is_winning 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hey, BEB! Good to see you post. Seemed like you'd been gone a month or so. Off topic for this post, but happy they've extended the recall Newsom deadline to St. Patrick's Day!

This worries me from their site: <Please note: We moved the announcement of this release forward, in honor of Transgender Day of Remembrance (November 20th). Orders containing this item will not be fulfilled until December 3rd.>

Why would they be honoring that? I wish Jennifer Bilek had a full-length book. Or a TV show! Or just that common sense was still the norm.

[–]eddyelric 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A link for anyone who is interested in downloading: http://library.lol/main/78617614BC1AA122331E4F9286DDE76E