trans social contagion more likely in single sex school?

[Twistiesandshout]

Inspired by another thread.

We have to choose between single or mixed sex senior school for DD. DD is not "girly' at all, and actively rejects stereotypical girl behaviour etc.

Lately with all the social contagion trans things I am reading I am getting worried about sending her to a single sex school. The girls school is my/our preferred choice and proudly states it is empowering young women of the future which I love.

So I thought I would ask here do you think social contagion is more or less likely in single sex school?

@FifteenToes

Some of the language used about young people who call themselves trans or make statements we find difficult to understand is quite dismissive, condescending and at worst ridiculing. The OP of this thread is a case in point: Calling it a "social contagion" seems like a way of saying that these young people can't really have thought about it properly or be saying anything serious, they're just going along with a trend.

But it is a social contagion. That's a term used in psychology. Suicide is also socially contagious. So is self-harm, and eating disorders. (And so are positive behaviours, thankfully).

Their unhappiness is real, but the form that it takes is absolutely "a trend". I think it's useful to realise that.

I would suggest mixed sex.

I was not girly at all - my parents were strongly recommended mixed sex but I was a high achiever and all the selective schools were single sex so that was where I went.

I knew a fair number of anorexics and bulimics, cutters and girls who were just generally unhappy. I became vegetarian in a social contagion event after watching a video at school in 6th form - I'm sure my DM was delighted

I get the alumni email now and they are definitely trans friendly in a way that sets my teeth on edge for a school that is supposed to be supporting girls to be happy in themselves and self confident women of the future.

Mixed would be better - much harder to pretend to be a boy when there are real boys around.

Off topic but I envy you with the choice of single or mixed sex education OP- girls schools have decreased so much in recent decades. It’s a good problem to have.

There can be misogynistic environments in mixed schools and in single sex schools is my experience. So looking into it carefully as you’re doing sounds very sensible. But I think girls don’t need to be at school all day with boys to get to know male peers as real people. Boys that they socialise with can be friends from other places or previous schools, clubs and hobby friends, their neighbours, family members, all the rest of it. My experience is that being freed from the male gaze at secondary school can be very liberating for girls, at what can be a difficult age with a lot of external pressure and self-scrutiny to deal with already.

Also wanted to agree that ‘social contagion’ isn’t a loaded term or shouldn’t be read that way. The “contagion” part just means spread or transmission.

@RoyalCorgi

At least at a single-sex school, the girls won't have boys grabbing their tits and calling them sluts which, as well as being an advantage in itself, removes one of the pressures for identifying as trans.

This. The stats for assault are through the roof. I'd prefer a bit of over enthusiasticwell meaning wokeness I can correct st home to that.

I think the social context makes more difference than single sex or mixed. I teach at a girls' school with mainly BAME students and I haven't seen any social contagion. Another girls' school nearby, which is very white and middle class, is Stonewall central with lots of trans identifying teens.

I went to an all girls school and I wasn't even aware that, say, maths and sciences weren't considered "girl subjects" til I got to university. In that context I think it's far less likely as there's far less pressure to confirm to one type of femininity in a boys vs girls scenario

@ChattyLion

Also wanted to agree that ‘social contagion’ isn’t a loaded term or shouldn’t be read that way. The “contagion” part just means spread or transmission.

Yes because "contagion" is often used to describe the spread of love and peace and harmony and flowers and all kinds of positive things.

wow such amazing responses! Been working all day so just sat down to read!

Thanks to persistentwomen, I did look up the policy sections on the websites and it was incredibly enlightening!!

Both schools are grammars and very well regarded.

The mixed school policy highlighted gender repeatedly! It actually rewrote the EA to state gender in place of sex. It is throughout the policy documents and clearly is a stonewall school!

The girls school had policy documents and mentioned the aims to eliminated discrimination based on sex, being gay, disabled etc. No mention of gender.

This has reaffirmed my desire to send her to the girls school!

Oh shit, just seen on the girls website..

External Organisations who come in and deliver workshops within PSHEE lessons:

Time to Change

Stonewall

Pretty much all schools have it. The local girls school at the moment have loads of it but also a lot of the mixed schools too. Maybe not so much at the catholic school my son is at

Actually just checking few other schools websites (private which was our alternative), every website has a focus on gender in PSHE.

It really is everywhere, well I will have to make sure she knows the difference between sex and gender and I will hopefully have to manage any school extremism at home.

Glad that the websites were useful Twisties It sounds as if the girls school remains child focused rather than Stonewall acolytes. It's that Maya Angelou quote: When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time
I feel part sorry and part enraged that so many schools and the good people working in them have abandoned critical thinking, evidenced knowledge about child development, psychology and pastoral care in favour of gender woowoo. It would be funny if the impact on children wasn't so catastrophic. And everyone is too scared of being called a bigot to question some of the dangerous mantras being pushed at children.

PSHE has been totally captured by the lobby groups I'm afraid. Transgender Trend has some horrifying (and very depressing) information about awful stuff that groups are promoting to schools under the PSHE / SRE umbrella.
www.transgendertrend.com/department-for-education-rse-guidance-schools/

@FifteenToes

Some of the language used about young people who call themselves trans or make statements we find difficult to understand is quite dismissive, condescending and at worst ridiculing. The OP of this thread is a case in point: Calling it a "social contagion" seems like a way of saying that these young people can't really have thought about it properly or be saying anything serious, they're just going along with a trend.

Fair point fifteen, I think I was referring to terminology used in a recent book discussing the social contagion aspect (like eating disorders/cutting etc). The title and post was a bit ill considered however I stand by my thoughts.

