The Cult Connection Part 1 looked at what a cult is - a group or movement with a shared commitment to a leader or an ideology. Cults can be religious, political, therapeutic, ideological, commercial, or even self-improvement-based, and they use manipulative techniques of control and persuasion to isolate and dominate members.
People caught up in cults often behave and think in ways that, to an outsider, seem irrational or crazy, ranging from the bizarre to the downright dangerous. For example, followers of the Raëlian Movement, founded in the 1970s and still running, believe humanity was created by extra-terrestrials called the Elohim. Among their unusual practices is guided meditation that involves imagining intimate encounters with these alien creators as a way to achieve harmony, pleasure, and spiritual connection, known as a “cosmic orgasm”. Then there’s the Solar Temple, a secretive, apocalyptic cult which originated in Geneva in the 1980s, and whose leaders coordinated dozens of murder-suicides in the mid-90s, telling members their deaths would be “transitions” to a higher spiritual plane. Humans can be manipulated.
Contrary to popular belief, people who fall for cults are not stupid or gullible. They’re often idealistic and educated, and in search of meaning, purpose, or belonging. The key, according to Steve Hassan in his book Combating Cult Mind Control, is not weakness but vulnerability. He says people are most susceptible to cult recruitment during periods of transition, distress, or uncertainty.
Five Features of Cults
Part 1 outlined the defining characteristics of cults according to experts Janja Lalich, Robert Jay Lifton, and Steve Hassan. Combining their work, we can conclude that there are five main features of cults:
information control
ideological totalism
behaviour control
psychological manipulation
bounded choice
These are not discrete categories - information control supports ideological totalism and is part of psychological control, which can then be used to manipulate behaviour and lead someone to believe they are making decisions based on their own free will.
Information control is central to cultic influence because when people are denied access to information, or are only given information of a particular type, their ability to think independently is seriously undermined.
What does this look like in the context of the trans movement?
When we ask questions about sex, gender, and gender non-conformity, what we need is information that is objective, factual, and balanced. Instead, even the most superficial examination of both real world and online information about these issues reveals that one-sided dogma prevails. Dissent is shut down, alternative views are censored, and propaganda is ubiquitous. That sounds culty.
Where Do We Get Our Information From?
From the day we are born we’re taking in information about our surroundings and reacting accordingly. It’s how we survive. Good information, accurate and timely, helps us make good decisions.
For a long time, we shared information through word-of-mouth and the odd hand-written document. The invention of the printing press in the 15th century dramatically expanded our ability to spread information in the form of pamphlets, books and newspapers, fuelling movements such as the Reformation and the scientific revolution.
In the 20th century, mass media like radio and television allowed messages to be broadcast instantly and simultaneously to millions of people. These tools enabled the widespread dissemination of news and cultural trends and gave governments, organisations, and individuals powerful platforms to shape public opinion on a scale never before possible.
Now, in the 21st century, we have the internet and with it social media. Platforms like X, TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram mean people and groups can share messages with a huge and international audience, bypassing traditional gatekeepers like publishers or broadcasters. Online influencers, the new charismatic leaders, can market their ideas to large numbers of devoted followers. The algorithm, originally designed to personalise users’ online experience by recommending content and tailoring advertising, has become an unwitting recruitment tool for cult-like ideologies. It creates an echo chamber, where a person increasingly encounters information or opinions that reflect and reinforce what they already believe. It also keeps users online by suggesting progressively more intense content. It’s one thing if that content is soccer highlights or make-up tutorials, quite another if it’s porn or trans ideology.
For some people, an internal alarm goes off at a hint of manipulation or coercion but others, especially young people, are more vulnerable.
Easy Targets
Adolescence is widely recognised in developmental psychology, neuroscience, and sociology as one of the most intense and rapid periods of change in the human lifecycle. It’s an often difficult and stressful time of transition, an emotional and hormonal rollercoaster. The prefrontal cortex - the part of the brain responsible for self-regulation, impulse control, and critical thinking - doesn’t fully mature until the mid-20s. As a result, this is a cohort that can be highly susceptible to cult-like tactics and easily manipulated by addictive platform design, persuasive and targeted marketing, pornography, ideological messaging, and extremist political content. It is also a cohort that are particularly online.
Information Control
When it comes to trans ideology, like many issues these days, we get our information from a combination of real-life and online experiences, encounters, and resources. What do we see around us? What information is given to us, and what can we find when we search? How do we communicate with each other about it, and what happens if we disagree?
Without actively searching for information about gender ideology we are regularly exposed to signage, symbols, and media reportage that endorse it. Pride month - now almost as hallowed, well-known, and drawn-out as Christmas - is a state-endorsed, weeks-long campaign. Visual symbology is everywhere - rainbow and trans colours decorate corporate and government logos and public transport; progress pride* flags are hoisted at government buildings and many other institutions; food, drink, and fashion labels promote special pride items. Some call it advertising (there’s money to be made in virtue signalling), some call it campaigning, and some call it propaganda.
