Serious official criticism of Butterfly

[Charliethefeminist]

link

I have an issue with my login so good luck with the link. You might only get the headline.

This is serious journalism by Andrew Gilligan.

I think he went to his father, I seem to remember that after a few weeks with him he reverted to being just an ordinary kid

Plus Mermaids tweeted afterwards that the judge in the case was an ignorant bigot, or words to that effect.

Despite him being a leading expert in transgender law and having written the forward to a book about same-sex parents.

I mean seriously, what non social services body would ever, ever state publicly and repeatedly that they will target children with no parental support?

It just reads, as Floral says shockingly creepy. Why don't they know that?

Daily Mail
'My child wouldn’t be here today if she hadn’t gone from Jack to Jackie': Defiant mum whose harrowing story inspired Anna Friel's transgender drama Butterfly praises show - which critics say is just crude propaganda
Susie Green's daughter Jackie, now 25, announced she was a girl aged four
Biologically born as a boy named Jack she was subject to bullying growing up
During her teenage years Jackie made seven suicide attempts
Susie shares her story on Jackie's transition to a happy and healthy woman
(extract)
"At that time (although protocols have changed now) the NHS would not supply any medication to pause puberty, no matter how bad a child’s reaction to it — ‘and Jackie was telling me she’d rather be dead than see her body changing into a man’s. She was suicidal. The Tavistock Clinic had told me puberty would probably resolve her feelings of being female, but it didn’t. The reverse happened.

‘So this is when I found Dr Spack in America, who was prepared to prescribe totally reversible hormone blocking medication for her, just to pause the onset of puberty. But although it transformed her life, she was still enduring terrible hostility at school.’

At her wits’ end, Susie consulted an educational welfare officer and, aged 14, Jackie left school and continued her education three days a week at a special unit for children with long-term health issues.

Meanwhile, Dr Spack prescribed oestrogen, which promoted breast development and helped to stop Jackie growing too tall. (Today she is a little over 6ft.)

‘Her school life in the specialist unit was much less turbulent,’ recalls Susie ‘but she still hated her body.’

So, in a move that many would find extreme, just before Jackie turned 16, Susie consulted plastic surgeon Dr Suporn in Thailand. ‘I asked him when my daughter would be able to have gender reassignment surgery. I expected him to say 18, but to my delight he said she could have it at 16.’ (continues)

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-6275447/My-child-wouldnt-today-hadnt-gone-Jack-Jackie.html

'To my delight'

What.

The.

Fuck.

Susie Green is a bloody weirdo.

The worst for me is that the show's writers seem to have absolutely ignored the Samaritans organization guideline to never associate suicide with a single cause, because of the very real risk of propagating suicide ideation among people dealing with this issue.

This is especialy relevant for all the impressionable youths who will now be identifying with Butterfly's hero. And since four out of the five of the youths being pressed into transition are girls, greatly influenced by their peer group, the results may prove disastrous in terms of untested puberty blockers, loss of fertility, later osteoporosis and needless surgeries.
All of this to sell advertising...

I have long considered the TRAs want to increase suicide.

Self fulfilling prophecy.

I really hope Samaritans suit up and sort this appalling manipulation out. They absolutely have the power.

Here is their statement about Media Guidelines.
In a perfect world, it would force ITV to pull the program off the air.
They write: "Research shows that inappropriate reporting of suicide may lead to imitative or ‘imitational’ behaviour, so Samaritans publishes Media Guidelines for Reporting Suicide and has been working with the media for more than two decades, providing expert advice on the portrayal of suicide.

The media can also help encourage people who are struggling to reach out for support and raise awareness of sources of help, such as Samaritans. It is important that programme makers consult with us to help make sure this is done in a safe and responsible way."

www.samaritans.org/media-centre/media-guidelines-reporting-suicide?fbclid=IwAR3heoZ8pVuTPjBK-biu3Qd9GkpeoOWG-PmPGUD4Yq1xv194jkqlc9meCMo

www.samaritans.org/media-centre/media-guidelines-reporting-suicide/suicide-reporting-10-things-remember

-Leave out technical details about the method of suicide, such as describing the type of ligature used or the number and types of pills taken in an overdose. Never suggest that a method is quick, easy, painless or certain to result in death.

