I strongly believe that much of the trans phenomenon in boys and young men in the past decade is in fact a persecution phenomenon equivalent to how Jews were persecuted so harshly in medieval Spain that many converted to Christianity just to be accepted as humans.

I think that the rise in transitions in males is a mass migration out of a sex due to societal persecution of that sex. This was my understanding since three years ago, when I discovered at the time, that in the preceding decade, male-to-female transition was 4 times higher than vice versa and that there was an exponential rise in the phenomenon in boys and teen born male in that decade. I don't argue that all the trans phenomenon is related to feminist chauvinism, sexism and persecution - trans-sexual men existed much before the past two-to-three decades, the period of feminism becoming a fascist-racist movement of anti-male racism. But I would argue that such people are the very small minority today in trans men (born male) and that the vast rise is a simple and familiar phenomenon - persecution and mass conversion to avoid harm as Jews undergone in Spain in the middle ages. If science, medicine and psychology were not under censorship and intimidation as they are we would have seen this feminist persecution of maleness discussed by the medical and psychological community as the cause for the rise in trans boys and young men (born male).

And as for the recent rise in trans girls or young women (born female), this might be a result of the status trans men received from the feminist society - encouragement from feminists who in a sick and distorted way see the transition as a victory to womanhood and confirmation of female supremacy, "men admit that being a male is bad and that femaleness is better" - which made young girls envy the sympathy boys presenting as girls received from a feminist society and to want that status and applause from the feminist world for themselves and hence developed a fashion.

To see the Western anti-male chauvinism, notice how it was completely legitimate for a woman to publish a year ago a book saying that this surge in girls is a harmful and offensive phenomenon. What man would have been able to likewise publish five years ago when the surge was in boys a similar book calling the transition bad out of a view that it's distorted and humiliating that masses in a sex wish to abandon the sex - which is the sentiment that drove that woman's book. Only for girls the truth can be said - that thousands deserting a sex means something bad is happening. Men were not allowed in our feminist world to write what that woman wrote in her book, and she was respected for it and interviewed all over the world. If a man would have published the same on boys he would be annihilated, boys are not allowed this simple protection - of saying publicly that it's not normal to see a surge of sex-desertion and that society needs to see it as a problem and look for a cause, as it was allowed to be said only about girls and only when the surge arrived to girls.

It was amazing to see how when she published the book, boys were not even mentioned in it - as if, if this is a problem, to see thousands undergo transition, then it's a problem only when happening to the supreme sex - girls, and the same in boys is completely natural (it's not that it is perceived as natural. The fact of the matter is that male transitions is encouraged by feminism simply because of a castrating urge in feminists - since society is feminist, all of society is forced by feminism to remain silent and play along as feminists encourage it out of their violent castration urge. Sorry, we all know that this is the truth) . She did not discuss the transitioning boys and male teens at all. In fact, throughout the entire decade that transition went up exponentially in boys and young men, no one dared to write that a mass transition might be an indication for something bad happening to them - this would be considered "fragile masculinity" and "male ego" - but the reception of her book revealed how manipulative that atmosphere which silenced men of responding normally to the surge was. Suddenly it wasn't "fragile femininity" or "female ego", to be horrified of a surge of self-mutilation to escape your sex. The book and its reception revealed how naive men are, when they face feminist manipulations that are meant for men's oppression and silencing. While men were afraid of responding the same way as that female author responded to a mass transition in girls, they discovered when that book came out from how it was received, that none of the arguments they were afraid of, should they do what she did, are presented to her - they discovered again, that feminists would attack men for things that are in fact completely legitimate as is revealed when women do the same things - they discovered (again) that what feminism forbids for men, is not universally forbidden but forbidden by feminism only for men - which is a situation of oppression, chauvinism. And when society discussed her book, it was just as amazing to see none of the journalists asking her if it's also bad in boys, or mentioning at all that the surge is first and foremost in boys and male teens - this is normal - only self-mutilation in the supreme sex into the inferior sex is out of the ordinary.