Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Investigation into 4000% increase in girls unhappy with their gender.
Options
Comments
-
Body integrity dysphoria = mental health issue.
Gender dysphoria = not a mental health issue.0 -
ohnonotgmail wrote: »I was thinking more Daily Mail online comments section myself.
This isn’t any kind of reasonable argument. In real life I know plenty of people generally on the left who aren’t really that comfortable with these kind of interventions with children.
Mostly this shows how controlling the ideas of fashion are.0 -
Should we be checking the Feedback forum for a thread on the raging transphobia in AH?0
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
People like Louise O'Neill doesn't help constantly going on about how it's unsafe to be a woman.0
-
Should we be checking the Feedback forum for a thread on the raging transphobia in AH?
No but there might be one on why everything has to be "... phobic" when it's child protection we're talking.
I work with trans students - potentially - to my knowledge only one has come out in a decade.
The current penchant for being able to declare oneself a different gender irks her beyond words - this girl went through family disownment, painful surgeries and cultural "snubbing" - to become the person she should have been born.
Yes there's a mental health component - she had counselling, and why not ? It is a massive step.
To call people questioning this "transphobic" is myopic and pointless and just stifles discussion.0 -
freshpopcorn wrote: »People like Louise O'Neill doesn't help constantly going on about how it's unsafe to be a woman.
I walked from the pub at midnight on Sunday after the footy, no bother.
Gets back here and two women say "did a man not offer to walk you ?".
I'm heading for 50 - I don't need my hand held ffs!!!!!0 -
Advertisement
-
One correction, it’s not Penny Mourdant’s job to be sympathetic, it’s her job to define how sympathetic or otherwise the government should be. Given that the UK has an increasingly extreme right wing government that position is unlikely to be overly sympathetic and is more likely to be one of trying to find any possible evidence to justify their prejudice.
I think the fact that you stated yourself, in the past some transgender people would have just been depressed instead, explains the increase pretty clearly, as they now have options to get out of depression that weren’t there before.
The current government in the UK is less right wing than the Blair government circa 2001 to 20070 -
PlaneSpeeking wrote: »To call people questioning this "transphobic" is myopic and pointless and just stifles discussion.
I know someone who's going to be (sideways) involved in a project to support transgender people and while she is very excited at the prospect (because she thinks she will be able to help and feels that more support is necessary) she's also dreading it because of precisely this tendency to shut down any questioning and just label it as bigotry. (that's not to say there isn't any bigotry out there, but probably far less than they'd have you believe)0 -
PlaneSpeeking wrote: »You're on a hiding to nothing on this one Tiger!
The study was worrying - mainly because (possibly) well meaning groups have defined what being female is.
They perpetuate the myth of the constantly attacked woman, always the prey and needing chaperones for meetings with men and special considerations for jobs like shortlists etc. They create the mythical gender pay gap which is so far from being real it might as well have Mr Tumnus on speed dial.
Serena Williams is treated like a goddess for getting to final a whilst being a parent, Roger Federer has four children and wins regularly - Serena is not an impoverish single mother, she's a long time outta Compton and has a billionaire husband. Is it somehow more important to be a mother ? No wonder men suffer in childcare and custody cases - cf the "UK soap star" who had her kids removed and there was a backlash, yet no one knows why - she may be an unfit parent. Katie Price - shagging her toyboy on holiday and missing her youngest's first day at school, a man would be destroyed for doing that.
Can you blame girls nowadays for not wanting to be part of that ????
I just want to say that I like the cut of your jib.
More please :-)0 -
As a 31-year old man, I'd also like to know where I can cheaply buy comfortable loose-fitting jeans that don't cling to your legs or try to strangle your crotch.As an example, from about age 2 and up, it's really difficult to buy children's trousers that are not skin tight like leggings or skinny jeans for girls. When was the last time you saw a girl child in boy type jeans? It was common in the 80s and 90s from memory, but not now. It's skin tight or dresses/skirts. Why do we put small girls in leggings and boys in more comfortable jeans? A question for another place.0 -
-
pickarooney wrote: »You'll have to explain the maths behind that hypothesis!
Heh, sorry, maths is not my strong suit. But it is a heck of an increase. Social contagions and psychic epidemics have happened before. Examples include multiple personality disorder which became a buzz diagnosis for some years, satanic panics, removal of children from parents for imagined sex abuse (clusters). And there have also been historical examples of medical reactions to issues that seemed viable at the time like lobotomy, even eugenics. It's my firm opinion that we will look back at the affirmation of gender dysphoria in children as insanity. At the scale it's increasing especially.0 -
Heh, sorry, maths is not my strong suit. But it is a heck of an increase. Social contagions and psychic epidemics have happened before. Examples include multiple personality disorder which became a buzz diagnosis for some years, satanic panics, removal of children from parents for imagined sex abuse (clusters). And there have also been historical examples of medical reactions to issues that seemed viable at the time like lobotomy, even eugenics. It's my firm opinion that we will look back at the affirmation of gender dysphoria in children as insanity. At the scale it's increasing especially.
