Custody battle in Texas over 7-year-old transgender

[pelmut]

...plenty of parents today allow their children to explore their gender identity, including boys wearing dresses without any particular meaning being attached to their doing that ...

I have a happy memory of watching a friend's 7 or 8-year-old son tearing around with his mates, enthusiastically playing at pirates or some-such noisy game and thinking there could be no mistake that he was a boy.  Shortly before that Christmas his mother told me that he wanted a pretty frock to wear to a party; she was a bit worried by this but had decided that she would buy him one if that was what he really wanted.

He is now an adolescent man with no signs of any gender issues.  If he had wanted to continue wearing dresses or skirts, I'm sure he wouldn't have felt inhibited about doing so.

[Stu]

He is now an adolescent man with no signs of any gender issues.  If he had wanted to continue wearing dresses or skirts, I'm sure he wouldn't have felt inhibited about doing so.

The key is to divorce clothing from gender at least to some degree. I do wonder if many gender issues that young children present with could be eliminated if we simply allowed all children's clothes to be available to all children. Many would experiment, get it out of their system, and then move on. The obstacle to this is the stringent and irrational taboo which exists that proscribes the wearing of unbifurcated garments by males, and it is this taboo that we are challenging. However, when someone chooses an unbifurcated garment as an expression of their "femininity", that simply reinforces the taboo and it is for that reason that I see a conflict of interest here.

The cause of the Texan boy in the news story bears out my argument. He seems to have been the victim of abuse by his own mother convincing him that he is a girl, which appears to be what she wants him to be, and one of the main ways she is imposing that on him is by making him wear dresses - because only girls wear dresses, right? If it were the case that there was no taboo against boys wearing dresses, then she wouldn't be doing it.

[Daryl]

Once again, I couldn't agree more with Pelmut!
In the future, when things like this come into Cafe could we please limit our comments to concerns based on the facts at hand rather than far-fetched speculations based on our prejudices.

One person's "far fetched speculations based on prejudices" are someone else's opinions, anxieties or interests.

"Facts" are the most tyrannical of things, especially in social, political and psychological dimensions. Sticking to what's "at hand" may be appropriate in a technical forum but is not necessarily appropriate in a social forum.

In my opinion.

[Jim]

The mother has one opinion about the boy and the father another. I expect he just meets each parents' expectations when he is with each one, so both have good evidence that they are right.

[Grok]

He seems to have been the victim of abuse by his own mother convincing him that he is a girl, which appears to be what she wants him to be, and one of the main ways she is imposing that on him is by making him wear dresses - because only girls wear dresses, right? If it were the case that there was no taboo against boys wearing dresses, then she wouldn't be doing it.

Would the dresses be a "signifier"? I recall coming across that term in another thread, and I didn't quite grasp the meaning.

[oldsalt1]

Once again, I couldn't agree more with Pelmut!

In the future, when things like this come into Cafe could we please limit our comments to concerns based on the facts at hand rather than far-fetched speculations based on our prejudices.

So no, I don't think that if as boys they had been allowed to wear dresses any of them wouldn't have changed sexes.

In addition, plenty of parents today allow their children to explore their gender identity, including boys wearing dresses without any particular meaning being attached to their doing that so we can all stand down.

Are you the expert that determines what are the facts and what is speculation or is it that you only want to hear from those that agree with your opinions

I think your statement is incorrect shouldn't it be any of them " would " have changed

[Stu]

Would the dresses be a "signifier"? I recall coming across that term in another thread, and I didn't quite grasp the meaning.

Yes, absolutely. I use the term "signifier" in the semiotic sense, i.e. that it signifies something other than itself. So, a policeman's uniform might signify the power of the state and the authority of the law and the consequences for breaching the law, while a wedding ring on a woman's finger signifies someone who has made a lifetime commitment to a partner that is recognised by law, following cultural conventions and sexual exclusivity. A baseball cap may be a signifier of age/generation in that this garment is less commonly worn by elderly people, and also the occasion/event - i.e. that the wearer is dressed informally rather than formally (we don't wear baseball caps with a business suit). Dresses and skirts in our modern western culture are used to signify the female sex because, and only because, there is effectively an established social taboo on males wearing them. This is why when a man wishes to appear to be a woman or a boy wishes to be regarded as a girl, these garments are the automatic choice even though the majority of females in their environment are probably wearing something else, e.g.leggings or jeans. If boys and men like us want to be able to include these as sartorial options and without expressing a desire to be identified as female and the associated misunderstandings or social stigma, then we have to challenge and eliminate the taboo.

