Transgender Trend's new resource pack for schools

[Betti936]

www.transgendertrend.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Transgender-Trend-Resource-Pack-for-Schools.pdf

I’m deeply uneasy with the way in which transgender affirmation is the one true path.

As the mother of a 3 yr old boy who likes dresses, sparkles and hair clips, loves pink, who wears his hair long, breast feeds his dolls and whose best friends are girls I’m worried.

He’s a boy who likes pretty things and who is nurturing. Maybe he’ll be gay. Maybe...

Is it be transphobic to want to ensure that transgender status isn’t glamourised or presented as a solution to the intolerable pressures of puberty for boys who don’t conform to toxic masculinity’s strait jacket gender norms.

Am I transphobic? How would we want our children to be treated in school if they were transgender?

I’m genuinely uncertain. I think we need to imagine this is our child and how we would advocate for them. Eg I know that my brother got very depressed when a boy and he was unable to participate in sport due to an injury that took a year to recover from. Also it would be humiliating to transition to a girl and then be denied the ability to play netball etc. And these children are at a low ebb emotionally to start with.

And then I remember playing football with my brother. It got terribly dull being trounced and I stopped playing completely. I can absolutely see the harm to girls in school sports.

Because if they genuinely do believe that 41% rate and value that report, then the fact that they ignore that little detail is even more abhorrent than the whole 'trans kids will keeeeeeeelllll themselves' stick.

YY.

L has tweeted about half of trans children in schools attempting suicide. I tweeted (nicely) to ask where that figure came from and have just gone back on to see her response - I’ve been blocked.
So, no actual source for the statistic then clearly!

LM's previous tweet is interesting though, appearing to condemn conversation as a form of therapy. Because it's dangerous for people to talk I assume.

Essentially Lily and TrAs object to it because it's not affirmation. They object to pretty much anything that isn't immediate affirmation. By affirmation I mean acceptance of a new identity and positive reinforcement to make the child happy with that new identity.

Anything that tries to slow down that process into something more staggered and cautious is wrong. They preach that delay in beginning the transitioning process is harmful (Scottish Trans' own school guidance explicitly states this without support).

He's goading Davies now. 'You okay, hun?' Sounds like playground bullying.

Essentially Lily and TrAs object to it because it's not affirmation. They object to pretty much anything that isn't immediate affirmation

What gets me is they have pointed to the stonewalls research, which has this crazy omission in their headlines and their key findings. Tucked away in the methodology is that 51% of respondents were disabled.

Which should set alarm bells ringing that something isn't quite right here and isnt reflective of the general population.

If a higher than normal suicide rate is something to be concerned about, why isnt a higher than normal disability rate?

Whats going on? Why are so many disabled people trans? How are they disabled?

They are stat illiterate. They have no idea what that report showed and what it didn't.

Elle, no you're not transphobic.

When I was around 5 and starting school I remember a little boy who loved playing with 'the girls' in the home corner. I remember all being great at first, he probably was often the dad, though I think I remember him also being mum. All normal play.

Later on in the year I remember him crying about being teased for playing in the home corner and I remember an idea that he 'wasn't allowed in there as he was a boy'. I remember we were upset that we might loose our home corner playmate - and the father figure - and I remember him distinctly saying he wished he was a girl.

For some reason I marched up to him in the playground and kissed him on the cheek and told him firmly that he couldn't be a girl as then I wouldn't be able to do this. (Kiss) I remember his beaming face clearly (then I may have been teased for kissing him - I can't remember what happened thereafter).

It's only recently that I've realised that this was a significant situation but also that kids are savvy at a young age, and social influences (eg stereotyping and bullying) do damage our perception of ourselves.

I wish I knew what had happened to him later on; I just always hoped he was happy.

This was the v early 80's incidentally...

A friend's little boy reacted to his new brother by carrying a doll around with him and pretending to breastfeed it. He took the doll to playgroup and told people 'I've got a dolly, but I'm a boy'. Kids imitate and pick on social cues, it's what they do.

Absolutely.

Interestingly my son worked out the physical differences between girls and boys v early (2.5) in terms of the fact that he couldn't and would never be able to bf, as he knew he'd grow into a daddy, so handed his toys to me to bf (I did end up feeding him till 3.5 - lots of deep and meaningful talks during those sessions!)

He played pretty exclusively with girls till School bar one very imaginative boy; he enjoyed the more complex imaginative elements to their games; wasn't keen on the bashing and charging that some boys only seemed to be into.

There's been a bit of "that's a boys toy or girls toy" lately (he's 5) but it's all from School. Announced he wanted a squirty Bath doll advertised on milkshake earlier, hasn't a clue that sewing (which he enjoys) used to be considered girly, and always wears the girl bear pudsey headband for CiN, CIA he likes the brown ears.

