Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Impressive new article by Debbie Hayton.

185 replies

Umyeahnah · 03/02/2020 02:26

I've not been Debbie's biggest fan, but this is changing my view. Thankyou Debbie for owning your autogynaphilia, and writing about it .

The irony is I'm not sure guidelines allow me to use that word?

quillette.com/2020/02/02/i-may-have-gender-dysphoria-but-i-still-prefer-to-base-my-life-on-biology-not-fantasy/

OP posts:
Fieldofgreycorn · 04/02/2020 17:16

Katie Alcock is a senior lecturer at Lancaster University

Yes and Sally Hines is a professor at Leeds University.

What does any of that prove?

Thelnebriati · 04/02/2020 17:25

You haven't disproved anything yet Field, just posted a link that you don't seem to have read.

Here's another link, its written in plain English;
www.healthline.com/health/piaget-stages-of-development#stages

Children go through an extremely long period of development and need parenting the entire time. Once you grasp the stages of development you can immediately see how children at each stage are prone to external influences that influence their beliefs.

OldCrone · 04/02/2020 17:33

As an illustration of Alcock's point quoted by R0wantrees, here's the first paragraph from a paper about child development (my bold).

One of the most compelling yet controversial ideas in the gender literature is ‘‘gender constancy.’’ As proposed by Kohlberg (1966), children’s developing understanding of the permanence of categorical sex (‘‘I am a girl and will always be a girl’’) is a critical organizer and motivator for learning gender concepts and behaviors. Slaby and Frey (1975) demonstrated that children move through a series of stages: first learning to identify their own and others’ sex (basic gender identity or labeling), next learning that gender remains stable over time (stability), and finally learning that gender is a fixed characteristic that is not altered by superficial transformations in appearance or activities (consistency). Thus, children are thought to reach a full understanding of constancy once they recognize that they will always be the same sex, across time or change in situation (e.g., a boy who puts on a dress and a long-haired wig is still a boy even though he resembles a girl). These stages have been confirmed in other research, including cross-cultural studies (e.g., De Lisi & Gallagher, 1991).

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17650129

You'll notice that the authors are using sex and gender interchangeably, but always to mean sex.

Fieldofgreycorn · 04/02/2020 17:45

Thelnebriati I’m not trying to disprove anything, I just don’t think Alcock’s talk reflects the current state of understanding about gender identity development.

She’s using Kohlberg’s gender constancy as being a pre requisite for gender role typing, yet there is plenty of evidence of gender role typing occurring before the establishment of gender constancy.

OldCrone · 04/02/2020 17:49

Do you mean sex or gender in your last post Field?

R0wantrees · 04/02/2020 17:52

I just don’t think Alcock’s talk reflects the current state of understanding about gender identity development.

It doesnt no.

She is describing how children come to understand & classify sex eg girl/boy (male/female)

R0wantrees · 04/02/2020 17:56

She’s using Kohlberg’s gender constancy as being a pre requisite for gender role typing, yet there is plenty of evidence of gender role typing occurring before the establishment of gender constancy.

No she's not doing this.

Dr Alcock is demonstrating how children come to understand & classify sex eg girl/boy (female/male)

R0wantrees · 04/02/2020 18:13

Dr Hayton's pinned tweet
"In summer 2016, a trans friend (not involved in this debate) told me to watch two videos. The first featured
boodleoops. She blew apart my ideas about gender identity. I needed to either abandon intellectual integrity or change my way of thinking.
Critically Examining the doctrine of gender identity
A presentation by Rebecca Reilly-Cooper for Coventry Skeptics on Wednesday 16th March 2016. Audio of the Q&A session that followed is here www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=QPVNxYkawao&feature=emb_logo
Dr Debbie Hayton 🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍🌈

Dec 14, 2019
The second was by Magdalen Berns
. Where Rebecca had been gentle, Magdalen was brutal. I do feel for Alex being made the example, but it made me realise that I am no more a woman than Alex is a woman."
www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=JkK7zisjoDk&feature=emb_logo

It seems very strange that the NASUWT school guidance which relied on Dr Hayton's expertisewas published the following year & remains in place. Especially strange given the incusion of policies explicity demanding that males such as Pips/Philip Bunce, Alex Drummond & those who recognise the nature of their autogynaephilia be treated as female members of staff in school.

