Is This Just Me?

[Catiette]

So, for context, I've a range of concerns about mandated pronoun use (eg. children's health & well-being in the light of the Cass Review's findings; the impact on individuals with learning difficulties or who are neuro-divergent; the ethics of compelled speech especially in eg. a courtroom or DV context; women's rights...)

However, I also recognise this is a complex issue & am sympathetic to aspects of it. For example, I support using opposite sex pronouns in a legitimately diagnosed case of gender dysphoria, & am beginning to think that, where a child perceives themselves as, let's say, "gender-confused" for whatever reason (& a key issue with pronouns is, of course, how many reasons there may be for this in the current climate), using "they/them" may be a way of alleviating their distress as they work it through while also mitigating the Cass-identified risks of using opposite sex pronouns in this context.

Anyway, in advance of the start of the new school year, a place near me has shared the leaflet linked below with its staff, and I've been asked my thoughts about it as someone who reads fairly widely on all this.

I found pages 1 through 5 pretty much as expected - some parts concerning, many frustrating in the simplistic & didactic treatment of a hugely complex issue, but overall, "so far, so familiar". Then I read the penultimate page: "10 Things You’re Actually Saying When You Deliberately Misgender or Ignore Someone’s Pronouns". Before sharing my own views on this in more detail, I wondered what others think. Link below, content of relevant page pasted below that.

https://www.kogarahcommunity.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/All-about-Pronouns.pdf

"10 Things You’re Actually Saying When You Deliberately Misgender or Ignore Someone’s Pronouns

1. I know you better than you know yourself
2. I would rather hurt you repeatedly than change the way I speak about you
3. Your sense of safety is not important to me
4. Your identity isn’t real and shouldn’t be acknowledged
5. I want to teach everyone around me to disrespect you
6. Offending you is fine if it makes me feel more comfortable
7. I can hear you talking, but I’m not really listening
8. Being who you truly are is an inconvenience to me
9. I would prefer it if you stopped being honest with me
10. I am not an ally, a friend, or someone you can trust"

This reminds me of the recent discussion on here about the use of the badge about being an ally. There is a huge concern about the messaging being given to children and adolescents at the moment.

It is all about effectively isolating them from any person who won’t affirm them, not harm them kind you, just treat them as normal humans who in a friendly neutral manner, while not ‘affirming them’. It is opening a generation up to only feeling safe with some one overtly and overly interested in them. Which is something I taught my child to be wary of if they are a stranger or not well known person.

This is so much about lowering boundaries to allow people that they SHOULD be wary of access and constructing boundaries to exclude the people who care or who probably have their best interests at heart but are treating them neutrally.

This list is something I have seen a few times now. It is not new. And I am sure that the children and adolescents who are interested will have seen it and taken it to heart. It is really dangerous.

This is absolutely spot on.
(Edited to day that I was trying to quote op's point by point critique of the list)

@Catiette If I remember correctly, Kogarah has a huge immigrant population with English not as a first language and maybe not spoken by a large %. I used to live not far from there and have watched it change over time.

This document is shocking to see. Particularly if it is being used to ‘educate’ school staff. This is likely to cause division in families due to language differences for a start. If children are taking any of this kind of message home or censuring families or friend’s families via their friends when they go to the friend’s houses etc, it will be harmful.

This document seems to be ill planned for the area.

This is a side point but I really dislike this modern usage of the word "ally".

The old meaning of the word ally, like military allies, meant a two-way partnership. An alliance. Mutually beneficial for both parties, and mutually agreed.

These days, it seems to mean a kind of subservience to a vulnerable group (or something like that).

No, in the vast majority of cases I'm not "your ally". I don't even know you. You don't know me. I'm not going to unquestioningly do things for you, when the only reason for doing it is that you're in a certain demographic group. Nor do I expect you to do things for me.

Tune in next week for: rant about the word "safe" (as in "feeling safe" and "safe space") having completely lost its original meaning

“Mummy08m”

It has been a constant theme, hasn’t it? The words that have been changed to mean what a group want but that when you look further mean something completely different and may mean the opposite.

And that is not including the words describing sex categories. I am thinking of words like : tolerant, kind, compassion, justice, life-saving, truth, science, free speech, and yes, ally and safe.

It seems to very much fit into queer theory and the destabilisation of society, its mores and established science.

@JellySaurus Fair points, in a sense, re. anorexia etc. It's difficult.

