Teen declared they were trans and now says they can't be in contact with us

[crochetedcat]

As the title says really, I'll try to keep this brief but obviously it's complicated.

DS went to university and within a few weeks of being there declared he was now trans and had a new name. We were all rather confused as this seemed out of the blue at 18. He is autistic but seemed happy and doing well, good course, plans for the future etc. I've kept using 'he' here for clarity.

We decided to jointly take the approach to be supportive and to focus on everything else, didn't question it, carried on as usual. I was very aware that challenging it would not go down well, especially when at uni with potentially lots of people saying how awful we were for asking any questions at all. So we decided to take the 'thanks for telling us dear, that's great, how's uni going' approach.

Tbh there was very little change apart from when they came home for a visit in November they were wearing a bit of make up and had made changes to voice and mannerisms. This was difficult to deal with as it felt like the concept of being female was being stereotyped but again, we didn't react and continued to support. He happily went back off to uni after a few days of seeing family etc.

Christmas was the same. He came home for a week but was fairly distant. But we continued being positive and asking about course, friends etc etc - everything you would usually do. No one questioned anything and just rolled with it. The key point here is we have all been as accepting as possible, no one has said anything even vaguely negative, lots of enthusiasm about uni and life more broadly.

Then early in the New Year, we got a message that we were all clearly embarrassed by him and there would be no more contact ever again. It felt ludicrous tbh. The day before we'd been chatting on WhatsApp about his course and something I'd been reading. I responded asking where this had come from, that we weren't embarrassed and would support him in whatever. He said ok and asked about the dog as she'd needed to go to the vet. A completely unemotional reaction really to having just declared he'd never see his family again.

However I haven't heard from him since. He ignores all messages including asking him if he's ok. This was nearly 3 weeks ago. He's not great at responding to messages but would usually do so in a day or two even if just an emoji.

I am guessing the accusations that we are unsupportive are about his anxieties. Or wanting the drama of no one supporting him. It feels very similar to 'the script' of the cheating husband where history is rewritten to fit the narrative.

I also assume the wanting to cut contact is due to him feeling uncomfortable in his 'old life' because it's confronting and now his new normal where probably everyone is effusive.

I would bet money on new friends / the internet driving this.

But it feels so unreal and I don't know what to do next. Is it serious? Is he just never going to have contact with us again? Do I just remain supportive and sending him photos of the dog and articles I see about climate science and including him on the family groups, he hasn't left those yet?

I'm of course angry that someone could just send a message like that to his mother with no feeling. And upset. And scared etc etc

And then there's the minor fact I'm financially supporting him through university. I'm paying for the phone contract for the phone he used to tell me he was never going to see me again. Is he assuming I'll carry on sending him £700 a month to cover his uni halls costs whilst he declares he's estranged?! It feels like a younger teen yelling that they hate you and then asking what's for dinner and can they have a lift to town.

At a loss really and not sure where to go from here to have the most sensible outcome.

Thank you.

AND?

Whats your point?

Why do the desires of a male trump the feelings and safety of women? Every time.

All you've done on this thread is use misognistic language to berate women. Your attempt to smear someone who has done research took the biscuit. Women are not permitted to make intellectual arguments.

Then you went to smears about how asking difficult questions was 'aggressive'. Yet again another misgonistic slur. Women are not allowed to challenge. They should be passive, accomodating and kind. Even if it harms them to do so.

And now you are resorting to the emotional blackmail angle again, saying 'why don't you feel for the poor feminine looking man?' Thus reducing women to merely to their visual appearance. With no regard to how women who have a history of abuse might feel. Or thought to patterns of how sex offenders are MORE LIKELY to transition than the general population.

Cos women are invisible, they are unimportant. Research is irrelevant and shouldn't be carried out. Anyone not virtue signalling is a baddie. They have all the rights they need; the right to be silence.

Its funny.

If a male wishes to dress in a dress, thats fine by me. But they aren't a woman. And its not the responsibility of women to uphold this fantasy. If male violence is the problem then thats what should be dealt with. Its not for women to expose themselves to additional issues to avoid this issue.

Women deserve better than this clap trap.

Its like a script.

And only serves to demonstrate a huge amount of my point about how families are marginalised, silenced and emotional coerced and blackmailed into situations that are not helping any party directly involved.

Instead we have to put up with the 'do gooders' trying to stick their oars in and look good, rather than addressing the underlying difficult issues that unpin all of it.

Its part of the problem. Its CREATING stigma and its CREATING unnecessary barriers and obstacles.

That sounds tough. As much as you're trying to be supportive from their point of view they will be able to tell you're uncomfortable. The clue is you refer to them as him, you probably looked uncomfortable about the make up etc... I'm not saying that's right or wrong but they can probably tell you don't accept it even if you've tried.

I think all you can do is continue as you are. Send occasional messages it would be lovely to hear from you. Use their new name etc... Maybe read up on what you can do.

It sounds like you've generally been kind parents and in time they'll most likely realise and appreciate this and reply.

I'm not sure why this thread has turned into a discussion about how female a man looks in still photos.

OP - I do hope you manage to have some clear discussions with your son.

Here's a photo of a man before and after transition. I would never, in a month of Sundays, ever think that the person on the right had ever been a man. I don't think that the person on the right makes a changing room mixed-sex. Sport is different because it makes use of physical strength, which the activity of changing doesn't.

