Sheffield Party Of Women candidate threatened with arrest for leaflets

[ItsFunToBeAVampire]

Not much info about this yet, but just saw it on Twitter.

BREAKING. Party of Women
@SheffieldPOW
candidate in Leeds has been threatened with arrest for the leaflets she distributed on a charge of malicious communications.

com/terfasaurus/status/1806370775894491266

Fine to think I'm wrong for having a different opinion...not fine to say i have a "superficial perspective" or am "bad faith".
Neither of those are constructive approaches to a discussion.

A 16 year old can have sex and become a parent if they choose. That's more risky and damaging than a "social transition".

A 17 year old can learn to drive and be unsupervised in charge of a vehicle.

At some point with teenagers you have to let them make their own choices.

Do you know what, that's exactly how you come across to me when you turn up on threads I'm interested in and posting on, to say they've been "derailed by the usual suspects" because the conversation isn't what you think it should be.
Telling women what they should talk about can also be perceived as male behaviour.
Maybe you can just scroll past if you aren't interested and make the points you want to make.

If a 17 year old had a sincerely held belief that they were napoleon, no one would be going along with that. Any sensible adult involved with that young person would be accessing the best psychiatric care they could find.

Yes they would. But probably also trying their best to support said child and not telling parents they are committing "profound abuse" for following whatever medical advice they followed, e.g. sectioning.

Anyway it's kind of irrelevant to the topic. Let's wait and see what happens.

When I was 17 I believed all sorts of utter nonsense and am very glad this particular sort of nonsense wasn’t available, because I’d have jumped onto that bandwagon like a flash, as would many of my more confused/immature/rebellious/gullible contemporaries. Many 17 year olds are sensible and mature. Many are distinctly not so, and need to be prevented from harming themselves in various ways.

Yes I agree.
I just don't think calling their parents "abusers" is going to be a particularly effective tactic at getting 17 year olds not to transition. Or banning teaching about it at school. Or only allowing teaching that lectures them about why it's wrong.

I'd hope we would have learnt the best way to manage teenagers by now. But we seem to be going back to some authoritarian 1950s "shame them into submission" approach.

To summarise Cassie's position:

If POW or KJK did it then it is probably against the law. And if isn't against the law then it should be. Whatever it was that they did. I hate them and there should be laws to prevent them. So there.

And if that medical advice was, as was recommended by some doctors at one point, a lobotomy, would it be better to go along with that or point out exactly how destructive and abusive it was? Especially if the parents then went on to advocate lobotomies whilst ignoring the lack evidence?

I am sure a parent who had a lobotomy performed on their child would have been very distressed to be told they had allowed their child to be subject to a profoundly harmful procedure too. Maybe we should have allowed them to continue so that parent felt better?

You can search people's old usernames? How?

And to be honest, as another veteran of the Caroline Farrow threads, I was also struck by a similarity to Felix's catchphrases. Perhaps if you find the comparisons offensive, you could stop doing that.

Brevity is the soul of wit.

I was talking about social transition. Saying to your 17 year old son "it's up to you if you want to wear a dress and call yourself Skye" is nothing like giving him a lobotomy. And in my opinion it's also nothing like "profound abuse".

You know full well what social transition leads to.

Nicely summed up.

In over 80% of cases teenagers without medical intervention desist.

https://www.transgendertrend.com/children-change-minds/

What helps teenage mental health is to have parents they can talk to, that are proud of them and supportive, while setting good boundaries.

I think its ridiculously arrogant to label parents like David Tennant, Emma Bunton etc as "abusers" because you've decided you know best about their family circumstances.

This isn't about "womens sex based rights" at this point. This is about socially conservative, judgemental and authoritative approaches to parenting.

I'd say "nicely made up".

No one has ever, to my knowledge, sent a young person with anorexia to slimming world, or other fat club. To my mind the two things are very similar, anorexia is a body dysmorphic illness, I would suggest that to be trans is the same, to socially endorse either view is harmful.

JanesLittleGirl · Yesterday 23:06

To summarise Cassie's position:

If POW or KJK did it then it is probably against the law. And if isn't against the law then it should be. Whatever it was that they did. I hate them and there should be laws to prevent them. So there.

That made me laugh, but it's entirely accurate!

@CassieMaddox

This isn't about "womens sex based rights" at this point. This is about socially conservative, judgemental and authoritative approaches to parenting.

That is your opinion.

I agree it's not about "womens sex based rights". But that jump to " socially conservative, judgemental and authoritative approaches to parenting"? - that's a jump you made. Your head went there. No one else.

What it's really about is people who want children to believe that they are somehow broken because they don't fit into sexist ideas about what personality belongs in which body, to believe that everyone who doesn't agree they are broken and need to be fixed must hate them and wants them dead or "not to exist". Maybe you genuinely do think that's a great thing for children to be lead to believe, and that anyone who doesn't cheerlead it is "socially conservative, judgemental and authoritative", but honestly that's a pretty bad look.

And by the way, the person who made the jump from "abuse" to "accusing parents of abuse" is you. You've yet again set up a strawman to argue against because it's easier for you than what people are actually saying. Some parents of trans kids, the ones who cheerlead them, who tie their own identity up with being the parent of a trans child, are emotionally abusing their children because of their own beliefs and for their own needs. Many are desperately trying to tread the line between protecting their child from physical or mental harm, and driving them away into the arms of the people who are pushing these things.

Did you read that article?

Childhood social transitions (name changes and presenting as the opposite sex using hairstyles and dress) were also shown to be important predictors for persistence of gender dysphoria into adolescence, especially for boys (see Figure 2). The reasons for this are currently unknown. The independent role and impact that social transitions play on persistence has never been studied. It may be that social transitions make it easier to persist in their new gender identity or conversely it may make it more difficult psychologically for the gender dysphoria to resolve and for children to desist. Long term studies are urgently needed in this area.

If you read the whole thread you will see I asked about the ages of the "profound abuse" and PP confirmed they thought it applied to all people under 18 socially transitioning.

Another PP then said "social transition leads to medical transition" about my example of the 17 year oldboy socially transitioning.

The research talks about children who socially transition before adolescence. That is not applicable to the scenario I was describing.

It is quite a neat illustration of why i think "transitioning children is profound abuse" is a ridiculous statement though. It forces people to cling to an extreme black and white position

Socially transitioning children IS profound abuse. It is gaslighting other children; telling them something is not what they can see with their own eyes. It is demanding they lie; lie to other children, lie to teachers, lie to their parents, lie to their siblings. It is demanding they ignore their boundaries and their safeguarding. It is telling them they must believe something that is clearly untrue (that people can chose their sex). It is telling them that boys and girls are defined by regressive stereotypes.

Agree.

Fine if it’s break out of stereotypes and wear and do what you want

Not this Orwellian lie about what dc can see and know

A 17 year old is socially transitioning themselves.
I can't be arsed to argue about it but if you think a 17 year old popping on a dress and demanding to be called Skyw is "profound abuse" I suggest you read some other kinds of child abuse cases.

Maybe this one
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-68094466.amp

‘Popping on a dress’

Go for it. It doesn’t need to mean other children should have to go along with the false idea sex has changed

Leave out pronouns and access to female spaces and do as you wish with that skirt or dress.

Silly me - I thought this thread was at the top of the list because there might be some news about the POW candidate in Sheffield 🤦‍♀️