CPS Schools Project: The Erasure Of Sex And The Silencing Of Girls

The Crown Prosecution Service has devised lesson plans for pupils aged 11-16 to teach them awareness of hate crimes towards lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender pupils. The CPS Schools Project is a free educational resource pack developed with the help of Gendered Intelligence, Stonewall and the Ministry of Justice and includes dramatised scenarios, a power point and a full teaching pack from which we have taken the quotes below. It includes extensive training in both recognising, and understanding sentencing guidelines for hate crimes, together with role-play scenarios where pupils can play the part of police arresting someone on hate crime charges.

Although we agree with the aim of raising awareness of homophobic bullying and its impact on targeted pupils, the issue is not so simple when it comes to defining ‘transgender hate crime.’ Accepting and respecting someone as gay or lesbian is not the same as accepting that a boy is a girl.

Being forced to accept and agree with another person’s personal identity when it contradicts biological reality has particularly serious implications for girls. Sex-segregated facilities are established as part of basic safeguarding policies, specifically to protect girls in situations where they are physically vulnerable. To suddenly say that a boy is female does not change the fact that he is male.

Trans activists will insist that there have been no recorded incidents of ‘transwomen’ assaulting women in public toilets or changing rooms. Of course that is not true, but the point is irrelevant anyway: this guidance gives any man or boy an easy means to access girls’ private spaces, based only on his own self-declared ‘gender identity’ which nobody is allowed to challenge.

Under the guise of protecting ‘LGBT’ pupils, the CPS schools project is in reality the thinly disguised promotion of a trans activist agenda; explicitly in regard to male rights to access female spaces, together with the enforcement of a blanket ‘affirmation only’ response to trans-identified young people. The obfuscating definition of ‘lesbian’ (quoted below) also implicitly supports the manipulation of young lesbians to accept males as sexual partners or be seen as ‘transphobic.’ This teaching resource takes that agenda into schools.

We have analysed the document to show exactly what messages girls will be getting from these lessons; use of bold is ours and our comments are in italics.

 

Article continues at CPS Schools Project: The Erasure Of Sex And The Silencing Of Girls – Transgender Trend

Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? Thoughts on BBC2’s This World programme

A butterfly’s diary writes, about this program:

On 12 January, BBC2 aired Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? This documentary featured those who support a gender-affirmative approach to childhood gender dysphoria on one hand, and those who argue for a more nuanced approach to what is a complex issue on the other. It was the first balanced programme on this thorny topic (that I’m aware of at least) and one I’d thoroughly recommend watching if you can.

It has come as no surprise to see this documentary come under attack by trans activists who claim that it was biased. The issue really is not one of bias, it’s one of allowing alternative views to be heard, something the trans community is averse to. This is hardly a new problem: I wrote about it here, and Renee Gerlich has written an excellent article on the topic, with a focus on the no-platforming of feminists. In the case of Transgender Kids, it’s a strange accusation. The programme included several trans people: Warner, Ella and Hershell Russell. We also heard from Cheri DiNovo, Dr Norman Spack and Dr Joey Bonifacio, all of whom support the gender-affirmative approach. Any claim of bias is simply unfounded, a situation that contrasts markedly with previous BBC programmes on the subject.

The gender-affirmative approach is one most people will be familiar with: if a child claims to be transgender, then the child’s identity should be affirmed and no questions should be asked. But such as an approach is indefensible for a number of reasons. As [….]

Rest of article at Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? Thoughts on BBC2’s This World programme — A butterfly’s diary

A mum’s voyage through Transtopia: A tale of love and desistance

4thWaveNow

Lily Maynard (a pseudonym) lives with her husband and their family in the UK. Her daughter, Jessie, was 15 when she first began identifying as trans.

In this post, Lily chronicles her grueling journey of self education on trans issues, and her determination to share what she learned with Jessie, who at first utterly dismissed her mother’s efforts.  But after 9 months, Jessie, now 16, eventually desisted from trans identification, and, with the support of her mother and another formerly trans-identified friend, came to recognize and embrace herself as a young woman.

Jessie adds her own observations at the end of her mother’s post.

Lily and Jessie are both available to interact with readers in the comments section of this post.


by Lily Maynard

My youngest daughter Jessie was never a ‘girly’ girl. As a small child she was often mistaken for a boy, despite her long hair, because mostly…

View original post 6,369 more words

Genderqueer teddy bear teaches toddlers proper pronoun etiquette

You’re never too young to learn about pronouns. While far too many of us have been snoozing through the 21st century, other intrepid souls have been busy, busy bees. First, they succeeded in convincing mainstream lesbian and gay activists to adopt transgender identity politics. And that has been a fait accompli: Now all major LGB organizations are steered and funded by trans activists, with a predictable mission shift. Over the same time period, university students were brought on board with “gender”(formerly women’s) studies, their brains heavily gummed up with postmodernist gobbledygook.