I know a lot of doctors - & sensible un-captured ones, at that. They're deeply concerned by the current trends, & make a careful distinction between the existence of patients genuinely suffering from diagnosable gender dysphoria, & those swept up in the movement for whatever reason. I'd say that your "confused" group is too large or reductive, as it includes both of these. And the important distinction to make is, I personally feel, between them.

The latter - the genuinely dysphoric - is, as I understand it, a tiny minority, & an aspect of approved treatment for them seems to be considered, partial affirmation. For example, there are cases in which surgery has been to the proven benefit of the individual, however difficult we may find this to understand. I honestly can't imagine a parallel scenario for an anorexic, in which starving themselves was to to their benefit. As such, there are similarities between these conditions, but that doesn't mean they're equivalent.

In fact, I think one of the most distressing aspects of the current ideology is the damage it has done the gender-dysphoric population themselves. By subsuming them into a larger group for whom affirmation is arguably inadvisable - if not actively damaging - it's muddied the waters.

I recognise there are other factors to consider, too. For example, transwomen who have undergone surgery may yet be content to call themselves male and this, to me, is indeed the ideal - I find the denial of biological reality on any level, for any reason is deeply troubling, & the thin end of a dangerous wedge! Then there's the fact, as pointed out by someone upthread, that the concept of a "legitimate diagnosis" is itself problematic, in a culture which is attempting to uncouple dysphoria from mental health conditions, & is influenced by capitalist - & even more cynical - forces (eg. ref. Gender GP). Even the word "genuine" is considered problematic now, & I can see why.

As such, my position isn't a definitive "That's it, I'm decided!" To the best of my knowledge, I've never met or interacted with someone who's undergone surgery, for example. Maybe doing so would shift my views - one way or the other.

But I do think it's essential to make a distinction between the kind of dysphoric "old-school transexuals" my relatives have treated, & the infinity of others swept up in (or surfing on) this movement (closet-ed lesbians, confused kids, victims of abuse, mature cross-dressers, bad actors etc. etc. etc.). This is what I want to keep trying to do.

I do recognise that affirmation in the case of the "genuine" comes with its own issues (how would I know, who am I to decide, the thin end of the dangerous wedge etc.)

These issues always existed, but, I suspect, have been massively, ironically & rather tragically, compounded by this movement.

@Helleofabore's comments re. message generally & immigrants specifically, really good points, making me think...

And @Mummy08m, I'd tune in for the "safe"-related rant. The "progressive" (both meanings, one ironically) loss of literally (in that old-fashioned, literal meaning of the word "literal"!) safe spaces for women, in the name of metaphorically "safe" spaces free from mere offence, without the slightest twinge of irony on the part of the many thinking & using words this way, is, just

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!

(Ahem).

"4 Things You’re Actually Saying When You Deliberately Misgender or Ignore Someone’s Pronouns*

1. I’m your parent and it’s my job to keep you safe
2. I don’t want to back you into any corners with a social transition
3. We both know humans can’t really change sex
4. This could open up a while can of worms for safeguarding you outside of home

do recognise that affirmation in the case of the "genuine" comes with its own issues (how would I know, who am I to decide, the thin end of the dangerous wedge etc.)

The thin end of the wedge, indeed. You're a kind and considerate person, so you agree to support a person's therapy by joining their pretence, even though you know you are lying about them. Just a little white lie. It makes them happier. What harm can it do?

How far does it go?

Does it even need to get to the thin end of the wedge?

language is as powerful as a drug in altering perception and response.

Have you read Pronouns are Rohypnol? https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

Woah - that list at the end is pure evil, and I don't use that word lightly. It's harmful to children. I'm fairly sure it breaches Keeping Children Safe in Education and is a huge safeguarding red flag. (I will try and look tomorrow at KCSIE).

It is encouraging children to think other people just going about their lives who use normal language in the way they have always done HATE them.

It's like the opposite of CBT - designed to encourage paranoia, anxiety and poor mental health, designed to encourage the most self-destructive spin on any situation. Designed to encourage children to base their self worth on the actions of others to a tiny degree - i.e. the absolute worst interpretation of a person's actions is always assumed. And yes, opens them up to adults who are overly invested and interested and those with ill intent as a PP has pointed out. It's boundary destroying. It's a GIFT to anyone trying to alienate children from their family and friends (perhaps that's the point?).

Misgendering is common, even among TRAs, because pronouns are parts of language we generally use unconsciously and we've been trained, usually from a very young age, to use them as sex-based and applying to broad categories of human not individuals (like names). It takes a lot of effort to switch to using gender based and individual and to use them consciously- TRAs often don't succeed in doing this.

