Independent Leyton Orient Forum

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 10:50 am 80% now

What bit of that do you think is not demonstrably true?

Story of O wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 11:24 am Apart from the obvious, what is it that defines a man/woman? No two people are the same, so you could have feminine traits but still think of yourself as a man. So there has to be something that makes a person feel they are in the wrong body

Chromosomes?
Society?

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 11:43 am

Story of O wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 11:24 am Apart from the obvious, what is it that defines a man/woman? No two people are the same, so you could have feminine traits but still think of yourself as a man. So there has to be something that makes a person feel they are in the wrong body

Chromosomes?
Society?

Your question, and LSN’s answers, still conflate the various concepts that are referred to, and fail to delineate them, or to recognise the usage within this activism.

These are the actual answers to your question (and to LSN’s suggestions)

“Apart from the obvious, what is it that defines a man/woman?”

There is no need whatsoever to go beyond the obvious. Men are adult male humans, women are adult female humans. If you associate whether someone is a man or a woman with traits, you are reinforcing structural “gender”, where “gender” refers to a cultural concept of expectations of what is appropriate for the sexes.


“You could have feminine traits but still think of yourself as a man”

Above where I mentioned “expectations of what is appropriate for the sexes”, this is what I mean: the idea that traits that occur in males are “feminine” *is* what we mean by the idea that “gender” is a limiting set of ideas that tells men how they should be. Is talking about mental health a feminine trait? Is liking football a masculine trait? What do we mean by that?
It’s almost always the case that when we “gender” traits, we are trying to limit what people can or should do or be like because of their sex.

“There has to be something that makes people feel that they’re in the wrong body”

The clue is in your questions: the labelling of traits as “feminine”, with those who have those traits experiencing societal pressure to conform, which may well be very difficult to do, is self evidently a perfect way to get somebody to feel that their sense of self is at odds with their body.
A society that imposes limits on what people can do due to their sex, is a society which is likely to have some people who feel that they are at odds with their sexed body.

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 11:32 am

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 10:50 am 80% now

What bit of that do you think is not demonstrably true?

Well, it’s probably not true that what you say is happening is actually happening at scale. I accept (and agree with stereotypes and sexism being at the root of all this) but you’ve gone from a badly worded question on a form straight to “and here’s some puberty blockers for your kids”

No I haven’t. I’m not saying, nor would I say, that puberty blockers are being handed out like sweets to kids with no issues whatsoever.

I’m saying that the outcome of the *actual policies that trans activist organisations train schools in* is to teach that whether someone is a boy or girl is about their traits, not their bodies. And that the predictable outcomes from that, are these:

1: children who don’t conform to gendered norms receive, at best, mixed messaging about their identity, hearing very nice, well meaning people saying that “boy” is a feeling, and doing so in a culture where the obvious inference is that that “feeling” refers to masculinity.

2: children who assert a trans identity are met with an “affirmation only” approach at schools, where the policy (adopted from stonewall’s trans guidance) is that parents should not necessarily be told if their child “socially transitions” at school

3: charities that work with “trans kids” see puberty blockers as a life saving necessity, and think it’s harmful to even look at other potential reasons for a trans identity - in fact, every mainstream trans organisation is seeking to have doing so enshrined in law as conversion therapy”

4: the upshot of that is that children who would be likely to grow up to be healthy gay adults (being a demographic highly likely to display gender non conformity as children) are disproportionately assessed as being “trans”, in the recent massive ramping up of children asserting a trans identity.


Just because it sounds mad does not mean it isn’t exactly what is happening.

Here’s a thought. Usually, if someone said something that sounded like a mad conspiracy theory, you’d say “prove it”, right? And if someone said “do your own research” you’d rightly be like “lol, can’t even prove it”. But if they pointed to a specific source, you’d look, if only to try to discredit it, right?

Well, here is an incredibly well researched book that covers all of this, written by a newsnight journalist who spoke to whistleblowers as the Tavistock clinic, where many staff members expressed concern that they were sterilising gay children.
The link to it is here, synopsis below. Have a read and then get back to me

Ah, forum doesn’t allow Amazon links: it’s Hannah Barnes’s Time To Think


SHORTLISTED FOR THE BAILLIE GIFFORD PRIZE FOR NON-FICTION

SHORTLISTED FOR THE ORWELL PRIZE FOR POLITICAL WRITING

'This is what journalism is for' - Observer

Time to Think goes behind the headlines to reveal the truth about the NHS's flagship gender service for children.

The Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), based at the Tavistock and Portman Trust in North London, was set up initially to provide — for the most part — talking therapies to young people who were questioning their gender identity. But in the last decade GIDS has referred more than a thousand children, some as young as nine years old, for medication to block their puberty. In the same period, the number of young people seeking GIDS's help exploded, increasing twenty-five-fold. The profile of the patients changed too: from largely pre-pubescent boys to mostly adolescent girls, who were often contending with other difficulties.

Why had the patients changed so dramatically? Were all these distressed young people best served by taking puberty blockers and then cross-sex hormones, which cause irreversible changes to the body? While some young people appeared to thrive after taking the blocker, many seemed to become worse. Was there enough clinical evidence to justify such profound medical interventions in the lives of young people who had so much else to contend with?

