Do you want to discuss boring politics? (256 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

you are equating this with someone being evil/ fat/ basically undesirable?

I know you’re not a stupid person, but that’s just wrong.

Im going to be generous and assume you’ve misread that. The analogy is clearly the delusion not a moral judgement.

I assume you can read my other comments so take my examples to dubed instead, unless you’re going to claim being black or an alien is undesirable.

Address the point: should we always affirm a child’s delusions?

 

---

[COV]

Im going to be generous and assume you’ve misread that. The analogy is clearly the delusion not a moral judgement.

I assume you can read my other comments so take my examples to dubed instead, unless you’re going to claim being black or an alien is undesirable.

Address the point: should we always affirm a child’s delusions?

No, because that isn’t the point, you are trying to force it to become the point when it’s actually way more complex than that.
Nobody is on about ‘affirming’ anything, ‘delusions’ is patronising, and the age 4 part is basically sensationalism. But I suspect you know that already. This is something of relevance to me and this place is a bad place to talk about it, leaving it there.

 

[shmmeee]

No, because that isn’t the point, you are trying to force it to become the point when it’s actually way more complex than that.
Nobody is on about ‘affirming’ anything, ‘delusions’ is patronising, and the age 4 part is basically sensationalism. But I suspect you know that already. This is something of relevance to me and this place is a bad place to talk about it, leaving it there.

It’s not patronising. If a boy says they’re a girl that’s literally a delusion. They aren’t a girl. What do they even mean by saying they want to be a girl? That they wish they had long hair? That they want to play girls games at playtime? That they like dresses? That they “feel like a girl”, what does a girl feel like and how would they know?

If you find the word delusion distasteful feel free to substitute for statement not based in fact.

And the topic is literally about guidance for teachers saying to affirm a child’s statement from the age of four. If you accept there’s circumstances where we shouldn’t affirm a child’s statement that runs contrary to evidence then the question is why this one in particular?

I’m sorry if you don’t like the topic of debate. Happy to leave it there.

 

[shmmeee]

Nooooo! Humans can't change sex - only certain animal species can do that. I haven't seen anywhere that this is being taught? They can also change gender, which is what humans are able to do. That is, reflect the behaviours, characteristics and appearance that are traditionally associated with a particular sex. But bearing in mind that medical science is pretty unanimous in considering that sex is a combination of genetics, genetic expression (throughout life) and socially learnt behaviours, we are all placed .differently along the gender spectrum.

Anyway, that's a wrap from me!

You’re using sex and gender interchangeably when they’re not the same thing. Asparagus has a sex, it doesn’t have socially learned behaviours. Not all sexed species use SRY genes on the Y chromosome to activate male development.

I’ll leave it on this: gender is bollocks. Dress how you want, love who you want, change your name to whatever you want, when you reach age of majority and are of sound mind do whatever you like to your body that makes you happy and fuck anyone that fucks with you for doing so. But schools are there to teach fact as much as possible and telling a kid they can be a different sex ain’t that.

Also teachers should never keep secrets from parents. Safeguarding leads should only do so on extreme circumstances with cast iron evidence of likelihood of harm.

 

[Ian1779]

Safeguarding will always supersede everything, which isn’t really emphasised in the newspaper article or the written paper.

Children will be protected and safe - the people on the ground will make sure that happens.

 

[shmmeee]

Bejesus, I'm not. It's very simple. Sex - the vast majority of the scientific literature takes the presence of a Y chromone to determine one as male, no matter how many Xs that person may have. There of of course nuanced discussion in the literature around this, but most taking as their starting point gamete sex. Similarly, whilst there is much still to be understood about gender behaviour, the vast majority of the scientific literature concludes that gender is likely determined by the expression of gamete sex (including exposure to hormone in the womb) and wider environmental (sociological) influences.

Genuinely would be interested in the gender literature you’ve seen. I’m far from a blank slatist, but I’d feel very uncomfortable about saying something that’s getting close to “GNC are going against biology”. You’re also taking a hammer to some pretty important feminist shibboleths there and I’m not sure we have the evidence for “brain sex”. I’m open to having my mind changed though, but would still worry about what that meant for those who are outliers to the data.

Would nit pick about sex determinism. Sex itself is very well defined across species. And it to do with gamete production, functioning or not. I’d be interested to know where it’s not because my understanding of DSDs is that all can be traced to affecting males or females.

 

[SBAndy]

have I missed something- where does it say that things are going to be ‘pushed onto children’?

surely is just about creating a safe environment where everyone can be what they want to be, with no questions asked- can only talk for me but far as I’m concerned that’s a really good thing.

