Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
mudsticks
Squire
Did someone say something funny ?? 🙄
monkers
Guru
I'm not sure why. (shrugs). Never mind.
icowden
Legendary Member
Um...Fück me, is there anybody on this forum more desperate for attention than you?
Rusty Nails
Country Member
It was a joke at our Sartre wannabe's expense. But of course it wouldn't have been seen.
multitool
Shaman
Can you imagine just hovering around a thread, never posting on topic, but just waiting to snark at somebody else in a way that isn't on topic?
That's Rusty Fails.
Pathetic, isn't it.
Me? You may not agree with my positions or the manner in which they expressed , but they are on topic. Plus there is always the ignore button.
Last edited:
icowden
Legendary Member
I don't know. Failing to take a joke and then deliberately snarking by refusing to use people's handles isn't exactly statesmanship.
All too true. Just remember that discussions are about listening to both side and not just putting your point of view.
multitool
Shaman
Listening is not the same as agreeing.
You'll find me listening and agreeing just as much as I listen and disagree. What you won't find me doing is deliberately distorting and misrepresenting other people's positions and throwing up straw men. I actually find that more objectionable that something like adam456642's constant abuse.
As to handle jokes, I'll think you'll find there is a fair bit of that aimed at me. But you won't find me objecting. My username was deliberately chosen to offer that possibility.
I know...blows your mind, doesn't it, cowpen
You'll find me listening and agreeing just as much as I listen and disagree. What you won't find me doing is deliberately distorting and misrepresenting other people's positions and throwing up straw men. I actually find that more objectionable that something like adam456642's constant abuse.
As to handle jokes, I'll think you'll find there is a fair bit of that aimed at me. But you won't find me objecting. My username was deliberately chosen to offer that possibility.
I know...blows your mind, doesn't it, cowpen
Last edited:
multitool
Shaman
So anyway, rather than you dorks having your pathetic little pile-on attempt then claiming I'm the attention seeker, here's something back on topic:
There's a lot going on here conceptually. The notion that the child has 'transitioned'*. The notion that the school did it to her**. And the huge question as to why the child didn't feel able to confide in her mother***. Then there is the link between that last point and the mother's behaviour here.****
*what does 'transitioned' mean in this context? The girl requested people at school address her by a different name and they did. She hasn't legally transitioned. She is not on any medical pathway.
**AIUI schools have a statutory duty of safeguarding, and given that the primary location of child abuse is the home it seems reasonable that schools do not automatically share with parents.
***/**** see **
There's a lot going on here conceptually. The notion that the child has 'transitioned'*. The notion that the school did it to her**. And the huge question as to why the child didn't feel able to confide in her mother***. Then there is the link between that last point and the mother's behaviour here.****
*what does 'transitioned' mean in this context? The girl requested people at school address her by a different name and they did. She hasn't legally transitioned. She is not on any medical pathway.
**AIUI schools have a statutory duty of safeguarding, and given that the primary location of child abuse is the home it seems reasonable that schools do not automatically share with parents.
***/**** see **
Last edited:
Bromptonaut
Rohan Man
- Location
- Bugbrooke, Northants
So there's a child at or beyond puberty who let's her school know that she wants to be known as, say, Arthur rather than the name Martha given to her by her parents at birth. Inevitably, she's asked what do Mum and/or Dad say. The answer to that questions and further probing that follows raise significant concerns for her safety etc.
All good; the system has worked. As the folder says she's 'socially transed', no medication or anything else that cannot be reversed later.
AuroraSaab
Legendary Member
Follow the money? All that Tweet says is that a $15k grant was given to a US radical feminist group. No evidence the US far right are funding UK feminist groups. The article it links to says a conservative group paid UK feminist Linda Bellos's air fare to the US to speak and links KJK with US groups but says nothing about funding. Hardly mega bucks funding UK feminism.
Here's some dubious UK funding for you though:
The Lib Dems has received over a million pounds in donations from the company who make puberty blockers, Ferring Pharmaceuticals.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blocker-drug-firm-donated-cash-to-lib-dems-cf3x77nh3
The Dutch Study, which became the impetus for countries to start treating kids with puberty blockers, was also funded by Ferring, the puberty blocker manufacturers.
https://thepostmillennial.com/maker...ng-care-for-minors-dutch-investigative-report
Groups like the Arcus foundation and the Open Society Foundation routinely fund newspapers like The Guardian to run articles promoting transgender issues:
They also fund Stonewall:
There are lots of organisations funding the positive promotion of trans rights in the media and within the charity sector. All pushing for influence behind the scenes.
(Edited for formatting)
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Legendary Member
That's the 'Tip of the Iceberg' report. Apart from saying that US right wingers the Koch brothers have financially supported the Spiked Online media site, I can't see anything linking US money to UK feminism. Most of the claims seem to be about US Christian groups promoting pro life views in the EU.
