Six year old trans girl ‘tries to cut off her penis’ after Guide ban

[JonesTown]

Quite a disturbing article in this morning’s Observer regarding the impact of the Guides’ ban on trans girls following the Supreme Court ruling.

It reports on the experience of one six year old trans girl named Emily after hearing she could no longer attend Rainbows:

Emily’s parents decided to be honest with their daughter about the situation, and explained that she was no longer able to take part in Rainbows because she was trans. A few hours later Curt said they found her “sobbing in her room” and were “shocked” to find her holding a pair of plastic scissors to her penis.

AIBU to find this a distressing consequence of campaign by anti-trans activists or is it a natural result of allowing such young children to change their gender identity?

When does the magic happen that turns a boy into a girl? I've asked this question so often and no one seems able to explain.

Again for those at the back

BOYS CANNOT BE GIRLS

Nonsense. No male person can be a girl or a woman, just as no female person can be a boy or a man. Words have meaning and the words girl, woman, boy, man refer to juvenile or adult members of the two reproductive sexes - female and male. How western society has lost sight of this basic fact to the extent it has is mindboggling. Feelings, however strong, can never outweigh biology.

Zoe Williams has argued that a sensible solution to all of this would be to make the Brownies mixed gender like the Scouts.

So, @JonesTown because one boy - and his father - doesn't get what he wants, ALL girls have to give up single-sex organisations and activities? Some pretty strong male entitlement there.

We KNOW that girls thrive educationally in single-sex schools.

We know that boys do better in mixed-sex schools.

So who's the problem here?

If this is the parent that's been speculated

A) For attention, without question

B) Possibly also something darker. Multiple red flags.

Honestly, they need investigating

So true

The framing is quite tragic, a little boy attempting to cut his penis off. What age do you think is acceptable for him to wait to before he is castrated?

Impossible.
They may be convinced that they are while society encourages it but they’re not.
My own beautiful DD went down a rabbit hole of non gender, some of her friends use male pronouns or they/them. Thank fuck she grew out of it.
The link between trans and ASD teens is undeniable. We’ve let down a section of society who feel different, misfits, certain online creators convincing them they were in the wrong body.

Really. What makes trans girls with their penisis girls then? Is it because they have been incorrectly told by their parents that they can be girls. That poor boy has been lied to by his parent (s) and others from an extremely young age. Whe ne finds out he was supported by people who lied to him and continue to lie to him. That he actually cannot be a female. The poor little boy will have to deal with that.

Sadly, I work with young people and a lot of young people that are vulnerable due to autism or previous abuse or looked after go down the rabbit hole. I'm glad your daughter escaped from it.

The reason you need to keep saying that trans girls are girls is because you know they aren't. Argument by assertion means nothing. Dogs are roses. Forks are spoons.

The narrative that little boys should get to do things that they want when policy and law says they should in case they self harm in distress is emotionally manipulative. It is part of DARVO too. Not from
the little boy, but from those around him declaring that others should change the policy or law to include him based on his distressed.

When does society ignore safeguarding boundaries for protected categories for any other group based on distress of rejection?

That some posters feel this is manipulation is acceptable for one group makes it pretty clear that they expect one group’s subjective and unevidenced reality to be acted on as if it was materially real and evidenced. That is a remarkable claim.

However, when you see the rest of the emotionally manipulative, false and abusive accusations that come with that demand, it all falls into place.

That some posters feel this is manipulation is acceptable for one group makes it pretty clear that they expect one group’s subjective and unevidenced reality to be acted on as if it was materially real and evidenced. That is a remarkable claim.

They know who the women are!

What makes them "girls"? What is the core difference between "girls" and "boys" such that they need, or benefit from, single gender provisions?

How does that quality relate to the traditional meaning of "girl" as a sex class, and to the female children for whom Rainbows, Brownies and Guides were originally created?

