Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Friends child and gender change!

370 replies

Namechangeforthis44 · 03/06/2024 08:49

Don't know if this is the right place to post, but just need some input.
Meeting up with a friend soon, whose child has changed gender. I have no issues with that, live and let live.
BUT
Friend has indicated that we not reminisce about kids childhood as this will trigger her child.
As we have moved away, we only see them every few years, so the one thing we do chat about is their childhood memories.
I think it's unreasonable to tell my kids we can't talk about their memories while we meet up with them.
How do I tackle this?

OP posts:
TheKeatingFive · 04/06/2024 19:20

Feelsodrained · 04/06/2024 19:15

Ffs they will probably be used to this at school and will encounter it throughout their lives. They really won’t be harmed by going along with a request not to bring up something that might be upsetting for a peer. And as someone else said it doesn’t mean you cannot discuss anything at all from the past, just don’t spend all the time reminiscing about a period that this child finds painful. You know like you would without question if the request was made for other reasons than gender transition.

Again, misrepresentation. They're being asked to not reference their past together. I expect many children would find that confusing and upsetting. And as that's the basis of their relationship, what's even the point of a meet up?

JLou08 · 04/06/2024 19:23

justteanbiscuits · 03/06/2024 11:00

I have teen children at highschool, work with teens and volunteer with teens. None of them are eye-rolley, and all incredibly understanding, supportive and so much less rude and entitled than their parents.

Like I say, the current crop of teens truly gives me hope for a better future for our country.

My experience is that teenagers are accepting too. If @OolongTeaDrinker family are really having a negative attitude about it they are in the minority for that age group or may just be scared to show their honest thoughts/feelings. Those are the children I feel for, how can they reach out for support from family when their family are judgemental and bigoted.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 04/06/2024 19:36

Look at the language on here between the pro-child safeguarding group and the anti-child safeguarding group. It's clear which one cares about children the most from the language alone.

It is not in any child's best interests to convince them they are fragile, cannot be resilient and require other people to lie continuously for them to be 'safe' or happy. Telling them this will destroy any chance of normal human relationships because healthy relationships are not one way only and do not require lying as a bedrock.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 04/06/2024 19:38

Acceptance goes both ways. And requires everyone to accept that people have freedom of speech and thought. And do not have to validate anyone else's delusions.

AgentJohnson · 04/06/2024 19:41

Her child’s triggers are hers to cope with not for everyone else to pussy foot round

Wow! The compassion in the above post says it all.

You can be both be critical of the current climate and still be compassionate, they aren’t mutually exclusive.

justteanbiscuits · 04/06/2024 19:52

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 04/06/2024 19:36

Look at the language on here between the pro-child safeguarding group and the anti-child safeguarding group. It's clear which one cares about children the most from the language alone.

It is not in any child's best interests to convince them they are fragile, cannot be resilient and require other people to lie continuously for them to be 'safe' or happy. Telling them this will destroy any chance of normal human relationships because healthy relationships are not one way only and do not require lying as a bedrock.

Anti-child-safeguarding 🙄🙄

Name5 · 04/06/2024 20:23

Anti child safeguarding.
Very offensive.

Education takes time and research. One report doesn't an ideology solve . I truly hope everyone reads Cass. However without reading about Suzie Green and The Tavistock the reader will think this is done and dusted.
Suzie Green took her DC overseas for surgery (apologies if you know this).
First hand I can tell you if you rang Mermaids you were told to affirm. No ifs or buts. It will take time to get people to understand the movement was being fed by non medical TRAs. Schools really have enough to do without adding to their work load. I'm sure that don't want to have to cover lgbt.

The jeanie is out of the bottle and transpeople are protected by law. I spend all of my days reinforcing sex versus gender. I don't pussy foot around but I don't tolerate a bigotted attitude to a protected characteristic. Most will detransisition by adulthood.
Segregation and exclusion just takes us back to the dark times of criminal convictions for LG people.
My DD can't get a part time job. She's a uni student but suffers discrimination at each interview. Is that her life? I hope not.

I hope the OP sees her friend.

OolongTeaDrinker · 04/06/2024 20:37

JLou08 · 04/06/2024 19:23

My experience is that teenagers are accepting too. If @OolongTeaDrinker family are really having a negative attitude about it they are in the minority for that age group or may just be scared to show their honest thoughts/feelings. Those are the children I feel for, how can they reach out for support from family when their family are judgemental and bigoted.

