LGBT children board title

[ArabellaScott]

Given that the Cass Review says social transitioning is not a neutral act, and refers to 'gender incongruent' or 'gender questioning' children, the use of 'trans children' looks startlingly out of date and incorrect on Mumsnet.

The board should be renamed 'LGB and gender questioning children' to better reflect best practice.

The new school guidelines likewise use 'gender incongruent' and 'gender questioning' and not ever 'trans' when referring to children.

Non sequitur of the century.

Have a wee trophy 🏆

Let me try and explain.

You seem to be saying in your previous post that the 'LGBTQ community' should not be split from the T and it is 'emotionally manipulative' and in general wrong that anyone should seek for this.

So I'll ask again.

Are you ok with lesbians being openly homosexual based on sex and wishing to group and date on this basis, and do you recognise the reasons why they might wish this AND the attitude and exclusion they face for stating this?

Do you still feel an 'LGBTQ community' IS actually a community of people united by their sexualities, when LGB people who will not conform to gender identity (TQ) ways of framing things have been excluded? Or is it a group united solely by a belief in gender identity?

This is relevant when looking for resources exclusively for homosexual children, because homosexuality and gender identity beliefs are not happy cohabitors for obvious reasons, and children and their parents need access to neutral discussions and information as well as the framing through the gender identity lens. As discussed in Cass.

O my bad I thought we were talking about how best to support LGBT children, but I can see you have a different concern.

How does having 2 separate boards support or solve any of what you are saying? How on earth do you think you are suddenly going to get neutral discussions just by virtue of their suddenly being 2 boards?!

Agree.

I would think it would be because its important that children and parents are able to talk and consider resources and support for gay children without it being necessarily through the gender identity lens? Reference the Cass report. Or to be able to do so without being perceived as hostile, as is obviously happening here. Why is it so necessary to keep LGB with the T for children and parent support when in the adult world it is far from a sunny upland working so well for everyone? Who loses by there being more information available and more specific focused resources?

forgive me for saying it probably is not very useful to debate with certain people let them have their say and leave it at that.

But as I said earlier...the board as it stands was being used perfectly well earlier by the mother of a gay son...she posted clearly about this, made no reference to trans issues whatsoever, and it has been others coming in randomly saying things like 'make sure he doesn't join any LGBT societies as he may be encouraged to transition.'

Other posters redirected it in this political fashion because of their own agendas, the OP was not interested in any trans issues.

Do you think that's suddenly not going to be the case just because there are 2 boards? Don't be ridiculous!

It is people who are hostile to trans issues who are populating threads on gay young people for their own agenda.

Maybe if they just stopped doing it then genuine OPs could get on with finding the best support for their children on their specific concerns.

The solution appears to be at hand if you want to keep the issues distinct.

I'll ask again - and this is the last time but this is illustrating the point really - is a girl who wants to be homosexual on the basis of sex and be part of female only lesbian groups or exclude males from her dating pool regardless of identity being 'hostile' to trans issues?

Come on, be honest. Children and their parents need to be able to consider LGB AND T without the LGB necessarily being framed solely through the gender identity preferred lens. Neutrality is not hostility. And Cass raises some important points about this.

But as I said earlier...the board as it stands was being used perfectly well earlier by the mother of a gay son...she posted clearly about this, made no reference to trans issues whatsoever, and it has been others coming in randomly saying things like 'make sure he doesn't join any LGBT societies as he may be encouraged to transition.'

You really didn’t like that did you?

Do you honestly think - despite the Mermaids Barbie to GI Joe spectrum, despite all the concerns Tavistock clinicians had about ‘transing the gay away’, despite all the ridiculous books about children knowing they’re trans because a boy has a taste for pretty dresses and a girl would rather have short hair & trousers, despite all the children who think they’re trans but don’t go on puberty blockers & then turn out to be LGB - that no feminine-presenting gay boy in an LGBTQ+ club ever gets asked his pronouns or encouraged to think that he might actually be a girl? Even if the idiots who suggest it are doing it with the best of intentions?

Answering that question has no relevance to how 2 boards are more helpful than one.

I think you'll also find that Cass acknowledged, actually more than that - she centres, the complex experiences of young people as they grapple with both their sexual identity and their personal identities in her report and her subsequent interviews and statements. She argued that it is important to consider how these areas interact in subsequent decisions young people make when they assert they are trans.

If she can see how these areas impress upon each other in journeys towards adulthood why are you so reluctant to see it, and so keen for segregation of issues?

She also of course acknowledges the enduring trans identity of some young people.

It is people who are hostile to trans issues who are populating threads on gay young people for their own agenda.

And that is because many of those you deem "hostile" were once those "gay young people" themselves and have "lived experience" of "LGBT" groups.

This is interesting. You have been told by a number of posters (I have only looked back a couple of pages and saw several) that they would find a separate board helpful for their kids, yet you continue to insist that the boards must be kept together and your big reason seems to be to combat ‘transphobia’.

As your view appears to include the situation below as ‘transphobia’:

there are posters already advising that he stay away from LGBT groups in case he is encouraged to transition

Can you see how this is not to the benefit of gay or lesbians kids - only the trans side? Adopting a trans identity is a huge life changing thing with long term implications on physical health and often results in worsen mental health. We know that parents feel that their impressionable children are being pushed down a path by interested parties and it’s absolutely right that parents want to ensure that their child has true options - do you agree?