TinselAngel · 04/02/2020 18:24

Funnily enough it was that film of Rebecca Riley Cooper that peaked me too.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 04/02/2020 19:13

OMG, JollyYellaHumberElla, for a moment, I silently commiserated with you on your DH situation.

Same here Grin

ThePurported · 04/02/2020 19:22

It seems very strange that the NASUWT school guidance which relied on Dr Hayton's expertisewas published the following year & remains in place. Especially strange given the incusion of policies explicity demanding that males such as Pips/Philip Bunce, Alex Drummond & those who recognise the nature of their autogynaephilia be treated as female members of staff in school.

^^It's baffling. I've learned not to expect rational behaviour from AGP males, but for NASUWT to adopt such guidance is just... I have no words.

"I do feel for Alex being made the example"
Eh? Alex Drummond is the Stonewall posterperson for this shit! Not exactly shy, is they? Alex visits schools as a lesbian "woman".

ahumanfemale · 05/02/2020 00:19

I'm one of the earlier posters. I am in shock. I hadn't realised AGP included humiliation. I had someone who I'm now 99% certain was AGP very close to me.

Feel a bit sick...

And want yo vanish said Shakira.I L so chevwed their ear out.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 05/02/2020 00:56

Perhaps Debbie's next article can be about the schools guidelines that Debbie helped write and how those can now be amended to reflect Debbie's admission that Debbie's transition was motivated by AGP. This is particularly important in that Debbie's personal journey is not an unusual one in any way, so there will be other teachers in the system to whom all the same information applies.

Goosefoot · 05/02/2020 02:07

But why did you think you were a boy? What gave you that idea?

As far as I remember there was nothing specific that gave me that idea. I was a tomboy, but it wasn't like I thought girls couldn't be tomboys, or even that boys had a better life, and I had plenty of girl friends. It was very concrete, I just thought I was a boy. I remember telling my mom I had boy hands, but it was a rather circular argument, in hindsight.

I grew out of it, and I don't consider it developmentally abnormal.

My point was that someone talks about their perception as a child, I don't really see any reason to dispute it unless it's a matter of telling a lie on purpose, or clearly mangling what actually happened. If someone says their sense of gender identity, which is I think the same or close to the concept of self-image, was of being the opposite sex, that seems quite possible to me. And someone who later sees themselves as trans might well see that as the starting point.

Goosefoot · 05/02/2020 02:31

you keep saying this place doesn’t have to be supportive. Is this a dig at trans widows because it feels like it?

It's a response to people suggesting that we can't discuss certain topics. That's not a dig, I'm not the person who brought up trans widows, it's an opinion about what we can and can't talk about.

Not ever space has to curtail their discussions in order to show support. There are specific threads here for that, which is good, but there is also a lot of discussion that may be uncomfortable to all kinds of people, including many women. At the least the OP thought this article could be useful or revealing or influential, and wanted to discuss it with the people here. The article itself doesn't talk about the families of men who transition, because that's not the topic, but it also doesn't in any way deny or minimise their experiences. And I really can't fault the author for making a fairly short comment, in any case the dominant voices in the forum are women, and GC women.

I am not at all comfortable with people telling us we can't have discussions because it makes someone uncomfortable, or even unwelcome. (For that matter, I have doubts about people asking such things on behalf of a whole group of people, who may or may not agree.) I'd very much like to know where you think we are suppose to discuss articles like this?

