Are we going to talk about our kids? [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

kildare lad

osarusan wrote: »

Anybody at all?

By your logic if a man can identify as a woman , why can't he identify as a child , or why can't a white person identify as a black person .

IamtheWalrus

“LGBT crowd”

Ten of Swords

I have removed a large number of off topic posts attempting to drag the discussion into other areas such as crime and prisons. Thread concerns the proposals put forward by FG to allow children under 16 to self declare their gender (with parental consent) so lets see how we get on with that.

Any more off topic posting or trolling will result in instant red cards and threadbans

Mellor

kildare lad wrote: »

By your logic if a man can identify as a woman , why can't he identify as a child , or why can't a white person identify as a black person .

Certain adults are considered to be "children" from a mental standpoint.
There is no law proposed that allows them to operate as children legally.

Only a sick twisted individual would proposing that they should be allowed to. You need to have a look at yourself for think that is ok.

JoannaJag

The primary reason for legal recognition is surely to offer legal protection based on gender id. I wish children and adults could be offered legal protection on the basis of both gender and sex. I don’t want my young daughter forced to share changing communal facilities with a male bodied person, as she was pressured to do so during this school year.

I don’t think trans girls should be forced to share facilities with boys either, considering the risks. Until sex and gender legal protections are each given equal status I will continue find it hard to stand up for trans rights including reducing the age for gender recognition.

Aside from that, I do think it’s sad that feminine boys and masculine girls are told they might really be the “wrong” sex but recognize that I don’t have experience of the feelings of these young people. I wonder if they ever consider that they can’t experience how some girls feel having male bodied people in our private spaces when we are at our most vulnerable, considering many of these girls will have been subject to sexual abuse by a NON TRANS person with a male body. Please note - not a suggestion in any way that trans people are a risk, only a suggestion that feelings of non trans girls also matters.

Gruffalux

JoannaJag wrote: »

The primary reason for legal recognition is surely to offer legal protection based on gender id. I wish children and adults could be offered legal protection on the basis of both gender and sex. I don’t want my young daughter forced to share changing communal facilities with a male bodied person, as she was pressured to do so during this school year.

I don’t think trans girls should be forced to share facilities with boys either, considering the risks. Until sex and gender legal protections are each given equal status I will continue find it hard to stand up for trans rights including reducing the age for gender recognition.

Aside from that, I do think it’s sad that feminine boys and masculine girls are told they might really be the “wrong” sex but recognize that I don’t have experience of the feelings of these young people. I wonder if they ever consider that they can’t experience how some girls feel having male bodied people in our private spaces when we are at our most vulnerable, considering many of these girls will have been subject to sexual abuse by a NON TRANS person with a male body. Please note - not a suggestion in any way that trans people are a risk, only a suggestion that feelings of non trans girls also matters.

That is a good idea. And point. Legal protection and recognition based on sex. Which is what so many battles have been fought for. Legal recognition of gender seeks in certain areas to trump legal recognition of sex. Really that is the essence. It is not a problem per se for people to have legal recognition and protection of gender. Although I do think the under 16 element must cause one to ask what drives and motivates the activists to seek this for children. It seems a terrible thing to do to children to have them so wound up about "gender identity". It is a problem when legal recognition and protection of gender identity trumps legal recognition and protection based on sex.
I think a court case could certainly be made on that proposition Joanna.

Gruffalux

Public policy is changing in other jurisdictions with regards to trans issues and children. As scientific research piles up it is found that earlier approaches were incorrect. Damaging even.
Up until a few days ago the NHS website in the UK stated the following -

"Hormone therapy

If your child has gender dysphoria and they've reached puberty, they could be treated with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. These are synthetic (man-made) hormones that suppress the hormones naturally produced by the body.

Some of the changes that take place during puberty are driven by hormones. For example, the hormone testosterone, which is produced by the testes in boys, helps stimulate penis growth.

GnRH analogues suppress the hormones produced by your child’s body. They also suppress puberty and can help delay potentially distressing physical changes caused by their body becoming even more like that of their biological sex, until they're old enough for the treatment options discussed below.

GnRH analogues will only be considered for your child if assessments have found they're experiencing clear distress and have a strong desire to live as their gender identity.

The effects of treatment with GnRH analogues are considered to be fully reversible, so treatment can usually be stopped at any time."



