..to think Stonewall should not be involved with schools?

[ConcernedMum100]

AIBU to think Stonewall should not be involved with schools...

Historically, Stonewall has done amazing work and led the way for equality. However, over recent years their priority seems to be a different sort of activism, which has caused many of their original supporters to abandon them.

I want to stress that I am very much in favour of primary schools teaching about diversity and different types of families including same sex parents, etc. I believe that's very important. I do however have reservations with Stonewall for various reasons, as follows:

-Its school resources with regards to transgenderism and gender identity, such as An Introduction to Supporting LGBT children, breach the Department of Education’s guidelines in many ways, including the sexist and regressive suggestion that children enjoying clothes or toys typically associated with the opposite sex is a sign they may be transgender. The resources also say that children are given a label at birth (they mean their sex is recorded) and that sometimes this label will have been wrong. They are not referring to the tiny percentage of babies born with a DSD, but children whose gender identity is supposedly different to their sex. Whatever that means. The resources also say that a school should not tell the child’s parents about their gender identity if the child does not want them to. Which means they’re suggesting schools change a child’s name and pronouns without informing the parents. Seeing as they communicate that children with gender dysphoria are often vulnerable and even suicidal, this seems very irresponsible.

-Its stance on child safeguarding. Stonewall have been very clear that they disagree with the High Court’s ruling which concluded that children under the age of 16 are highly unlikely to be able to consent to puberty blockers. They are in favour of medicating children as young as 10 years old, who are experiencing gender dysphoria and say they want to live as the opposite sex. This follows research showing puberty blockers do not have a positive effect on the children’s mental health, but do cause issues with brain development and bone density. Nearly 100% of children who have taken puberty blockers go on to take cross sex hormones which will likely lead to loss of sexual function and infertility. There has been an alarming increase in children identifying as trans over the last few years and the reasons for this is unknown, and there has been no research to understand the apparent strong link between autism and gender dysphoria, nor homosexuality and gender dysphoria.

-Its stance on women’s single sex spaces. Via both Tweeting and their school resources, Stonewall have made clear they believe women and girls do not have the right to single sex spaces at time when they may be vulnerable, because they believe males who identify as women (the prerequisite of which is to declare themselves a woman-no need for any medical treatment or diagnosis) should be treated as females in every aspect of life. This means access to women’s communal changing rooms, prisons, hospital wards, toilets, and rape shelters, to name a few examples.

-Its stance on women’s sports. Stonewall disagreed with World Rugby’s decision to prevent transwomen competing in women’s rugby. This decision was reached by World Rugby because they found that to include TW in the women’s teams would be unfair and unsafe (in increased risk to the women on the team by at least 20-30%) Stonewall appear to believe (and say) that inclusion comes above all else, even the safety of women and girls and their right to fair competition.

I don’t feel comfortable that an organisation with these highly controversial and political viewpoints has access to primary school children, whether it’s via face to face sessions, training school staff, or learning resources.

Of course Stonewall are not the only organisation which has these worrying beliefs. However, they are the biggest and most well funded. They are also listed on the Department of Educations “experts” page, despite breaching its own guidelines, which I think is wrong and also makes it very difficult for parents to complain to schools.

What are your thoughts?

@BrumBoo

Normal' is a word used by many.

Usually in a highly offensive way.

They said they didn't agree with children being subjected to gay behaviour.

What the fuck is 'gay behaviour' and how is one subjected to it in everyday life?

I took it to mean they disapproved of children being coerced or encouraged.

Again, how does one encourage someone to be gay?

Which nobody would agree with?

Agree with what? People being gay?

I am not of the opinion that every person is nice, whether straight or other.

What? This is a bizarre statement.

I know some deeply unpleasant gay people.

And your just going for the full ban now, arent you. This faux 'oh let's mix in homophobia with trans discussion' to make it seem we're all just phobic as he'll on MN is getting real old, real quick and only real thickos will fall for it.

You made an assumption. The mods must have too.

As for you paraphrasing my points - which I'm entitled to say from EXPERIENCE.

You are a contrary one.

I don't care if they ban me.
Plenty of other ways to have my say.

And I will.

Good for you, Wotapalava

so, either:

There has been a huge rise in referrals to adult services over the same time period, this reflects an increasing tolerance of trans people in society and more trans people feeling able to come out and access treatment:

OR,
there are ever increasing violence and attacks, spiralling transphobic hate crime and apparently the UK is known internationally as Transphobia Island.... according to Stonewall it is endemic.

which is it jj? you (as a group) can't have it both ways..

