Hmm. I read your first post and thought it sounded ok. Having to have 6 of the factors seemed pretty reasonable to me. Then I read your second post - i.e. how they assess children to see how they fit the criteria in your first post - and I went
In this case both me and my DS are suffering from gender dysphoria.
No not at all dittany. I was sceptical at seeing those in the first post, but couldn't see how they could make a diagnosis just on those points alone as (unless I've misread it) the 6 criteria has to include point 1. I was focusing on points 1 and 7 TBH and possibly point 8 (though I don't know enough about this sort of stuff to see how much it is open to misinterpretation).
I did just go back and re-read the post though and on second reading I am a bit alarmed that at least 5 of those points are based on what is considered 'normal' behaviour for boys and girls, which we all know is largely constructed through social norms, not biologically influenced behaviour. So I see why you're tackling me on it.
It was the second post that really got me though. Even me, with my limited understanding of psychology and gender issues can see that those criteria are nuts!
When are men i.e the patriarchy going to understand that there is nothing wrong with children who don'T conform to man made standards of how they're supposed to behave. Tomboys and sissies these children used to be called and that was bad enough. Now we have knob-ends insisting they've got a disorder.
Gender (masculinity and dominance coupled with femininity and subordination) will be defended to the very bitter end in order to uphold male dominance... and they don't give a shit how many kids are culled in the meantime
I'm suprised the gay rights movement isn't up in arms about this because the American Psychiatrists are talking about starting tomboys and "sissy" children on hormones to stop them developing properly.. which will render them sterile
Surely a lot of this will be opportunity based. DS dresses as minnie mouse and wears hair clips. If DD was DS2, he probably wouldn't get the chance. Nice that they have neatly categorised what childish behaviour is right and what's linked to mental health problems though
Well, having had some contact with GIRES, an association for trans people in this country, they talk with great envy of the treatment options available in the US. And of the great distress caused to a young person with gender dysphoria being forced to go through the puberty of, what they themselves consider, to be the wrong gender. They were particularly disappointed that the hormone treatments weren't available in the UK.
I think that the pre-eminence of A1, ie that the child is consistently insisting that they are of the opposite gender, is the main point here. And what people want for themselves.
Re the point that insisting that you are the opposite sex for some time indicates some sort of issue, there was a gorgeous thread a while ago where a number of children insisted for at least a year that they were puppies, horses, etc. It was cute, not a symptom of mental issues.
Blimey I guess that makes me a boy. I would have scored 'high' on their 'test'. I have no doubts I am a woman, but I liked playing boys games, and with their toys and spent a large proportion of my pre-teens in jeans and a jumper......
God that sounds like a way to screw your children up from an early age
IsItMe - I'm sure there are people with gender dysphoria who feel it from an early age. But there are far more children (practically all of them in fact) who just are, and like cars and beads and football and handbags, in no particular order, and should just be left to get on with it, without hysteria that they aren't playing in the way society dictates they should
But isit- read the second post. That ISN'T the sole criteria - if it was, fine.... but they are using stuff like games you prefer and clothes you prefer. Admitted I would like to see the weighting they place on these questions, and the age of children they are questioning, but in essence their criteria is shite.
If you think that this definition would mean that you or your children would have this - really? - even including criteria B?:-
The condition is associated with clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning, or with a significantly increased risk of suffering, such as distress or disability.
Isitme - It's has such broad qualifying criteria! Loads of children could be diagnosed if their parents were homophobic (how many dads freak out if their little boy plays with dolls?).
It's also enforcing a very narrow box of what is socially considered acceptable make and female behaviour by calling any deviation (through PLAY for gods sake, if you can't experiment during play, when the heck can you?) a mental disorder and worse - medically straightjacketing those who deviate from their fucked up definition of normal.