AIBU to think a soap shop shouldn't be encouraging young girls to self harm?

[Elleexxtra]

Lush Paddington are giving out binders, meaning girls can self harm without any danger of their parents knowing and being able to discuss potential issues with them.

www.instagram.com/lushpaddington/

AIBU to think young girls shouldn't be groomed to hate their bodies?

The fact is it's a sad state of affairs when there isn't easily accessible help for trans and non binary people, and places such as LUSH shouldn't be demonised for trying to help

Try replacing 'trans and non binary people' in this statement with 'people with autism/eating disorders/bipolar/PTSD/OCD' or any number of other conditions. The fact is that mental health support and treatment is a low priority in this country, particularly for young people. That's a scandal, but still no excuse for a shop gleefully jumping in to plug the gap by having their untrained staff offering damaging products to vulnerable children. See @BloodinGutters analogy re cocaine for those waiting for ADHD assessment.

If Lush is truly concerned they could donate to professionally-staffed support services, or fund research or bursaries for training MH workers, or they could campaign for better services.

Thanks Blood for your reply above - totally agree with you. It's a very worrying situation for neurodiverse children who are vulnerable to being swept up by this ideology. The twisted logic seems to be that if this only affects trans people, then all of those caught up must therefore be trans, and nothing to do with the rest of us. @KurtWilde hasn't responded to posts explaining that there are other reasons for being dysmorphic, and there are people who detransition. I want support for trans people, but I also want policy to be debated by people who are willing to see beyond their own narrow ideology and understand that others have skin in the game too.

I believe that posters like Kurt cannot accept that things that are done in secret from parents can be harmful to children. I mean, what other conclusion can we draw.

Parents who care and are engaged about their child's life and health say no to a young female wearing a binder (for whatever reason that that girl wants to wear it). The assumption is that the parents are hostile and bigots.

Not that there is a grave issue with a cohort of young females at the moment who are binding for whatever reason. Many because they believe they are 'trans' - and to be clear as I have been pages ago, not only transboys, but also many for other reasons.

Either way, social media and search engines are feeding only positive stories to these children. They tell their peers there is no issues at all. There is a collective lying that is happening. Why? Well, that would be because to point it out would be considered by some people as transphobic. Even if the girls are doing it for other reasons!

And while there is this collective lying about the harms, the message about those harms does not get through so that these girls can even evaluate them.

The fact that NONE of this is registering with posters like Kurt who is so proud of their inclusiveness that they cannot see that their ignorance about what is actually happening in this particular age group of girls is, in fact, harmful within its self.

So ..... Kurt..... about those links I have been requesting.... got anything? Or just more personal anecdotes that miss the actual point?

I do think that there are posters who would support medication that has been ordered by underage and self diagnosed children being supplied by Starbucks next. If it fit into that category of children.

Yes... ok. Those drugs are completely harmless, and completely reversible, so of course you can order them from the internet and have Starbucks be your collection point.

Because.... body autonomy, am I right?

For anyone new to this who is alarmed at being called "transphobic", please be aware that you can be labelled "transphobic" for the following:

-knowing that Homo sapiens is a biologically dimorphic species that reproduces sexually (ie there are two sexes; males producing sperm and females producing eggs)- sub-GCSE level Science
-thinking that people with penises shouldn't be in women's changing rooms
-thinking that people who've been through male puberty shouldn't be in women's sports
-wanting to prioritise safeguarding for minors in the context of single sex toilets, changing rooms and sleeping arangements on residential trips
-thinking female rape and domestic violence survivors have the right to female-only support spaces
-thinking that experimental medication (puberty blockers) should be subject to strict and regular clinical/ethical reviews
-knowing that "lesbian" means a female who is attracted to other females

I'd like to think none of the above is novel, complicated or unreasonable.

