To put this in perspective, it's worth noting that while the field of psychiatry may have laid the groundwork for today’s conventional wisdom among trans allies—that there is such a thing as a “trans child”—developments outside psychiatry have contributed equally influential elements to the trans kid myth. Reforms that focus solely on psychiatry, without addressing the broader cultural, educational, and activist dynamics, will not puncture the myth on their own.
That’s why I was surprised by a few omissions in this otherwise compelling discussion.
First, there was no mention of the frequent claim—common among trans activists and affirming clinicians—that very young children (often boys) “always know” their gender identity. This assertion is routinely cited to justify the belief that “true” trans kids exist, yet neither speaker addressed it or interrogated its basis.
Second, there was no exploration of how childhood trans identities characterized as "strong and stable" might actually be stable and strong only because they are shaped and reinforced by an affirming cultural environment (parents, schools, media, and clinicians) rather than reflecting something innate. The role of adult affirmation in creating rather than validating identity deserves scrutiny.
Lastly, the conversation ignored a growing concern that some children are declared “trans” not based on persistent self-identification, but to satisfy the ideological commitments of their parents. Whether or not this is common, it is certainly relevant and merits acknowledgment in any serious attempt to dismantle the so-called “transgender child.”
There's something about the "I always knew". It can only be a proclamation made later. No one can unfailingly predict someone will feel later. One's eventual interpretation of previous feelings may be wildly different.
Your different DSM VI wishes could be completely combined into one. Mia‘s point that gender is the current vehicle through which various sources of distress are funneled and labeled matches perfectly with Stella‘s idea that this all leads to faulty ideas about one’s own identity. Ideas that come from distress and a desire to escape the body one is in while experiencing that distress. And also, back to Stella‘s childhood without presumptuously analyzing her, an alternate identity that is clung to as an escape from what the sexed world is seeming to offer. Very much in line with Sundar’s Dysphoric: Fleeing Womanhood Like a House on Fire. Of course, none of this will ever happen, because the current authors of the diagnostic statistical manual of mental disorders are tasked more with finding diagnoses for insurance reimbursement and the righting of social justice wrongs then truly asking the questions of whether these diagnoses are inherently accurate and can lead to true understanding and beneficial care.
There’s also the question of which group children gravitate to. My sister - a tomboy in the 70s - much preferred playing football with the boys and got a lot of teasing for her preference for male friends. Later on, at her girls secondary school she suffered a lot from female aggression - being cut out of her friendship groups etc. I think either alienation from (or feeling like) you don’t belong with your sex group, or having inflexible gender roles laid on you that you can’t stand are big drivers in how much childhood non conformity causes distress and how much. Our parents were very flexible with dress and pursuits, she found other female friends eventually, and came through. And yes, came out as gay at about 20.
Some thoughts on homophobia as the main force behind discomfort with feminine boys. I actually think that it’s more status and historic sexism. The things of boys and men have usually seemed higher status, commanding more recognition, validity and reward. So when girls are tomboys their aspirations are sympathised with. Of course she’d rather be a boy - boys do / get / are better stuff! And a lot of traditional men (who approve of gender roles) are a bit despising or patronising towards things typically valued and made much of by women. “I don’t mind what curtains we have but it means a lot to her”. Stella’s comments about despising girls’ silliness fit in her. And of course there’s Jo March “If only I were a boy” who wishes she could have gone to war and adventure with her father.
When girls / women’s things are despised, any boy who wants to be downward mobile towards this is incomprehensible - he obviously has something wrong with him!
I eagerly seek out the work you BOTH do on this cultural and medical scandal. I feel the roots and path of this psychological manipulation into policy is very important to understand. It must be brought into the sunlight.
To put this in perspective, it's worth noting that while the field of psychiatry may have laid the groundwork for today’s conventional wisdom among trans allies—that there is such a thing as a “trans child”—developments outside psychiatry have contributed equally influential elements to the trans kid myth. Reforms that focus solely on psychiatry, without addressing the broader cultural, educational, and activist dynamics, will not puncture the myth on their own.
That’s why I was surprised by a few omissions in this otherwise compelling discussion.
First, there was no mention of the frequent claim—common among trans activists and affirming clinicians—that very young children (often boys) “always know” their gender identity. This assertion is routinely cited to justify the belief that “true” trans kids exist, yet neither speaker addressed it or interrogated its basis.
Second, there was no exploration of how childhood trans identities characterized as "strong and stable" might actually be stable and strong only because they are shaped and reinforced by an affirming cultural environment (parents, schools, media, and clinicians) rather than reflecting something innate. The role of adult affirmation in creating rather than validating identity deserves scrutiny.
Lastly, the conversation ignored a growing concern that some children are declared “trans” not based on persistent self-identification, but to satisfy the ideological commitments of their parents. Whether or not this is common, it is certainly relevant and merits acknowledgment in any serious attempt to dismantle the so-called “transgender child.”
There's something about the "I always knew". It can only be a proclamation made later. No one can unfailingly predict someone will feel later. One's eventual interpretation of previous feelings may be wildly different.
Your different DSM VI wishes could be completely combined into one. Mia‘s point that gender is the current vehicle through which various sources of distress are funneled and labeled matches perfectly with Stella‘s idea that this all leads to faulty ideas about one’s own identity. Ideas that come from distress and a desire to escape the body one is in while experiencing that distress. And also, back to Stella‘s childhood without presumptuously analyzing her, an alternate identity that is clung to as an escape from what the sexed world is seeming to offer. Very much in line with Sundar’s Dysphoric: Fleeing Womanhood Like a House on Fire. Of course, none of this will ever happen, because the current authors of the diagnostic statistical manual of mental disorders are tasked more with finding diagnoses for insurance reimbursement and the righting of social justice wrongs then truly asking the questions of whether these diagnoses are inherently accurate and can lead to true understanding and beneficial care.
There’s also the question of which group children gravitate to. My sister - a tomboy in the 70s - much preferred playing football with the boys and got a lot of teasing for her preference for male friends. Later on, at her girls secondary school she suffered a lot from female aggression - being cut out of her friendship groups etc. I think either alienation from (or feeling like) you don’t belong with your sex group, or having inflexible gender roles laid on you that you can’t stand are big drivers in how much childhood non conformity causes distress and how much. Our parents were very flexible with dress and pursuits, she found other female friends eventually, and came through. And yes, came out as gay at about 20.
Some thoughts on homophobia as the main force behind discomfort with feminine boys. I actually think that it’s more status and historic sexism. The things of boys and men have usually seemed higher status, commanding more recognition, validity and reward. So when girls are tomboys their aspirations are sympathised with. Of course she’d rather be a boy - boys do / get / are better stuff! And a lot of traditional men (who approve of gender roles) are a bit despising or patronising towards things typically valued and made much of by women. “I don’t mind what curtains we have but it means a lot to her”. Stella’s comments about despising girls’ silliness fit in her. And of course there’s Jo March “If only I were a boy” who wishes she could have gone to war and adventure with her father.
When girls / women’s things are despised, any boy who wants to be downward mobile towards this is incomprehensible - he obviously has something wrong with him!
I eagerly seek out the work you BOTH do on this cultural and medical scandal. I feel the roots and path of this psychological manipulation into policy is very important to understand. It must be brought into the sunlight.