I'm lucky to be in an area that not into stereotypes I think, the children don't appear to bat eyelids at boys in princess dresses as the parents don't. I am a teacher and have seen it be v different in other areas.

For some reason I marched up to him in the playground and kissed him on the cheek and told him firmly that he couldn't be a girl as then I wouldn't be able to do this. (Kiss) I remember his beaming face clearly (then I may have been teased for kissing him - I can't remember what happened thereafter).

Well, you just made my day 100% more adorable.

Seriously, thank you. That story was cute as hell.

What gets me is they have pointed to the stonewalls research, which has this crazy omission in their headlines and their key findings. Tucked away in the methodology is that 51% of respondents were disabled.

I haven't seen that research (totally believe you, though), but I've looked into two other pieces by Stonewall. Well, one indirectly. The first was the Scottish Trans school pack they approved and in it is a full page piece of stats on parental support, clearly intended to tell parents they were bad parents risking their child's health if they didn't fully support their child as being a new gender right away. It was about the only thing in their guide that was actually cited - I guess they had to - so I searched and found their source. What was it? A small Canadian study from self-reporting survey showing preliminary results. Subjects were ages 16 and upwards (many respondents in their twenties). And it was commissioned by Trans PULSE which is not exactly an unbiased source, imo. But at least the researchers had the decency to describe their results as preliminary. But the document was presenting it with huge confidence to push a trans agenda.

The second was directly published by Stonewall and is their recent LGBT in Britain Trans report. This gives no anonymised source data to verify interpretation, is not peer reviewed in any way that I could see, was gathered from a YouGov poll circulated through social channels. Zero reference is made at any point to trying to control for respondent bias. We can't even see the questions that were asked to see if they're good questions. The whole thing is a triple whammy of Trust the YouGov respondents to be honest, trust us when we say what they said and trust our ability to properly understand both. It might be right. But frankly, I would be rather surprised.

holycheeseplant That was a lovely thing you did.

It also echoes perfectly the Transgender Trend's info pack's own advice which is to initially treat gender non-conformity as exactly that and to emphasize that there are not "boys' toys" and "girls' toys" but to make sure children feel comfortable playing with whatever they want to play with and who they want to play with.

Stonewall's approved pack equates gender non-conformity as a type of trans. (That may be hard to believe but they do it several times in the document. Really!).

Oh these gorgeous boys. How could anyone advocate butchering them?

This Scottish trans guidance/ propaganda sounds like grooming.

The pseudo science needs calling out. I’m not a statistician. I’ve referred to the 41% in the response to the Scottish GRA consultation I’m drafting. Thanks RTB.

Oh and thanks holycheeseplant for the lovely story. That would be my boy. He loves playing imaginary games

@Elletorro this is a picture of my eldest at 3. He was just the same. Loved sparkles and dressing up in tiaras etc. I let him choose what he wanted without comment.

He's now 16 and has a girlfriend and is the most well adjusted ordinary bloke who likes fishing. He smiles when I show him pics like this. So it doesnt even follow that children who like this might be gay. They're just reaching out with interest and without prejudice to everything they see in the world around them.

And I saw a report on suicides for teenagers from 2016. Majority of reasons were death of a loved one. No particular mention of trans issues.

Here some of the stats

'Suicide-related internet use was an antecedent in 23% of cases' - and I've seen the Samaritans saying that talk of suicide can lead to contagion. WTF are the transgender organisations DOING when they actively tell teenagers that other kids like them mostly think about suicide? Are they just madly irresponsible or actively trying to stir up a trend?

Yes they go against all the media guidelines for talking about suicide. I don't think they actually care.

I can't access the whole of that report, BusyBoysMum, but the summary does mention 'better support needed for LGBT mental health issues' without specifying further.

Sorry, I think I was looking at a different year's report (2014-15) which says 17 deaths (out of 922) were of LGBT teenagers/young people, but not how many of those considered themselves transgender.

It goes without saying that it's utterly shit that any child or young person should commit suicide rather than receive sufficient support, but telling people they ought to be suicidal is NOT supportive.

I think what’s just as bad is using the flawed suicide stats to shut down any discussion about transgender issues that isn’t totally in line with the transactivist ideology.

I just saw on social media that yet another kid I know is now trans.

When I went to school (a million years ago) there were gay kids (who were bullied, though not by me, I had gay friends). There were zero trans kids. And decades later, amongst the 100 or so kids I went to school with, there are still zero trans and a few more gay and lesbian people.

I’m concerned that the majority of these kids are gay or lesbian but closeted. And this seems more acceptable to them to be a girl rather than a less traditional guy (& vice versa for biological girls, though all the kids I know who are trans are boys).

My ds thinks I’m a backwards cavewoman & my dd agrees with me. I am very grateful I don’t have kids with gender dysmorphia - I’m sure it’s hard to know what the right thing to do is.