Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Economist Article on Rise of Teenage Girls Referred to Gender Clinics

19 replies

Wanderabout · 30/08/2018 20:23

amp.economist.com/united-states/2018/09/01/why-are-so-many-teenage-girls-appearing-in-gender-clinics?__twitter_impression=true

OP posts:
OP posts:
loveyouradvice · 30/08/2018 20:38

Really great to read this .... clear, balanced, and interesting.... So glad they gave it this space

hackmum · 30/08/2018 20:56

That’s a good piece. Sensible. Usual hyperbolic comparisons about KKK from TRAs.

howonearthdidwegethere · 30/08/2018 21:04

I try not to bang on about this issue to OH too much but he was sitting next to me earlier this evening reading The Economist and was eager to point out this piece!

It'll reach a new audience, as OH is not engaged on these issues on social media (which is the case for most people, of course).

I don't think the debate pieces on The Economist made the print version - is that right? Otherwise OH would have flagged them up with me!

Wanderabout · 30/08/2018 21:10

Yes how that's right the debate pieces were online only.

The Economist doesn't usually have guest writers. Or indeed bylines.

OP posts:
JellySlice · 30/08/2018 21:16

Squashing research risks injuring the health of an unknown number of troubled adolescent girls. Rachel, now 21, believes she latched on to a trans identity as a way of coping with on-off depression and being sexually abused as a child. After receiving therapy, her gender dysphoria disappeared. Had her mother affirmed her gender identity as a 16-year-old, as several gender therapists urged, Rachel would have embarked on a medical transition that she turned out not to want after all.

Charliethefeminist · 30/08/2018 21:50

Thanks economist

MissConductUS · 31/08/2018 00:16

There was an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal about a new law making people criminally liable for not using someone's preferred pronoun.

[[https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-transgender-language-war-1535582272 The Transgender Language War:
California threatens to jail health workers who refuse to use ‘preferred’ pronouns]]

In case this is behind their pay wall exclusively, here's an excerpt:

If you want to control people’s thoughts, begin by commandeering their words. Taking this Orwellian lesson to heart, Virginia’s Fairfax County public school system recently stripped the phrase “biological gender” from its family life curriculum, replacing it with “sex assigned at birth.”

Without permitting parents to opt out, public schools across the country are teaching children that “gender” is neither binary nor biological. It’s closer to a mental state: a question of how girllike or boylike you feel. Students will fall anywhere along a gender spectrum, according to these educators.

So how girllike does any girl feel? The answer might reasonably be expected to vary throughout adolescence, depending on whether a girl was just dumped by a boy or tripped in the hall. Mishaps that once only compromised one’s pride now threaten a child’s gender identity, the ever-evolving claim to a “girl card.” As if adolescence weren’t already hard enough.

This is the left’s allegedly defensive battle, waged on behalf of an aggrieved microminority even as it sets its sights on broader ideological territory. Consider recent state and local actions punishing those who decline to use an individual’s pronouns of choice. California Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation last year threatening jail time for health-care professionals who “willfully and repeatedly” refuse to use a patient’s preferred pronouns. Under guidelines issued in 2015 by New York City’s Commission on Human Rights, employers, landlords and business owners who intentionally use the wrong pronoun with transgender workers and tenants face potential fines of as much as $250,000.

Typically, in America, when groups disagree, we leave them to employ the vocabularies that reflect their values. My “affirmative action” is your “racial preferences.” One person’s “fetus” is another’s “baby boy.” This is as it should be; an entire worldview is packed into the word “fetus.” Another is contained in the reference to one person as “them” or “they.” For those with a religious conviction that sex is both biological and binary, God’s purposeful creation, denial of this involves sacrilege no less than bowing to idols in the town square. When the state compels such denial among religious people, it clobbers the Constitution’s guarantee of free exercise of religion, lending government power to a contemporary variant on forced conversion.^

PerryPerryThePlatypus · 31/08/2018 07:41

I feel like I keep saying this but there are so many undiagnosed ASD girls and women. Teenage girls, for the most part, want to fit in and have common ground with their peers. Of course ASD can severely hamper this and as girls often mask and "cope" until teen years when the differences are becoming more obvious and social situations more complex. Routinely girls are tested for ASD using traditional testing when they often present very differently to boys. Anorexia is also thought to be higher in ASD girls.

