Most children aren't aware that their genitals are in any way different from anyone else's until they are a few years old, and by that time, they will have gendered themselves.
At most, they as individuals need to be educated on how to keep their bodies clean, and warned to not let grownups take advantage of them.
Most of the more specific stuff can wait until just before puberty.
If a doctor needs to examine their genitals, then the doctor will quote immediately know what kind of genitals they have.
Then, when puberty is close, discuss gonads, hormones, and reproduction.IFF (if and only if) they express that the effects of the hormones their body will produce are not the ones they wish to be effected by in puberty, then make plans and discussions with them about rectifying that, what consequences this will have on reproductive goals, and whatever else so they can make an informed decisions about their body.
Most children aren't aware that their genitals are in any way different from anyone else's until they are a few years old, and by that time, they will have gendered themselves.
At most, they as individuals need to be educated on how to keep their bodies clean, and warned to not let grownups take advantage of them.
Most of the more specific stuff can wait until just before puberty.
If a doctor needs to examine their genitals, then the doctor will quote immediately know what kind of genitals they have.
Then, when puberty is close, discuss gonads, hormones, and reproduction.IFF (if and only if) they express that the effects of the hormones their body will produce are not the ones they wish to be effected by in puberty, then make plans and discussions with them about rectifying that, what consequences this will have on reproductive goals, and whatever else so they can make an informed decisions about their body.
When a child is born, genitals are absolutely one of the first things noticed. Whether or not the urinary tract functions well is essential knowledge.
Young children are aware of what kind of genitals they have from a very young age—long before they are two or three. They may or may not be aware of what the genitals of the opposite sex lol like, depending on whether or not there are siblings and whether or not the parents are always very covered up or whether the parents dress/undress, shower in front of the kids.
Toddlers are very concerned with whether they are a boy or a girl and they like other people to know.
It is a fantasy that one can raise a child to not believe strongly about which sex they are. Raising my kids, we used correct names for all parts of the body, including genitals. My oldest loudly sang a song of his own invention to a rush hour bus load of people about penises and vaginas when he was 2.
Both our boys and our girls were raised with the same types of toys, cuddly stuffed animals, costumes, building blocks and legos and art supplies Some gravitated more towards traditionally male or traditionally female toys than others. All played with other children who were male, female, and trans.
Sex education starts long before puberty, with naming body parts, talking about body autonomy, respect for yourself and others, respect for privacy. With multiple children in the family there was no mystery about where babies came from or how babies were fed—or indeed what was under diapers. Our kids bathed with each other when they were small enough to not feel shy about it. At some point all of them were in a bath or shower with mom or dad.
Questions were answered as they arose.
Very few adolescents want to hear anything At. All. About S-E-X from their parents. Although questions tend to arise when you’re driving them home, just the two of you, after some school event. Especially at night.
YES you absolutely should/must pay attention room to how comfortable your child is with their body, and how comfortable they are with every aspect of themselves. You accept children for who they are, as they show themselves to be.
Yes, children can and do know that they are transgender, although that’s not the words they use, before they start school. Not all children do but certainly some do and in my observation were very very outspoken about it. YES it’s important to pay attention to how they see themselves and to support and accept them for who they are—including seeking out guidance and treatment when the need presents itself.
Unfortunately, there's a higher likelihood that Mary had her hymen intact, and got knocked up from Joseph (or someone else) ejaculating on her labia. Because that actually can happen.
It's more likely Joseph lied, about his dream that said she was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, to avoid Mary getting stoned to death, if she was ever real at all. What, the patriarchy accepted a cockamamie story like that on a woman's say so?
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
Unfortunately, there's a higher likelihood that Mary had her hymen intact, and got knocked up from Joseph (or someone else) ejaculating on her labia. Because that actually can happen.
It's more likely Joseph lied, about his dream that said she was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, to avoid Mary getting stoned to death, if she was ever real at all. What, the patriarchy accepted a cockamamie story like that on a woman's say so?
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
Unfortunately, there's a higher likelihood that Mary had her hymen intact, and got knocked up from Joseph (or someone else) ejaculating on her labia. Because that actually can happen.
