Children as young as 4 allowed to choose gender identity

[Plastic01]

Surprise surprise, Scotland again.

mol.im/a/9888899

So the Scotish Gov response to sexual abuse of girl children is...to make it easier.
Why does Scotland hate women so much? Genuine question.

Is uniform really the most important thing to be discussing just now?

The Scottish Government has just given advice to schools that go against all safeguarding principles from transing 4 year olds, not telling parents and allowing mixed sex showering, changing rooms and toilets.

This is where my focus is. I think that is more important than bloody uniform. I've written to my MSP. I'll be writing to the head teacher of my daughters school to ask how they will safeguard her. Anything else that can be done?

This is where my focus is. I think that is more important than bloody uniform. I've written to my MSP. I'll be writing to the head teacher of my daughters school to ask how they will safeguard her. Anything else that can be done?

Tbh it is actually all part of it.

The drip drip drip of erasure of girls as a sex class, the shaming of any girl who dares to wear anything remotely feminine. The victim blaming culture. Girls being a performance as opposed to an actual real life class of people. It may seek trivial but its a big indicator of how girls needs are never thought about. Another obstacle for girls to overcome with regards to accessing an education they should have an equal right too.

How can these guidelines be challenged?

And thinking something is trivial so we shouldnt worry about it because there's something bigger is exactly how we got here.

Truth us this small stuff is a red flag fir an attitude and ethos that leads to all these bigger things.

Remember it was just one tiny 6 letter word that started most of this. A word nonone gave any thought to. Thought was no big deal. But that substituting needed fir sex was the beginning of this whole catastrophe

Its never just small and insignificant.

@ludothedog

Is uniform really the most important thing to be discussing just now?

The Scottish Government has just given advice to schools that go against all safeguarding principles from transing 4 year olds, not telling parents and allowing mixed sex showering, changing rooms and toilets.

This is where my focus is. I think that is more important than bloody uniform. I've written to my MSP. I'll be writing to the head teacher of my daughters school to ask how they will safeguard her. Anything else that can be done?

I strongly want to do this as well.

But words are failing me right now and I don't know how to begin.

@lazylinguist

The whole 'gender neutral uniform' is disturbing as well and will result in girls losing even more of their female identity.

Skirts aren't what make you a girl. And I doubt many girls would like their identity to be represented by a boring school uniform skirt. Trousers are practical - that's partly why women spent so long wanting to be allowed to wear them. No, they're sometimes not particularly flattering on some people, but school uniform isn't flattering on many people, including some boys. Perhaps a wider variety of styles of trousers would be a better option.

Some girls find skirts to be a more practical garment when learning to deal with periods. Kids should be allowed free choice on the matter.

There's a thread in AIBU about this, which points out how thus guidance has been totally misrepresented by some quarters - including screen shot of the actual guidance which says that u16s require parental consent for any changes to how they appear on the school roll. Also that parents should be brought in to any discussions at the earliest point.

No, the screen shot says that it ‘would be helpful’ to communicate with parents.

That is not the same as immediately sharing relevant information with a child’s legal guardian as a matter of policy.

This is particularly concerning because the concept of gender identity is not clearly defined and the policy seems to be based on ideological beliefs rather than objectively evaluated research.

I'm so fucking angry about this tripe I can't formulate my words.

But you agree that the screen shot also says that there will be no change to school records of u16s without parental consent?

My apologies for the paraphrase on the other bit - it is however clear that parents should be involved and from as early as possible.

But you agree that the screen shot also says that there will be no change to school records of u16s without parental consent

That simply relates to the fact that a child under 16 cannot change their name without parental consent.

There is a big difference between ‘would be helpful’, ‘should’ and ‘must’.

Again, parents are legally responsible for children’s welfare and teachers have limited authority and only provide temporary care. If this related to other health and welfare concerns and not a policy based on an ideological view of gender, teachers would still not be in a position to help young children without parental involvement.

The SNP have heavy links with PIE. PIE never disbanded they just moved back to Scotland and hid under other organisations. But the trail is there to find.

The end game for pushing the gender change on to our small children is to lower the age of consent, I'd bet my house on it.

Exactly. If this stands, it may will be challenged in court. But in the meantime, its really scary - for parents, teachers and children - to suggest that they are legally obliged to keep secrets . It's also a safeguarding risk.

This is the biggest issue for me. Teachers are in a position of trust and authority, normalising keeping secrets makes children vulnerable to predatory adults.

How many survivors of CSA report that their abuser told them "this is our little secret".

This is safeguarding 101 and it should be considered a red flag when any adult promotes the idea of children keeping secrets.

Fuckery , the guidance says:

“ Recognising the rights of all parents and carers, it is recommended that consent is obtained from all of those with parental responsibilities for those young people under 16. Bringing parents into this discussion at as early a point as possible would be helpful.”

So, “recommended” and “helpful”. That’s not the same as saying you can’t change records without parental permision.

It also says:

“ A transgender young person may not have told their family about their gender identity. Inadvertent disclosure could cause needless stress for the young person or could put them at risk and breach legal requirements. Therefore, it is best to not share information with parents or carers without considering and respecting the young person's views and rights[66].”