In the Fahmy tribunal one of the witnesses rather piously pointed out that another employee of the Arts Council being discussed used they/their pronouns not he/his and then spectacularly and repeatedly (and hilariously) failed to do so in his ensuing testimony, continually saying 'he'. It's HARD, even for someone fully signed up to gender ideology and trying their best! Anyone with any other worries in their life, health issues, old age, other things to think about is likely to fail repeatedly. And that's before you even get to whether it's desirable for language to be changed in this way and to encourage children to deny reality or if it's reasonable to expect people to use language they don't believe in and are opposed to and which may actually cause them distress (i.e. putting someone else's needs above their own).

I had a friend with anxiety who had CBT - she discussed with me one of the exchanges with her therapist. She'd been out and a colleague had 'blanked' her (failed to say 'hi' or stop for a chat) and she was consumed with the idea this colleague (who was perfectly fine with her at work) disliked her. The therapist explored with her if that was really the most likely reason for not acknowledging her in a crowded shop or perhaps said coworker was thinking about something else and didn't see her - really there are a million other more likely scenarios than that this coworker chose this chance encounter in shop to deliberately hurt my friend, and friend eventually realised this and the CBT really helped with her confidence and anxiety problems. Really, this idea that if someone else going about their life / work does something you don't 100% approve of / like that they HATE you is really bizarre, it's like no-one else has an inner life and worries. It's really, really mentally unhealthy and destructive.

This list would be destructive for anyone's mental health, but it's particularly bad for children / teenagers.

Personally I think teaching children that it's other peoples responsibility to validate their choices/feelings is utterly irresponsible.

Children become adult by learning resilience and having faith in their own sense of self, choices and decisions.

When you tell children that they are dependent on other people (regardless of their relationship to that child) to shore up their identity you take away that child's self agency.

You take away their ability to live independently and make decisions on their terms because they have learned that the perceptions of others are more important than their own internal emotional, moral and rational compass.

Moreover you've also taught them that emotional blackmail is a legitimate means to get what you want. That is not something that will foster their ability to have positive relationships and develop lasting/meaningful connections with other people.

In short it's beyond inappropriate advice/guidance. It's damaging and harmful.

What I have noticed is that some of those who call themselves ‘transexuals’ and reject transgender have perhaps gradually adopted harder and harder stances now. They may have in the past used female pronouns or just left people to use whatever, but are now stating clearly they are male. They have not changed sex. And that they don’t use female single sex spaces and so on.

I have often wondered if this current movement has forced them to solidify their thoughts more and because they are older and have much more lived experience as male transitioners that they are so much more confident than those younger or newer. Maybe at the start they too thought they should be allowed into ‘womanhood’. Or maybe they had robust therapy and knew all along and were happy to have a body that worked for them, a change of name and lived in an ambiguous state and they never forced others acceptance. I would love to ask them.

Either way, the continued discussion around the pressure on others to validate does result in deepening understanding of the degree of narcissism (in general) this ultimately exposes. And it might be a perception of narcissism now too, or perhaps the ‘group level’ narcissism. I say this because the group has been conditioned to expect, need, these concessions from others. That these newer trans groups have been told this is needed or you will kill yourself.

That so many feel that they are fighting to stay alive clearly shows the cruelty of the group who started this direction lobbying. They built in an even deeper vulnerability than their was before.

As the parent of a child diagnosed with gender dysphoria (wrongly in my view, actually it’s social contagion and multiple other mental health problems). I don’t think this list is helpful in any way. It is actually harmful in reinforcing damage in the relationship between non-affirming parents and their children. This is the whole trans script that non-affirming parents are transphobic and hate their children. Other adults affirming the child then feed into the script.

Gender dysphoria in teenage girls is a complex mental health issue that the medical profession is putting zero effort into actually trying to understand, with the exception of a few psychotherapists such as Susan Evans.

The notion that affirmation is the only or best treatment for "genuine dysphoria" makes my teeth itch.

Some believe they are Jesus.
Some belive they are fatter than fatty mc fat and are physically in starvation mode.
Some can't remember their spouses are dead.

Affirmation only avoids immediate discomfort whilst the actual treatment to bring them back into reality or protect them from their delusion continues.

And from that falsehood that affirmation is the treatment rather than the treatment enabler, you get this barrage off blackmail. it is exhausting.

So many excellent insightful posts on this thread. Thank you all.
Parents aren’t failing their child whatsoever in the specific context their child is in, if the parents go ahead with using new pronouns in extremis, it could be a breakthrough that’s desperately needed in some situations. It’s one of those extremely difficult calls that a parent may have to make and I absolutely don’t envy anyone struggling with that decision at all.

But I heavily, heavily judge anyone (parent or not) who starts advocating for this generically as the first starting place to begin from, or as the very least that a non-‘hated’ child should expect, in a banal social media campaign. So dangerous, irresponsible and damaging.

I'm a teacher and there are a number of mtf trans kids at my school, so I've had to think about this issue in a practical sense.

That list is all about the impact on the trans kid themselves. In reality, you're using the pronoun in front of other kids, because it's a third person pronoun. What of the impact on them?

I have used correct-sex pronouns in front of my students about a trans student - it wasn't even deliberate at the time, and it was in a conversation initiated by them - and I could feel an actual lessening of tension in the room. There's genuine resentment among some of the students that they have to monitor their own speech. And a perception that the trans kids are more likely to be picked for assemblies, or are favourites, etc (among these specific kids I teach).

What does using the correct sex pronouns tell those other kids?

1. I'm confident using sex-based pronouns, you can be too.
2. I'll back you up if you're accused, officially or socially, of "transphobia" against a classmate (a real risk, a real fear among today's teens)
3. That kid isn't more important than all of you, you matter too.

This - all day and every day.

Thank you for expressing my thoughts better than me.

Yes excellent Catiette thank you

I think the list is nonsense. It would be improved by changing the introductory sentence to "10 made-up opinions we have decided you definitely have if you don't agree to be compelled to lie about reality by joining in with our fantasy that we can change sex".

Fascinating, thoughtful responses – I second the earlier thanks, all! Reassuring, too. I had such a strong reaction to that page, was really quite upset by it.

@jellysaurus, I have read the Rohypnol essay a few times. I found it difficult first time around – the emotive language, the implied link with abuse in the title. But over time, watching this all unfold (just a few examples of hundreds – Isla Bryson entering the female estate in the UK prison system, women driven out of previously single sex spaces, rape victims forced to use the wrong pronouns in court) my feelings have shifted - another example of the damage I feel this militant, authoritarian activism is doing to what should be a worthwhile cause, supporting the “genuinely dysphoric”. While I'm not comfortable with all of it, it makes more sense to me than ever before. Pronoun use is, quite clearly, contributing to degrading women's sex-based rights.

I suppose I just worry that the tiny, tiny number of (there's no suitable term, all are suffused with issues, but let's say) the "genuinely dysphoric, diagnosed across an extended period of time by a non-captured medial professional fully in support of partial transition" risk getting lost in, or subsumed by, the mess that’s evolved. As I understand it, there are so few of them for pronoun use for them alone (NB. emphatically NOT unquestioned entrance into previously single sex arenas – the impact a minority group can have on 51% of the population in THIS respect is far more significant) to have a negligible impact.

But this is no longer the case in the current context. And, as such, as Helle else points out, even among the few “transexuals” in the public sphere, there does seem to be a similar trend towards resisting enforced pronoun use.

So, given all the associated issues, I’m not entirely at ease with or even confident in my thinking.

@dimorphism, I found your comments about CBT very revealing, as I thought exactly the same thing! You & others explain so well, why, in the context of the CBT model, this list seems actively harmful. In this context, I find it deeply disturbing that material like this top-ten is being shared by trained educational professionals etc.

With reference to all this, I find @Mummy08m’s observations about the impact on other students especially powerful. This is what I worry about above all else when pressured to use opposite-sex pronouns in public contexts – that, in my own small way, I’m contributing to the dissolution of boundaries and social contracts designed to keep women and children safe safe. Those appalling signs appearing in universities that tell female students using the Ladies to trust that any man in there knows what he’s about; the proven loss of single-sex spaces in schools! Every time I use the wrong pronoun, I worry that I'm contributing to upholding something I believe is actively damaging to half of society. And because of that – not really because of any strongly-held personal convictions about pronoun use in principle, although the attacks on freedom of speech that it increasingly represents do concern me – I actually find it actively upsetting to use them. Each syllable is filled with concern for the individual in question (“Maybe this is the right thing for you, maybe it isn’t; how do I know?; I can’t enquire... I just hope you’re OK…”) – and for the listeners (“I wish I could discuss with you the complexities of this!; instead, I know you’ve been taught to see my words as unquestioning acceptance of something I feel is potentially damaging to you… I'm so sorry; I just really, really hope that you recognise your own right to eg. correctly sex a male and act accordingly to safeguard yourself, despite my arguably modelling an opposite perspective...”)

It didn’t have to be like this. But now that it is, what to do? I don’t know…

Certainly not publish lists like this, anyway. If it's being disseminated to the kids in the school...! I mean, adults can form their own opinions (whether or not I agree with these), but, please, please don't give struggling, vulnerable, naive children such awful, misleading messages about the adults caring for them through a challenging time!. I do think, like others, that it's rather dangerous.

One of the differences I noticed when I started reading about toilet use was that I was very used to calling toilets ‘female’ and ‘male’ toilets. When I was back in Australia last year, I noticed that Australia does seem to use that language more. I noted that in one department store (not gonna say which) in Queensland, there was even a printed a4 sign stating the female fitting rooms were for female people only.

I wondered if that usage of sex based descriptions rather than ‘women’s’ toilets in spoken language has also meant less males are accepted in these spaces? Or whether there just is so few that women are not noticing unless they are in the cities or they notice at school level? Has anyone got any thoughts? My trip back was spliced in half with covid so I didn’t get to see what was happening in Sydney or Melbourne.

I've noticed increased use of "female" as a noun more generally, certainly. And am sure it's due to the loss of "woman" as the descriptor for "adult human female". I find myself, simultaneously, pathetically grateful to those troubling to make the distinction, and really, really resentful of it, to be honest. Female's a biological term, an adjectival descriptor applicable to animals and plants, and as such has connotations more of reproductive capacity than of the human agency that "woman" encompasses. And as an adjective used as a noun, "female" can feel degrading - like "Black" as opposed to "Black American" or "Person of Colour", "gay" as opposed to "gay man", and "trans" as opposed to "transpeople".

(NB. Interestingly, in typing that, I suddenly realised "transexual" IS, in contrast, conventionally used as a noun - "transexual man/woman" feels tautologous, somehow... Interesting!)

Okay, lets see how it plays out if the young person's mental health problem is around weight rather than gender:

I know you better than you know yourself Yes, I can see that you are underweight and lying about your food intake and exercise regime

I would rather hurt you repeatedly than change the way I speak about you I'm not going to lie you and reinforce your dangerous delusion (because I love you for some reason) - if that hurts, so be it

Your sense of safety is not important to me Your wish to be permitted to keep starving yourself is not important to me

Your identity isn’t real and shouldn’t be acknowledged Your misperception of your body size is not real and should not be acknowledged as factual

I want to teach everyone around me to disrespect you I want to alert other people with your best interests at heart to the dangerous place your mental health crisis has taken you

Offending you is fine if it makes me feel more comfortable Telling you the truth is fine if there is a chance it will save your life

I can hear you talking, but I’m not really listening I can hear you talking and I'm old enough, sane enough, and informed enough, to realise that what you are saying comes both from your own mental illness and from those facilitating you

Being who you truly are is an inconvenience to me Being a person who I quite inexplicably care about and watching you trying to starve yourself to death is way beyond inconvenience (though it's that too) it is a waking walking nightmare

I would prefer it if you stopped being honest with me I would prefer it if you stopped lying to yourself

I am not an ally, a friend, or someone you can trust I am an ally and a friend and someone you can trust, that is why I will do anything I can to stop you destroying your future choices and chances and health

Many of us have been round the block with adolescent mental health crises before - the difference with this one is the terrifying influence of pharma and the industries who scent money, and the reinforcement provided by the internet - puts the pro ana sites in the shade.

Unconditional acceptance is not always a good thing.

I don’t agree that there is a valid distinction to be made medically between ‘old fashioned transsexuals’ and today’s dysphoric children and young people.

If you reject the idea that that people have ‘gendered souls’ that can be ‘born in the wrong body’ (which I do), then gender dysphoria can only be understood as an expression of psychological distress.

Gender dysphoria is real and distressing to the patient, whether they were a male ‘transsexual’ brought up with suffocatingly sexist ideas about how a ‘real man’ should feel and behave, or an abused lesbian teenage girl today.

The medical question is how to help relive their psychological distress. There is NO evidence that medical/surgical transition improves the mental health of ANY patients with gender dysphoria in the long term.
This paper reviews the evidence:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11930-023-00358-x
One of the few long term studies on transition found that post surgical transsexuals had twice the suicide rate of transsexuals who did not have surgery.

We are witnessing the biggest medical scandal in history, as thousands of patients suffer the harms of hormonal and surgical treatment for which there is no evidence of benefit.