‘No questions asked’ is an insane policy when you’re talking about primary-aged children. Like shmmeee has touched on, kids of that age largely aren’t capable of rounded analysis so questions would need to be asked to get them thinking. I don’t think it’s an alien concept to have policy for schools to discuss this, but it should be very much reactive. Parents would also need to know as has been highlighted. Even on a practical level, if a child wanted to wear the uniform of the other gender then I’m guessing the parents would have to purchase it?

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

No it's not , they are weird fuxkers trying to do shit like this to kids at such a young age

While I've not looked into this fully and part of me suspects it's something being reported in an alarmist way, we already do try and force things on kids at a young age.

Boys and girls are treated very differently from a very early age, from how they should act, to what toys they should play with etc.

Going into things in detail and legally is way too far (if that is indeed what they're considering) but letting a boy play with a doll or a girl play with a football/toy soldiers etc is encouraging 'gender neutrality'.

 

[COV]

Safeguarding will always supersede everything, which isn’t really emphasised in the newspaper article or the written paper.

Children will be protected and safe - the people on the ground will make sure that happens.

the reporting on this is hugely sensationalist and a lot of people on here have just swallowed the headlines. Guessing nobody has even opened or attempted to even look at the document itself, it’s just a case of jumping straight into the tabloid “hands off our kids you weirdos!” approach & leaping into assumptions that surgical procedures are going to be discussed with 4 year olds & ‘ideology’ will be rammed down their throats, which is false.

 

[SBT]

Would you be OK with the school supporting anorexia if the child feels they are fat? After all kid knows best. What about suicide if they feel there’s no point? Kid knows best.

The fact that someone like you can casually compare identifying as a different gender with something as harmful as suicide or anorexia shows that as a society we just have no fucking idea how to talk about this stuff.

Count me in as one of the people who has a lot to learn about all this - I think it’s going to be one of those things where in 20/30 years, we look back with embarrassment about how we handled it all, and it won’t be easy for everyone to get on board.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Deleted as probably tactless!

 

[Skybluefaz]

Deleted as probably tactless!

I don't think you were far off tbh.

 

[COV]

I genuinely think it's my generation's racism - most of us have probably had an old Great Aunt or Uncle who we cringed at when they said something... 'of their generation' wrt racism, and they genuinely had no idea what they were saying was offensive.

Wrt transgenderism, I fear I might be the same as that in 30-odd years if I'm not careful! I try to understand... some things I don't.

this is a great point. Even a quick look on here and you’ll see it equated to evil, suicide, anorexia, people saying it’s ‘not statistically normal’, and a lot of fear & outrage driven by a lack of understanding.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I don't think you were far off tbh.

Ha! It's a difficult subject though, isn't it!

And sometimes of course, the wanting not to cause offence sometimes stops learning more from others as much as people causing offense (even if unwittingly). And so the circle continues...

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Anyway, as COV quoted me I may as well stick it back up!

I genuinely think it's my generation's racism - most of us have probably had an old Great Aunt or Uncle who we cringed at when they said something... 'of their generation' wrt racism, and they genuinely had no idea what they were saying was offensive.

Wrt transgenderism, I fear I might be the same as that in 30-odd years if I'm not careful! I try to understand... some things I don't.

 

[Sick Boy]

Ha! It's a difficult subject though, isn't it!

And sometimes of course, the wanting not to cause offence sometimes stops learning more from others as much as people causing offense (even if unwittingly). And so the circle continues...

From what I can see teenagers today are far more aware and understanding of the issue compared to my generation (mid 30s).

I’m sure I’ve also read studies that ‘trans’ people are the most likely to be on the end of violence/abuse than anyone else.

 

[Skybluefaz]

Ha! It's a difficult subject though, isn't it!

And sometimes of course, the wanting not to cause offence sometimes stops learning more from others as much as people causing offense (even if unwittingly). And so the circle continues...

Extremely difficult.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Anyway, as COV quoted me I may as well stick it back up!

I genuinely think it's my generation's racism - most of us have probably had an old Great Aunt or Uncle who we cringed at when they said something... 'of their generation' wrt racism, and they genuinely had no idea what they were saying was offensive.

Wrt transgenderism, I fear I might be the same as that in 30-odd years if I'm not careful! I try to understand... some things I don't.

You're probably right.

I'll admit my difficulty in understanding it is that how is transgenderism that much different from other forms of body dysmorphia? Pretty much everyone has something they feel is not 'right', whether it to be with body shape, facial features, hair and we spend a lot of time changing them physically, some in more drastic ways than others.