Why is a quality "girl" that is not sex-based best accomodated in a group that was set up based on sex, and if such groups going forward are to be non-sex-based, where are the new supports for children, in particular female children, who do enjoy and relax more in a single sex environment?

They do indeed know who to manipulate

Goats are oats
Headphones are phones
Potatoes are toes
Tomatoes are toes
Carpets are pets
Stents are tents
Barrows are arrows
Lamps are amps
Duvets are vets
Cushions are ions
Pearls are earls
Ghosts are hosts
Glasses are assess
Boxes are oxes
Sharks are arks
Shampoo is poo
Mice are ice

What have i missed??

I hope everyone reads the article by Victoria Smith in the Critic

The costs of telling the truth too late | Victoria Smith | The Critic Magazine https://share.google/b1Os8svNdUCLJj1Ct

This tweet she quoted

I brainwashed my son into thinking he was a girl. Chemically castrated him with puberty blockers. Then persuaded him to have his penis cut off. And now the Girl Guides won’t let him in. How could anyone be so cruel to a child?

Chips are hips, there’s another load of old arse for @TealScroller

If you want to be technical about it, it's the difference between subsective adjectives or modifiers that keep the original category intact, and privative ones which denote a different category from the noun. So a sweet apple or red apple or bad apple would be subsective as those adjectives are still describing an apple. A fake apple, though, is not an apple.

Trans, unlike black or tall or strong, is a privative adjective. A trans woman is not a woman. It's impossible for a woman to be a trans woman.

Linguistic sleight of hand, Newspeak and sheer bloody lying. That's all it is.

Another issue about the misuse of Dr Cass in the argument that women pointing out safeguarding issues are zealots, trump supporters, and far right really is missing her clear statements about use of pronouns being not a neutral act.

Using pronouns and female language may cause a male child to remain in a situation they no longer want to be in. Because well meaning adults have supported them and they don’t know how to explain they have changed their mind.

Allowing a male child to access a female single sex provision may also influence that child in a number of ways to remain transitioned. Because they don’t want to lose that community connection even if they no longer believe they are a girl. Plus there is an issue where a child might feel so much energy has been expended to get that child into that provision that it will cause problems if they then say they don’t want this situation to continue.

That is also part of safeguarding.

There is a significant difference between supporting a materially real and proven fact and a subjective reality. And campaigning for a child to bypass category boundaries based on their subjective belief about themselves that has no basis in material reality is not harmless to the child involved or the children in the group protected by the category boundary.

This is spot on.

Indeed, the TRA and some parents doing so much harm and yet screaming that the harm comes from others for merely speaking biological reality. They ingore their own harm and yet do the most harm. Shameful. Do they not have any ability to self reflect on what THEY have done to innocent children?

I love this post!
At this stage, are we preaching to the converted?
@JonesTown hasn’t been around for a couple of days.
I think the anti Trans group have won the discussion by having more cards up their sleeve.
People who rely on insults and emotive attacks are forced to drop out before too long IMO. Their arguments don’t really go anywhere.

I guess feeding time went on long enough. There are still enough people talking this crap to make it worth saying, though.

"the anti Trans group" who are the anti Trans group?

It is not anti-trans to advocate for the exclusion of a male person from a female single sex provision. It can be said to 'misandrist' but it is not driven by hate so even that is inaccurate and mischaracterises the issue.

I think that many of us who have pointed out the flaws in the OP's and other's posts are also inclusive of female children in Guiding who believe that they are male. So, how should that be phrased? 'anti-male-transgender-people-inclusion-into-female-single-sex-provisions'? Quite a mouthful, but maybe.

Mind you 'anti-male-transgender-people-inclusion-into-female-single-sex-provisions' there are numerous professionally conducted general population based polls that show this is the majority opinion of the general UK population. Maybe we could just say 'the majority of the UK population' rather than 'anti-trans' which is again very often emotionally manipulative in its use and used to shame people who don't believe that male people should be treated as if they are female people.