Is there more gender and sexual fluidity now among teen girls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There has been an attempt to research this phenomenon.
But it has been met with resistance. This linked article talks about a study that has been started.


https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/brown-university-criticized-over-removal-transgender-study-n906741

Anytime research is met with resistance or an outright attack, you can bet there are nefarious influences at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There has been an attempt to research this phenomenon.
But it has been met with resistance. This linked article talks about a study that has been started.


https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/brown-university-criticized-over-removal-transgender-study-n906741

Anytime research is met with resistance or an outright attack, you can bet there are nefarious influences at work.

Actually the researcher had to come back and say that she did not use sound research practices. So it is not a study it’s a paper written about opinions of parents from a right wing website. If you buy her book she now has to have a disclaimer on the front page saying that it is not a scientific study. She literally only asked parents on one or two webpages that were dedicated to parents who are unhappy about their kids transitioning to fill out the survey.

[Anonymous]

Is it more common? No.
Are girls less afraid to talk about it? Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There has been an attempt to research this phenomenon.
But it has been met with resistance. This linked article talks about a study that has been started.


https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/brown-university-criticized-over-removal-transgender-study-n906741

Anytime research is met with resistance or an outright attack, you can bet there are nefarious influences at work.

Actually the researcher had to come back and say that she did not use sound research practices. So it is not a study it’s a paper written about opinions of parents from a right wing website. If you buy her book she now has to have a disclaimer on the front page saying that it is not a scientific study. She literally only asked parents on one or two webpages that were dedicated to parents who are unhappy about their kids transitioning to fill out the survey.

That’s fine and good, but if we are going to acknowledge shortcomings of her study (and there were shortcomings) then we need to equally acknowledge the many shortcomings of studies that are used in support of pro-medical-transition studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it more common? No.
Are girls less afraid to talk about it? Yes.

Many women in my age group were closeted lesbians growing up. So yes, girls are less afraid to talk about it nowadays. That’s a good thing.
But there is no way you will convince me that the trans kids were ALWAYS there in the numbers reported now.
Yes there were some. But not hundred in a single high school.
It’s manufactured.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it more common? No.
Are girls less afraid to talk about it? Yes.

This. it’s actually trendy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it more common? No.
Are girls less afraid to talk about it? Yes.

Many women in my age group were closeted lesbians growing up. So yes, girls are less afraid to talk about it nowadays. That’s a good thing.
But there is no way you will convince me that the trans kids were ALWAYS there in the numbers reported now.
Yes there were some. But not hundred in a single high school.
It’s manufactured.

Really? Where?

[Anonymous]

With regards to sexual fluidity, I think middle-school girls these days are just giving a new name (whether it is proper or not) to feelings that have always been there throughout generations.

Girls are much more emotional/touchy feely at that age. Even back in the 50s, there were movies/books talking about female friendship and how best friends would link their arms together while walking. They would also say "love" so much more freely to their friends. Girls are also more likely to be "huggy". They would feel more comfortable hugging/touching their best friends but not boys yet.

Don't we all remember haivng a "girl crush" on someone in middle school? Maybe we thought they rocked junior high fashion. Or we were envious that they were so effortlesssly cool while we felt like dorks. We wanted to be like them.

I think girls today are having those same feelings but are thinking those feelings must be equivalent to sexual feelings they will naturally develop later towards boys. They just don't realize it so they declare themselves bisexual/pansexual/whatever because the trend is middle school girls MUST declare their sexuality at a young age. For the vast majority of middle school girls, it might not even be developmentally appropriate to declare their sexuality in middle school.

Gender fluidity - from my experiences/observations - is different. What I am observing are the girls who are socially awkward/kind of on the spectrum are declaring themselves non-binary/trans. Maybe they need something to make them feel like they belong to a group?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With regards to sexual fluidity, I think middle-school girls these days are just giving a new name (whether it is proper or not) to feelings that have always been there throughout generations.

Girls are much more emotional/touchy feely at that age. Even back in the 50s, there were movies/books talking about female friendship and how best friends would link their arms together while walking. They would also say "love" so much more freely to their friends. Girls are also more likely to be "huggy". They would feel more comfortable hugging/touching their best friends but not boys yet.

Don't we all remember haivng a "girl crush" on someone in middle school? Maybe we thought they rocked junior high fashion. Or we were envious that they were so effortlesssly cool while we felt like dorks. We wanted to be like them.

I think girls today are having those same feelings but are thinking those feelings must be equivalent to sexual feelings they will naturally develop later towards boys. They just don't realize it so they declare themselves bisexual/pansexual/whatever because the trend is middle school girls MUST declare their sexuality at a young age. For the vast majority of middle school girls, it might not even be developmentally appropriate to declare their sexuality in middle school.

Gender fluidity - from my experiences/observations - is different. What I am observing are the girls who are socially awkward/kind of on the spectrum are declaring themselves non-binary/trans. Maybe they need something to make them feel like they belong to a group?