It really is one heck of an increase, but the phenomenon of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (wayhey, they’ve managed to medicalise it!) isn’t actually a new phenomenon in and of itself. It’s just a different way of expressing something that has always been prevalent in society - children questioning their place and where and how they fit in in society. Their increasing exposure to social media takes that level of introspection to the nth degree, and now they have not just the ability, but also the tools to self-diagnose and have their own self-diagnosis confirmed for them, and the mindset is even encouraged. This used happen through books, music, art and even in their own limited cultural experience of the physical world. Social media now offers them a place where their imaginations can and often will tend to run wild. The uncertainty they have creates an opportunity for unscrupulous capitalist entrepreneurs to fill their inquisitive minds with all sorts of “answers” that “just make sense” to them, appealing to their need to make sense of the world and their place within it.
One of the more troubling overall aspects of this cultural phenomenon was identified in the study you linked to and it is that of the “victim mentality” as a social currency -
Parents describe a process of immersion in social media, such as “binge-watch- ing” Youtube transition videos and excessive use of Tumblr, immediately preceding their child becoming gender dysphoric. These descriptions are atypical for the presentation of gender dys- phoria described in the research literature [1–5] and raise the question of whether social influ- ences may be contributing to or even driving these occurrences of gender dysphoria in some populations of adolescents and young adults. For the purpose of this study, rapid-onset gender dysphoria (ROGD) is defined as a type of adolescent-onset or late-onset gender dysphoria where the development of gender dysphoria is observed to begin suddenly during or after puberty in an adolescent or young adult who would not have met criteria for gender dysphoria in childhood.
...
The majority of respondents (69.2%) believed that their child was using language that they found online when they “came out.” A total of 130 participants provided optional open text responses to this question, and responses fell into the following categories: why they thought the child was using language they found online (51); description of what the child said but didn’t provide a reason that they suspected the child was using language they found online (61); something else about the conversation (8) or the child (7) and don’t know (3). Of the 51 responses describing reasons why respondents thought their child was reproducing language they found online, the top two reasons were that it didn’t sound like their child’s voice (19 respondents) and that the parent later looked online and recognized the same words and phrases that their child used when they announced a transgender identity (14 respondents). The observation that it didn’t sound like their child’s voice was also expressed as “sounding scripted,” like their child was “reading from a script,” “wooden,” “like a form letter,” and that it didn’t sound like their child’s words. Parents described finding the words their child said to them “verbatim,” “word for word,” “practically copy and paste,” and “identical” in online and other sources. The following quotes capture these top two observations. One parent said, “It seemed different from the way she usually talked—I remember thinking it was like hearing someone who had memorized a lot of definitions for a vocabulary test.” Another respondent said, “The email [my child sent to me] read like all of the narratives posted online almost word for word.”
...
Theme: emphasizing victimhood. Participants described that their children and friend group seemed to focus on feeling as though they were victims. One participant described, “They seem to wear any problems they may have, real or perceived like badges of honor. . .I feel like they want to believe they are oppressed & have really ’been through life’, when they have little life experience.” Another participant said, “. . .there is a lot of feeling like a victim [and being] part of a victimized club.” Another parent said “But all talk is very ’victim’ cen- tered”. And finally, another said, “They passionately decry ‘Straight Privilege’ and ‘White Male Privilege’—while emphasizing their own ‘Victimhood.’”
In short, it’s not just this particular phenomenon should be taken in isolation without acknowledging the broader context of the influence of social media, and whether or not the State has a responsibility to step in and legislate to prohibit this type of content in the interests of children’s welfare and society as a whole.
To be honest, I can’t see that happening, but I’m not at the point yet where I do believe there is actually a credible threat present in society that the vast majority of parents don’t have the confidence in their own parenting to be able to say “No” to their children. I’m aware of parents who are mentally at least paralysed with an inability to say no to their children and continue to enable them for fear that the child will take their own lives, and I can understand that hearing “You’ll regret this” from a child when they’re sent out to school or they’re refused the latest gadget would indeed take on a far more sinister undertone when the parents know their children have not just the knowledge, but now also the means to carry out such a threat. They fear for their children’s happiness, health and indeed their safety, and so they are more likely to enable the behaviour and the mentality rather than tempt fate as it were.