KurtWilde

Many years ago I was having quite a heated discussion wth someone, in a somewhat frustrated tone I tried to end the conversation by saying, "you just don't get it", they responded, "no, it's YOU that doesn't understand". I had a lightbulb moment where I suddenly realised they had heard and comprehended my arguements but I was so busy trying to force them to agree with me I hadn't actually understood they had rationally countered every argument I made. Lesson learned. There is literally nothing you have posted here about trans people which is news to me. Some of us actually have trans friends and still disagree with you.

This thread is about safeguarding young females. Arranging for a binder to be collected from a store so that it is kept secret from their parents is a safeguarding concern. Any adult or organisation encouraging or facilitating minors keeping secrets from their parents raises a red flag. If you work with young people (specifically vulnerable young adults or minors) and you do not know this then might I suggest you request further training.

@Helleofabore

I do think that there are posters who would support medication that has been ordered by underage and self diagnosed children being supplied by Starbucks next. If it fit into that category of children.

Yes... ok. Those drugs are completely harmless, and completely reversible, so of course you can order them from the internet and have Starbucks be your collection point.

Because.... body autonomy, am I right?

And actually, sticking with the theme

Ritilin is a very serious medication (as someone who takes it and whose children take it -albeit not full dosage)

It’s a controlled substance. Which is roughly the equivalent of class a drug iirc.

It can have serious side effects and interaction and isn’t suitable for plenty of us adhers to take it.

Because it’s a controlled drug it can only be prescribed by a psych and only picked up every 28 days. If the boxes are at all tampered with it becomes a police matter to investigate. Controlled meds are treated that seriously.

But actually if someone wants to stop taking it or if it turns out not to work for that person and they stop, ANY & ALL side effects are gone the minute it’s out their system. The only long term impact of taking it once stopped is that the neural pathways that might have developed while the person was able to focus for longer would remain, which obviously isn’t a negative.

But binders having caused harm like broken ribs or decreased lung capacity can’t be resolved the day the person stops using them. And all the evidence indicates the very serious health risks of puberty blockers etc are devastating even once stopped.

But if lush are helping out by supplying a pick up point for binders why not Starbucks for hormones?

Trans kids can’t be expected to wait like the rest of us. No need to put time and effort into lobbying for better services if shops provide them instead is there.

It’s all such a quick fix mentality. Bet plenty of girls picking up binders will insta their pics & thank lush for helping.

‘Hi guys, I’m not trans but like our trans brothers I also feel uncomfortable with my breasts. So grateful lush let me be free to achieve my perfect body and finally be myself by letting me pick up my binder with my fav glitter bath bombs and girly supplies. #liveyourbestlife #betruetoyourself #bodypositivity #bodyfreedom #glitterfamily’

extract

If you hope to get top surgery (a procedure to reduce or remove breast tissue), binding frequently can affect skin elasticity and impact surgery outcomes (4,5).

(continues)

Risks and side effects of binding

Binding can affect skin, muscles, and movement, particularly over long periods of time. Tightly covering the skin and chest with materials that don’t allow free-flowing air can create warm, moist environments for bacterial and fungal infections to develop. Wearing binders that are too tight can cause underlying tissue and muscle damage, prevent free movement, and even restrict a person’s ability to breathe.

Two studies have been completed that focus specifically on people who bind. They were cross-sectional studies, observing a specific population (people who chest bind) at a specific point in time, and were published in 2017 and 2018. Both of these studies are based on data from 1,800 responders to an online survey.

Across both studies, the majority of people (89-97%) reported experiencing at least one negative symptom from chest binding (2,3).

Common side effects of chest binding

76-78% of people in studies reported skin/tissue problems, like tenderness, scarring, swelling, itching, infections

74-75% of people reported pain in chest, shoulders, back or abdomen

51-52% of people reported respiratory problems (like shortness of breath)

47-49% of people reported musculoskeletal symptoms, like postural changes, muscle wasting, or rib fractures (2,3)

People who bind their chest more frequently (every day) are more likely to experience negative symptoms. For this reason, taking days off between binding may help decrease this risk. Long term binding (over years) was also more likely to be associated with negative symptoms, particularly skin, tissues, and musculoskeletal problems (2). People with larger breasts were more likely to experience skin and soft tissue issues (2).

