Gender Identity Explained

[Terrylene]

www.amazon.co.uk/Who-Are-You-Gender-Identity/dp/1785927280/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506330457&sr=8-1&keywords=Who+Are+You%3F%3A+The+Kid%27s+Guide+to+Gender+Identity&tag=mumsnetforum-21

Then it says that it is your "BRAIN" that indicates your sex, not anything else to do with your body. They claim this is somehow "hard-wired" into brains, presumably from birth.

If brain indicated a person's sex, who decides which is the correct type of brain for each sex? If reproductive organs do not indicate someone's sex how are reproductive differences categorised?

Are schools actually using these particular resources?

I hope not, but GIRES and mermaids are where everyone is directed, if someone transgender turns up and they 'need to understand'

I would expect them to take one look at the grammar and bin it

Are there any gender resources, out there, which are genuinely inclusive and compatible with feminism?

I think some feminist organisations need to produce a really good one.

I would expect them to take one look at the grammar and bin it

And not only that, any resource needs to be compatible with the language and science curriculum, in terms of definitions! Those resources are neither!

Crown prosecution service produces a really bad one for teens.

I have not come across a decent well balance information pack to date.

Whatever they're currently teaching children in secondary schools completely convinced my daughter that sex change at the chromosomal level could be accomplished by hormones.

And this is a child who is allegedly quite good at biology.

Terrylene
I think the reason why the materials are so unbalanced are because (unlike most other educational material) it's been produced and delivered to teachers (and many many staff in local authorities and workplaces) by the very people with a vested interest in their message getting across. And as it is all presented as 'transphobia is a hate crime / against the law and it is transphobic to challenge / argue with what is stated', there's immediately a fear of committing a hate crime on top of not wanting to be seen of as transphobic. And when schools are openly directed in the direction of GIREs by the NHS and the DfE, no wonder all critical thought is suppressed.
It is a real scandal and I wish some enterprising journalist Times Educational Supplement I'm looking at you, would take a critical look at these materials.

A good resource could have those cardboard cut outs of dolls which clothes and hair can be attached to. The base dolls would detail the reproductive organs and the children would be shown how to identify which doll is which sex. The dolls would then be covered by different clothes and given different hair and then children would be asked to identify their sex (they would not be able to because the reproductive organs would be concealed). The clothed dolls could then be put into storyboard scenes showing occupations. The children would be asked identify their sex and be shown they would not be able to,

Do the GIRES resources actually say 'You're black and white' over a picture of... a grey penguin?

yes it does - click on the GIRES link above, then on 'Penguin Story Trans Girl Lesson Slides'

There is a logo on the slide to prove it is theirs with a picture of a microscope to prove they know about science

And as it is all presented as 'transphobia is a hate crime / against the law and it is transphobic to challenge / argue with what is stated', there's immediately a fear of committing a hate crime on top of not wanting to be seen of as transphobic.

If a really good quality non biased resource was produced it would be inclusive and not 'transphobic'. However it would also be consistent with other parts of the National Curriculum, such as science. It would would have clear, consistent, workable, definitions of 'gender', 'sex' and the difference between the two. I would have thought these differences would be important, in terms of trans awareness since being transsexual is different to being transgender.

theendisnigh I totally agree. It is because charities and voluntary groups are now doing work that was once the job of government. It was David Cameron's thing - only we had people going round volunteering to clean parks in mind.

I have the same gripe with Jo's cancer trust which oversteps the mark by having questions raised in parliament to apply pressure to remove the small phrase in the very well researched 'invitation' letter that it is the person's right to screen " or not", yet it is linked to in all the government leaflets to provide information.

