Independent Leyton Orient Forum

I’ve been reading a book called The Future Of Dinosaurs, and the blurb describes it as being up to date with the science, and said that there is lots of surprising stuff about what we think we know about dinosaurs, as well as insight into what we will probably find out in the future.

I’m two thirds in and the gist is:
We don’t know how big they were
We don’t know what they did
We don’t know what colour they were
We don’t know how they had sex
We do know some of them had feathers

We do know that we’re unlikely to work much if this out in the future
Also, they had feathers
Bye, game day

Find it odd that apart from Max, no lefty is willing to discuss this with you. Do they all agree?

PJ has done, but none of those who were confident in the first few pages will.

Max also hasn’t actually discussed it. When I looked back on our first interactions, he was talking around it from the start - there was no actual engagement on the substance

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:07 pm Its a complex issue which I have differing opinions on, depending on the element.

If it was my child I would do my absolutely very best to support them and help them into being themselves. But I'd also try to do the very hard job of convincing them to wait. Your body and your mind changes so much before and after puberty. The things I wanted at 10 were very different at 16, as were the things i wanted at 23 are different today, ten years later. It's hard to understand that when you are young though and ultimately it's very difficult for anyone if they cant be themselves, no matter what age. I think you need to balance listening, understanding and your responsibility as a guardian.

Still stand by this on page 1. But I’ll concede that my opinions on the subject have changed in the last few months. Due to a combination of the mad direction it’s gone in (that I didn’t fully comprehend or was aware of previously) and some of the points made on this thread.

That was actually IMO the best post on this thread’s early days.

What struck me was that you did come over after that as swayed based on what seemed moderate, rather than about what actually stood up to scrutiny. Do you think that’s a fair observation? Or am I off the mark?

The only issue with that post is that “help them to be themselves” is vague enough to be able to mean both

“assure your child that whatever their interests, traits etc, that’s all fine, you’ll support your children to express themselves freely”

and

“Be alert to signifiers that they might actually be trans, in which case I’d seek guidance from trans orgs about how to support them”, which are obviously very different ideas about what it means to support a child in that case, and is one that ideologues have hijacked

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 2:46 pm

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 2:40 pm Well this is painful

Your early takes on this weren’t much better. You were all (and I don’t blame you because a LOT of people were) talking ill informed nonsense based only on a vague sense of what was considered “good” - you assumed good intentions of organisations and movements that didn’t warrant it, and assumed negative intentions of those with reservations.
LSN, Dunners, and Conkles are probably the only ones who should be able to read the early pages of that thread without being embarrassed.

I’d genuinely be interested in anyone who revisited their opinions and either revised them or stood by them

Not sure why you’ve grouped me with those right wing fools?

In fact, this is a good opportunity to talk through an example of how this works in practice where I think I can demonstrate exactly what the issue is, and why it’s horrifying. Is it OK if I ask a couple of questions based on potential scenarios and then follow up after your answers RTW?

Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 4:20 pm

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 2:46 pm

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 2:40 pm Well this is painful

Your early takes on this weren’t much better. You were all (and I don’t blame you because a LOT of people were) talking ill informed nonsense based only on a vague sense of what was considered “good” - you assumed good intentions of organisations and movements that didn’t warrant it, and assumed negative intentions of those with reservations.
LSN, Dunners, and Conkles are probably the only ones who should be able to read the early pages of that thread without being embarrassed.

I’d genuinely be interested in anyone who revisited their opinions and either revised them or stood by them

Not sure why you’ve grouped me with those right wing fools?

I’d asterisk that before you get banned. Especially when there’s little Lampards waving imaginary yellow cards around

Here’s how a prominent male trans activist is viewing the Edinburgh case.

This is not a fringe view, this is an influential guy who sings from the same hymn sheet as Mermaids, Stonewall etc

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 4:21 pm In fact, this is a good opportunity to talk through an example of how this works in practice where I think I can demonstrate exactly what the issue is, and why it’s horrifying. Is it OK if I ask a couple of questions based on potential scenarios and then follow up after your answers RTW?

As long as it’s in good faith and you can wait a few days for answers, go for it

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 5:17 pm

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 4:21 pm In fact, this is a good opportunity to talk through an example of how this works in practice where I think I can demonstrate exactly what the issue is, and why it’s horrifying. Is it OK if I ask a couple of questions based on potential scenarios and then follow up after your answers RTW?

As long as it’s in good faith and you can wait a few days for answers, go for it

Yep, no rush for answers.
I’ll be honest from the start - the questions are designed to make you think about what it means to hypothetical support a child to be themselves, in this context.
The first question is just a simple one; are you aware that trans activist organisations like Stonewall, Mermaids etc have provided training and guidance to schools, and helped write policies that have been implemented in many schools, with one outcome of this being that in PHSE lessons, primary and secondary school aged children are taught this:
“Being a boy or girl isn’t about your body or what’s between your legs. Gender identity is about how you feel on the inside. When you were born, doctors made a guess about whether you were a boy or girl, and sometimes they get it wrong. That’s what being trans means”
?