What people use to bind their chests with is a very personal choice, and finding a standard “best type of binder” for everyone is unclear. One study showed that people who used commercial binders experienced increased risk for the highest number of negative symptoms from binding, followed by those who used bandages, and plastic wrap or duct tape (2).*

The high amount of negative effects found from commercial binders in this study were a surprise to the researchers, since blogs and other informal resources dedicated to trans men and healthy binding often recommend commercial binders (2,4). This could be due to people wearing binders that are too small, wearing them for longer periods, or wearing more than one at a time. More research is needed, but if you choose to wear a commercial binder, do your research, read reviews online, and make sure it is the right size for you.

helloclue.com/articles/cycle-a-z/chest-binding-tips-and-tricks-for-trans-men-nonbinary-and-genderfluid

Kurt, given you seem unaware of the above, and keep saying that binding damage doesn't matter if you plan to have an elective mastectomy, could you explain how I can be certain a female teenage Lush customer will be aware of it?

I do not think that wanting a binder or even "being trans" endows teenagers with magical powers. They are still teenagers.

This thread is about safeguarding young females. Arranging for a binder to be collected from a store so that it is kept secret from their parents is a safeguarding concern. Any adult or organisation encouraging or facilitating minors keeping secrets from their parents raises a red flag. If you work with young people (specifically vulnerable young adults or minors) and you do not know this then might I suggest you request further training.

Surely you can see that this is a rational argument and not inherently bigoted @KurtWilde?

@Whatwouldscullydo

None of that explains why its a good idea that non dbs checked, untrained staff in a soap shop should sell binders to teenage girls

No it doesn’t

And i know its suits some people to believe that any poster that disagrees with Lush doing this is being transphobic and ignorant but I would prefer if this was being done through pharmacies with trained staff

And if you don’t believe me…well to be honest i do not give a shit

I will absolutely judge anyone that thinks this should be done without trained staff and a duty of care

Just as their penis is an unwanted appendage to a trans woman. The lengths they go to to hide the male genitalia (usually in the form of pushing the testicles back inside the body and using extra tight support underwear to properly tuck the penis) also causes tissue damage. restriction and shrinkage.

As if!!!

The vast majority of transwomen, even the 'very well passing' ones who have spent thousands on all the facial feminising surgery and nice tits and all that, keep their 'lady penis'. And a proportion of those get cross because lesbians aren't interested in said lady penis.

Let's face it, it's only really the girls who are being pressured to crush their perfectly normal bodies into deformity and mutilation isn't it?

Who the hell are the 15% who think that it's fine for a huge company like Lush to be colluding in handing out equipment which can cause serious damage to female bodies, without parental permission, and seemingly without any assessment whatsoever of the recipients understanding, mental state or capacity?

@Thefartingsofaofdenmarkstreet

Just as their penis is an unwanted appendage to a trans woman. The lengths they go to to hide the male genitalia (usually in the form of pushing the testicles back inside the body and using extra tight support underwear to properly tuck the penis) also causes tissue damage. restriction and shrinkage.

As if!!!

The vast majority of transwomen, even the 'very well passing' ones who have spent thousands on all the facial feminising surgery and nice tits and all that, keep their 'lady penis'. And a proportion of those get cross because lesbians aren't interested in said lady penis.

Let's face it, it's only really the girls who are being pressured to crush their perfectly normal bodies into deformity and mutilation isn't it?

It’s almost as if transitioning doesn’t change the reality women and girls are the second sex.

Which is why I'm forced to shake my head in disbelief when women have this idea that a trans woman in the women's changing rooms must be flashing a penis in their faces. After it's taken them so long in the morning to properly organise post-op genitalia in order to pass, the last thing they want to do is undo that work while trying on a pair of jeans.

Perhaps they think this way because more than 80% of males who identify as women retain all their male genitalia. The numbers of what used to be called transexuals is very low. So your disbelief is quite mistaken.

