When Exactly did Trans/Non Binary Become So Commonplace?

[miniaturepixieonacid]

This isn't to start (yet another!) debate on the rights and wrongs of gender identification, transitioning etc. Just pondering on how quickly and in what year it became so common.

I'm just watching an old episode of Waterloo Road (Drama set in a comprehensive school) where one of the characters (Casey Barry for anyone who watched it) realises that she wants to be a boy rather than a tomboy and everyone reacts as if it's extremely unusual. The other pupils mock and bully her, her brother gets violent and tells her she is disgusting and a freak and the teachers talk about what a difficult road she has ahead and how much support she will need.

The episode is set in 2013. Not the 1990s. Only just over 10 years ago. But in a Year 10/11 class in a comprehensive in 2024 this wouldn't even raise an eyebrow, would it. There will be several trans and non binary pupils (maybe even several per year group) and pupils would consider it normal.

I teach in a prep school (only goes up to Year 8) so we haven't actually yet had a single pupil transition to the opposite gender. There's one 10 year old who I could potentially see it happening to over the next couple of years but it hasn't yet. So I'm relatively unknowledgable about the whole thing.

Interested to know from secondary school teachers who have been teaching for 10+ years what year you think it was that transitioning and being non binary went from rare to a relatively popular trend.

Did you see my comment where I said it was a complicated issue?

It’s not. If the lobbying makes you think it is then the indoctrination has been successful. Can you think of any women in your life who’d be uncomfortable with a mixed-sex ward?

Discounting the obvious small sample size, and that fact that they would need willing participants.

Absolutely I can, show me where in my posts I said that wards should be mixed sex.

But you said a man identifying as trans should be on a female ward, in case they were less likely to accept treatment (or something).

You also said:

I caveat that by saying that I absolutely do understand concerns about trans women who have male anatomy staying on a female bedded ward/bay, and that has its own debate. I'm not saying that I am for or against it, because I can see arguments on both sides.

So to be fair, you don’t think they should be mixed sex. But you don’t think they shouldn’t be either. But you think saying no to a male and insisting they stay in a men’s ward would be discriminatory and lead to them refusing treatment.

I suggest with previous figures prior to the current exponential rate of increase in female adolescents seeking treatment at the gender clinics around the world that you will indeed have detransitioner clients. The rate that I have found in studies that were not measuring detransition primarily have sat around 8-10% of medical transitioners (those studies never eventuated as I noticed ones put forward were deemed transphobic and were rejected.) Again, this was before the exponential increase of female adolescents seeking treatment.

My suspicion is that with the current exponential increase of medicalised adolescent transition, particularly amongst female adolescents the rate will be rather much higher. You do know about that exponential increase, don't you? The x000% increase over a very few short years of particularly female adolescent patients? It is one of the reasons for the Cass Review, to understand what the fuck is happening to our teenagers and children. Because heavily invested lobby groups had no curiosity at all.

I am happy to present you with links. And you can make up your own mind as to whether you feel detransitioners are important to understand. Because you don't really seem to be up to date on the issues if you ask 'how many male transitioners are likely to be AGP? and 'how many detransitioners will there be'? Considering the brutality of transition on the female body, you are likely to encounter more female transitioners than you probably think, and with that you will also encounter detransitioners with their very own unique needs.

Either way, I, and others, are trying to point out to you that while it is great that you had a male trans person give you their insight, has your education provider presented a balanced as well as detailed approach? Or are you left to do the research for yourself on any other balancing insight as you see fit, or not see fit?

I also worry greatly about 'cheerleading' vulnerable teens on in their pretend identities because it is not a neutral act. It can make reversing out of this crap so much harder because everyone around them is invested and 'cheering' them on - it's a huge amount of pressure. It is just so fucking stupid - why are adults doing this?

And yes - that poster's partner is a woman, she has told us so so why the faux outrage at me referring to her as such?
I am way, way past pretending that human beings can change sex and using compelled speech to facilitate this stupidity. I just won't do it.

I think it's very much down to the individual. Bearing in mind they are not a large demographic, the last trans woman I actually met in practice was younger and had medically transitioned abroad and very much passed as female.

Again I realise people on here will disagree and say things like 'I always know, tall, deep voice, big hands' and so on and so forth. Of course this person is not biologically female and never will be (genetics, DNA, chromosomes and all that). I have genuinely never heard anyone in real life argue otherwise.

But to the average observer they really did look and sound female and I'm not sure I would have guessed they were trans, had they not told me. My point is that no, I'm not convinced it would be fair to put her in a male hospital bay or in a male prison etc.

He.

The thing is @Thirtiesphysio it’s not about your views, per se. It’s about the idea that a seminar at a university from a middle aged male is remotely adequate to fully demonstrate the status of trans ideology.