In the case of the Texas boy, his mother didn't simply allow him to experiment with unbifurcated garments to expand his clothing options; it is claimed she put him in sparkly dresses for the express purpose of encouraging him to identify as a girl - which he is not. You may disagree, but I believe there is a world of difference between a boy choosing and being allowed to wear a simple dress like the one worn by the model below, which really ought to be regarded as unisex, and a mother putting a sparkly party dress on a boy, which is clearly intended to feminise him:

[Grok]

I just thought of a new term.

Pseudo-Transgender.

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

Hello Stu,

Where did you get the idea that this mother forced her son to wear a sparkly party dress to feminize him? I reread both the Texan article and the CNN piece. Neither mentioned a party dress. I’m also very sure that if such a thing had been done, the father’s attorneys would have brought it up, and if it was such an effort the judge would have ruled it child abuse. But the judge stipulated NEITHER parent had abused the child.

However, it was entered into the record that the American Pediatricians Association says that children have a stable idea if they are a girl or a boy by age 4 and this 4-year old child told the duly appointed therapists that she is a girl named Luna!

Why don’t you take the child’s word for it?

Hello Dan,

I used an awkward construction, but I meant what I said. I was asserting that no one takes the drastic step of changing sexes just because they weren’t allowed to wear skirts as a child. I don’t know where that notion originated, but it doesn’t work that way.

I know that’s pretty blunt of me, but again, I’ve met and talked with enough transsexuals I feel I can say that with confidence. Have you met any or read about any who meet your model?

[Stu]

Hello Pdx,

I have read a couple of reports which suggested the mother was doing this:

https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/26/mo ... sagreeing/

https://www.ntd.com/mother-forces-son-t ... 62028.html

Of course, there are two sides to every story, but those of us who do not have direct knowledge have to rely on press reports.

[Daryl]

Hello Stu,

Where did you get the idea that this mother forced her son to wear a sparkly party dress to feminize him? I reread both the Texan article and the CNN piece. Neither mentioned a party dress. I’m also very sure that if such a thing had been done, the father’s attorneys would have brought it up, and if it was such an effort the judge would have ruled it child abuse. But the judge stipulated NEITHER parent had abused the child.

However, it was entered into the record that the American Pediatricians Association says that children have a stable idea if they are a girl or a boy by age 4 and this 4-year old child told the duly appointed therapists that she is a girl named Luna!

Why don’t you take the child’s word for it?

Hello Dan,

I used an awkward construction, but I meant what I said. I was asserting that no one takes the drastic step of changing sexes just because they weren’t allowed to wear skirts as a child. I don’t know where that notion originated, but it doesn’t work that way.

I know that’s pretty blunt of me, but again, I’ve met and talked with enough transsexuals I feel I can say that with confidence. Have you met any or read about any who meet your model?

I knew one, now dead from suicide by jumping in front of a subway train, who was desperately trying to transition back to male after having made the mistake of having himself surgically altered in an attempt to become what he wasn't.

I also know one person who seems to have made the M2F transition quite well. She became a tradesperson in a male-dominated field just a little while ago, long after her M2F transition. Partially thanks to her support group (whose parties I attended), I've also met a lot of other people in the trans community.

But, your argument from authority would be invalid even if I hadn't had these experiences or personal affinities.

Your assertion that "no one takes the drastic step of changing sexes just because they weren’t allowed to wear skirts as a child" is a mischaracterisation of what is being said. Along with other typically gendered attributes, the desire to wear skirts CAN lead to the conclusion of being "transgendered". After all, what else other than typically gendered attributes would even give a person the idea of being "in the wrong body" to begin with? So, wearing skirts instead of pants signifies much more than merely that. It signifies one of many gendered attributes that taken together could lead a person to conclude the person is in need of "transition".