How is it really different? Just a different name for the same thing.

English boarding schools are rife with stories of same sex relationship s since the 1500s. Now the kids can be out and proud

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

How is it really different? Just a different name for the same thing.

English boarding schools are rife with stories of same sex relationship s since the 1500s. Now the kids can be out and proud

I see it being different when I ask myself the questions "what is sexuality"? To me sexuality, is me being attracted to someone I want to have intercourse with. Someone I'd want to f*@$.

Do these girls really want to screw the other girls? I'm going to say most likely not. So are they really sexually attracted to them? Or are they attracted to them in a way that isn't sexual? I would say the latter. So is describing oneself as pansexual really accurate? Or does there need to be a new word (because as we are told, this generation is all about coming up with new words to describe these feelings) that notes an attraction but one that isn't sexual? Then these middle school girls can just identify themselves with that new word. It would probably be more accurate/age appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How is it really different? Just a different name for the same thing.

English boarding schools are rife with stories of same sex relationship s since the 1500s. Now the kids can be out and proud

I see it being different when I ask myself the questions "what is sexuality"? To me sexuality, is me being attracted to someone I want to have intercourse with. Someone I'd want to f*@$.

Do these girls really want to screw the other girls? I'm going to say most likely not. So are they really sexually attracted to them? Or are they attracted to them in a way that isn't sexual? I would say the latter. So is describing oneself as pansexual really accurate? Or does there need to be a new word (because as we are told, this generation is all about coming up with new words to describe these feelings) that notes an attraction but one that isn't sexual? Then these middle school girls can just identify themselves with that new word. It would probably be more accurate/age appropriate.

If you want to get really specific, what you describing is pan- or biromantic and asexual for middle school girls. (Interested in romantic interactions with all or multiple genders, sexual with none.) But honestly I think it’s easier to let middle school girls say they’re bisexual if they want to — it seems pretty obvious to that the actual interest in sex of middle schoolers in general is somewhat mixed. Some want to start experimenting for real, others are just starting puberty. This diversity in development rates is also not new, we’re just using different terminology these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How is it really different? Just a different name for the same thing.

English boarding schools are rife with stories of same sex relationship s since the 1500s. Now the kids can be out and proud

I see it being different when I ask myself the questions "what is sexuality"? To me sexuality, is me being attracted to someone I want to have intercourse with. Someone I'd want to f*@$.

Do these girls really want to screw the other girls? I'm going to say most likely not. So are they really sexually attracted to them? Or are they attracted to them in a way that isn't sexual? I would say the latter. So is describing oneself as pansexual really accurate? Or does there need to be a new word (because as we are told, this generation is all about coming up with new words to describe these feelings) that notes an attraction but one that isn't sexual? Then these middle school girls can just identify themselves with that new word. It would probably be more accurate/age appropriate.

If you want to get really specific, what you describing is pan- or biromantic and asexual for middle school girls. (Interested in romantic interactions with all or multiple genders, sexual with none.) But honestly I think it’s easier to let middle school girls say they’re bisexual if they want to — it seems pretty obvious to that the actual interest in sex of middle schoolers in general is somewhat mixed. Some want to start experimenting for real, others are just starting puberty. This diversity in development rates is also not new, we’re just using different terminology these days.

We’re also medicalizing it. Girls (and boys) are on puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and are getting mastectomies. That’s very different than just experimenting with same-sex attraction.

[Anonymous]

The ancient Romans had lead poisoning. People used to use mercury and lead for makeup.

For a while radioactive things were all the rage...

Our kids will survive a couple hormones

[Anonymous]

And how many generations drank alcohol while pregnant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How is it really different? Just a different name for the same thing.

English boarding schools are rife with stories of same sex relationship s since the 1500s. Now the kids can be out and proud

I see it being different when I ask myself the questions "what is sexuality"? To me sexuality, is me being attracted to someone I want to have intercourse with. Someone I'd want to f*@$.

Do these girls really want to screw the other girls? I'm going to say most likely not. So are they really sexually attracted to them? Or are they attracted to them in a way that isn't sexual? I would say the latter. So is describing oneself as pansexual really accurate? Or does there need to be a new word (because as we are told, this generation is all about coming up with new words to describe these feelings) that notes an attraction but one that isn't sexual? Then these middle school girls can just identify themselves with that new word. It would probably be more accurate/age appropriate.

If you want to get really specific, what you describing is pan- or biromantic and asexual for middle school girls. (Interested in romantic interactions with all or multiple genders, sexual with none.) But honestly I think it’s easier to let middle school girls say they’re bisexual if they want to — it seems pretty obvious to that the actual interest in sex of middle schoolers in general is somewhat mixed. Some want to start experimenting for real, others are just starting puberty. This diversity in development rates is also not new, we’re just using different terminology these days.

We’re also medicalizing it. Girls (and boys) are on puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and are getting mastectomies. That’s very different than just experimenting with same-sex attraction.

OP wasn’t really talking about trans kids.