It's more likely Joseph lied, about his dream that said she was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, to avoid Mary getting stoned to death, if she was ever real at all. What, the patriarchy accepted a cockamamie story like that on a woman's say so?
That's a good point. Joseph and maybe some rabbis or women granted the skill of hymen checking by the Man would have vouched for the virginity, if it's even true. A woman saying such things on her own would not have been trusted.
Unfortunately, there's a higher likelihood that Mary had her hymen intact, and got knocked up from Joseph (or someone else) ejaculating on her labia. Because that actually can happen.
It's more likely Joseph lied, about his dream that said she was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, to avoid Mary getting stoned to death, if she was ever real at all. What, the patriarchy accepted a cockamamie story like that on a woman's say so?
That's a good point. Joseph and maybe some rabbis or women granted the skill of hymen checking by the Man would have vouched for the virginity, if it's even true. A woman saying such things on her own would not have been trusted.
The simplest explanation is that Mary and Joseph were a married couple, but Christians really liked the whole 'born of a virgin' thing and plagiarized Ra's life story so their god could have one too.
Unfortunately, there's a higher likelihood that Mary had her hymen intact, and got knocked up from Joseph (or someone else) ejaculating on her labia. Because that actually can happen.
It's more likely Joseph lied, about his dream that said she was impregnated by the Holy Spirit, to avoid Mary getting stoned to death, if she was ever real at all. What, the patriarchy accepted a cockamamie story like that on a woman's say so?
That's a good point. Joseph and maybe some rabbis or women granted the skill of hymen checking by the Man would have vouched for the virginity, if it's even true. A woman saying such things on her own would not have been trusted.
The simplest explanation is that Mary and Joseph were a married couple, but Christians really liked the whole 'born of a virgin' thing and plagiarized Ra's life story so their god could have one too.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
That's not necessarily true (most "trans ideologists" are at least aware of NB or genderqueer folks I should think!) but even if it were, no trans person is claiming that they were never assigned a different gender at birth. I think a lot of people wish that terms like "trans" or "homosexual" did not need to exist any more, that people could simply be accepted as they are for what they are without the invocation of a legitimizing label. But our social reality is such that fluidity of sexual expression, gender, and romance still make people targets for persecution, and such a society produces such labels.
And that can be done without listing it on a personal document that anyone can see and read and have knowledge of. Everyone with the need to check those functions and discuss them will know what they are, anyway.
The fact that it is something noticed and known by some rather promptly is NOT a basis for making a big deal about it.
It's even something that can go into hospital records, even though we had a whole thread where we discussed that when the doctor is visited, really only the doctor needs to know, and a few select nurses.
The vast majority of folks who see their documents don't need to know that.
Yes, them being aware of their own genitals is important. Anyone else being aware of their genitals is on a case by case basis.
They don't need to be aware of the genitals "others" have until they have the interest to know, or they have a developmental hurdle coming up.
Did you need to think your son was a "boy" in order to wash their penis? Or in order to tell the doctor when he had trouble peeing? Did the doctor need to be told "he has a penis" to look at the urinary tract, or to discover that penis?
Do you need to tell someone "you have a penis, therefore you are a boy" to actually be a "boy"?
The answers to all these questions is "no, not really."
It is. Which is why I don't hold to that. What I believe people CAN do is raise a child so that the beliefs they have about their own sex are not forced upon them or loaded with authoritative essentialism.
Indeed this can be supplemented with information about the capabilities of their genitals (and other genitals) and the effect of gonadal hormones on the body. It SHOULD be discussed, even.
But proclaiming 'you are a boy' and treating them 'like a boy' without them first volunteering 'I think I am a BOY' is what is the problem.
Indeed, and so it is important that when they say they are a boy, it comes from them and not someone else.
I might imagine we would see some percentage of toddlers, maybe 2-3%, making that declaration entirely accurately while not being what Oleg would call "a boy".
And he may have loudly belted off a number of inaccuracies on a bus when he was 2, assuming it was something like "boys have penises, girls have vaginas", to which you might have some obligation to explain "some people with vaginas are boys and some people with penises are girls".
The point is that decisions on what someone is and how strongly, what they show and ultimately what they allow their body chemistry to be, all need to be their decisions. For most people these are easy decisions!
