it would not surprise me if some parents might FORCE their kids into been opposite sex form the one they were born.
Just show that they are Progressive And enlightened people they are by being accepting of different.
There's even a possibility of them building a media career out of it. See Jazz Jennings.
On the other side of the coin, I would be rather worried today as a parent of a 'non gender conforming' child. Would there be pressure from schools, social services, etc to treat them as trans, rather than just allow them to be individuals?
Children tend to became aware of their genitals around the time of potty training and the fact that urine comes out of them. That's pretty much it really unless the parents/ adults make a big deal out of 'gender identity'.
It is not all there is to it, I am afraid,
I can tell you from first hand experience that as a child you gradually develop a sense of your gender identity from around the ages of 3/4/5 as you start to interact with others and you gradually perceive that there is a difference.
It might take a few years for you to fully realise that you are being perceived and treated as a boy or girl but that you yourself feel that you are the opposite. But by the age of about 6 or 7 most kids who are gender dysphoric and may eventually transition will be very aware that they have a major problem. Even if they are not yet fully aware what that is.
It has nothing to do with boys toys/girls toys and - whilst I agree that there will be cases where parental influence over gender roles might be a factor - I doubt it could overwhelm this innate sense within a person of just knowing what gender you are.
Even if that gender is different from what the world at large assumes you to be.
As we know so little about this case and probably never will discover more given the judges ruling it would not be wise to jump to conclusions here.
It is certainly possible that the mother imposed ideas onto the child. It is equally possible the child was genuinely gender confused. Which might not be the same as gender dysphoric as children can play with gender identity but will retain that innate sense of absoluteness about whether they are a boy or a girl and move on in time.
Only those with true dysphoria will reach a stage where they need to be seen by and helped by psychologists and psychiatrists and might eventually decide to transition permanently.
It is not at all clear if that is what is going on here. But if that is the situation then they will never be happy being forced to be a boy and that reality will emerge over the coming years and they will, hopefully, get help.
If not and the child was pushed into this gender role by the mother then they will indeed thrive in their true gender identity as a boy and there should be fewer ongoing issues.
For now we just have to trust to the court's judgement and hope they have acted wisely in the child's best interest and that he will be happy.
Ultimately, when he is older, the choice will be his and nobody else then will be in a better position to say what their true gender identity should be.
Do you not see the massive contradiction in your 'theory'
The whole situation is full of contradictions. Transing children can only happen if we believe in gender roles, other than as a social construct.
Believing in rigid gender roles and applying them to young children is reactionary and ultimately harmful to both men and women.
JayceeDove (don't want to take up half the page through quoting your post)I respect your point of view as someone who has been through a similar situation. I'm speaking as a parent.
I don't believe there is any such thing as an 'inate sense of gender'. We are identified at birth as being of one of two biological sexes (other than in the small number of intersex individuals). From birth people treat male and female babies differently. Behaviours are reacted to in a different way.
What seems to be happening in some families is the assumption that because the child likes things and behaviours typically identified with the opposite sex then there must have been a mistake and they were 'incorrectly assigned' at birth. No, they weren't. The fact is that they are just individuals who like different things. Girls do not have to behave or like the same things as other girls, the same with boys.
That is what I belive happened in this case. That is as the parent of a 'non gender conforming' child, who grew up to be perfectly happy with his biological sex, perhaps because no one ever made a big issue out of it?
I do take your point that there can be a more deepseated issue and that gender confusion/dysphoria can be intensely painful for the individuals concerned. However as a parent I am very aware of how easy it is to mould and implant ideas into very young children. That is what is happening in some of these cases, whether it is from a desire to be forward thinking and liberal, or something more serious such as munchausens by proxy. IMO of course
DaisyBill, I do not think that we are far apart in our views on these matters.
I am certainly with you that gender confusion can be accelerated by way of how a family treats a child and to some degree by society's dealing of gender stereotypes.
And I agree that in most cases the child will grow out of this and evolve according to their biology.
But I think that is because they DO have an innate sense of gender and I think it something that is part of us and we all grow up with.
