Canadian PM Mark Carney's child attended Tavistock

I never knew that about one of the offspring of a Labour Party family. A quick google led to many photos and newspaper articles, with publicised spread of photo shoots showing a bandaged woman just having had her breasts cut off. Not for disease or anything; just you don’t want them. An adult, so not a child. A woman who identifies as non binary, but oddly definitely now as a ‘he’. Why say you’re now a ‘he’ man, yet also make a big deal out of saying you’re ’non binary’? He and she are very much binary. How proud they all are of her for her great accomplishments, i.e.cutting bits off, and being so brave as to ‘identify’ as man. It truly makes you humble in the presence of such greatness.

Just my personal opinion, but I find it incredible that so much energy and resources are expended (and drained from true need) on this absolute codswallop. To me it is unfathomable how a not very enriching (quite the opposite) anti scientific ideology has been allowed to erode rights and protections against abuse of women and children. Something incredibly homophobic too as lesbians are vilified for not accepting a man as a lesbian.

I must admit, I never thought about having children until later in life. Certainly not breastfeeding any offspring. Until I did. F You can never predict how important it may be to someone to have the choice of feeding your baby, and keeping them alive for months with tailored milk from your own body.

I usually agree that it's wrong to bring politicians' families into political debates, but in this case, as PPs have said, the subject is not a child, and has freely published her own forceful opinions on gender.

I also agree that having a trans child appears to influence parents' thinking on the subject - or maybe it's just a whole lot of coincidences? - and therefore it is relevant to what Carney's prime ministership might mean for the restoration of women's rights in Canada.

I don't see anything wrong with what the OP has done.

She's bloody named herself! And she is not a kid.

I think she is criticising the idea that there is one "truth" of trans, that either dysphoria in children persists and is a sign of true transness or that it doesn't and therefore the truth is that "trans" does not exist. And therefore also disagreeing with the idea that science or data can be used to arbitrate between these.

She just doesnt address what "trans" is. Or that it's often used as an umbrella term which means that there is no such thing as "authentically" trans since it can mean more or less anything, much like queer. But then again she also describes mumsnet as something like "a mommy blogger site." so defining terms is either not her strong point or perhaps not relevant to her own thoughts or those of her intended audience.

Bearing in mind this article is from fourish years ago when she was 20ish, writing for what looks like a student publication with writers who self describe as predominantly queer women...

I think it's not as frothing or as rigidly ideological as might be expected. I wonder what she thinks of it now?

One thing I would take issue with is her lack of empathy for parents and the use of parentheses for "concerned". And as someone else pointed out, the information that she went to the Tavistock as a teenager doesn't really say much about her parents and their opinion of all this. Plenty of parents took this route. I wonder what she'll think of this if she ever gains the life experience that is being a mother?

Wow 😂
Carney is not the solution, he's the problem.

Economic inequality is created by people like him.
Wars are created by people like him.
Telling children they're "born wrong and need to be lifelong medical patients" is created by people like him.
Ideological austerity and human exploitation is what they dream of. Epstein's child sex island is a dream come true for him and his friends. Shame the Clinton's had to kill Epstein off in his opinion.

He is not going to help Canada, he will destabilise it further and make things worse. (Better for him and his billionaire banker friends, though).

This is what these people do.

No, by "transmeds" she means:

'Transmedicalists, or “transmeds,” are those who fixate on acute gender dysphoria as a litmus test for “true” transness.Transmed Youtubers mock nonbinary people and gender nonconforming trans people as “transtrenders. ”The message becomes clear: the only “authentic” form of transness is one that can be diagnosed by rules set out by cisgender medical professionals.'

It's in the article just before this (which she means sarcastically):

'If we can only objectively prove, with clinical diagnoses and data science, that childhood gender dysphoria does or does not persist into adulthood, is or is not alleviated by medical intervention, then we can prove the “truth” of trans identity.'

As if clinical diagnoses and data science are bad things! Why would someone not want to be 100% sure about the efficacy of medical intervention before they embarked on that path?

So a willful misunderstanding of the courtesy some women historically extended to full op transexuals is now thrown back as being unfair because all males of special identity aren't let in?

And this position of accepting post-op males is lumped in with so-called "TERF"s despite the fact that a feminist position would be that expensive elective surgery isn't really the answer for anyone's issues?

Genderism sure works hard to make sure the one thing nobody criticises is our capitalist, patriarchal status quo! God forbid anyone actually attempt to change this society that leads to so many unhappy people.

I looked up "transmed". Apparently it means "A person who believes that medically-diagnosed gender dysphoria or medical transition are essential traits of being transgender."

So, those are the bad guys now, apparently.