In more recent years, a new frontier has been pioneered: the open minds of high school, elementary-age…and preschool children.

Just one example is the educational YouTube channel Queer Kid Stuff –sort of a Sesame Street for the preschool gender ID set. The channel has posted three episodes so far, each about 3 minutes long—perfect length for the short attention span of young kids. Clearly much thought has been put into appealing to the little ones. There’s a catchy musical theme, a colorful set, a loveable and gullible teddy bear, and sing-alongs with Lindsay, the ukelele-wielding narrator-teacher.

[…]

Rest of article at Genderqueer teddy bear teaches toddlers proper pronoun etiquette — 4thWaveNow

Breast Binders In UK Schools

The Sun has reported on new guidelines issued from local authorities in Cornwall, Lancashire and Scotland to “properly accommodate transitioning pupils in school” by allowing transgender pupils extra breaks during physical education lessons.

And why would transgender pupils need breaks during P.E? Because:

“some youngsters who choose to bind their chests may suffer from “breathing difficulties and fainting” during sports sessions.”

“Youngsters” here means “girls,” but transgender rules don’t allow us to name them as girls. This conveniently prevents us from assessing the differences in the experience and typical treatment pathways between girls and boys, or study any differences in reasons for transitioning. If we can’t view these girls within the wider context of teenage girls as a group we can’t make the connections to the underlying causes of such behaviour in girls, nor position breast binding within a continuum of self-harming practices.

To read more, see the article from Transgender Trend: http://www.transgendertrend.com/breast-binders-in-uk-schools/

Johanna Olson, MD says 100% of children she has put on puberty blockers have gone on to cross-sex hormones. This can result in sterilization.

Deciding when to treat a youth for gender re assignment   Kids in the House

http://www.kidsinthehouse.com/teenager/sexuality/transgender/deciding-when-to-treat-a-youth-for-gender-re-assignment

Transcription:
“So, what a lot of people want to understand is, “If I give my child this blocker, can I take it away, if at the end of a certain amount of time they no longer have a trans-gender identity, or they don’t want to continue on to pursue a transition with cross-sex hormones.” The answer to that is, “Yes.” They are reversible. You can take them off without any problems or major medical problems. But it’s very rare that that happens. In my practice, I have never had anyone who was put on blockers, that did not want to pursue cross-sex hormone transition at a later point. I know some people have had that experience in the past, but we have not at our clinic. When we make a decision to move forward with medical intervention, either puberty suppressants, or cross-sex hormones, the most important person we consider in that decision making is the child, the young person. So, if they’re in that peripubescent, or time around where there puberty is starting, or if they are well into puberty, or, past puberty, we’re still looking at the child to help us make that decision about moving forward. Although, it’s not entirely up to the child themselves, we do need an entire team to make sure those interventions are not going to be dangerous for a young person. So, when I say dangerous, I mean psychologically dangerous, I mean medically dangerous, I mean socially dangerous. Safety is a really critical piece at all of the decision making points in this process. It could be considered a judgment call, but I would like to say it’s a team decision to move forward with medications. We see children, when they’re ready to go on blockers, that become very anxious about those first signs of puberty that is unwanted for them, and that helps us understand, they are really experiencing anxiety around this, and it’s very beneficial for them to have blockers on board. There are some centers that use much more technical, psychometric testing, that looks at various and assorted factors in children’s psychiatric development. We don’t practice that model in our clinic. We work very closely with our mental health providers to understand that that child is ready to go forward with those treatments.

Meet Dr. Winters: computer scientist, “empty nest mom,” & top pediatric transition expert

4thWaveNow

Some of the most vocal and vociferous proponents of early medical transition for other people’s children are late-transitioning biological fathers. (Note: While most of these individuals now call themselves “moms,” the fact that their contribution to reproduction was undeniably via biologically male gametes—aka “sperm”– cannot be simply “identified” away.)

Many of these individuals weaponize the fear that gender-defiant kids will kill themselves if not socially transitioned, puberty blocked, and moved on to cross-sex hormones and surgeries at as young an age as possible.  But there’s something hypocritical about their belief in the “transition or die” orthodoxy: Many of these MtF activists–who no doubt consider themselves “truly trans”–transitioned later in life, yet somehow managed to avoid suicide themselves, enjoying long lives as men with lucrative and productive careers (quite a few in typically male-dominated professions such as the military, technology, and finance) and the opportunity to father offspring.