My family are very much not judgmental or bigoted, that is a big stretch to reach! Kind of hyperbolic approach expected from gender ideologues though. If someone questions the gender cult, either call them transphobic or a bigot. Sadly the days of no debate are over and we all see the emperor has no clothes.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 04/06/2024 21:20

Surely it would be more bigoted to treat the child of the OPs friend in the extremely different way she is demanding? That's setting them apart. Surely treating them the same as everyone else includes having conversations about shared histories - or at least those topics not being forbidden?

The demands of the TRAs are discriminatory and exclusionary. Exclusionary of normal human interaction which does not include being expected to lie on demand and deny reality.

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 07:33

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 04/06/2024 21:20

Surely it would be more bigoted to treat the child of the OPs friend in the extremely different way she is demanding? That's setting them apart. Surely treating them the same as everyone else includes having conversations about shared histories - or at least those topics not being forbidden?

The demands of the TRAs are discriminatory and exclusionary. Exclusionary of normal human interaction which does not include being expected to lie on demand and deny reality.

Making adjustments for a person is not the same as bigotry. Sameness of treatment does not equal equality in all cases.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 05/06/2024 09:03

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 07:33

Making adjustments for a person is not the same as bigotry. Sameness of treatment does not equal equality in all cases.

Banning certain vast topics of conversation is not the same as 'making adjustments' - it's authoritarian and controlling and it disadvantages those to whom these (impossible) conditions are applied. I would also argue it's not obviously in the child's best interests and is a safeguarding red flag.

WaitingForMojo · 05/06/2024 09:11

I changed my name as an adult, and I hate hearing my old name. I associate it with some difficult times and with feeling wrong in who I was.

It was along the lines of being called Elizabeth, having been referred to as Elsie all my life, and finally becoming Elsie as an adult. The associations I have with Elizabeth are not good.

I am not trans. My name change has nothing to do with sex or gender. But i absolutely don’t think it would be unreasonable, if someone referred to my old name, to ask them not to. I am not that name or that person, the name was given to me without a choice, and I reject it. It is not who I am.

If someone kept reminding me that I used to be Elizabeth, or calling me that, I would absolutely ask them not to because it upset me.
There’s nothing controlling about that.

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 09:16

WaitingForMojo · 05/06/2024 09:11

I changed my name as an adult, and I hate hearing my old name. I associate it with some difficult times and with feeling wrong in who I was.

It was along the lines of being called Elizabeth, having been referred to as Elsie all my life, and finally becoming Elsie as an adult. The associations I have with Elizabeth are not good.

I am not trans. My name change has nothing to do with sex or gender. But i absolutely don’t think it would be unreasonable, if someone referred to my old name, to ask them not to. I am not that name or that person, the name was given to me without a choice, and I reject it. It is not who I am.

If someone kept reminding me that I used to be Elizabeth, or calling me that, I would absolutely ask them not to because it upset me.
There’s nothing controlling about that.

No, that is entirely reasonable. If this kid had been given a name they hated and had changed it and the OP was asked not to mention the old name, everyone would think it was really unreasonable if she was like “well it’s my shared history too and I knew him as Moon Unit so I refuse to call him Mikey and if anyone says I should, it’s infringement of my free speech”. It’s just because gender is mixed in that it’s now “controlling” and “gaslighting” to ask for certain things to be avoided.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 05/06/2024 09:28

But a name change is a specific thing. And names are individual parts of speech so it's not difficult to do. Although presumably if someone slipped up you'd understand.

It doesn't make sense to argue that any discussion of shared history at all will be triggering and should be avoided. It's a very, very difficult thing to do. Also pronouns are the same - even the most extreme TRAs in court cases have failed repeatedly to not use sex-based pronouns even when they were the ones castigating and punishing women for 'misgendering'. It's actually a very difficult thing for adults fully on board with the ideology to do, so it's quite unreasonable to expect children to be able to.

ScrapeMyArse · 05/06/2024 09:54

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 05/06/2024 09:28

But a name change is a specific thing. And names are individual parts of speech so it's not difficult to do. Although presumably if someone slipped up you'd understand.