I hope Mark Carney wins the election, Canada really needs him as PM with all the economic craziness Trump is throwing out there.

+1 on this.

The "bigger problems" have been partly caused by democrats insisting e.g. that people can change sex (and all the surrounding consequences) - I believe this had a contribution to Trump getting into power, as people were voting against the reality-deniers.

Trans children deserve support, love, affirmation of their identity, and access to resources like puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and gender-affirming clothing. They also deserve to have all of this on their own terms, without the legitimacy of their transness being interrogated, over and over, by transmeds and TERFs.

This is interesting, thanks Grey. By "transmeds", am I right in thinking they mean "old fashioned" transexuals who have had full surgery?

It reminds me of the Action for Trans Health list of demands - "we demand free full body laser hair removal and an anaesthetic of our choice for it"

Naming ANYONE’S kids is appalling.

She's 24 years old and she named herself!

Really? Why? Sasha Carney is an adult. She's been completely open about being transgender. It's hardly as if anyone has outed her.

This might thread might look "unkind" but we've had many years of trans activists using "transkids" as human shields and by doing so having some success in stifling discussion.

I don't want to see the same kind of tactic being used to shield leaders of countries from having their views examined. Or others having significant power in shaping what happens in law or the implementation of laws.

1. Tavistock wasn’t/isnt just about GIDS. It is a very well established service with a broad offering.

2. Naming ANYONE’S kids is appalling.

Very odd article. She's almost there - yes, there have always been girls who defied stereotypes. What she doesn't do is explain why they now need medication and surgery. They didn't need medicating in the past.

What on earth is 'gender affirming clothing'? And why is it lumped in with harmful medication? If she just engaged her brain for a second she'd realise this is all about reinforcing stereotypes, which is the opposite of what girls like George were doing in the past.

We vote for politicians, they are supposed to represent us. I don't see the harm in knowing a bit about their background as long as it's not overly intrusive. This article can hardly be said to be intrusive, the daughter wrote it herself for publication.

We similarly get a recurring question about how many members of Keir Starmer's cabinet have trans-identified children. It's a live topic in Labour gossip. Depending on who you believe, it's anywhere between three and six. I wouldn't want to out any individuals - just to note that, as Helen Joyce says, it only takes one parent of a trans-identified child to chill discussion in a whole organisation.

We all know about Stephen Kinnock's child. If one is enough, there's at least one.

Anne= annoying
George= me
Dick= best mate to have a laugh with
Julian= the one my parents wanted me to be friends with
Timmy= actually scrap Dick, I’d rather be with Timmy

Didn't every girl want the above or just me?

The article reads to me like “this is how I feel/felt, so give me what I want”.

This is the entire basis for transitioning children.

I'm always a bit reluctant to bring powerful people's children into it, even when they go public themselves.

But you remember there was a long-running issue of Labour politicians sending their kids to private schools while wanting to restrict choice for parents without their resources. It wasn't going after the kids to bring that up.

(It's less of an issue now, because the workaround is to send them to "comprehensives" in nice areas of north London that are grammars in all but name.)

We similarly get a recurring question about how many members of Keir Starmer's cabinet have trans-identified children. It's a live topic in Labour gossip. Depending on who you believe, it's anywhere between three and six. I wouldn't want to out any individuals - just to note that, as Helen Joyce says, it only takes one parent of a trans-identified child to chill discussion in a whole organisation.

If the leader of the country had some other anti-science views, say, being anti-vax, would it be reasonable to be able to discuss them? Or would we have to say that, well, it's his personal beliefs and we ought to respect them but it's not nice to talk about them?

Or what if the leader had fringe, and potentially harmful, views about curing autism in his child, would we also have to remain silent about that?

Enid Blyton could probably do with her own thread.

Ha ha, that's true! Could end up being very controversial though! I found some of @GarlicStyle 's comments upthread interesting, like this one: Enid Blyton's character George doesn't have to be trans, nonbinary or what Sasha calls a boygirl. She's just herself: a female child preferring those activities which, in the 1940s, were stereotypically ascribed to male children.

I suspect a lot of us here had a "tomboy" childhood.

On a completely different topic, the article reminded me how much I love 1930s and 1940s children's book illustration.

Agree Carney’s child is none of anyone’s business, and should be left alone.

But as Helen Joyce has pointed out, parents who supported their child’s transition can never retreat from a pro-trans stance - it’s just not possible because that would be to acknowledge what has been done to their child and their part in it.

So the fact that Carney has a trans child is relevant to understanding his opinions. As Canada’s PM, this will influence what happens to a lot of Canada’s kids, particularly if gets elected as opposed to just stepping in to the position as he has done now.