In the rare cases where conflict exists and is intense that is when dysphoria can develop into a lifelong problem.
This is supported by cases such as the boy whose genitals were mutilated soon after birth and was raised as a girl as a consequence but who was never able to accept that role. He seemed to know he was a boy instinctively. His gender identity had to be formed very early or be innate for that to be true.
Similarly Lady Colin Campbell, identified as a boy at birth due to ambiguous genitalia, but always sure she was a girl even when given testosterone to try to convince her otherwise. Later tests showed that her concept of gender identity was biologically right and not the decisions made at birth for her.
" A seven-year-old boy who was 'living life entirely as a girl' has been removed from his mother's care and ordered to live with his father following a High Court ruling.
Mr Justice Hayden said the woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had caused her son 'significant emotional harm' by trying to raise him entirely as a girl.
The judge said the woman had been 'absolutely convinced' that the youngster 'perceived himself as a girl' and was determined that he should be a female. "
Poor little lad. How confusing for him.
Good, the mother clearly was a fit parent.
I only hope he isn't too damaged to be able to go on to live a normal life.
Any parent that tries to force transgenderism on to their child is not fit to be a parent, they are putting their beliefs above the well being of their child.
You often hear now about very young children who are adamant they want to live as the opposite sex and are raised as such.
One red flag is that the father was prevented from having contact...... I wonder what the reasoning behind this was?
Which usually comes from the child itself, rather than it being forced on to the child as happened in this case.
Although I do believe in most cases of supposedly transgender children, there is an element of force applied to the assertion they are by people other than the person themselves.
Im wondering if as a young toddler he showed interest in 'girly' toys and his mother percieved this as gender identity and it escalated from there.
It is very likely this is the case. The mother is probably one of the nutters that believe having an interest in doing the activities that are stereotypically done by the opposite sex means the kid is trans rather than them just wanting to do something.
A boy that wants to play with girl's toys is still male, and a girl that wants to play with boys toys are still female.
It wasn't so long ago that people were going nuts about gender stereotypes being a bad thing, but now they're trumpeted as a proof of transgenderism.
Which usually comes from the child itself, rather than it being forced on to the child as happened in this case.
Although I do believe in most cases of supposedly transgender children, there is an element of force applied to the assertion they are by people other than the person themselves.
Very true - what isn't clear yet is if this was the case here. We don't know enough about it (as I'm sure no one does) to presume the mother forced the child to do anything rather than fought with the best of interests to allow her child to be the gender they themselves say they identified as.
I do still wonder though why she wouldn't allow the father to have an influence in the childs life and why she legally registered (with the GP) as a girl. Its not really the actions of someone who is "allowing" their child to develop their own identity - again though she may have done what she felt to be the right thing.
We should also remember that it wouldn't be completely unheard of for a parent to see traits in a child and try to discourage it. Perhaps very early on the father wouldn't allow his son to play with dolls and tried to force more masculine pursuits on him, hence the mothers actions re visitation. The judges personal feelings may also have played a part in his decision.
The correct decision by the judge. No parent should force an ideological choice on their child where there are potentially negative consequences.
Transitioning is a major and life changing decision and something which needs to be done as an adult when someone can make a sound decision on their own and know both the positives and consequences of their actions. Once a decision is made, it will be very difficult, if not impossible to reverse that decision.
I think we'll see more cases like this as there becomes a greater push toward the ideological concept of "boys defective, girls normal" by feminists means more mothers and male feminist fathers will encourage their boys to transition to girls - in what seems a remarkable correlation to the religious concept of being born with original sin.
The whole situation is full of contradictions. Transing children can only happen if we believe in gender roles, other than as a social construct.
Believing in rigid gender roles and applying them to young children is reactionary and ultimately harmful to both men and women.
Yeah because forcing Transism on to people is not harmful at all...
Gender roles are not the problem, people that believe gender roles are the problem and then interfere with it are the problem.
I genuinely believe that the rise is supposed transgender children is not a result of children thinking they are the wrong sex, but from people projecting their beliefs on to children.
