Stonewall thinks two-year-olds can be trans
Once again the charity embraces an extreme ideology
Last week, Stonewall, the former lesbian and gay rights charity turned trans activist, jumped the shark. In a tweet remarking on a newspaper report about a parent concerned that their four-year-old was not being “validated” in her “trans identity”, Stonewall claimed that:
“Research suggests that children as young as 2 recognise their trans identity. Yet, many nurseries and schools teach a binary understanding of pre-assigned gender. LGBTQ-inclusive and affirming education is crucial for the wellbeing of all young people!”
Like what you’re reading? Get the free UnHerd daily email
Already registered? Sign in
Just: wow. The idea that there is such a thing as a trans child is appalling propaganda, but nevertheless, even if we were to believe in the anti-scientific notion that one can be “born in the wrong body”, and that a four-year-old girl could actually be a trans boy is bonkers beyond belief.
This is an example of the extreme end of transgender ideology, but it is also the logical conclusion to this madness: if we are to believe in trans children, we have to believe in transgender babies. I don’t know about you, but when I was four I was neither exploring my “gender identity” or my sexuality. I was a small child, and already being conditioned into sexist stereotypes.
I do recall envying my brothers for the freedom that they were given to indulge in rough and tumble play, and to wear the clothes that allowed them to do that. While I mainly had toys that bored me stupid, such as tea sets, they had more exciting, action-packed games. I was not a trans child, I was a girl, curtailed by sexist gender rules.
Not only did Stonewall get it completely wrong when they suggested that the nursery was enforcing stereotypes on boys and girls, dictating how they should behave, they failed to recognise that the parent was angry because their nursery teacher had refused to accept that the four-year-old girl was a boy, and told her the truth.
Today, in a classic reverse ferret, Stonewall put out a tweet in which they claimed to have only been concerned about the nursery imposing sexist stereotypes on children who are ‘gender non-conforming’. What disingenuous rubbish. Feminists fight sexist stereotypes imposed on children, which includes resisting transgender ideology that dictates if girls don’t wish to play with dolls, that they must be boys, and vice versa. It is dangerous and it is ludicrous. Hopefully incidents like this are markers towards the end of Stonewall’s time as one of the country’s most powerful charities.
An internet quote from some time ago – “A trans child is like a vegan dog, we all know who is making the decisions.”
Absolutely! After all switching gender isn’t thinking big enough for a child, frequently they want the impossible like dragons and unicorns! Or superheroes! If you can be anything, Why settle for the mundane?
I do hope that when we start seeing Trans tank engines and Trans moshi monsters, that parents may realise the ludicrous can of worm they have opened. No your child is not trans or non gender conforming, they’re simply a small person exploring the world through imaginative play. They are not a tool either for you to signal your virtue to the outside world, they’re your child and they would benefit more from your undivided attention than your social media habit and virtue signalling. Had i reacted in this manner to my children, I would have a trans SpongeBob for a daughter, fortunately I’m not an idiot!
Of course if a small child is encouraged to think by their teachers that if she wants to do stuff associated with boys she might be trans, of course, the impressionable toddler may well agree without understanding the implications, so that she can act in a boyish way. A clear case of grooming and propaganda by the teachers. The child needs legal protection from this propaganda.
Read it again. The complaint is by the parent, herself an alleged ‘trans-man’, that her little girl thinks she is a little girl and the school agrees. It’s the parent who is annoyed that her attempts to convince a 4-year-old that she too is trans, are being stymied.
You are quite right. The teachers don’t seem to be pushing the ideology here. Barmy parent rather than school. I should read more carefully.
As is the poor little girl!
It’s weird, but Stonewall has morphed into a gay conversion organisation.
If one believed in conspiracies, I’d suggest that some religious people had successfully infiltrated Stonewall to destroy it. But no, it’s just the natural, logical conclusion of identity politics.
I asked my niece who loved animals, even bugs, what she wanted to be when she grew up. She replied – a cow. She was about three at the time. I asked a boy of about seven years of age the same question, he replied – a dustman: he liked the lorry. The reason I asked him was because I had heard his parents had taken him on numerous visits to Oxford and Cambridge to see the universities in the hope he would develop a deep desire to attend one of them and this would create a strong enough work ethic in him to gain a place. I was very young at the time, about 14. I never told his parents of his ambition, or anyone else actually.
When my own lovely daughter was 3 years old she wanted to be a spider when she grew up. Is that trans-speciesism?