There will soon be a court case by a young lady in the UK who had undergone hormone treatment for her dysphoria. She outlined the terrible side effects she had experienced. Keira Bell is challenging the NHS Gender Clinic for inaapropriate safeguarding. The inability for children to give informed consent forms the backbone of her argument. Informed consent - keep that in mind. It is the crux of wider issues.
Another complainant, the mother of a 15 year old autistic girl, is taking a similar action against Tavistock. The issues are pertinent to consider in respect of what we do here re children, in the legal field and in the medical field.

Perhaps fearing the quiet beginnings of an avalanche of legal action against them, the NHS has just significantly changed its public guidance re treatment of gender dysphoria in children. It now reads as follows -



"Hormone therapy in children and young people

Some young people with lasting signs of gender dysphoria and who meet strict criteria may be referred to a hormone specialist (consultant endocrinologist) to see if they can take hormone blockers as they reach puberty. This is in addition to psychological support.

These hormone blockers (gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues) pause the physical changes of puberty, such as breast development or facial hair.

Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.

Although the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) advises this is a physically reversible treatment if stopped, it is not known what the psychological effects may be.

It's also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children's bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue and mood alterations.

From the age of 16, teenagers who've been on hormone blockers for at least 12 months may be given cross-sex hormones, also known as gender-affirming hormones.

These hormones cause some irreversible changes, such as:

breast development (caused by taking oestrogen)

breaking or deepening of the voice (caused by taking testosterone)

Long-term cross-sex hormone treatment may cause temporary or even permanent infertility.

However, as cross-sex hormones affect people differently, they should not be considered a reliable form of contraception.

There is some uncertainty about the risks of long-term cross-sex hormone treatment.

The NHS in England is currently reviewing the evidence on the use of cross-sex hormones by the Gender Identity Development Service.’"

osarusan

osarusan wrote: »

If the OP or anybody else could post up the proposed law that will allow somebody who is not 14 to legally identify as 14, that would be helpful.

osarusan wrote: »

Anybody at all?

Nobody huh?


Fair to say then that the OP plucked that particular idea from the cavernous reaches of his rectum?

JoannaJag

I wish the OP had said:

“I, a 14 year old boy, identify as a 14 year old girl. Legally I can play on your daughters soccer team, use her changing room, shower with her.

Do you care now?”

So we could skip all the irrelevant age stuff.

Ive heard young trans people say they feel sick, panicked, frozen at the idea of growing into a man or a woman. That must be awful. It is also how many pubescent females feel about being forced to share private spaces with male bodied people. There has to be a way to support all these people without treading on their mental and physical health.

It would perhaps help if the numerous structures in place separating boys and girls were examined closely for necessity and reasoning.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Mellor wrote: »

Yes kids aren't mature enough to decide this on their own, that's why parents consent is needed.
This isn't about 14 years changing gender on their own. It's about parents helping their children. People seem to be missing that.


What do you think changing the gender legally actually means, practically? We're talking about a letter on a passport. It's not actually going to change how the child feels. It's not going change their genitals. At most, they'll use a different bathroom. And unisex bathrooms are hardly rare or offensive.


Wishful thinking that evidence, intelligent thinking or logic formed the basis of that argument.

In teenage settings, they are rare. In schools and at different youth clubs and gatherings. I think sex-segregated facilities (bathrooms, changing rooms etc.) are important as it’s an age where there are great bodily changes happening that many teenagers are deeply uncomfortable with. Both boys and girls.

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

In teenage settings, they are rare. In schools and at different youth clubs and gatherings. I think sex-segregated facilities (bathrooms, changing rooms etc.) are important as it’s an age where there are great bodily changes happening that many teenagers are deeply uncomfortable with. Both boys and girls.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8301769/amp/Schoolgirl-13-wins-court-fight-forcing-Oxfordshire-council-scrap-transgender-toilets-toolkit.html

Just recently a 13 year old girl took Oxfordshire council to the UK High Court for a judicial review of the council's trans tool kit which would have allowed young people who identify as female to use her spaces in school. The High Court allowed the review. In response Oxfordshire council withdrew the plan.
The council say they will wait on national guidelines to be published soon. It is likely the national guidelines will return the girl to the same invidious position of having to share intimate spaces with people who identify as her sex.
However, I feel hope now and am no longer as concerned, because the national guidelines will undoubtedly be similarly challenged and permitted to be subject to judicial review. Thus in the end rather than a battle being won based on scientific reasoning, the battle will be won in the end for protection of sex based spaces by the oldest profession in the world.
The fear of an avalanche of claims and the loss of filthy money by govt bodies will rule the day in the end. It is not the best motivation to have behind the overthrow of ludicrous gender theory ideology - it would be better if right reason and truth could have won the day against the bullying - but fcuk it, I will take the overthrow of ideology however it comes.