It is not a coincidence that this rise comes at a time when transgenderism is being made a big deal.
If this continues there are going to be a lot of screwed up kids and adults.
As JDF alluded to earlier, those that claim to be progressive, enlightened and accepting are usually anything but. The progressive, enlightened and accepting claim unravels as soon as someone disagrees with them. They then refuse to accept that people can believe something different to them and proceed to tell the person they are wrong for holding that opinion, and that their opinion is the only correct and acceptable one.
This case is a perfect example, rather than just allowing the kid to be what he is, the mother felt the need to interfere and to tell him he is a girl. She wanted him to be a girl when he clearly wasn't.
Give it a few years and that supposed disdain he had for his penis will disappear and he won't want to leave it alone.
The Social Workers that allowed her to do this should be struck off, they are not fit to do their job. Her actions should have been an immediate red flag.
It is the perception that 'girl stuff' and 'boy stuff' causes issues that is actually causing issues.
There is scientific consensus that boys and girls have different thought patterns, wants and preferences from the day after birth, long before babies can be influenced by society, the media and parents.
The anti-scientific stance that boys and girls are born equal by not just feminists, but also anti-feminists who think that sexual dimorphism ends at the neck and that anything biological can be dismissed as "biological determinism", is what is causing issues.
Very true - what isn't clear yet is if this was the case here. We don't know enough about it (as I'm sure no one does) to presume the mother forced the child to do anything rather than fought with the best of interests to allow her child to be the gender they themselves say they identified as.
I do still wonder though why she wouldn't allow the father to have an influence in the childs life and why she legally registered (with the GP) as a girl. Its not really the actions of someone who is "allowing" their child to develop their own identity - again though she may have done what she felt to be the right thing.
We should also remember that it wouldn't be completely unheard of for a parent to see traits in a child and try to discourage it. Perhaps very early on the father wouldn't allow his son to play with dolls and tried to force more masculine pursuits on him, hence the mothers actions re visitation. The judges personal feelings may also have played a part in his decision.
Sadly Mothers barring the fathers from having any involvement in their children's live is a common occurrence.
She registered him as a girl because she clearly wanting him to one because of her own beliefs. Her actions have all been because of her wishes and not want is best for the child.
Those that claim they want to let their children forge their own path and form their own identity actually do the opposite. They train their child to follow the path they want more than, coercing their child into being transgender rather than just letting their child be a child.
Which usually comes from the child itself, rather than it being forced on to the child as happened in this case.
Although I do believe in most cases of supposedly transgender children, there is an element of force applied to the assertion they are by people other than the person themselves.
Please elaborate on this last part.
I agree that a truly transgender child will make this clear in many ways from early in life and it is certainly wrong for any child to be swayed one way or another by parents or, indeed, other outside influences.
It certainly appears from what we know in this case that this might be what occurred with this unfortunate child. And as such the judge sought to act in his best interests.
But in what way do you mean that most cases of transgender children involve an element of force by others.
I would be interested in your reasoning or evidence for this, given that in most cases they will be in the hands of psychologists and psychiatrists trained to look for such things and correctly discourage them.
Sadly Mothers barring the fathers from having any involvement in their children's live is a common occurrence.
She registered him as a girl because she clearly wanting him to one because of her own beliefs. Her actions have all been because of her wishes and not want is best for the child.
Those that claim they want to let their children forge their own path and form their own identity actually do the opposite. They train their child to follow the path they want more than, coercing their child into being transgender rather than just letting their child be a child.
So, are you denying transgender exists and is purely a learnt identity?
The correct decision by the judge. No parent should force an ideological choice on their child where there are potentially negative consequences.
Transitioning is a major and life changing decision and something which needs to be done as an adult when someone can make a sound decision on their own and know both the positives and consequences of their actions. Once a decision is made, it will be very difficult, if not impossible to reverse that decision.
I think we'll see more cases like this as there becomes a greater push toward the ideological concept of "boys defective, girls normal" by feminists means more mothers and male feminist fathers will encourage their boys to transition to girls - in what seems a remarkable correlation to the religious concept of being born with original sin.