Your first post on this thread was naive, and the concern I have is many in that seminar will flitter away with the idea that “trans people have always been around” and should be “respected” without any thought whatsoever to what any of these things mean, the implications. You have stayed on this thread and learnt about AGP, had notions of what is genuinely “kind” challenged, are weighing up the pros and cons of going along with this ideology. I think that’s really valuable and I respect that. Posters on Mumsnet know more about this stuff than anyone else. It’s admirable you’re engaging.

But what about your classmates? Will they consider any of this? Will they wonder about the teenage girls’ perspective? Probably not because it sounds like your university is institutionally captured. The default person they chose to talk about trans people was A middle aged male. It’s so typical. Not a young female. Not a trans person who doesn’t believe in wrong sex pronouns. This is the concern with this rapid rise. It’s the unquestioning acceptance of what this particular cohort tells people and the impact that has on unrelated cohorts that is the concern. Hopefully you can ponder on some of these concerns and sow some seeds of questions in your colleagues also.

But do you know why this is? When males are puberty blocked at a young age, like they commonly do in countries like the Netherlands, they do not undergo any form of male puberty. They do not achieve any sexual maturation. They cannot have sex, they cannot orgasm. They have no fertility and have osteoporosis. There is no penile growth so nothing to invert to make a neovagina so they have to use colon.

This is the price that has been paid to “pass” so effectively you think it would be wrong to put them on a male ward. I agree with you that it would be wrong in this sense, but you should never lose sight of the fact you are actually treating a significantly adulterated male whose body is pre-pubertal but adult age with a number of complications. You are not treating a woman.

I saw the link somebody posted about the transwoman who raped a woman in hospital, but that doesn't mean I can get on board with homogenisation and simplification of a more complicated issue. There have been cases of male nurses who have raped or sexually assaulted female patients. It doesn't mean that you can automatically ban them from the profession on the basis of their gender, just in case they rape someone

So a man pretends to be a woman, is placed by idiots on to a female ward, rapes a woman, everyone pretends for a year that this did not happen because he is a woman then the NHS finally admits it and your response is' but male nurses...?'. Fucking hell.

With respect though, how can you decide if you weren't there?

I think what people perceive as naivety is merely the idea of being moderate with an opinion, rather than having extreme views one way or the other. These threads tend to attract people with the same opinion jumping on board, with the occasional comment crying transphobia. I appreciate it is more complicated than that.

I was very careful to avoid the word 'kind', yes the notion of kindness is important, but it is also simplistic in a healthcare context, and not surprisingly we don't tend to hear it used much at university.

Thank you though, I think it's always useful to engage and try and view an argument from different perspectives. Not that it is an argument to me, as I really don't feel that strongly one way or the other. My original point was that there are trans people out there in the UK using health services, and that education is needed in order for people like me to navigate this obviously complicated subject.

I was surprised by my classmates responses, most of them were largely disinterested in the subject to be honest! A few of them felt that they were largely humouring trans people by accepting them as a different gender to their biological sex. It's difficult to gauge as we're in a large cohort and I was only sat with six other people🙂

It is rather dismissive towards the needs of groups to relegate them to unimportant with 'how many do you think I will encounter' when a university has felt it important enough to bring in a specialist to present a trans perspective that covers an also small population. There is inconsistency in that approach.

This is going to sound massively patronising, and you can tell me to fuck off and I’ll deserve it😀.

Im in my 50s now but- 15 years ago, I was like you. I don’t believe people could change sex, I didn’t believe transwomen were actual women but I genuinely thought they were a poor, marginalised group who had been horribly discriminated against. I would have bent over backwards to #bekind. I had similar sounding work seminars and vowed to be as nice as possible to this troubled population.

Im in my 50s now, and my epiphanic moment actually came with shocking premenstrual cramps. I have had 4 children and, of course, cycles and whatever have changed. It was around the time that TRAs were announcing that trans identified men ALSO had periods and menstrual cycles without the bleeding. And I thought, whilst doubled over in agony - fuck off, you don’t get to appropriate female biology. You can never understand THIS.

Then came the horror and lack of oversight of hormonal manipulation of children. Followed by trans identifying men entering women’s hospital wards, toilets, changing rooms, sports. And the realisation that they don’t want 3rd spaces, they insist on female spaces because the boundary transgression is the point.

So, some of the posters on this thread may seem terribly unkind, or transphobes/TERFs or whatever. But we see this men’s rights’ lobby group for what it is.

With respect though, how can you decide if you weren't there?

Based on what you told us was said, and enough experience to know what wasn’t said. And we’ve been pretty accurate haven’t we?

I suspect you’ll learn more from MN than you ever will at university on this topic.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me

And a thread specific to physios:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4479019-uk-physios?page=1

For those people who are interested in sports and the impact that the extreme demands of trans activists here is a report just released for the UK. As I mentioned up thread, the inclusion of male people in female sport has been wedged open partly because of the kindness of using pronouns. It is very incorrect for any person to declare ‘no harm is done by using preferred pronouns’. Maybe not individually, with loved ones, but the collective damage is now huge.