(Ps given my post involves children, legal instruments, the wider judicial system and legal rights and definitions, I am presuming to have cleaved close enough to the OP. Other than constantly restating the opening post in a variety of ways, which would be ludicrous, I do not know how one can discuss this area without legitimately discussing wider context. The broader context and wider import of the proposed Irish legislation is relevant.)

corks finest

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Admin: Thread rules are simple. Legitimate discussion only. Any Godwin's Law type arguments, tarring everyone with the paedophile brush, threadshïtting, winding others up, or trolling and it means an instant red card and threadban. Particularly dickish responses will be met with a week long forum ban.

If you can't abide by that (i.e. posting with common decency), then this isn't the thread for you. There will be no further mod warnings beyond this point.






https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/children-under-16-could-legally-change-gender-under-new-proposals-from-lgbt-committee-1002933.html

Children changing their "gender" is absolutely wrong. Yes let them wear what they want and act how they want but legally, no. It's far too much. It's an already confusing time and they're already being bombarded with wondering if they're straight/gay/whatever. Introducing this idea to them is a step too far. First it'll be "legally" they're the opposite sex and next the LGBT crowd will be pushing for irreversible surgery/hormone treatment. The term legally opens up a whole other can of worms down the line too. Lets keep the discussion to the kids as we all know well what other problems are created by the likes of Jonathan Yaniv etc.

This is a mental health issue, telling kids they can be whatever "gender" they want is absolute lunacy.

Agree wholeheartedly,they are children after all,and certainly not mature enough to make this decision, FFS young teens follow different bands /trends weekly

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

osarusan wrote: »

Nobody huh?


Fair to say then that the OP plucked that particular idea from the cavernous reaches of his rectum?

What’s the question I’m not trawling the whole thread.

silverharp

Kids can get radicalised on the internet with trans ideologies and could be encouraged by dumb and weak minded processionals . This is the child abuse scandal of these decades. Parent need to step up and protect their kids

Gruffalux

silverharp wrote: »

Kids can get radicalised on the internet with trans ideologies and could be encouraged by dumb and weak minded processionals . This is the child abuse scandal of these decades. Parent need to step up and protect their kids

"It is recognised that the requirement for parental consent or the consent of a legal guardian can be restrictive and problematic for minors.
States should take action against parents who are obstructing the free development of a young trans person’s identity in refusing to give parental authorisation when required."

Direct quotes from the Dentons document for activist NGOs. Refer also to recent court cases in US and Canada removing parental say in the care of gender dysphoric children. It is not as simple as saying parents need to step up if those parents are being loudly portrayed as monsters. There are a lot of parents speaking out about this on various platforms. How their hands are tied. How scared they are for their children being given experimental treatment.

Dentons document is linked in this article. If I link directly to doc it is a PDF and people may not like to click on download link. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists/amp

Mellor

I know a few trans and non-binary people, they went through hell at school. Schools should just have trans bathrooms & showers for these kids.

Mellor wrote: »

The recording of somebody's current gender. There no revision to history. It's only changed from that point onwards.

The same way that's a birth cert records somebody name at birth. But a deed poll can change that name from that point onwards. You don't need a time machine to change your name.

I have 2 separate birth certs, with two different names. True story

Gruffalux

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I know a few trans and non-binary people, they went through hell at school. Schools should just have trans bathrooms & showers for these kids.



I have 2 separate birth certs, with two different names. True story

Having a separate facility for people is no problem. At all. Unisex options alongside protected sex spaces. Make it so. I wonder though if having a bathroom or shower to go to would really solve what you are talking about? Which is bullying. Which goes on for many kids for lots of reasons and no reasons at all. Bullying should be stopped. But given the darker side of human nature it is hard to do that. Sure. A unisex option is fine. Should be done. But not that any people who identify as a different gender can go into single sex protected spaces. That raises huge safe guarding issues.I do not understand how that is not obvious.