(For now, don’t worry about whether you think it’s a fair statement or not - I’m just interested if you’re aware that that’s how these concepts are described to children)

I wasn’t. I assumed there was conversation about it but not in those words

There are conversations, but the starting point (and it’s not negotiable according to the organisations that advocate for this) is this idea that we all have a gender identity that may or may not match with our body.

So my first question i suppose is, is there anything about this idea that rings an alarm bell with you?

(Not trying to catch you out here - what I’m getting at is that I’m interested in whether your instinctive response to that concept is “that sounds enlightened and progressive” “that sounds like a nice way to think about trans kids” or “there’s something about this that doesn’t sit well”, or something else entirely)

Oh, and to be absolutely clear, I was paraphrasing in the previous post but not editorialising - that’s a fair and neutral summary of how those organisations present the idea of gender identity and how it relates to sex, in terms of children and teenagers - but this is taken from the front page of the Mermaids website, which I think demonstrates that I’m not misrepresenting their position:

“What is gender and what does ‘dysphoria’ mean?

When you are born, it’s decided whether you’re a boy or a girl, based on the way your body looks. But for some people, looks can be deceiving and they’re given the wrong gender.

So ‘gender dysphoria’ is the uncomfortable feeling some people get when their gender is different from the one they were given at birth.

No matter how someone’s body looks, they might identify as male, female or non-binary. A non-binary person doesn’t identify as male or female, they can identify as male and female, neither, or their gender can change.

If your gender identity matches the one you were given at birth that’s called “cisgender”.”

My instinctive response (I.e. without thinking too much about the consequences or the reasoning) is that I want my son to have ideas taught to him that challenge him/the narrative. Since having a kid it has made me realise gender is a bit of a weird construct. But I think that’s mainly to do with stereotyping.

The next level up is feeling uncomfortable with that being taught at school. I feel like it’s sort of my domain to talk about that sort of stuff when I think it’s appropriate (but realise not everyone does so that’s when schools feel like they have a duty(?) and that I have biases).

I don’t agree with the statement that you said is being taught but I’d like the understand the context.
The important part for me is if it was being taught as fact I.e. maths or it was a position being put forward as an opinion that’s part of a debate the kids might have. (Suspect the former).

When you say “challenge the narrative” it’s worth thinking what you mean by that; presumably the narrative that the earth is round is a narrative that shouldn’t be challenged by presenting an alternative view that it’s flat, as if that’s fact?
But what you’re getting at I agree with - you’re saying schools should teach how to think, not what to think, right?

Anyway -
In PHSE lessons, according to the guidance from Stonewall, mermaids etc, their concept of gender identity is taught as fact, yes: it’s not taught as just one of a range of legitimate opinions about what it is to a be a boy or girl; inclusion policies in schools around this actually (as I’ll show later) treat the other views on this as bigotry.


So, just to check, if I’ve understood you correctly, you find the idea that that theory/belief of gender is being taught in schools to be a bit iffy, on the basis that you reckon that you’re better placed than the school to teach your kids what these terms mean?
(Again, I’m genuinely not being facetious, I’m working through a point that’s about how the policies work - or don’t work)

"Henderson apologises to the LBGTQ community as he joins Ajax ".

I mean, I'm not sure he did. It was an "I'm sorry if you got offended" non-apology.

Don’t think this is the relevant thread for that anyway - the issue of a footballer getting himself in a mess for his superficial support of a cause he abandoned when it suited him and then backpedals after it all goes wrong is for woke watch. It’s not like Henderson is a terf, he’s a bell end, he’s a wing nut, he throws onion rings at sailors

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:35 pm I mean, I'm not sure he did. It was an "I'm sorry if you got offended" non-apology.

Forgot to add quotation marks.
Silly of me not to think someone wouldnt
think it was my opinion he had apologised.

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:37 pm Don’t think this is the relevant thread for that anyway - the issue of a footballer getting himself in a mess for his superficial support of a cause he abandoned when it suited him and then backpedals after it all goes wrong is for woke watch. It’s not like Henderson is a terf, he’s a bell end, he’s a wing nut, he throws onion rings at sailors

Agreed , I just couldn't be arsed to search the relevant thread, so stuck it in this one as it's near the top of a football fans forum.

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 5:32 pm When you were born, doctors made a guess about whether you were a boy or girl, and sometimes they get it wrong.

I noted you used quotation marks but I just wanted to check - is that verbatim?

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 7:44 pm

CEB wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2024 5:32 pm When you were born, doctors made a guess about whether you were a boy or girl, and sometimes they get it wrong.

I noted you used quotation marks but I just wanted to check - is that verbatim?

I don't know. I'm lazy checking things like that.

I did clarify that I was paraphrasing within my quote marks but trying to do so without editorialising or framing it my way, but yes - it is absolutely the case that Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence, Stonewall have used that wording in training materials for staff in schools - I don’t think they’d even seek to deny it, it’s an in controversial summation of their position within the activism

When you think about it, that this is their position is obvious - when they say “assigned male at birth”, which I’m sure is a phrase you’ve come across, they actually ideologically rely on the idea that whether you’re male or female is an arbitrary decision made by doctors about whether you have a male or female gender identity, which they base on genitalia

(If you want I can try to dig out some training materials etc that support this)