Worth pointing out that the US Christian and right wing funders aren't particularly gay friendly so won't be interested in grassroots UK feminist groups that are often advocates for lesbians.
It's basically the same as other left leaning groups or certson individuals are doing though, including very rich transwomen like Martine Rothblatt - ie. spending their money to promote advocacy of their particular ideology, whatever it is.
Let's face it, whatever side of the fence you sit on, the quango, charity, advice, and advocacy sector is a huge grift these days with a revolving door of CEO's moving from one to another, chasing grants and willing to do whatever it takes to keep the cash rolling in. Far greater transparency on donors and supporters needed all round.
Worth pointing out that the US Christian and right wing funders aren't particularly gay friendly so won't be interested in grassroots UK feminist groups that are often advocates for lesbians.
It's basically the same as other left leaning groups or certson individuals are doing though, including very rich transwomen like Martine Rothblatt - ie. spending their money to promote advocacy of their particular ideology, whatever it is.
Let's face it, whatever side of the fence you sit on, the quango, charity, advice, and advocacy sector is a huge grift these days with a revolving door of CEO's moving from one to another, chasing grants and willing to do whatever it takes to keep the cash rolling in. Far greater transparency on donors and supporters needed all round.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
My views on the transgender issue are quite simple. I can understand the difference between one's sex and gender and perfectly well understand there are people whose gender does not match their birth sex and wish to transition. These people need to be able to lead the life they wish without criticism or abuse. I can also understand the limited number of occasions such as some physical sports or use of traditionally single sex facilities such as toilets, where they are not allowed to have exactly the same access rights as their chosen gender...unless the vast majority of that gender have no issues and are prepared to accept them. There are limits to absolute freedom and rights within any society depending on the mores of that society. I do not consider it transphobic to have concerns about these issues.
The issue is complicated by aspects such as what form of criteria are acceptable for gender change recognition ranging from a simple declaration to gender re-assignment surgery, and I do not yet have a view on what the criteria should be.
I view the most extreme and abusive supporters of either side of the argument, in this country and the US, with equal distaste and do not believe the views of those extremes to be any reasonable guide to the views of most people on either side. I am not a great supporter of 'the right is on my side' or 'they started it' when it comes to verbal or physical abuse or threats, believing that they just deepen the polarisation. The tweet above about that woman protesting at the school's action over her child's transition actually proves nothing about the issues involved, nor makes any resolution easier, but is about apportioning blame and a further reflection of this polarisation.
This thread should be an opportunity for all issues to be discussed, as I believe was Claud's aim in starting it, but sadly it has turned toxic and is far too much about apportionment of blame.
The issue is complicated by aspects such as what form of criteria are acceptable for gender change recognition ranging from a simple declaration to gender re-assignment surgery, and I do not yet have a view on what the criteria should be.
I view the most extreme and abusive supporters of either side of the argument, in this country and the US, with equal distaste and do not believe the views of those extremes to be any reasonable guide to the views of most people on either side. I am not a great supporter of 'the right is on my side' or 'they started it' when it comes to verbal or physical abuse or threats, believing that they just deepen the polarisation. The tweet above about that woman protesting at the school's action over her child's transition actually proves nothing about the issues involved, nor makes any resolution easier, but is about apportioning blame and a further reflection of this polarisation.
This thread should be an opportunity for all issues to be discussed, as I believe was Claud's aim in starting it, but sadly it has turned toxic and is far too much about apportionment of blame.
AuroraSaab
Legendary Member
If there are safeguarding concerns about physical safery, schools have a duty to inform the police and social services. They shouldn't be taking it upon themselves to manage that safeguarding concern by facilitating social transitioning.
If a child was thought to be anorexic, would that be kept from parents?
Teachers aren't psychologists and are not equipped to diagnose whether children have body dysphoria or not, nor do they have the expertise to decide whether social transitioning is helpful or harmful to a particular individual.
What if a school facilitates social transitioning, doesn't tell the parents, and the child later self harms or worse? Had the parents known they might have brought other issues to the schools attention or sought counselling for their child.
As the Cass report says, social transitioning is not a neutral act. It can concretise what is simply a passing phase for a child. In fact as I recall Cass talks only of 'children with body or gender dysphoria' and doesn't use the term 'trans child', presumably because it's not helpful to take a child out of one box and put them in another.
Imagine being fully socially transitioned at school in Year 7 - changing your name in the register and on exercise books, friends and staff calling you a different name, using different facilities. How hard it would be to row back on that in Year 10 or 11 when your feelings had changed? Social transitioning isn't a neutral act at all.
