Teacher upset with my child questioning about trans child

But your entire argument depends on assuming that “woman” can only ever mean adult human female, and therefore that including trans women makes the word mean its opposite. That’s precisely the assumption I’m challenging.

People applied EXACTLY the same logic to marriage. They insisted that definitionally a marriage could only mean a union between a man and a woman, and that extending it to same-sex couples would fundamentally change its meaning. Some may still believe that this has degraded the institution of marriage, but the meaning of the word hasn’t somehow collapsed. It still describes a marriage, including between a man and a woman. Its application has simply expanded.

The analogies illustrate a simple principle: words can acquire broader meanings without losing their existing uses or compromising understandings of those. You haven’t demonstrated why that principle can’t apply here. You’ve simply repeated your preferred definition and treated it as proof that any other usage must be wrong.

No it isn’t.

I would be happy to keep talking through the substantive issues with you - what it is to be trans, what is gender, etc. As a non gender critical, but informed voice.

Very kind of you. Can you do a better job than the trans authors of books? Or the podcasters? Or the trans people I've discussed with? Or everyone else who has tried to mansplain explain to us all on Mumsnet? Or all your previous attempts? Because I really don't think more linguistic contortions, pseudoscientific talk about spectrums, conflation of sex and gender at the same time as saying they are different things, and all the rest that I've read or heard, are going to be much help.

I haven't even seen any explanation as to why 'gender identity' is central to a trans person's identity. This seems very unhealthy. Most people's identity is formed of a huge range of things, including various aspects of their body (e.g. height, perceived attractiveness, sex), likes and dislikes, sporting allegiances, religion, star sign for some, relationships (which is why being father of my son is important to me!), musical preferences, whether a carnivore or vegetarian or vegan, political leanings, country of origin or residence, etc.

By "something resembling grief" I didn't mean to diminish it, or suggest the pain was less. Simply to acknowledge that it's not exactly the same- for a range of reasons - many of which you yourself acknowledge (not least the person is not actually dead, no societal ritual etc).

I am sorry you are in pain. I think you are very wrong in your assessment of the "incoherence" and "poorly thought through arguments". Maybe your son isn't so good at articulating his feelings and experience, but there is a huge amount of perfectly coherent and detailed info out there . I think you are struggling to understand - which is understandable. and you are on this board which is doing you no favours whatsoever. I also think you are fixated on the idea that you are being "controlled".

for what it's worth (im sure very little) I would be happy to keep talking through the substantive issues with you - what it is to be trans, what is gender, etc. As a non gender critical, but informed voice.

Otherwise, I hope you might over time , one day, come to some sort of shared understanding with your child - or at least find a way to an uneasy truce. and you are able to move through some of that grief and into a less stagnant place.

Gender is the knowledge, recognition and meaning that we give to sexual differences

By "something resembling grief" I didn't mean to diminish it, or suggest the pain was less. Simply to acknowledge that it's not exactly the same- for a range of reasons - many of which you yourself acknowledge (not least the person is not actually dead, no societal ritual etc).

I am sorry you are in pain. I think you are very wrong in your assessment of the "incoherence" and "poorly thought through arguments". Maybe your son isn't so good at articulating his feelings and experience, but there is a huge amount of perfectly coherent and detailed info out there . I think you are struggling to understand - which is understandable. and you are on this board which is doing you no favours whatsoever. I also think you are fixated on the idea that you are being "controlled".

for what it's worth (im sure very little) I would be happy to keep talking through the substantive issues with you - what it is to be trans, what is gender, etc. As a non gender critical, but informed voice.

Otherwise, I hope you might over time , one day, come to some sort of shared understanding with your child - or at least find a way to an uneasy truce. and you are able to move through some of that grief and into a less stagnant place.

Supporting difference is not the same as expecting a four-year-old child to accept that a boy is actually a girl.

I think what’s striking about your framing is how consistently you present this as a question of someone attempting to control you. You describe being expected to use particular language as an imposition of someone else’s worldview, and your child’s decision about whether to maintain contact as coercion.

But your child isn’t obliged to maintain a relationship on your terms any more than you’re obliged to share their understanding of gender. You have autonomy over your choices, and they have autonomy over theirs.