Another activity with the dolls and clothes. A child could be asked if they think any of the clothes and hairstyles belong to either sex. If they did, they could sort them. They could sort the storyboards scenes, as to which sex belongs in them, too. They could then be told these are their own gender beliefs or perceptions. They could be then given some information / shown a video which disproves sexual stereotypes. They would be then asked to do the same activity again. If any children change their minds they can be shown how beliefs/perceptions can change.

pondering - agreed.
They have some e learning materials for medical / education professionals:
cs1.e-learningforhealthcare.org.uk/public/GEV/GEV_01_001/story_html5.html?lms=1

Module 3 is called "Critical information about medical intervention and frontline support." In this module they are quite specific about the importance of adolescents taking puberty blockers at an early stage :

"The suspension of puberty provides a 'breathing space' for young gender variant people to make considered decisions about their future, without the constant distress of changes to their body. N.b. At puberty, young people sometimes evolve as lesbian, gay or bi-sexual. If for these, or any other reasons, the young people ceases to take hormone blocking interventions, the original puberty will resume"

I'm not a medic, but I don't believe that is scientifically or medically accurate - but it is presented as fact. The whole e learning module pushes the importance of early access to puberty blockers - an indoctrination of professionals into their view.

It is really disconcerting when actual medical advice begins to be biased by political ends and ideologies. Clinical reasoning and in turn advice is supposed to be scientific, anything which is not due to science (or cost and availability) should be pointed out as patient choice. Are children genuinely considered 'Gillick competent' before puberty?

Doctors are reluctant to sterilise women in their 20s in case they change their minds about getting pregnant. How on earth anyone can argue that 13 - 16 year olds can fully comprehend the impact of blocking puberty on their long term sexual / physical / emotional development defies belief.
It's SAFEGUARDING (shouting now). Young people are actually being harmed - both self harming and by others and we're all standing by and watching this happen.

And a lot of girls are beginning puberty at 10 years old.

So the drugs can start in primary schools? After all, they say before puberty starts.

I can't believe dangerous drugs are an answer when schools could do so much more with just making sure that people visit to give talks didn't conform to stereo types.

Even a trip to say a theatre would show male dancers. They could get male nurses in and female Drs and female police officers/fire fighters

Maybe A history lesson could have a bit more focus on when little boys wore dresses and the days when there weren't silly slogans about smiling and being pretty and stuff.

How has it come to stunting growth and delaying perfectly natural processes based on nonsense stereotypes

I suppose so. To children who are not generally considered 'Gillick competent'. Let's hope the adults who make decisions on their behalves have their best interests at heart. Also, as with any other physical health and mental health issue, who else would have an influence? Would schools be reporting 'concerns' to a parent, if, for example, a girl wanted to 'be one of the boys' if she preferred playing with boys and didn't like wearing the school skirt?

And this stuff will really cost. All the drugs, all the counselling, all the resources required to teach, changing leaflets to be consistent with these ideas, even further deciding what to do with all the scientific inconsistencies.

The are conflating your and you're, just like sex and gender

And species too. Sally , Tom and Blur's parents are seriously deluded. This is just utter drivel.

Sally’s story is about a penguin child whose gender identity as a girl, was not immediately understood by her family, they thought she was a boy;
Tom’s story is the same, but in reverse, the family thought he was a girl;
Blur’s story is about an identity that is neither boy nor girl (non-binary, gender queer)

I've a 5 year old DD who's just started reception and I'm genuinely concerned that this brainwashing is going to be forced on kids :( I don't even know what to do anymore, it seems to be utterly out of control.

I try my hardest to teach her that there are no 'boy toys' or 'girl clothes' etc and anyone can play with anything or wear what they want. This regressive sexist bullshit is telling kids there is something wrong with them if they don't conform to stereotypes. It's completely batshit. How long will it take for people to realise the emperor has no clothes?

I'm also really worried about what my 6 year old DS will be taught about this. I'm buying him a (age appropriate) book about the body so that I can explain what sex means in no uncertain terms.

On a side note I was invited to some "Trans Training" at work. The invite (and the posters all over the office) stated that the training was to help us understand key words - one if which was "Cis". It gave me rage. I really really wanted to make my feelings known about that word being plastered around the office. But it's so difficult to raise these issues.