Institutional Capture
In Ireland, one need only go as far as the local primary school to see the progress pride flag on display, signalling that our education system believes in gender ideology. Within schools, and embedded in the national curriculum, all of the information on offer unquestioningly endorses gender ideology with resources such as this booklet for parents of 8-12 year olds, and this “Busy Bodies” booklet for children and parents, both of which suggest that a child can be boy, girl, neither or both. These booklets and other school materials direct people with questions to TENI (Transgender Equality Network Ireland) and Belong To, an Irish LGBTQ+ youth organisation, both of which actively support an affirmation only approach to children or young adults who are confused about their gender. In fact, organisations like TENI and Belong To provide training and workshops for staff and students in schools around Ireland and are actively involved in shaping school policies like the new Bí Cineálta (Be Kind) anti-bullying policy about to be rolled out in all schools around Ireland. Irish secondary schools also direct staff, students and parents to these organisations, in addition to other guidance from, yet again, TENI and Belong To as well as the University of Limerick which offer no alternatives to affirming trans identities.
Nowhere in school materials is there mention of the Cass Review which highlighted the dangers of an affirmation only approach to children struggling with gender issues. Nowhere is there acknowledgement of the fact that not everybody believes in gender ideology and that it is not based in science or fact. There are no resources sharing information on the risks associated with attempts to transition, or the stories of detransitioners. There are no mentions of organisations like Genspect which promote an exploratory and non-medicalised approach to gender, or websites like StatsforGender where parents, teachers or kids could easily see that without affirmation from those around them, most young people will desist in their trans identification. All of the information on offer, as part of the curriculum and for those who request more detail, supports trans ideology as fact.
Universities and other third level institutions, ostensibly places where one can question everything, are also one way streets when it comes to this issue. Queer theory and gender ideology are embedded in courses across many disciplines including medicine, education, law, social sciences, and the arts. All Irish universities must sign up to the Athena Swan Charter in order to receive funding for research. This requires them to commit to “fostering an environment that creates collective understanding that individuals can determine and affirm their gender”.
Stories like that of philosophy professor Kathleen Stock in the UK are enough to deter academics from questioning the prevailing narrative. Stock, who was open about her gender critical views, faced violent protests, sustained online harassment and threats to her safety leading to her resignation in 2021. While it is heartening that, this year, the Office for Students fined the University of Sussex £585,000, citing a “chilling effect” on academic freedom due to the university’s trans and non-binary equality policy, witnessing the gruelling process that Kathleen Stock went through is deterrent enough for most people who may have considered speaking out. Again, the assumption is that gender ideology is fact; expressing doubt or disagreement is heresy, punishable by ostracisation from the group.
Other institutions are equally captured. One of the most disturbing, given that it is meant to be grounded in science, is healthcare. Hospitals - places which should be free from ideology - are adorned with progress pride paraphernalia during the month of June. Ireland’s HSE (Health Service Executive, our public health service) would like staff to wear a badge to demonstrate their support for gender ideology. Imagine a parent who is concerned that their child is being drawn into an ideological cult, going to a medical professional for help, only to see that the professional is themselves a member of the cult?
The progress pride flags, lanyards, signage, and badges displayed by state and private organisations send the message that this is what institutions believe and expect staff and service users to agree with. Institutional policies, staff training and workshops provided by trans rights activists and lobby groups, and guides like this one for HSE staff which treat gender ideology as fact, consolidate it.
Almost everybody knows by now that to express a belief in the binary and immutable nature of sex is to expose yourself as a “bigot” and a “transphobe” so the language and ideas continue to be embedded and normalised. The ongoing case of Sandie Peggie in the UK, a nurse who complained about a male doctor who identifies as a woman using the female changing rooms, is another reminder to non-believers that they will be punished should they speak out against the accepted doctrine.
Language is powerful
The use of specialised jargon shapes how members of a cult think, communicate, and perceive the world. Globally, we are seeing manipulation of language in order to support trans ideology and persuade us that biological sex is irrelevant and being a man or woman is a matter of personal choice. In health literature, where clarity is of the utmost importance, the de-sexing of language is both nonsensical and dangerous. A recent article in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology about pelvic floor dysfunction described women as “individuals with vaginas”, and here’s well-known and highly regarded medical journal The Lancet describing women as “bodies with vaginas”:
Increasingly, institutions and places of work or study are expecting employees and service users to introduce themselves with their pronouns or to state them in email signatures and social media bios. Using the wrong pronouns - misgendering - is all but criminal. The more jargon is used, the more the ideology is reinforced and normalised.
Media Madness
The media, a main source of information for many people, is doing us a disservice on two accounts - inaccurate reporting by using incorrect pronouns and failure to report alternative views.
Here’s the BBC recently reporting that “A woman who allegedly killed her husband with a samurai sword ‘stabbing and slicing him’ more than 50 times told police ‘I had no choice.’”. The woman in question was a trans-identified male. Here’s the BBC again reporting a murder as committed by a woman when the perpetrator is, in fact, male. These are extreme examples, but if the media will respect the demand to use opposite sex pronouns for murderers, we can be sure that they won’t hesitate to use them elsewhere. The result is news that is inaccurate and misleading.