You seem to recognise the first principle very clearly, but struggle considerably with the second. I think it’s telling that throughout this discussion, you’ve found it so difficult to consider the situation from your child’s perspective.

Yes, estrangement can be used coercively. But it isn’t inherently coercive for someone to decide they cannot maintain a relationship in which they feel continually hurt or disrespected

And I do wonder whether what troubles you most is the prospect of losing your relationship with your child, or the perceived affront to your ego of imagining that someone — your own child, no less — might not only reject your authority, but actually be presuming to try to exercise authority over you. Do you think you might be struggling with that ?

Isn’t this just #bekind?

Of course the speaker’s feelings and wellbeing matter too. But I don’t regard the two positions as morally equivalent.

One person is saying, “This is who I am, this is my experience, please refer to me respectfully.” The other is saying, “I must refer to you in a way that conflicts with your wishes, because I can’t tolerate doing otherwise.”

Those are fundamentally different requests.

Of course, if someone genuinely finds it distressing to recognise another person’s gender, I acknowledge that their distress is real, whether or not I consider their beliefs reasonable. They’re entitled to their feelings and to set boundaries around their own interactions, including choosing not to engage with someone.

But that doesn’t mean their discomfort should have priority over the dignity of the person they’re describing.

Recognising that both people have feelings doesn’t mean their competing demands carry equal moral weight.

Thank you for expressing a little understanding of my position, and that of thousands of others in this country. But you reveal how little you understand when you talk about "something resembling grief". It absolutely is grief, and there is no resolution, no comforting societal ritual, no funeral. It is like someone going missing, except that it comes with the need to try to continue the relationship with someone who is now trying to control your speech, who is desperate for you to turn your worldview upside down and inside out, but who cannot explain their new worldview coherently.

So, after telling your child that you love them no matter what, you have some options. Some parents come to the conclusion that they must pretend, and try to persuade themselves that this is fine, at the expense I suspect of their integrity, because most don't really think it's fine. Some perhaps, though I have never met any, reject their child. Some, like me, as they can't get any sense out of their child through (perhaps clumsy) attempts to ask gentle questions, go looking for answers: we read books by trans people, we listen to podcasts, we look for anywhere where the issues are actually debated (these places are almost as rare as hen's teeth). And we fail to find any rational coherent philosophy of trans identity. But we do find out something about queer theory and its close relationship with other identity politics manifestations.

Meanwhile we try to continue our relationship with our child, and we discover that he is on a very well-trodden path, with poorly thought through arguments, many of which read like scripts, and that there are undoubtedly people who are trying to separate him from his family (in our case, I could name one person, and there are probably others in real life, and many voices online whispering that we don't love him and that disagreement is hatred. And he gradually starts to make demands, and if you don't accede, or he perceives that you are not enthusiastic enough, he starts to distance himself.

And the grief settles into a dull ache as the rest of life makes its demands, and intensifies unpredictably. You have, at times, very dark thoughts. But other people need your care and attention, so you push down the dark thoughts and misery. We are very adaptable people. But we have lost a child, or almost lost one, and did I mention there is no resolution, no proper chance to mourn, because he's still out there somewhere? And you are aware that he too is almost certainly grieving the lost relationship, but everyone says you are a far right bigot and he is probably angry, because he thought you were a liberal lefty who would pat him on the head and say, "bless you my child, do whatever you like."

I think you’re wrong. It’s entirely normal for a loving parent to be concerned about medical interventions, particularly when they carry risks or have irreversible consequences. Of course those concerns might provoke conflict with their child. That’s understandable, not because of some sinister trans ideology, but because conflict is a natural response when people feel misunderstood, or when their understanding of a deeply personal situation differs.

And my empathy isn’t disingenuous. I genuinely feel for parents in your situation. I’ve spoken to them, including men, and watched them cry as they tried to make sense of what was happening in their families.

If one of my daughters told me tomorrow that they were a boy and wanted me to recognise them as my son, I imagine I would find that incredibly emotionally challenging. I’ve heard parents describe something resembling grief, and I can understand why. Everything you’ve known, recognised and understood about your child since the moment they were born has been shaped, in part, by your understanding of them as a boy or a girl. Having to reconsider something so fundamental might feel like losing the person you thought you knew, even though they’re still right there in front of you.

So yes, I have genuine empathy. It’s not feigned, and it doesn’t come from a place of condescension.