Starkstaring · 31/08/2018 07:59

Yes it can't be said enough. My daughter fits exactly with that - undiagnosed until she could cope no longer and her mental health fell apart. Then a declaration of being transgender. The psychiatrist who finally diagnosed the ASD also confirmed the overlap with eating disorders and gender difficulties.

These are vulnerable young people, and it's the girls who seem to be suffering most because of poor diagnosis.

Charliethefeminist · 31/08/2018 09:00

This sort of detailed and serious argument in a publication like the Economist is what we need. This series being published is very important. It might not be as catchy as Spectator comment but it is grounded and evidence based, and extremely valuable for diluting the toxic branding which gender critical feminism has right now.

Charliethefeminist · 31/08/2018 09:05

What is happening to children is the great sorrow and cruelty of transactivism. The fight for our sex-based rights is a serious and crucial political battle, whereas this is a vast tragedy that must be ended. A person I follow on twitter last week wrote a simple tweet about telling her daughter 'I love you' before she was wheeled into the operating theatre to have her breasts removed. She'd been fighting for years to save her daughter from this horrific cult. I wept for her. That poor girl, her poor family. This must end. Thank you Melanie.

Charliethefeminist · 31/08/2018 09:07

Thank you Melanie? Getting my bylines mixed up, and this doesn't have one.

Forgotthebins · 31/08/2018 09:28

Charliethefeminist that's very upsetting and exactly the fear of that is why I've suddenly started getting involved here. I self-harmed as a teenager so I have some empathy with the process of feeling alienated from your body, and exercising mental pain against the body. But I made little cuts that healed. I'm so worried that children may be confusing gender dysphoria with other issues - goodness knows it is all complex so it's not surprising - and making irreversible and life-changing decisions so quickly. As the Children's Society report yesterday suggests, the underlying reasons for why so many (especially) girls have issues with their bodies are not being given due attention. Also, like you, glad to see this in the Economist - one of the things that kept me distanced from the issue for a long time was that I though "oh it's a right-wing moral panic" and I'm so frustrated with papers like the Guardian not looking at the issue more carefully.

Charliethefeminist · 31/08/2018 09:31

Plenty of BBC and Guardian types read the Economist. You know, they might not even read this, but they'll see it, they see the other pieces, they will know it is not verboten.

JellySlice · 31/08/2018 10:04

I wish that the WSJ had not just linked 'conviction that sex is both biological and binary' to religion, but also to science.

For those with an empirical evidence-based conviction that sex is both biological and binary, and for those with a religious conviction that sex is both biological and binary, God’s purposeful creation, denial of this involves sacrilege no less than bowing to idols in the town square. When the state compels such denial among religious people, it clobbers the Constitution’s guarantee of free exercise of religion, and when the state compels such denial of science and fact, it also clobbers the Constitution’s guarantee of free exercise of religion, lending government power to imposing a faith-based position upon the population.

MissConductUS · 31/08/2018 13:48

I wish that the WSJ had not just linked 'conviction that sex is both biological and binary' to religion, but also to science.

I agree, that would have been a more complete argument. But in this case the writer was making the connection to a constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religious views. There is no corresponding constitutional freedom to scientific views.

I just posted the excerpt because when major business publications like the Economist and the WSJ start pointing out the absurdities a threshold has been crossed.

JellySlice · 31/08/2018 14:08

Doesn't theAmerican constitution separate religion and State, and rejection the imposition of faith upon people? In which case it is relevant and connected with their point about religious freedom.

MissConductUS · 31/08/2018 16:07

In which case it is relevant and connected with their point about religious freedom.

Indeed, that was my point as well when I said the writer was making the connection to a constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religious views.. Sorry if I was unclear.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page