This urgent, scrupulous and dramatic book explains how, in the words of some former staff, GIDS has been the site of a serious medical scandal, in which ideological concerns took priority over clinical practice. Award-winning journalist Hannah Barnes has had unprecedented access to thousands of pages of documents, including internal emails and unpublished reports, and well over a hundred hours of personal testimony from GIDS clinicians, former service users and senior Tavistock figures. The result is a disturbing and gripping parable for our times.

But can you accept it could be considered as jumping to conclusions based on confirmation bias or paranoia?

What is the conclusion that I have jumped to? I’ve literally just walked you through what the guidelines are, who I think is at risk and why. “Have you thought you might just be wrong?” is the evidence-free position here. Your position is “it sounds mad so it can’t be happening”, and yet this thread is full of things I’ve said that have been received as mad before it turned out that it’s happening.

Have a read of the book I recommended. I’ll buy it for you if you like.

Let’s try this one more time.

A teacher who is enthusiastically pro the mainstream trans rights movement probably believes
“A girl is a child who feels like a girl”

and doesn’t believe

“A girl is a child with a female body, not a feeling”


Agree?

You accept there has been a massive, massive increase over the last decade in the number of children being referred for treatment based on asserting a trans or no?
Care to hazard a guess at the scale of that increase?

CEB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 12:37 pm Let’s try this one more time.

A teacher who is enthusiastically pro the mainstream trans rights movement probably believes
“A girl is a child who feels like a girl”

and doesn’t believe

“A girl is a child with a female body, not a feeling”


Agree?

I have seen quite a few trans activists asked “what is a woman?” And they all say “someone who identifies as a woman”

Yes - that’s because they’re nuts.

Not really giving his employers much choice, is he?

Did you read the context of it, and the basis of their upholding the complaint?

They concluded that - even in the context of discussing sport - that to state that transwomen are male is to be biased towards one side of a debate.

But “trans women” *are* male.

In the long term all this is not helping trans people get acceptance in society.

Oh I don’t know, fall in line, repeat the mantra or lose your career is quite a motivator for a lot of people

That’s just paranoia! Got any proof for the assertion that people are being told to agree or shut up lest they lose their career? (PS I will just not reply if you post proof)

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ide-united

Wilson said their perception of gender does not fit into the western standards of man and woman, and that finally making the announcement came as a huge relief to them.

“Every non-binary person experiences this differently,” Wilson told Holly Ransom, Pride Cup board chair. “As a kid, I didn’t see that things were supposed to be for girls or for boys but I was taught that as I grew up.

“You don’t realise how much of a difference it makes. Being referred to as ‘they/them’ for the first time gave me this euphoric feeling. I just wanted to be free.”

Arent they falling into the western standards by identifying as non-binary then?

@CEB - I occasionally visit this thread and must admit I find it hard to follow. Accepting my level of ignorance, and attempting to explore in good faith, I just tried to write out this flow chart to make sense of the whole debate in my mind. Appreciate this will read much too binary, and there are loads of other spokes which I haven't thought of, but:

(a) What major amendments would you make to this?
(b) Help me understand where your views lie on this flowchart?

Am asking not to catch you or anyone out, but to try to understand the arguments better.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 10:02 am https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ide-united

Wilson said their perception of gender does not fit into the western standards of man and woman, and that finally making the announcement came as a huge relief to them.

“Every non-binary person experiences this differently,” Wilson told Holly Ransom, Pride Cup board chair. “As a kid, I didn’t see that things were supposed to be for girls or for boys but I was taught that as I grew up.

“You don’t realise how much of a difference it makes. Being referred to as ‘they/them’ for the first time gave me this euphoric feeling. I just wanted to be free.”

Arent they falling into the western standards by identifying as non-binary then?

Commentator's nightmare.

Also, assume the Western standard which enable her represent the women's side internationally are...OK?

Wally Banter wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 10:09 am @CEB - I occasionally visit this thread and must admit I find it hard to follow. Accepting my level of ignorance, and attempting to explore in good faith, I just tried to write out this flow chart to make sense of the whole debate in my mind. Appreciate this will read much too binary, and there are loads of other spokes which I haven't thought of, but:

(a) What major amendments would you make to this?
(b) Help me understand where your views lie on this flowchart?

Am asking not to catch you or anyone out, but to try to understand the arguments better.

Would have preferred you to go retro and do this via the medium of Cornflakes.

Long slender neck wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 10:02 am https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ide-united

Wilson said their perception of gender does not fit into the western standards of man and woman, and that finally making the announcement came as a huge relief to them.

“Every non-binary person experiences this differently,” Wilson told Holly Ransom, Pride Cup board chair. “As a kid, I didn’t see that things were supposed to be for girls or for boys but I was taught that as I grew up.

“You don’t realise how much of a difference it makes. Being referred to as ‘they/them’ for the first time gave me this euphoric feeling. I just wanted to be free.”

Arent they falling into the western standards by identifying as non-binary then?

“ Wilson has been hailed for their bravery after becoming the first professional footballer in Australia to come out as non-binary”


Therein lies part of the problem, where coming out as non binary is given the social validation of saving a baby from a burning building

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Fri Mar 01, 2024 10:13 am Would have preferred you to go retro and do this via the medium of Cornflakes.

If I can characterise each box in the form of a cereal box, believe me, I will.

The most immediate issue I see with it, and apologies if this is unhelpful, is that I don’t think there actually is a clear either/or for nature/nurture.

bear with me though, I’ll have a proper look and give some thoughts, but my immediate suspicion is that I think the starting point isn’t the most helpful framing

If it helps:

Nature = organic cornflakes
Nurture = Special K