Susie Green article in the Graun

Exactly Procrastinator1. She has bugger all reaction to trans children who are being forced out of the girl guides.

I wonder if that's because they are girls?

The woman makes me seethe.

I don't disagree with you Datun. But the general public are being led to only thinking of the de-sexualised trans girl when they read these articles / see the Butterfly drama etc, not the LM types.

Yy RealGhouls the whole package really. Jackie does seem like a genuinely nice person. I hope she is happy now.

Green never seems to give any thought to the trans boys or girls who may be having difficulties with their "identity". She is saluting their exclusion from the Girl Guides.

"I also wonder if Susie and Jackie Green would be so influential if Jackie was less physically attractive?"

I'm not sure that it's even so much that Jackie is attractive or not. Jackie comes across as entirely non-threatening, conforms to a female gender stereotype, and is as such the perfect poster child to push through the rest of the Stonewall agenda.

The pressure on pink boys and their parents may be just too overwhelming and the prepubescent kid may indeed be happier living as a girl as a result
Yep, sadly, but it seems to be hard for some parents, for whatever reason, to have the insight to realise this is what’s happening. The belief in a medical condition/mistake made by nature must be sooo seductive, parents grab it with both hands and run with it.

Starkstaring

Whilst I agree there might be a world of difference to the child in question, there is zero difference to the girls who are expected to share with someone of the opposite sex.

You're right that no one can make the distinction. But for those girls, the distinction will often be immaterial.

Susie Green couldn't care less about girls.

It strikes me that transgenderism is an ideology that parents who don’t have much imagination and perhaps aren’t very intelligent are more likely to get caught up in?

I mean, I believe part of it is parents who can't imagine a 'pink boy' (I have seen featured conservative Christian families pretty often in these transkid documentraries), presumably due to unacknowledged homophobia. But what also plays a part, imo, is society. I can very well believe that a boy of whom everybody knows he is a boy in a pink dress is treated differently (and way worse) by people than a boy who everyone thinks is a girl in a pink dress. The latter will probably be way happier as a result.

The pressure on pink boys and their parents may be just too overwhelming and the prepubescent kid may indeed be happier living as a girl as a result.

There is a world of difference between a child who has believed they were the opposite sex from a young age all the way through puberty, and may be on puberty blockers, probably has no sexual function(arguably an "intractable case" for whom transition is a "good" option) who wants to go to guides; and a 15 year old who has recently declared their identity to be female, who wants to be included in Girl Guides. How do the GG guidelines allow for a distinction to be made?

I also wonder if Susie and Jackie Green would be so influential if Jackie was less physically attractive? I think I know the answer to this one, tbh...

I also remember Susie Green laughing at the stunted size of her child's penis and the contingent expected difficulties with genital surgery.

Beyond belief that someone who did what she did to her child is considered any kind of authority on safeguarding.

'comment is free'- but not if you want to critique the abuse of children it seems

re there no fact checkers at The Guardian anymore? Also, no comments allowed?

The Guardian drank the woke kool-aid years ago. Its sole focus now is identity politics.

As others have said, Susie Green’s TED talk reveals the likely reason for her child beginning to believe they were a girl: the homophobia of the father when the child preferred “girl” toys and clothes. These stories seem quite common for trans kids ‘i told them they weren’t allowed the toys they liked because only girls like those toys’ the kid then says ‘I AM a girl mum’ then is suddenly allowed to play with the toys they want and grow their hair long and wear a dress to school etc. And the parents say ‘they’re like a different child! So happy and so confident!’ but for some reason don’t question whether that’s because they’re not being told that everything they do and like is wrong anymore. They take it as absolute proof that the male child is ‘really a girl and always has been’
It strikes me that transgenderism is an ideology that parents who don’t have much imagination and perhaps aren’t very intelligent are more likely to get caught up in? Without meaning to be rude about parents of trans children in general, but children who identify as trans as pre teens are likely to be extremely influenced by their parents, as young children are. ROGD teenagers are a different matter though.

With apologies to deepwatersolo because I don't want to upset you,

No apologies needed for speaking the truth. The disconnect in much of society is the enraging part of it, and the best we can do is speaking out on it again and again, until they can't ignore it any more.

She also has no concept of the privacy of girls issue - largely because all she knows is her own child.

As Susie Green joked about her child's tiny penis—the inevitable result of chemical castration—on television, she clearly has no regard for the privacy of children of either sex.

I'm not sure what her point about the suicide is. There was a recent case of a transman committing suicide in Cardiff, at Uni, member of LGBT society, all very woke, couldn't hope for more supportive environment, all the resources of the NHS, transition, hormones, etc. - things that perhaps not available in native Bulgaria.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/transgender-student-20-took-life-13274028

Still committed suicide. What is Susie trying to say?

What her child has been through is so extreme (the only one in the country?) that she has to defend it.

I'm sure if none of this was in the media and her child wanted to join GG they would have made an exception due to the exceptional circumstances.
However what she doesn't seem to see is that she's trying to open the doors for anyone and everyone and this leaves young people vulnerable to abuse.

The brutal truth is that scouts, guides, and sports clubs attract men who are attracted to young people. Football, gymnastics, etc etc.

With apologies to deepwatersolo because I don't want to upset you, but the Barry Bennell case - youth football coach convicted of 43 counts of child sex abuse - was plastered all over the news recently for months. He got away with it in plain sight, over and over and over again. 86 new victims came forward since the most recent investigation started. That's just the most high-profile example that springs to mind.

It's like a total disconnect in the minds of these people who continue to parrot that there's no need to worry about safeguarding.

Those bloody suicide statistics again! It makes me so angry that she continues to portray these numbers as fact when they have been completely debunked. Are there no fact checkers at The Guardian anymore? Also, no comments allowed? I'm shocked.

The brutal truth is that scouts, guides, and sports clubs attract men who are attracted to young people. Football, gymnastics, etc etc.

As the mother of a boy, this really keeps me up at night. I want him to do stuff, but this nagging feeling is just there... I don't have a daughter, but it is beyond me, why people would want to throw the really straight forward 'females only' safeguarding for girls out of the window.

Dear Susie, if a single case IS reported, will you change your view on this?

Because it sure as heck doesn't seem to have been the case for other single-sex areas.

And the tone of outrage at “boys” sharing showers and tents with girls invites the reader to imagine predatory young people stalking girls and abusing them in these settings. What is most worrying is that this will inevitably lead to prejudice against transgender children increasing, despite no evidence whatsoever that trans girls pose a threat.

She doesn't give a stuff about the girls who don't want a boy in there does she? She is so sexist it's not even funny.

In the eight years since trans girls have had this protection, not a single case has been reported of sexual abuse or inappropriate behaviour by a trans child towards a cisgender child.

This is a complete lie. A woman on Twitter told Stella Creasy (I believe), that a transgirl was fondling her penis while watching her daughter shower/change (can't quite remember). The woman was told it was her daughter's attitude that was wrong.

So Green is either ignorant, lying, or doesn't think that behaviour is predatory.

If you do the-thing-that-Green-did then the reality is that you will spend the rest of your life justifying that act to yourself. Because the alternative is unthinkable.

I don't blame Green personally. I bet she has spent many a night wishing she'd left her stupid husband earlier and wondering what might have been.

I do however blame those supposedly in charge of safeguarding for letting her run amok and set the agenda for other people's children.