Transgender Children

[Macman]

Watching Victoria this morning in work, our screens are mounted across the walls around the building, and are on all day with no sound.

A question occurred to me when they were interviewing a 'teenager', I assume this person would've went through the transition a good few years prior to the interview today as I think Victoria is live? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

So my question is... "How does a child at such young of an age, able to make that kind of life changing decision?"

They are saying things like, they played with boys toys and had boy pals. But being a girl, they felt they were trapped in a girls body? Is Social Media, TV, News play a part in this?

What are your thoughts on this?

Can I make this clear, I don't hate transgender or anything. I'm just confused how a child at a young age can make a decision like this and just wondered what other peoples views are on this.

[kalniel]

I don't know the background here - but I presume by the age of being a teenager a person could know what sexual orientation and gender they associate with. I know I did when I was a teenager (before, even). We don't ask people to try being straight until a certain age so I would assume the same applies to gender changes.

[Macman]

I don't know the background here - but I presume by the age of being a teenager a person could know what sexual orientation and gender they associate with. I know I did when I was a teenager (before, even). We don't ask people to try being straight until a certain age so I would assume the same applies to gender changes.

But children as far back as the early years as Primary School? They are able to decide they are infact male but trapped in a females body?

Sexual Orientation has nothing to do with this. You found more out about yourself as you get older or have certain experiences.

Some children are going through transition as young as 5/6...

[kalniel]

But children as far back as the early years as Primary School? They are able to decide they are infact male but trapped in a females body?

Sexual Orientation has nothing to do with this. You found more out about yourself as you get older or have certain experiences.

Some children are going through transition as young as 5/6...

I think it does have a lot of parallels with sexual orientation - why can't you also find out more about your gender as you get older or have certain experiences? Again only speaking personally, I associated with my gender well before I associated with my sexual orientation.

And just like sexual orientation, I don't think we should be pre-empting an individual's choice.

What I do have concerns about is where the gender dysphoria is as a result of society's expectations on a particular gender, causing the sufferer to feel they have to undergo a change simply in order to meet those societal expectations. IE does someone associate with being male/female? Or with what is expected of being male or female?

[Jowsey]

I think we are all on the same line, in that there's no good reason that should stop people from being who they are, no matter how the transformation occurs.

I think my concern is how Macman feels, it's a VERY big change. I've not done any research into the matter but I'd assume irreversible? And the point I'm focusing on is at these young ages it's not that we don't allow children to be whatever sexual orientation they are, we don't let them perform completely life change procedures that are required to announce these facts.

A young child can happily announce they love the same gender as themselves but in 3 or 4 or 15 years time when the announcement doesn't ring as true as previously then it's very easy to reverse. I can appreciate that this is one of those things that you 'just know', and that's fine, but what we don't want to do is positively encourage extreme changes whilst children are at extremely developmental ages as we could swiftly find ourselves with a different issue at hand. Certainly we could encourage children to be who they are but I think the medical alterations could surely be delay a little bit?

I don't propose a hard age line to pass before you can go forward with procedures but I believe a small amount of common sense could go a very long way in what could turn into an extremely defining issue for our generation.

[kalniel]

I think that's the agreed process Jowsey - children are effectively given fully reversible hormone delayers to give them more time to choose either way. The medical alteration decision is taken quite a bit later I believe.

[Macman]

I think my concern is how Macman feels, it's a VERY big change.

That's pretty much it yeah.

Just something I can't get my head wrapped round for children at a young age to decide. But I can't help but think parents/social media/friends might play a part in it.

[TheAnimus]

A friend of mine's 4 year old child decided they were a cho cho train. This lasted for a few days. They insisted that the cereal they were eating was coal. I thought it was kind of adorably funny.

Instead of worrying if a child of that age is suffering some dysmorphia, surely it's just simpler to not pigeonhole children, a lot of the gender separation stuff is nonsense. My understanding of the gender differences in neuroscience is that most of them don't really kick in until the onset of puberty, but then this is an area which is not very well understood or researched no matter how fascinating it really is.

In the case of the child in the news today, I would worry that their choice is being influenced by a parental figure that is also transitioning gender. But I also hold the view that we are horrifically, irreversibly, mutilating peoples body for what is really a neurological imbalance.