It would be very interesting if the USA female athlete groups will do something similar. Obviously there is many more of them. (again I would like to make clear this difference that this is not all trans activists who rightly campaign for their needs such as to remove discrimination in housing as just one example).

In regards to the impact in the USA, cyclocross has been severely impacted for female people there. Many races now will have been won or even just placed by a male rider in the female category. That is just one sport.

Anyway, here is the report.

Fairplay for women have released a new report as follows.

NEW REPORT: How trans inclusion in sport is harming women and girls

13th January 2024

For years women and girls have been facing unfair, and sometimes unsafe, sport because of trans inclusion – which means male inclusion in women’s teams, events and changing rooms.

and

The scale of the problem, and its effect on women and girls, has been concealed by the fear around this issue. A culture of intimidation and silencing has forced women to keep quiet or walk away. This is not inclusion, it’s female exclusion.

Fair Play For Women has heard personal reports from across 35 sports in the UK. From these, we have compiled around 50 personal testimonies representing 25 sports. We have protected their identities because they are worried about reprisals in their sport, or about the possible impact on relationships or on their jobs. Given that women have lost their jobs for expressing opinions about this, they are probably right to be cautious.

Our report gives them a voice. This, the first ever report on the impact of trans inclusion in the UK, shows a widespread problem, affecting many women and girls all over the country, at all levels, from juniors to masters and at all levels of competition and participation. Women and girls are being put at risk and their legitimate concerns disregarded. Their stories debunk the claims that this is a small problem, affecting only a few, and that it does no harm. They include big sports like football, athletics, swimming and cycling, and contact sports like judo, American football, ice hockey and roller-derby.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/new-report-how-trans-inclusion-in-sport-is-harming-women-and-girls/

I believe that women have the right to decline to be in a bay with a trans woman

Your belief is wrong, @Thirtiesphysio . The trans person gets a choice about where they would like to be accommodated. The other patients on the ward they choose do not.

Just coming back to puberty blockers and the safety of them.

https://www.authorea.com/users/713322/articles/697715-the-impact-of-suppressing-puberty-on-neuropsychological-function

If puberty blockers are impacting children's IQ as this review suggests, do those who supported them previously still think that they are a safe treatment for any teenager or child? Considering there is no indication that that IQ improves with the treatment finishing?

Some of the girls noted in this review are girls taking this drug for precocious puberty. It is a very hard decision for any parent to decide to use this set of drugs for precocious puberty. However, all I see is cheerleading for the use of these drugs for a mental health purpose.

The adults who repeat the almost mantra like 'puberty blockers are safe and the benefits outweigh the concerns and it is all good gender treatment', while not understanding fully the repercussions of that cheerleading is a major concern, I think.

Use for precocious puberty is likely to be fairly short, and - by definition - before the normal age of puberty.

Research is essential on how the effects differ when used longer term and during the ages when puberty is normally meant to happen, but it has to be a reasonable.starting hypothesis that the effect would be greater.

This week the WHO has become the latest to declare that there is a significant lack of evidence that the current treatment for children and adolescents around gender.

"the evidence base for children and adolescents is limited and variable regarding the longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents"

tgdfaq16012024.pdf (who.int)

This update came less than a month after the WHO released what was supposedly their guidelines that were supposedly, at the time, very well evidenced and supposedly balanced. But obviously was not and the WHO has now had to concede that perhaps they have not taken a balanced approach, not that they have said this, but in releasing this update it has become apparent.

And yet, through out the world and on threads on MN, activists refuse to acknowledge the deficit in evidence around this issue.

This is such an ignorant take, not least the assumption that marriage equality being legalised ‘in a lot of jurisdictions’ - so in other words not everywhere (I take it you’re in the US) - meant that homophobia was magically abolished and there was no work left to do. Particularly ignorant given you’re writing from a position less than 10 years later where the Supreme Court has been stacked with judges who will happily reverse marriage equality if they get the opportunity, Florida has a ‘don’t say gay bill’, etc etc etc. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Not that it is an argument to me, as I really don't feel that strongly one way or the other.

A luxury denied to every woman imprisoned with a male claiming a trans identity. A luxury denied to every woman excluded from rape counselling because the head of her service is a transwoman who has decided rape victims need to be “re-educated” about their trauma. A luxury denied to the woman raped and gaslighted by the NHS. A luxury denied to every lied-to detransitioning young woman mourning the loss of her breasts. A luxury denied to every woman who has lost her place on a sports team, podium, chance at the Olympics, sports scholarship to a mediocre male. A luxury denied to every woman of faith who can no longer access spaces opened up to male strangers without her needs even considered. A luxury denied to the women living with profound disabilities requiring intimate care who are threatened with withdrawal of services if they refuse a transwoman carer.

I know I’ve forgotten many other cohorts of women who are being actively disadvantaged at best, put in danger at worst in the name of “inclusivity”.

If you don’t feel strongly about it, you haven’t been paying attention.

Absolutely @SoundTheSirens