I have seen many such pictures on social media. Then people unearth unfiltered images, or video stills, and they are inevitably obviously male, and unrecognisable from the carefully curated images initially seen.

I've seen people suggest that the TRA movement wouldn't have gained the traction it had without filters, and I think there's something in that.

I agree that it does seem to be teen like behaviour, sticking two fingers up at the world, coming later than you would expect and sadly when they are away from home and probably feeling lots of emotions about that too. If only the stakes weren’t so high

Oh look. The whole 'prove it' cos I can't be arsed to do 'weeks of research', but still think I have the authority to berate the women who can be bothered to. And if they do, then they are either 'too intellectual', 'too aggressive' or simply just reading biased stuff.

Women can't win. We know this. But we are also aware of just how damned misognistic the whole debate is and what techniques are being used to try and get us to sit down and shut up.

It annoys me, cos the people doing it don't have trans people centred in their arguments anymore than a full on raving christian puritan would.

Some of the posts on here read like sociology textbooks. I'm not into this topic in the same way. I just think that if someone has fully transitioned, they should be accepted as that sex. Imagine going through all the pain and suffering of gender reassignment and taking hormones and looking as female as the person in that photo and then being denied that you're at least a type of woman, if not the same as a biological one.

I do not think that any man would have his penis and balls removed and would take hormones that made all his muscle and body hair disappear just to use cubicles in the same changing room as women.

Regarding behaviour patterns, everyone knows that hormones have vast influences on behaviour. And I gather that there's a Swedish study that some people take as proving a male pattern of behaviour persists in transwomen but the author says that's inaccurate and that that's not what it shows.

I just think that if someone has fully transitioned, they should be accepted as that sex.

Do you mean if they have had surgery to their penis to create a simulacra of female genitalia?

By fully transitioned, I mean gender reassignment surgery and established use of hormone treatment.

With apologies to @crochetedcat, whose thread is being hijacked, but I just have to say this on coming back after not checking since this morning…but wow. ChicLilacSeal has really broken cover in spectacular fashion.

And as for ‘Says medicine’?! LOL.

And I gather that there's a Swedish study that some people take as proving a male pattern of behaviour persists in transwomen but the author says that's inaccurate and that that's not what it shows.

She's pandering to trans rights activists. It does indeed show that and she hasn't rescinded that claim on the paper itself, just in interviews that most people aren't ever going to read.

So no.

That's from the Swedish study that the authors said everyone misunderstood.

@crochetedcat If your teen had been a teen in the noughties, he’d have gravitated towards being an emo. Look at the comments on this article reminiscing about being an outsider.

Would it be worth showing him this?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8d9156r6pyo.amp

That's from the Swedish study that the authors said everyone misunderstood

She's misrepresenting it to pander to TRAs. It's what her own study says.

I don't know what you mean by breaking cover, I've just been expressing my opinion like everyone else.

As for says medicine, it's established medical fact that hormones have a huge influence on feelings, behaviours, and desires.

Also, the claim is not only that the the earlier period "trans women" in the study had a propensity to male pattern violence, but greater than male pattern violence.

So what YOU think, trumps anyone who has looked into this from any kind of research point of view, be it medical or psychological.

Just cos YOU think, 'why would anyone do that?' and can't look beyond your own field of knowledge we should vigouriously support and affirm transition.

Would you like to be any more anti-science?

We should all just blindly follow, not think about consequences of doing so, and just BELIEVE in what you say?

Well we all can clearly see how we got here, can't we.

Meanwhile kids and families are harmed. But meh, what do they matter?

I would be clear if he wants to cut off contact, you respect him as an adult and will treat him as such. This means no further financial support.
it sounds like drama and attention seeking behaviour , and as you haven’t risen to it, they are causing more issues to get you to react.

Imagine going through all the pain and suffering of gender reassignment and taking hormones and looking as female as the person in that photo and then being denied that you're at least a type of woman, if not the same as a biological one

There are a number of important issues this intersects with. Firstly, it is unlikely that any laws will be passed that affords 'passing privileges' to those who do 'pass'. No law intended to bring about equality and address oppression will make appearance part of the accepted criteria. Added to this, I worked for 16 years in a hospital that provided gender reassignment surgery and whilst I would not have identified those who passed most of those in the waiting room really didn't.

Part of gaining informed consent for the operation should include a strong statement that undergoing this treatment will not afford you the status of 'female' in law. That a G

.....that a GRC can be obtained without surgery and a GRC has limits as to what 'rights' you have in relation to being considered legally female.

As for says medicine, it's established medical fact that hormones have a huge influence on feelings, behaviours, and desires.

Yes, that's a complete non point.

Now show the evidence that taking oestrogen stops men having male pattern violence. Because let's not forget, that was your claim. That was what you said "medicine" said. Go on then, where.

*committing

I don't need to do deep scientific research to know that it's extremely unlikely that a man would remove his penis and balls and take hormones that feminise him just to be allowed into a cubicle next to a woman. Neither do I need to do weeks of research to know that it would be completely unreasonable to think such a thing.

I also don't need to do scientific research to feel compassion for trans people. Did you know that someone who did not always identify as their birth gender recently took their own life because of all the comments posted online after they dared to host an episode of Blankety-Blank? Do you even care?

I already told you, the Swedish study, which shows exactly that in the 1989-2003 cohort, per the author of the study.

I don't think GRCs should be issued without the person having fully transitioned.