Is this woman a transphobe?

[co-op]

I'm not convinced that happens, it's my understanding that the general shift in acceptance of trans stuff has precisely opened up more space for kids to be given options, including being GNC. If people are really going around telling kids that they must be trans, are they telling them that they have to be "binary" trans people, or do they at least give them the option of maybe being non-binary?

The options within being trans presumably include being non-binary trans (I assume). But when trans activists condemn "conversion therapy" for young (potentially) trans people what they mean is offering anything except "affirmation" if a person has self-diagnosed themselves as trans, in other words possibilities such as being gay, being gnc, suffering from body dysphoria due to other reasons are expressly ignored. If a therapist were to try and address those issues or even find out if they exist, that is "conversion therapy" and transphobic. This seems utterly wrong to me.

It also explains why detransitioners are so controversial and take so much abuse from TRAs. They are a standing criticism of the idea that you simply "know" when you are trans, because they "knew" and then they changed their mind. There will be legal actions over this - young people were stuck on hormones and given surgery with lifelong consequences without any real discussion as to the cause of their psychological pain.

 

[8ball]

The options within being trans presumably include being non-binary trans (I assume).

Which doesn't make much sense when you break it down. If not conforming to social gender norms was less of an issue, I think we might not have needed so many classifications in the first place.

 

[Border Reiver]

Not really. It might conceivably turn out to be wrong, but we're back to reproductive sex again (and no definition of biological sex can avoid reproduction). So if it turns out that the baby with a penis isn't actually developing to reproduce in the 'male' way, it may be that the interpretation of the presence of a penis was wrong, but generally speaking, 'having a penis' is quite a reliable indicator, and sadly if the interpretation is wrong, that's an indication of a developmental disorder.

This is where I do have an issue with some of the language that is coming in for these things - in this instance, 'assigned male/female at birth'. What exactly are we talking about there if not sex? But the word 'assign' has connotations of an active role on the part of the assigner, as if it could have been done differently. So later, you can say 'I was assigned male/female at birth, but I'm not really'. I think that misunderstands what is done at birth tbh, and in many instances, it goes as far as suggesting that it was the gender that was being assigned, or as co-op has been saying, that sex is the construct and gender the essential to being, so you can only guess at the essential bit at birth as it only comes out much later.

There is a great deal of muddle over the difference between sex and gender - increasingly so, it seems to me, as I regularly see the word 'gender' used now when what is actually meant is 'sex'. I suspect that people don't really like thinking so hard about it each time so just plump for a default choice, which used to be 'sex' and is now 'gender'. But I see people getting it wrong who really shouldn't be getting it wrong, including science writers.

You are ignoring history where external genitalia or their absence was the only signifier of sex at birth.

You are also ignoring the biology of sex that stands apart from the politics. Sex had multiple signifiers. Your concentration on reproductive ability is not the whole story.

 

[co-op]

Pre-pubescent children are being denied the option to NOT have puberty blockers? Is that really true? Is this from the Abigail Shrier book?

This is why I don't think a lot of this has nothing to do with feminism. It's just fear mongering.

I wasn't clear, pre-pubescent children definitely have the option of not taking puberty blockers. My point was whether you pass or don't pass (which came out of the conversation about being "seen as" one sex or the other) is a lot to do with puberty for transwomen. Avoiding it makes passing much more likely, which - arguably therefore makes this the right course of action for trans children. But can there really be such a thing as a transchild? How can a child make decisions like this? How can parents when they are bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic if they do anything except affirm and puberty block?

 

[Border Reiver]

Not really. It might conceivably turn out to be wrong, but we're back to reproductive sex again (and no definition of biological sex can avoid reproduction). So if it turns out that the baby with a penis isn't actually developing to reproduce in the 'male' way, it may be that the interpretation of the presence of a penis was wrong, but generally speaking, 'having a penis' is quite a reliable indicator, and sadly if the interpretation is wrong, that's an indication of a developmental disorder.

This is where I do have an issue with some of the language that is coming in for these things - in this instance, 'assigned male/female at birth'. What exactly are we talking about there if not sex? But the word 'assign' has connotations of an active role on the part of the assigner, as if it could have been done differently. So later, you can say 'I was assigned male/female at birth, but I'm not really'. I think that misunderstands what is done at birth tbh, and in many instances, it goes as far as suggesting that it was the gender that was being assigned, or as co-op has been saying, that sex is the construct and gender the essential to being, so you can only guess at the essential bit at birth as it only comes out much later.

There is a great deal of muddle over the difference between sex and gender - increasingly so, it seems to me, as I regularly see the word 'gender' used now when what is actually meant is 'sex'. I suspect that people don't really like thinking so hard about it each time so just plump for a default choice, which used to be 'sex' and is now 'gender'. But I see people getting it wrong who really shouldn't be getting it wrong, including science writers. We're in danger here of replacing the old obnoxious, and mostly wrong, sex essentialism with an equally objectionable, and wrong, gender essentialism.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

You are ignoring history where external genitalia or their absence was the only signifier of sex at birth.

