Charity rejects disabled child for mother's GC views

It wasnt though. I'm 99% sure of that. And I've never seen it marked as compulsory despite seeing it more and more on forms. Actually, one one form recently it was, but it was a sort of drop down form and every single answer was compulsory. Even ones totally irrelevant to you and they wouldn't even have n\a to express that it isn't relevant. But that was more about the construction of the form than anything else. Bad coding or design or whatever.

Because they know the staff will try to gaslight him.

https://sex-matters.org/about-us/

Staying silent and thinking you've said enough is not safeguarding.

This. Any ideology that triggers the reaction “Sssshhh! They might hear you! You can’t say that you’ll get in trouble! Best just to keep your mouth shut” is a nasty, controlling, oppressive ideology. We already know of the Stasi like practices of police action against Wrongthink, it’s a feature, not a bug of this ideology to rely on people saying nothing in opposition to its horrible ideas and practices.

It’s remarkable to me how little understanding people have of how walked over they are when they comply with this way of thinking.

What if the question was compulsory to answer?

She strikes me a someone who correctly identified that this organisation actively supports gender ideology, which poses a risk to her child.

So absolutely does know 'where and when'.

Asking how disabled children like to be referred to is not particularly outrageous and part of respecting their rights to self-expression, something that can be really hard for those children who need constant care.

Child cannot be held responsible for their own safeguarding.

@Nameychangington yes I completely agree. I refuse to call these people "women," or other female terms such as "sister," "mother" etc, and this is easily avoidable. Pronouns are much trickier - people might say, "Well you don't use third person pronouns to a person, you just say, "you", but these people come up in conversation with other people.

"How is X? Has he passed his exam?"
"Are you seeing X at the weekend or is he still away with work?"

I can't use a name as a substitute here, that sounds ridiculous, and it's mentally taxing to rework the sentences. This means I often avoid talking about them at all.

I made those assumptions based on the mother's behaviour. As I said, I'd have left it blank and felt I'd said enough. She's one of those people who really don't know where and when.

Politeness is sexless.
I agree that asking pronouns is ridiculous, but going to the lengths of writing "seriously" on the form spoke volumes to the charity and tbh would have done to me as well.
The one we should all be sorry for is the child, because they've now lost out on a lovely trip which is possibly their first considering the difficulties they have.

Then she told him to double down based on what he sees

There's more to it than your title

"In a statement, the charity claimed its decision was not based on the mother’s objection to the question about pronouns, but her “aggressive” conduct over the phone and the fact that a potential “conflict” might arise given there was going to be a <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/zGGCc/www.telegraph.co.uk/transgender/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">transgender child at the camp"

I dont think it as clear as that purely because of the mother's behaviour. If for instance, they came across her social media, saw sh3 is GC and then banned her child, that would be different.

How are they insisting that they believe that? Is the pronoun question compulsory?

Where did you get all this from? Is this a gender camp or a general activities camp?

They're fucked

Thanks for posting this. It should be required reading for everyone working with children.

This tiktok, reposted by James Dreyfus, clearly illustrates the dangers to children when organisations buy into gender ideology.

Thank goodness this tomboy girl's step mum was sensible.

https://x.com/DreyfusJames/status/1961341405617406322

Pronouns are rohypnol.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

By calling a male 'she', you are being required to pay lip service to the belief that male and female are identities which can be picked and chosen, rather than descriptors of biological reality. You are being required to experience discomfort and make more mental effort, to 'be kind' to someone else without any reciprocity or any acknowledgement of the impact it has on you. It's neither equal nor neutral.

So not addressing them then. In any case it is vital that children are able to describe what they see. They must not be gaslit and told someone they know is the opposite sex or coerced to pretend they are.

But also for the other child - social transitioning is not neutral. It embeds a false belief in a child. Pronouns relate to sex and they wish everyone to use wrong-sex pronouns to uphold a fantasy about themselves. It is not safe for children to be told they can force the world to pretend things that are false.

No, children aged 8 and above also go to school, where they are socialised by teachers and peers. That's why organisations pushing gender ideology have worked so hard to get into schools to promote their beliefs. This child has not purely been exposed to his parents ideas about sex and gender.

You're right that 'we have no idea what the family has been teaching the child about gender', yet your posts make a lot of assumptions about what that has been.

Humans can't change sex. This child has eyes and a brain and can very likely sex other humans accurately. Requiring him to pretend another person has changed sex, to make that other person happy, is exploitative.

The camp staff are Genderists just like Jewish or Muslim or Christian belivers they have a belief system which they follow.

In this case they demand was that the mother and the child follow a faith pratice of knowingly and actively mis-sexing people.

When the staff member phoned she explained how the belief and belief pratice applied to the camp and the application process. When the mother explained she was not of that belief system and did not follow the same belief pratice the staff member rejected the childs application and put the contact details on a no contact list.

I know a couple of transwomen, who are referred to as "she" in our circle. But as time goes on, rather than getting used to it, I feel more and more annoyed that I am expected to go along with this. It does indeed fuck with my brain, and I feel I am coerced into a lie in order to "be kind".

@Ihavetoask You seem to be concerned that the child will mistakenly mis-sex another child and this will cause harm.

The situation is that trusted adults are actively demanding the child mis-sex another child against the evidence of his own eyes. This is harmful to all concerned.

There is no evidence that the former is happening, while the latter is what the whole situation is about.

Unfortunately this type of behaviour is rife amongst the charity sector and it is well & truly captured. The girl guides has recently advertised for a safeguarding officer & the first image on the ad is of them at Pride with their rainbow flags. No pictures of their activities or participants but a very prominent display of their rainbows. They're sending a very clear signal of the type of candidate they want without explicitly saying so.