Umyeahnah · 05/02/2020 02:52

So the word 'impressive' may not have been quite the right word in the header, but really???? That's worth critiquing? Out of the whole subject??

I am hard hard hard core GC but some of you get so far up your arses dissecting wrongspeak that I can almost understand the aversion many have toward this board.

OP posts:
Umyeahnah · 05/02/2020 03:16

I take my last paragraph back Blush

Drink has been taken (antipodean so not morning drinking), and chagrin.

OP posts:
Datun · 05/02/2020 04:49

Umyeahnah

I take my last paragraph back blush

Drink has been taken (antipodean so not morning drinking), and chagrin.

Nicely said. We're all flawed.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 05/02/2020 07:22

She’s using Kohlberg’s gender constancy as being a pre requisite for gender role typing, yet there is plenty of evidence of gender role typing occurring before the establishment of gender constancy. Is that wilful?

She is explaining how children come to understand sex, being a boy and being a girl. How a kids begins to understand that the universe is not just them...

Kids are 100% solipsists until they are about 7, like playing hide and seek and hiding by putting a bin on your head... if I can't see you then you can't see me. Same thing with genitals and anything that is not 'me'.

OldCrone · 05/02/2020 07:53

It was very concrete, I just thought I was a boy. I remember telling my mom I had boy hands, but it was a rather circular argument, in hindsight.

I grew out of it, and I don't consider it developmentally abnormal.

Well yes, children can have all sorts of odd ideas about themselves as they grow up and learn about the world, but as you say, they tend to grow out of the ones which don't align with reality.

If someone says their sense of gender identity, which is I think the same or close to the concept of self-image, was of being the opposite sex, that seems quite possible to me. And someone who later sees themselves as trans might well see that as the starting point.

This idea of a 'gender identity' which might be the opposite sex only makes sense if you assume that personalities or self image are somehow connected to one's sex. Why not just accept instead that anyone can be masculine or feminine? The idea of a gender identity just seems so regressive, as though men and women should fit in specific boxes for their sex.

Fieldofgreycorn · 05/02/2020 07:58

Age 7? Bin on head?

What? Children have developed object permanence by age 2.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 05/02/2020 08:05

If someone says their sense of gender identity, which is I think the same or close to the concept of self-image, was of being the opposite sex, that seems quite possible to me. And someone who later sees themselves as trans might well see that as the starting point.

Let me muse... based on my own expereince....

I was a tomboy, was called by the male version of my name for a few years, even as an adult my chosen name is 'non binary'. At 4 and 5 I wanted diggers, cars, transporters and rollerskates. Never liked dolls or dressing up. Had very long hair, wore dresses out of choice. Favourite sports were boxing, played football, to play and watch... in the late 1960s early 70s.

I grew to know I was female, a girl by the time I was about 7. But continued to enjoy more masculine pursuits, always dislike feminised products, girly spink, sparkly shite! Still do. Nobody batted an eyelash. I was me, I was always accepted. Later, in my teens, I would be bullied for wearing glasses, being freckled, being clever and having red hair, but never because I was not feminine enough!

I am hetero, married, female adult.

Had I been born in this century what would I be?

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 05/02/2020 08:10

In the 70s if you were GNC as a kid and had decent parents they shrugged and got you the toys you asked for. Now they get you Lupron, in some cases not because they want to but because they've been told that if they don't either you'll kill yourself or they'll be reported to social services.

How anyone considers this progress is beyond me.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 05/02/2020 08:10

Age 7? Bin on head? Have you never seen that? It's a common enough occurence in small children!

What? Children have developed object permanence by age 2. Such absolutism! They have started, gained some understanding of how they are seen from someone elses perspective. By the time they are 8 it has become relatively stable.. before that it is all pretty much in flux with new concepts of self and other being added all the time.

Fieldofgreycorn · 05/02/2020 08:47

Oh now stop it! Hiding your face is something you’d play with an 18 month old, not a child of 7.