Teacher upset with my child questioning about trans child

I'm not sure why you're struggling to understand the point I'm making. It's very simple.

Several posters were claiming that every individual has sex characteristics that can be unambiguously classified as exclusively male or female. That claim is false and oversimplistic.

But are so often introduced to derail discussions about safeguarding vulnerable children 🙄

@Lacksie et al are perfectly aware of this which is why they do it.

But are so often introduced to derail discussions about safeguarding vulnerable children 🙄

It would be interesting if this were done. I expect that if gender-non-conforming people, whether children or adults, had to be tested for DSDs to see if they were truly trans, the number with DSDs would be close to zero and trans ideology would collapse.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Are you suggesting that all non gender conforming children should be tested for rare DSDs so that the 'true' trans children, those with an identified DSD could be medically and emotionally supported to achieve their transitions?

And those that don't have a DSD are offered psychological support to accept their bodies as they are?

(Apologies to anyone with a DSD offended by the suggestion above, this is not my viewpoint I'm trying to get to the bottom of the point Lacksie is trying to make)

Edited to change 'for' to 'to' in the final paragraph.

DSDs are irrelevant to the topic on this thread.

Biological sex in Homo sapiens is overwhelmingly simple. The vast vast majority of people go through an unsurprising puberty, recognise the opposite sex and are able to reproduce. Hence our crowded planet. In the developed world, the tiny number of babies born with DSDs are diagnosed quickly and their parents given appropriate support.

There is no suggestion the child in the OP's scenario has a DSD. It sounds very much like a parenting and safeguarding issue though.

Not really, no. How exactly is this pigeon chess? People are claiming that biological sex is simple and invariably unambiguous. That is demonstrably false. Pointing out the biological complexity that contradicts that claim isn't pigeon chess.

I see we are playing pigeon chess again...

You keep asserting that one pathway is always dominant without providing any explanation or evidence to support that universal claim. What do you mean by “dominant”: tissue quantity, hormone production, anatomy or reproductive function? Which measure takes priority, and why? Is there a consistent criterion across cases? If different criteria are used in different cases, how is that choice determined and justified in each?

No because there is always a dominant pathway. Even in the incredibly rare cases where there is ‘tissue’ from another reproductive organ, the other pathway will be much more developed.

And what we are talking about here is the fringe case of fringe cases. It has zero relevance to ‘trans’ identification, which has absolutely nothing to do with DSDs

No. I'm arguing that it's false to assume every individual can be objectively and unambiguously classified as male or female when their biological sex characteristics don't align. An individual doesn't need two functioning reproductive systems for their sex classification to be ambiguous. They may be completely infertile - lots of people with DSDs are. So what? That doesn't establish which sex they are.

That's completely irrelevant to the claim that every individual can be objectively and unambiguously classified as male or female, even when their biological sex characteristics don't align.

An individual doesn't have to produce both sperm and ova for their sex classification to be biologically ambiguous. Equally, the fact that someone cannot produce either type of gamete doesn't, in itself, establish which sex they are.

Something odd must have been happening in Copenhagen to spark Hand Christian Andersen's story. I wonder what it was, that he felt it needed saying but also needed disguising.

I agree it is now quite unusual to see young girls with short hair. It never used to be. 'Gender' seems to have exerted its grip more strongly since the 1980s - when it became a marketing opportunity and a product you could buy. Clothing and toys became more heavily segregated and the whole pink - barbie 'thing' took off. Pink ailes for girls' toys, blue aislesfor boys. It is all so retrograde.

Gender Ideology itself is also a product of Amercan style consumer culture, in my mind ( aligned with the rise of big pharma). People are so easily led and bought. Dylan Mulvaney is perhaps a perfect example of American gender culture.

Are you suggesting that humans can have two functioning reproductive systems ? Or am I reading this wrong ?

Not to mention that the poster is completely sidestepping the main issue. They are advocating that the OP ‘communicate’ with the teacher, as to how best her child can be ‘accepting’ of the other childs’ preferences, despite the fact that the teacher is expressly acting against the guidelines issued for primary schools. Namely that primary school teachers should not encourage or initiate social transition requests—including asking other children to use different pronouns.

No.

There is not one single human in the history of the species who has had two equally functioning reproductive systems and has been able to produce both gametes.

Both of your first two claims are irrelevant to the third- which is an assumption you have drawn with no justification.

How old before people realised?

Ah, so, we have a genuinely curious child who has identified that what she is being told and coerced into accepting is false. She is obviously aware that some kids are boys and some kids are girls, and at her level of development she understands that these are mutually exclusive categories.

Particularly as one of this hydra’s heads is an aspect of male sexuality, and another hydra head is an aspect of patriarchy.

Thank you. Yes, it's amazing how many people seem unable or unwilling to accept that very young children's cognitive skills will naturally be immature and take some time to develop. They treat them as their own authorities, whose word and feelings are gospel, when in reality, they still have a lot of mental developing to do.

There are people who would always make sure to firmly hold the hand of a child when walking through the street, as they can't be trusted not to dart into the traffic; yet they genuinely claim that the same child who vaguely says they're a girl (when they're actually a boy) or vice versa is able to know for a fact that they have been 'born in the wrong body'. Oddly, when it isn't a child of the opposite sex that they 'are', but rather a dinosaur, Thomas the Tank Engine or a firefighter, THEN it is somehow clearly obvious that it's just imaginative play and the workings of a very young mind.

Little ones do tend to struggle with the idea of cause and effect - and will understandably reach backwards conclusions. It's far from uncommon for tiny children to know when their birthday is, and that it's their special day - as they've been told by their parents; but then to be staggered by the amazing 'coincidence' when they later come to learn that it was 'also' the day when they actually happened to be born!!

There have, but that was before the days of the www and social media. This hydra will be rather more difficult to dispose of, I think.

Mass psychosis generally does stop. There have been other well documented events that were just as stupid as pretending men are women before. They were less pervasive for various reasons, but all ended eventually, because they were simply false, as this is.