Kelley…

View original post 1,368 more words

THE TRANSGENDER EXPERIMENT ON KIDS

COMMENT | THE TRANSGENDER EXPERIMENT ON KIDS

Channel 4’s ‘Born in the Wrong Body’ season of programming has begun, with the first episode, My Transgender Kid, doing its bit to reinforce uncritical mass acceptance of the idea that children have an innate ‘gender identity’ which overrides their biological sex.

The Tavistock and Portman gender clinic has seen referrals increase by 50% every year since 2009, and we are likely to see a continued rise in referrals of children the more publicity is given to ‘brave’ parents on TV and throughout the popular media. On seeking information, worried parents will be directed to ‘gender support’ groups such as Mermaids, who will frighten them further with misleading statistics on suicide rates of young ‘trans’ people. The ‘trans’ label in itself may be covering up underlying psychological or emotional issues which remain undiagnosed by therapists keener to exhibit their social-justice credentials than their clinical judgment. Meanwhile, what remains undisclosed is the fact that hormone treatment and surgery is not effective in bringing these figures down.

The pressure on schools to go along with the trans narrative will also increase if The Gender Identity Research and Education Society gets its way. GIRES has presented evidence to the Women and Equalities Committee, calling for children as young as three to be taught about transgender issues in school. The trans advocacy charity criticised the DfE for failing to include ‘atypical gender identity development’ in the curriculum.

Teaching children that it’s fine to be ‘atypical’ simply involves allowing children to play with whatever they want, encouraging all children in an expansive definition of what their sex can be, and having no tolerance for teasing or bullying of those children whose behaviour doesn’t fit the stereotypes for their sex.

What GIRES are advocating though, is giving kids the opposite message. Through books in which right-on versions of Pingu tell their friends ‘We’ll tell them you are Sally and were never really John!’ they want children to be taught that if you are a boy who likes what society deems to be ‘girl’ interests, then you must actually be a girl.

Schools are in a bind: teach all children that a little boy can be a little girl and grow up to be an adult woman, and little girls can grow up to become adult men, or be seen as transphobic. If we do teach children that these things are possible, we also have to re-write the whole biology curriculum – perhaps we could call it Biological Creationism.

The theory that children have an innate ‘gender identity’ which does not match their biological sex has no scientific basis; it is impossible to have a brain which is the opposite sex of the body. The idea that male and female brains are significantly different has long been discredited. There is no existence of a pathophysiology to support treatment: to have preferences typically associated with people of the opposite sex is not a pathology, and there is nothing medically wrong with the body.

To even make the claim that a child is biologically male but ‘is a girl inside’ requires a definition of the term ‘girl’ as a recognised category with a set of definable characteristics. The definition we have is the biological classification ‘young female.’ Beyond that, we are in the realm of subjective judgment and stereotype. If ‘girl’ is a self-definition, an identity or a feeling, then the word means potentially anything and therefore nothing.

Children in any case have no fixed innate ‘identity;’ children’s identities are in process of being built through interaction with environmental influences, without which no identity can develop. ‘Social transition’ then is nothing short of indoctrination into a trans identity.

There is also no evidence that a child’s non-conforming behaviour is in itself problematic for the child, or whether any experienced distress is caused by secondary factors such as the judgements of adults, imposed restrictions of expression or teasing and bullying from peers.

We are nevertheless advised by self-appointed gender specialists to try to fix something non-pathological in the head by medically treating the healthy physical body; making this the only situation in which medical intervention does not cure a sick body, but healthy organs are mutilated in order to match a psychological identity.

The facts, verified by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, are that most children with ‘Gender Identity Disorder’ will grow out of it by adolescence, and of those who don’t, the overwhelming majority will be gay or lesbian. Given this fact, we should be wary that the ‘transing’ of children is effectively just another form of gay conversion therapy.

So where is the outcry? It’s certainly not coming from the Lib Dems who have just voted to support the ‘right’ of gender-variant children to receive puberty blockers until they are eligible for cross-sex hormone treatments. We have no idea of the effects of puberty blockers on brain development, although we do know that for girls there is an increased risk of polycystic ovary syndrome. We also know that hormone treatments affect bone mass density and result in life-long sterility, but there is no research on other long-term effects on health.

In fact, no ‘gender specialist’ can tell you the long-term consequences of these radical treatments on children’s healthy bodies, because nobody knows. By setting children off on a path of sterilisation and medicalisation for life we are performing nothing less than an unprecedented and mind-boggling experiment using the children of this generation as the guinea pigs.