Did Susie Green do conversion therapy to her son?

[howmanybicycles]

Inspired by a fairly poor interview with a de-transitioner and her mother which I heard on radio 4 today. The mother had been concerned that her entirely sensible approach, which included rejection of an apparently unreflective offer by GIDS 'professionals', could be seen as conversion therapy.

This made me wonder why what Susie Green did to her son, because of the homophobia her husband felt, is not conversion therapy?

She seemed to be clearly trying to covert him to something she found more palatable.

Telling a potentially gay child they are a transexual IS conversion therapy. Telling a potentially gay child they need cross sex hormones & surgery IS conversion therapy. Children must be allowed to go throw puberty & reach maturity (age 25 at least.)

This cannot be mentioned though...

@Alldrelaxzz that’s fantastic!

For me the interview was so direct, simplistic and factual. I can’t see how any sane person could come away thinking that young person and her families approach, was not to be very carefully considered.

Does anyone remember this clip? It went viral at the time and this CBS upload alone has 4.5m views.

when it did the rounds I was horrified by how many of my social circle thought the dad was some sort of hero, whereas I saw him as a true homophobe (scared of his male child’s possible adult homosexuality) motivated by his religion.

The bbc are starting to sprinkle it around here and there. This is good and good on prime time news.

Unfortunately "balanced" by articles such as the one today on the website / app about a double trans couple in India where the female is currently heavily pregnant.

Just heard it and thought it very good - mother repeatedly emphasised "how do we know?"

Yes there was an admission that there maybe "true trans" but this is when mother pointed out with children, we can't 100% predict who will remain and who will not. Very critical of GIDs, clearly knew about Cass.

Would be good to have the 80-90% desistance rates from GIDs mentioned.

I just listened to the PM interview, thx for highlighting it @DameMaud
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001hwzz
The interview starts at 45.11
Yes, there was SO much in it that made me wince. "There ARE trans people" (from the interviewer) and "it wasn't right for her" from the mum (implying that there are kids for whom it is right, which I think most of us here would disagree with).
The interviewer was starting from a really one sided place: "...the rights of, and respect for, trans people..." No mention of the rights of women. Or that there is just a possibility that the whole concept might be a quasi-religious, socially contagious nonsense?

TinaYouFatLard · Today 07:51
I think munchausens by proxy plays a massive role in this.

A former Tavistock doctor calls it Transhausens by proxy. (See below a newspaper clip from The Times last October.)

Kai. A very bright, sensitive little boy who was nothing like his macho older brothers.
When he was 2 & 3 he liked “girl’s” things.
His mother thought “ Oh my God is he going to be gay?” She beat him and prayed over him. Unsurprisingly by age 4 he was talking about “ Going to Jesus” ( dying) at which point the mother relented and thought God had given her a girl.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=cuIkLNsRtas

She is now 11 and has another name. She is well known and has been featured on the front cover of a famous magazine.

I should think there will be no going back for her now. The family has moved out of Texas where the state has banned so called gender affirmation health care/surgery. She will be getting money from all her publicity, and no doubt will need to keep promoting trans to this end, so she will be able to pay for it all.

The radio programme was an excellent step in the right direction but this was because of the mother and her daughter themselves. They were eloquent and highly intelligent,sensitive to those who do choose to be trans, but clear that affirming a child cannot be wise. The mother had turned down the Tavistock after speaking to them as she realised they had a likely single pathway affirmation agenda.

Evan was better than usual but still got in that there are people who are just trans.

He still got in the torture of “ Conversion Therapy”.

There was no mention of The Cass Report and her saying that affirmation of a child is not neutral;

no mention about all the other factors known to be possibly affecting children/young people who say they are trans including autism ( this girl is autistic) ;

no mention that some gender non conforming children might simply be gay when they grow up;

no mention of the recent 4000% or higher, surge in girls saying they are trans, and an increase in boys, suggesting this can be social contagion; no mention that 90% of children will feel differently by age 18 or 19 and desist if not affirmed.

Evan could have pointed out these facts relating to young people who say they are trans in one quick sentence with back up available on the BBC website.There is no bothsidesing necessary.

It's Evan though innit. It's not going to happen.

I wonder if with his non apology for the gaming piece on JKR last week, he was told to offer "balance."

We are no where near true balance though as things can be said about JKR without shame and yet interviewees and interviewers still have to tiptoe around on eggshells.

But it's a start. Chip, chip, chip.

WH have been annoyingly and notably silent recently. They are mostly doing decent pieces on women and women's issues, just haven't touched the trans prisoner issue with a barge pole.

Possibly waiting for Emma to be back.

Absolutely. The interviewer did not ask follow up questions i thought were important and seemed to suggest that the girls trams identity was not 'deep' though, which I think misses the point. The mum was amazing. Let's put her in charge of mermaids.

oldwomanwhoruns · Today 10:30
The interviewer was starting from a really one sided place: "...the rights of, and respect for, trans people..." No mention of the rights of women.

And the right of children to be protected by adults from possible physical and mental harm of gender therapies in the form of hormones and surgeries, instead of, on the contrary, being in danger from adults who rely on doing that for their livelihood and who push the ideology to promote it.

WarriorN · Today 10:02
The bbc are starting to sprinkle it around here and there. This is good and good on prime time news.

Unfortunately "balanced" by articles such as the one today on the website / app about a double trans couple in India where the female is currently heavily pregnant

The BBC should give factual information about the harm that can be caused to children who feel they are trans; all the known facts about what causes their feelings; their desistance rates by the end of puberty; that the suicide rate fear comes from false research ( look at Finnish study).

There is no need to give ‘the other side’ where children are concerned any more than there is the need to give the ‘other side’ for advice around anorexia, OCD, being depressed through past trauma etc.

There is a very interesting video of detransitioner Ritchie on another thread.
He is older but his story is salutary and he is exceptionally articulate in explaining the chain of events leading to his surgery.

I'm not opposed to a rag reporting on a double trans couple in India where the female is currently heavily pregnant if it's done in the "human outliers" type of reporting. It's really a sensationalist story. When the BBC reports on it, it does seem to lower their quality of news, iykwim.

I agree scrolling; the truth is they're barely touching the surface.

In depth expose reports are missing. And yet happen for other medical fuck ups.

I've said on the other thread; Ritchie has been asked to go on either pm or today a couple of times but they keep cancelling him.

'Heterosexual couple conceive a baby' - it's hardly sensational. What may be vaguely unusual, and therefore of interest, is their alternative lifestyle. Rather like if this couple were to conceive a child.

I agree and have always thought so. It is a very convenient narrative for her.

Did Susie Green really write this (see screen shot) or was it someone being sarcastic? I am sorry I am clueless about the details so am just not sure what this is.

That’s gotta be a parody!

ShireWifeofNigelFarage· Today 18:45
That’s gotta be a parody!
Thank you! Of course, how silly of me😩
Its just somehow nothing is ever altogether surprising with with tra ideology.

It’s because we’re in PoMo clown world - we’ve been told over and over that what we see in front of us isn’t real (‘that rapist is a lady!’) no wonder we sometimes forget if we are coming or going!

IIRC Susie Green and ex husband are slightly Catholic (as in schools attended and family culture rather than spiritual belief or regular church attendance)