Is it physical or mental? Is it more to do with how we expect the different sexes to act that causes the problem rather than the physical body? if people were allowed to be who they wanted to be in terms of what they wear/do etc., would the desire to physically change be as strong? Do people want the surgery so that they feel society will be more accepting of them and the way they are? i.e. if I look like a man/woman it'll be more acceptable for me to act the way I want to?

Having all these classifications like trans/queer etc is just trying to fit people into boxes and the fact that more and more 'types' are being identified shows its an attempt to categorise because people are saying they don't feel like they fit into any of the categories so create another. In reality there's probably as many 'types' as there are people because no one person will be the same as another. It's the age old problem of everyone being different in some way to everyone else but wanting to feel like they belong and that there are people just like them.

Basically is the solution to do away with gender stereotypes than to do all this transitioning? After all even if you have gender realignment surgery you're still not, biologically, that sex. You just look more like it so again it seems more a mental thing.

I reckon in the short-term we'll have two classifications, sex and gender, but will eventually work towards removing gender stereotypes which are just a construct created by society over many centuries/millenia

 

[Sick Boy]

You're probably right.

I'll admit my difficulty in understanding it is that how is transgenderism that much different from other forms of body dysmorphia? Pretty much everyone has something they feel is not 'right', whether it to be with body shape, facial features, hair and we spend a lot of time changing them physically, some in more drastic ways than others.

Is it physical or mental? Is it more to do with how we expect the different sexes to act that causes the problem rather than the physical body? if people were allowed to be who they wanted to be in terms of what they wear/do etc., would the desire to physically change be as strong? Do people want the surgery so that they feel society will be more accepting of them and the way they are? i.e. if I look like a man/woman it'll be more acceptable for me to act the way I want to?

Having all these classifications like trans/queer etc is just trying to fit people into boxes and the fact that more and more 'types' are being identified shows its an attempt to categorise because people are saying they don't feel like they fit into any of the categories so create another. In reality there's probably as many 'types' as there are people because no one person will be the same as another. It's the age old problem of everyone being different in some way to everyone else but wanting to feel like they belong and that there are people just like them.

Basically is the solution to do away with gender stereotypes than to do all this transitioning? After all even if you have gender realignment surgery you're still not, biologically, that sex. You just look more like it so again it seems more a mental thing.

I reckon in the short-term we'll have two classifications, sex and gender, but will eventually work towards removing gender stereotypes which are just a construct created by society over many centuries/millenia

The wise words of my mate Renton: “One thousand years from now there'll be no guys and no girls, just wankers. Sounds great to me.”

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The wise words of my mate Renton: “One thousand years from now there'll be no guys and no girls, just wankers. Sounds great to me.”

So this forum is well ahead of the times then.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Ha! It's a difficult subject though, isn't it!

And sometimes of course, the wanting not to cause offence sometimes stops learning more from others as much as people causing offense (even if unwittingly). And so the circle continues...

In my student days in 'more socially conscious' Scotland I got stunned by mates asking if we 'wanted to go for a chinky'. The English ones among us were gobsmacked, the Scots non-plussed!

On gender in schools-in the past I've taught in all boys schools. At one of them a 6th former wanted to transition and was given the choice to stay on if they wanted. Further down the school I'm less sure how it'd have been handled

 

[wingy]

Would Afghanistan have been better to have recruited a women only army ?

 

[shmmeee]

Would Afghanistan have been better to have recruited a women only army ?

No. From the sounds of it they needed everyone they could get their hands on.

 

[wingy]

No. From the sounds of it they needed verging they could get their hands on.

Well I mean from the perspective they wouldn't have balls in the game, like their counterparts?

 

[shmmeee]

Yes it’s a Twitter poll and yes it’s TalkRadio, but not sure I’ve seen a Twitter poll with this many votes this unanimous before

 

[COV]

Yes it’s a Twitter poll and yes it’s TalkRadio, but not sure I’ve seen a Twitter poll with this many votes this unanimous before

They’re asking if kids age 4 should be allowed to change their gender at school. Not sure too many would approve of that.

it is however not what the proposal is. But it’s elicited the desired outrage.

The ignorance is amazing- I’m surprised at you falling for this type of thing.

 

[shmmeee]

They’re asking if kids age 4 should be allowed to change their gender at school. Not sure too many would approve of that.

it is however not what the proposal is. But it’s elicited the desired outrage.

The ignorance is amazing- I’m surprised at you falling for this type of thing.

That’s literally the policy though? You can keep saying “ignorance” “falling for it” but you haven’t explained what’s incorrect.

