Six year old trans girl ‘tries to cut off her penis’ after Guide ban

TRAs will lie to children about who they are and what they can do and then accuse everyone else of weaponising them when reality inevitably hits. They also don't give a shit about the needs and safety of children who need single sex spaces, usually girls although not always. If they had their way, men would be able to identify their way into changing rooms full of undressed children. Plus, they also seem to be hellbent on creating a generation of people who are legally and chronologically 16 or 18, but physically 12. How these people fucking dare attack anyone for "weaponising" kids by defending single sex spaces is insane. But as ever, when you insist women and girls can have penises, you have no limit on absurdity.

Girlguiding began as a response to girls wanting something equivalent to Scouting for boys. That's what you do when the option for you doesn't yet exist; you create a new one. Women have had to do this for nearly everything and that was never seen as a problem, but as soon as men who claim to be women want in, it would be a human rights abuse not only for them to do the same (even though options do exist, they just don't affirm boys as girls) but for women not to go along with the destruction of their spaces, and to be forbidden from creating yet another one.

Plus, Girlguiding began in 1910 and it's only in very recent years, with the rise of this ideology, that we are hearing even unsubstantiated and dubious claims that boys are trying to castrate themselves to join rather than become Scouts.

Shocking. Also shocking that the parents pushed this agenda for a young child, if they’re 6 now they must be living as a girl a year or two.
Why would you allow your 4/5 y.o to change gender.

"zealots hounding and turfing out 6 year olds"

The hyperbole of posts such as this really do show the level of emotional manipulation that is needed to support one group's demand. That demand being that the group's subjective reality (that is not based on material reality), should be treated as the universal material reality for everyone and that society needs to act as if that subjective reality is materially real when it is not.

Posts such as this demonise people who point out there are legitimate reasons that a boy should not be included in a female single sex provision. And I have yet to see any acknowledgment that there are legitimate reasons.

Let's face it, nobody is born in the wrong body. Your body is yours, just the same as your mind is yours.

Parents imposing a mental illness on a boy of 6 are criminally negligent in my view.

No child is “born in the wrong body.”

Take it up with the lads parents who, after the Supreme Court Judgement, still knowingly led him to believe that he could join in the first place instead of just signing him up for Scouts.

Do you tell your daughter that she is no anorexic? Do you deny the material reality of her situation?

I don't believe that Dr Cass has stated that any child should be told they are the opposite sex to what they materially are. And I don't believe that she has stated that society must treat a boy who believes he is a girl as if he was female for the purposes of single sex provision.

She has said somethings about 'weaponising' but she has also been clear that these children do not change sex and that even using pronouns is not a 'neutral act'. I believe that she has not been specific about what should happen to these male children regarding access to female single sex provisions.

So, if any poster has a record of her saying explicitly that little boys who believe they are girls should be included in female single sex provisions, such as guiding, please do post it. Otherwise, this discussion about 'weaponising' that has now moved to include Hilary Cass is just sparple and is, in fact, someone trying to 'weaponise' some of her words to make other posters out to be hateful.

No. It is not 'clear' in the way you assert.

What has happened is that a group campaigned to lower the safeguarding principles that Guiding used to exclude all male people from being guides and in leadership roles. This should never have happened because gender identity is based on a subjective belief, one that is only supported by philosophical theories, that a person has about themselves and not based on material reality based on established science.

If you are angry, be angry at the people who first demanded and those who agreed with these safeguarding principles being lowered in the first place. If guiding was always mixed sex, there would never have been an issue. But it was and is again, a female single sex provision.

The parents who have publicised this child's distress are the people who have 'weaponised' him.

Female athletes are female athletes because they have the attributes which make them a good athlete, so yes your "tall " example will have an advantage over other women.
They will most likely be better at sport than females without those physical attributes, be it tall, strong, agile ,good proprioception. Females who dont have these atributes will tend not to become athletes.
However those advantages exist on a curve ranging from body types which make you pretty shite at sport, to body types liable to make you good sport. They are however still female bodied and lie with in the range for female bodies.

Females athletes who have those physical advantages will still NEVER have the same physical advantages as men. Because thats biology.

It works a bit, as we can see with some posters. It worked a lot more previously, however, people are pushing back against this nonsense now and no longer afraid to speak out.

Even teens that were supportive of their confused classmates are seeing the performative attention seeking behaviour fir what it is now. Many teens are now eye rolling at 'changing sex' now. The poor autistic girls were also used. Already having to cope with autism then used by cross dressers to further their aims.

TRAs weaponise children

Absolutely. TRAs weaponise children by making children the front line for their cross sex demands, in the hope that they can DARVO society's entirely reasonable rejection of girls resources being given over to boys into ReaCtIonAries HAtinG On ChiLDrRen 😱

Nope.

The father (assuming he is real and not a person just identifying as a father) is weaponising a child. Joining a girl only organisation as a boy is pretty silly anyway.

The individuals like yourself wanting little boys to push into little girls spaces is weaponising too. There are lots of mixed spaces he can attend. Thinking girls should help sort his confusion by joining in the lies to him is also wrong. Mass lying is wrong. Why do you want us to mass lie?

TRAs weaponise children.

Women are fed up of being shoved aside to support confused males. Any child who is so disturbed that might cut off bits of his body needs urgent mental health attention. Or social services intervention. The parent sounds insane using his son this way.

Telling a boy that he can be a girl at such a young age is in my opinion abusive. It's setting him up for at best disappointment and at worse for extreme distress. Telling him that he isn't a girl but that he can have different hobbies and interests, that he can join mixed sex groups but not groups for girls stops problems before they start. We need to start being honest with children generally, it can be done kindly, in a matter of fact manner, but it really needs to be done.

However, telling someone who is one sex they can change to another is not realistic.

Someone who thinks they are overweight as you say is better managed being low weight to.keep stable rather than force feeding.

The anorexic comparison was a mistake by me. Weight can be overweight, within safe regions and underweight. Sex is binary and you are one or the other and lying that you can change from one to the other is wrong. People might present in dress, appearance as they think the opposite sex do and live as they "think" the opposite sex do. They will never be the opposite sex, its impossible due to DNA which is in every cell of the body, they can play pretend of course and if that makes them happy ...

Please note, @JonesTown has disappeared from the thread. I hope she'll be back soon, but perhaps she's persuaded that she's made a mistake?

If anyone "weaponised" this boy, it's firstly his father and secondly the OP.

This child, if he even exists, had no business being a Rainbows member, in the first place.
His parents have let him down, cos how can you turn the (metaphorical) tanker around?

Now, this TRA arsehole father, with this non existent ‘trans’ child can boldly reinforce the TRA talking point about it being innate, and people are who they say they are, blah, blah, blah.

I am convinced that this ‘father’ is an AGP, wielding a pretend kid so no one notices the elephant in the room.

lets not forget the parents signed this child up for rainbows knowing quite well what was coming.

Who exactly is weaponising the child?

God that is just utter crap though.

Its the LAW. What aspect of that do you not understand?

None of us have had anything to do with GG decision to be single sex.

None of us have had anything to do with this child being enrolled in an activity his parents knew he couldn't remain in.

None of us have had anything to do with lying to this child that he was somehow a girl and society would accept him as such.

Your position is complete and utter bananas. You are so completely blinkered, you cannot even understand the basics of how this child has been let down.

Rainbows is for girls, it's really that simple.

There is a reason why TRA's like to characterise the whole single sex exemptions thing as women making a fuss about toilets.

Far easier to shriek 'they just want to pee!!!' than acknowledge the need for single sex prisons, rape crisis services, domestic abuse shelters etc.

Or admit they see girls as nothing more than support humans to ensure that boys get their own way, all the time.

Oh it’s clear. Posters like you and the zealots hounding and turfing out 6 year olds
from Rainbows are weaponising children and nothing less.

Please explain how I or anyone else on this thread is weaponising this child?

It’s clear what CASS, weaponise as you wish but it’s clear.