@redpencil77

Good for you, Wotapalava

Pre-fucking-cisely

@BrumBoo

Why jj ? What's the reason?

Because transgenderism is more accepted apparently. Absolutely nothing to do with the huge rise of misogyny in our society. Adding in internalised homophobia and the completely coincidental rise in girls being recognised as having autism whilst services in mental heath care are at an all time low, there is absolutely no correlation in this data at all. It's certainly that medicine doesn't see diagnosis of a gendered lifestyle over the treatment of autism or any other cognitive differences as a get-out clause.

Indeed. Linking those with gender dysphoria, to the LGB community, was a deliberate move.

It's ludicrous to describe children who have gender dysphoria, as 'coming out'.

Seventy six? Why have 76 children got gender dysphoria? And if they haven't, what is trans?

@jj1968

JJ, when you get 76 children in one school saying they are trans, and an increase of 4000% showing up to gender clinics, mainly girls, it's a perfectly normal reaction to ask why. What are they being taught?

There has been a huge rise in referrals to adult services over the same time period, this reflects an increasing tolerance of trans people in society and more trans people feeling able to come out and access treatment: www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/10/transgender-clinic-waiting-times-patient-numbers-soar-gender-identity-services

A large scale study from the US shows that that ages of people who identify as trans are fairly evenly distributed, 0.7% of of 13-24 year olds identify as trans compared to 0.6% of 25-64 year old and 0.5% of over 65s: williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/age-trans-individuals-us/

When the Tavistock began publishing referral figures barely any GPs had heard of them let alone parents and their kids. The so called trans tipping point, when Laverne Cox appeared on the front of Time magazine, was in 2014 - this was followed by a spate of high profile trans celebrities emerging as well as trans characters appearing in mainstream media who were not perpetual murder victims, sex workers, serial kilers or the punchline of jokes as they had been portrayed as for decades previously. Meanwhile the UK press became seemingly obsessed with trans people and in particular GIDS. It seems inevitable that these factors would have led to both more trans kids feeling confident coming out and more people being aware of the services at GIDS and making use of them.

The numbers of referrals to GIDS has now levelled off and been pretty flat for the last three years as the attached grph shows. A study released last year shows there are no real differences between young people treated for gender dysphoria today concluding:

Our study also provides a new insight into factors that have possibly contributed to the recent increase in the number of adolescent referrals in gender identity services. Since most characteristics remained similar, we suggest that GD might be more common than previously thought and the exponential increase in referrals is just a reflection thereof. The increased publicity and visibility may have helped more young people and their parents to recognize and come out for their transgender feelings, and they seem more likely to dare to seek assessment and treatment.

link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00787-019-01394-6

This seems a far more plausible explanation than some vast conspiracy to destroy women, gays and lesbians being undertaken behind the scenes by a small LGBT charity for reasons which are never entirely explained.

Neither the guardian article nor the US survey mention the sex of the trans people they are discussing.

At GIDS, girls outnumber boys by about 3:1. People who start to identify as trans, or 'come out' as trans in middle age are predominantly male. If the children who are currently being referred to GIDS are a true representation of people who are transgender, you'd expect middle aged women identifying as transgender to outnumber middle aged men identifying as transgender by about 3 to 1.

Where are all the middle aged women who should now feel safe to 'come out' as 'transmen'?

Lots of very sensible and serious reasons behind the explosion in teenagers identifying as trans.

There’s another obvious one though. Teenagers are bloody sheep.

One of my friends became a goth, we all did for all of two months. One girl had anorexia and suddenly we were all discussing eating ice cubes to suppress appitite. One started smoking and we all took it up (I literally tried very hard to smoke 10 a day for 2 years even though I loathed them and never felt the urge, just to keep up with my friends). A few even took up cutting when they discovered I did.

Following the crowd is something all teenagers do, especially teenage girls because they learn as preteens to sacrifice their own voice to keep the safety of the crowd of girls (termed ‘loosing voice’ by Carol Gilligan and Lyn Mikail Brown).

We all go through these stages, and certainly some can have serious risks long term, but none as serious and irreversible as trans ideology does. All because teen girls do what teen girls do as part of being a normal teenager.

Adults are supposed to know better and step in to safeguard us, not encourage our dangerous dieting or buy us pack of fags or hand the razor blades and celebrate our scars.

@nothingcomestonothing

jj can you please stop calling Stonewall 'a small LGBT charity'? They are a multi-million £ political lobbying group, making a good chunk of money from the taxpayer while inserting their policies into the police, NHS, CPS, private companies, ofcom, the BBC and many others. And they are hardly LGBT, and haven't been for some time, it's all about the T these days - what have Stonewall done for lesbians lately, apart from campaign to remove their sex-based rights and redefine their sexuality to include male bodied people? Stonewall are not small, and they're not LGBT, and you know that, it's disingenuous to say otherwise.

Stonewall have an annual turnover of about £7 million. To put this figure in context Cancer Research have an annual turnover of £463 million, Oxfam £211 million, and Shelter £70 million. The EU descrine any organisation with a turnover of less than 50 million euro a small to medium enterprise, In the general scheme of things Stonewall are a small charity. In their most recent reporting period only around £700,000 came from Government funding.

A brief look at their website shows they run a helpline for LGBT people, have run campaigns about LGBT inclusion in sport, run anti-bullying initiatives for LGBT kids, employment schemes for young LGBT people, an overseas project for LGBT people, have been involved in several Pride events and a host of other activities none of which were just about trans people. They are not all about the T, they support trans people alongside LGB people and if they seem to have prioritised trans people recently that is no doubt because there have been changes proposed in the law targetting trans people and a hostile campaign against trans people in the right wing press. If Murdoch decides to turn his attention to lesbians next then I have little doubt that Stonewall would direct their resources towards tackling that.

They are an organisation run and managed by and large by lesbians and gay men. I wonder how many of those accusing these lesbians and gay men of homophobia are straight themselves - because if you are maybe you ought to have a little word with you and keep your nose out of LGBT politics that have nothing to do with you. Because it seems to me there is a new kind of homophobia in which lesbians and gay men accused of wrong think by anti-trans activists are now fair play for attack from straight people for being the wrong kind of gays.

because there have been changes proposed in the law targetting trans people and a hostile campaign against trans people in the right wing press.

What changes in British law are 'targeting trans people'?

If Murdoch decides to turn his attention to lesbians next then I have little doubt that Stonewall would direct their resources towards tackling that.

Stonewall doesn't seem to know what a lesbain is anymore, never mind has the ability to defend them.

because if you are maybe you ought to have a little word with you and keep your nose out of LGBT politics that have nothing to do with you.

Oh my god the irony....

I can't cope with the internal inconsistencies anymore. My head hurts too much. Bowing out of any further discussion here as non helpful. FWIW I would not be anywhere near this discussion if it were not directly impacting my community by way of distressed teenage girls, whom I have known since babies, opting out of womanhood en masse. You have not addressed any of these concerns JJ. You don't care. You are just simply political point making. It is pretty poor.

@BrumBoo

because if you are maybe you ought to have a little word with you and keep your nose out of LGBT politics that have nothing to do with you.

Oh my god the irony....

How do they know LGBT politics has nothing to do with Brumboo?

In fact, don't LGBT politics have everything to do with everyone?

@gardenbird48

so, either:

There has been a huge rise in referrals to adult services over the same time period, this reflects an increasing tolerance of trans people in society and more trans people feeling able to come out and access treatment:

OR,
there are ever increasing violence and attacks, spiralling transphobic hate crime and apparently the UK is known internationally as Transphobia Island.... according to Stonewall it is endemic.

which is it jj? you (as a group) can't have it both ways..

Yes you can. More trans people coming out has led to a backlash against them much as happened against LGB people in the 80s. I do wonder if the disparity amongst the birth sex of those presenting for treatment reflects that backlash - that is it's not that young trans men are over-represented but that young trans women are under -represented. I think it's highly likely that young assigned male at birth trans kids take a peek out of the closet, see trans women being denounced as abusive perverts who are trying to destroy society in the national press and think hmm, not today. I dearly hope that's not the case but I can certainly see why young trans women might be dissuaded from coming out given the hyper focus on trans women in the press and the growing hostility towards them more generally.

How do they know LGBT politics has nothing to do with Brumboo?

I have struggled with that side of myself for many years. I do have sympathy for people struggling with themselves, especially in a world of labels that is just ever expanding, and society expects you to pick at least one. I am another person who would absolutely have been drawn into trans/non-binary ideology if it had been such a 'thing' when I was a teen. Told I was far too 'male like' in personality by my mother, most of my friends were male, always cut off my hair and in lose clothing to hide my body (which went from being a chubby kid to having a large chest over night, I felt humiliated). Never mind the issues I have (and still have) around my sexuality. It is a fuckton to unpack as a teen, especially one with u sympathetic parents who believe a girl is x and a boy is y. To find as an adult, many many people felt like this during their teen years - especially the body dysmorphia, yes I do personally believe LGBT 'politics' should be open to all to discuss so people realise that they do not need to change or even label themselves to be seen in this world.

