Susie Green article in the Graun

[Freespeecher]

Based on the Guides thing.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/04/transphobia-daughter-guides-inclusivity-girlguiding-transgender-girls

There is a world of difference between a child who has believed they were the opposite sex from a young age all the way through puberty, and may be on puberty blockers, probably has no sexual function(arguably an "intractable case" for whom transition is a "good" option) who wants to go to guides; and a 15 year old who has recently declared their identity to be female, who wants to be included in Girl Guides. How do the GG guidelines allow for a distinction to be made?

It strikes me that transgenderism is an ideology that parents who don’t have much imagination and perhaps aren’t very intelligent are more likely to get caught up in?

I mean, I believe part of it is parents who can't imagine a 'pink boy' (I have seen featured conservative Christian families pretty often in these transkid documentraries), presumably due to unacknowledged homophobia. But what also plays a part, imo, is society. I can very well believe that a boy of whom everybody knows he is a boy in a pink dress is treated differently (and way worse) by people than a boy who everyone thinks is a girl in a pink dress. The latter will probably be way happier as a result.

The pressure on pink boys and their parents may be just too overwhelming and the prepubescent kid may indeed be happier living as a girl as a result.

Starkstaring

Whilst I agree there might be a world of difference to the child in question, there is zero difference to the girls who are expected to share with someone of the opposite sex.

You're right that no one can make the distinction. But for those girls, the distinction will often be immaterial.

Susie Green couldn't care less about girls.

The pressure on pink boys and their parents may be just too overwhelming and the prepubescent kid may indeed be happier living as a girl as a result
Yep, sadly, but it seems to be hard for some parents, for whatever reason, to have the insight to realise this is what’s happening. The belief in a medical condition/mistake made by nature must be sooo seductive, parents grab it with both hands and run with it.

"I also wonder if Susie and Jackie Green would be so influential if Jackie was less physically attractive?"

I'm not sure that it's even so much that Jackie is attractive or not. Jackie comes across as entirely non-threatening, conforms to a female gender stereotype, and is as such the perfect poster child to push through the rest of the Stonewall agenda.

Green never seems to give any thought to the trans boys or girls who may be having difficulties with their "identity". She is saluting their exclusion from the Girl Guides.

Yy RealGhouls the whole package really. Jackie does seem like a genuinely nice person. I hope she is happy now.

I don't disagree with you Datun. But the general public are being led to only thinking of the de-sexualised trans girl when they read these articles / see the Butterfly drama etc, not the LM types.

Exactly Procrastinator1. She has bugger all reaction to trans children who are being forced out of the girl guides.

I wonder if that's because they are girls?

The woman makes me seethe.

I mean, I believe part of it is parents who can't imagine a 'pink boy' (I have seen featured conservative Christian families pretty often in these transkid documentraries), presumably due to unacknowledged homophobia.

I'd like to see some of these documentaries deepwatersolo because that isn't a natural or common conservative Christian position. The conservative Christian position is that God doesn't make mistakes so the body you have is the body you're meant to have.

Current threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3382562-mermaids-want-trans-kids-to-legally-change-sex

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3383249-stonewall-encouraging-primary-aged-children-to-fill-in-the-gra-consultation

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3383512-Stop-Funding-Hate-has-joined-forces-with-Mermaids

Spectator lead article by James Kirkup,
'Trans rights have gone wrong
The new gender orthodoxy allows no room for dissent'
(extract)
"Others groups include Mermaids and the Gender Identity Research & Education Society, both frequently consulted by councils, NHS trusts, police forces and Whitehall departments for guidance on applying the law around transgender children. Both are tiny charities run not by lawyers but by parents whose children changed gender; it’s hard to think of another field of policy where personal experience is prioritised over objective expertise.

According to Michael Biggs, an Oxford University sociologist, the speed at which transgender rights advocates have advanced their cause is unprecedented in western history. In less than a decade, he suggests, the movement has embedded itself in public and corporate life and often succeeded in changing policy and practice without significant scrutiny or question." (continues)
thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3384307-James-Kirkup-Spectator-lead-article-Trans-rights-have-gone-wrong-The-new-gender-orthodoxy-allows-no-room-for-dissent

Argh - they should allow comments. Then we could post (again and again and again) the case report where Mermaids was criticised for its brainwashing of the social services...

I give the G money (for Cadwallr's work, mostly) and this is just a crappy appeal to emotion:

Using someone else's life (and very sad death) to push their ideas : check
Using straw men to cut down debate: check
Poor me: check

Makes me so angry we can't counter it.

Guardian article has disregarded long established Samaritans' guidance with regards reporting on suicide.

This is irresponsible.

www.samaritans.org/media-centre/media-guidelines-reporting-suicide

/charlestonchaplin here’s one:
www.goodhousekeeping.com/life/parenting/a43702/transgender-child-kimberly-shappley/

Guardian Complaints:
www.theguardian.com/info/2014/sep/12/-sp-how-to-make-a-complaint-about-guardian-or-observer-content

So let me get this right:

Susie Green is a parenting expert on the basis of raising one child. Sufficiently so, that she feels able to advise kids to keep secrets from their own parents.

As it happens DD was convinced age 2, that she was a boy. In retrospect some of it may have been that she had been a very sick baby so missed two years of early socialisation. Whilst catching up, and she was three before she had enough spare energy to play, she found girls were already quite complicated. She had an older brother and older boy cousins and so happily hung out with the boys kicking a football. We did not push it, let her wear the clothes she wanted, only laying down the law when we needed to. "You have to wear a dress to go into reception, otherwise you will have to stay in nursery." I was actually quite proud when I was called into school when she was in year 1, to hear that she was in trouble for fighting. There was a new boy in the class and the other boys were being mean, so she took them all on. By the age of eight the other girls had stopped wearing pink, and by 10 her friendship group was entirely girls. Boys were 'smelly'.

