Avoidance of things related to sexuality, or rejection of own genitals or bodies

[ChickenonaMug]

Avoidance of things related to sexuality, or rejection of own genitals or bodies This is taken from Amnesty International's Safeguarding Children Policy and it is listed as a symptom of child sexual abuse, which should be watched out for.

www.amnesty.org.uk/safeguarding-children-policy

a strong desire to hide or be rid of the physical signs of your sex, such as breasts, body hair or muscle definition
a strong dislike for – and a strong desire to change or be rid of – the genitalia of your biological sex These are listed as symptoms of gender dysphoria by the NHS. It is obvious that the symptoms listed from both the NHS and Amnesty are practically identical and are all consider strong identifying symptoms.

www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/symptoms/

Last week Amnesty UK stated that We are proud to work alongside
@Mermaids_Gender in helping to create a world where all trans and non-binary children are affirmed.

Mermaids, alongside Stonewall and others inform schools that when a child approaches a school staff member to explain that they think that they are transgender then the teacher (or TA etc) must not see this as a safeguarding issue and that complete confidence should be maintained. School staff are also taught that it is wrong or transphobic to question a child about why he or she may feel this way and that instead they should affirm what the child says is their gender identity.

schools.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/sites/schools/files/folders/folders/documents/antibullying/policies/TransInclusionToolkitforSchools.pdf

We know that most children who are sexually abused do not tell anyone in authority during their childhoods. We know that the reasons for not disclosing include shame and disgust, fear (including the fear of being disbelieved), protecting the abuser or other family members. We know of course, that these children are very vulnerable and are deeply hurting and sometimes feel very confused.

So if a girl or boy who is feeling a complete rejection of their body, sex or genitals decides that this must be because they are transgender, as opposed to thinking the potential harder thing to acknowledge and to think which is that it is because they are being or have been raped or sexually abused. Then at what point can a teacher start to recognise a significant symptom of sexual abuse and act upon this potential concern appropriately?

At what point can the teacher find out what the symptoms are that may be causing a child to identify as transgender and at what point can a teacher refer to the child to the school Safeguarding Lead?

At what point can the Safeguarding Lead discuss with the parents to work out the cause of a child who is rejecting their body, sex or genitals?

We know from some of the people who talk about their own desisting or detansitioning stories, that some/many of them acknowledge a history of sexual abuse or sexually assault. Some of them have recognised that it was their rejection of their own body following the abuse that lead them to conclude that they were transgender.

I am of course not saying that all children that identify as transgender have been sexually abused or are rejecting their sex or genitals as a result of abuse. However as these symptoms are identical or very nearly identical, and seeing as we know that sexually abused children may desperately trying to conceal or even deny to themselves the fact that that they have been abused or the impact that it has had, then I fail to see how any school can implement a policy which does not recognise that such a serious symptom may be a result of sexual abuse.

How can a school justify a policy that just affirms rather than 'questions' (by an appropriately trained adult ) a child's assertion, to ensure that there is not a history of sexual abuse causing the rejection of body?

How can a school promise complete confidentiality to a child which may prevent the appropriate help being sought and found?

And how on earth can a school policy promise complete confidentiality, which risks a vulnerable child being in the position where only one person knows her secret, after all we know that sexually abused children with difficulties asserting their boundaries are more likely to be preyed upon again by predators. And it won't necessarily be the teacher who preys upon the child but instead the next person in authority she tells who promises her complete confidence in return for... ?

I don't really have anything to add to that, but I agree with you.

This is so dangerous. Making children who have been abused easy prey for more abusers. I find it impossible to believe that predators did not have a guiding hand in designing this..

This is a really good point and something I hadn't fully considered before.

I have just read this in the main Welsh school safeguarding legislation: I have bolded the sections that I think are perhaps relevant to my points above.

Research by the NSPCC found that on average it took seven years for young people to disclose sexual abuse. The young people said they wanted: someone to notice that something was wrong to be asked direct questions; professionals to investigate sensitively but thoroughly; and to be kept informed about what was happening. Young people in this research tried to tell an adult about the abuse but many disclosures were either not recognised or understood, or they were dismissed, played down or ignored. Some children and young people disclose abuse directly and verbally, and others attempt disclosures indirectly, behaviourally and non-verbally. Disclosure – especially at the time of abuse – is rarely a straightforward process of revealing clearly that they have been abused. Positive experiences of disclosures were when: the child was believed; some action was taken to protect the child; and emotional support was provided.

learning.nspcc.org.uk/research-resources/2013/no-one-noticed-no-one-heard/

I think that it is awful that that this very important symptom of sexual abuse may fail to be recognised and may be mistaken as a symptom of something else.

Mermaids, alongside Stonewall and others inform schools that when a child approaches a school staff member to explain that they think that they are transgender then the teacher must not see this as a safeguarding issue and that complete confidence should be maintained

Is there any law that say anyone has to do what Stonewall says? Or can they just be ignored?

Thank you for posting this Chicken. I completely agree with you.

