Police say binding = child abuse

[elferian]

www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/caa/child-abuse/breast-ironing-flattening/

Says it all really. Maybe just me, but this is the first time I have seen it called for what it is - and came across it on Sky News story re Mermaids. Does this signal endgame.

I've posted this on the other thread too. But I find it interesting that Maisie Williams talked to n anl recent interview about how being made to wear a binder in GoT made her feel as a developing teen:

"They'd also put this strap across my chest to flatten any growth that had started and that just felt horrible for six months of the year, and I felt kind of ashamed for a while."

I hope the adults involved have reflected on their part in her treatment.

I read this as an adult making a child do it though, not when it’s a child’s decision. I can see that that is something as it stands though, if you follow the logic though.

It is child abuse.

The police also needs to answer to its crimes as we have repeatedly warned them of the murky practices of such groups.

The police ave played a huge part in facilitating Mermaids and co. cheerleadering them on, and visiting anybody who Susie gets upset by. Especially West Yorkshire Police.

The NSPCC state re children's competence that "Remember that consent is not valid if a young person is being pressured or influenced by someone else." Given all the propaganda which mermaids and stonewall et al distribute, clearly when this occurs in the context of gender ideology, the child is being influenced by others. That would seem to suggest that a child cannot make an informed decision to bind their breasts.

You could argue that about loads though, couldn't you?

For example, children under 16 are not legally able to give consent to sexual activity. Lots of children under that age may say they are happy to participate in sexual activity, but the law does not seek them able to consent. Under 13, the law is very clear that regardless of the child's view, sexual activity is illegal. This is to protect children.

Children may say they're happy to work for money in shops, cafes and restaurants but the law says that they must not, except in v specific circumstances which are closely monitored.

Children may say they're happy not to go to school and to miss out on the opportunities that education provides. We still say there is a minimum standard of education all parents must provide.

Children are children, vulnerable because of their emotional, physical and cognitive immaturity. They do not have the ability of life experiences to enable them to make decisions that have long lasting consequences. We protect them for this reason.

A child with anorexia will share with you a deeply held inner belief and desire to starve themselves. A child who gets relief from self harming will explain to you their sincere desire to harm. A child may have a currently sincere inner belief that they are an enjoying and willing participant in abuse from an adult. Little girls in China would have told you it was right and good that their feet had been broken and bound.

In all these cases, something much more is going on under the child's surface awareness of what they think is the case. This is why children shouldn't be making those decisions and require protection.

Some of the people pushing this stuff are "simply" homophobic and sexist. But the two excellent posts above demonstrate so well how some of the support for trans ideology must be coming from people with an ulterior, paedophilic motive to remove age of consent and weaken parental influence over children.

It is scary that so many people still really don't understand consent and safeguarding.

I imagine the police would seek to draw a distinction between breast ironing (primitive, not western, bad and harmful!) and binders (rainbow joy, western, progressive!). There is no distinction of course apart from the participation of the minor which is not sufficient for the reasons given by PP.

We had info about breast ironing as new info in Safeguarding training at the start of term ( secondary) but I couldn’t bring myself to ask if this implied a safeguarding risk to girls engaged in breast binding as well.

Well exactly. But we know the police have institutional racism issues.

Also, I wouldn't be certain that children don't sometimes "willingly" participate in non western forms of abuse too.

maltravers · Today 16:06
I imagine the police would seek to draw a distinction between breast ironing (primitive, not western, bad and harmful!) and binders (rainbow joy, western, progressive!). There is no distinction of course apart from the participation of the minor which is not sufficient for the reasons given by PP.

I agree. I wondered if the police would have written this way about Mermaids sending out binders, or pro-trans websites suggesting them?

I've seen a lot on Twitter with people saying breast ironing is different but their justification for that seems to be that it is done in Cameroon. It really sounded as though they were saying if black people do it it's bad but if white people so it it's OK.

The CPS and National FGM Centre both say the same as the Met police and specifically include flattening, not just ironing in this. They also say that children cannot consent to abuse.

Very much this point.

The unconscious prejudice at work here is quite marked. And again demonstrates that no one involved in saying such things has had any significant safeguarding training or experience.

Of course wearing or supplying a binder is not an offence, Jesus, it's an undergarment that is freely available to sell. The people comparing it to breast ironing should be absolutely ashamed. You're comparing trans mascs who feel uncomfortable with their breasts and try to minimise them to actual violence meted out to girls and women.

Honestly, after this, the cartoon alien nonsense, the KF stupidity and seeing Glinner go full on crazy saying trans people would be murdering people if it wasn't for CCTV, I think 'gender critical' activists have no bottom to which they will sink..

I guess YMMV. I can most certainly see a whole lot of parallels.

I'm deeply uncomfortable with something which causes actual physical harm being mailed out to female children behind their parents' backs, by the same group who deny having any medical expertise or qualifications to advise on health. I'm even more uncomfortable that an adult would attempt to justify and minimise this.

"Jesus, it's an undergarment that is freely available to sell."

In that case, why aren't TRAs just recommending good sports bras? Hmmm?

Rather than a restrictive piece of equipment that deprives normal breathing and movement. Restricts spine, shoulder, neck and arms posture. Tight skin irritation and consequent risk of infection.

Inability to take part in sport because of lung and chest compression - so not like a sports bra, at all, then.

Oh has Colin infiltrated Mumsnet. Sounds very much like him a couple of posts up. 😴

Why are you so incensed by people who are worried about safeguarding?

Do you think that young girls should be trying to flatten their breasts?

Is it easier for you in your head to call young girls "trans mascs" than to think about them as young girls flattening their breast tissue and damaging themselves? Is that how you use slippery language to obscure abuse?

Because safeguarding is what wise societies do to ensure dangerous people don't harm vulnerable people. If you have an agenda which depends on recruiting vulnerable people and encouraging them to subscribe to a self-harming ideology to be part of your lobbying group - you're not going to like society preventing that, are you?

Yes what stood out about that is there is clear reference to cultural issues ‘early forced marriage’ and FGM however no reference at all to trans ideology. It doesn’t seem right, if it’s bad for one reason it should be bad for all reasons?

A child may say that she wants an early marriage, or that she wants to be trans - isn’t the commonality that she is a young, highly influential child and there has to be some question mark over her ability to fully agree to something which leads to medical harm?

if you're into harming young girls by encouraging them to compress their breasts and chests, and restrict their breathing an movement, as is your current fashion - then yes, you're an abuser.

The obviously twitter fervent person on here is strangely and openly able to say ‘Binder’ in the same sentence as ‘just an undergarment’

Binder - is not and never will be an undergarment! The clue is in the name…

How is it different?

It is the exact same thing.

In one, they have grown up in a culture who encourage the practice.

In the other, a dangerous ideology supported by a community who believe in it tells them that they must adopt this practice in order to belong.

In both cases, there is a massive pressure from the community in which they are engaged to conform.

If a child was self harming by cutting wouldn't you be complicit if you handed them blades?

@SecretTransTwitterEngineer

You can freely buy all sorts of undergarments, many are not suitable for children. I'm thinking of the things you buy from Anne Summers and online.

"some surgeons will refuse top surgery if your ribs and chest are extensively damaged"

@SecretTransTwitterEngineer