It's a lot easier to accept them for who they really are when you don't tell them who they are but let them tell you. That way, they come to their own understanding of who they are rather than being programmed into a belief that they must be someone who they are not.
I know plenty of trans people who didn't transition until their late 20's or even 30's specifically because while "other people" can be trans, they had a penis so they were assumed to be a boy and they went with it and didn't ever discuss the fact that they felt pressured to perform and mask that entire time.
as an example of this kind of opportunity cost, let's look at an example from my own life. In 5th grade when band started to become a thing and everyone had to at least try playing an instrument, my parents asked what instruments we wanted to play.
Looking at who was choosing what instruments, I noticed that most of the people choosing drums were not very bright people. In fact enough people disinterested in band joined and picked "drums" that in my child mind, I drew an essentialism between playing drums and being dull-minded: people picked drums because "drums are easy" (they are not). Instead of playing the drums (I wanted to) I played a wind instrument, and have since spent my life wishing I hadn't.
I felt pressured to play a wind instrument because of beliefs I held about what it meant to play the drums, combined with pressure I felt to take on challenge.
I imagine many people feel the pressure to undergo puberty with testosterone because of beliefs they form (and which are formed for them whole cloth by adults just telling them this kind of bullshit) about what it means to have a penis, rather than what beliefs they form about who they are. The difference is, I can still learn to play the drums (even if I am bad at it, and find the coordination hard to develop at my age) whereas I would have to grow myself a whole new body to undo puberty.
When essentialist views arise, they can be hard to spot, but the absolutism there should be challenged when it is expressed.
An adult telling a child unequivocally "what they are" is a powerful and unnecessary finger on the scale when the decisions made should not be weighed on the basis of what one has been told is "normal", but on the basis of who they are themselves as an individual.
"Taking it for granted" is a recipe for a 30 year old with surgical bills, especially when we don't need to give them essentialist views at all.
Again, none of this is dependent on telling people what genitals they have.
And that can be done without listing it on a personal document that anyone can see and read and have knowledge of. Everyone with the need to check those functions and discuss them will know what they are, anyway.
The fact that it is something noticed and known by some rather promptly is NOT a basis for making a big deal about it.
It's even something that can go into hospital records, even though we had a whole thread where we discussed that when the doctor is visited, really only the doctor needs to know, and a few select nurses.
The vast majority of folks who see their documents don't need to know that.
Yes, them being aware of their own genitals is important. Anyone else being aware of their genitals is on a case by case basis.
They don't need to be aware of the genitals "others" have until they have the interest to know, or they have a developmental hurdle coming up.
Did you need to think your son was a "boy" in order to wash their penis? Or in order to tell the doctor when he had trouble peeing? Did the doctor need to be told "he has a penis" to look at the urinary tract, or to discover that penis?
Do you need to tell someone "you have a penis, therefore you are a boy" to actually be a "boy"?
The answers to all these questions is "no, not really."
It is. Which is why I don't hold to that. What I believe people CAN do is raise a child so that the beliefs they have about their own sex are not forced upon them or loaded with authoritative essentialism.
Indeed this can be supplemented with information about the capabilities of their genitals (and other genitals) and the effect of gonadal hormones on the body. It SHOULD be discussed, even.
But proclaiming 'you are a boy' and treating them 'like a boy' without them first volunteering 'I think I am a BOY' is what is the problem.
Indeed, and so it is important that when they say they are a boy, it comes from them and not someone else.
I might imagine we would see some percentage of toddlers, maybe 2-3%, making that declaration entirely accurately while not being what Oleg would call "a boy".
And he may have loudly belted off a number of inaccuracies on a bus when he was 2, assuming it was something like "boys have penises, girls have vaginas", to which you might have some obligation to explain "some people with vaginas are boys and some people with penises are girls".
The point is that decisions on what someone is and how strongly, what they show and ultimately what they allow their body chemistry to be, all need to be their decisions. For most people these are easy decisions!
It's a lot easier to accept them for who they really are when you don't tell them who they are but let them tell you. That way, they come to their own understanding of who they are rather than being programmed into a belief that they must be someone who they are not.