I still think it's highly ironic to suggest 'straight people' should stay out of LGBT politics when the T especially won't stay out of women's....

@BrumBoo

because there have been changes proposed in the law targetting trans people and a hostile campaign against trans people in the right wing press.

What changes in British law are 'targeting trans people'?

If Murdoch decides to turn his attention to lesbians next then I have little doubt that Stonewall would direct their resources towards tackling that.

Stonewall doesn't seem to know what a lesbain is anymore, never mind has the ability to defend them.

What changes in British law are 'targeting trans people'?

I said proposed. So far they haven;t hapened, but the GRA consultation and the focus on it in the press is dountless one reason a lot of Stonewall's time has been taken up with trans people over the last couple of years.

Stonewall doesn't seem to know what a lesbain is anymore, never mind has the ability to defend them.

Given Stonewall are run by a lesbian do not think that statement is just a little bit offensive? Do you really think Nancy Kelly doesn't know what she is?

@JoodyBlue

I can't cope with the internal inconsistencies anymore. My head hurts too much. Bowing out of any further discussion here as non helpful. FWIW I would not be anywhere near this discussion if it were not directly impacting my community by way of distressed teenage girls, whom I have known since babies, opting out of womanhood en masse. You have not addressed any of these concerns JJ. You don't care. You are just simply political point making. It is pretty poor.

Like everything from recorded history onwards, policies are not determined by what could happen, the Cassandras of this world are ignored and shunned and when it does happen "lessins are learned" to "protect the vulberable" to "make sure it doesn't happen again".

Unfortunately what you will find is, like me, I was heavily into things traditionally boy-orientated, was shunned by the "popular girls" and taken apart by my parents for not wanting to do typical girl things.

You may very well find that, like me, these girls are ASD, tried to mask, failed, no-one has diagnosed them so they beeline for "that's me, I want to change gender, I will "fit" then into society."

Many parts of my life boil down to me being, at heart a 12 year old boy.

As a totally anonymous forum I have the opportunity to say this, something I've never told anyone before. Amd it's OK to want to do the things 12 year old boys want to do. But as a teenage girl there is too much stigma about "fitting in" so it is not surprising so many girls are opting for a socially acceptable way forward.

What there should be is responsible safeguards to protect these girls should it turn out there are other reasons they feel like this.

After realising I couldn't do whar 12 year old boys could acceptably I spent my teenage years being a Grunger, an animal rights activist, trying to run away from home to protest about the Newbury Bypass, was a vegan for 2 years at which point in RE I was made to stand up by the RE teacher to justify my choice - laughed at by most of the class and her - launched myself into my school work, alienated by my parents for not having friends - got friends who weren't "good enough" became a petty shoplifter, saw that I needed to get out, put my head down for my A-levels, got out, managed to build a life for myself.

As for the 3:1 ratio of girls wanting to change as teenagers, they want to fit in; there aren't similar ratios as women as they have either settled for the life they have or perhaps, very tragically, have taken their own life.

Gender changing is another choice in the pantheon of teenage girl options. And, as other threads point out how little their DHs do, and get to do their hobbies etc without considering the impact of their children on their choices - and their wives picking up the slac, job opportunities etc maybe the perceptive ones have figured it may be better off identufying as a man.

It's ludicrous to describe children who have gender dysphoria, as 'coming out'.

Why? The experience of pretty much every trans person I know, myself included, is that most of us kept the way we felt secret, sometimes for a long long time. It's no fun living with a secret that is such a fundamental part of who you are, I don't see why it's unreasonable to call finally expressing that part of yourself to others coming out.

Given Stonewall are run by a lesbian do not think that statement is just a little bit offensive? Do you really think Nancy Kelly doesn't know what she is?

I am referring to what was discussed earlier in the thread about Stonewall deciding they have the right to change the definition of a lesbian, regardless of the fact there's already a definition for those that are gender-attracted.

As for the GRA reform, do you not think that it's vital for the safeguarding of women and children to review this?

@jj1968

It's ludicrous to describe children who have gender dysphoria, as 'coming out'.

Why? The experience of pretty much every trans person I know, myself included, is that most of us kept the way we felt secret, sometimes for a long long time. It's no fun living with a secret that is such a fundamental part of who you are, I don't see why it's unreasonable to call finally expressing that part of yourself to others coming out.

