Really. What makes trans girls with their penisis girls then? Is it because they have been incorrectly told by their parents that they can be girls. That poor boy has been lied to by his parent (s) and others from an extremely young age. Whe ne finds out he was supported by people who lied to him and continue to lie to him. That he actually cannot be a female. The poor little boy will have to deal with that.

Impossible.
They may be convinced that they are while society encourages it but they’re not.
My own beautiful DD went down a rabbit hole of non gender, some of her friends use male pronouns or they/them. Thank fuck she grew out of it.
The link between trans and ASD teens is undeniable. We’ve let down a section of society who feel different, misfits, certain online creators convincing them they were in the wrong body.

The framing is quite tragic, a little boy attempting to cut his penis off. What age do you think is acceptable for him to wait to before he is castrated?

So true

If this is the parent that's been speculated

A) For attention, without question

B) Possibly also something darker. Multiple red flags.

Honestly, they need investigating

Zoe Williams has argued that a sensible solution to all of this would be to make the Brownies mixed gender like the Scouts.

So, @JonesTown because one boy - and his father - doesn't get what he wants, ALL girls have to give up single-sex organisations and activities? Some pretty strong male entitlement there.

We KNOW that girls thrive educationally in single-sex schools.

We know that boys do better in mixed-sex schools.

So who's the problem here?

Nonsense. No male person can be a girl or a woman, just as no female person can be a boy or a man. Words have meaning and the words girl, woman, boy, man refer to juvenile or adult members of the two reproductive sexes - female and male. How western society has lost sight of this basic fact to the extent it has is mindboggling. Feelings, however strong, can never outweigh biology.

Again for those at the back

BOYS CANNOT BE GIRLS

When does the magic happen that turns a boy into a girl? I've asked this question so often and no one seems able to explain.

If they were girls, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

@TealScroller could you explain, without resorting to sex-based stereotypes, what makes a boy actually and materially a girl?

Well no. They're not.

You know that. Why are you engaging with this play pretend?

Guides is not a gendered institution it's a single sex one for females only. Transgirls are boys so cannot join a female only organisation .

The boy could have joined Scouts

Münchhausen's by proxy, I should think.

Also, if a small boy wants to dress in a princess dress or wear high heels ... nowadays, to the zealots, this means he's trans.

But I always think it's quite logical for a small child to want to "dress like mummy" - boy or girl. A boy spends a lot of his early life in a pretty female and feminine world. Most DC are still cared for mostly by women - mothers are seen - still- as the default parent & primary carer in the first couple of years of a child's life. Most nursery staff are women.

It's not so startling that a boy in this atmosphere, connected to & dependent mostly on his mother and other women , would want to be like them, is it?

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with raising boys in this female-centred atmosphere. Just that it shouldn't surprise us when our small sons want to wear the princess dress or the tutu or whatever.

I agree, it's utterly tragic. Trans girls ARE girls and the decision to exclude them from guides (or any other gendered institution) is plain wrong.

Yes, I think anger is going to be experienced by more people - especially parents who, even with the best intentions, have unfortunately listened to the advice of the trans activists and are now slowly waking up to the reality of the harm it’s doing to their children.

I think in the short term we are going to see a lot of this anger directed at us for telling the obvious truths but maybe at some point they will understand that we have only ever come at this with a view to reduce harm and protect all children.

It does seem that some people have only selectively read and understood what Cass has said. It actually seems to be contradictory for posters to try and present Dr Hilary Cass’ words as any type of support for male people being included in female single sex provision. To do that would be simply inaccurate.

The bit you may have missed is that she also acknowledges that there is no reliable way of telling which children will persist and which won’t.

Current desistance after 5 years is 75% in the latest research, so without any means of identifying which kids will persist past 5 years, affirmation is harmful to at least 75% of children. And that’s not taking into account the kids that will desist at a later date.

No one has yet looked at the psychological harm done to a child who is affirmed as the opposite sex at a very young age (like 6) and who then discovers the truth as they mature.

It's really not our fault if the left's current obsession with fucking women and girls over has led them to talk such absurd shite that they've left Donald Trump to be right on point of objective fact when they are not. I could go into a boxing match with the world's biggest bastard, it's still not the referee's or the crowd's fault if I proceed to punch myself in the face on purpose and they don't declare me the winner. Or to go into the crowd and start punching them, while screaming about how they should go along with it so I can win. Somehow.