Also:

“ If the young person has not told their family, school staff may want to discuss the most likely reaction with the young person. This will allow the teacher and the young person to discuss whether sharing information is in the young person's best interests, and if so, what information to share and with whom.”

The guidance is absolutely telling schools they can support a social transition at school without telling their parents. If a school has concerns about the safety of a child at home, they should escalate via their normal safeguarding routes and inform social services (who will keep parents in the loop), not affirm the child in school without their parents knowing.

The section on working with parents is all about trying to get parents inside to affirm. The guidance says:

“ Teachers should always provide impartial information and guidance which prioritises a young person's wellbeing.”

But they cannot provide impartial information on the back of this guidance which is completely unbalanced, comes from an ideological position , does not cover GD from a clinical point of view or mention watchful waiting as an acceptable alternative approach.

This is particularly concerning because the concept of gender identity is not clearly defined and the policy seems to be based on ideological beliefs rather than objectively evaluated research

Yes this is something that's been.lacking the whole time. A definition of terms.

How are they explaining gender identity without using stereotypes?

Honestly it's so simple . All.kids need to know is some kids have 2 mums some have 2 dads and boys and girls can play with amd do whatever they like. The rest should be covered by a half decent bullying policy.

The whole thing is dependent on making kids label themselves. We need to re normalise not knowing and not caring about identities and sexualities.

Its actually normal to have not given it a second thought and to just want to hang out with friends.

Stop making them feel there's something wrong with them because its not all.mapped out yet.

I had a girl in my class who, for various sport related reasons, said she wished she was a boy. She also wanted to change with the boys as she wasn’t close friends with the girls.
Obviously I did suggest that maybe she might be trans, since football is for boys… did I fuck. She left my class saying she wanted to be a woman who changed the world. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.

@Fatboyslimschin

The SNP have heavy links with PIE. PIE never disbanded they just moved back to Scotland and hid under other organisations. But the trail is there to find.

The end game for pushing the gender change on to our small children is to lower the age of consent, I'd bet my house on it.

Remember the National Library of Scotland?

A small display in a reading room at the academic centre in Edinburgh hailed Ian Dunn as a champion of LGBT rights - but failed to mention he was also involved in establishing the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE).
…
[Dunn's] links to PIE have been well-documented. Last year, the BBC faced criticism for uploading a 1976 documentary on gay rights in Scotland to its website as Dunn was listed as one of the programme’s presenters.

Newspapers were reporting Dunn’s links to paedophilia as far back as 1984. A Sunday Mail report from the time alleged he “allows his flat to be used as the main contact address for Britain and the whole of Europe for paedophiles”.

archive of Scotsman: archive.is/jBXkU

Scotsman: www.scotsman.com/arts-and-culture/national-library-scotland-criticised-over-tribute-paedophile-campaigner-1423640

@EmbarrassingAdmissions, yeah you couldn't make it up. You hide under the LGBT guise and you are untouchable. By the way that flat is also the flat that Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence register from. There is a great pic of Nicola Sturgeon with her arms around them at a festival. I watched a video of them the other night, dressed up in all their weird shit getting men to taste the flavour of condoms that were on sausages, bananas ect ... whilst children were walking past in the back ground (this was at a family festival)

This is Named Person 2.0. Time to make it go the way of the first version.

I agree

Named persons 2

And again where’s the guidance for schools about sexual assaults in schools

70 pages. They hardly mentioned the LGB children either

Totally biased

The whole thing is dependent on making kids label themselves. We need to re normalise not knowing and not caring about identities and sexualities.

This is a deeper societal issue that I think needs more attention. The labeling of people, yourself which also leads to society seeing people as ONLY their labels, which leads to individuals placing their entire worth and identity into these labels, which leads to division, hate, fear, etc.

This started before now. I believe it really took off with the mental "health" boom, rise of antidepressants etc. Labels really took off. Any deviation from "normal" was labelled as sick, ill, "you have a chemical imbalance so are broken for life." I know MANY people who list a bunch of diagnoses they've been given instead of hobbies, interests, etc. I know a girl who said, "I fit into a lot of categories..." (meaning she fit into a lot of mental health diagnoses).

Everything has been pathologized; everyone must have a label if not society's perfect clone of "normal."

And it starts from a young age. People are a bunch of illness and/or identity labels, nothing more. What are you? replaced, who are you? Well let's see I am these 10 disorders and these 3 identities.

So kids grow up being pathologized and cut down into labels, more and more as they get older. Depressed, feeling like they are born flawed. So the best thing is to identify with that label completely. And anyone against said label is always wrong cuz it is literally an attack on you. You are the label, nothing more. If it is a "bad" label, well too bad, you are a worthless human. Here take these 12 pills, remember you will be messed up for life but that's your problem, just stay out of normal society's way.

And since the 80s at least, more and more aspects of life, self are put into a pathologized label.

People are taught to be a label, that your label is the end all be all, that it is the word of God, and that it is You, for life.