I know plenty of trans people who didn't transition until their late 20's or even 30's specifically because while "other people" can be trans, they had a penis so they were assumed to be a boy and they went with it and didn't ever discuss the fact that they felt pressured to perform and mask that entire time.
as an example of this kind of opportunity cost, let's look at an example from my own life. In 5th grade when band started to become a thing and everyone had to at least try playing an instrument, my parents asked what instruments we wanted to play.
Looking at who was choosing what instruments, I noticed that most of the people choosing drums were not very bright people. In fact enough people disinterested in band joined and picked "drums" that in my child mind, I drew an essentialism between playing drums and being dull-minded: people picked drums because "drums are easy" (they are not). Instead of playing the drums (I wanted to) I played a wind instrument, and have since spent my life wishing I hadn't.
I felt pressured to play a wind instrument because of beliefs I held about what it meant to play the drums, combined with pressure I felt to take on challenge.
I imagine many people feel the pressure to undergo puberty with testosterone because of beliefs they form (and which are formed for them whole cloth by adults just telling them this kind of bullshit) about what it means to have a penis, rather than what beliefs they form about who they are. The difference is, I can still learn to play the drums (even if I am bad at it, and find the coordination hard to develop at my age) whereas I would have to grow myself a whole new body to undo puberty.
When essentialist views arise, they can be hard to spot, but the absolutism there should be challenged when it is expressed.
An adult telling a child unequivocally "what they are" is a powerful and unnecessary finger on the scale when the decisions made should not be weighed on the basis of what one has been told is "normal", but on the basis of who they are themselves as an individual.
"Taking it for granted" is a recipe for a 30 year old with surgical bills, especially when we don't need to give them essentialist views at all.
Again, none of this is dependent on telling people what genitals they have.
Re: Birth certificates. Not just anyone can access someone else's birth certificate.
Noting apparent sex IS important when tracking a child's growth and development. Even if the child later realizes that they are not comfortable with being called male or female, that IS something that comes from the child. Refusing to note apparent sex is not a solution but would create a greater problem.
Re: urinary track infections. The issues are somewhat different depending on whether or not the child has a penis or does not have a penis. Yes, doctors need to know. Yes, I think it's better in settings to have bathrooms segregated by sex, and also that there are stalls with doors for privacy on all bathrooms.
Toddlers are often.....extremely likely to prefer to run around naked given the opportunity. Toddlers--and babies have an intense curiosity about other people's faces, hair, clothing, hands, feet, bodies, belly buttons, genitals. Toddlers and babies sort people into a variety of categories, including by apparent sex.
Children do not grow up in a vacuum but in families and in society which provides important context. This happens in all societies, whether there are rigid assumptions about sex and gender or if there is more broad acceptance of appearance, dress, behavior, paths in adulthood, etc.
When our first child was born, I was certain that there were no gender differences in how children played, if they were given free choice, no gendered differences in whether or not any given child would prefer to play with say, trucks or dolls. I played with both as a child, for example. Turns out: yes, some kids indeed do choose stereotypical toys and play. Turns out a penis is also a gun and little boys are fascinated with penises: theirs and other people's. Turns out that even if they are raised with no television, no weapons, or books or media about weapons, some children will gravitate to...using their fingers, carrot sticks, celery sticks, and yes, their penis as a 'gun.' I was shocked when our child at barely a year old picked up something and pointed it, saying POW. I still have no idea where he got that idea.
Whether a child is 'told' they are male or female, if they begin to notice that they do not feel as though they are male or female or something else, they will feel discomfort. A trans child will eventually want and need counseling, and medical intervention, regardless of whether or not they are identified as male or female from birth onward. I don't see that changing.