I would think "coming out" is the right phrase, it's admitting that their outward physical being is not truly a reflection on them.

Now if we had a truly equal society, there would be none of this - anyone would be accepted for the choices they wanted to make - but in a society where robust laws protect children and the vulnerable

@BrumBoo

How do they know LGBT politics has nothing to do with Brumboo?

I have struggled with that side of myself for many years. I do have sympathy for people struggling with themselves, especially in a world of labels that is just ever expanding, and society expects you to pick at least one. I am another person who would absolutely have been drawn into trans/non-binary ideology if it had been such a 'thing' when I was a teen. Told I was far too 'male like' in personality by my mother, most of my friends were male, always cut off my hair and in lose clothing to hide my body (which went from being a chubby kid to having a large chest over night, I felt humiliated). Never mind the issues I have (and still have) around my sexuality. It is a fuckton to unpack as a teen, especially one with u sympathetic parents who believe a girl is x and a boy is y. To find as an adult, many many people felt like this during their teen years - especially the body dysmorphia, yes I do personally believe LGBT 'politics' should be open to all to discuss so people realise that they do not need to change or even label themselves to be seen in this world.

I still think it's highly ironic to suggest 'straight people' should stay out of LGBT politics when the T especially won't stay out of women's....

Brumboo - exactky - just because someone hasn't "declared" something, doesn't mean they should be excluded from the discussion. In fact, it should be the other way around. It shouldn't be called "LGBT politics" it should be called "politics".

@BrumBoo

Given Stonewall are run by a lesbian do not think that statement is just a little bit offensive? Do you really think Nancy Kelly doesn't know what she is?

I am referring to what was discussed earlier in the thread about Stonewall deciding they have the right to change the definition of a lesbian, regardless of the fact there's already a definition for those that are gender-attracted.

As for the GRA reform, do you not think that it's vital for the safeguarding of women and children to review this?

What? Stonewall want to change the definition of a lesbian?

Oh, to include transwomen? Sigh.

I will stick to xx-chromosomed and xy-chromosomed then, so I can follow facts, rather than opinions

Just let any two consenting humans over the legal age of consent do what they want as long as they are both happy then there wil be no need to label anyone anything

Interesting how these discussions repeatedly get derailed. This was a challenging discussion about the problems that Stonewall poses as a lobby group seeking access to schools. Now we're treated to individual tales of personal experience and beliefs and why these should trump everything - especially in relation to women and children's safety and rights.

I am still reading. I read @redpencil77's post quoting me. I feel so sad to read it and I can see why girls want to opt out of womanhood. It is sad because for a while perhaps in the 90s and 00s our culture was quite good for women. This was on the back of the second wave feminists who fought for that. We knew there would be backlash and of course there is. This is it. Womanhood can be an amazingly supportive and inclusive place. Femaleness is astonishing, from puberty through motherhood if that is what you choose and out the other side, it can be such a rich and rewarding journey. But it isn't until you are out the other side necessarily that you can see that. People are amazing. I wish they would just live their lives in the bodies they were born in. If the bodies are healthy that in itself is an amazing gift. So many are not given that gift. Life isn't easy for anybody. But one can make it so much harder by focusing on things that don't matter, rather than things that do.

Stonewall define homosexual as anyone attracted to the same gender (regardless of sex). This is quite problematic given that institutional homophobia is defined as when sex is ignored and that what being identify as is used instead.

The clue is in the 'sex' bit of homosexual. In reality Stonewall support homogenderism. Which is by default homophobic because it seeks to erase the ability of those who are homosexual to define themselves. It creates a situation where to say you are homosexual because you have a preference based on sex rather than gender, you are transphobic. And that in turn means that saying no to the opposite sex - if they identify as trans - is verboten. This is coercive and encourages a culture where lesbians need 'correcting' and there is support for lesbians to 'just try ladydick'. This is also known as conversion therapy in the world of understanding the word 'homosexual' accurately. It takes us back 30 odd years.

Until there is a realisation that no this is not fucking ok. It is not progressive. And no it really shits on homosexuals and does not allow them to identify as they wish or define their own personal sexual preferences and boundaries without prejudice, persecution or intolerance we are right back to the bad old days.

Being trans or supporting trans people does not give them the right to shit over people and force others into situations which make them feel at risk or unable to speak freely and express their own sexuality. There needs to be a massive push back on how this is an abuse of power and there MUST be a balancing act going on, which recognises this.