It doesn't make sense to argue that any discussion of shared history at all will be triggering and should be avoided. It's a very, very difficult thing to do. Also pronouns are the same - even the most extreme TRAs in court cases have failed repeatedly to not use sex-based pronouns even when they were the ones castigating and punishing women for 'misgendering'. It's actually a very difficult thing for adults fully on board with the ideology to do, so it's quite unreasonable to expect children to be able to.

Yeah this isn't talked about enough.

I read a paper once that explained the detrimental affect on mental processing especially for non neurotypical people but I stupidly didn't save it.

But as you say, it's normal in language for names to be changeable and not intrinsic to the person and therefore it is easy to replace them. But replacing definitions and pronouns is more like those tests where you have to say the word "blue" but it's written in bold red writing.

Pronouns aren't functioning as names in language, they replace nouns - man, woman, group of humans etc - so switching them requires the mental effort it takes to internally acknowledge you see one thing and then make yourself say a different thing.

Where the requirement to say wrong sex pronouns or use wrong definitions of words is coerced in a power imbalance relationship, that's really fucking problematic imo. Eg when teachers require it of pupils; when healthcare staff require it of patients; when courtrooms require it of witnesses/ claimants; when men require it of women; when police and other government agencies require it of citizens; when it is required of people with ESL or specific learning difficulties. Situations such as these are dangerous abuses of power which put the less powerful person at a further disadvantage by intentionally disrupting their ability to think clearly.

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 10:00

ScrapeMyArse · 05/06/2024 09:54

Yeah this isn't talked about enough.

I read a paper once that explained the detrimental affect on mental processing especially for non neurotypical people but I stupidly didn't save it.

But as you say, it's normal in language for names to be changeable and not intrinsic to the person and therefore it is easy to replace them. But replacing definitions and pronouns is more like those tests where you have to say the word "blue" but it's written in bold red writing.

Pronouns aren't functioning as names in language, they replace nouns - man, woman, group of humans etc - so switching them requires the mental effort it takes to internally acknowledge you see one thing and then make yourself say a different thing.

Where the requirement to say wrong sex pronouns or use wrong definitions of words is coerced in a power imbalance relationship, that's really fucking problematic imo. Eg when teachers require it of pupils; when healthcare staff require it of patients; when courtrooms require it of witnesses/ claimants; when men require it of women; when police and other government agencies require it of citizens; when it is required of people with ESL or specific learning difficulties. Situations such as these are dangerous abuses of power which put the less powerful person at a further disadvantage by intentionally disrupting their ability to think clearly.

Edited

Was the ‘paper’ “Why pronouns are like rohypnol”?

RedToothBrush · 05/06/2024 10:17

Name5 · 04/06/2024 20:23

Anti child safeguarding.
Very offensive.

Education takes time and research. One report doesn't an ideology solve . I truly hope everyone reads Cass. However without reading about Suzie Green and The Tavistock the reader will think this is done and dusted.
Suzie Green took her DC overseas for surgery (apologies if you know this).
First hand I can tell you if you rang Mermaids you were told to affirm. No ifs or buts. It will take time to get people to understand the movement was being fed by non medical TRAs. Schools really have enough to do without adding to their work load. I'm sure that don't want to have to cover lgbt.

The jeanie is out of the bottle and transpeople are protected by law. I spend all of my days reinforcing sex versus gender. I don't pussy foot around but I don't tolerate a bigotted attitude to a protected characteristic. Most will detransisition by adulthood.
Segregation and exclusion just takes us back to the dark times of criminal convictions for LG people.
My DD can't get a part time job. She's a uni student but suffers discrimination at each interview. Is that her life? I hope not.

I hope the OP sees her friend.

This is where I take issue.

Safeguarding isn't something you should be offended by.

Safeguarding is just safeguarding. If pointing out there is an issue with trans activism neglecting safeguarding isn't offensive - its saying that its a wilful blindness to safeguarding protocols.

If a child presents with particular behaviours we should - as a matter of routine - be asking questions about whether they are autistic, gay, have a history of trauma, have a sexual abuse history BEFORE we affirm. Without exception and regardless of whether parents like it or not.

Because safeguarding is often about checking if a child is alright AGAINST a parent and whether they are happy about safeguarding checks precisely because of what safeguarding is!!!