YES I definitely believe that children should be raised to express themselves and all of their interests regardless of whether or not those are considered 'appropriate' for their gender. In many ways as a child, I was very gender non-conforming. I preferred a lot of typically male pursuits---and also enjoyed playing with dolls. I detested being made to wear a dress. I preferred climbing trees, collecting rocks and sticks and bugs to sitting quietly and doing anything except reading or drawing. I challenged every gender stereotype I could, deliberately, and proved that girls were as good or better than boys at math and science and, until they really outgrew me, basketball, running, arm wrestling. I was thrilled that schools were much less inclined to push girls and boys into specific courses, some of which I was forbidden to take when I was a student. (Girls were not allowed to take any shop or drafting courses; boys could not taken any home ec classes, but girls were REQUIRED to). Despite not conforming to what society said a girl liked and wanted and was good at, I never doubted for a second that I was female and did not want to be male although I DID want the opportunities that boys had that were not allowed girls. None of my career aspirations as a child were those associated with female jobs or careers. I was furious when I found out about menstruation ---and then it turned out that I didn't find it a big deal once it arrived.
My mother really wanted me to be in band. I have zero musical talent and I knew this about myself. But, to please her, I said I'd like to play drums. She was aghast: boys played drums. So I suggested playing the trumpet: Nope. That was a boy's instrument. So was a sax. I was uninterested in playing the flute or clarinet which she deemed acceptable. So I stuck with art classes, where a lot of kids who struggled in school were placed because it was an easy pass.
For whom? It can in fact confound tracking a child's growth and development, especially when assumptions about these things cause injury. The topic is those for whom there is discordance.
And it's important to get out ahead of that by educating them out of such behaviors of ignorance, so that they don't end up having Metaphor be a metaphor for them, trapped in an oversimplification that they will not be broken of before it sets in.
Some toddlers may attempt to sort people by comorbidity and come to the understanding that "black people are poor". Do you think THAT is appropriate? In their experience it may be true, but the issue is that it is far from universal and absolutely not an essential comorbidity.
There is no such thing as an absolute set of "girl things" or "boy things", to include genitals, and this is something that bears educating about early.
Personally, I would rather parents just stop with all the "pink is for people with vaginas and blue is for people with penises" nonsense.
The only truths about genitals are "these produce sperm and testosterone, and testosterone causes these effects", and "these produce eggs and estrogen, and progesterone and estrogen/progesterone cause these effects", and "these are the conditions that one must be aware of for each of the genital types."
Enforced normativity is the problem here. Eliminating those expectations towards "normal" is a laudable goal. So that girls can wear pants. So that boys can wear dresses. So that people with testicles can grow up girls (whatever that means), so that people with ovaries can grow up as boys (again, whatever that means).
Personally, I find artificial pressure towards such norms to be stupid and counterproductive to happiness and joy.
I find the distinction to be altogether meaningless. Talk to the people you are interested in talking to, fuck the people you are mutually interested in sex with, contribute work to your household on the basis of the work you have an interest in doing, be affected by the hormones you have an interest in being affected by.
Save discussion of what is in your pants for the doctor's office, or whichever date you deem is appropriate for discussing one's long term family planning goals.
This thread has gone all over the place, and as usual, nobody has changed their position. I don't understand it since there is so much evidence that a small percentage of people are both with brains that don't match their physical bodies. So, instead of arguing, I'm gifting a beautiful opinion piece that I read this morning, written by a trans male, and the struggles he had accepting his own gender id. Interestingly enough, he is a rare trans male who chose to join other men on a university swim team, despite doing better when he was part of the women's swim team. I hope that most of you will read the entire piece as, regardless of your personal beliefs, it might help some understand the struggles that those who identify as the opposite of the gender they were assigned at birth, deal with during their lives. I'll quote a sample, in hopes that it motivates some of you to read this person's perspectives.
The first time I remember feeling different from the people around me was in fourth grade. I felt like I’d been thrust onstage for a show without having been given a script. Every interaction seemed wrong. Recognizing my bisexuality in seventh grade gave me a degree of comfort, like a candle held out against dark confusion, but even then, so much of myself still felt impossible to discern.
Despite growing up in progressive California, it wasn’t until eighth grade that I met a trans person. He put words to feelings I hadn’t been able to name for myself, like how out of place he felt in his own skin or to be perceived as a girl. After reading other people’s stories of realization online, I was certain enough that I was trans to tell my mom that I was her son, not her daughter.
But I wasn’t ready to follow through and soon found myself retreating. I concluded that I should try to fit myself into an identity as close to “normal” as possible, to follow the path of least resistance.
