CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:26 am
That article seems to not mention the sample size, nor how the cohort was found.
n = 372 (transgender subset of broader survey (n = 6309)); recruitment via sexual and gender minority youth organizations and social media
CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:26 am
It also mentions only self reported thoughts/attempts, and doesn’t seem to control at all for whether same sex attraction is present, which in young people is something that does have a statistical link to suicide due to bullying/homophobia/struggling with sexuality.
They used a DSM assessement survey to assess suicidality (the exact same way the assess suicidality in studies of homsexual/bisexual young people). 'They might be lying about their suicidal thoughts', is probably the most disturbing objection I've ever encountered when discussing an article in a psych journal.
Partipant's sexual orientation was self-reported and presumably in at least some of the participants will be tied to their gender identity, so I'm not sure 'same sex' attraction can be controlled for here.
Bullying, transphobia and struggling with gender identity are just as 'real' and valid problems as bullying/homophobia/struggling with sexuality, I think.
CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 11:26 am
Maybe when doing so, you could clear up why you believe that alleged susceptibility to suicide should compel compliance from those upon whom a demand is being made that they redefine their understanding of what it is to be female?
I would like to believe that through a process of slow, compassionate negotiation (compassionate towards trans people and towards those who have fears about how any proposed changes to legislation and/or social relations might affect them) we might be able to re-construct the way we conduct society in such a way that trans people are able to live in a way that is congruent with their sense of selves.
That’s not good data. It invited people to participate, and has not controlled for co-morbidities. UK studies have noted that suicide attempts in trans people are at pretty much exactly the same level as those for any other CAMHS referrals.
And you can be as disturbed as you like, but since it’s demonstrable that trans activists routinely weaponise their self described status as the most vulnerable in society, and since you yourself here have demonstrated the usefulness of the concept of suicide in demanding compliance, then the Pearl clutching at the suggestion that trans activists might have motivation to take opportunities to skew survey results isn’t really convincing. Of COURSE a self selected cohort of trans people needs to be controlled to ensure it isn’t impacted by politically motivated answers. It’s not exactly good science to be like “OH MY GOD YOURE SAYING TRANS PEOPLE MIGHT LIE!!!”
And you can’t get away from - nor can you actually explain, why “congruence with their sense of selves” should = “have the right to redefine an existing group because they want access to that category”
God, honestly the sheer banality and lack of substance of any argument is incredible.
CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 12:02 pm
The one woman in my year who continued to describe herself as a lesbian was once asked to, since she had said she fancied a trans man, reconsider describing herself instead as bisexual or pansexual.
Probably the last exchange we'll have in this thread (barring any further responses from you), but I agree that this is appalling. It's nobody's business to ask anyone else to 'reconsider' their sexuality/sexual orientation.
Well then take a close look at the activism you’re supporting, because the idea that lesbians should reconsider their “genital preferences” is absolutely baked into mainstream trans activism in the UK. Never heard of the “cotton ceiling”?
(And if you’re appalled by that, but are quite happy with young women with mental health issues lovebombed when they express an intent to have their breasts removed, then I honestly think that’s depressing as f***)
Is he making himself out to be the victim here? He just says he suffered a bit of bullying at school and copped a bit of weird, misplaced racist abuse.
Good thread about what “woke” actually describes/what is being referred to, and why it’s not interchangeable from “it’s PC gone mad!!”. Though obvsly tabloid newspapers use it the same way, this is a really good summation of what is going on
(There’s a thread there, the visible parts here aren’t the point)
When the word woke suddenly started appearing in papers, on the news, I had no idea what it meant and looked it up. It means to be aware of social injustice. It's an Afro-American corruption of stay awake. So everyone using it as an insult is way off the mark and everyone should be woke.
What is a 'trans identity'? I get that there can be feminine boys and tomboy girls, are they trans identities?
It’s really the bit I don’t get. Not saying I’m against it but whenever I read something like that, people are using gender stereotypes. I’m not into things that traditionally girls like or look like a stereotype of a girl, therefore I’m a boy. Since having a child it’s very clear all the bollocks of what a boy/girl should be into/wear and I find it all weird and something that should change if we want gender equality but to then make the jump that if your child doesn’t align with these made up societal norms means that they are a different gender.
Maybe that’s the point and genders a made up concept that can and should be fluid?
What is a 'trans identity'? I get that there can be feminine boys and tomboy girls, are they trans identities?
It’s really the bit I don’t get. Not saying I’m against it but whenever I read something like that, people are using gender stereotypes. I’m not into things that traditionally girls like or look like a stereotype of a girl, therefore I’m a boy. Since having a child it’s very clear all the bollocks of what a boy/girl should be into/wear and I find it all weird and something that should change if we want gender equality but to then make the jump that if your child doesn’t align with these made up societal norms means that they are a different gender.