You can't claim that its offensive to say that affirming a child without doing this isn't anti-safeguarding. Its clear that safeguarding protocols at the Tavistock, with the influence of Stonewall in schools, the pushing of Mermaids without question WAS AND CONTINUES TO BE a failure of safeguarding protocols. This was deliberate. It IS anti-safeguarding to say this isn't important or that its just one report or that its going to take time to unpick.

That doesn't change safeguarding principles. Its just saying once again that somehow we should be ignoring these.

And its not just one report. Its one report PLUS a whole bunch of court cases which are demonstrating sexism and homophobia being prevelant in TRA ideology and riding rough shot over the law and the well being of various vulnerable groups.

Half the fucking problem here is precisely because we can't talk about harms being done because people are getting 'very offended' by being challenged over how practices and protocols have been totalling ignoring all the principles that BALANCE rights in order to prevent harms and are in place to prevent abuses of power.

There are so many abuses of power that have gone on in the course of pushing this ideology I don't know where to begin.

As for your daughter getting rejected for jobs - you are asuming that its because of her identity. I think theres a fair few people around these parts who will argue that theres quite a lot of trans identifying individuals who have an attitude problem precisely because of the bullshit they've been fed. The whole TRA trying to suppress critical thought and challenging of ideas is a social problem. There's no willingness to be accepting of others and their opinions in the opposite direction and yes that matters. They have failed to learn essential life skills and how to relate and communicate with others outside their bubble because they've been overly protected or pandered to within education. Thats something that would come across in an interview. I'm sorry but it is too easy to dismiss as just purely being down to prejudice. Im sure that prejudice may be a factor for some employers as yeah quite frankly people are fed up and see Trans Activists as a HR headache, but i can't believe thats the case with every single employer. So unless shes not applied to that many jobs, I don't believe theres no employers out there willing to take her on either due to the sheer amount of TQ Rainbow pushing by companies out there.

I am fed up of denialism tbh. Its a tough job market for young people generally at the moment and one of the big issues I always saw even ten years ago with kids straight out of education is the inability to use their initiative or common sense in the work place. Ask a practical question and there was a clueless silence. Employers are relunctant to take on young people who can't prove practicality in a lot of job areas because training someone up takes time and effect and its easier to take on someone else who does have that. Getting the first step through the door IS a massive problem for a lot of young people, particularly if they've only focused on academic study. Again, there are a whole load of public conversations going on about attitude and young people and work generally. Don't assume its a trans thing. Theres a lot being expressed about difficulties with Gen Z in the workplace and the unrealistic expectations of young people in broader terms with not really much going on in terms of either how to help develop skills (by government or employers) or by young people themselves in terms of how need to be more realistic or how they can make themselves more employable. Parents are not helping their kids by doing the modern equalivent of adopting an Ali G persona and saying 'is it cos they is trans?' at every single slight hurdle in life.

I have said this from the off years and years ago: The problem I've always had is not about identity it is about the excuses and the denialism of issues relating to behaviour in various ways. Behaviour and lack of respect which would not be tolerated in any other situation is not just tolerated but actively encouraged and enabled. There always going to be consequences to this - not being good with social communication and social skills is one - and that will have lots of knock on implications. People who don't give good first impressions, perhaps due to a lac of confidence, or aren't particularly likeable have different life opportunities to those who do. It is that simple.

But no, we are not allowed to have conversations like this, because they are uncomfortable, difficult, perhaps upsetting and 'are offensive'. This does not stop them being an unfortunate reflection of reality though. If we don't challenge and we don't go 'erm hang on you are being your own worst enemy here, its not necessarily everyone else's fault' then we don't improve the lives of others either. So we are kind of stuck in this culture of just blaming everyone else and saying safeguarding shouldn't apply to this because other people said so and this should continue whilst the fuckwits struggle to get their heads around they created this problem. Erm no. I don't really care if people find this offensive - its essential that we stand up and be difficult and say stop it and stop it now, not in 5 years time. This is a cult. We don't pander to cults. Stop it.

Name5 · 05/06/2024 10:56

@RedToothBrush

You don't know me or the sheer push back I have made over trans identity.
If you wish, advance search and you will see I am not a TRA nor is my DD. I have never affirmed. I use my DDs birth name and gender. She chooses otherwise. She is a young adult.

