The idea of "true trans" needs to die. No one is "trans" and being gender-nonconforming isn't something that requires treatment. It's actually pretty normal. Thinking that you should be the opposite sex as a child needs to be recognized as the fight of fancy of early childhood that it is. It doesn't need to be "affirmed" anymore than a child believing they're a princess or a fucking train. If an older child believes they should be the other sex, we need to address the mental health issues or social pressures that might be driving that belief. Perhaps there is trauma around their sexed bodies. We currently have such narrow boxes for people to fit into when it comes to "gender" (much more strict than they've ever been) and it doesn't surprise me that so many young people try to escape the boxes through the means presented to them as the solution. The problem is the boxes. But we're trying to treat the rebellion against the boxes instead.
We used to understand that kids who don't conform to sex-stereotypes often grow up to just be gay or lesbian and that an evolved society understood that was a natural variation of human sexuality. Gays and lesbians may experience some bodily distress but we also know that if they go through puberty most grow out of it once realizing that being gay or lesbian made them feel like they did not fit in. Most gay or lesbians will tell you they did not conform to sex-stereotypes as kids or even as adults in many cases. If we could stop obsessing about why some kids are just different and that it's ok to be gay or lesbian and they don't need to be fixed all would be better off. The problem is when any kid or adult thinks he or she can be the opposite sex or should be the opposite sex that creates a problem for society and probably for the individual too b/c so many areas of society require we division of the sexes.
Exactly. Once upon a time, we weren`t concerned about what a child wants to wear or play with. We were concerned when he or she was constantly lying, stealing, setting things on fire, hurting themselves, others or animals, or exhibiting other serious hehavioral issues.
When I was in Junior High and high school, the reason I didn't want to wear skirts and dresses to school was because I didn't want the boys to be able to look up my skirt. It was also because I would be cold, sometimes, too.
Any schoolgirl who's ever wished her uniform had trousers so her knees could be less cold… Why, they're just a wee twans bean, waiting to be affirmed 🥰
I am no fan of Genspect as I said, but sorry Karen you are wrong on this, your bias is showing. Though maybe it is because you haven't read the whole document.
That questionnaire is to be completed by Family and Friends (which will include parents but there is a separate questionnaire at page 20 for parents, which addresses some of your issues). Seriously what response do you think to the questionnaire would be if the first question was "Have you your partner of another family member been sexually abusing your child?" people would just tear it up.
Second point from reading it and the document as a whole is that this part of the questionnaire is designed exclude teenagers and maybe those just approaching puberty and is designed in my opinion to exclude them (where possible) from an initial and immediate diagnosis of GD.
Questions 7,8,9,10, 12, 14, 15 and 16 are all addressed in the past tense. "Did the person ....... as a child? In that it appears they are trying to weed out the ROGD, AGP and those with a developing Transvestic Fetish from those kids with a deep seated identity disorder.
The Parental Questionnaire at page 20 has a whole section on "Trauma" questions are asked if the person has had experience of;
*Experienced bullying now or in the past
*Issues because of divorced parents
*Teenage anxieties
*History of sexual abuse
*Experience of physical violence
It may not be perfect and it could use some work but compared to the shit WPATH pushes it's light years ahead.
Compared to other parent-completed assessment tools (the ABAS functional assessment, for example), from even a cursory glance at that single page it's abundantly clear that that questionnaire is poorly designed and will not be likely to capture truly meaningful data.
The flaw with psychometric measures is that they only capture generalisations with little room for nuance, and they only work if the researcher and participant have a shared understanding of the meanings of the questions and answers. That can be ameliorated by employing a Likert scale in a manner similar to that which Karen suggested in the video, whereas a simple yes/no scale leaves no room for nuance: e.g. if someone displayed the behaviour in question only once, several years ago, is that a yes or is it a no?
I don't know who designed the questionnaire, but it looks like something a first year psychology undergraduate would be told to go and significantly redesign before it went anywhere near a participant.
Or these phases are not so worrying that you have to drag your child to a psychologist straight away to begin with? In my humble opinion, too much attention to what a child wants to wear, what they want to play with, how they want to wear their hair, wether they imagine to be something they are not can lead to exactly what is meant to be treated. Creating a symptom and then selling the treatment.
Basically this questionaire is worthless because its starting point is that so called 'trans kids' exist when they don't? It is in the interests of GENSPECT to keep the illusion of trans going when they should be stating that trans is impossible and believing oneself to be the opposite sex is delusional and a mental illness that can hopefully be treated.
And who's going to be answering this questionnaire? The parent or guardian? They're sure as shit not going to admit to any abuse in the family and will do literally anything to keep it covered up. Legit terrifying to see an org defended by so many parents make a model that benefits the abuser so perfectly.