In terms of a previous post by you
"I suspect that people on this board like to imagine that a biological female saying "I'm a girl" is just accepting certain facts about her biology and that's all. That's easy for us to say with a whole tradition of feminist theory fighting against gender stereotypes behind us, badly sadly I think it's still not how most people perceive it. Particularly when they're first discovering and coming to terms with what it "means" to be a boy or girl, in terms of sex, relationships, careers and wider social participation as an adult.."

It has really made me see aspects of this in a different way.

I still believe in biology first, I also believe the TRA campaigning is dangerous, particularly in schools. I worry about our young lesbians who seem to preference changing gender over being gay etc.

@Sheleg

Utter madness. I'm actually seriously thinking of sending my DD to a strictly Orthodox girls school (we're Jewish) to escape the ideology that seems to have infiltrated education. I would honestly rather have her in a school that teaches women to be homemakers and mothers than one which tells them they can be male if they feel like it. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place.

I wouldn’t go that far... I think that’s likely to leave her with a whole bunch of other issues, and might be harder to shake off,

I’d recommend anyone interested in the psychological term/concept of ‘social contagion’ to watch this excellent documentary (go to part one of the 4) which at about 27 mins, has research professionals talking about rapid onset gender dysphoria and social contagion, which they rightly do thoughtfully and with concern and respect for the young people affected by this. They also consider parallels with other examples, in which girls specifically, have been affected by social contagion.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4150470-Dysphoric-A-four-part-documentary

I expect most of them accept the reality of their biology, they just use the words male and female to mean something else.

I think its very clear that some significant organisations do not accept the reality of biology.

The Feminist Library:

feministlibrary.co.uk/statement-on-transphobia-and-accountability/

"We understand gender and sex as constructed categories with meanings that have changed over time and are dependent on time periods, geographical location, culture, amongst a range of other factors."

Parents and prospective parents need to ask all schools about their PSHE policy (has it been amended to reflect latest guidance re teaching of sex vs gender) and specifically ask the school for a list of external providers that they invite in to talk and teach the pupils and to train staff (and then challenge them if they are effecively lobby groups eg Stonewall, Mermaids). Until schools get repeatedly challenged they won't think about it (not least because they save money by inviting lobby groups in) and the girls will continue to get brainwashed.
In my dds' (all girls comprehensive) school my dds tell me about 90% of the girls identify as either lesbian or one of that crazy long list of possible sexualitys (whilst this is fine it seems somewhat out of sync with the percentage in the general population so I suspect there is a certain feeling of needing to label temselves). There are numerous trans pupils in every year group and the staff now have to avoid collective terms like "girls". My dds have certainly drunk the kool-aid and there seems to be little or no room for any girls in the school to voice any concerns about self-id etc. I don't know whether this comes from the school's teaching (although they certainly don't seem to do much to talk about the difference between self id and biological sex etc) or a wider issue with echo chambers online (I suspect the latter has a huge part to play).

merrymouse -

Organisations, yes. But this thread is about teenage girls saying that they have a male gender, and the whole way that that becomes a trendy and accepted way for teenagers to think (or, "social contagion" if you like). I really don't think the majority of them believe that biology is not immutable. I think the normal approach among them is, while still understanding that they're biologically female, just to believe that it's gender "identity" that determines whether you call yourself a boy or a girl.

I could be wrong. I've never met a teenager who believes sex isn't real, I don't really know how many there are, if any.

I really don't think the majority of them believe that biology is not immutable. I think the normal approach among them is, while still understanding that they're biologically female, just to believe that it's gender "identity" that determines whether you call yourself a boy or a girl.

I don't agree. The logic of 'TWAW' depends on believing that sex is irrelevant, and that people should be categorised according to gender stereotypes.

I think it's more accurate to say that teenagers haven't really thought this through, don't want to think about the impact of sex and vaguely hope that the rules won't apply for them.

It's boring to think about maternity pay and the impact of the menopause when you are 15, so why acknowledge these things at all? Who wants to think about the dangers of changing rooms, when you fervently need to believe that you can travel the world in safety?

I've never met a teenager who believes sex isn't real, I don't really know how many there are, if any.

Have you ever met a teenager who can explain TWAW without resorting to stereotypes and/or denying the existence of sex?

And that isn't meant to be patronising - If 1980s and 1990s me had the same attitude to risk as 2020s me, my life would have been very boring. However, that doesn't mean that the dangers didn't exist, or that everyone else should be forced to take the risks I took.

I don't agree. The logic of 'TWAW' depends on believing that sex is irrelevant, and that people should be categorised according to gender stereotypes.

Trans people and activists tend to believe that people should be categorised according to gender identity, not stereotypes. You can argue that their concept of identity is largely influenced by stereotypes, but there's still a crucial difference. Stereotypes are recognised by external observation, whereas identity is determined by subjective experience and declaration.

We can take the piss out of men/boys calling themselves trans women because they like to dress in high heels, and that may be part of the story. But a biological male can still maintain outward characteristics that society would call "masculine" and call themselves a transwoman. Medical and psychiatric professionals and TWAW activists recognise that it's the subject's own declaration that is key, not the appearance of stereotype.

And there's a difference between believing that sex is irrelevant and believing that it doesn't exist. You can believe it's irrelevant to how we should categorise people in the same way as you can believe race is irrelevant. That doesn't mean you don't "accept the reality of your biology" (which was the point that started this). If you went to the doctor for example and they wanted to know your biological sex in order to determine whether you might be pregnant or have ovarian cancer, you'd probably tell them, you wouldn't pretend that you don't have a biological sex. You just think that there's this other thing - gender identity - that is what we should actually categorise people by.

Disclaimer: I want to make clear that I don't believe in that (categorisation by gender identity). In fact I think it's batshit crazy. But I don't think we help this issue by assuming everyone involved in it holds to an extremism that many really don't.