'Denying my Existence' - a piece by Mary Harrington

[NotHavingIt]

Mary Harrington's world view has very clearly been revolutionised by her having become a mother, hence her interest in, and focus on, the effects of socialised childcare in 'Feminism Against Progress' and here, in this piece, on the postulated effects of maternal deprivation on developing identity.

As ever, speculative and exploratory - but certainly interesting.

https://open.substack.com/pub/reactionaryfeminist/p/denying-my-existence?r=clsg2&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

It’s generally accepted in the scientific community that sexual minority children (LGBT) are more likely to be abused and or made homeless (kicked out to the streets as a young teen) because they are sexual minorities.

Theres not really any evidence that child abuse/neglect causes a child to become a sexual minority (LGBT).

The examples of posters on the real correlation of abusive homes and transgender children are speculating on causation running opposite to what the actual evidence shows as is Mary Harrington.

Parental neglect/abuse does cause trauma and mental illness in teens and adults, but being LGB or T isn’t a mental disorder.

There's absolutely no evidence that childhood neglect or abuse causes a child to be LGB that's true. And many teenagers/young adults can suffer abuse, alienation from family or homelessness as a result of coming out.
I wasn't referencing that. I was talking about early years loss of a parent (through death) or other forms of severe childhood trauma. And the fact that attendants at gender clinics are apparently more likely to have suffered this than those in the general population. Which can't be explained by parents rejecting their children (death isn't rejection)

Ah, thanks for clarifying I did think more of parent in prison or divorce by “loss of parent” than death as that is really quite rare.

The data from earlier in the tavistock groups both together (42% had experienced the loss of one or both parents through separation or death. Much higher than the average). I agree that they are two very different things but I really don't think you can argue that the difference is down only to parental rejection. It would be super useful if the tavistock had collected more information to make it possible to separate out different causes (death,divorce,separation) and even to see where that separation or abuse was related to them coming out as trans but suprise suprise the tavistock didn't do that
There is also a lot of partial/anecdotal data from different sources.
If you don't want to call "being trans' a mental condition I think you do have to face the possibility that many children with mental health conditions are being misdiagnosed as trans

I do agree the diagnostic process is imperfect. It is not 100% accurate for all health conditions, physical and mental. It’s possible that the divorce/separation could have been due to domestic abuse.

I was thinking a bit on death and the thought struck me that parental suicide can be seen as a kind of abandonment by a dependent child. So cause of death would need to be considered too.

It is frustrating when we have incomplete data.

I don't think it helps to conflate the LGB with the T. Two very different kettle of fish.

Many trans identified kids or young people are actual fleeing from homophobia. There is much eveidence to support this. I don't get why so many gay people profess to be blind to this?

And the "T' is not a sexual minority; unless you accept that most trans identified people are gay/same sex attracted.

Although, of course, this has now morphed into many AGP older, heterosexual men being trans identified, having been cross dressing for a life-time.

Sorry, that is incorrect.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/sexual-minority
a member or members of the LGBTQ+ community, used especially in the context of discrimination against or advocacy for a minoritized sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-are-sexual-minorities-21876
Sexual minorities are groups of people whose sexual orientation, gender identity, or sexual characteristics are different from the presumed majority of the population, which are heterosexual, cisgender, and non-intersex individuals.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/sexual%20minority
noun idiomatic LGBT people; those outside of the mainstream of accepted sexualexpression or orientation in a given culture

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_minority
A sexual minority is a group whose sexual identity, orientation or practices differ from the majority of the surrounding society. Primarily used to refer to lesbian, gay, bisexual, or non-heterosexual individuals,[1][2] it can also refer to transgender,[3] non-binary (including third gender[4]) or intersex individuals.

I’m not conflating them. Everything I have written are commonalities shared by LGBT children.

Why don't you use your own words? It would be more simple.

The 'T' has got nothing to so with sexual orientation which is what i understand by sexual minority.

Unless, as I suggested, that you are accepting of the fact that many Trans identified people are lesbian or gay, as in same sex attracted.

Many trans identified people are actually hereosexual - and so - not a sexual minority.

Heterosexual

I did use my own words and you objected to them. So now I’m showing you that your understanding of my words are based on some definition you have made up and not the actual definition of “sexual minority”.

You are wrong. That’s why I included the links to show you that I am correct in saying that sexual minority children are LGBT children. And no, they don’t have to be T+ L, G or B to be sexual minorities FFS.

You are WRONG. Read the bloody definition.

And why intersex people keep being used to prop up this ideology I've no idea.

I think you need another term than 'sexual minority' if you want to include people for whom sexual orientation is not the defining issue.

You are not making logical or consistent sense, but then I suppose you've got by so far without having to.

Swearing may distract some people from your lack of logical argument, but not many here.

What do you mean by 'sexual', for a start? That might help in understanding your position.

If the loss of a parent could make someone get caught up in trans stuff, it should be rare now than in the past. In Shakespeare’s time, around half of children had lost at least one parent by adolescence (which included a huge numbers of children who lost a parent as a very young child). Don’t even get me started on the fact that the middle and upper classes used to send children out to non-resident wet nurses, from whom they were then removed from to be brought home at the age of 2 (without the slightest attempt to make either transition non-traumatic for the child).

Parenting in the past is really, really, really not the way that the Why Love Matters crew seem to imagine.

No, because there was no cultural idea of "trans".

People who suffered from trauma in the past expressed it in other ways, like going to the Crusades, or becoming a nun and acquiring stigmata. Although I suspect many spent too much time working to look really think about their trauma all that much.

People got up to all sorts of crazy behaviour in the old days as well. Just different stuff. Dancing mania for example. Plus female "hysteria". Witchcraft trials. That business in Florence with Girolamo Savonarola. Religious wars. Castration cults in Russia. Human beings are weird and irrational sometimes and vey susceptible to group think. Especially people that think they are immune.

Sure. So can we have some actual evidence that “babies who were sent out to wet nurses were more likely to develop stigmata” rather than more Just-So stories?

For me the most interesting thing ( about the effects of institutionalised childacre from babyhood) is not so much the impact on the individual child, but the net effect on how generations of children may then look for safety or care-taking from the State.

Thinking of cultures such as Maoist China, or those in the former Eastern European Communist coutries when it was standard practice for state/collective provided childcare from a very early age.

Follow the links I posted as they are several sources which give the definition for the term “sexual minority”. It isn’t my position that sexual minority has the definition I am using, it is its recorded and accepted definition.

The way you are understanding the term sexual minority is not in accordance with its definition. Your understanding of the term sexual minority as only applying to anyone who is LGB is wrong, incorrect, and probably due to assuming what words mean without actually looking up what they mean.