It was the correct decision in so far as we know the evidence for this case. And assuming we know all the salient parts.
However, it would be a terrible miss step from here to conclude as you do in the BIB.
The system works if child psychologists and social workers correctly identify those who are clearly suffering from gender dysphoria and those who are not and might be just going through a phase of dressing up or have interests outside the stereotypical boundaries imposed by society.
If we make a blanket decision not to allow children to transition when it is clearly their choice and they are being appropriately monitored and treated then we risk severely undermining the genuine cases by not wanting to accidentally miss some that are not.
Transitioning early - if that is a child's passionate desire - and having hormone blockers to delay puberty - before then having surgery at 18 - which is current policy - helps in an enormous way to allow those who really are trans to have a normal life.
Delaying into adulthood prevents them from evolving more naturally and limits the degree with which they can physically transition.
So I am all in favour of tighter controls and more monitoring and to not progress children towards transition and medicine unless it is very clearly the right step for them.
But very opposed to delaying into adulthood all such possibilities.
Those that claim they want to let their children forge their own path and form their own identity actually do the opposite. They train their child to follow the path they want more than, coercing their child into being transgender rather than just letting their child be a child.
I think I understand what you mean but I seriously doubt from my own experience that any child can be coerced into becoming transgender.
You either are or you are not.
There are children who might feel they are and who might even act that way for a time but who soon realise as they grow older where their true destiny lies.
But if you are actually transgender it is something very deep within you and totally outside the control of anybody.
You cannot be talked into it and you cannot be talked out of it.
You just are and it never goes away unless or until you get help to find your true path.
Believe me, I can attest to this.
Here if this child was coerced into thinking they were transgender their true self would have always emerged. They could not have been made trans once they developed into an old enough child and their body started to develop as that would have reinforced their inner gender identity.
You cannot manufacture that however hard someone with a desire to 'change you' attempts such a thing.
If they could then there would be a psychiatric cure for transgender people and nobody would be going the surgical route with its inevitable possible complications.
Unfortunately in true transgender cases it is the only thing that works.
And those rare cases of regret post surgery from people who want to change back are the ones who should never have transitioned in the first place but who were somehow misdiagnosed or who ignored diagnosis recommending against this action and went off to Thailand or somewhere and circumvented the safeguards built into the NHS.
I agree that a truly transgender child will make this clear in many ways from early in life and it is certainly wrong for any child to be swayed one way or another by parents or, indeed, other outside influences.
It certainly appears from what we know in this case that this might be what occurred with this unfortunate child. And as such the judge sought to act in his best interests.
But in what way do you mean that most cases of transgender children involve an element of force by others.
I would be interested in your reasoning or evidence for this, given that in most cases they will be in the hands of psychologists and psychiatrists trained to look for such things and correctly discourage them.
Not a problem Jaycee Dove.
They force the issue by encouraging the child down the transgender route because they believe the child is trans without actually knowing.
They then proceed to treat the child as trans because they believe that is best, which encourages the child to see themselves as trans even if they are not.
If they just let the child be who they are without coercing them to be something because of your own opinions.
Some people classify being interested in things that are stereotypical of the opposite sex as a signal that they are transgender, when it is not indicative of anything other than the person's interests.
Smoggy, is that a perception based on experience or evidence or a supposition of what you think is happening?
I can see why you might think that and even why it is a danger that it might be true in these days when children are being allowed to transition at primary school.
But that is why there are safeguards built into the system and these decisions are not left solely in the hands of the family or child.
Plus none of this was happening until the past decade and so the circumstances for this coercion were not there.
Yet transgender children certainly existed and had a very miserable life because of the lack of any possibility of help.
It is arguable that there are more today (cases have risen from maybe 100-200 a year to 1000 a year in the UK in recent years) because of the factors that you suggest or because some children who were never brave enough to come forward now do so before they became unexplained child suicide victims in the past. As some very clearly must have done given how many adult trans people say they felt so helpless as a child that they considered suicide.