I tried to help on this thread by offering a view of the mothers position. Yes she might be 'pandering' but equally she could have been saying Fred is sensitive. It's the first time I've got them out in six months. Please help. Who knows?

If I could have done I would have gone into every school and warned them. The ideology is cult like, that we can agree on.

Josette77 · 05/06/2024 10:58

DelythBeautyQueen · 04/06/2024 18:29

Thankfully, my daughter is perfectly happy being a girl and is fully aware that it is impossible for a human being to change sex/gender.

If she wanted to wear boys' clothing, do boy things and call herself "Jack" that would be fine. But I would never participate in the transgender lie that she could become a boy by saying she is one, or by taking life-changing drugs or hormones, or having mutilating surgery.

I don't think it is "kind" to pretend a girl can be a boy, or a boy can be a girl. They will spend the rest of their lives finding out the painful way that it's a lie.

You might be able to coerce friends and family to comply with the pretence, but strangers will clock who they really are however hard they pretend to be someone else.

It shouldn't really matter what strangers think, but in reality it seems to matter a great deal to trans people.

I would rather keep my child based in reality and accepting of who they really are (recognising the sex/gender they were at birth) than suffering the pain of realising later when permanent damage is done, that it was a false promise.

My partner looks like a man. Sounds like a man. No one clocks him as trans.

That said, does anyone really believe the OP was asked not to discuss the past? I don't. This seems to have incited the predictable outrage and op has left.

Youmeanyouvelostyourkey · 05/06/2024 12:25

I agree that there needs to be safeguarding but you cannot say because my daughter wishes to identify as male, that there not safeguarding measures being followed for him.

We have ensured that he is not rushing into making lifelong decisions. We have ensured that he has a safe and secure home, where he can feel safe and to be able to express his thoughts, concerns, hopes for the future. We have sought help when he has needed it and he is currently seeing CAMHS.

We are working with the school with regards to support and his schooling. He said to them that didn't want to live anymore so there is safe guarding for that and we are working hard with everyone involved.

So physical and mental safeguards are in place. So to say that parents of children who wish to identify as a different gender, are the anti safeguarding brigade is complete bollocks.

ScrapeMyArse · 05/06/2024 13:57

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 10:00

Was the ‘paper’ “Why pronouns are like rohypnol”?

No, although that's brilliant too!

What I read was an academic paper or article, possibly by speech therapists although that's quite an ideologically captured profession so possibly wasn't.

I suspect it's been buried far down when I attempt to Google. I've noticed that kind of thing a lot recently.

VinnieVanDog · 05/06/2024 15:23

Josette77 · 05/06/2024 10:58

My partner looks like a man. Sounds like a man. No one clocks him as trans.

That said, does anyone really believe the OP was asked not to discuss the past? I don't. This seems to have incited the predictable outrage and op has left.

Considering the outrage from transactivists if someone's 'deadname' is mentioned then yes, I can easily believe OP was asked not to discuss the past.

Josette77 · 05/06/2024 16:10

VinnieVanDog · 05/06/2024 15:23

Considering the outrage from transactivists if someone's 'deadname' is mentioned then yes, I can easily believe OP was asked not to discuss the past.

I changed my name and I don't like it being used.

Dead naming is not the same as ignoring someone's childhood.

Op has disappeared. I think that says a lot.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 05/06/2024 16:25

Feelsodrained · 05/06/2024 10:00

Was the ‘paper’ “Why pronouns are like rohypnol”?

No, it was one by some linguists and speech therapists. I'll see if I can dig it out.

dougalfromthemagicroundabout · 05/06/2024 16:30

ScrapeMyArse · 05/06/2024 13:57

No, although that's brilliant too!

What I read was an academic paper or article, possibly by speech therapists although that's quite an ideologically captured profession so possibly wasn't.

I suspect it's been buried far down when I attempt to Google. I've noticed that kind of thing a lot recently.

This is the MN thread about it. The link no longer works - so looks like the speech therapists were silenced.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4901191-use-of-wrong-sex-pronouns-is-ableist

Use of wrong sex pronouns is ableist | Mumsnet

Couldn't see a thread on this new article, which says much of what a lot of us knew intuitively - that amongst other harms, use of preferred pronouns...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4901191-use-of-wrong-sex-pronouns-is-ableist

Swipe left for the next trending thread