Where were all the 'transchildren'?

[Mmmnotsure]

For those not on Twitter/X - a brilliant summary by
Read some Piaget please!
@ prof_curiosity1:

A question transactivism cannot answer.

Where were all the 'transchildren' from 1920-2000 when Piaget, Kohlberg, Bandura, Vygotsky, Erikson, Bowlby, Steiner etc along with their students (and their vociferous critics) were spending tens of thousands of hours doing empirical research on children?

Research that involved studying children at home, in nursery and at school. Studies that involved writing down every action, statement, or question that the child asked. And then analysing these recordings for patterns and insights.

Not one of them observed a 'transchild' in all this time.

So where were all the 'transchildren'?

The logical answer is, of course, nowhere, as they were not yet required. They were not invented as a typology until the 2000s when the trans movement needed children to validate the sexual fetishes of autogynephiles and make transgenderism palatable for the public.

The other answer is a conspiracy theory. That research showing transchildren existed was suppressed; rather like alien conspiracy theorists talk about Area 51 in Nevada USA.

If we ignore the conspiracy theory, we are left with the answer that no child was trans until the 'transchild' was needed, in the 2000s, to demonstrate the universality of 'gender identity'.

Children, sadly, were the logical choice due to their undeveloped brains/thinking and their vulnerability. It is not hard to persuade children that Santa exists or even that sexual abuse is a normal part of family life. 'Gender identity' can easily be packaged to appeal to the magical thinking of children.

'Transchildren' have thus become the main focus of transgenderism. For the activists know that without the winsome, photogenic 'transchild', groomed to repeat adult phrases about 'gender identity' the movement consists in the main of adult males with a fetish for dressing up as women.

Transgender ideology needs 'transchildren' to survive. It needs them to harm themselves and kill themselves to demonstrate that the ideology is real.

We need to protect our children. And we can start by debunking the idea and existence of the 'transchild'.

And yes transsexualism and transvestitism did exist through history. What is extraordinary is how these historic identities have been erased by the modern blokes who wear dresses and call themselves transwomen. Where are the transvestites and transsexuals now?

And yes again...
Children experimenting with sex roles and pretending to be the opposite sex is well documented.

This was always historically regarded as a playful phase of experimentation and growing up. It was ignored just as children pretending to be dinosaurs, horses, airplanes etc

What is new is adults stepping into the playful pretences and pathologising them for their own gratification. And insisting that one particular iteration of pretend play is an adult 'gender identity'.

This is child abuse.

And another question that cannot be answered by transactivism.

Where are all the children pre 2000 who killed themselves because their 'gender identity' was not affirmed?

(As we are frequently told "better a live son than a dead daughter" in order to bully parents into allowing their children to be prescribed puberty blockers. Parents are terrified into allowing transition.)

So what happened before the advent of 'gender affirmative care'? According to the current transgender narrative, there would be thousands of children from 1920-2000s who had killed themselves because they were misgendered - and btw what a historic scandal that would have been. But there are no records of these deaths. Mass suicide by misgendered children is yet another transactivists fabrication unless, of course, you believe conspiracy theories and believe all these deaths of 'transchildren' were hidden.

There is no part of scaffolding that supports the 'transchild' fabrication that can stand up to the remotest scrutiny.

And if you are thinking what additional force apart from transgenderism is driving the transing of children, look at this link. Transing children and young people is a highly profitable business with revenue forecast to double by 2030. https://grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/us-sex-reassignment-surgery-market…

"The logical answer is, of course, nowhere, as they were not yet required. They were not invented as a typology until the 2000s when the trans movement needed children to validate the sexual fetishes of autogynephiles and make transgenderism palatable for the public."

This I agree with. 👍🤬

I worked with trans people in the 1990s.

So they were a thing before 2000s.

Also most of the researchers you mention did not write down everything children did and said.

They (mostly) did specific experiments on specific aspects of child development. Piaget in particular believed in stages of development that are not considered accurate any more (there were various things he thought children under 7 or 12 couldn't do which has now been disproved)

I worked with trans people in the 1990s.

So they were a thing before 2000s.

Did you work with transsexual children before the 2000s @Octavia64?

There is an interesting paradox here, because if we believe that there are some trans adults, and those trans adults were once children, then it is true that there are 'children who will grow up to be trans adults'.

At the same time, it may not ever be possible to reliably identify these 'children who will grow up to be trans adults'. And so it probably doesn't make sense to label them as 'trans children' because there are lots of other children who play be being different characters, animals etc but don't stick with it.

As an analogy, there are some children who grow up to become a pilot - but that does not mean that there are 'child pilots'. Nor does it mean that every kid who ever plays at being an airplane should be given a pilot hat and sent to pilot training and not allow to consider a different career. And they certainly shouldn't be flying a real airplane.

That’s brilliant OP. Gutting but brilliant.

I was a Steiner kid, I wonder what their take is on the whole thing these days.

I sort of see what you’re saying, but there clearly were gender non-conforming children in that window, and I think that’s where trans allies would see trans children. I’m not saying GNC is the same as trans, but if I wanted to counter your argument then I could probably make a case that what used to be pejoratively called “tomboys” and “sissies” were the equivalent. I think broadly speaking very few people tried to change sex before 2000 as it wasn’t really thought possible.

I think broadly speaking very few people tried to change sex before 2000 as it wasn’t really thought possible.

It's still not possible.

I sort of see what you’re saying, but there clearly were gender non-conforming children in that window, and I think that’s where trans allies would see trans children. I’m not saying GNC is the same as trans, but if I wanted to counter your argument then I could probably make a case that what used to be pejoratively called “tomboys” and “sissies” were the equivalent.

No. They're not the equivalent.