It was the correct decision in so far as we know the evidence for this case. And assuming we know all the salient parts.
However, it would be a terrible miss step from here to conclude as you do in the BIB.
The system works if child psychologists and social workers correctly identify those who are clearly suffering from gender dysphoria and those who are not and might be just going through a phase of dressing up or have interests outside the stereotypical boundaries imposed by society.
If we make a blanket decision not to allow children to transition when it is clearly their choice and they are being appropriately monitored and treated then we risk severely undermining the genuine cases by not wanting to accidentally miss some that are not.
Transitioning early - if that is a child's passionate desire - and having hormone blockers to delay puberty - before then having surgery at 18 - which is current policy - helps in an enormous way to allow those who really are trans to have a normal life.
Delaying into adulthood prevents them from evolving more naturally and limits the degree with which they can physically transition.
So I am all in favour of tighter controls and more monitoring and to not progress children towards transition and medicine unless it is very clearly the right step for them.
But very opposed to delaying into adulthood all such possibilities.
The child was being forced into an ideological stance because of a parent's ideology. If the child was suffering from gender dysmorphia, they wouldn't likely be playing with Power Rangers and other "traditional boys’ things" as a boy after the case!
This, in my view, is no different to life changing decisions being made on children despite the wishes of the child on the grounds of religion - which is also an ideology.
Such decisions should be made when the child is an adult and is mature enough and of sound mind to make such a decision. No child should be guilt tripped, forced or coerced into an ideological, life changing and permanent decision because of the beliefs of their parent - that is child abuse in my opinion.
I never claimed that people didn't suffer with transgenderism until recently. I claimed that it has blown up as an issue recently because people are wanting to it be one, so badly that they are seeing transgenderism in cases where it may not be present, because the ideology they believe classes certain behavioural traits as a symptom.
People are always going to suffer with the condition, and struggle with it until it is recognised and diagnosed. What matters is they get the help they need.
You aren't going to help people by imposing transgenderism on to them just because you believe they are suffering from it. You just end up causing problems like the woman in the article has.
Social services uselessness on full display.
I hope his clearly disturbed mother is only allowed supervised access to this little boy and his father and partner can help him recover from her abuse during such an important formative period of his life.
The child was being forced into an ideological stance because of a parent's ideology. If the child was suffering from gender dysmorphia, they wouldn't likely be playing with Power Rangers and other "traditional boys’ things" as a boy after the case!
This, in my view, is no different to life changing decisions being made on children despite the wishes of the child on the grounds of religion - which is also an ideology.
Such decisions should be made when the child is an adult and is mature enough and of sound mind to make such a decision. No child should be guilt tripped, forced or coerced into an ideological, life changing and permanent decision because of the beliefs of their parent - that is child abuse in my opinion.
The child in this case very possibly was being forced. I have certainly not suggested otherwise.
Nor have I said anything other than it seems the correct decision in this case to reverse the transition and take supervision from the mother based on the evidence we know. Such as it is, of course.
But I was arguing against your wider point that transition should not occur in childhood and all such decisions be made only as an adult.
I am saying that we need safeguards to prevent cases such as the one in this thread from happening but not blanket postponement of aid to truly suffering children until they are adults.
I have no issue whatsoever with ensuring that no child should be guilt tripped or coerced into a life changing decision through the ideologies of a parent.
Absolutely not.
But you appear to be extending the argument to a more general wait until adulthood policy which would thus disadvantage many people who benefit hugely from medical and social help as a child.
Why hurt suffering children to protect others who are being coerced by stopping all aid. Instead improve supervision and make sure transition only happens in well supported cases.
Comments
On the other side of the coin, I would be rather worried today as a parent of a 'non gender conforming' child. Would there be pressure from schools, social services, etc to treat them as trans, rather than just allow them to be individuals?
It is not all there is to it, I am afraid,
I can tell you from first hand experience that as a child you gradually develop a sense of your gender identity from around the ages of 3/4/5 as you start to interact with others and you gradually perceive that there is a difference.