For me it is one of the most concerning and horrifying aspects of the transgenderist ideology.

As you say, not only does it mean that many abused children will be wrongly diagnosed and given the wrong treatment at the time when they need help so badly, but not asking the right questions about sexual abuse also allows abusers to go undetected and free to abuse more children. This is a double evil.

The NSPCC research is heartbreaking. Children want to be heard, want to tell, but IMO many are afraid to disclose because they pick up on the subtle and not so subtle messages from adults that say "we don't want to know that - anything but that".

Because adults know that it brings their world crashing down and to avoid that difficulty, to avoid facing up to the doubt, betrayal, guilt, horror etc, many would instead deny and shut the children up.

Our safeguarding frameworks must not accept these regressive policies that enable denial and avoidance. Langcleg for one was always bringing the discussion back to what does the child need, not what do the adults want.

Thank you again Chicken for raising this.

aliasundercover there is no law that says that schools or anyone must do what Stonewall say. They should just be ignored. However Stonewall (and others), have persuaded schools and councils to implement their guidance with its incorrect 'understanding' of the law and safeguarding.
Stonewall have misrepresented legislation to imply to schools that the consequences of not following their guidance could be bad for both the school and for some pupils. The reality is that it is schools who are responsible for their safeguarding policy and practices and they have a duty to get it right for all of their children.

Sadly ChickenonaMug the Department for Education have been signposting schools to Stonewall and other trans lobby groups for some time. Thus schools believe that these organisations are legitimate authorities and have been 'quality assured' by the government.
Catastrophically incorrect as is repeatedly being evidenced on here and elsewhere.

Absolutely perdriXX and in many tragic cases it will be exactly the same children who suffer immensely because adults do not want to face up the extent and horror of sexual abuse, as the ones who suffer because adults do not want to face up to the idea that they have enabled the affirming approach to children who are identifying as transgender, which could be deeply harmful to children.

It really does feel me with horror that these same children may well be let down by society so badly in both situations. How do you begin to heal from such a betrayal?

Is there any law that say anyone has to do what Stonewall says? Or can they just be ignored?

Stonewall is the law. Did you not know?

Interesting. Save your long posts though, this will be gone before morning

Just to cross reference information from another thread posted by Mockers (here) regarding our concern about "who benefits" and that paedophilic predators have had a hand in this policy direction...

Peter Newell a 'children's rights campaigner' was, with his partner, responsible for writing the policy book for the UNICEF Implementation Handbook for the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC).

In the third edition published in 2007, they introduced concept of recognising a child's "gender identity" as an inherent right. Others inside and outside the UN also were and are, pushing this, then and since.

Peter Newell was in Feb 2018 jailed for 6 years after admitting to the historic rape and sexual abuse of a 12 year old boy.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/child-rights-activist-peter-newell-convicted-of-sex-abuse-wrn0cnvm9

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5399247/UNICEF-kids-rights-campaigner-jailed-rape-boy-13.html

I leave you to your own conclusions.

I entirely understand your concern StealthPolarBear but I will try and place trust in the fact that MNHQ should clearly be able to see that this a thread is about the concerns for the safeguarding of vulnerable children who have experienced sexual abuse and who are displaying the symptoms of avoidance of things related to sexuality, or rejection of own genitals or bodies. This is a discussion about the conflict that is created by the guidance which encourages schools to ensure complete confidentiality and only affirm what a child first says, rather than investigating further for any other possible causes for the rejection of their body, genitals or sex.

I am sure that MNHQ will recognise this and not want to shut down this discussion .

Sylviajean I understand your concerns for children who may be rejecting their sexual orientation and therefore their sex due to the homophobia they have experienced or fear. I am sure for some children that the homophobia they observe around them may lead to serious feelings of shame about their sexual orientation. This is also often mentioned in the stories of those who have desisted from identifying as transgender. Certainly this is another group of children who may be seriously let down by adults who do not want to face up to the reality of certain situations and cultures.

For children who have been sexually abused, are lesbians or gay and who are incorrectly affirmed as transgender by the adults who surround them, then they face a betrayal of their needs in at least three ways.

It is actually shocking, or it would have been a few years ago, that any organisation concerned with children and adolescents, can write the words “... the teacher (or TA etc) must not see this as a safeguarding issue...”, and not come under scrutiny.

Discouraging seeing anything as a potential safeguarding issue is, in and off itself, a massive fed flag.

Especially given the knowledge that children often attempt indirectly to get adults to suspect and investigate.

Thank you OP.

It is horrific that these organisations are lobbying against safeguarding of children. Telling organisations to ignore red flags will enable children to be abused. These groups are actively pushing to destroy boundaries, ignore red flags putting children at risk, why? Money, 'validation', evil?

Who benefits from this? Abusers especially paedophiles - they will use any weakening of protection to get their prey.

Yep. I always have the thought that surely, SURELY, the people whose job it is to work in safeguarding are aware of these things, thinking about them and addressing them?!