Despite my best efforts to minimize my queerness, whispers of the “scary lesbian” followed me my first week at a new high school during my sophomore year. Because of my deeply internalized homophobia, being perceived as obviously queer felt like the worst thing that could possibly have happened as a new kid. I renewed my efforts to fit in, growing my hair out, wearing more traditionally feminine clothing and learning how to do my makeup. These changes didn’t help me feel better or more confident, but they shifted others’ perceptions of me.
I have nothing more to add to this discussion. If this person's story doesn't convince some of you that some people are born in a body that doesn't match their brains, I doubt us arguing with each other will. I just hope that those who deny trans identity or nonbinary identity will at least have compassion for those who are different. We don't have to understand everything to be willing to accept it.
I also will add that I doubt that Oleg read the entire article about the person who was confused about their gender identity after experiencing dementia. I read the entire article and it didn't simply support the idea that those with dementia stop identifying as the gender they felt comfortable in during their earlier life. Plus, it mentioned all of the prejudice that sadly exists in the medical community towards trans individuals. Plus, it's very common for those with dementia to retreat to childhood and act like little children, or to forget a lot of things about their past identity. I know this as one who cared and advocated for the victims of dementia for many years. But, that's a very different topic that probably belongs in a different section of this forum, so I'll leave it at that.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
That's not necessarily true (most "trans ideologists" are at least aware of NB or genderqueer folks I should think!) but even if it were, no trans person is claiming that they were never assigned a different gender at birth.
You are correct: trans ideologists make the false claim that people were assigned a gender at birth. Nobody was, of course. Their sex was observed and recorded on a birth certificate.
For whom? It can in fact confound tracking a child's growth and development, especially when assumptions about these things cause injury. The topic is those for whom there is discordance.
And it's important to get out ahead of that by educating them out of such behaviors of ignorance, so that they don't end up having Metaphor be a metaphor for them, trapped in an oversimplification that they will not be broken of before it sets in.
Some toddlers may attempt to sort people by comorbidity and come to the understanding that "black people are poor". Do you think THAT is appropriate? In their experience it may be true, but the issue is that it is far from universal and absolutely not an essential comorbidity.
There is no such thing as an absolute set of "girl things" or "boy things", to include genitals, and this is something that bears educating about early.
Personally, I would rather parents just stop with all the "pink is for people with vaginas and blue is for people with penises" nonsense.
The only truths about genitals are "these produce sperm and testosterone, and testosterone causes these effects", and "these produce eggs and estrogen, and progesterone and estrogen/progesterone cause these effects", and "these are the conditions that one must be aware of for each of the genital types."
Enforced normativity is the problem here. Eliminating those expectations towards "normal" is a laudable goal. So that girls can wear pants. So that boys can wear dresses. So that people with testicles can grow up girls (whatever that means), so that people with ovaries can grow up as boys (again, whatever that means).
Personally, I find artificial pressure towards such norms to be stupid and counterproductive to happiness and joy.
I find the distinction to be altogether meaningless. Talk to the people you are interested in talking to, fuck the people you are mutually interested in sex with, contribute work to your household on the basis of the work you have an interest in doing, be affected by the hormones you have an interest in being affected by.
Save discussion of what is in your pants for the doctor's office, or whichever date you deem is appropriate for discussing one's long term family planning goals.
No. Children put the world into various categories. It's how they make sense of the world. They see how they are and who they are in relation to everything around them. Growing up usually makes people less self centered but learning and establishing what is like/unlike is part of differentiating self from the rest of the world. Including siblings, parents, family members, friends, pets, etc.
Children also learn that others, including other children differ from them in important ways but that the similarities are more important. My children have had friends who were hearing impaired, vision impaired, had a variety of learning disabilities and physical disabilities. From preschool on, my youngest was friends with a child who was vehemently, outspokenly trans although trans was not the word used: he was named and treated as female but was outspoken in his assertion that he was male. Made zero difference in their friendship. As far as I could see, zero difference in their friendships at school. During middle school, they changed schools so I can't comment about how they well they were accepted, except as I occasionally heard through other children who attended the same school. Eventually some of their friends came out as gay or bi. Everyone had/has friends who are male, female, gay, bi, trans.