Maybe that’s the point and genders a made up concept that can and should be fluid?
The reason you don’t get that bit is because your instincts are right; there is sexism and actual reinforcement of traditional gender stereotypes underpinning this.
How do you think that on this subject I went from telling people off for misgendering Frank Maloney to being stridently and proudly in opposition of a charity, stonewall, I had supported for years until it changed its focus a few years ago?
Here’s how to break it down, to understand what is happening - and like with that debate I offered,I’m happy to discuss any of it, back up parts that don’t seem credible, and be corrected if you know I’m wrong.
First of all, you conclude with “maybe that’s the point and gender is a made up concept that can and should be fluid”
Right. Gender *is* a made up concept that should be fluid. Sex *isnt*. Stonewall conflates the two, because its demonstrable aim is to overwrite the concept of sex in law, with the concept of a gender identity.
What Stonewall says, and where the sexism around children stems from, is that sex is irrelevant to whether children are boys and girls. Being a boy or girl is a *feeling* we have, which may manifest in behaviour and play.
But here’s the thing. Let’s say you’re an adult that believes that. You’re teaching concepts to your children. Because you’re a good progressive, stonewall ally who is moving with the times, you believe that just because a midwife said your child is a boy, that’s not necessarily so. You teach your child that whether he’s a boy or girl is something that he’ll work out for himself. And as Stonewall says above, it’s through play that it’s found out.
“Oh, you’re very much enjoying those Barbie dolls aren’t you?” you might say to your child. And a small child who has been taught that “girl” describes a cluster of “girly” interests, will have no trouble saying “I am a girl”.
Stonewall claims that this shows that the child is telling you who they really are; gender critical feminists say that this is a child being put on a pathway towards believing they’re in the wrong body.
And that’s because there is a direct line between Stonewall’s claim that small children know who they are, to the idea that *affirmation* of a trans identity is the only approach that won’t lead to a child dying (see all the lovely sweet dramas sponsored by Mermaids where you’ll hear the phrase “better a live daughter than a dead son” said by a mother before putting her kid on puberty blockers), to the idea that in order to “live in their stated gender” they will need “gender affirmation surgery”
(and why is it that if Stonewall sees “gender” as a concept that defines something innate in us that isn’t about sex, that it ultimately claims that changing bodies to resemble those of the opposite sex is eventually *essential* for children, yet not a necessity for heterosexual middle aged men who “come out” as women?)
It’s sexism all the way down.
There are casually regressive parents turning up at their GP because they don’t understand why their male child is playing with girly toys. Parents telling their male child off because he wants to wear a dress and have long hair (the CEO of Mermaids banned her, now transitioned, male child from playing with girls toys, to the point where he secretly begged his grandmother, in tears, to buy him a Barbie doll. He was bought sex reassignment surgery in Thailand for his sixteenth birthday)
And if they get referred to the Tavistock clinic, the parents of these gender non conforming children are *not* told:
“children can play with any toys they like, don’t read too much into it, they’re just finding out what they think of the world, developing their personalities - boys can play with toys that were designed for girls”
They *are* told:
“Your child may be telling you who they really are… the reason your male child wants to play with girls toys is likely to be because this is how she can tell you she’s a girl”
And that’s where the homophobia comes in: gender non conformity in children is more of an indicator of *homosexuality* in later life, *not* being trans.
Here’s a newsnight report I’ve posted here before:
This is why I ask this question. Which of these positions do you think most reasonable?
1: a boy is a child with a male body and any personality (people who think this: me, JK Rowling, evil TERFs,Martina Navratilova
2: a boy is a child with a male personality and any body (Stonewall, Mermaids, mainstream trans activism, Dawn Butler)
Because the idea of a “male personality” is the only meaningful description of a male “gender identity” possible - you won’t find a better one on stonewall’s website.
Stonewall basically is not what it once was, and plenty of people have casually assumed that supporting trans rights is the kind thing to do, and haven’t really looked at whether it makes sense or not, because why would you? It sounds like it’s just like gay rights, right?
But it’s not.
At the start of your post, you say “not sure I’m against it”
Why aren’t you sure you’re against it? What existing information or beliefs do you have that have caused you to tone down your criticisms of what, clearly, every instinct of you is saying “this is sexist bullshit”?
Because I was at that point too. I saw some things some trans activist acquaintances were saying, and thought “that seems a bit sexist”. I even raised it, and was told my line of questioning was transphobic. I can’t support something that I don’t understand, so I tried harder to understand it. And doing so - reading a range of opinions, not just a blog post by JK Rowling, actually trying to show myself there was substance to trans activism - got me here.
I’ll be very interested to hear your thoughts on this, I was actually surprised, given your earlier posts, to see you acknowledge the potential sexism here. I wonder whether it’s given you pause?
?