Trans identifying people gaslight their parents - a heartbreaking read.

[Soontobe60]

www.pittparents.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web

This broke my heart to read. The impact a child who chooses to declare themselves the opposite sex has on their mother in particular is brutal. I cannot imagine a world where my children would demand that I change my own history to bow to their indoctrination.

Its difficult to know how much truth people post here.

TPA always comes across as someone who writing from the perspective of the ideal TRA parent. Supportive, affirming and ready to blame women for any problems faced by the trans community.

Its always easier to fight for trans children's rights when talking about a girl who wants to be a boy. As redtoothbrush notes, eliminates talk about imposing boys sexuality onto girls.

It could all be real.

Parenting isn't ideal, though. No parent would claim to have made the best decisions all of the time. With hindsight we'd all do different things and we all have doubts.

One of the 'fakenesses' in trans reddit is the scenarios they retell. They either calmly tell the transphobe where to go with cheers from the crowd, or they are a wreck because of transphobia. Theres no doubt about their own behaviour, though. They do everything correctly, its other people who are wrong.

And thats how TPA writes. Its doesn't seem authentic for parenting experiences.

This all day long.

The sheer desperation that the world has finally woken up with the NHS, education, organisations and even the government now recognising that sex is real, that men aren't women even when they say they are.

They're only seething and moaning on Mumsnet because women have proved to be implacable about safeguarding children and defending the rights of women to privacy, dignity and safety from dangerous men.

It's that "no is a complete sentence" that so infuriates transactivists. 😀

Its how i interpret it, too. They have definitely added the 'gender identity' between the sex and wearing stuff.

But that doesnt explain why sex should be ignored at key times? And why sexed based pronouns and SSE are gendered.

Why cant TPA say to her daughter, wear what you like, but to keep you safe we need to acknowledge your sex. Why does the gender part have to be a big deal when its not actually doing anything? Its not changing sex and it doesnt mean clothes and behaviour needs to be a set thing?

Why does the gender part have to be a big deal when its not actually doing anything? Its not changing sex and it doesnt mean clothes and behaviour needs to be a set thing?

Again, straw-personing, because it's the "gender layer" congruence with your sex that determines whether you are happy "in yourself". Perhaps it's seen as easier to change the manifestation of your sex than to work on altering your gender, or perhaps your gender is presumed to be ineffable. I'm not sure.

I'm not buying into it, just trying to see if there's a theory of mind that is at least lexically consistent first.

If you can produce one male trans person who states that they are a female and then spends their life 24/7 presenting 100% as male in a such a way that no person in the world thinks he's female unless he tells them, then that 3 layer model might make some sense.

One?

Until he is produced from somewhere then the 3 layer model is the same gender stereotyping we always get told makes a man a woman.

We know sex isn’t gender.

But that message hasn’t reached trans people who want access to provisions made for the opposite sex.

Some of them believe they have changed sex, when they have changed gender presentation. Deluded.

Perhaps you could do them a kindness, and go and explain that gender is not sex to all the trans identified people on Reddit?

I am sure they would benefit from your marvellous erudition and clarity.

We know sex isn’t gender.
But that message hasn’t reached trans people who want access to provisions made for the opposite sex.

Exactly! I mean, trans identified men, including some who have posted on this site, are constantly talking about how their ingestion of cross sex hormones, their extreme body modifications and overall adoption of female social sex stereotypes, actually makes them the opposite sex and thus entitled to female single sex spaces, services, shortlists etc. There was also that big- jawed lawyer on Channel 4, who complained about the Supreme Court decision saying that every 'cell in his body has become feminised', so because of that, he shouldn't be excluded from female spaces.

I remember reading a comment from a self proclaimed "transsexual woman" activist, on a substack article regarding the paused puberty trials, who asserted multiple times that sex is mutable because children who are given exogenous cross sex hormones early enough, will grow up to be the opposite sex. Here's part of their comment: "An MtF ends up a sterile female, from molecular biology up to phenotype. For example."

During the Sandie Peggie employment tribunal, the trans-identified male doctor Theodore "Beth" Upton, described himself as a "biological woman" who would impose himself on female patients in the event that they requested a female doctor for intimate care.

Here's an excellent article with multiple examples of trans-identified men, including prominent activists, describing themselves as "biological women" and "female", including the fragrant India Willoughby.
https://speakingplainly.substack.com/p/is-it-really-true-that-no-ones-denying

This quote is really apt:
"Is it really true that “no one's denying the reality of biological sex”? There seems to be a lot of people doing that thing that "no one" is doing"

We know sex isn’t gender.
But that message hasn’t reached trans people who want access to provisions made for the opposite sex.

I am going to disagree (in a nice way!)

I think that the vast majority of people who make claims that as men they have now become women know full well that no man can become a woman.

• They know that they can't have a baby
• they know that they don't have the actual sexual organs of a woman - however much surgery they have
• they know that their artificially enlarged breasts don't really make milk for babies in the way that women's do - they know that secretions from chemicals is not breast milk
• they know that they don't really pass - which is why they are always looking for validation
• they know that they appear as men - which is why they dress in a way which is peak woman stereotype of high heels and tights and short skirts etc. to show that they are 'women'

They know the reality, the truth... but...

They have ulterior motives, and that is more about power, and misogyny, and intimidation of women, and power over women, and a self-centered approach to life, and proof that they can do what they want, and me, me, me etc.

For some it goes further and there is a sexual thrill, or even a desire to access women against their will for nefarious purposes

There is a reason that they don't just get on with life, but focus on changing rooms and toilets and public performance of their womanliness, etc.

So, I don't think that we will ever convince them that a man can't become a woman, because they know that already and that is not the battle.

