Unlimited potential: Report of the Commission on Gender Stereotypes and Early Childhood

[HecatesCatsInXmasHats]

From the Fawcett Society:

UNLIMITED POTENTIAL: REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON GENDER STEREOTYPES AND EARLY CHILDHOOD

Society teaches our children life-limiting stereotypes from the moment they are born. Our expert Commission on Gender Stereotypes in Early Childhood came together in 2019 to build a new consensus on the impact gender stereotypes and intersecting inequalities have in our children’s formative years and how, together, we can end them.

On the 15th December we are publishing our final report. We set out the case for change, the evidence about how gender stereotypes are perpetuated, and promote practical solutions to change childhood and change lives.

Speakers include:

Gillian Keegan MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Apprenticeships and Skills at the Department for Education

Professor Becky Francis, Chief Executive of the Education Endowment Fund

Jess Day, Campaigner with Let Toys Be Toys

Owen Thomas, Future Men

Janeen Hayat, Co-Founder of You Be You

Chair: Sam Smethers, Fawcett Society Chief Executive

www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/Event/unlimited-potential-report-of-the-commission-on-gender-stereotypes-in-early-childhood

Oh, aye.

The Fawcett society? Didn't they let pass a statement at a meeting in Westminster that a parliament consisting of 50% men and 50% transwomen would be a success for equal representation for women. That Fawcett society?

I wouldn’t trust them to tell me it’s Monday.

I'm sceptical to say the least. I'm assuming they hold a position that so many seem to be comfortable with, but which makes no sense, that Trans people can be diagnosed, in part, on the basis of the clothes, toys and the sex of the other children they like/d to play with as kids, but also that stereotypes are bad and children shouldn't be forced to conform and girls/boys should be allowed to play with whichever toys and wear whichever clothes they like, because they shouldn't be designated by sex.

Worth cheering this one on as it exposes the insurmountable contradiction re diagnosis

Trans people can be diagnosed, in part, on the basis of the clothes, toys and the sex of the other children they like/d to play with as kids, but also that stereotypes are bad and children shouldn't be forced to conform and girls/boys should be allowed to play with whichever toys and wear whichever clothes they like

Yes, I would like someone to explain this contradiction, which is embedded deeply within the gender ideology.

Without 'born in the wrong body' and without 'toys and clothes and games usually associated with the other sex', what is there to 'trans'?

It's an event. I wonder if it will be open to questions?

They don't mention questions, you'd imagine they might throw it open, but Fawcett are probably wary of that.

The report is out. What's the likelihood that Fawcett will be joining any dots between these findings and the dramatic rise in the number of girls with gender dysphoria?:

Unlimited Potential - the final report of the Commission on Gender Stereotypes in Early Childhood sets out how gender expectations significantly limit our children, causing problems such as lower self-esteem in girls and poorer reading skills in boys. The report finds that stereotypes contribute towards the mental health crisis among children and young people, are at the root of girls’ problems with body image and eating disorders, higher male suicide rates and violence against women and girls.

KEY FINDINGS FROM THE REPORT
• Three quarters of parents (74%) say boys and girls are treated differently, and six in 10 (60%) say this has negative impacts.
• 70% of mothers and 60% of fathers agree that this unequal treatment affects how able boys are to talk about their emotions.
• Asked what work parents could see their kids doing when they grow up, seven times as many could see their sons working in construction (22%) compared to just 3% for their daughters, while almost three times as many could see their daughters in nursing or care work (22%), compared to 8% in relation to their sons.
• 66% of parents want to see companies voluntarily advertise toys to boys and girls in the same way.
• Four in ten (38%) education practitioners had either had negligible training, or none at all, on challenging gender stereotypes before starting their role.

www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/news/gender-stereotypes-significantly-limiting-childrens-potential-causing-lifelong-harm-commission-finds

I'm assuming they hold a position that so many seem to be comfortable with, but which makes no sense, that Trans people can be diagnosed, in part, on the basis of the clothes, toys and the sex of the other children they like/d to play with as kids, but also that stereotypes are bad and children shouldn't be forced to conform and girls/boys should be allowed to play with whichever toys and wear whichever clothes they like, because they shouldn't be designated by sex.

I'm gender critical, but I think GC people only see that as a contradiction because we are GC. We don't believe in innate gender identity, so we read the "stereotypes are bad but also a trans symptom" as saying the stereotypical behaviour is not innate and yet somehow innate in trans people - a contradiction.

But someone who is not GC could believe gender identity is innate but the expression of it follows stereotypes set culturally. In that reading, the natal little girl and the trans little girl both love pink and sparkles because they both believe themselves to be girls so they subsconciously (or often consciously, based on my own childhood) follow the girl stereotypes. So the girly stereotypes in the trans girl are proof they are a girl because only girls naturally like this stuff, but evidence they may identify as a girl and therefore aligning to those stereotypes.

And in fact, that could be true whether the child truly has some innate gender identity or has simply formed a belief about their gender for other reasons.

