It's a sad day when pie has power on mn

[Floorplan]

Why not just engage @mnhq

But what I do question is the reaction of the trans lobby groups to those who point out these safeguarding failures in their material. Information about safeguarding loopholes brought to them should result in an immediate change to the material, not shrieks of bigotry. That shrieks of bigotry is the reaction and the material remains the same tells me a great deal about the fitness of such groups to advise anyone about anything, ever. And about the fitness of such groups to be given government funding of any kind

YY. This Lang.

Any other group would have to immediately retract, grovel and maybe someone would resign. When has a TRA or Stonewall ever apologised or condemned any 'extremist' trans statements? Like transwomen are female? Or the violence? Or the attack on Alison Moyet? Never that I am aware of. They do not distance themselves at all - that is deeply concerning.

I don't doubt there are many PIE members who would love the concept prescribing of puberty blockers to children

But what I do question is the reaction of the trans lobby groups to those who point out these safeguarding failures in their material. Information about safeguarding loopholes brought to them should result in an immediate change to the material, not shrieks of bigotry. That shrieks of bigotry is the reaction and the material remains the same tells me a great deal about the fitness of such groups to advise anyone about anything, ever. And about the fitness of such groups to be given government funding of any kind.

This, with bells on.

@sophiemumsnet

Why should we avoiding conflating tactics used by TRAs and by PRAs? Do you mean conflating motives? because I get that, although I might not agree, I could stick to that. But pointing out the similar tactics, and the risk that PRAs could benefit from TRA lobbying is reasonable and necessary. Why is it verboten?

De Becker states it is not your responsibility to work out the motive of someone who breaks safeguarding. And that;

"The best cons make the victim want to participate."

My post was deleted, I'd love to know why exactly? I'm not sure how exactly I was outing the user I posted about. All I did was show some of her tweets to show how the attitude that trans and Paedophilia are linked is definitely present on this forum. @MNHQ?

confessions
I think this is an important point regarding puberty blockers.

By effectively promoting the prolongation of physical (and emotional?) immaturity (changing the human phenotype essentially), the paedophiles' interests are served by providing an artificial pool of, albeit over-16 (consenting), what are, essentially, 'children's' bodies. Although this is completely above board and legal, it is not without the most natural and forceful misgivings to anyone with an ounce of sense or decency.

@floorplan @confessions
I get your logic but... Most trans youth begin hormone therapy at around 16 and start going through the puberty the hormones are signalling for. So they wouldn't be pre-pubescent for long.

Not to mention this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how child abusers work. I mean, it's not like kids below 16 aren't going through puberty already and despite that are still targets for abusers.

Abusers aren't all that interested in how far developed someone is, they tend to be interested in manipulation and the power they have over someone. That's why they choose 'weaker' victims like children, who they know often don't know how to report anything or are scared of threatened consequences if they do.

And considering trans youth see a whole variety of specialists, including numerous therapists, along their journey towards medical interventions. It's hard to imagine that child abuse would slip through the gaps and not be noticed by someone.

Plus when we add the tiny minority factor in - that is that trans kids are a teeny tiny majority of kids - it all makes it seem really unlikely that child abusers would target trans kids.

Not to sound grim as heck here, but with the sheer number of young cis kids vs trans kids on blockers, even the creeps who prefer pre pubescent kids would have a far easier time targeting cis kids, not trans.

So I don't really think this worst case scenario idea you've got going on holds all that much water.

Puberty blockers when taken from a young age do not allow the child to mature psychologically.

Are we pretending that this dangerous material isn't in our primary schools now? Are we pretending that teens-with-a-secret (regardless of medical interventions) aren't prime targets for abusers? Are we ignoring the fact that all our safeguarding procedures were bought with the suffering of children and are there for very good reason?

Wow. Yep. Nothing worrying about an airy brushing aside. Nothing at all.

Cis kids
My kids are just kids

So I don't really think this worst case scenario idea you've got going on holds all that much water.

Safeguarding is about planning for worst case scenarios.

Child abusers only need one child to target at a time so I don't see what numbers have got to do with it.

The point is school guidance written by trans lobby orgs has massive safeguarding holes in. When this is pointed out they don't change it, they attack the people pointing them out.

This creates a dangerous loophole that can be deliberately targeted and put kids at risk.

The guidelines need changed and the political environment where normal safeguarding concerns are being silenced or ignored urgently needs changed too

So I don't really think this worst case scenario idea you've got going on holds all that much water.

You really do have to wonder about people who are saying 'nothing to see here'.

I get your logic but... Most trans youth begin hormone therapy at around 16 and start going through the puberty the hormones are signalling for. So they wouldn't be pre-pubescent for long.

Some lobby groups are lobbying very hard for much earlier treatment access.

To my mind, the current trend towards gender and sex being words that mean the same thing, is the worrying part.

There are groups stating that children can choose to change their gender at a very young age. There are also groups who seem to deliberately use the word sex rather than gender. Once these two words are muddled up in the general publics mind, it does not become a huge leap for certain interest groups to state that children can choose to exercise their sexual preferences as well as gender preferences at a very young age.

I think certain trans activists are being used to achieve an end. The end being that language around sex becomes meaningless and therefore impossible to safeguard.

When trans 'experts' tell teachers that these children are very 'special' and different safeguarding rules apply to them, most busy teachers just accept the views of the 'experts'. They assume - as these organisations are in their schools - that they have been 'quality assured' in some way and that any advice takes full account of 'Working Together'. And when they're told that 'puberty blockers' are reversible and breast binding is perfectly 'normal' all their safeguarding experience about what is acceptable treatment for children goes out of the window because surely nobody would be in schools promoting things that actually harm children would they??
So these children are cast adrift and all the concerns and support that would normally be offered to those with eating disorders, the self harmers, the depressed and sad, the vulnerable are not available. Adults have been warned off these children and told that their interventions are likely to be transphobic.

So who does that leave available for a child to turn to??

Wow. Apologist much neighbourhoodtrans

^^ Let these posts be seen by everyone.

No children are cis. That word is considered a slur by the moderation team, please stop using it.

"Most trans youth begin hormone therapy at around 16 and start going through the puberty the hormones are signalling for"

Are you implying that male children will go through a female puberty and vice versa? I don't believe that taking artificial hormones actually makes a boy go through a female puberty. Do you?

Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?

And insisting on using cis to describe other people who have not been asked about how they think or feel (which is banned)

Cis does not equal no trans. Not trans = not trans.

I will not force or pressure you to call anyone cis if that's your choice - but please respect that my choice is to use the word cis where it applies. Thank you.

It never applies. Hope that helps.

And when those children hit 16? Or a little earlier perhaps?

Cross sex hormones do NOT enable a ‘normal puberty just of the opposite sex.’

These children will be guinea pigs - there are no long term studies in the mental or physical effects of delaying puberty then using cross sex hormones.

This should not be happening. At all. These drugs are powerful, with lifelong effects. They are not a harmless pause button. They channel the child down the affirmative pathway. They are not licenced for gender questioning behaviour - they should not be being used full stop. On any child, for any reason other than precocious puberty while under strict supervision.

They are actively contraindicated for use in any young person (or indeed adult) with coexisting mental health conditions. they should not be being used at all*

How can I say this any clearer? These drugs should not be being used like this. These children are incredibly vulnerable.

Friendly - stop using it on here please. I find the term offensive, as do the majority of society. Now respect that.