We don't yet know if complete acceptance of all those gendered attributes for persons whose sex doesn't align with the gendered stereotypes would result in fewer people concluding they were "in the wrong body", but we do know that it is those attributes that people use to affirm someone's trans status. "Everyone always said he seemed like a girl in a boy's body" is heard often enough. Affirmation of an idea is a potent thing, and the idea of "wrong body" has had so very much affirmation. The idea that mind and body are separate and separable is deeply rooted in western culture, and in fact has religious roots. It's neither objective nor inevitable.

The example of the muxe is suggestive that people can accept a differently gendered set of attributes without leading to the conclusion that bodies need to be medically altered to match minds.

[oldsalt1]

According to the latest article the mother was dressing as a girl at the age of 3. Do you think that there is the possibility of parental influence. and is It possible that the mother just wanted a girl

[Daryl]

According to the latest article the mother was dressing as a girl at the age of 3. Do you think that there is the possibility of parental influence. and is It possible that the mother just wanted a girl

Certainly a possibility, and the perceived modern ability to make it a reality through science could play into that.

Funny that historically dressing very young boys up in pretty things, including dresses and curled hair with ribbons and such, was normal and not considered "feminising".

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

I'm sorry Daryl, but I'm not following you at all. In simple, plain English, what are you trying to say? Iwas tying to refute the notion that simply not being allowed to wear a dress as a boy is not going to lead that individual to take such a drastic step as changing their sex later in life just so they can wear skirts. That doesn't track with my knowledge and experience of transsexuals.

That said, is there always room in any behavior for an outlier or two? Sure. That benighted soul who jumped in front of the subway train apparently was one.

In the current case, I don't find either of the two articles that Stu found to be reliable. The Federalist is a conservative publication -- nothing wrong with that per se, but one has to be take their bias into account -- and the author clearly has an axe to grind. I read The Atlantic article he referenced and I feel he put too much weight on it. Suffice it to say, that for all of The Atlantic's other marvelous qualities, it is not a peer-reviewed psychological journal.

I have never heard of NTD News before, but there didn't seem to be any original reporting in that piece, just a rehash of The Federalist piece, which I said is somewhat suspect.

My feeing is, if the Father's attorneys had credible evidence that James's identifying as Luna was strictly under the influence of the Mother, that the case would never have gotten as far as it has. Call it what you will, but about the time those attorneys had such evidence, they would have asked for a meeting of the parties and their lawyers to lay out their findings and say, "If we go to court, this will become part of the public record. Perhaps you'll be able to convincingly refute it, but what will the accusation alone do to your practice as a pediatrician? Here's our offer for a settlement … "

Clearly that hasn't happened. So I'd say the odds are that the child does honestly identify as a girl.

But you naysayers have aroused my curiosity, why are you so determined to believe there is no truth to the Mother's assertions? Why do you have so little faith in the judge's judgement?

[Stu]

So I'd say the odds are that the child does honestly identify as a girl. But you naysayers have aroused my curiosity, why are you so determined to believe there is no truth to the Mother's assertions? Why do you have so little faith in the judge's judgement?

You have to remember that we Brits are not familiar with different US publications, which are reliable and which are not. All I can say is that the reports I have read suggest the mother is influencing the boy to think he's a girl while others who know him are saying he otherwise is happy to identify as a boy. Maybe others are reporting something else. As for judges - sorry, I have enough experience of the judiciary in my own country (in a professional capacity, I should add!) to know that they can not be trusted as impartial or rational adjudicators, and that applies especially to those who sit in family law cases.

Don't misunderstand me. If the lad strongly and persistently identifies as a girl and to the extent that it is causing him serious distress to be identified by others as a boy, then some allowance must of course be made in terms of how he dresses etc. But there has to be compelling evidence from more than one independent source that this is the case, otherwise telling him he is a girl and dressing him as such is an act of cruelty. We also must be mindful of his tender age and how impressionable children can be. Even if he is not being influenced by his mother and he is claiming to be a girl, it is entirely possible that this is simply a phase - something he will outgrow if this is not actively encouraged. Gender identity disorder is a serious and distressing condition that will have lifelong ramifications and it's not something we would want to unnecessarily inflict or encourage.