The idea of medicating children to become sterile facsimiles of people of the opposite sex, children who will never reach sexual maturity because their puberty has been halted, is not the same as 'tomboys' and 'sissies' in the past. The nearest equivalent would be the castrati who were similarly prevented from going through puberty to satisfy the wishes of adults who didn't care about the wellbeing of those children.

'Tomboys' and 'sissies' grew up to be normal, sexually mature adults. Some gay, some not.

Look, I'm gender critical.

But I have personal experience that what you are saying just isn't true.

There were trans children in the 1990s.

Not as many as today, and yes I agree that there has been a massive explosion in the numbers but they did exist.

And saying that Piaget etc would have found them if they existed is just weird. These researchers were working (mostly) on child development - although bandura if I remember correctly was working on aggression and Bowlby was working on animals to start with. It's ridiculous to say that they didn't exist because researchers into psychoanalytic theory (Bowlby) cognitive development (Piaget) and aggression (Bandura) didn't write about them,

They didn't write about kids with downs or autism or any number of things. Doesn't mean they weren't there

There were trans children in the 1990s.

What makes a child a transsexual @Octavia64 ?

I don’t disagree with you, but I don’t think your argument here is as much a slam dunk as you think.

Is that a reply to me? Can you describe the attributes of a transsexual child and why they should be left sexually immature for life (and of course, sterilised)?

I remember as a youngish child that my parents were generally gender non conforming. My mother telling me that there will always be feminine men and masculine women, that's how they behave. Is this what we are now experiencing, but that SM has exploited to tell people that can't be an effeminate man, they must be a woman inside?

There have always been children and young people who have not fitted gender stereotypes - I was one of them.

Younger children, it's mostly down to the fact they are exploring the whole concept of what it means to be a boy/girl/human and they haven't figured out what their particular culture's rules are around that.

Older children it may be deliberate resistance to gender stereotyping, especially if parents are strict on traditional roles.

There are also children and young people who have gone through trauma and sexual abuse that then try and cope with that by rejecting their bodies - often seen in self harming/ eating disorders and more recently, gender dysphoria.

But 'trans' children - what does that mean?

Were gender non-conforming children like "non macho" boys or tomboys who played with what conservatively-minded adults said were the "wrong toys" or liked the "wrong things" something known as "trans kids" who were in need of "medical treatment" like puberty blockers and opposite sex hormones and perhaps then surgery to cut off their breasts if female and penises if male to "cure" them of their failure to fit into appropriately pink and blue sex stereotypes/"be their true authentic selves" or they'd "commit suicide" prior to the the spread of current postmodernist gender ideology, which started in universities at some point in the late 80s early 90s and which oddly coincided with the rise of "post-feminism" and queer theory?

Or were there always kids who didn't fit conservatively-minded people's idea of the correct behaviour for boys and girls? And was there ever a period in modern history where such kids were just left alone without censure to grow up as happy male and female adults, many of whom turned out to be lesbian and gay? It's just I strongly remember that it was common in society to fight against such rigid pink n blue sex stereotypes from years back at least from the 60s and 70s onwards for a good 20 years or so, no surgery or hormones as "healthcare" required and for this to be called "feminism" (and "getting rid of old-fashioned gender stereotypes"). Did this mysteriously get missed?

But 'trans' children - what does that mean?

I expect @Octavia64 or @ApoodlecalledPenny will be back shortly to explain exactly what makes a child a transsexual.

Yes, I'd like to know exactly who "trans children" were too, @Octavia64 and what their attributes are.

And why it is felt that they are in need of hormones and surgery as healthcare?

On the hand one hand you seem to be condemning conspiracy theories yet on the other hand talking about a conspiracy by transactivists to create transchildren.

I believe that some children suffer with gender dysphoria and, in some cases this will persist into adulthood. This doesn't mean that I think we should be putting them on puberty blockers but I don't think denying their existence is the answer either.

Great article.

There is a third option which is that something has caused it. Like something in the water or an environmental toxin or some such.

I don't think anyone was denying that young people who feel distressed with their bodies or "wrong" to the extent they believe they're in the wrong bodies exist, were they? But again, are they something we should call "trans children" or are they something else?

What does it mean to suffer with gender dysphoria and in what life circumstances is it generally known to present itself from the evidence?

Is "being trans" and not feeling you fit in your body/gender expectations akin to being gay, do you think, or might it be something else?

@DoIEver Not denying there are children that are struggling with cultural expectations of gender or trauma

Just feel that the solution to this is helping them overcome these issues, not labelling them as 'trans' and agreeing to pharmaceutical therapy or surgery that will harm them.

What do you think gender dysphoria is?

I was a child in the 70's and 80's and luckily was just surrounded by kids playing out in jeans, brown cords, tshirts, jumpers, bobble hats and wellies. There was no pink for girls blue for boys. Only one girl on our street had a dolly. We all played on bikes, skipping rope, skateboards, played armies, tag, knock down ginger, british bulldog. Boys and girls together.
I literally had very little concept of being a boy or a girl before the age of about 6/7. I was just a kid, playing out, having fun with all my friends.
Such a shame it isn't still like that now.

I still blame the pink and blue aisles and the mass production of kids clothes (tractors for boys, flowers for girls) in supermarkets which appeared in the late 90's. Anyone who didn't want clothes from that stereotyped aisle was pretty much stuffed.

So true.

The opportunity to transition is far more accessible (and accepted) now.

I grew up with an extremely effeminate male cousin. While he didn't transition and is happy as a gay male, he does have friends of a similar age who have made the transition later in life when it became accessible (basically had they been born 20 years later they'd have transitioned much sooner).

I think it's a feeling of distress about your sex. What do you think it is?