I think people are trapped in their labels and the only way they know how to lash out is to even further cement themselves to their labels and become a walking label. Some may strike out cuz of it; some may retreat inward.

People are being dehumanized. And everyone wants to know all your labels cuz then they "know" you. Oh, so you have these 5 labels, ah hah, I know all about you now. Which isn't true. Maybe the labels give a false sense of security and protection from others and in categorizing others and stereotyping them...but in real life all this cutting people up and down to fit tons of "disorders" and arbitrary categories is only gonna drive up violence to others and intolerance, plus self-hate and denying the self. So what do we do? Attach more illness labels, make em think about the labels and how it is them, make em feel bad and lying if they don't adhere to every tenant of every label.

I literally think people are gonna start identifying out of human bodies all together. Think it's crazy? Not really. Bodies are causing too much problems, just be rid of em. Honestly though if everyone was in a robot body and they all looked literally the same, it would bring almost world peace. No sex, no gender, no food, no water, no physical illness, no physical procreation or birth (lab babies). Seems better than this hell-hole of current Earth reality.

But the smaller and smaller, and more numerous labelling and categories is a big issue, imo. Others only see you as your label, and oftentimes yourself. "there's that depressed gal", "there's that transgender guy" "there's that schizo" "there's that gay dude" "that gir's on psych meds" ad infinitum. And drs perpetuate this cycle to no end, too.

We have become labels and not people. Since women were always labels beforehand, it is even worse on some levels for them. And when someone is labelled, they are much more easily dismissed. We are all stripped of personal power, cuz even if you don't label yourself or ppl, or get caught up in it, don't worry, you will be labeled by others and not allowed to disagree.

Get in your label and shut up, and play the part of your label or be further patronized. Even if said label is wrong, or shouldn't be the focal point of your soul and life, too bad, society needs you in pathologized labels so you police yourself and others for us.

The mental "health" field is anything but for health, sorry. I do believe it either started this trend, or exacerbated it. Even before all this gender stuff, a lot of the youth (and adults) was obsessed with "omg, am I or they mentally ill." And then different groups sprouting up for every illness, which became identities, which became us vs them. And any government or person wishing to instill hate, fear, division amongst people or within individuals has perfect tool. Pathologize, label, encourage the complete usurping of the soul with said labels. "oh, people lie that with that label, I know all about em cuz of those articles about those people..."

We are the sum of our perceived labels, and I think people are making a mass exodus to try and identify out of humanity cuz it sucks. Or burrow so far into a label that you are blinded to everything else.

@rogdmum

Fuckery , the guidance says:

“ Recognising the rights of all parents and carers, it is recommended that consent is obtained from all of those with parental responsibilities for those young people under 16. Bringing parents into this discussion at as early a point as possible would be helpful.”

So, “recommended” and “helpful”. That’s not the same as saying you can’t change records without parental permision.

It also says:

“ A transgender young person may not have told their family about their gender identity. Inadvertent disclosure could cause needless stress for the young person or could put them at risk and breach legal requirements. Therefore, it is best to not share information with parents or carers without considering and respecting the young person's views and rights[66].”

Also:

“ If the young person has not told their family, school staff may want to discuss the most likely reaction with the young person. This will allow the teacher and the young person to discuss whether sharing information is in the young person's best interests, and if so, what information to share and with whom.”

The guidance is absolutely telling schools they can support a social transition at school without telling their parents. If a school has concerns about the safety of a child at home, they should escalate via their normal safeguarding routes and inform social services (who will keep parents in the loop), not affirm the child in school without their parents knowing.

The section on working with parents is all about trying to get parents inside to affirm. The guidance says:

“ Teachers should always provide impartial information and guidance which prioritises a young person's wellbeing.”

But they cannot provide impartial information on the back of this guidance which is completely unbalanced, comes from an ideological position , does not cover GD from a clinical point of view or mention watchful waiting as an acceptable alternative approach.

It's gobsmacking that somewhere along the line the idea that trans means a person with gender dysphoria, or a cross dresser, has disappeared, and is now an ideological stance that means if you don't adhere to rigid gender stereotypes, you are called transgender. But, 'only if you want to be.'.

It's a nonsensical and deeply damaging non-definition.

People are right when they say there is no actual description to any of this. Because as soon as you ask for one the whole thing falls over.

Iirc, the biggest and strongest statistical indication that a child will maintain they are trans and enter a medical pathway, is social transition.

Which, of course, stands to reason.

If you tell your four year old the obvious and damaging lie that they are the opposite sex because of their personality, and they continue to accept this for the next X number of years, how fucked up are they going to be at puberty?

The Prussian general Marshal Blucher had a phobia about falling off his horse because he believed he was made entirely out of glass. He also thought he had been made pregnant by an elephant. No doubt everyone 'affirmed ' him. But reluctantly back on topic - will there be a wave of applications to religious schools to escape this dangerous nonsense? I'm in favour of secular education but in this case ....lesser of two evils.

edit: should be "oh, people LIKE that..." not lie, at the end of previous post.