Mermaids response to piece in Mail tomorrow

[EweSurname]

Looking forward to seeing what drops

www.mermaidsuk.org.uk/press-enquiry-from-the-mail-on-sunday-25th-may-2019.html

We are very proud of the training we offer to schools and we have a proven record of helping teachers to support vulnerable children who simply want to get along with their lessons like any of their classmates.

We are disappointed to find that a school governor has made a covert recording of our training because our presentations are not held in secret and all of the scientific and legal information we offer is publicly available and well-tested.

We are surprised to see that a Church of England rector is complaining about our training when we are included in the CoE guidance on support for transgender people, which can be found here.

Part of the work of Mermaids is giving training talks to schools. These talks are well received and are an important part of how we promote an inclusive and informed approach to trans children and those who support them.

We have been contacted by the Mail on Sunday who are doing an article about one such talk. This post is our response, in accordance with our policy of posting our replies to media queries for the benefit of anyone interested in our activities.

I am sorry but trans people have always existed in every culture. Different societies and religions have found different solutions for it (you can do your own research for the different categories recognised by rabbis historically).
It is difficult to find in Europe a more 'gendered' society that the British. This is my view, but even if you don't agree with it, you may agree that the Victorian rules brought to the colonies hurt transgenders particularly, because of the insistence of strict dichotomy and segregation between sexes. Transgender people who had some kind of recognised status in society became totally marginalised (see, e.g. here: www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/style/india-third-gender-hijras-transgender.html)

I am totally surprised that you can have such strong positions on a topic by denying known facts: this is not a fashion.

You may prefer a world without gender stereotypes. You may prefer a world without nationalities and borders (by the way, do you feel you 'belong' to a nationality? what does it mean?) The issue remains that trans people exist. Even if it was a new phenomenon, they exist and I can't see how the approach of denying their identity as some kind of dressing game, is helpful for women's rights or anybody else.

Please everybody: talk past the goaders. If you don't, you're doing their work for them.

Yes, unfortunately this is going to end being very embarrassing for the Sussexes.

Well, it's not as though it's the first time the royals have backed the wrongest of horses, is it? They've a long track record of endorsing dodgy charities and personalities.

Women don’t need to publish academic papers on being a woman, what with actually being women and all.

Just focus on sex. Why are the sexes separated in some cases (ex religious ones). For a laugh?

Well, it's not as though it's the first time the royals have backed the wrongest of horses, is it? They've a long track record of endorsing dodgy charities and personalities.

Who was that German Chancellor they were quite fond of?

They are not trying to get rights 'away' from women. They are trying to be treated like women because our society has been divided in many aspects by sex. This can cause problems. In the UK the legislation already takes into account those problems. Transpeople are trying to fit in the space that is there.

There is no 'third/non-binary' spaces in many instances. If you are telling me they are 'attacking' women give specific examples. You will find them of course. The same way I can find hundreds of violent members of any minority if I want to. This is a tiny minority in a vulnerable situation. It would be nice if people tried to honestly listen and to find solutions.

It is disheartening that a forum like this one has become like the twitter line of many others I used to follow out of professional interest. In the past 18 months or so, 90% of the posts are about trans people. Where does the obsession come from?

Edward and Walis Simpson, silly Harry and his nazi get up...

Yy Lang.

I don't actually think it'll be embarrassing for them; if and when the scandal hits, they'll be in such huge company across the land, they can just blame Stonewall.

Who was that German Chancellor they were quite fond of?

Even without going full Godwin (!) there are plenty of charities and personalities backed/feted by the royals who have turned out to be dodgier than a dodgy thing.

The royals are highly susceptible to the halo effect. Same goes for corporations going for Woke branding.

Classy LanCleg. I know there is no reasonable debate to have. It was my first intervention. I tend to read and not intervene. I am also able of discussing something without insulting anybody. There are human beings at the other side of this very public discussions.

I just do not want to see folk from any charity being wheeled into schools peddling inaccurate, biased, pseudo scientific nonsense to children that the teachers are too dumb or afraid to put a halt to thus legitimizing them.

@justju there are a lot of people stating they will now unfollow them, these remarks had not been deleted when I looked. Some reasoned arguments why as well.

Not really a tiny minority any more. NY Times article today reckons 0.7% of under 18s in the US identify as transgender or nonbinary or one of the other terms that fall under the Stonewall umbrella. Not dissimilar estimates here, I believe. All a far cry from the 5000 people expected to get a gender recognition certificate when the GRA was passed 15 years ago.

They are not trying to get rights 'away' from women. They are trying to be treated like women because our society has been divided in many aspects by sex.

There are legitimate reasons for dividing society in some instances by sex. Those reasons don’t go away because somebody ‘identifies’ as a woman. It doesn’t matter whether a male athlete or a male sex offender identifies as a man or a woman.

The dangers they represent to fair play or safety don’t change.

We will not identify the school or the governor as that in turn could identify the child. There is no public interest in placing a child in that position.

Another piece of law they have wrong, public interest cannot be used as a defence for the naming of a child.

Well, it's not as though it's the first time the royals have backed the wrongest of horses, is it?