Three years ago one of Ireland’s most popular and long-running daytime radio talk shows - Liveline, hosted by Joe Duffy on RTÉ, the national broadcaster - covered the issue of trans ideology over three consecutive days. A wide range of opinions were heard and the conversation was mostly civilised. The backlash, though, was swift and brutal. In the ensuing days, Dublin Pride announced that it was terminating its media partnership with RTÉ and the broadcaster was requested to attend an Oireachtas (Irish Parliament) committee to discuss the controversy. Since then, RTÉ has barely touched the issue of gender ideology. The recent UK Supreme Court ruling on the legal definition of woman in law received minimal coverage.
Paying the Price
One devastating outcome of all this is the dramatic rise in the number of young people, particularly adolescent girls, identifying as trans or nonbinary in the past 15 years. In the UK alone, gender services went from handling under a hundred youth referrals in 2010 to over 5,000 referrals in 2022. This marked a huge shift, not just in volume, but demographically toward young women. Prior to this, the dominant demographic seeking to transition was adult men. Helen Joyce (Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality) and Abigail Shrier (Irreversible Damage) have written extensively on the issue and posit that this increase among teenage girls is heavily influenced by online culture, in particular platforms like TikTok, Tumblr, YouTube, and Instagram, where influencers and peers normalise and celebrate transition while casting doubt or caution as bigotry and transphobia. The internet offers powerful and seductive stories of belonging and identity which, as we read in the outline of cults, can be especially alluring for adolescents in the midst of developmental upheaval.
The transgender movement is not just about young people, but they are a vulnerable group and an obvious casualty of the capture of society in general by an ideology that has no basis in fact. The notion that male or female is determined by how you feel rather than by your actual biology, or that a gendered soul was put into the wrong body (by who is anyone’s guess), is as bizarre as some of the most outlandish cult claims. The science and our senses tell us that this is non-sense and yet the idea has somehow taken hold. Cult-like tactics have played a role in this brainwashing.
Quackery
Delving into this topic, it would appear that we are mired in trans ideology. The information that we come across in daily life, and the information that we find when we search is predominantly of one persuasion. Expressing the view that sex is based on biology and is immutable, that nobody is born in the wrong body, and that women have a right to single sex spaces and sports, has become controversial. As a result, many people keep quiet, and so the ideology beds in further.
Does this sound like a cult to you?
Again, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it just may be a duck.
*The original pride or rainbow flag that most of us know is a symbol of the lesbian, gay and bisexual community worldwide. The progress pride flag is a different thing. The baby blue, baby pink, and white stripes represent those who identify as transgender or nonbinary.
Catherine Monaghan is an Irish women’s rights activist and founding member of Wicklow Women 4 Women.
Genspect publishes a variety of authors with different perspectives. Any opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect Genspect’s official position. For more on Genspect, visit our FAQs.
Bust the Cult by Telling the Truth
Join Genspect at The Bigger Picture conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico, September 27–28, 2025 where we’ll confront the uncomfortable truth about trans. Break through received wisdom and be there!
Register now at genspect.org
Tickets selling fast - secure your seat now.
Oh, most of us parents have no doubt about gender identity ideology being a cult. But we need the wider world to see it too. So thanks for writing your piece! And I too have written about the flags. https://thetranstrain.substack.com/p/the-progress-pride-and-trans-flags
Together we can hopefully help others see what is happening. Thank you.
During the 1980's there was an explosion of cults in the U.S. and a movement also arose in reaction against it. Anti-cult organizations consisted mostly of family members of those who joined the cults, "deprogrammed" former cultists, as well as a handful of religious and mental health professionals. Steve Hassan's work and Robert Lifton's became very popular among these groups. Their work is brilliant and definitely worth reading for a deeper understanding of how all cults do their thing.
I did observe, however, that one reason why family members and former cult members liked the work of the above authors was that they could be used to support the argument that "anyone can be programmed into a cult." Families had a strong tendency to want to see their loved ones as victims who had no agency or motives of their own for joining authoritarian groups. Many anti-cultists became very nasty and cancelled me from speaking engagements if I mentioned that people who join cults were doing so willingly, and probably had personal traits beyond the situational factors mentioned by Hassan that led them to respond favorably to cultic organizations.
A recent book by Luke Conway on leftist authoritarianism (Liberal Bullies) documents from his research that people who join authoritarian movements have pre-existing authoritarian personality traits, and that the members play an active role not only in creating the movements but the leaders as well. Other work in professional literature during the Eighties and Nineties found that people who had personality disorders were overrepresented among cult followers. High rates of psychopathologies are also present in the adolescent gender patient population, according to informal reports by European healthcare professionals and documented by an increasing amount of research.
An exclusive focus on the "cult member as victim" narrative is not necessarily a realistic way to analyze cultic phenomena. In the current cultural environment the victim narrative is particularly problematic, because it is the basis of woke ideology.