It's a fantasy that children do not care what is in their pants or the pants of those around them and do not share that information but that's not reality. Two of my kids were absolutely inclined towards nudity. Two were much, much more shy about their bodies. I remember a group of little girls deciding to exchange underwear on the school playground before school. I cannot begin to count the number of times I've seen little boys peeing on bushes, trees, fire hydrants, etc. There is no reason that children cannot learn that most people with vaginas are girls and most people with penises are male but that's not always the case. Just as most of their friends can hear with their ears but some cannot and must read lips or use sign language and may/may not use hearing aids. Or use mobility aids of various types. Or learn very quickly or very slowly. Or just see the world differently. Children have different configurations of family and of types of home.
If parents around them are accepting of people who are in some way different, the kids usually are as well. And sometimes, even if the parents are more suspicious of what is different, the kids are usually very open and accepting. My school district used to take advantage of the number of international college students in town and have international days, where the international student association presented a variety of programs to elementary aged children, including an opportunity to prepare and serve a meal. It took a lot of convincing on my part to get the parents to go along with having the meal served--it was to be cooked and served by students from Bangladesh. The parents were certain the kids wouldn't touch it. Mind you, I live in an area where a lot of people consider pizza to be 'spicy.' Parents as well as children were included in the day long event and the parents just shoved the food around their plates. The kids LOVED it, and asked for seconds! I can confirm it was absolutely delicious.
The purpose of childhood is to help the individual make sense of the world and their place in it. When I was growing up, I never heard the term transsexual and would have been very confused by it. I was frustrated and angered by those handful of individuals, including a couple of my siblings, who insisted that girls couldn't do something I could and did do and loved doing, and worse, that I wasn't really a girl because I liked math/science/bugs/rocks/sticks/playing football/playing basketball/climbing trees/hiking plus I was really flat chested until my 4th child was born so according to my siblings, I wasn't really a girl and didn't even look like a girl. Somehow, I had no problem being asked out on dates by boys who were not confused about my gender or sex any more than I was confused. But sometimes I wonder if I were born today, to a certain kind of family, if they would have wondered and perhaps encouraged me to think of myself as transgender. I myself was never confused. I wanted to do things that boys were allowed to do and I rejected a number of things girls were supposed to love. I had no ambition to follow any traditional female career path. I was thoroughly a tomboy. For a while, I did want a penis because I saw boys peeing outside and I thought that would be very convenient. But frankly, I also thought a penis would just get in the way of doing things I liked such as running and climbing trees. (Obviously my fleeting glance of a penis in action was very fleeting). I was fortunate that I had a strong sense of self. I don't know how that happened, but it did.
I think that good parenting, and a good society accepts children as they are, answers questions as they arise and gives children the opportunity to figure out a lot of things for themselves. And accepts children and all people as people first.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
That's not necessarily true (most "trans ideologists" are at least aware of NB or genderqueer folks I should think!) but even if it were, no trans person is claiming that they were never assigned a different gender at birth.
You are correct: trans ideologists make the false claim that people were assigned a gender at birth. Nobody was, of course. Their sex was observed and recorded on a birth certificate.
That is correct. Which is why the language has shifted to refer to "Trans-identified people" more correctly as transgendered rather than transexual as was once common when we knew less fashions in ideology were different.
I guess if you're not familiar with the sciences, changes of common terminology must seem quite faddish? They do happen often, but that is because knowledge is constantly expanding. We generally adopt new conventions of categorization when our awareness of the world increases, and more precise language is needed to avoid error or confusion.
Whilst the term 'transsexual' does not make sense, since people cannot change sex, 'transgender' equally does not make sense. Trans ideologists claim trans people are ans were always the gender they claim, so there is no 'trans' to it. Nothing is transitioning--certainly not your gender identity.
That's not necessarily true (most "trans ideologists" are at least aware of NB or genderqueer folks I should think!) but even if it were, no trans person is claiming that they were never assigned a different gender at birth.
You are correct: trans ideologists make the false claim that people were assigned a gender at birth. Nobody was, of course. Their sex was observed and recorded on a birth certificate.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
