In 10 years, we'll ask how we allowed the trans lobby to hijack childhood

[hackmum]

Opinion piece by Celia Walden in the Telegraph. (Apologies if someone's already posted this - I can't see it anywhere.)

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/10-years-ask-did-allow-trans-lobby-hijack-childhood/

I can't read the whole thing, unfortunately, as my free articles have run out.

I'm sure that will be asked.

And I'm sure they'll find some way to blame feminists.

Lol

That was a bitter lol
Not a jolly one

That's mainly a rehash of the Mail article so you're not missing an enormous amount hackmum. Though she does quote Dr Kate Godfrey-Faussett who I've never heard of.

She is 'a psychologist who works with children in schools across London, and goes so far as to call it “state-sanctioned child abuse”.

When I ask whether it can really be true that children could be sent off to consult with gender clinics without the parents’ knowledge, she explains that, currently, “the confidentiality of a trans child actually trumps everything, including a parent’s right to know. And if a school believes a child is mature enough to understand the implications of what they’re doing, they don’t need parental consent.”
Added to this, “if a child comes to school and tells the teachers ‘my parents are anti-trans’, the school can call in social services and treat it as a safeguarding concern under emotional abuse. Theoretically, the child could even be taken away.” '

Bloody hell

To be fair, some feminists will be to blame - 'lib fems'.

But the distinction will not be made

Orchid

That's exactly what will happen in Scotland if they pass the Named Person legislation and Self ID legislation. Some of the councils even stated as much in their submissions to the Scottish Government Self ID consultation.

Two good reasons not to vote SNP if you live in Scotland.

Celia Walden, of course, is married to Piers Morgan, and we know what Piers's view is on all this. But it's good to see this in the Telegraph - so far almost all of the coverage has been in the Times, Mail and Spectator. Perhaps the Telegraph will set their own news reporters on it.

But the distinction will not be made

No, it won't.

The comments were interesting. Not quite what you get here .

My favourite was someone called Hugh Oxford at 19 Nov 8:22:

"^As a father of a daughter, I phoned the "Girl Guides" to ask them whether, as an organisation that advertises itself as being only for girls, it actually lets male children in.

I then had a conversation with one of their policy officers, himself a man. The man was literally insane. Literally insane. He defined a girl as any child who "feels" themselves to be a girl.

I asked him how someone who wasn't actually a girl could ever know what it felt like to be a girl, such that he could know that he thought himself a girl. He had no answer.

These people are out of their minds. Apart from anything else, how can it possibly be legal for an organisation to advertise itself as an organisation exclusively for girls when it lets boys in?

Are these people from the same planet as the rest of us?^

On the whole, DT readers are not happy.

My DF will like this. He reads the Telegraph and is very GC. Bet he rings me about it.

These people are out of their minds. Or they sold their soul to the Devil - they care more for their reputation, career and income than anything else.

10 years time? Feminists are trying to stop this hijacking happening now. We really do not want to have to say (as we're already starting to say) 'we told you so'.

I read this and thought the comments were interesting too. So many people going WTF? And that was without the article really going into the detail of puberty blockers and their long term health effects

I thought it was very good observation how those in positions of power (schools, Girl Guides etc) are not acting out of genuine concern for children, but out of fear of not doing the so-called "correct" thing.

Like restaurants being very keen to hear about your allergies before ordering. They don't give a monkeys! They just don't want to be sued.

Remember the satanic abuse thing in Orkney? This is the same sort of thing, people will look back and think wtf?! How did this happen?

Of course we want to stop it now, but sadly the way things go it's not going to be stopped until something really tragic happens.

There are some seriously bonkers, homophobic, Islamophobic and everyone-but-the-writer-phobic comments under that article.

It's astonishing how many people can read about changing gender and think the writer meant 'coming out as gay', and rant about that instead.

You would think that when the prison thing happened, those that have drunk the cool aid would have started to think actually maybe the fears we are hearing do have some bearing.

We look back at the child sex abuse cases (the real and the not real), PIE, saville etc and say ‘never again’. Until the next time.

Time and time again we see how Hitler did what he did, the establishment and enablers concerned about personal republican, career and income allow it.

Modern day professionals, Politicians, Momentum and trans activists are the exactly the same as Nazis, lobotomy and Eugenics advocates and Nuns who carried out orders to harm and enslave women and children in the Magdalene laundry scandal.

...personal reputation, career and income allow it.

There is a reason why the vast majority of those that have drank the Kool-Aid are on the left and the vast majority of those that haven't are on the right.

Just as I never saw anybody on the right deflecting or making excuses when the Pakistani rape gangs came to light. Only people on the left did this and still do.

It is about it kind of fear and group think, say one thing outside the bubble and everybody else comes down on you like a ton of shit.

Look at what Germaine Greer has had thrown at her.
After a lifetime of being an icon of feminism and the left, feminists are queuing up to abuse her and D platform her because of this one thing.

I was already walking away from the left but this lunacy puts the tin hat on it.

What happened to Germaine Greer?

The crossover between feminism and the right wing on the trans issue is an agreement that biology is real and means something.

The backlash will come when those on the right start saying that oology means everything. Feminism's entire basis is that biology is a real thing that is used as justification to oppress one sex class, and gender is created as the means of doing this. Radical feminism as I understand it says among other things that you can't break entirely free of biology and you have to keep taking it into account - hence when you just say all humans are the same and biology means nothing, that women remain disadvantaged.

However if the right say that biology is destiny and women want to be treated differently (paid less, framed as sexy always or nothing, raped?) due to biology. Hence there will be some major clashes to be had. Which will seem arcane to those who think that 'the feminists' want trans boys to burn their bras and use Germaine Greer's toilet, or something.

Feminists and the Right aren’t on the ‘same side’ in this - except in the sense the Allies and the Soviets were when they fought against the Nazis.

The Allies didn’t become communists and the Soviets didn’t become capitalists.

The Right aren’t becoming feminist and the feminists aren’t becoming Right-wing.

When this war is over the Cold War is back on.

That's a very apt analogy, Aspie.

That's a very apt analogy, Aspie.

Yes, it is! May I pinch it?