It’s moral panic of a different kind, and a different nature is all, and the mainstream media and social media corporations certainly don’t help matters as creating and fostering moral panic among the public is how they generate income for themselves. To say they are irresponsible is an understatement, but I don’t imagine it has any influence on what they choose to publish when it’s giving people what they actually want. They wouldn’t be as popular or powerful as they are if people didn’t want the snake oil and moral values they’re selling.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »It really is one heck of an increase, but the phenomenon of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (wayhey, they’ve managed to medicalise it!) isn’t actually a new phenomenon in and of itself. It’s just a different way of expressing something that has always been prevalent in society - children questioning their place and where and how they fit in in society. Their increasing exposure to social media takes that level of introspection to the nth degree, and now they have not just the ability, but also the tools to self-diagnose and have their own self-diagnosis confirmed for them, and the mindset is even encouraged. This used happen through books, music, art and even in their own limited cultural experience of the physical world. Social media now offers them a place where their imaginations can and often will tend to run wild. The uncertainty they have creates an opportunity for unscrupulous capitalist entrepreneurs to fill their inquisitive minds with all sorts of “answers” that “just make sense” to them, appealing to their need to make sense of the world and their place within it.
One of the more troubling overall aspects of this cultural phenomenon was identified in the study you linked to and it is that of the “victim mentality” as a social currency -
.......
In short, it’s not just this particular phenomenon should be taken in isolation without acknowledging the broader context of the influence of social media, and whether or not the State has a responsibility to step in and legislate to prohibit this type of content in the interests of children’s welfare and society as a whole.
To be honest, I can’t see that happening, but I’m not at the point yet where I do believe there is actually a credible threat present in society that the vast majority of parents don’t have the confidence in their own parenting to be able to say “No” to their children. I’m aware of parents who are mentally at least paralysed with an inability to say no to their children and continue to enable them for fear that the child will take their own lives, and I can understand that hearing “You’ll regret this” from a child when they’re sent out to school or they’re refused the latest gadget would indeed take on a far more sinister undertone when the parents know their children have not just the knowledge, but now also the means to carry out such a threat. They fear for their children’s happiness, health and indeed their safety, and so they are more likely to enable the behaviour and the mentality rather than tempt fate as it were.
It’s moral panic of a different kind, and a different nature is all, and the mainstream media and social media corporations certainly don’t help matters as creating and fostering moral panic among the public is how they generate income for themselves. To say they are irresponsible is an understatement, but I don’t imagine it has any influence on what they choose to publish when it’s giving people what they actually want. They wouldn’t be as popular or powerful as they are if people didn’t want the snake oil and moral values they’re selling.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Do you know, One Eyed Jack, it's not just (for me anyways) that there is a problem going on in the recesses of social media, it's the interface between that ethereal world and the real live flesh and blood world when the dodgy material in there meets an ideologically indoctrinated PC culture that can't or won't wave the stop sign or have cop on. It's not just regarding childhood gender dysphoria, it's there in pornified sex, and hyped up promiscuity that does no ones head any good, especially kids.
Sure kids have always felt like questioning their place in society, but much more from the ears up type of thing before, I would have thought, rather than this fecken obsession with genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics etc.
Also some respondents here have said how they were tomboys and hated that girly stuff and how bad this would have been if they were kids. But there is another kind of kid who would be not interested. I was always feminine as a child, reserved, shy etc but absolutely not a tomboy. I had zero interest in gender or sex until practically adulthood, the body was just how I travelled around the place. So there are other kinds of girls who are not tomboys, but who could not possibly fit into the present highly genderised culture comfortably. Ironically this specific genderising of the childhood culture is coming from the very ideology that says gender is fluid.
Maybe the culture overall has become hyper-sexualised for children and that is what we did not notice creeping up on us? That's quite worrying.
(Sorry for vagueness. I know I am not expressing myself well. Now that the rage has gone off me hehe)0 -
Also some respondents here have said how they were tomboys and hated that girly stuff and how bad this would have been if they were kids. But there is another kind of kid who would be not interested. I was always feminine as a child, reserved, shy etc but absolutely not a tomboy. I had zero interest in gender or sex until practically adulthood, the body was just how I travelled around the place. So there are other kinds of girls who are not tomboys, but who could not possibly fit into the present highly genderised culture comfortably.
