Binders. The world has gone mad.

There aren’t any. They’ve been in use since the 1980s and there hasn’t been any long term damage reported.

Riverwalk you’re quite right! Thank you - trans boys, trans men and NB people.

AmberSpyglass

The wrong puberty is irreversible. Puberty blockers and binders aren’t. Trans supportive parents are trying to give their kids a choice, it’s the “gender critical” lot who want to take them away.

What are the long term effects of puberty blockers?

AmberSpyglass

It isn’t young girls who are wearing binders - it’s young trans men and non binary people.

Why are young females 'girls' and young males 'men'?

The wrong puberty is irreversible. Puberty blockers and binders aren’t. Trans supportive parents are trying to give their kids a choice, it’s the “gender critical” lot who want to take them away.

Don't transchildren have the right to a childhood, with adults protecting them until they are old enough to make irreversible decisions for themselves? The same rights as other children?

This is why it is illegal to get a tattoo until the age of 18. Yes, tattoos can be removed, and transitions can be reversed, but neither very successfully, and both involve long and painful procedures to restore what was there in the first place.

GagaJo

AmberSpyglass

It isn’t young girls who are wearing binders - it’s young trans men and non binary people.

Exactly. These children are resorting to taking matters into their own hands, having been denied access to support elsewhere. The consequences of making trans support harder and harder to access. Of course, covid hasn't helped either.

So you support commercial interests aiding children to go behind their parents' backs? Isn't that the hugest red flag for safeguarding? I'd have expected a teacher to have more awareness and respect for the safeguarding principle. If anyone had ignored safeguarding to that extent on my watch they'd have been looking for a new position!

AmberSpyglass

It isn’t young girls who are wearing binders - it’s young trans men and non binary people.

Exactly. These children are resorting to taking matters into their own hands, having been denied access to support elsewhere. The consequences of making trans support harder and harder to access. Of course, covid hasn't helped either.

Chewbacca✅✅✅

That's a good point Doodledog. NICE actually has guidance for adult transgender:

Men whose breasts are causing them distress and who have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria or have a Gender Recognition Certificate may need to have chest reconstruction around the same time as the change of gender role. Breast binders may be worn, but this can be painful and problematic. Binders restrict breathing and may have significant physical consequences. Damage to the breast tissue is also caused, so that chest surgery may be more complicated and less successful.'

So, if adult breast tissue can be damaged by binders, it doesn't bear thinking about what irrevocable damage is being done to a young girl's developing breast tissue when she wears a binder that's been flogged to her for £7.00 from a soap shop.

AmberSpyglass

It isn’t young girls who are wearing binders - it’s young trans men and non binary people.

At what point does a girl become a transman? Or a non-binary person? The minute she puts on a binder? Are you suggesting that transpeople don’t start life as children?

Adults won’t need to use a service like this - as trisher points out, binders are widely available online for those old enough to access them.

Elegran

How old were they? Most of the women in my family were "in service" from their early teens, while they still had a lot of growing to do, in all respects. Their earnings (such as they were) mostly went to their mothers to help support the younger members of the family, as "With your feet under someone elses's table you don't need to spend much on yourself". They had one afternoon a week off, when they were expected to visit home. Parties and dances didn't feature much.

Freedom and finances improved a bit as they got older and more independent, and as younger siblings started to make contributions to the family income, but by then their development was complete and they would not have been compromising it if they followed a fashionable shape.

It is young teenage and prepubescent Lush customers who are causing the concern here, who also have much of their growing to do.

There were 10 them Elegran so my gran was one of the eldest Born 1899. Into service before WW1 returned home because of war. her sisters ranged in age from her age to born in 1930s. So really covered the whole era. 3 brothers at various times between girls. They had a whole range of jobs. Girls didn't go into service so much after WW1. Maybe we were just a party family!

It isn’t young girls who are wearing binders - it’s young trans men and non binary people.

How old were they? Most of the women in my family were "in service" from their early teens, while they still had a lot of growing to do, in all respects. Their earnings (such as they were) mostly went to their mothers to help support the younger members of the family, as "With your feet under someone elses's table you don't need to spend much on yourself". They had one afternoon a week off, when they were expected to visit home. Parties and dances didn't feature much.

Freedom and finances improved a bit as they got older and more independent, and as younger siblings started to make contributions to the family income, but by then their development was complete and they would not have been compromising it if they followed a fashionable shape.

It is young teenage and prepubescent Lush customers who are causing the concern here, who also have much of their growing to do.

Ok, let’s pretend that working girls all bound their breasts in 1910 so that they could wear fashionable dresses. What that has to do with the Lush situation I really don’t know, but whether they did or they didn’t is diverting the conversation from the point of the thread, which is that very young girls are being encouraged to go behind their parents’ backs to get body-modifying garments that could cause them serious harm, and are actively intended to prevent their natural development.

This is being done in the name of what? Freedom of choice? Fine for adults, but arguably not for children who by definition will have serious MH issues.
Profit for the company? If one agrees with an unregulated market there may be a case to be made for profit to over-ride ethics, but at least they should be above board in their dealings? Or is it being done in the name of trans rights activism, in which case, the rights of children and of parents, along with those of women are irrelevant?