She is still a sporty tomboy. She was very lucky aged about 16 to be playing sport in a Club that had a lovely diversity of confident and kind young women, all seemingly confident with their own version of female, from a pop star's girl friend to visibly butch. Lots of good role models, confirming that you are who you are and that as a woman it is important to feel confident within your own skin.

So that is my experience of parenting, when faced with raising a two year old who would throw a major tantrum if you so much as suggested she was a girl. Will the Guardian invite me to write an article?

twitter.com/guardian/status/1047754910840905729?s=19

You can comment on the Guardians article on Twitter. I think it's worth doing so.

Needmoresleep did the school insist that girls had to wear dresses to reception? It’s that kind of stuff that reinforces gender stereotypes and leaves children with no room to be themselves without claiming to be of the opposite sex isn’t it!
I did notice though that you’d sort of reinforced the stereotypes of girls as ‘complicated’ and boys as rough and tumble and fun

I don't disbelieve the suicide stats. I can well believe that 45% of people who suffer extreme mental anguish due to their bodies and how they see them, might reach that point.

However, how many people with anorexia attempt suicide? Or body dysmorphia? Or other mental health conditions? How many women have attempted suicide as a direct result of how they feel about their bodies, or after their bodies have been abused by a man? Surely the answer to high suicide stats is to increase mental health support, or to look at the factors driving this, not extensive surgery?

Someone has posted a link saying the Times has admitted to lying about Mermaids.

This is the text of the correction.

In our article “Charity ban as boy forced to live as girl” (News, October 8) we reported that Mermaids, the transgender charity, had been banned by the High Court from making contact with a family.
Mermaids has informed us that it has not been the subject of a court order; rather, it was told by the child’s mother that the judge had said that the child was to have no contact with Mermaids. It has also asked us to clarify that Dr Birgit Möller did not offer fast-track cross-sex hormone treatment for children; the treatment offered on a fast-track basis was hormone blockers.

I'm not sure that qualifies as lying and I don't think it invalidates the original article.

It is my belief that at some point Susie Green is going to have to confront her own internalised misogyny and the fact that she failed to protect her gay , gender non-conforming child from her abusive homophobic husband. However deeply unpleasant that will be for Susie if that time comes, it is not my responsibility to engage in her delusion to protect her from that pain.

Shrinking - three year girls really do seem to be more socially sophisticated than boys. My understanding is that girls often develop speech earlier, and then use it. We were actually too exhausted from looking after a very sick baby to care much, and were mainly relieved that we had got through it. So she was free to make her own choices. It was just observation that she found girl play more difficult than boy play. By chance there happened to be quite a lot of "pink" girls around.

But this is now two decades ago, similar to Susie Green's experience. I don't know if the school now allows girls to wear trousers. A lot of school policies have changed in the interim.

The Girlguiding policy has been in place for more than two years, and there hasn’t been a single case of a transgender girl suddenly morphing into a sexual predator.

1st - the policy was rolled out to guide leaders via email (so no meetings/training/discussions with leaders) and buried in their website in Jan '17. No express communication with parents, no explanation that they'd switched from a single sex to mixed sex organisation.

2nd - has anyone asked girls about their experience of having their boundaries disregarded? Of being silenced with the threat of being labelled transphobic, in need of re-education should they express any unease about male bodied children claiming to be girls being allowed to share spaces when they are vulnerable, while undressed, showering, attending to personal care?

Do girls have to be assaulted before Susie Green thinks about their right to exert their own boundaries, to have privacy and dignity? How would any girl report or explain a male bodied child indulging in voyeurism or indecent exposure within the confines of the girls changing rooms/showers, if they're told they must be kind, that it's disrespectful of any girl to feel discomfort at a trans identifying male bodied child sharing those spaces? How do you consider this behaviour within the confines of girls changing room/showers if trans girls are girls?

Claiming there's never been a problem, never been a reported issue and never any indication that any trans identifying teenager born male has made any girl uncomfortable, when you've never bloody asked those girls affected, and when this whole set up has been orchestrated to silence & intimidate anyone who has an issue, is down right manipulative and wilfully disingenuous.

Girl Guides surveys are pretty good indicators of the level of sexual harassment and assault and abuse teenage (and younger) girls experience as they grow up - has Susie Green any idea how those girls who endure that treatment feel about their private spaces being opened up to male bodied children/teenagers? Because if she's never bothered to ask any of them, she's no authority to claim that there's never been an issue simply because no child has been charged or convicted of illegal or inappropriate behaviour. You don't need to demonstrate illegal behaviour for there to be an issue for girls.

Dr Ford was a 15 yr old teenager when she was allegedly attacked by Brett Kavanaugh and never spoke a word about it to anyone for years - she certainly didn't report it to any adult at the time.

Susie Green is no expert or moral authority on child safeguarding. And that's as polite as I can get.

I don't blame Green personally. I bet she has spent many a night wishing she'd left her stupid husband earlier and wondering what might have been.

I do blame Green personally. She didn't have to become CEO of an organisation pushing transgenderism for children just because she's not sure if what she did was right for hers.

In fact if she in any way regrets or is unsure about what she did to her child, what she is doing now is evil. I think that she is utterly convinced that what she did was right.