Can you give some examples types or well known individuals? If ever there was time where people are allowed more individuality it is now so relative to the past there is less “genderised culture comfortably”A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
silverharp wrote: »Can you give some examples types or well known individuals? If ever there was time where people are allowed more individuality it is now so relative to the past there is less “genderised culture comfortably”
Not sure I get your meaning. But it was in response to posters mentioning the highly genderised outfits available for kids - which is true. Also toys past times etc. Heck, you could even get bra and knicker twin sets for toddlers a couple of years ago in Penneys. Little girls are wearing lipstick and blusher to their First Holy Communions and Irish Dancing regattas. Hair, beauty, the whole shebang, it's all much more in the face of children. I cannot even manage high heels yet, so I am really glad I did not have to be glam when still a child. And don't even start about young teens.0 -
Advertisement
-
Organisations like mermaids who actively campaign for children to be allowed to transition have huge influence in UK schools for some reason.
If you look at some of material kids in the UK are being taught by these groups you'll see that it is strictly enforcing gender stereotypes. Girls = feminine, caring, delicate. Boys = strong, assertive etc. They are being told that if they don't meet these stereotypes then perhaps they are "really" the opposite gender. It's not surprising that more children who don't fit those are thinking they are transgender and of course , on the advice of these groups we must allow them to start the process.
In reality, the vast majority of "transgender" kids are not in fact transgender. They usually turn out to be gender non conforming or gay. This is a fact that every study has shown. It's beyond sinister that groups are advocating kids being put on the path to medical transistion and a lifetime of surgical and hormonal interventions and you'd have to wonder who is funding this push. It certainly is an amazing result for pharma companies anyway. Even more sinister is that schools in some areas have taken on the recommendations that parents do not need to be informed if their child is starting to socially transition at school.0 -
Sure kids have always felt like questioning their place in society, but much more from the ears up type of thing before, I would have thought, rather than this fecken obsession with genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics etc.
Also some respondents here have said how they were tomboys and hated that girly stuff and how bad this would have been if they were kids. But there is another kind of kid who would be not interested. I was always feminine as a child, reserved, shy etc but absolutely not a tomboy. I had zero interest in gender or sex until practically adulthood, the body was just how I travelled around the place. So there are other kinds of girls who are not tomboys, but who could not possibly fit into the present highly genderised culture comfortably. Ironically this specific genderising of the childhood culture is coming from the very ideology that says gender is fluid.
I think that can’t be emphasised enough tbh, that there are by far and away the vast majority of children who aren’t at all interested in sex and sexuality or gender identity or a multitude of other social and political ideologies. I think again that social media and indeed the mainstream media is magnifying exponentially the actual influence of these phenomena in wider society beyond any influence it actually has in reality.Maybe the culture overall has become hyper-sexualised for children and that is what we did not notice creeping up on us? That's quite worrying.
(Sorry for vagueness. I know I am not expressing myself well. Now that the rage has gone off me hehe)
I genuinely don’t think society and culture have become any more sexualised than they were, or indeed weren’t already. I just think as society becomes more educated in certain ways, it’s actually the type of education they receive is more important, and naturally there are going to be all sorts of influences competing to educate children in the belief that getting to them young is going to have them always hold to that belief. Such arguments were never particularly well thought out if we take religion as an example of just one ideology. I think one of the biggest reasons why we might be given the impression that hyper-sexualisation has become more obvious and we didn’t notice it was because how could we, when we were children ourselves at the time and this stuff was mainly confined to third level institutions as far back as the institution of third level institutions, or establishments of higher education. I suppose particularly in the era of the ‘60s and ‘70s, and it’s enjoying something of a revival now thanks to being able to be disseminated faster via the internet.
I don’t think you’re being vague at all, I completely get where you’re coming from, but can it truly be said that for example Nicki Minaj’s “Barbie Dreams” is actually any worse than Elvis’ hip thrusting his way through the Bible Belt to become something of a worldwide phenomenon? The point I’m making is that for their time, both are arguably huge cultural influences on children, and both are (or in Elvis’ case was) roundly condemned as being a bad influence on children and corrupting children’s minds, but most children actually turned out ok as adults, as will the current generation.
Perspective really, is what I’m saying, it’s just as important to keep things in perspective as it is to protect children, and set boundaries for them rather than expect society should have to change to suit us any more than society is likely to change to suit people who want to appear to be so open minded that their brains have fallen out, because that’s unlikely to happen.0 -
Not sure I get your meaning. But it was in response to posters mentioning the highly genderised outfits available for kids - which is true. Also toys past times etc. Heck, you could even get bra and knicker twin sets for toddlers a couple of years ago in Penneys. Little girls are wearing lipstick and blusher to their First Holy Communions and Irish Dancing regattas. Hair, beauty, the whole shebang, it's all much more in the face of children. I cannot even manage high heels yet, so I am really glad I did not have to be glam when still a child. And don't even start about young teens.
