Tragic suicide

[Ramblingnamechanger]

Channel four news spent long time talking about the suicide of a young person ( male ) who killed themself because of not receiving gender affirming surgery when they wanted it. Obviously distraught parents seemed to think that that should have had whatever it was, affirming their son was their daughter and interviewer calling them she throughout.nothing about treating the depression which was underlying. Did not touch the area of what exactly GAS is. I have no idea what they meant…the only thing that was interesting was that they were discharged at 18 from the gender identity clinic, because of depression ( I think that was stated), Would this now be a counter indication for surgeries I wonder?

LGBT LIVES MATTER

Well of course they do. And if there is a possibility that medical transition is increasing the risk to those lives, it's important to know that. It certainly has some heavy side effects that shouldn't be taken lightly.

Do you actually have it in for transgender people, Stephannee? You are very cavalier about their long-term health.

Of course Arabella. We should tighten it up and post it in break it down so anyone can C&P it with their own modifications because someone posts the explanation painstakingly at least once a week.

Is anyone else getting vibes of a known poster who thrives on humiliation from some of these posts yet?

Yes.

I think it means, "they were always going to be".

With the "gender critical" term...

I think feminist criticism of transgenderism goes back to the 70s.

Anyone know when "gender critical" was first used? Were the first users of the term much interested in transgenderism?

Did the position originally involve skepticism of a biological difference in gender traits?

As in, as the term was originally used, does "gender critical" involve:

(1) Of course men and women are naturally different at the psychological level, (at least typically), but there is no need for the rigid gender roles that exist in society today.

Or:

(2) Men and women aren't psychologically different by nature. They have just been socialised that way, and "gender" is an unhealthy myth that we have created.

Of course it's possible that different users of the term had different perspectives on this, I'm just wondering if the term originally had a particular meaning.

If original users of the term were critical of transgenderism, are any particular books essential on this?

I don't know Porcelina and I hope that someone will come through with an answer.

What I cannot quite work out though is why feminists became supporting of gender stereotypes and gendered role or why anyone thought this would be a mainstream feminist belief. It really seems like the antithesis of feminist principles. A tautology.

I think it may be useful to have a separate thread on that. Although I'm sure it's been discussed before. Its useful that we have an example here of someone trying to use the term 'gc' to apply to someone who is attacking or smearing people, in a clear attempt to malign anyone who may have gc beliefs.

Yes, it's clearly a fair point to discuss when a coroner is making recommendations, or activists may be using the situation to push a particular narrative.

Of course we need better mental health services for everyone, and long waiting lists can cause distress no doubt.

But this issue has become politicised to the point that people want a ban on trying to cure children of a condition.

Or a ban on even exploring other less invasive, permanent and potentially later irreversible approach to support a child. With a view that a few sterilised, medically very vulnerable or unwell and distraught children regretting it down the road is worthwhile collateral damage.

This begins to look like blinkered support for a political agenda over and above support or care, or even basic ethical responsibility, for an individual child.

The attitude to Keira Bell certainly seemed to be 'Well, you should have known better', even though anyone telling her that at the time would have been called transphobic.

Stephannee: what would you see as the way to help distinguish the Keiras, who need more time to understand themselves, from the young people who must be accelerated through the process? Seriously. How are they to make the right choice?

Always going to be what? Transgender? But what does that mean? I've read that blog post and they say:

Those who argue that being transgender is a “phase” often rely on deeply flawed studies that conflate gender dysphoria with gender non-conforming behavior. That means that these flawed studies lumped children who don't conform to gendered expectations in with transgender children, regardless of how they describe themselves or whether they experience gender dysphoria at all.

But they don't explain what the difference is between gender non-conforming children and 'transgender children'.

It's just "some people are transgender, but we have no definition of what transgender actually is".

Oh dear another thread allowing itself to be at the beck and call of one poster. Sigh.

re "gender critical"

The original use (in terms of more recent feminism ie 50+ years) was about rejecting gender stereotypes.

ie gender is a social construct that limits both men and women to behave in certain ways and that for women to be free from social constraints gender should be rejected. eg led to the setting up of the Letterbox Library to try and provide books for children that were gender free.

But that was at a time that no one, except maybe a few queer theorists in universities, ever thought anyone would combine the word gender with identity. Why would anyone identify with a concept of people primarilly spread by commercial advertising and reactionary Hollywood films.

So there may still be some who talk about being gender critical in those terms, but also those newer to feminism who see it as rejecting the idea that you can change sex (identify as a "gender"). Presumably the phrase gender identity was coined because originally nobody would have accepted the phrase "identify as a sex".

Cue someone better educated to post about how language can be weaponised.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/vile-account-mocked-a-trans-boy-s-suicide-doxed-his-mother-they-re-making-money-on-x/ar-AA1inBpW

What’s a shitposter on X got to do with Feminists on Mumsnet?

Losing a child to suicide is a parent’s nightmare.
You won’t find anyone mocking a recently bereaved mother on Mumsnet.

You seem to be exploiting a family’s distress for your own political aims - I would ask you if you are Susie Green but you really remind me of MargaritaPIE (who has been strangely absent from MN since that time when we caught Marge saying transphobic things about a transgender actor) 🤔

What’s a shitposter on X got to do with Feminists on Mumsnet?

It's the first rule of misogyny: "Women are responsible for what men do."

Maybe Steph is just trying to warn us where our gender criticalness might lead us. One minute we’re simply concerned about medicating children with experimental treatments/admitting men into our single-sex spaces and sports, then BAM! Suddenly we’re trolling bereaved parents.

It’s a slippery slope.

As we pointed out, in the past we on MN FWR have been accused of an overwhelming number of incidents. One from another poster with 'Steph' in the name who declared women posting opinions on MN resulted in men assaulting each other at a protest in the USA.

It is remarkable. That Steph making that accusation was a male poster. As OldCrone says, it is an act of misogyny making women responsible in this way. But I doubt we can expect anything different from this poster?

That this poster seems to never quite understand misogyny or their own vile act of politicising a family's grief is all any reader needs to see to understand their motivation here.

Ugh! Is that ghoul still trying to exploit that poor woman?

yes Cake.

Meanwhile this edit button works a treat!