The support group helps young people feel like they are 'not alone' while telling them they are outcasts and raising the stakes
...telling them that "who they are" is a person of the opposite sex, that people have "died for believing who they are": the world is hostile.
"the support group has done a world of good for me....it helped me feel like i was not alone. I've grown in confidence. I've helped people. The group does a good job at helping people who need to feel normal and feel like they are not alone. All we want is to be accepted in life"
It is aimed at "LGBTQ young people aged between 13 and 24, providing them with safe and confidential places to meet, socialise and talk about issues of
interest and relevance to them as young LGBTQ people.
They do cooking, games and crafts.
The most common declared sexual orientation of the children (mainly under 16) is "panromantic"
73% of the children and young people answered the sexual orientation as pansexual, bi, asexual, don't know or NA (...or possibly just teenagers figuring life out...)
These are kids growing up with an intense pressure to declare a sexual and gender identity
Many of the young people who attend the group are troubled.
Two fifths say their mental health or emotional health is not good.
Only a quarter say it is good.
The group seems to provide a supportive place to be for young people who don't have more organic social groups
Everyone need a place to go.... but are these children and vulnerable young people only being offered a welcoming 'second home' based on a focus on the political and sexual identity of being "LGBTQ"?
Only 45% identify as either male or female
- the rest have adopted the idea of mind/body mismatch as solving their social and emotional issues
And of course to question whether the two young people interviewed are really women makes you transphobic and hateful, isolating them from any other source of support which might not involve hormone treatment, surgery & the dream of being accepted as the opposite sex.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This conversation between @BretWeinstein and @DouglasKMurray is interesting - both for the visitor-local conversation on what's happening in Portland (it's really bad) and for the liberal-conservative discussion
There is an interesting tension between Murray's individualist view about liberty & responsibility & Weinstein's evolutionary lens. Murray keeps rejecting "we" talk (we fucked up etc) & Weinstein makes the case for understanding history as emergent systems where there is "we"
There is a really interesting (to me) bit from 1:22 where Weinstein is talking about incarceration rates of black men and impact on the bargaining power of women in relationships, & then on children. Where Murray says but not all uncommitted dads are incarcerated...
In the summer I asked people to fill in an online survey about why they were concerned about the push to replace sex with gender identity in laws and polices.
More than 700 people completed the survey over the course of a couple of weeks
They were 90 % women, 80% left wing, two-thirds parents, mainly non-religious, almost a quarter LGB
Reed & Castiglia sound just like the kind of Professors you would want at university, and the axioms and their letter sing.
Its amazing just how surprising and unusual it is now to read grown ups using wit, speaking clearly & standing their ground to defend open conversation
Which makes their final recantation all the more heart-breaking (& I read Jane's thread one-by-one as she posted.... i didn't see the ending coming)
I talk to administrators, shop floor workers, police officers trying to defend themselves against these same totalitarian demands
We don't all have the language and space to express ourselves as the Professors, and the arguments on Twitter are not as elegant, but perhaps we don't have the same crushing incentives to fall back into line.
Or perhaps we do and enough of us refuse to anyway.