Also an article on this in the Guardian:

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/15/gender-stereotyping-is-harming-young-peoples-mental-health-finds-uk-report

Argh, missed a word. Slight rephrase

So the girly stereotypes in the trans girl are not proof they are a girl because "only girls naturally like this stuff" , but evidence they may identify as a girl and therefore are aligning to the girl stereotypes.

But what else would make you feel you should be the other gender apart from the stereotypes? If a boy was happy playing football and having short hair why would the fact that he shouldnt be a boy occur to him? It's only the boys who prefer the girl stereotypes who seem to start worrying about this stuff, or those around them do

But someone who is not GC could believe gender identity is innate but the expression of it follows stereotypes set culturally.

But this doesn't explain what they think gender identity is.

If it's not based on the body and it's not based on stereotypes, what is it?

I've asked this lots of times, and the answer seems to be 'a feeling'. But a feeling based on what?

@Blibbyblobby

Argh, missed a word. Slight rephrase

So the girly stereotypes in the trans girl are not proof they are a girl because "only girls naturally like this stuff" , but evidence they may identify as a girl and therefore are aligning to the girl stereotypes.

But the stereotypes don't maketh the girl, as many people who are non GC would agree so why would they think 'aligning' with those stereotypes makes a boy a girl?

I've asked this lots of times, and the answer seems to be 'a feeling'. But a feeling based on what?

But that's what I mean about we can't hear them because we place a GC filter in front and demand they explain terms in a way that fits a GC world view. They CAN'T explain it in a way that we will accept because fundamentally we don't believe in that feeling or innate knowledge, so we keep demanding a concrete explanation for something that even if it exists is not concrete.

It really is like an atheist and a theist. The theist cannot explain the basis of their belief in a way the atheist will ever accept because the atheist's position is "First, assume there is no god. Now prove to me the existence of god". The theist's own experience of feeling the presence of a god and their understanding of that experience in terms of religion is the source of their belief and for them it is real, but they cannot prove it to the atheist because the atheist has already put that explanation outside the acceptable terms of debate.

As I said before, I'm GC. I don't believe trans people have an innate identity at odds with their body. I do however accept trans people believe that and I wish we could have real, respectful and productive political conversations about the various different reasons that can happen without it being shut down as transphobic because I think in increasing our understanding we would evolve a better society for trans and GC alike.

But I can be GC and still not think the stereotypes vs trans position taken by many GC people holds up. I think it's a GC misreading of what some trans people are saying.

But the stereotypes don't maketh the girl, as many people who are non GC would agree so why would they think 'aligning' with those stereotypes makes a boy a girl?
They don't "make" the boy or girl, and yet clearly today many little girls do choose them. If we assume it's purely stereotypes and those little girls are responding to external cultural cues about what girls "should" like, why would a little boy who believes he is a girl not also follow the same little girl cues?

a little boy who believes he is a girl

Why is he not just a little boy who likes things that society has designated for girls? Why pigeonhole?

Thank you for the link Hecates, it all seems quite sensible stuff but I wonder how it will be interpreted in practise. Will some people think there is a need for more drag queens in the classroom?

Why is he not just a little boy who likes things that society has designated for girls? Why pigeonhole?

Sure, that's the GC view. But that's a different conversation. What I'm saying is if one does believe in trans identities there is no contradiction in believing stereotypes are harmful external pressures and believing child adopting the stereotypes of the opposite sex may be trans. Not definitively IS trans, he could indeed be a little boy who likes the girl things, but COULD be. So I don't think everyone who believes in trans identities want to pigeonhole children into stereotype boxes or believes gender stereotypes are innate, I think they think that given stereotypes do exist in our society today, a child who is trans may well adopt gendered stereotypes that align to their identity. Not that all trans kids adopt the stereotypes, nor that all kids adopting the opposite sex's stereotypes are trans, just that it can be symptom and that doesn't contradict a belief that stereotypes themselves are something to get rid of.

I don’t think the comparison to atheism holds up. It conflates knowledge of God with belief in God.

Some religious people have direct knowledge of God through personal experience, but that isn’t the basis of a rational argument for other people as to why they should believe in the existence of God.

There are a series of rational arguments that are used to defend belief in God. People who argue from personal experience just don’t have enough knowledge of the intellectual development of religion to make a proper argument.

And atheists who ask people why they personally believe in God are also misunderstanding the terms of the debate. Personally believing in something isn’t a demand that other people believe it and so doesn’t require the same standard of evidence.

People can go around believing all kinds of stuff for all kinds of non rational reasons, including a nebulous sense of gender identity. That shouldn’t form the basis of imposing those beliefs on the rest of society. To do that you still need to put forward a rational argument.

I don’t think the comparison to atheism holds up. It conflates knowledge of God with belief in God.

I think you have missed my point.

Again, I'm not trying to argue for gender identity. I'm trying to explain that the GC "gotcha!" about stereotypes rests on a misunderstanding of how identity and stereotypes interact, and I can see that despite being GC.

I know you are not arguing for gender identity.

I understand the point you are making. Girls like girl things not because they like butterflies, flowers and pink innately, but because they innately want to be part of the girl group and if the stereotype was that girls like lizards they would all like lizards. I believe that myself.

What I am saying is that you have misunderstood the basis for rational arguments between atheists and theists.