Which is why I'm forced to shake my head in disbelief when women have this idea that a trans woman in the women's changing rooms must be flashing a penis in their faces. After it's taken them so long in the morning to properly organise post-op genitalia in order to pass, the last thing they want to do is undo that work while trying on a pair of jeans.

So.... because someone has taken so long to get ready in the morning ... they miraculously have a lower rate of committing sex crime than all other males? And they miraculously lose the power they gained from male puberty.

I mean, I know this thread is about young girls, but this also shows a complete lack of understanding of the evidence to the contrary. In fact, the statistics show that transitioned males DO NOT have anything looking like a female rate of sex crime. They still commit sex crime at the same rate as other males. Meaning they should be treated just the same as any other male and should not have access to single sex spaces.

So.... while we are waiting for your evidence about the young females who are binding, can we also have something other than this rather farcical anecdotal led assertion on transitioned male crime stats.

Quite happy to link some up if you don't know where to look.

Please, this isn't about trans issues at all

It's about cynical marketing targeting young girls

YANBU. I had no idea they could do so much damage

Apologies OP just responding to a misleading assertion by another poster.

Yes… apologies OP, I am getting a bit impatient waiting to be educated by Kurt about why young girls should be misled in this way about the harm that they could inadvertently do to their bodies due to this bonkers virtue signaling move by, as you say, a soap store.

Binding goes along with the culture of breast ironing in some countries. The physical damage is obviously greater with breast ironing but binding according to this website can have some of the same problems.
nationalfgmcentre.org.uk/breast-flattening/

So we're adopting the breast destruction techniques that take place in some undeveloped countries. Great. What about FGM, that might as well be next, although I suppose puberty blockers which have permanently damaging effects on the body are not much better.

What's the definition of child abuse again?

@334bu
@Helleofabore

Completely understand, I just don't want the PSA to be lost

I work in Lush. I can honestly say our customers are not predominantly young girls.

I haven't heard about this latest binder thing, I'll ask my manager about it tomorrow and see what's what.

Just to be clear though,

A: we don't get paid minimum wage.
B: we have a shed ton of training on all our products (not saying that would make any of us qualified to deal with issues surrounding this of course)
C: we're not asked to aggressively sell and pester customers.
D: Our Christmas sales are as good as ever.
E: I can practically hear the sneer in the soap shop comments, we (like many high street stores) have regular customers who will come in for a chat or comfort or human contact. I can think of many customers who we have helped to get skin/hair issues under control which has helped MH. We're not all the monsters who just want £££ as we're being made out to be.

It's horrifying really that a company unrelated to these issues are providing a. Service behind parents backs. I mean what other scenario can you think off where this wouldn't raise massive red flags?

I'm pleased to say it's been picked up by the papers (even if it is the mail)

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10181729/Lush-comes-fire-offering-chest-binder-collection-service.html#article-10181729

C: we're not asked to aggressively sell and pester customers.

Oh? You must work in the one and only branch that doesn't require staff to follow customers around, ask ridiculous open-ended questions and start smearing moisturiser on customers who stand still for long enough.

@Goshitstricky

I work in Lush. I can honestly say our customers are not predominantly young girls.

I haven't heard about this latest binder thing, I'll ask my manager about it tomorrow and see what's what.

Just to be clear though,

A: we don't get paid minimum wage.
B: we have a shed ton of training on all our products (not saying that would make any of us qualified to deal with issues surrounding this of course)
C: we're not asked to aggressively sell and pester customers.
D: Our Christmas sales are as good as ever.
E: I can practically hear the sneer in the soap shop comments, we (like many high street stores) have regular customers who will come in for a chat or comfort or human contact. I can think of many customers who we have helped to get skin/hair issues under control which has helped MH. We're not all the monsters who just want £££ as we're being made out to be.

I don't think anyone is sneering because your a soap shop, more because your soap shop is no where near qualified to assist with these issues as you yourself have said. In fact I see posters sticking up for the staff in case of any potential repercussions.