You are also ignoring the biology of sex that stands apart from the politics. Sex had multiple signifiers. Your concentration on reproductive ability is not the whole story.

Sex may have multiple signifiers, but it has one function. It has evolved for the purpose of reproduction, and its definition depends on reproduction. It seems odd to me that people can see this quite clearly for pretty much any organism other than humans.

 

[Border Reiver]

I wasn't clear, pre-pubescent children definitely have the option of not taking puberty blockers. My point was whether you pass or don't pass (which came out of the conversation about being "seen as" one sex or the other) is a lot to do with puberty for transwomen. Avoiding it makes passing much more likely, which - arguably therefore makes this the right course of action for trans children. But can there really be such a thing as a transchild? How can a child make decisions like this? How can parents when they are bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic if they do anything except affirm and puberty block?

The law on prescribing puberty blockers has been clarified by a case heard last week. Parents retain the legal right to agree to puberty blockers being given to their child. The decision on child consent is currently being appealed and I have every expectation that the law will return to Gillick Competence for children making their own decision.

 

[Knotted]

I wasn't clear, pre-pubescent children definitely have the option of not taking puberty blockers. My point was whether you pass or don't pass (which came out of the conversation about being "seen as" one sex or the other) is a lot to do with puberty for transwomen. Avoiding it makes passing much more likely, which - arguably therefore makes this the right course of action for trans children. But can there really be such a thing as a transchild? How can a child make decisions like this? How can parents when they are bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic if they do anything except affirm and puberty block?

Are they really being bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic? Is this coming from health care professionals, from schools?

 

[Border Reiver]

Sex may have multiple signifiers, but it has one function. It has evolved for the purpose of reproduction, and its definition depends on reproduction. It seems odd to me that people can see this quite clearly for pretty much any organism other than humans.

Perhaps you could link to a scientific source that supports your contention that reproductive ability is the sole signifier of "sex".

 

[SpackleFrog]

You know there are trans people who agree with those statements?

No, they don't. No one claims you can change sex. You tedious prick.

 

[Border Reiver]

I wasn't clear, pre-pubescent children definitely have the option of not taking puberty blockers. My point was whether you pass or don't pass (which came out of the conversation about being "seen as" one sex or the other) is a lot to do with puberty for transwomen. Avoiding it makes passing much more likely, which - arguably therefore makes this the right course of action for trans children. But can there really be such a thing as a transchild? How can a child make decisions like this? How can parents when they are bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic if they do anything except affirm and puberty block?

The law on children's consent to medical treatment was very clear until the recent court case (Gillick Competence). The law is yet to be clarified at appeal.

 

[co-op]

Are they really being bombarded with messages telling them they are transphobic? Is this coming from health care professionals, from schools?

There is a big Stonewall campaign under way right now to ban "conversion therapy" ie to allow gender confused, gender non-conforming, gay young people to discuss the reasons why they feel they might be trans. The only acceptable course of action is "affirmation", anything else is "conversion therapy". This puts a huge amount of pressure on parents of very distressed children. But my wording "being bombarded with messages" is probably not catching the actual quality of the pressure that is being applied.

Any organisation or school that has become a Stonewall Diversity Champion will be absolutely pushed into supporting this line - and that could be quite a "bombardment" imo but I can't vouch for that our of personal experience.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I think you'd find little to object to in their politics before and yes my jaw was on the floor when she told me. It is blowing my mind what this topic is doing to the left.

You wouldn't have a clue what dodgy politics look like cos you're a dodgy cunt

 

[Border Reiver]

There is a big Stonewall campaign under way right now to ban "conversion therapy" ie to allow gender confused, gender non-conforming, gay young people to discuss the reasons why they feel they might be trans. The only acceptable course of action is "affirmation", anything else is "conversion therapy". This puts a huge amount of pressure on parents of very distressed children. But my wording "being bombarded with messages" is probably not catching the actual quality of the pressure that is being applied.

Any organisation or school that has become a Stonewall Diversity Champion will be absolutely pushed into supporting this line - and that could be quite a "bombardment" imo but I can't vouch for that our of personal experience.

"Conversion Therapy" has nothing to do with biological sex or gender identification. It applies only to sexual attraction.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Perhaps you could link to a scientific source that supports your contention that reproductive ability is the sole signifier of "sex".

Maybe you could give me a definition of sex that doesn't centre on reproduction. Meanwhile, you could also go back and reread the post you're replying to. You don't seem to have read it very closely.

It's always necessary to be careful about definitions in biology lest notions of non-Darwinian design creep in, but biological sex has been selected because sexual reproduction has been a successful strategy (exactly how and why that is is still up for debate) - specifically, two individuals mixing up their genes (and usually halving them but not always) then combining the two halves to produce a new individual. Sexual reproduction has a very specific definition, even if the ways in which it happens may vary hugely, and sexual reproduction within different groups of organisms can be even more closely defined.