[TheAnimus]

I think that's the agreed process Jowsey - children are effectively given fully reversible hormone delayers to give them more time to choose either way. The medical alteration decision is taken quite a bit later I believe.

I don't think it's fair to describe the hormone delayers are fully reversible, they will have affected the child's development (physical and psychological) and shouldn't be offered lightly.

[kalniel]

I don't think it's fair to describe the hormone delayers are fully reversible, they will have affected the child's development (physical and psychological) and shouldn't be offered lightly.

Fair point, but presumably they'd only be used when the child was at risk of even more severe psychological impediment due to the dysphoria.

[scaryjim]

... What I do have concerns about is where the gender dysphoria is as a result of society's expectations on a particular gender, causing the sufferer to feel they have to undergo a change simply in order to meet those societal expectations. IE does someone associate with being male/female? Or with what is expected of being male or female?

This, all over the place. The whole transgender issue is pretty much entirely societal, driven in part by societal expectations on what aspects of a person's personality are determined by their biological sex (spoiler: none of them are), part by the expected external presentation of a person of a particular sex, and part by the huge failure of society to clearly differentiate between "gender" and "sex", so there is huge ambiguity where the two terms are used (e.g. there's a big furore about "gendered" public bathrooms, when public bathrooms are in fact sexed, not gendered).

There's no such think as female and male personalities. It's something that's been studied extensively, and it's been shown pretty conclusively that there is no actual difference in the way males and females think. People are people. End of. All those long-standing assumptions about things boys are better at and girls are better at are entirely expectation driven. And whilst there are clearly external presentations - beyond the purely physical - that we associate with males and females, they're not an inherent part of your biological sex. There is no biological imperative to prevent men from wearing dresses. It's entirely societal expectation.

Against that backdrop, it's terribly sad that we're still putting people in the position where the only way they can feel comfortable in society is by denying their inherent nature in an attempt to resolve their personal preferences with society's expectations. And, of course, doing that creates a whole host of other societal problems (not least of which is the fact that being out transgender is inherently sexist).

It's an undeniable charlie foxtrot.

Also, worth noting that being out transgender does NOT mean you've had a sex change (or "gender reassignment" as the NHS puts it). There are all sorts of hoops to jump through for that one, and I suspect you need to be at least 16 (i.e. age of medical self determination) before any reputable practitioner would even consider it. Transgender is not - AFAIK - exactly the same as transsexual (otherwise why would we need a different word for it ).

[TheAnimus]

There's no such think as female and male personalities. It's something that's been studied extensively, and it's been shown pretty conclusively that there is no actual difference in the way males and females think. People are people. End of. All those long-standing assumptions about things boys are better at and girls are better at are entirely expectation driven. And whilst there are clearly external presentations - beyond the purely physical - that we associate with males and females, they're not an inherent part of your biological sex. There is no biological imperative to prevent men from wearing dresses. It's entirely societal expectation.

Whilst a lot of the stereotypes are cultural creations, we can't begin to suggest there is no such thing as male and female personality traits.

In particular the lymbic system which is often going to be the centre point for most peoples gender stereotypes, we know from fMRI studies that there are significant differences, heck I remember reading something about size correlation not having an impact for boys, but a rather strong one for girls. A rough understanding of why women are often considered to be more "emotionally intelligent" than men.

This is really fascinating stuff that we have only the crudest tools for analysis off. There are strong gender traits, there are strong traits to specific hormones too. I dare say in the future we will be able to offer transgender people medication which will change some of these, rather than offer the more brutal option of surgery.

I think it was this book I found a rather fun read: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Essential-Di...watch_0&sr=8-7

[Tyrannosaur]

This was on the BBC site a few days ago, a clip from a 5 live radio show.

Why my 4 year old boy attends school in a dress: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03slfcc

[SeriousSam]

There's no such think as female and male personalities. It's something that's been studied extensively, and it's been shown pretty conclusively that there is no actual difference in the way males and females think. People are people. End of. All those long-standing assumptions about things boys are better at and girls are better at are entirely expectation driven. And whilst there are clearly external presentations - beyond the purely physical - that we associate with males and females, they're not an inherent part of your biological sex. There is no biological imperative to prevent men from wearing dresses. It's entirely societal expectation.