Elegran

Working-class girls who had just left school and started work probably had neither the money to buy fashionable clothes (they would make their own clothes by hand during their brief leisure time) or the nutrition to have developed enough fatty breast tissue to need to flatten it. Flappers were largely a breed of better-off young women with money to spare. The story heroine and the stock stage flapper were fiction, and not necessarily any more true to life than the stock mother-in-law, the honeymoon couple or the wicked Sir Jasper.

Well some of my great aunts were undoubtedly flappers. They dressed accordingly and attended parties and dances. I have photos taken at dances to prove it.They were working class girls. They made their own flapper dresses. Some of them had big boobs (it's a family trait), they might have worn a binder.

It's as though Martians have landed and taken over the minds of perviously sensible people!

Biden is pushing the trans agenda over the pond, and Nicola Sturgeon has completely sold out Scottish women. The CEO of Amnesty has bought the Kool Aid, and after over 30 years I've cancelled my subscription to them. I don't do a DD to Oxfam, but it's my charity shop of choice for donations of clothes and things - or was.

It's hard to know who'll be next.

Doodledog I let Oxfam know why the bequests to them in my husband's and my wills were being removed, as well as the cancelling of our DD payments. Basically their reply was the game didn't feature transwomen so that had offended their trans staff, and their staff feeling safe was vital. They didn't give a monkey's about the loss of funding to their supposed recipients. I even said I had swallowed hard and given credence to that the sex scandal was an aberration but this was a step too far. The bequests (and regular donations) have been diverted to top up donations to a fistula charity who really know what a woman is.

That's interesting, MerylStreep. Did he say why?

I was prepared to give them the benefit of the 'a few bad apples' doubt over the sex abuse case of a while ago, but I was shocked that a decision was taken at a high level to withdraw a game that was designed to introduce young girls to female role models. It seems like at every turn trans 'needs' are put ahead of those of women and girls.

It's so desperately sad, as I think at least some of it is done with the best of intentions.

Doodledog
I remember very clearing having a conversation with a priest over 40 years ago. I was defending the charity when he said to me please don’t give money to Oxfam, they’re not very nice people

Working-class girls who had just left school and started work probably had neither the money to buy fashionable clothes (they would make their own clothes by hand during their brief leisure time) or the nutrition to have developed enough fatty breast tissue to need to flatten it. Flappers were largely a breed of better-off young women with money to spare. The story heroine and the stock stage flapper were fiction, and not necessarily any more true to life than the stock mother-in-law, the honeymoon couple or the wicked Sir Jasper.

What's that about, Molly?

I have already opted out of Amnesty membership, stopped the charity contribution from Amazon from going to Stonewall, and am having second thoughts about Oxfam after they withdrew an 'inspirational women' game from their catalogue. Where is this all going to end?

Whilst on the subject of abusing children, is it true that Children in Need gives money to a group which promotes the sterilising of children?
If it is, I won’t be contributing this year.

Keira Bell is not the only case, though. If you listen to the Stephen Nolan podcasts you will hear examples of others. Episode 5 is the one about children transitioning.

Of course it is true that not all children confide in their parents about everything - in fact I'd be surprised if many do, and it's not necessarily always a bad thing. Children need to learn how to think for themselves and make mistakes before they leave home, or they'd be doing it for the first time when they are on their own.

That is not the point, though. Just because something happens doesn't make all instances of its happening right, or mean that it should be encouraged to continue. Also, we are not talking about 16 year olds taking the pill, or drinking cider in the park. These are pubescent children.

It's bad enough that schools are teaching that there are over 100 genders, although if the DofE follows the BBC that may soon stop, but if 10 year olds who are already confused by this are getting pandered to by cosmetics companies their confusion is likely to get worse, and as long as consultants are persuaded/coerced into thinking that any child who presents with body image issues is potentially transexual the number of regrettable and terrible cases will proliferate. Again, the position of the medical profession is discussed in episode 5 of the podcasts. I really recommend that you listen to them with an open mind. They are not pushing one 'side' or another, and participants are given time to put their case in their own way without the interruption that usually happens on TV and radio interviews.

Actually some people look for historical patterns to use as excuses for anything.
Why are you sick of Keira Bell being brought up. It’s the beginning of what will probably be an historical pattern, and more likely to be so if more thought and care isn’t put into protecting children from the danger of too early life damaging surgery, drugs or other practices, especially those supported as a money making exercise.
How can you think is it right to allow young children to leap into changes which could well render them infertile or damaged for life, before they are even old enough to legally have sexual intercourse.

I think it is always helpful to look at historical patterns and there is no doubt that women have restricted their bodies for various reasons at different times. This huge panic over girls wearing chest binders will pass.

I am so tired of the single case of Keira Bell being brought up all the time. Mistakes are made in everything, it's regretful and terrible for the person concerned, but just as a mistake in a surgical procedure does not mean that operation is abandoned completely, one transgender mistake should not mean the whole transgender community is attacked or that all transgender people regret their change. It is in any case a developing process.

Lots of things go on behind the backs of the parents of teenagers. It happens. It isn't entirely a bad thing. It's part of growing up. It would be great if every teenager who questioned their gender identity had parents who would help them explore and examine their situation, but the fact is that some parents will simply shut down the debate. Desperate teens resort to far more dangerous ways of flattening their curves, for them being able to pick up a binder from Lush is a safer option. This idea that it is always wrong to go behind a parent's back relies on the concept that all parents are supportive, unfortunately they aren't.