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.

Well I agree. I don't think any adult with responsibility for children should be lying to them about their sex.

The child in that situation, learning that adults, who should be truthful and safe, will lie to them is put in a terrible position.

I dont think that works because we do all have pronouns. It is the mother's view that his pronouns should be obvious because he's stated his gender.

It would be more like a Christian camp asking attendees if they believe Jesus is the son of God and a parent asking if they're really asking a Christian child that question because they think that belief is fundamental for Christians. Which most do, there are some fringe denominations where it isnt as important.

And since they say that the accommodation is allocated according to 'gender', will the boy who says he's a girl be sleeping in a girls' dormitory?

Indeed the email comming in directly after the phone call suggests it was a forgone conclusion and the no contact list was pretty final

Asking about pronouns is purely from the presumption that they might differ from your sex. Without the basis of gender ideology, the question would be pointless.

It assumes a belief.

Start another thread if that's what you want to discuss.

So if a Schizophrenic believed he was the second coming of Jesus and demanded someone (who may be Christian) call them Jesus or even God, you think that is not denying reality?

If a male wants to be addressed as 'she', that is denying reality. It is lying. And further, it not just harms, it gaslights women who are gaslit to deny our lived experience as the oppressed sex and allow a male to appropriate our oppression and struggle. It's a denial of reality. And it's abusive towards women.

Ah, toy cars. Not cards.

I'd say it assumes the attendees may have certain beliefs. rather than speaking of the personal views of the organisation.

It is relevant in this thread as the child was told to identify people based on what they see.

Quasi-religious - yes.

Imagine a Jewish child wanted to attend a camp run by an inclusive Christian organisation. What would be the most inclusive approach?

1. To tell all the campers that there would be no Christian prayers, all food would be kosher and nobody mention Jesus or Christmas because there's a Jewish child at the camp.

Or

2. Tell the Jewish camper that they didn't have to join in Christian prayers, they would be provided with kosher food, and that people around them would be talking about Jesus and Christmas.

Of course, this depends on their definition of 'inclusive' being inclusion = tolerance of other views, rather than inclusion = imposition of our view.

Do we know the trans child is male?

Well that fits with @ArabellaScott analogy even better.

Is the camp focused around gender and identity in any way?

I don't think we do for certain.

But then, would a girl who says she's a boy sleeping in a cabin with 7 actual boys be acceptable?

How else do you expect children to identify people? Especially if they can't trust adults to tell the truth?

Is the camp focused around gender and identity in any way?

Clearly it is, if one child's role play controls who will be allowed to attend.

I don't know about focussed.

But a declared belief in gender ideology certainly seems compulsory in order to attend.

Well no, because you could leave it blank after stating the sex/gender (depending on the form phrasing). So for my son, I'd say he is male or a boy or whatever, and then leave the pronouns question blank. People are most likely to assume he uses the pronouns most commonly associated with a male identity and I haven't played into the idea that they would be anything different.

Was the pronoun question compulsory?

Well it is now, isn't it? When attendees are required to conform to gender ideology, in defiance of reality and of the law, in order to attend, then the camp has chosen to focus on gender and identity to the detriment of it's actual stated purpose.

The charity caused this problem, not the mother.

Any organisation that is asking the question of pronouns has bought into the idea that in some situations it is ok to lie about a child's sex.

It is not ok.

Reading posts from trans young people and the mistrust it causes when adults 'affirm' what they know deep down to be untrue has only solidified for me that this has to stop. It is not a 'kindness'. It is actively harming children.

Are you me? I experienced sexism for the first time at playgroup when Father Christmas came and all the girls got Barbies and all the boys got Transformers. Not a single boy would swap with my and I was really upset that Father Christmas gave me something girly.

The problem with saying this to a child is that so far, their only agency of socialisation has been the family and we have no idea what the family has been teaching the child about gender. This goes for everyone by the way. You're as likely to see people with extremely rigid views of gender expression at either end of the spectrum when it comes to this issue. You see the parents of "trans children" insisting their child is really a girl because they like dolls, and you see people at the other end who insist their boys can only play with cars and "masculine" stuff.

What this child "sees" will be through the lens of his parents. It's best that we encourage an open environment where we discuss how people vary despite being the same sex.

It seems that it is:

“I attempted to explain that as a charity, we value diversity and inclusion, and our primary focus is to ensure that every child feels safe and respected at camp, regardless of their gender identity."

From the archive link on the opening post

Not regardless of their sex, disability, age etc. BTW

Such a statement does assume acceptance of gender ideology, and an expectation that others share that belief.