4 year old boy started primary school as a girl...

He was 4 when enrolled at reception age. He's now Year 3. Which is ages 7-8.

He's not 4. He's year 4.

My experience of four year old boys is that they are obsessed with what's in their pants and this one seems no different.

I've talked before about shared identities and the impact on those closest to someone who has transitioned and the impact.

We have the trans widows who talk about the impact on wives and children.

I've mentioned about how the Beaumont society many years ago talked about women having breakdowns over this.

Are we really surprised that very young children might end collateral damage to this?

And yet again we have this idea that the only protected characteristic in this scenario is gender and that's the only thing that matters. It's crap. Safeguarding still applies as does sex.

I see that people say it doesn't matter if they are a girl or a boy, they should just play if they like the child. That's fine to a point - but what we have here is a situation where the kids feel lied to and have had their ability to make informed choices removed. It therefore is a consent issue too.

Nor does it take into account what happens later when any of the four children do find out the truth. How does it impact them? Do they get confused over the relationship? How do the parents safeguard out of school in this situation? There's an issue with parental trust there.

The idea that it's no one else's business what is in a child pants is nonsense because eventually I these children will be teens and it very much will matter and will be relevant.

At some point someone will study the psychological impact of transition on families and close friends and it won't make for light, happy reading.

Yes I remember that case. And mermaids trying desperately to discredit the judge.

Despite him being quite an expert in how the ideology affects children, iirc. And had written about it extensively.

He still didn't know he was doing, the bigot.

Yes - he just let him do his own thing with no pressures, under direction from courts and ss etc, and the boy started asking for toys other boys had and then wanted to wear the same as them. Then the life with his mother started to come out.

He was 7 by then, too, like the boy in the OP.

Really the parents need looking at by social services. Some type of munchasen by proxy surely. But really ss will threaten to take the child away if you don't transition them because they are just as captured as the church.

They get changed separately from Y4.

Mixed activities throughout Primary, so I guess Y7 (assuming Secondary is not mixed).

Is this the one where the child was sent to his father to live and he stopped identifying as a girl almost immediately?

Yes. The reality is a lot more prosaic, isn't it.

I remember the mother using the every day methods that you would use to prepare a child for what will happen in the future - surgery - but of course it wasn't everyday at all.

The child became more disturbed, presumably as his awareness and understanding of reality around him grew. She also isolated him more and more as the world outside failed to comply with how she wanted things to be.

He's always had long blonde hair and I think it could be something along them lines, infact when he was identifying as a boy I thought he was a girl. I know lots of boys who also have long hair and are very much boys. But I do think the parents have guided him along, he looks like a girl and he's been led to believe he is one. I don't know but he uses the girls toilets too, it's been very confusing for the other kids

There is a sort of mystique to these articles, so that even when you don't believe them, you are left believing that there is something special about these children that needs some help or sorting.

Yes, you're right! There's an esoteric slant to them that hints at it being a medical condition, or innate, but never quite says so.

This court case showed the reality. There is an everyday, banal abusiveness to it.

Yes. The reality is a lot more prosaic, isn't it.

https://www.transgendertrend.com/uk-court-case-exposes-social-services-in-thrall-to-transgender-orthodoxy/

There was a court case about a 4 year old that totally peaked me.

Before that, I had heard plenty of trans PR pieces on R4 Today, including one where a mother was bringing her 4 yo up as the opposite sex. There is a sort of mystique to these articles, so that even when you don't believe them, you are left believing that there is something special about these children that needs some help or sorting.

This court case showed the reality. There is an everyday, banal abusiveness to it. I grew up with parents who worked in social care with neighbours and friends who worked in child protection and this brought everything home to me.

This court case should have been an end to cases like the boy in the OP. Questions should have been asked.

from the Telegraph article

Some headteachers may have felt pressured into taking stances that are not in the interests of their pupils. If the new guidance is not adopted by schools in spirit and in letter, then new laws may be required.

That's exactly what I was saying. The reaction of transactivists to the loopholes in the government guidance will force the government into more stringent measures.

They just need to get a bloody move on.

And yes, what the hell reason is there for this child to be claiming they are the opposite sex? Have they got gender dysphoria? Are they under a doctor?

Where did it come from.

At what age do kids start to do sex-segregated PE in schools these days? What will happen then?

Then the adults are encouraging and enabling this. 4 year old children do not have autonomy. We don't allow them to choose whether they go to nursery/school, when to go to bed, whether to swear at people, whether to come on a family visit to the grandparents, and many other things. Where did this 4 year old boy even get the idea that identifying as a girl and changing his name/pronouns was at all an option?

The Telegraph have published a 'Telegraph View'. It doesn't add much to the previous articles but it's good they're still pursuing it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2024/01/27/calling-gender-wrong-in-schools/

https://archive.ph/2nAFt

It’s astonishing that this needs to be pointed out, really. After all, there’s a reason why we can’t vote or get a tattoo until we’re 18 🤷‍♀️

This can't be stated too often. 4 years olds - in fact children generally - don't have the life experiences or capacity to consent to undertaking the impossible task of "changing sex'.
What is happening is a complete breakdown of safeguarding. These children are being at the very least, emotionally abused - including the teenagers caught up in all this.

You mean: the parents changed his name, bought different clothes and told everyone he’s now a girl. The poor child doesn’t “identify” as anything; he probably still needs help brushing his teeth, wiping his bottom and putting his shoes on. He has no agency over anything in his life at this stage. It’s all about his parents.

At 4 my niece identified as an owl & wore a set of wings. That didnt mean that we encouraged her when she tried to climb on the shed to see whether she would fly

she also at other times identified as a cat and a dinosaur

a 4 year old has no concept of ‘gender identity’ unless it’s been implanted by adults imposing gendered expectations around clothes & toys

My dds friend started nursery as a boy and at 4 years old identifies as a girl. Wears girls clothes, identifies as she and changed their name.

The boy seems to think it's important and to want others to know to the point of flashing.

Poor child being lied to and his poor classmates too. I'd be finding another school if my child was in a school who abused kids like this.

I was quoting a previous poster, but I meant somebody with a DSD. I’m not aware of any other meanings, though I agree it isn’t the preferred term.

"The protected characteristic of gender reassignment only works one way – not being transgender is not a protected characteristic....Consequently schools can make adjustments to meet the needs of a trans pupil without being accused of discriminating against non-trans pupils".

I think this bit is actually correct. It's similar to how disability is a protected characteristic, but not being disabled isn't.

But the legitimate adjustments would be something like allowing a boy with the pc of gender reassignment to wear the girls' uniform. This wouldn't be discriminating against other boys who are not allowed to do this, because they don't have this protected characteristic.

When there is a conflict with other protected characteristics, the other pcs still have to be considered. There is obviously a conflict in allowing a boy to use girls' toilets, since the protected characteristic of sex still applies, so other arrangements have to be found for him. Gender reassignment being a one way pc doesn't mean that all other pcs can be ignored.