It’s a bit like the female athletes saying they want female only sports, or women saying they want single sex wards and being refused - this is forced teaming and it only benefits one group- the proponents of trans.
Can you accept that if parents are saying that they would find a split helpful, they should be listened to and given due consideration - not just shouted down and told they can’t?

If she can see how these areas impress upon each other in journeys towards adulthood why are you so reluctant to see it, and so keen for segregation of issues?

That might be a valid comment if the nature of the T didn’t have the function of erasing the LGB.

The entire concept of trans claims that sexual attraction is based on gender identity, not sex, thus totally cancelling out the concept of being either exclusively same sex or opposite sex attracted.

From what I read parents who either have children who are considering a possible LGB orientation, or are LGB themselves, say they would be supportive of a split and shift in language from 'trans children' to 'gender questioning children', while the counter view is just railing at this being somehow 'transphobic' and 'political'.

Mumsnet should hold the best interests of children and parents in mind at all times, imo.

I am the parent of LGB and T kids.

I wouldn't mind the boards split, I also wouldn't mind it remaining LGBT.

I wouldn't mind 'gender questioning' being added.

I wouldn't support the 'trans' taken away at all. I don't believe that's in the best interests of the people who will use the board.

Well for starters, I don't believe that this thread is dominated by genuine LGBT parents. I believe (although none of us are in a position to know for sure) that this thread is in the main populated by people who are coming at this from a political angle. We can see from poster user names and history of posting how this plays out, and of course we know Mumsnet attracts GC posters who are keen to influence LGBT family boards.

We can also see by the content of posts that the preoccupation of many is GC concerns, not LGBT family concerns.

The main rationale for splitting the board is GC in nature, and hasn't articulated well how this would help LGBTQ families.

The LGBTQ community are also well aware that splitting the T from the LGBTQ is a well-developed strategy that is being used to undermine us all:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

This thread seems to be a point in action; another part of the broader effort that is ongoing to split the T from the LGBT.

Meg Kilgannon from the Family Research Council in the States has given speeches on this strategy. And of course she and the Family Research Council believe homosexuality is unnatural and harmful; gay people are also in the line of sight. But we will be easier to tackle once divided.

The Cass report is clear; childhood experiences and feelings that lead them to assertive a trans identity are complex, and often invoke issues of sexuality. She is clear this complexity has to be acknowledged and addressed in order to provide best support for children and young people and ensure the best pathway forward for them.

LGBT family discussions, therefore, may well include areas of both sexuality and gender identity and Mumsnet boards should encompass and reflect that complexity, rather than attempting to segregate issues that can not always easily be separated. Cass would appear to say this approach would not be helpful.

I don't see a genuine explanation for how a split would support families grappling with these complex areas which frequently come up together in family discussions.

The main rationale for splitting the board is GC in nature, and hasn't articulated well how this would help LGBTQ families.

When TRA posters wanted the feminism board to be split, which was of no tangible benefit, it happened. Yet when GC posters (who are quite possibly also parents of LGB/T children) ask for the same elsewhere, it's transphobic and unnecessary.

Trans/gender questioning DC and LGB children face different issues and prejudices. There is, sometimes, some crossover. But often not.

Trans/gender questioning DC and LGB children face different issues and prejudices. There is, sometimes, some crossover. But often not.

I'm not sure why this point keeps getting glossed over/ignored by the usual 'you're just big GC transphobes' suspects.

When people wanted the feminism boards to be split the rationale I believe was because some people wanted to more easily avoid the bile that was posted about trans people.

So we see that in plenty of Mumsnet threads about users experience of the site, with posters frequently talking about hiding the feminism: sex and gender boards so they don't have to see the discussions there by accident.

This isn't the preoccupation here.

Of course, a split here would allow any posters who are so motivated to target their posts more precisely at Trans concerns, which is why I spoke earlier about Mumsnet doing the homework for some posters for them if they arrange boards in this way.

So apparently parents of same sex attracted children are to be considered not genuine. And our concerns are to be dismissed because of someone else’s political agenda.

That is good to know.

@Helleofabore

AFAIK there are both LGB parents and parents of LGB children posting on this thread. Suggestions admits that she doesn't actually know who is or not, so I'd take this confident assertion with a big pinch of salt, as it's just her reckons.

I don't believe that this thread is dominated by genuine LGBT parents.

I can assure you @suggestionsplease1 that I am a genuine LGBT parent. In fact, the board was established initially at my request, when we found out that DC was gay.

This was, I think, back in 2010.

I have no 'skin in the game' re trans issues - although I will happily put my hand up and say that I'm gender critical - but at the time (and still now) my concerns were always about DC's sexuality. 'LGBT' was just used as a 'commonplace' acronym. I had little thought about the T part of it, as it simply wasn't on my radar. I was all about the sexuality and believed, as I still do, that gender identity had nothing to do with the issues we were dealing with.

Here you go:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/1047746-Can-we-have-a-new-topic?reply=21459177

I think lots of us have professional experience that is relevant to this conversation too. We are keen to see best practice followed for the sake of children.