One eyed Jack

corks finest wrote: »

Agree wholeheartedly, they are children after all,and certainly not mature enough to make this decision, FFS young teens follow different bands /trends weekly

The proposals are concerned with children who are already making this decision for themselves - whether or not there should be legal recognition of the fact that children are making this decision for themselves. Children under 16 who experience gender dysphoria are already treated for it in a medical context -


'It's another case of Ireland exporting healthcare' - Transgender community call out for better health system


These new proposals are concerned with the legal and social implications of this phenomenon.

It is proposed that where there is a conflict, decisions would be made in the best interests of the child by the Courts, and that for me is the sticking point - I don’t believe that having to go to Court in the first place is actually acting in the best interests of the child. But that is part of the proposals being made when there is a conflict between all the stakeholders involved in upholding the rights of the child. The proposals seek to undermine parental authority over their own children if the parents do not agree to go along with people who are arguing against them in their own children’s best interests.

This legal mechanism already exists in Irish law as part of the Gender Recognition Act and a couple of other pieces of legislation relating to children’s rights, but there is no legal mechanism to recognise that a child identifies as something other than, or distinct from, their biological sex. It’s coming up now again because a two yearly review was promised when the legislation was first introduced, and the same proposals as are being made now, were made two years ago too -


Restrictions on children changing genders should be lifted – new report urges


Just to put this in an overall context, there are also proposed changes to the relationships and sex education curriculum for national schools being proposed by the NCCA, which many parents and teachers have objected to, objections which Minister Joe McHugh characterises as “a campaign of malicious scaremongering” surrounding plans to change the RSE curriculum. It’s not a malicious scaremongering campaign when it’s true (the bill has now lapsed with the dissolution of the Dail) -


Provision of Objective Sex Education Bill 2018


The sponsors of the bill sought to undermine both parental authority and the authority of the Board of Management of schools in order to force their own ideology on children under the guise of education, somewhat similar to what the NCCA is now proposing. And to give further context again, the best thing that a recently established secondary school with capacity for 1,000 pupils thought they could offer parents, is that they have unisex bathrooms -


New Limerick secondary school to install gender-neutral toilets


In short - that unicorn has already bolted.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalox wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8301769/amp/Schoolgirl-13-wins-court-fight-forcing-Oxfordshire-council-scrap-transgender-toilets-toolkit.html

Just recently a 13 year old girl took Oxfordshire council to the UK High Court for a judicial review of the council's trans tool kit which would have allowed young people who identify as female to use her spaces in school. The High Court allowed the review. In response Oxfordshire council withdrew the plan.
The council say they will wait on national guidelines to be published soon. It is likely the national guidelines will return the girl to the same invidious position of having to share intimate spaces with people who identify as her sex.
However, I feel hope now and am no longer as concerned, because the national guidelines will undoubtedly be similarly challenged and permitted to be subject to judicial review. Thus in the end rather than a battle being won based on scientific reasoning, the battle will be won in the end for protection of sex based spaces by the oldest profession in the world.
The fear of an avalanche of claims and the loss of filthy money by govt bodies will rule the day in the end. It is not the best motivation to have behind the overthrow of ludicrous gender theory ideology - it would be better if right reason and truth could have won the day against the bullying - but fcuk it, I will take the overthrow of ideology however it comes.

(Ps given my post involves children, legal instruments, the wider judicial system and legal rights and definitions, I am presuming to have cleaved close enough to the OP. Other than constantly restating the opening post in a variety of ways, which would be ludicrous, I do not know how one can discuss this area without legitimately discussing wider context. The broader context and wider import of the proposed Irish legislation is relevant.)

Isn’t it sad that it was a teenager that had to take this action though? Where are the adults?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

It’s been an interesting week for the NHS on this topic. They have without fanfare changed some crucial information about puberty blockers on their website. Before, they said that blockers were “fully reversible”. That has now been changed to “Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria.”.

Many people have been saying that for a while, that there were no long-term studies on the effects of these drugs on minors. Why then did the NHS claim that they were fully reversible when they didn’t have the data to say that? How many individuals took reassurance from that when they shouldn’t have?

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Isn’t it sad that it was a teenager that had to take this action though? Where are the adults?

I understand what you mean - why did the grown ups allow it to come to this for the child. But in this case the child is the one with locus standi to pursue the legal review as it was her who was being directly affected. An adult could not claim the same in this case.
There will arise future cases where adults can make the claims. There is a case I believe in the UK High Court taken by a woman who was assaulted in prison. But for now and to keep as close to OP as possible there are children who are taking action eg Connecticut sports case where the trans sports policy has recently been found to violate Title IX which benefits girls and women - https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/sport/2020/may/28/connecticut-transgender-federal-civil-rights-lawsuit

These legal reviews will increase greatly.

It is also mounting fear of legal action that has the NHS changing its official advice re children and hormones.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

As for children choosing a gender, I don’t really see the need to formalise it. If a little boy thinks he’s a girl or vice versa, just leave them be. If it’s formalised, I’d worry that they might end up feeling pigeonholed if it turns out that it was a phase. Maybe it’s not a phase for some but others, it may well be despite any strong feelings they have. Children can be incredibly wilful about all kinds of things and then can change their mind. So I think the best thing to do is just support them and wait to see how they develop.

One eyed Jack

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

As for children choosing a gender, I don’t really see the need to formalise it. If a little boy thinks he’s a girl or vice versa, just leave them be. If it’s formalised, I’d worry that they might end up feeling pigeonholed if it turns out that it was a phase. Maybe it’s not a phase for some but others, it may well be despite any strong feelings they have. Children can be incredibly wilful about all kinds of things and then can change their mind. So I think the best thing to do is just support them and wait to see how they develop.

The point trans advocates make though, is that their gender has already been legally formalised from birth, in the form of their birth certificate (which the GRA is used to address by issuing the applicant with new legal documents and having their preferred gender recognised in Irish law). It’s effectively pigeonholing children as they see it, from the moment they’re born.

Their argument is that this pigeonholing children leads to negative outcomes and stigmatisation which has the opposite effect of the current “wait and see, it might be just a phase” approach. You asked the question earlier as to why the NHS have changed the wording on their website, but isn’t that how science and medicine actually develops? Decisions are made based upon current data that is available, and through further research new data becomes available, and further decisions are made based upon that data. It’s no different in this case, only that the current legislation is somewhat lagging behind what is arguably currently best practice medicine, which has abandoned the wait and see approach in favour of the supporting children who are gender non-conforming in affirming their gender identity and expression.

Waiting to see how they develop leaves children in somewhat of a developmental limbo, which it is arguable supports the case for the introduction of hormone blockers before puberty, in order to give children and their parents and all stakeholders involved, more time to make decisions regarding the children’s welfare. In that time, the argument is that those kinds of supports are simply inappropriate and unhelpful, and the kind of support they are looking for is acceptance, and the recognition that they have the capacity to make these decisions for themselves, without the intervention of psychiatrists, psychologists, endocrinologists, social care workers, the Courts systems and so on.

It’s a minefield for parents who have to try and come to terms with their children experiencing gender dysphoria who feel there is no appropriate support for their children because when people hear of the condition, they’re immediately thinking of the high profile cases that have gained so much media attention in the last few years as a consequence of the media fostering ignorance and paranoia about people who experience gender dysphoria or are experiencing some form of incongruity with their gender or sex identity.

It’s not helpful to anyone that the discussion has been polarised by identity politics and radical all sorts, and there is absolutely a good argument to be made in questioning the authority of the likes of Graham Linehan, JK Rowling or Ricky Gervais in steering the public discourse regarding legal recognition of people who are transgender. There is of course also a good argument to be made in questioning the whole idea of exposing children to questioning their gender identity or their sex in the first place, but for some adults who were once children themselves, we know that people were questioning their identity long before they had developed the language and the knowledge to be able to articulate what they were sensing or feeling, which was outside the norms of conforming to social expectations of their sex or gender.

I don’t care much for the politics of it tbh, but there are medical, social and legal aspects to the whole idea of people who are experiencing distress with being pigeonholed into boxes they just won’t fit into, and unfortunately for them the implications from the point of view of healthcare, human rights and their legal status, and of course their social status are all issues which need to be addressed, and they need to be accommodated, in just the same way as everyone else in society is accommodated, and sure, a minority of people’s noses are going to be out out of joint by having to accommodate people they really don’t want to, but never in the history of human rights have we ever allowed the minority of objectors to dictate the human rights afforded to anyone in society, as recognised and protected by law, and that’s why it’s important that for those children, their preferred gender is formalised in our legal system. Their identity as it pertains to either gender or sex is of equal importance as their religious, ethnic, racial, linguistic, national or any other personal identity which pertains to them as a member of society.

In short, just because I think someone’s an obnoxious asshole, is not a reasonable argument to offer up as a justification in order deny them the human rights which are afforded to every member of society, formally recognised in Irish and International law.