Let's take it back to basics - no-one cares what they are now, what they appear to be, who they think they are, or anything else about them - if they were born male, they are still male and they have no access.

Ultimately it is not about making people admit that they are men - it is about keeping them out of women's spaces - if they want to parade around their own home in a twinset and pearls - good for them, but still no access to women's areas! No admission of reality is needed because we know and they know already - but still no access as a man to a woman's space.

India Willoughby’s comment there is hilarious. Claiming he’s ‘100% a biological woman and female’, and then stating that the GC movement are jealous. It doesn’t make any sense. Even if he really had become female and science backed him up on that, why would GC women be jealous? We’re already women, we wouldn’t need to be jealous of a man who had become a woman. (And we’re certainly not jealous of a man who thinks he is a woman but is not 😂)

I care about them being propagandised, even over and above whether or not they are in the ladies lavatories, because it filters through to damaging children’s minds and lives.

Fair point... though I do think that if they have their main motives defeated, gradually the whole edifice will die out...

“no one's denying the reality of biological sex”? is the new 'It never happens'. 😂

Thank you - I've bookmarked that.

Given that GI is an incoherent, contradictory set of statements and beliefs, we shouldn't be surprised then proponents of it repeatedly beclown themselves by uttering incoherent nonsense.

Going back to the original topic of this thread, there seem to be a lot of posters in the earlier comments using DARVO arguments quite heavily against the mother.

Framing the mother as abusive and the child as being abused by her "refusal to accept her child for who he/she is"
But that is not the dynamic at play here.

Many parents are who were abusive or neglectful or simply a bit useless later, when confronted, attempt to rewrite history. They tell their child it wasn't how they remember it. They were decent people doing their best and the child is just ungrateful/lying for attention/selfish etc.
There is a whole series of threads on MN about this phenomenon known as the Stately Homes threads (as in "But we took you to Stately Homes")

There can be very few people who wouldn't categorise this behaviour as abusive gaslighting and yet when it's the CHILD who is trying to force a rewriting of shared history to suit their own agenda - often with implied or open threats that they will kill themselves/cut off their family/report them to social services - suddenly somehow it's still the parent who is abusive for refusing to agree to it and even daring to be upset by it. So a reversal of the original understanding of the roles of abuser and abused to suit an agenda.

No! In the scenario described in the OP it's the trans child whose behaviour is abusive. It's the trans child who is gaslighting the parents (and other family and friends) no doubt egged on by transactivists and allies both online and in real life. Are they also being abused? Possibly but not by their parents in this scenario.

Poster after poster on this thread yapping on about how this poor mother had better get with the program or risk losing her child is evidence of the immense social pressure that is on these parents to validate and affirm these kids and bow down to the new order. Because you can bet she's hearing this in real life too.
People going on about being kind or what THEY would do in this situation need to sit the fuck down quite frankly. How can anyone possibly know what they would do or say or feel in this situation if they've never experienced it? How about listening to those who HAVE and showing a little compassion and understanding?

(Obviously this is a very different scenario to those where it's clear that the parent is the one driving the transition and I don't mean to suggest that that doesn't happen because we know it does. But it's very clear that that's not what is happening in this case.)

Biology 101:
'Biological female' isn't the same as a cis/natal/reproductive female. Biological female can refer to biological female traits like secondary sex characteristics. Maybe pay attention in class next time?
😂

Society has not agreed this, despite the attempt to impose "no debate". And the singular of "phenomena" is "phenomenon

The context was word usage. Part of words being accepted in the dictionary means they are in broad social usage first so the 'meaning' so to speak has been socially accepted. Social word usage isn't the same as agreeing with it.

Why then is my son claiming to be a woman when it's only his "gender" that he has changed?

Woman & Man don't just have sex associations but gendered one's hence it can be applied regarding sex & gender.

so why is everyone else expected to act as if it is?

Social conventions as in respecting other people's right to their own identity aren't a belief statement.

He remains my son, and I will not deny my son by pretending that he is something he cannot possibly be.

Sex is not gender.

and hope that he eventually remembers and values the relationships his new worldview denies, that of a son with his father and mother.
A "feminine" son if that's his choice. What isn't his choice is to be my daughter, as that is a logical impossibility. He doesn't get to force us to lie.

"Adopted' just like 'step' children hold no biological relationship with their parents & yet they are still their children. Its not just biological associations that determine relationships but sociological ones.

Absolute twaddle.

Woman & Man don't just have sex associations but gendered one's hence it can be applied regarding sex & gender.

So in your world, there are male women as well as female women, and female men as well as male men.

Don't you think it would be a lot simpler if we stuck to the original definitions of men as adult male humans and women as adult female humans?

We could then have feminine men (adult male humans) and masculine women (adult female humans), as well as masculine men and feminine women. And of course, most of us are somewhere in between these extremes, but for those who like to have a gender identity, they could still have one.

Changing the meaning of men and women to suit your ideology just causes confusion. There are still vast numbers of people who think a 'transman' is a man who wants to be a woman and a 'transwoman' is a woman who wants to be a man.

Biological female means X chromosomes and no Y. You simply can't keep changing the meaning of words to suit the way you see yourself.

"Duh, biological female isn't the same as female, it can also mean moobs, get wrekt" is certainly the height of scientific knowledge!😃

Is that the "class" where we all get "educated" in the gulag?
I'll pass thanks, I've got a cake to ice

Booooorringggg

"Adopted' just like 'step' children hold no biological relationship with their parents & yet they are still their children. Its not just biological associations that determine relationships but sociological ones.

A step son cannot be a girl.

An adopted daughter cannot be a boy.

Biology fail.
Chromosomes are female sex traits they don't on their own determine gamete structure always if they did there wouldn't XY humans who could birth children & there are.

🙄