Obviously yes, and since you didn’t affirm it your kid was denied her right to grow up as a spider. For shame.
I wanted to be a Roman soldier…my grandson would like to be a dinosaur.
Ha ha brilliant Lennon.
I wanted to be a horse.
“I do recall envying my brothers for the freedom that they were given to indulge in rough and tumble play, and to wear the clothes that allowed them to do that.”
You seem to have had extremely repressive parents. Girls love to play rough and tumble.
As for the clothes you were made to wear, had they never heard of jeans?
Yes, I rolled my eyes at that bit. I climbed, roamed and fought with my brothers, learned to shoot, fish and build stuff. Grew up to love fashion and make up though my mother cared for neither (and certainly didn’t force me into frocks).
I think one of the weirdest things about trans people is the way they ape the stereotype of the opposite sex. It seems to me that there has never been more freedom to dress in an androgynous way and I know many women who never wear skirts.
Someone who sees a child with interests in play or clothing that is not stereotypical for their sex as potentially trans is not offering that child freedom of expression, but is pushing their own limiting (and, I would argue, sexualised) concepts onto that child.
It certainly is the unintended irony of trans activists, that they so militantly wish to preserve traditional gender stereotypes, despite all the alphabet soup and gushing on about a spectrum. They are, if anything, obsessive categorists.
or sinister agents of recruitment?
Or useful idiots shilling for sadistic paedophiles.
Yes – I am older than Bindel but was allowed to play with cars and wear trousers when I was a small tomboyish child. These days I would no doubt be pressured to believe I was really a boy in a girl’s body – the thought of it makes me shudder and fear for our youth!
It does depend on the age of the writer.
I’m 70 and when I was in junior school it was rare for girls to be allowed to wear trousers and I don’t think jeans had escaped from the wild West yet. I had the same experience as the writer but fortunately my parents gave in and let me wear trousers after school (it was never allowed in school).
The world has gone truly mad. I well remember one of my daughters (who’s now 31) stomping off in a huff shouting “I wish I was a boy” when her brother told her “This is boy’s work” he was 3 years older and was helping (read – getting in my way) while I was concreting in a post in the back garden of our house. She went on to train as a nurse & now manages a team of nurses. We still tease her at family events about that episode & she’s still capable of the odd strop.
Nowadays I should be having a discussion about whether she was born in the wrong body.
What puzzles me ( as a father of 5, now adult children) is that young people change their mind about all kinds of stuff as they grow up.
Unless, it seems it’s sexuality or gender.
Surely that’s just dogma.
That the trans zealots scream, shriek and tantrum about their whacky ideology is one thing, but what boggles my mind is that legions of otherwise normal managers, administrators and service providers have so completely flung themselves on the ground and supplicated to this crock.
That is the really disturbing part of this whole fiasco. Have they no backbones at all?
News article this morning is how we should be helping trans men “chest feed” their babies. The phrase “A rose by any other name …..” springs to mind.
I read that – and the cowardly Telegraph were not allowing comments on that particular article. I wonder why…
An issue I have is nobody is taking names. When those kids are adults and want to take legal action, I hope Stonewall still exists. And perhaps a list of donors.
That’s the great thing about social media: very rarely is anybody responsible for anything.
If Stonewall really cared for that child they would have reported the parents to social services..!
The article/letter from the metro is something else…
Stonewall is an unpleasant and dangerous organisation these days, it needs to be disempowered
My daughter’s school encourages pupils to respect a rainbow of sexualities, which is to be applauded — but gender and sexuality are separate concerns, and teachers still need educating about checking their ignorance or prejudice when it comes to gender identity.
from the Metro article mentioned above.
This is what happens when heterosexual men are discouraged from teaching.
Men are from Mars Women are from Venus & every other gender is from Uranus.
I wonder if anyone has stopped to wonder how little sense it makes for a male to say “I feel like a woman” or vice versa. Having never been a woman, no man knows what it ‘feels like’ to be a woman, and having never been anything but a woman, no woman does either. We have no meaningful point of reference for these kinds of statements. They are logically unsound. But for a man to say that “I am so unhappy with myself that I want to believe that I am something that I clearly am not (e.g., a woman, a blue bird, etc.) is clearly a statement of a deep disturbance in that person’s psychological functioning. Why is that so hard for people to see? Why is it that most people seem to reflexively sense this point, but they are being punished for articulating it and being browbeaten into saying something that they know to be untrue? This is a dangerous time indeed.
Join the discussion
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.Subscribe