Charity rejects disabled child for mother's GC views

[PaddingtonSwear]

Archive link here: https://archive.ph/zGGCc

Pretty shocking but it seems they think they're right.

I'm going to save your post, DarkwingDuk, it's useful to have so many inaccuracies and insults in one place, and the even the 'keep your opinions to yourself' nod to #no debate as well...

I disagree. If you arent given the idea that boys must do this and girls must do that, you'd have no reason to want to change your sex.

That’s just not true. The charity’s clinical director contacted the mother months after the application was submitted and lectured her on the importance of pronouns. The mother didn’t start the conversation. This is part of the tactics used to force people to take part in this ideology.

I am talking about mumsnet on the whole. Not particular boards on here. I dont pay much attention to that. Just read and respond to threads in active.

She did by writing seriously.

Do you have a link to this that isnt behind a paywall?

Or the girl just thought it was a woman. I wouldn't know from the pic on the front there.

I couldn't care less what gender someone else thinks they are either. It's no concern of mine. But when they demand that I conceptualise my own material reality according to their beliefs, then I do have a problem. I have no desire to announce my pronouns to support their belief system, which was what was being demanded in this case. Particularly when that belief system reinforces damaging socially-constructed stereotypes, and when it ignores the ways in which biological sex shapes both experience and oppression in real life, and seeks to erase our ability to speak about that.

So, yes, it does affect me.

And I don't believe that anyone has said that they would prefer trans people to commit suicide than change their pronouns - resorting to this kind of lying and emotional manipulation, while very predictable for adherents of this movement, is not going to gain you much credibility here.

Some parties support clear distinctions in the law. And no your example is absolutely nothing that I would support and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of my posts that I do not care to correct. There are other more engaging posters who seem to be able to at least read what I have written. I'll focus on those.

Feminism is about equity for women - not about spouting hate - so maybe you're the person who's in the wrong place.

None of what you've just said actually has anything to do with feminism - this is akin to religious people using outdated texts in order to persecute gay people...but you'd probably think that was reasonable too 🤦🏻‍♀️🙄

I will never remove myself from a place that is in dire need to perspective and education- because ignorance will not be bliss, it will be harmful.

So jump down off your soapbox until you've got something sensible to say.

I hope to goodness you don’t work with children, what you’re suggesting contravenes any and all safeguarding. JFC some people are absolutely insane about this ideology 🤦‍♀️

No one is spouting 'hate' here, only you. The dangerous ignorance you spew harms women and children, and I will NEVER step off my soapbox, your ignorance and misinformation is not welcome here and will always be counteracted.

That was a response to them.

You are claiming that you would not have a problem with your child
• being taught to lie to you
• being told-off or sanctioned for correctly sexing a child
• being instructed by adults to obey instructions without question when you know said staff would openly lie knowing your child understood they were being lied to.

And you dont see any safeguarding problems wih that or with organisations who have those actions as core ethos values.

If a male is in a female space, it ABSOLUTELY affects us.
If children are told they are born in the wrong body, it absolutely affects children.
If you stopped and used critical thinking, you'd understand that.

How about we stop lying to children about this topic and then if a child gets it wrong we can trust that an adult volunteer who corrects them is telling the truth?

Not to mention that treating the belief that boys and girls or men and women are different because they just naturally think differently as an actual, true fact that everyone in society should arrange their language and lives around, instead of a comically sexist idea that people should rightly laugh at, is harmful to everyone!

😂
Fancy making yourself look like a prat by insulting the intelligence of a poster before you've done a quick Advanced Search to see their posting history.

Honestly duk, you'll get nowhere on here slinging insults around instead of informed arguments and engaging with issues. Maybe Reddit's more your cup of tea if it's the slanging match you're after?

AS shows this DarkwingDuk has a history of defending mens rights and saying women are abusers.

I think you will find that safeguarding measures are very much a feminist concern.

However, this:

"this is akin to religious people using outdated texts in order to persecute gay people...but you'd probably think that was reasonable too"

is something that shows that you have little true understanding of safeguarding. Plus, it looks more like you are indulging in your own prejudice here by bringing in an irrelevant comparison. Safeguarding is needed to protect people who are attracted to the same sex as much as those who are attracted to the opposite sex.