The fact that these people are still shouting at us for refusing to be sacrificed frankly shows just how much they ever gave a shit about women and girls to start with.

So at what age can we break the news to him that he will always be a boy and cannot be in female only spaces?

Surely getting him used to the idea at a young age is better than waiting until he’s older?

Totally agree with PPs that the only people weaponising this 6 yr old is his parents and OP. It is not ‘weaponising’ any child to point that male children will never become female and should be treated accordingly.

"It wouldn't be acceptable to lie about any of these things to get into these groups."

This is key. If a group has been identified as needing defined category boundaries for eligibility for that category, allowing people to access that group that don't qualify for eligibility needs to be correctly labelled a safeguarding risk. Because, the boundary around that category would not exist if it were not needed and the group would be open to every person who wanted to join.

Safeguarding boundaries are not 'hateful' if they are considered legitimate under law in a democratically elected government that has been carefully audited and monitored so that the law is not considered illegitimately discriminatory. I think that there are many people on this thread who don't quite understand the difference between legitimate and illegitimate discrimination and categorise anything that they don't agree with as 'illegitimate'.

Hence the absurdity of bringing in language such as accusations of siding with 'Trump', 'far right', 'zealots' and on and on. That language really is absurd in the face of what has been decided.

There is a point where society has to have laws that allow legitimate discrimination such as excluding a group for safeguarding purposes from a provision, be that a service or a facility provision. This is not controversial.

If you consider it from a sports perspective, would any of these be acceptable:

A 25 year old competing against a 10 year old in a 10 year old and under category?

A 25 year old competing against a 85 year old in a masters category in the 85 year and over category?

A person who had 90% vision competing with someone with 5% vision in an event specifically for someone with that % of vision impairment?

A person who was a professional standard athlete competing in a novice only event?

A bicycle with an electric engine competing against a 100% human powered bicycle in the Tour de France?

if they are not acceptable, why?

This is really interesting.

I knew I should have been a boy at around age 5.

I grew up in the 70s and 80s as a reasonably masc heterosexual, bicurious woman. I hated my breasts and squashed and squeezed them to the extent that they never grew properly ( I actually damaged them). I had it drilled into me that I had to marry (a man, too!). So I did. Several different ones. Not all at once.

Now I have space to be me? I'm female. I dress masc. I have men as partners but can fancy women. I am slightly down on women as I don't much like being one. I'm about as neutral as you can get!

If I'd been born 30 years later though, I could have ended up as what I think would have been a very unhappy trans man.

This OP's example of a trans girl could grow up to be an effeminate man rather than a woman. Who knows?

Nothing is all-or-nothing!

There are loads of groups and activities my children aren't allowed to join because they are too old, too young, live in the wrong place, not eligible for free school meals, don't have the relevant helath conditions or disabilities, aren't young carers. I could go on and on.

It wouldn't be acceptable to lie about any of these things to get into these groups. As a parent my job is to manage expectations.

My autistic son isn't eligible for local disability sports group because they only accept physical disabilities. Strangely enough no one has ever suggested chopping off a leg or pretending to not be able to walk...

"The IOC have caved into pressure from Trump and the far-right gender critical activists."
"Those who are campaigning against dignity for trans women should be asking themselves if they’re really happy to be on the same side as Trump"

I think you should get better informed. You quite obviously have very little knowledge about this topic and seem to be only keen on repeating trope you have seen on the internet. The female athletes who started campaigning for these changes have been campaigning long before 'Trump' entered the discussion at all. Not only that, but do you simply reject universally proven facts because someone you don't agree with believes that fact? That is the level of your argument here OP. It is really very weak.

Do you think also that a 'far-right' group would be 'gender critical'? Because that seems like an oxymoron there. A far right group being critical of gender stereotypes? Really?

Perhaps rather than simply following a tribalist approach to information, you should read widely and openly and look at arguments and check the integrity of statements, conclusions etc and make an informed decision. From reading your posts on this thread, I don't believe you have done this.

It's not just this young boy being "turfed out" as you put it. ALL male members of Girlguiding will have to leave by September as the charity follows the Supreme Court judgment and reverts to being the single-sex organisation it was founded to be.