This isn't entirely the case as some things it still appears are influenced by hormones, whose relative levels are predicated by which sex a person is biologically. So whilst yes the underlying system of thought is the same, i.e. neurologically you can't tell male and female brains apart, there are still differences which do emerge. So because personality is born of both biology and environment, with the latter being a perception impinged upon by biology, there are "male" and "female" nuances. The key is realising that it isn't a simple singular or binary system; so trying to force either uniform or defined gender identities will ultimately fail.

The problems stem from the way our brain automatically works on a comparative classification system. Essentially anything we sense is compared against a vast library of information to look for similarities, so that the brain can make sense of it and add it to the reality it presents. Thus life is inherently easier when things fall into neat little boxes, providing a potentially false sense of security. The flip side is that any "unknown" could be a threat and subconsciously we have a habit of treating it as such. Societally this translates into trying to enforce our perspective onto everything irrespective of reality. Though ironically even this changes in amusing ways, e.g. there was a time when pink = boy and blue = girl

Against that backdrop, it's terribly sad that we're still putting people in the position where the only way they can feel comfortable in society is by denying their inherent nature in an attempt to resolve their personal preferences with society's expectations. And, of course, doing that creates a whole host of other societal problems (not least of which is the fact that being out transgender is inherently sexist).

As a dissociative I probably have a better understanding than most of the difficulties a person faces trying to integrate "self" with "society". So whilst I agree it is sad, I also know that it is a frighteningly complicated situation. I for one cannot be myself at all times, especially when around other people who don't know me. I don't really want to go into examples so I'll use something analogous. Think about the amount of emotional carnage Sherlock (either the BC or JLM version) causes by being himself. Now this is an extreme but it does indicate that there has to be some level of quid pro quo between the individual and society, as we all have to live together.

To my mind we have to accept that changing society is often a painfully slow process and forcing the issue can oft-times make things worse. So start by teaching kids that different does not mean "less than" or "wrong". Not least because as shown by some of the reports referred to in the story, kids are a darn sight more flexible of thought than adults. Then in time they will be the adults and society will be more "evolved".

*** It appears Animus beat me to it... which is what happens when you go off to do some gardening mid post I suppose ***

[TooNice]

There's no such think as female and male personalities.

Hang on, doesn't hormone (of which the composition/balance will differ by gender) affect our behaviour?
I can believe that social expectations has a great, perhaps even overwhelming influence. But I find it hard to believe that nature has no say whatsoever in this.

[Biscuit]

This, all over the place. The whole transgender issue is pretty much entirely societal, driven in part by societal expectations on what aspects of a person's personality are determined by their biological sex (spoiler: none of them are), part by the expected external presentation of a person of a particular sex, and part by the huge failure of society to clearly differentiate between "gender" and "sex", so there is huge ambiguity where the two terms are used (e.g. there's a big furore about "gendered" public bathrooms, when public bathrooms are in fact sexed, not gendered).

As others, I disagree with the disconnect between sex and personality and the idea that it is entirely societal.

There's no such think as female and male personalities. It's something that's been studied extensively, and it's been shown pretty conclusively that there is no actual difference in the way males and females think. People are people.

Do you have any references for these studies?
My understanding is that studies found a significant difference in the chemistry of male and female brains which begins to develop whilst in the womb and impacts the way men and women process data, emotions and tasks. Hence the respective single focussed/multitasking stereotypes. Obviously this doesn't determine your entire personality, but it would have a significant impact irrespective of the influences of society.

A quick bit of google-fu found quite a few sources that appear to be credible (psychology and science based) that support the idea of character traits do come from brain chemistry so it certainly seems rather false to state the opposing idea as conclusive.

Against that backdrop, it's terribly sad that we're still putting people in the position where the only way they can feel comfortable in society is by denying their inherent nature in an attempt to resolve their personal preferences with society's expectations. And, of course, doing that creates a whole host of other societal problems (not least of which is the fact that being out transgender is inherently sexist).

It is quite sad really. I do wonder if this recent raise to the fore of the gender issues is due to increased (perceived) understanding and tolerance, or its popularity as a discussion topic.... perhaps a bit of both.

Personally I think the idea of introducing such fierce chemicals to a body and even going as far as operations is quite a scary concept when we are talking about anyone under the age of 18. The risks associated with this added to the inherent nature of young people to want to 'fit in' and their inability to see the bigger picture of the future could result in some horror stories in the coming years.