 

[skybluetony176]

That’s literally the policy though? You can keep saying “ignorance” “falling for it” but you haven’t explained what’s incorrect.

I think the key point is use of the word “allow”. The only thing it’s allowing is a safe place for expression of what they already feel they are. You can’t allow someone to be trans gender, gay, whatever. They already are, it’s the safe place that’s disallowed.

 

[shmmeee]

I think the key point is use of the word “allow”. The only thing it’s allowing is a safe place for expression of what they already feel they are. You can’t allow someone to be trans gender, gay, whatever. They already are, it’s the safe place that’s disallowed.

But they aren’t. Demonstrably. It’s a load of wibble based on vaguely defined terms and bad science.

According to this document anyone who is a boy an emotional or doesn’t “conform to masculine physical attractiveness” is trans:



This is the exact problem. No one can consistently define what being trans is. If a kids got a diagnosis of gender dysphoria that’s one thing. But this guidance is a load of bollocks looking to be trendy and seemingly written by some dodgy charities that promote child transition.

It’s a load of sexist drivel. Uses the word gender 171 times in 71 pages yet doesn’t define it once.

WTF is an “individual experience of gender”? What does that even mean?

This is stuff for a tumblr blog or a gender studies assignment not school guidance.

 

[JAM See]

In my student days in 'more socially conscious' Scotland I got stunned by mates asking if we 'wanted to go for a chinky'. The English ones among us were gobsmacked, the Scots non-plussed!

On gender in schools-in the past I've taught in all boys schools. At one of them a 6th former wanted to transition and was given the choice to stay on if they wanted. Further down the school I'm less sure how it'd have been handled

Strange one that. I still (after a few pints) refer to Chinese cuisine as 'a chinky', but I balk at others use of the N word.

Glad that all racial stereotyping is being gradually erased. We've got a fair way to go with regards to gender stereotyping, but we are headed in the right direction I reckon.

I am still a complete bigot when it comes to those cheating Barnsley cunts though!

 

[SBT]

According to this document anyone who is a boy an emotional or doesn’t “conform to masculine physical attractiveness” is trans:

It doesn’t appear to say that at all from what you’ve posted? But you go on citing TalkRadio Twitter polls.

 

[shmmeee]

It doesn’t appear to say that at all from what you’ve posted? But you go on citing TalkRadio Twitter polls.

the only thing I was citing was the one sided nature of the poll that was surprising. But go on cherry picking one out of tens of questions posted to make yourself feel better.

It literally does. It says trans people are people who don’t conform to gender stereotypes and lists those as gender stereotypes.

Maybe you can answer: what’s gender? What’s a gender identity mean?

 

[SBT]

It literally does. It says trans people are people who don’t conform to gender stereotypes and lists those as gender stereotypes.

It says that not conforming to gender stereotypes is something that trans people do. It does not say that anyone who doesn’t conform to gender stereotypes is trans. You sound like someone trying to drum up a moral panic.

 

[shmmeee]

It says that not conforming to gender stereotypes is something that trans people do. It does not say that anyone who doesn’t conform to gender stereotypes is trans. You sound like someone trying to drum up a moral panic.

You sound like someone who can’t explain what they’re on about so resorts to insults.

Gender is sex stereotypes. That’s what I’ve always been taught: boys have short hair, girls can’t throw, etc etc.

It says transgender people are people who’s gender isn’t the same as their sex. Which makes no sense so I assume they mean they don’t conform to sex stereotypes.

If you have a better description feel free to give it. I seriously doubt you have though.

You’ll be the third person in this thread to get get angry and abusive and be completely unable to answer basic questions about the ideology you’re getting angry about. It’s tiresome.

 

[SBT]

You sound like someone who can’t explain what they’re on about so resorts to insults.

Gender is sex stereotypes. That’s what I’ve always been taught: boys have short hair, girls can’t throw, etc etc.

It says transgender people are people who’s gender isn’t the same as their sex. Which makes no sense so I assume they mean they don’t conform to sex stereotypes.

If you have a better description feel free to give it. I seriously doubt you have though.

You’ll be the third person in this thread to get get angry and abusive and be completely unable to answer basic questions about the ideology you’re getting angry about. It’s tiresome.

I’m talking only about this specific statement of yours:

According to this document anyone who is a boy an emotional or doesn’t “conform to masculine physical attractiveness” is trans

The document you then posted doesn’t say that at all.

Why would you suggest that Scottish government policy is trying to impose trans status on any non-stereotypical kid when it isn’t doing that at all?