It might take a few years for you to fully realise that you are being perceived and treated as a boy or girl but that you yourself feel that you are the opposite. But by the age of about 6 or 7 most kids who are gender dysphoric and may eventually transition will be very aware that they have a major problem. Even if they are not yet fully aware what that is.
It has nothing to do with boys toys/girls toys and - whilst I agree that there will be cases where parental influence over gender roles might be a factor - I doubt it could overwhelm this innate sense within a person of just knowing what gender you are.
Even if that gender is different from what the world at large assumes you to be.
As we know so little about this case and probably never will discover more given the judges ruling it would not be wise to jump to conclusions here.
It is certainly possible that the mother imposed ideas onto the child. It is equally possible the child was genuinely gender confused. Which might not be the same as gender dysphoric as children can play with gender identity but will retain that innate sense of absoluteness about whether they are a boy or a girl and move on in time.
Only those with true dysphoria will reach a stage where they need to be seen by and helped by psychologists and psychiatrists and might eventually decide to transition permanently.
It is not at all clear if that is what is going on here. But if that is the situation then they will never be happy being forced to be a boy and that reality will emerge over the coming years and they will, hopefully, get help.
If not and the child was pushed into this gender role by the mother then they will indeed thrive in their true gender identity as a boy and there should be fewer ongoing issues.
For now we just have to trust to the court's judgement and hope they have acted wisely in the child's best interest and that he will be happy.
Ultimately, when he is older, the choice will be his and nobody else then will be in a better position to say what their true gender identity should be.
Believing in rigid gender roles and applying them to young children is reactionary and ultimately harmful to both men and women.
I don't believe there is any such thing as an 'inate sense of gender'. We are identified at birth as being of one of two biological sexes (other than in the small number of intersex individuals). From birth people treat male and female babies differently. Behaviours are reacted to in a different way.
What seems to be happening in some families is the assumption that because the child likes things and behaviours typically identified with the opposite sex then there must have been a mistake and they were 'incorrectly assigned' at birth. No, they weren't. The fact is that they are just individuals who like different things. Girls do not have to behave or like the same things as other girls, the same with boys.
That is what I belive happened in this case. That is as the parent of a 'non gender conforming' child, who grew up to be perfectly happy with his biological sex, perhaps because no one ever made a big issue out of it?
I do take your point that there can be a more deepseated issue and that gender confusion/dysphoria can be intensely painful for the individuals concerned. However as a parent I am very aware of how easy it is to mould and implant ideas into very young children. That is what is happening in some of these cases, whether it is from a desire to be forward thinking and liberal, or something more serious such as munchausens by proxy. IMO of course
It does, doesn't it?
I am certainly with you that gender confusion can be accelerated by way of how a family treats a child and to some degree by society's dealing of gender stereotypes.
And I agree that in most cases the child will grow out of this and evolve according to their biology.
But I think that is because they DO have an innate sense of gender and I think it something that is part of us and we all grow up with.
In the rare cases where conflict exists and is intense that is when dysphoria can develop into a lifelong problem.
This is supported by cases such as the boy whose genitals were mutilated soon after birth and was raised as a girl as a consequence but who was never able to accept that role. He seemed to know he was a boy instinctively. His gender identity had to be formed very early or be innate for that to be true.
Similarly Lady Colin Campbell, identified as a boy at birth due to ambiguous genitalia, but always sure she was a girl even when given testosterone to try to convince her otherwise. Later tests showed that her concept of gender identity was biologically right and not the decisions made at birth for her.
I only hope he isn't too damaged to be able to go on to live a normal life.
Any parent that tries to force transgenderism on to their child is not fit to be a parent, they are putting their beliefs above the well being of their child.
Although I do believe in most cases of supposedly transgender children, there is an element of force applied to the assertion they are by people other than the person themselves.
A boy that wants to play with girl's toys is still male, and a girl that wants to play with boys toys are still female.
It wasn't so long ago that people were going nuts about gender stereotypes being a bad thing, but now they're trumpeted as a proof of transgenderism.