No one is 'persecuting' people with transgender identities. Plus, of course, no one else should be coerced in any way to act as if they share the philosophical belief that someone has a gender identity. There are no biological or neurological markers that are shared amongst all people with transgender identities. Therefore, the only commonality is the belief they share about their personal identity.

Discussing whether there will be appropriate safeguards in place at a camp for children will also involve whether those children are directed to use another person's preferred language. It is important to discuss this because the English language conventions are to use sex based pronouns not 'gender' based pronouns.

If you, personally, wish to support others by not following the English language conventions that is your choice freely given. In a case where there is some kind of negative ramification to someone who chooses to observe sex based pronouns, this is a safeguarding concern.

If the form was not a place to express socio-political views why did the organisation decide to collect a viewpoint via their form?

Why did the staff member engage in a process designed for additional data collection?

Why did staff who held a different socio-political view reject the application on the basia of their viewpoint and the mother viewpoint not being in agreement?

And that would mean what for the child?

That the child would be expected to comply with the staffs socio-political belief.

That the child could have been directly involved with the conflicting beliefs if the application had been accepted.

That staff would likely attempt to obtain data directly from the child to update the data point.

That the child could have been directly subjected to discrimination at the event.

That the child would likely be placed on the no-contact list during or after the event.

If how somebody chooses to identify themselves gives them access to reserved rights and resources they would not otherwise have access to, or requires society to accept their belief not just about who they are but who other people, including me, are, then damn right it affects me!

How on earth do you think people insisting that society agreees the things that make men and women different are not our bodies and the different social risks and experiences they bring, but some sort of handywavy in-built difference in our minds, could not affect everyone in society?

Actually if you look at the suicide rate for trans teens you'll see that it is a very real issue - and minimising it just because it doesn't suit your agenda is disgusting. Having worked with children within mental health it's heartbreaking to see how people like you make these kids feel - you're an awful human being if you think that's ok. No if's, and's or but's about that.
If you don't have a problem with your nasty views and comments making a child CS then you are monstrous.

Do fully explain how exactly a teen identifying as the opposite of their genetic make up "reinforces damaging socially-constructed stereotypes, and when it ignores the ways in which biological sex shapes both experience and oppression in real life, and seeks to erase our ability to speak about that"?
Some of these people have identified since they were 4-6years old, if it's affect a biological male or female it's affected them, and to deny that is pure ignorance.

I'd also love to know how you know what gender a person is? Do you think you've got the ultimate x-ray vision and you're going to spy through their clothes?!
It honestly laughable.

What you're actually saying is you won't respect a trans persons pronouns unless you can't tell the difference - which feeds right back into the point that it does not affect you! - not in your every day life, not to such an extent that you would be valid in being so hateful.
It only bothers you when you believe you can tell the difference - god help that bigger set, more masculine looking women who will have ignorant fools referring to them as male or trans when they simply look different to a "typical" female.

Mind blowing that so many people can't hear how stupid that is! "Oh it's ok for that man to be trans and for me to call him a man because he's got a beard and no breast - but if I got an incline he was born with a different gender identity I'd insist on calling him her"
That the reality of it - and that's why your whole view is ridiculous!

So, that is a very interesting opinion to have though on a feminist board. That we cannot discuss something that doesn't not affect us.

Imagine that! So, we shouldn't discuss anything unless it directly impacts us. We should just ignore all the women in prison who have safety needs and who might be dealing with unjust sentencing? Because it doesn't impact us. We should just ignore women and girls losing out opportunities for reward if we are not personally expecting to access that opportunity? Because it doesn't impact us. We should not bother discussing VAWAG unless it directly impacts us?

But apparently, you also seem to be ignoring that generally how some male people and some female people choose to identify does directly impact us all in the UK. This camp's policy could be the same policy at many other camps and organisations. So, yes, this is a parenting site and this camp was for children so it is actually pretty hard to say that this doesn't affect us.

Does how someone chooses to identify themselves affect us? Yes, collectively it does affect us. And in some instances, it individually has impact on us too.