The idea of "true trans" needs to die. No one is "trans" and being gender-nonconforming isn't something that requires treatment. It's actually pretty normal. Thinking that you should be the opposite sex as a child needs to be recognized as the fight of fancy of early childhood that it is. It doesn't need to be "affirmed" anymore than a child believing they're a princess or a fucking train. If an older child believes they should be the other sex, we need to address the mental health issues or social pressures that might be driving that belief. Perhaps there is trauma around their sexed bodies. We currently have such narrow boxes for people to fit into when it comes to "gender" (much more strict than they've ever been) and it doesn't surprise me that so many young people try to escape the boxes through the means presented to them as the solution. The problem is the boxes. But we're trying to treat the rebellion against the boxes instead.
We used to understand that kids who don't conform to sex-stereotypes often grow up to just be gay or lesbian and that an evolved society understood that was a natural variation of human sexuality. Gays and lesbians may experience some bodily distress but we also know that if they go through puberty most grow out of it once realizing that being gay or lesbian made them feel like they did not fit in. Most gay or lesbians will tell you they did not conform to sex-stereotypes as kids or even as adults in many cases. If we could stop obsessing about why some kids are just different and that it's ok to be gay or lesbian and they don't need to be fixed all would be better off. The problem is when any kid or adult thinks he or she can be the opposite sex or should be the opposite sex that creates a problem for society and probably for the individual too b/c so many areas of society require we division of the sexes.
Exactly. Once upon a time, we weren`t concerned about what a child wants to wear or play with. We were concerned when he or she was constantly lying, stealing, setting things on fire, hurting themselves, others or animals, or exhibiting other serious hehavioral issues.
When I was in Junior High and high school, the reason I didn't want to wear skirts and dresses to school was because I didn't want the boys to be able to look up my skirt. It was also because I would be cold, sometimes, too.
Any schoolgirl who's ever wished her uniform had trousers so her knees could be less cold… Why, they're just a wee twans bean, waiting to be affirmed 🥰
💀
I am no fan of Genspect as I said, but sorry Karen you are wrong on this, your bias is showing. Though maybe it is because you haven't read the whole document.
That questionnaire is to be completed by Family and Friends (which will include parents but there is a separate questionnaire at page 20 for parents, which addresses some of your issues). Seriously what response do you think to the questionnaire would be if the first question was "Have you your partner of another family member been sexually abusing your child?" people would just tear it up.
Second point from reading it and the document as a whole is that this part of the questionnaire is designed exclude teenagers and maybe those just approaching puberty and is designed in my opinion to exclude them (where possible) from an initial and immediate diagnosis of GD.
Questions 7,8,9,10, 12, 14, 15 and 16 are all addressed in the past tense. "Did the person ....... as a child? In that it appears they are trying to weed out the ROGD, AGP and those with a developing Transvestic Fetish from those kids with a deep seated identity disorder.
The Parental Questionnaire at page 20 has a whole section on "Trauma" questions are asked if the person has had experience of;
*Experienced bullying now or in the past
*Issues because of divorced parents
*Teenage anxieties
*History of sexual abuse
*Experience of physical violence
It may not be perfect and it could use some work but compared to the shit WPATH pushes it's light years ahead.
I'll be discussing this comment in tonight's substack.
Compared to other parent-completed assessment tools (the ABAS functional assessment, for example), from even a cursory glance at that single page it's abundantly clear that that questionnaire is poorly designed and will not be likely to capture truly meaningful data.
The flaw with psychometric measures is that they only capture generalisations with little room for nuance, and they only work if the researcher and participant have a shared understanding of the meanings of the questions and answers. That can be ameliorated by employing a Likert scale in a manner similar to that which Karen suggested in the video, whereas a simple yes/no scale leaves no room for nuance: e.g. if someone displayed the behaviour in question only once, several years ago, is that a yes or is it a no?
I don't know who designed the questionnaire, but it looks like something a first year psychology undergraduate would be told to go and significantly redesign before it went anywhere near a participant.
Seriously. This would never make it out of undergrad.
Or these phases are not so worrying that you have to drag your child to a psychologist straight away to begin with? In my humble opinion, too much attention to what a child wants to wear, what they want to play with, how they want to wear their hair, wether they imagine to be something they are not can lead to exactly what is meant to be treated. Creating a symptom and then selling the treatment.
Exactly this. There's no 'good' way to make a child ruminate on a ridiculous, nebulous concept like gendew.
Basically this questionaire is worthless because its starting point is that so called 'trans kids' exist when they don't? It is in the interests of GENSPECT to keep the illusion of trans going when they should be stating that trans is impossible and believing oneself to be the opposite sex is delusional and a mental illness that can hopefully be treated.
My daughter loved a bucket of worms,her brother's boots and a fairy costume.
And who's going to be answering this questionnaire? The parent or guardian? They're sure as shit not going to admit to any abuse in the family and will do literally anything to keep it covered up. Legit terrifying to see an org defended by so many parents make a model that benefits the abuser so perfectly.