Very true - what isn't clear yet is if this was the case here. We don't know enough about it (as I'm sure no one does) to presume the mother forced the child to do anything rather than fought with the best of interests to allow her child to be the gender they themselves say they identified as.
I do still wonder though why she wouldn't allow the father to have an influence in the childs life and why she legally registered (with the GP) as a girl. Its not really the actions of someone who is "allowing" their child to develop their own identity - again though she may have done what she felt to be the right thing.
We should also remember that it wouldn't be completely unheard of for a parent to see traits in a child and try to discourage it. Perhaps very early on the father wouldn't allow his son to play with dolls and tried to force more masculine pursuits on him, hence the mothers actions re visitation. The judges personal feelings may also have played a part in his decision.
Transitioning is a major and life changing decision and something which needs to be done as an adult when someone can make a sound decision on their own and know both the positives and consequences of their actions. Once a decision is made, it will be very difficult, if not impossible to reverse that decision.
I think we'll see more cases like this as there becomes a greater push toward the ideological concept of "boys defective, girls normal" by feminists means more mothers and male feminist fathers will encourage their boys to transition to girls - in what seems a remarkable correlation to the religious concept of being born with original sin.
Gender roles are not the problem, people that believe gender roles are the problem and then interfere with it are the problem.
I genuinely believe that the rise is supposed transgender children is not a result of children thinking they are the wrong sex, but from people projecting their beliefs on to children.
It is not a coincidence that this rise comes at a time when transgenderism is being made a big deal.
If this continues there are going to be a lot of screwed up kids and adults.
As JDF alluded to earlier, those that claim to be progressive, enlightened and accepting are usually anything but. The progressive, enlightened and accepting claim unravels as soon as someone disagrees with them. They then refuse to accept that people can believe something different to them and proceed to tell the person they are wrong for holding that opinion, and that their opinion is the only correct and acceptable one.
This case is a perfect example, rather than just allowing the kid to be what he is, the mother felt the need to interfere and to tell him he is a girl. She wanted him to be a girl when he clearly wasn't.
Give it a few years and that supposed disdain he had for his penis will disappear and he won't want to leave it alone.
The Social Workers that allowed her to do this should be struck off, they are not fit to do their job. Her actions should have been an immediate red flag.
The anti-scientific stance that boys and girls are born equal by not just feminists, but also anti-feminists who think that sexual dimorphism ends at the neck and that anything biological can be dismissed as "biological determinism", is what is causing issues.
She registered him as a girl because she clearly wanting him to one because of her own beliefs. Her actions have all been because of her wishes and not want is best for the child.
Those that claim they want to let their children forge their own path and form their own identity actually do the opposite. They train their child to follow the path they want more than, coercing their child into being transgender rather than just letting their child be a child.
Please elaborate on this last part.
I agree that a truly transgender child will make this clear in many ways from early in life and it is certainly wrong for any child to be swayed one way or another by parents or, indeed, other outside influences.
It certainly appears from what we know in this case that this might be what occurred with this unfortunate child. And as such the judge sought to act in his best interests.
But in what way do you mean that most cases of transgender children involve an element of force by others.
I would be interested in your reasoning or evidence for this, given that in most cases they will be in the hands of psychologists and psychiatrists trained to look for such things and correctly discourage them.
So, are you denying transgender exists and is purely a learnt identity?
It was the correct decision in so far as we know the evidence for this case. And assuming we know all the salient parts.
However, it would be a terrible miss step from here to conclude as you do in the BIB.
The system works if child psychologists and social workers correctly identify those who are clearly suffering from gender dysphoria and those who are not and might be just going through a phase of dressing up or have interests outside the stereotypical boundaries imposed by society.
If we make a blanket decision not to allow children to transition when it is clearly their choice and they are being appropriately monitored and treated then we risk severely undermining the genuine cases by not wanting to accidentally miss some that are not.
Transitioning early - if that is a child's passionate desire - and having hormone blockers to delay puberty - before then having surgery at 18 - which is current policy - helps in an enormous way to allow those who really are trans to have a normal life.