-Language matters. Avoid dramatic headlines and terms such as ‘suicide epidemic’ or ‘hot spot’.

-Include references to support groups and places where suicidal people can find help – it really does make a difference.

-Treat social media with particular caution and refrain from mentioning websites or networks that promote or glamorise suicide.

-Avoid dramatic or sensationalist pictures or video.

-Young people are especially vulnerable to negative suicide coverage. Do not give undue prominence to photographs of a young person who has died and avoid repeated use of images such as galleries.

-Try not to give a story undue prominence, for example with a front cover splash.

-Don’t brush over the complex realities of suicide and its impact on those left behind. Remember that people bereaved by suicide are often vulnerable and are more likely to take their own lives than the general population.

-Speculation about the ‘trigger’ for a suicide, even if provided by a close family member, should be avoided.

-Use statistics with caution. Check with Samaritans or the relevant national statistical agency to make sure you have the most recent data and are comparing like with like.

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

The main reporting regulations and codes of practice within the United Kingdom are:
The Ofcom Broadcasting Code
Section 2: Harm and Offence

Violence, dangerous behaviour and suicide:
2.4 - Programmes must not include material (whether in individual programmes or in programmes taken together) which, taking into account the context, condones or glamorises violent, dangerous or seriously antisocial behaviour and is likely to encourage others to copy such behaviour.

2.5 - Suicide and self-harm. This rule reflects a continued concern about the impact of real or portrayed suicide, and self-harm, on those whose minds may be disturbed. Whilst it is always difficult to prove causality, various studies have shown that there may be a short-lived increase in particular methods of suicide portrayed on television. Broadcasters should consider whether detailed demonstrations of means or methods of suicide or self-harm are justified.

In addition:
Rule 1.13 in Section One: Protecting the Under-Eighteens:
Dangerous behaviour, or the portrayal of dangerous behaviour, that is likely to be easily imitable by children in a manner that is harmful:

• must not be featured in programmes made primarily for children unless

there is strong editorial justification;

• must not be broadcast before the watershed (in the case of television) or when children are particularly likely to be listening (in the case of radio), unless there is editorial justification.

www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/how-to-report-a-complaint

Thank you for this!

The Manchester evening news has a bit about it in Facebook. Comment after comment in unanimous support. People recommending mermaids to other parents. I genuinely can’t comment negatively about it because of the risks to myself. How I wish I had a secret Facebook profile so I could comment freely without the TRAs seeing me. So utterly, utterly depressing. After thinking the tide was turning we have so much work to do.

The comments on the MEN Facebook are selected from twitter. The actual article is not accepting and comments, so it’s not really representative.

Or maybe I’m not looking at the right article? I’ve just tried to comment but it wouldn’t let me

The Times reviewer is braced to be fed an agenda. James Jackson is sceptical.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tv-review-butterfly-the-cry-pqj3nh9vx?shareToken=1132b76d2d8f602c96d4fefcb120c7e3

From the Times review:

quite a bit of histrionic high drama too, such as Max slashing his wrists to stop Vicky from going on a date.

But but but, I though he slashed his wrists due to being trans and being unaccepted?

I can't bring myself to watch it, but I'm assuming the dad is an imitation of Susie Green's husband. Does that make sense? In terms of the way he treats the child?

I didn't watch it either. Spent the time most productively instead, delivering Fair Play leaflets door to door.

Comments in The Times TV review are open-please critique if you have time

If you have a complaint about the programme...*
www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/how-to-report-a-complaint

Thanks Glad. I'm making my complaint tonight.

I meant the comment on Facebook not the actual article

Ah right I see, sorry

Thank-you [WomanDictionaryDefined], I will be complaining too. Lots wrong with the production but I particularly disliked the romanticising of the self harm scene and how Max's behaviour achieved the reward he wanted. He was able to place himself at the centre of his parents relationships as well as have them fawning around his hospital bed. What child wouldn't like that?

Genuine question to younger parents, is that how self harm is dealt with these days? Is there never any anger, disapproval or disappointment shown? Are things like selfishness or stupidity never mentioned? Is the 'victim' rewarded in such a way that they identify with, and enjoy their victim status?

Those young people have an average 2.4 parents each. I can see why they might have a problem.

Yeah, what the fuck are adults without kids doing in the group? Assuming that each child has both parents there...even then there is a large surplus of adults.