And now I'm off this line of enquiry. It's bonkers that this level of detail ends up needing to be defined.

 

[co-op]

"Conversion Therapy" has nothing to do with biological sex or gender identification. It applies only to sexual attraction.

You are not up to speed. It is now being used to describe any non-affirmatory medical or therapeutic response to children presenting as trans.

 

[SpackleFrog]

There is a big Stonewall campaign under way right now to ban "conversion therapy" ie to allow gender confused, gender non-conforming, gay young people to discuss the reasons why they feel they might be trans. The only acceptable course of action is "affirmation", anything else is "conversion therapy". This puts a huge amount of pressure on parents of very distressed children. But my wording "being bombarded with messages" is probably not catching the actual quality of the pressure that is being applied.

Any organisation or school that has become a Stonewall Diversity Champion will be absolutely pushed into supporting this line - and that could be quite a "bombardment" imo but I can't vouch for that our of personal experience.

Thin end of the wedge isn't it. He says he just doesn't want anyone to recognise trans people to exist but actually he wants gays and lesbians to undergo conversion therapy so they can live how he thinks they should.

 

[co-op]

Thin end of the wedge isn't it. He says he just doesn't want anyone to recognise trans people to exist but actually he wants gays and lesbians to undergo conversion therapy so they can live how he thinks they should.

This is literally the opposite of what I want or what I think I've said, apologies if that wasn't clear.

 

[Knotted]

There is a big Stonewall campaign under way right now to ban "conversion therapy" ie to allow gender confused, gender non-conforming, gay young people to discuss the reasons why they feel they might be trans. The only acceptable course of action is "affirmation", anything else is "conversion therapy". This puts a huge amount of pressure on parents of very distressed children. But my wording "being bombarded with messages" is probably not catching the actual quality of the pressure that is being applied.

Any organisation or school that has become a Stonewall Diversity Champion will be absolutely pushed into supporting this line - and that could be quite a "bombardment" imo but I can't vouch for that our of personal experience.

I think the key thing with any therapy or consultation of any kind is to believe the patient even if they're children. And puberty blockers are there to delay any further decision. And as for passing, I would suggest that most people, trans or not want to pass.

Talking very generally, a lot of parents will deny that their children have various issues. It could be to do with being gay or neuro-nontypical or whatever. Mum and dad don't always know best. And I would suggest that this is the problem with these conversion therapists, they don't listen to the child, they listen to mum and dad. I don't think that it's a coincidence that mumsnet is a hot bed for "gender critical" opinion forming.

 

[Border Reiver]

Maybe you could give me a definition of sex that doesn't centre on reproduction. Meanwhile, you could also go back and reread the post you're replying to. You don't seem to have read it very closely.

It's always necessary to be careful about definitions in biology lest notions of non-Darwinian design creep in, but biological sex has been selected because sexual reproduction has been a successful strategy (exactly how and why that is is still up for debate) - specifically, two individuals mixing up their genes (and usually halving them but not always) then combining the two halves to produce a new individual. Sexual reproduction has a very specific definition, even if the ways in which it happens may vary hugely, and sexual reproduction within different groups of organisms can be even more closely defined.

And now I'm off this line of enquiry. It's bonkers that this level of detail ends up needing to be defined.

So you cannot back up your opinion with evidence. You are just ignoring scientific fact that "sex" has mutiple signifiers.

 

[Shechemite]

I think the key thing with any therapy or consultation of any kind is to believe the patient even if they're children.

Is it?

 

[Athos]

So you cannot back up your opinion with evidence. You are just ignoring scientific fact that "sex" has mutiple signifiers.

Did you not see this?

Sex may have multiple signifiers, but it has one function.

 

[Shechemite]

What’s neuro-nontypical?

 

[Border Reiver]

You are not up to speed. It is now being used to describe any non-affirmatory medical or therapeutic response to children presenting as trans.

Then it is being misused. Perhaps you can offer some examples of your claimed usages. Then we can assess how much authority that usage has.

 

[Border Reiver]

Is it?

It is a key definition of therapy that the client has the right to their own experiences.

 

[Knotted]

Is it?

I would be interested in your opinion on this.

 

[LDC]

Is it?

Yeah, I also think that's very suspect idea. There's plenty that could be drawn out about the subtleties of what believing them means exactly, but surely if someone comes to a medical professional for advice and/or a diagnosis it's a dynamic (especially if it's for therapy) to discover what's going on for them, rather than just sitting there accepting everything they say as fact.

 

[Knotted]

What’s neuro-nontypical?

Autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, that sort of thing. Just short hand in this instance.

 

[LDC]

It is a key definition of therapy that the client has the right to their own experiences.

Nobody would deny their experiences, nor is anyone suggesting that, but the interpretation of them and the impact of them could be discussed.

 

[Border Reiver]

Did you not see this?

Function does not define anything completely. It is merely one aspect of meaning.