Where you lose me is when those understandable parental concerns become entangled with a much broader ideological position in which trans identities are characterised as delusions, requests for respect as manipulation, and recognition of a minority group’s dignity as oppression.

That’s where I see the hardened fundamentalism of gender-critical ideology coming through, and I find it troubling. Not because I doubt that you love your child, but because I worry about what happens when those ideological convictions begin to take precedence over trying to understand and maintain a relationship with your own child.

I think what’s striking about your framing is how consistently you present this as a question of someone attempting to control you. You describe being expected to use particular language as an imposition of someone else’s worldview, and your child’s decision about whether to maintain contact as coercion.

But your child isn’t obliged to maintain a relationship on your terms any more than you’re obliged to share their understanding of gender. You have autonomy over your choices, and they have autonomy over theirs.

You seem to recognise the first principle very clearly, but struggle considerably with the second. I think it’s telling that throughout this discussion, you’ve found it so difficult to consider the situation from your child’s perspective.

Yes, estrangement can be used coercively. But it isn’t inherently coercive for someone to decide they cannot maintain a relationship in which they feel continually hurt or disrespected

And I do wonder whether what troubles you most is the prospect of losing your relationship with your child, or the perceived affront to your ego of imagining that someone — your own child, no less — might not only reject your authority, but actually be presuming to try to exercise authority over you. Do you think you might be struggling with that ?

I was a typical liberal lefty with a slight doubt about identity politics until transgender matters very suddenly became part of my world. The adjustment led me to question my whole worldview. It is not recognising individual trans people's dignity that places them above anybody else, it is the framing of their wants as more important than other people's. Do you deny that it is coercive to threaten estrangement if someone doesn't use the language of your worldview?

Incidentally, DW who has a very different way from me of navigating the world and relationships came independently to the same conclusion that there is an attempt to control her. Very likely an unwitting attempt, but nevertheless controlling behaviour.

Trans activists often claim that parents are cutting off their children and expelling them from their homes. That is completely untrue of every single real life example I have come across, and I am talking about dozens of families. Parents in these families are all desperate to keep contact, but in many cases the child (usually adult) has gone "no contact" or nearly so. This is encouraged by many trans activists. Many of the people with trans identities are autistic and have difficulties navigating relationships. They are vulnerable to misunderstanding people's motivations and ways of expressing themselves.

I think you’re wrong. It’s entirely normal for a loving parent to be concerned about medical interventions, particularly when they carry risks or have irreversible consequences. Of course those concerns might provoke conflict with their child. That’s understandable, not because of some sinister trans ideology, but because conflict is a natural response when people feel misunderstood, or when their understanding of a deeply personal situation differs.

And my empathy isn’t disingenuous. I genuinely feel for parents in your situation. I’ve spoken to them, including men, and watched them cry as they tried to make sense of what was happening in their families.

If one of my daughters told me tomorrow that they were a boy and wanted me to recognise them as my son, I imagine I would find that incredibly emotionally challenging. I’ve heard parents describe something resembling grief, and I can understand why. Everything you’ve known, recognised and understood about your child since the moment they were born has been shaped, in part, by your understanding of them as a boy or a girl. Having to reconsider something so fundamental might feel like losing the person you thought you knew, even though they’re still right there in front of you.

So yes, I have genuine empathy. It’s not feigned, and it doesn’t come from a place of condescension.

Where you lose me is when those understandable parental concerns become entangled with a much broader ideological position in which trans identities are characterised as delusions, requests for respect as manipulation, and recognition of a minority group’s dignity as oppression.

That’s where I see the hardened fundamentalism of gender-critical ideology coming through, and I find it troubling. Not because I doubt that you love your child, but because I worry about what happens when those ideological convictions begin to take precedence over trying to understand and maintain a relationship with your own child.

And again, you’re treating your own interpretation of what pronouns mean as an objective fact.

Rachel’s biological characteristics don’t change when you refer to her as “she”. Nobody is asking you to believe otherwise.

What you’re being asked to recognise is how Rachel experiences herself, rather than insisting that the language you use to describe her must exclusively reflect your understanding of her biological sex.

Rachel is asking to be addressed in a way that respects her identity and dignity. You’re insisting that addressing her in that way would somehow violate your own experience, even though nothing about your own identity or biological reality is being called into question.