I was thinking more teenagers and adults, and more general pressuresA belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Do you know, One Eyed Jack, it's not just (for me anyways) that there is a problem going on in the recesses of social media, it's the interface between that ethereal world and the real live flesh and blood world when the dodgy material in there meets an ideologically indoctrinated PC culture that can't or won't wave the stop sign or have cop on. It's not just regarding childhood gender dysphoria, it's there in pornified sex, and hyped up promiscuity that does no ones head any good, especially kids.
Sure kids have always felt like questioning their place in society, but much more from the ears up type of thing before, I would have thought, rather than this fecken obsession with genitalia and secondary sexual characteristics etc.
Also some respondents here have said how they were tomboys and hated that girly stuff and how bad this would have been if they were kids. But there is another kind of kid who would be not interested. I was always feminine as a child, reserved, shy etc but absolutely not a tomboy. I had zero interest in gender or sex until practically adulthood, the body was just how I travelled around the place. So there are other kinds of girls who are not tomboys, but who could not possibly fit into the present highly genderised culture comfortably. Ironically this specific genderising of the childhood culture is coming from the very ideology that says gender is fluid.
Maybe the culture overall has become hyper-sexualised for children and that is what we did not notice creeping up on us? That's quite worrying.
(Sorry for vagueness. I know I am not expressing myself well. Now that the rage has gone off me hehe)
I'll tell you what absolutely sickens me - in this supposed free age, stereotypes are slavishy adhered to, even when wrong.
I'm a woman, aside from not being able to pee where I want I'm generally fine with that.
I don't meet most stereotypes of women though - love my sport, wear trousers, hate make up, etc etc etc - but girls now are feeling (and being encouraged) that they must be trans if they feel "like boys".
It's not going to end well for our kids.0 -
PlaneSpeeking wrote: »I'm a woman, aside from not being able to pee where I want I'm generally fine with that.
Believe it or not that's generally frowned upon for men as well.0 -
Not arsed reading the source or any posts. I assume it was a low number, and it was always something people dealt with by themselves, but as it became more acceptable, more people seeked advice and treatment.
It would be lunacy to investigate some explosion of homosexuality for the same reasons.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Not arsed reading the source or any posts. I assume it was a low number, and it was always something people dealt with by themselves, but as it became more acceptable, more people seeked advice and treatment.
It would be lunacy to investigate some explosion of homosexuality for the same reasons.
Assumption is the mother of all f*ck ups.
It's not really a valid comparison to homosexuality, since exploring your sexuality doesn't involve radically altering your body.0 -
Addilyn Squeaking Snooper wrote: »Assumption is the mother of all f*ck ups.
It's not really a valid comparison to homosexuality, since exploring your sexuality doesn't involve radically altering your body.
It is a valid comparison. Both taboo things that people hid about themselves. Homosexuality became socially acceptable, and then so did transexuality.
If that isn't the whole reason, then enlighten me on how much of a percentage the above would account for? Since saying 0% would obviously be retarded.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »It is a valid comparison. Both taboo things that people hid about themselves. Homosexuality became socially acceptable, and then so did transexuality.
If that isn't the whole reason, then enlighten me on how much of a percentage the above would account for? Since saying 0% would obviously be retarded.
Well, first of all I don't know why you bother commenting in a thread where you admit to not bothering to read the premise, but on your homosexuality point you should perhaps do a little research on homeosexual attitudes towards transgenderism (by the way, transsexual is not cool to say anymore, it's awkward because it points to the truth that sexual biology cannot be changed). There is considerable concern among many homosexual activists that transgenderism is an extreme form of conversion therapy and that if not this, then it is still problematic because many children who identify now as trans are actually gay, which is revealed in the stats among those very many young adults who desist.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well, first of all I don't know why you bother commenting in a thread where you admit to not bothering to read the premise, but on your homosexuality point you should perhaps do a little research on homeosexual attitudes towards transgenderism (by the way, transsexual is not cool to say anymore, it's awkward because it points to the truth that sexual biology cannot be changed). There is considerable concern among many homosexual activists that transgenderism is an extreme form of conversion therapy and that if not this, then it is still problematic because many children who identify now as trans are actually gay, which is revealed in the stats among those very many young adults who desist.
I've read the premise now and the original figure is so low, it could only be explained with my reasoning above. 40 girls in 2009-2010 in a country the size of the UK is, practically speaking, zero.
I take you're going to accept that 40 girls a year on average is the true number of cases, since that's what it used to be, and everything over that is societal hysteria and the world falling apart. If that's the case, you should perhaps do a little research on statistics and how they can be manipulated.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement