Yeah, touché, I stand corrected on that one.
I still wouldn't give my children shirts with texts like that on it though.
[RD] LGBTQ news
- Thread starter bernie14
- Start date
I still wouldn't give my children shirts with texts like that on it though.
Nor would I. Bleh.
But not pushing sexual orientation on a child (as I feel all those examples do) is different than hiding the existence of sexual orientation from them, and it sounds like you do understand that.
I am the same way about gender. Gender
While when kids start realizing their own sexual orientation may be pre-puberty, I'd argue that gender identity shows up well before that and it is absurd to think that they shouldn't be allowed to even learn that not being cisgender is a valid thing, much less not be allowed to stray from their at-birth assignment until they're 18, especially given the possibility of avoiding wrong-gender puberty entirely.
And even if they are cis gender identity is not an excuse for gender stereotyping.
Learning about sexual orientation and gender identity should definitely be taught as part of what we used to call sex-ed, but then given that I was at school during Section 28, safe (hetero) sex and avoiding STDs were the only "sex-ed" topics on the curriculum at the time. I think it's called Personal & Social Education these days.
Personal, Health, Social and Economic Education
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...nal-social-health-and-economic-pshe-education
Its not a statutory subject and theres no standardised framework for it so what you get depends on the school.
Zardnaar
Deity
5 for me kissed her in the playground.
Similar beliefs we didn't get sex ed until year two high-school (age 14/15 normally I was a year younger).
And we god the advanced version year 4.
EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 11,712
I don't have kids, but I imagine anyone who does can speak to what it's like raising them in a keenly gender-obsessed society, even if you try to let them be themselves.
A couple of images of tee-shirts for girls and boys, from Amazon. They're even cut differently. I'll let you work out which was 'for boys' and which was 'for girls.'
Spoiler :
All my young nieces would want the dinosaur one.I don't have kids, but I imagine anyone who does can speak to what it's like raising them in a keenly gender-obsessed society, even if you try to let them be themselves.
A couple of images of tee-shirts for girls and boys, from Amazon. They're even cut differently. I'll let you work out which was 'for boys' and which was 'for girls.'Spoiler :
EgonSpengler
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 11,712
The shark one freaks me out a little bit.
What this apparently underscores, is that physicians have been viewing gender identity as something that was formed, or could be formed, through socialization, because they were essentially telling parents of children born with male physiology that they could surgically remove and/or alter it into female anatomy and then they could simply socialize the children as/into females. That line of thinking seems to presuppose gender identity as a blank slate, that is filled in by how the parents/society elects to socialize the child... which is ironic, thinking about how adamant folks opposed to trans identity are, that gender is locked-in based on genitals-at-birth.I cannot get over how out there this mainstream advice sounds now:
Among the more difficult decisions physicians have to make involve cases of ambiguous genitalia or significantly traumatized genitalia. The decision as to how to proceed typically follows the following contemporary advice: "The decision to raise the child as a male centers around the potential for the phallus to function adequately in later sexual relations (pp. 580)."1 and "Because it is simpler to construct a vagina than a satisfactory penis, only the infant with a phallus of adequate size should be considered for a male gender assignment (pp. 1955)"2 These management proposals depend upon a theory which basically says: "It is easier to make a good vagina than a good penis and since the identity of the child will reflect upbringing, and the absence of an adequate penis would be psychosexually devastating, fashion the perineum into a normal looking vulva and vagina and raise the individual as a girl." Such clinical advice, concerned primarily with surgical potentials, is relatively standard in medical texts3, 4, 5, 6 and reflects the current thinking of many pediatricians.7
That reference 7 is this paper from 1990:
Spoiler A review of expert opinion of management of intersex treatment 30 years ago :
The study we were discussing suggests that for many of these children, their gender was in-fact, locked-in at birth, and the attempt to assign them a different gender through surgical alteration coupled with socialization... failed.
What I also notice about that study is that at least some of the children apparently embraced their assignment as female, or at least, did not reject it outright. I am mulling around in my mind the implications of that, but at first blush, it does seem to support the notion that their assignment as female better comported with their sense of self, in spite of them being born with male anatomy.
I do not know if you looked in the spoiler, but there is not very much "presupposeing" going on, it is stated right there:
- To use the Pygmalion allegory, one may begin with the same clay and fashion a god or a goddess
- Gender and children are malleable, psychology and medicine are the tools used to transform them
That was my point yes, that they are starting from the standpoint that gender identity is initially blank and can be fashioned in one direction or another.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
So a quick update on how things are going in America: SB 254 has been signed in Florida, which unequivocally bans all gender affirming care for trans youth. It also bans all HRT prescription and refill by RNs and APRNs. Many trans people get their prescriptions from RNs and APRNs through organizations like Planned Parenthood (because e.g. at PP you don’t need insurance and they will do needs-based sliding price scales). In total around 80% of trans people in Florida (the state with the 2nd largest trans population) receive their HRT from an RN or APRN. These people have all been medically detransitioned effective immediately. Finally, the wording of the bill requires all patients sign off on a formal consent form to be prescribed HRT. This form has not been written or distributed yet by the state. Consequently, out of fear of not being in compliance with the new law, insurance is refusing to cover, and doctors are refusing to prescribe HRT to anybody, adult or minor. In essence this constitutes a de facto ban on all care for all trans people. It’s never actually about youth, trans youth are simply an effective wedge to get buy-in from normies unfamiliar with the science on this stuff.
It must also be mentioned and reminded that if you have had bottom surgery, you are no longer able to produce hormones internally. If you lose access to estradiol as a post-op trans woman your body effectively goes into menopause and this can lead to severe long-term chronic health issues. It is unbelievably cruel to deny these women HRT, and belies all the hand-wringing about permanent damage and early onset osteoporosis in trans youth from blockers (which itself is very heavily exaggerated).
Secondly, Texas has passed SB 12, which prohibits sexually-oriented performances on all public property, or any place where minors are, or may be present. It includes in its definition of “sexually-oriented” (a) the sexual presentation or representation of genitals in a “lewd” state incl. a state of sexual stimulation or arousal - lewd undefined, possibly could apply to, say, visible nipples or prominent or visible bulge. (b) actual or simulated contact with the buttocks, breast, or genitals - again could apply to, e.g. sitting or cuddling on someone in a park, standing front-to-back in a romantic embrace at a beautiful vista, etc. (c) the exhibition of “sexual gestures” using accessories or prosthetics that exaggerate male or female characteristics. This applies to inserts and prostheses (which of course cis women who have had mastectomies also use), but also: push-up bras, spanx or accentuated hip pants, breast aug, hair extensions, makeup, etc.. Once again, it is conceivable to interpret this to mean: any trans woman who wear women’s clothing.
While literally none of these things are exclusive to trans women, it always bears remembering that laws are enforced by people, and those people get to choose where, when, and on whom they apply the law. New York’s masquerade law explicitly banned any makeup, but the makeup ban was only ever applied to trans women. So this ought to be viewed as a ban on trans people’s ability to move outside of the home. When interpreted in terms of possible applications, it is the most restrictive and most punitive drag ban we have yet seen.
Oh and finally, Posie Parker held another anti-trans rally which Nazis attended and performed the sieg heil. JK Rowling took to Twitter to defend her dear friend, in which she both (a) said the Nazis are right to call trans people degenerates (using that word, which I remind you has a *very specific* history and legacy in a Nazi context), and (b) promised to pay any legal fees Parker incurs as a result of the rally whether defensively or in litigation.
It must also be mentioned and reminded that if you have had bottom surgery, you are no longer able to produce hormones internally. If you lose access to estradiol as a post-op trans woman your body effectively goes into menopause and this can lead to severe long-term chronic health issues. It is unbelievably cruel to deny these women HRT, and belies all the hand-wringing about permanent damage and early onset osteoporosis in trans youth from blockers (which itself is very heavily exaggerated).
Secondly, Texas has passed SB 12, which prohibits sexually-oriented performances on all public property, or any place where minors are, or may be present. It includes in its definition of “sexually-oriented” (a) the sexual presentation or representation of genitals in a “lewd” state incl. a state of sexual stimulation or arousal - lewd undefined, possibly could apply to, say, visible nipples or prominent or visible bulge. (b) actual or simulated contact with the buttocks, breast, or genitals - again could apply to, e.g. sitting or cuddling on someone in a park, standing front-to-back in a romantic embrace at a beautiful vista, etc. (c) the exhibition of “sexual gestures” using accessories or prosthetics that exaggerate male or female characteristics. This applies to inserts and prostheses (which of course cis women who have had mastectomies also use), but also: push-up bras, spanx or accentuated hip pants, breast aug, hair extensions, makeup, etc.. Once again, it is conceivable to interpret this to mean: any trans woman who wear women’s clothing.
While literally none of these things are exclusive to trans women, it always bears remembering that laws are enforced by people, and those people get to choose where, when, and on whom they apply the law. New York’s masquerade law explicitly banned any makeup, but the makeup ban was only ever applied to trans women. So this ought to be viewed as a ban on trans people’s ability to move outside of the home. When interpreted in terms of possible applications, it is the most restrictive and most punitive drag ban we have yet seen.
Oh and finally, Posie Parker held another anti-trans rally which Nazis attended and performed the sieg heil. JK Rowling took to Twitter to defend her dear friend, in which she both (a) said the Nazis are right to call trans people degenerates (using that word, which I remind you has a *very specific* history and legacy in a Nazi context), and (b) promised to pay any legal fees Parker incurs as a result of the rally whether defensively or in litigation.
Lexicus
Deity
Here's a great example of why we need more different reaccs; I would like to add to your reacc score but am loath to attach any positive reaction to the appalling information contained in this post.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
The silence from cis people who claimed they didn't want to harm us has been deafening
I had exactly the same reaction to the post... and this comes up often for me in general.
I know that the like-button can mean a bunch of different things, and does not necessarily always equate to agreement with the poster, or enjoyment/agreement with the content being cited, but sometimes a post has such disturbing topic/content that it just doesn't feel right to like-button it without context.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
And from those who insisted that no total ban was in the works after the Medicaid restriction.
This one is going to get a pretty strong Free-Speech challenge... but then the SCOTUS is 6-3 Republican, including at least three religious fanatics.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
yeah we’ll see, but that doesn’t take away hurt already inflicted. Trans people in Florida who aren’t self-medicating off the gray market have been detransitioned for 3 weeks now already. As I said, if you have had an orchiectomy, that’s 3 weeks of no testosterone OR estrogen
Similar threads
