LGBT youth scotland statement

[SuperLoudPoppingAction]

www.lgbtyouth.org.uk/news/2018/november/a-response-to-claims-made-by-the-christian-institute/

Have folk seen this?

Seems a bit slimy.

Like... Scotgov support us with funding ergo they haven't withdrawn support for our insistance that safeguarding flies out the window... or something?

Just in case the deletions are regarding linking cross dressing with a fetish:-

Let's go back to Tara Hewitt once again, Trans educator, giving a wide ranging definition of who's under the trans-umbrella to a room of healthcare professionals.

5.28 for any of you who want to whip through the lecture

Tara includes in the trans definition
"Cross dressing, so theres two types of cross dressing. You've got people that fetishitically cross dress so they wear clothing to get sexual desire out of that clothing of the opposite gender. It generally tends to be associated with men wearing women's underwear and women's clothing. I don't know any women who wear boxer shorts and find that sexually arousing, but if you do, that's cool"

[Note tumbleweed in room full of mostly women at this point!]

HQ - delete LemonJello for this and you'll need to delete Tara's opinions and, well, that would be erasure!

Hands up anyone who thinks Tara isn't the best at giving presentations?

Anyone?

NB, as always. I have no issue with a person getting a sexual kick out of whatever thing they like to use, think about, etc.

As long as it doesn't affect any other non-consenting person to their kick.

And as long as it's not presented as a 'condition' that is oppressed and needs coddling within the healthcare system.

A man who gets "sexual desire" from wearing women's underwear, is, according to a Trans educator and many key lobby groups, part of the an oppressed group and excluded group that need extra understanding from the healthcare professionals in the room. And this understanding also is apparently going along with them if they have a pressing need to describe their penis as a 'clit'. (Later in the video, if you have the stamina!)

And these cross dressers who are "men who get sexual desire from dressing in women's underwear" also represent part of the group that LGBT Scotland seem to want to champion too.

I bet lots do. My dd’s p7 class is rife with who’s going out with who. Though you’d hope v innocent at that age, you still would probably know if you’d no interest in the opposite sex.
I’ve been in classrooms with their help line advertised. Prior to all this I think they were a good organisation. Well the awful illegal behaviour of one aside (was he the leader?)

I bet lots don't though. In my children's year 6 (same as primary 7), it was rare. The youngest is 17. Perhaps there has been a sudden change in sexuality presenting itself younger?

I doubt it

Placemats No hand-up emoji here, but yep!

I think Tara is good at 'presenting', just not 'engaging' !

I wish I'd been at the coffe break after that workshop -

a group of mostly down-to-earth, experienced, mostly empathetic healthcare professionals, up for trying to understand individual issues, dealing with people's nuanced and complex lives every day, that also includes cancer, being lectured by a * who's telling them to remember that men who get a sexual kick out of dressing in women's underwear have specific healthcare needs and should be regarded as transgender.

Conscious I'm derailing slightly here - back to the thread.

LGBT Youth Scotland include cross-dressers in their definition.

Tara's definition of cross dressers = men who get sexual desire out of wearing women's underwear.

A concerning conflation.

A concerning conflation.

It's a major safeguarding issue that is ignored to placate those who badly present their views (I think) and who are not at all engaging (I agree).

There is no way Tara would speak to an audience of men in that way. NO WAY.

Wow, not seen this before

gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/big-pharma/?fbclid=IwAR1rGlt8WWZvkUzSU7Jla1WmrB6JJIX06euaMelXMB8nzY0x4qQpPscXo-M

From the article...

"An environment where the rights of all are respected would be universally beneficial."

What about natal girls who do not want to share with natal boys, however they present or identify. Where are those natal girls rights being respected?

Girls don't matter

That teachers ‘should ask the young person if they can share information and with whom’. This is usual practice when working with young people and can be particularly important when working with LGBT young people as sharing information could put them in a situation where they could be vulnerable.

They give two references for this: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (interpretation by Children & Young People's Commissioner Scotland website) and Getting It Right For Every Child, which describes itself as 'the national approach in Scotland to improving outcomes and supporting the wellbeing of our children and young people by offering the right help at the right time from the right people. It supports them and their parent(s) to work in partnership with the services that can help them.'

LGBT Youth Scotland don't pinpoint where exactly these two sources say that a teacher can offer confidential disclosure to a minor. We are directed to the home page of each project's rather large website. If they had solid backing for their dodgy safeguarding notions I would expect to be linked straight to the relevant material.

They say 'sharing information could put them in a situation where they could be vulnerable.' Yeah that's exactly the lesson everyone learnt over the last decade or so of safeguarding children

NOT SHARING INFORMATION PUTS CHILDREN AT RISK OF SERIOUS HARM

Our guidance states that:

Teachers should not ‘disclose the gender history or any sensitive information about a trans young person to anyone inside or outside the school, without the consent of the young person’.

Why don't LGBT Scotland want this group of children to have normal safeguarding protections?

I don't know if it's deliberate or not, but I really hope someone somewhere is asking questions.

The use of the word ‘claims’ implies that some children and young people are not being truthful regarding their gender identity. LGBT Youth Scotland is not aware of any such cases and finds the language used here prejudicial.

They are children. When you're a child or young person your identity is all over the place. Not until your 20s does it settle down and even after this it can change. Also some children WILL misbehave and claim an identity if it gets them attention or access to places they shouldn't be. Any girl who has been to a mixed school can attest to this. All the time we are fobbed off with 'boys will be boys' but say the magic trans word and suddenly boys wouldn't dream of 'being boys'. Boys are lovely if they are brought up well but too many are allowed to get away with all sorts of shit because 'boys will be boys' and it's dangerous for girls to just suddenly be expected to ignore that because someone said the magic word 'trans'.

The guidance is clear that it is not good practice to share a young person’s gender status with other parents ‘without the young person’s express permission to do so’. Not only do all young people and their families have right to privacy, it would be unlawful to share personal or ‘sensitive information’ without their consent under current GDPR[4] legislation – unless there was clear safeguarding reason to do so.

THERE ARE CLEAR SAFEGUARDING REASONS TO DO SO

Every time you plan a trip away and are expected to arrange communal sleeping accommodation by 'gender identity' instead of sex there are safeguarding reasons to disclose this to girls' parents because they need to know if their daughter is sleeping alongside a male bodied child so they can give informed consent or withhold it, based on their own risk assessment. If you don't tell parents their daughter will be sleeping with a male child, how can they give informed consent?

Our guidance also sets out that ‘private changing facilities and bathrooms should always be available for learners wherever possible’.

They seem to think this is some sort of get-out clause. As if school trips can run to a single en-suite room for every child!

Dangerous fuckers.

But it is a fetish. It's in the DSM and everything, or at least it used to be.

MN have recinded my strike

Are there any other children’s and young people’s organisations which directly and openly pursue policy changes that will grant additional rights and protections to men with fetishes?

I can’t think of any.

Yay! Welcome back

Thanks! I didn’t get banned or anything, just a strike. Three makes a ban though.

I was just too nervous to post as I didn’t understand why I got deleted. MN agreed with my appeal tho so I’m not worried any more

I hope we can expect to see your deleted posts back soon too...