Delaying into adulthood prevents them from evolving more naturally and limits the degree with which they can physically transition.
So I am all in favour of tighter controls and more monitoring and to not progress children towards transition and medicine unless it is very clearly the right step for them.
But very opposed to delaying into adulthood all such possibilities.
I think I understand what you mean but I seriously doubt from my own experience that any child can be coerced into becoming transgender.
You either are or you are not.
There are children who might feel they are and who might even act that way for a time but who soon realise as they grow older where their true destiny lies.
But if you are actually transgender it is something very deep within you and totally outside the control of anybody.
You cannot be talked into it and you cannot be talked out of it.
You just are and it never goes away unless or until you get help to find your true path.
Believe me, I can attest to this.
Here if this child was coerced into thinking they were transgender their true self would have always emerged. They could not have been made trans once they developed into an old enough child and their body started to develop as that would have reinforced their inner gender identity.
You cannot manufacture that however hard someone with a desire to 'change you' attempts such a thing.
If they could then there would be a psychiatric cure for transgender people and nobody would be going the surgical route with its inevitable possible complications.
Unfortunately in true transgender cases it is the only thing that works.
And those rare cases of regret post surgery from people who want to change back are the ones who should never have transitioned in the first place but who were somehow misdiagnosed or who ignored diagnosis recommending against this action and went off to Thailand or somewhere and circumvented the safeguards built into the NHS.
They force the issue by encouraging the child down the transgender route because they believe the child is trans without actually knowing.
They then proceed to treat the child as trans because they believe that is best, which encourages the child to see themselves as trans even if they are not.
If they just let the child be who they are without coercing them to be something because of your own opinions.
Some people classify being interested in things that are stereotypical of the opposite sex as a signal that they are transgender, when it is not indicative of anything other than the person's interests.
I can see why you might think that and even why it is a danger that it might be true in these days when children are being allowed to transition at primary school.
But that is why there are safeguards built into the system and these decisions are not left solely in the hands of the family or child.
Plus none of this was happening until the past decade and so the circumstances for this coercion were not there.
Yet transgender children certainly existed and had a very miserable life because of the lack of any possibility of help.
It is arguable that there are more today (cases have risen from maybe 100-200 a year to 1000 a year in the UK in recent years) because of the factors that you suggest or because some children who were never brave enough to come forward now do so before they became unexplained child suicide victims in the past. As some very clearly must have done given how many adult trans people say they felt so helpless as a child that they considered suicide.
This, in my view, is no different to life changing decisions being made on children despite the wishes of the child on the grounds of religion - which is also an ideology.
Such decisions should be made when the child is an adult and is mature enough and of sound mind to make such a decision. No child should be guilt tripped, forced or coerced into an ideological, life changing and permanent decision because of the beliefs of their parent - that is child abuse in my opinion.
People are always going to suffer with the condition, and struggle with it until it is recognised and diagnosed. What matters is they get the help they need.
You aren't going to help people by imposing transgenderism on to them just because you believe they are suffering from it. You just end up causing problems like the woman in the article has.
I hope his clearly disturbed mother is only allowed supervised access to this little boy and his father and partner can help him recover from her abuse during such an important formative period of his life.
The child in this case very possibly was being forced. I have certainly not suggested otherwise.
Nor have I said anything other than it seems the correct decision in this case to reverse the transition and take supervision from the mother based on the evidence we know. Such as it is, of course.
But I was arguing against your wider point that transition should not occur in childhood and all such decisions be made only as an adult.
I am saying that we need safeguards to prevent cases such as the one in this thread from happening but not blanket postponement of aid to truly suffering children until they are adults.
I have no issue whatsoever with ensuring that no child should be guilt tripped or coerced into a life changing decision through the ideologies of a parent.
Absolutely not.
But you appear to be extending the argument to a more general wait until adulthood policy which would thus disadvantage many people who benefit hugely from medical and social help as a child.
Why hurt suffering children to protect others who are being coerced by stopping all aid. Instead improve supervision and make sure transition only happens in well supported cases.