True. But then many well intentioned, good people have initially gone along with this agenda thinking it's what it says on the tin: just about inclusion, no different to accepting gay/BAME and all the rest of protected characteristics. I did for quite a while before I saw enough to start questioning it and realised this ideology has a very dark underbelly, it has a lot of hidden agendas and things being done highly dishonestly and it's not good for women, or for children. Or for society in terms of how laws are being quietly brushed over and put aside and policy being made behind closed doors by an elite that won't allow democracy or equality, or regulatory capture, or police starting to enforce a highly partisan, highly questionable political view point not shared by the majority of the general public.

Which is why peaking only happens one way, and this board has gone from relatively small numbers to being one of the most active boards on MN.

The Monarchy has been living on borrowed time since Its a Knockout. If your only reason for existence is tradition, embracing trendy causes isn’t a great idea.

Whatever the legitimate reasons (privacy/religion/safety/fair play) for sex-segregated spaces, there must be a solution for trans people. The societies that have the strictest rules on sex-segregation are not gender free.

The concern about mermaid is not about Mermaid. It is about parents not wanting children to be informed about the existence of transgender people. It is based on the denial of their existence and the belief that this is bullshit.

If any of you don't see me as a 'goader' or 'derailer', why do you think males are more violent than women? Is it a social construct? Is it biological? I don't have the answers. I was brought up to believe gendered behaviour is a social construct, but I understand it is a belief. I don't have any science to back it up because I don't have any expertise on this.

Are the good reasons to segregate by sex based on safety a social construct too? A necessary evil until we get free of the cultural/social factors that make boys become more violent?

I don't have any answers to this question and many others. I don't have a problem with an organisation explaining to children that trans people exist. I would prefer to live in a country without uniforms for state schools and particular dress-codes based on sex where you did not need to make a fuss to wear a skirt if you are a boy. I would prefer a society where we can find a way of bringing boys 'like girls' so 90% of violence would end. These are (to me) good causes to invest time and energy.

I don't normally engage much here or elsewhere online and not even sure what prompted me to answer this time. I have avoided the feminist chat since it became the trans chat. It might be a good idea to keep that way.

Interesting @justasking111.

I wonder if anyone there properly monitors social media, or if they just count the number of likes and comments etc.

Forgot to answer Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g. One real problem with this discussion is how we mixed figures: you say 0.7% in the US. How does it relate to the Gender Recognition Act 'expected numbers'. What were the numbers? What is the percentage of people who have used the GRA in the UK to change their ID?

0.7% is still a very small number. Cannot think of many minorities in the US that are this small.

I wonder if anyone there properly monitors social media, or if they just count the number of likes and comments etc.

And how savvy they are with social media and doing due diligence.

That's the failure that keeps coming up again and again and again isn't it? No one doing the job of checking up and being sure of facts before waving all this through on lovely feelz.

Mermaids. It’s Mermaids.

And why would the parents of a teenage girl not want to understand that, say at a girl guide camp out their daughters may well be sleeping and washing alongside a male bodied teenager (guides are for older girls/young women)? Are young men beyond lying to gain access to girls? Would this never happen?

Same as a male prisoner would never claim female status to be moved into a female prison (for worth sexual jollies or a perceived ‘softer’ environment)? No, never? Once, twice? Who are we protecting here? Who is getting thrown under the bus here?

Why is the trans lobby so powerful? Where were the protestors and lobbyists for women’s rights or disabled rights? Where were they? Why has this group gained such momentum and influence so swiftly, and why is the target seemingly the dismantling of the rights of those they mostly say they want to emulate (or are)?

Why do they demand the redefinition of the ‘woman’ and swoon at the written OED definition of the word?

What is their game? What do they want? How is a male person who says the magic words ‘I feel like a woman’ yet refuses to have any medical or psychological intervention in any way the same as a man who undergoes gender surgery and groom one treatment?

Think about it and get back to us.

I would prefer a society where we can find a way of bringing boys 'like girls' so 90% of violence would end. These are (to me) good causes to invest time and energy.

Fantastic. You knock on with sorting out Male violence, in particular against women and children. Then once you’ve sorted that out I’ll be happy to share my female only sex spaces with males who identify as trans. Up until that happens I’d rather maintain those female only spaces in order to protect the rights, dignity and safety of females.

@justju I wonder which poor souls job it is to find and vet 11 charities each and every month 132 a year and ensure they are above board so that they can be used for this months feel good idea. Would they get the sack if the media then expose some or even one as being dubious. It is a big ask. When you think about royal warrants their application and approval takes ages, this avoids the embarrassment of having them removed. I have done research for grants for charities, just because someone offers you money does not mean you can hold out your hand and say ta very much. A lot of digging goes on, it is boring and soo time consuming. Made harder by folk having stuff removed from google these days.

Evidence given to Parliament when the GRA was being debated was that psychiatrists specialising in treating people with gender dysphoria estimated that there were about 5000 people in the UK who would meet the criteria to get a gender recognition certificate. In the 15 years since around 4910 have got a GRC, so that was spot on.

Stonewall and others want the criteria removed so anybody can get a GRC using self-ID and estimates are that about half a million people would do that. This would include people who don't suffer from gender dysphoria as that would no longer be a requirement.

The number of children and teenagers being referred to the Tavistock for gender dysphoria has gone through the roof in that 15 year period. Historically it was always the case that tiny numbers of boys were referred, and vanishingly small numbers of girls. Now it's thousands of girls, about twice as many as boys.

I find that very concerning and it amazes me that the government hasn't followed through on the promise to investigate this. Mermaids meanwhile thinks instant affirmation is the way to go, never mind the underlying reasons for this huge increase.