These are not morally equivalent requests.

I think this is quite revealing. You’ve moved very quickly from explaining your concerns as a loving parent to presenting requests for recognition and respect from trans people as part of a wider political project of manipulation, oppression and the elevation of a minority group above everyone else. I think that says a great deal about the ideological beliefs shaping your response to your own child.

You’re entitled to your beliefs, but I don’t accept the idea that respecting someone’s account of their own identity gives them superior status, or that recognising a minority person’s dignity places them above everyone else.

What strikes me is that you insist on the importance of your own feelings, experiences and boundaries, while repeatedly characterising those of trans people as manipulative, coercive or oppressive.

There’s a fundamental asymmetry there, and I think it’s worth reflecting on.

You are not recognising the reality of gender identity thinking. It is not permitted to gently question the wisdom of a man taking oestrogen – that is repeatedly and consistently framed as transphobic. Parents are expected to affirm and approve every proposed action, and the threat of estrangement puts us in an impossible position. When your loving concern is taken to be bigotry and hatred, and your evidence is framed as far right reactionary propaganda, just what can you do?

Please spare me any more of your faux sympathy. I don't believe you really care about anything or anyone outside your worldview. Not vulnerable children and adults who are being misled; not detransitioners; not women who need single sex spaces, services and sporting opportunities.

At least you are willing to discuss sex and gender. Most trans people and allies I have met have a very low tolerance for the expression of any other view than the one they are trying to impose on society.

And again, you’re treating your own interpretation of what pronouns mean as an objective fact.

Rachel’s biological characteristics don’t change when you refer to her as “she”. Nobody is asking you to believe otherwise.

What you’re being asked to recognise is how Rachel experiences herself, rather than insisting that the language you use to describe her must exclusively reflect your understanding of her biological sex.

Rachel is asking to be addressed in a way that respects her identity and dignity. You’re insisting that addressing her in that way would somehow violate your own experience, even though nothing about your own identity or biological reality is being called into question.

These are not morally equivalent requests.

I think this is quite revealing. You’ve moved very quickly from explaining your concerns as a loving parent to presenting requests for recognition and respect from trans people as part of a wider political project of manipulation, oppression and the elevation of a minority group above everyone else. I think that says a great deal about the ideological beliefs shaping your response to your own child.

You’re entitled to your beliefs, but I don’t accept the idea that respecting someone’s account of their own identity gives them superior status, or that recognising a minority person’s dignity places them above everyone else.

What strikes me is that you insist on the importance of your own feelings, experiences and boundaries, while repeatedly characterising those of trans people as manipulative, coercive or oppressive.

There’s a fundamental asymmetry there, and I think it’s worth reflecting on.

No. If Bob wants to be called Rachel, then using his new name is respectful of his experience. However, referring to Rachel using feminine pronouns is disrespectful of my experience. It is an objective truth that Rachel remains male, regardless of Rachel’s feminine name, or clothing or wishes of belief, and referring to Rachel as “he” is objectively truthful.

I don’t doubt that you love your child, or that your concerns about their wellbeing are genuine. And of course you’re entitled to have questions and reservations about medical interventions. Those deserve careful consideration, just as they would in any other area of healthcare.

But I think you’re conflating two very different things: recognising and respecting your child’s experience of gender, and encouraging them to pursue particular medical treatments.
Referring to your child in a way that respects their wishes doesn’t commit you to supporting hormones, surgery or any other intervention.
Nor does it require you to deny anything about their biological characteristics.

You describe your role as being a “rock of reality”, but your child’s experience is also part of reality, even if you don’t fully understand or agree with how they experience/ interpret it.

Surely it’s possible to remain a loving, steady and supportive parent, to have legitimate concerns about medical decisions, and still recognise that your child’s experience of themselves matters?

Those things needn’t be in conflict.

The framing of demanded pronouns as "respectful" is one of several manipulations of language and of people's desire to be nice and kind.

This is part of a wider problem with identity politics. Once you have elevated a minority over everyone else, their needs and wishes become more important than anyone else's. I think there is a place for recognising disadvantage and doing something about it, but identity politics and the reifying of "intersectionality" allow a member of a minority group or groups to become, in some circumstances, the oppressor, or for them to be given not just a hand up but a pedestal.