Mermaids CEO Reveals Her Views

Mermaids is a registered charity and the UK’s main support group for “gender variant young people” up to the age of 19, plus their families and the professionals involved in their care. Mermaids also provides resources and gives advice to schools, social services, local authorities, police forces, the NHS, Childline, Scouts and ‘many more.’

CEO Susie Green is the main spokesperson for the group and last week she engaged in a Twitter conversation with people who were protesting the publication of the children’s book Introducing Teddy. Her comments were revealing of the beliefs underpinning Mermaids’ work and give cause for concern considering their far-reaching influence, not least on the vulnerable children and young people they ‘support.’

Most worrying is the clearly fixed diagnosis of ‘transgender’ that the charity brings to their view of ‘gender variant’ kids, with no allowance made for any other interpretation of a child or adolescent’s behaviour. There is also the conflation of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ which characterises the language of all transgender advocate organisations; the idea that a child who transitions actually becomes a member of the opposite sex, while at the same time denying the reality of biological sex itself.

Susie Green’s first tweet was especially ironic, given that she believes it is possible to change a child’s sex:


The comment ‘you are who you are’ belies a lack of knowledge of basic child and adolescent development. To say that a child or teenager has a solid sense of self which is impervious to outside influence is obviously ridiculous: a young child’s self develops through relationship with the environment, without which no real human identity as we understand it would develop at all. A teenager is especially vulnerable to outside pressures and ‘social contagion,’ that’s why we worry about them. It takes time and maturity to understand ‘who you are’ to any degree. 

The next tweet is a commonly-used tactic often heard from transactivists to suggest that they are concerned to protect gay and lesbian children just as much as ‘trans kids:’



Of course, no-one goes into schools telling children “you might be gay” and there are no programmes to support children by affirming a gay identity. Although the outcome for ‘gender variant’ kids is commonly same-sex orientation, ‘transing’ kids prevents this process from happening and is therefore essentially another form of gay conversion therapy. You can’t make a child gay, but you can condition a gay child into a heterosexual orientation if you “affirm their preferred gender” as immutable fact.

The next comment is true only in the sense that Mermaids does not acknowledge that it is biology that determines which sex you are:



The use of the word ‘gender’ and the idea that ‘gender identity’ is a truth which overrides sex, obfuscates the fact that Mermaids affirms children as the opposite sex. The following tweet reveals the confusion:



The oft-repeated mantra of transactivists that gender is between the ears and not the legs is to say that gender identity is real and biological sex is an illusion.  And yet Susie Green’s ‘daughter’ is ‘female’ – a biological sex category.

To clarify, Green spells out the conservative ideology behind transgender theory:



To believe that what’s in your head should match your genitals assumes that there is only one correct personality which corresponds to a penis or a vagina. There is no concession here to the option of accepting your biological sex while keeping your personality, no support for children to achieve mind-body integration and ‘be who they are’ in both mind and body. There is only one answer, it is inevitable, fixed and cannot change: it is ‘not your choice.’ Adults with a pre-determined view of what individual children are should not be working to set in stone the identities of children and adolescents which are in flux at this stage of life. Kids need a safe space to explore all ‘identity’ options, not a ‘support’ group which reinforces only one. The number of young adults who later regret transition is testament to the fact that identities change with maturity.

When asked whether homophobia may be a motive for ‘transing’ kids, this was Susie Green’s reply:



It is reasonable to be cautious and aware that some parents may be homophobic and prefer, for example, to have a daughter rather than a gay son, but if you have a fixed mind-set you won’t see it because you won’t be open to the possibility. In this response Green suggests that she is able to look into people’s minds and discern true motives which may even be unconscious to the parents themselves. The next series of tweets is very revealing of Green’s own attitude to gay, lesbian and bi-sexual people:



Gay, lesbian and bi people are apparently ‘happy with gender’ so they can’t be trans, but cis people ‘fancy opposite sex’ so they can’t be cis either. The actual definition of ‘cis’ includes nothing about sexual orientation so the contradictions here, even allowing for the level of debate Twitter allows, reveal a lack of regard or care towards the gay community which is concerning for someone involved in the care of young people, and raises questions about Green’s own unconscious motives. It’s also interesting that Green concedes here the existence of ‘opposite sex’ (which is biology again, not something ‘between your ears’) The level of confusion is astounding for someone who advises so many organisations.

Next, we have the promotion of puberty blockers and the denial of sterilisation:



We don’t know that blockers are completely reversible. There have been no long-term studies, and the effects on a child’s brain are not yet understood. Even the Tavistock clinic, in their written submission to the government trans inquiry, concede: “this intervention is putatively completely reversible.” In other words, nobody really knows for sure. Polly Carmichael has stated “nothing is completely reversible.” In any case, the question in regard to sterilisation is academic, as once a child is on blockers the progression to cross-sex hormones is all but assured, and the outcome of infertility is uncontested for this treatment pathway. We should be able to expect objective, accurate information from a group that advises parents.  Is Green really misleading parents on an issue as important as their child’s fertility?

The elevation of individual experience over research and statistics is another characteristic of trans advocate groups:



Having been tweeted a link to research studies on high rates of desistance, Susie Green responded with a link to a blog post which pronounced these studies ‘dubious data’ because no long-term studies had been carried out – clearly unnecessary because the short-term studies have already provided the evidence which long-term studies would only replicate. Green pronounced the actual research studies as ‘flawed data’ and offered this opinion piece as proof of that assertion. Although personal testimony is of course important, the anti-science denial of evidence is irresponsible. It matters to be in possession of the facts and to be informed by evidence-based research; this is the least we can expect from any group that is working to support vulnerable children and teens, especially when they are promoting an idea about children which is completely unprecedented.

Having engaged with a variety of obviously highly-informed people, Susie Green subsequently blocked everyone at the point that she was asked by 4thWaveNow whether Mermaids would host a public debate on the ethics of sterilising children. Those who had questioned her were subsequently dismissed in the following terms in a later tweet from Mermaids to a supporter: 



“When you can’t answer questions, call people ignorant and prejudiced” seems to be the favoured bullying tactic of transactivists everywhere as a means of stifling debate.

Is this the level of professionalism we are happy to accept in a group purporting to support children and young people? Mermaids’ by-line on their website is ‘Embrace Empower Educate.’ Maybe it should be ‘Don’t Ask Questions.’

This Post Has 15 Comments

  1. Lucymarie Ruth

    Speaking as a transgender person, I agree with Transgender Trend completely about the inadvisability, to say the least, of having puberty blockers prescribed to children. It is terrible to think that these children will later in life have medical problems like osteoporosis, will be sterile, and who knows what else. Experimenting on children in this way is heinous. Anyone who thinks that children have the rational ability and maturity to decide, before they have had a chance to get closer to personhood, that they are transgender rather than gay or lesbian or gender-fluid or genderqueer, is most grievously wrong and totally irresponsible and a menace to our children. Only a small minority of these children that Mermaids is dealing with will turn out to be transgender, especially if they are not given the snow-job that they get from Mermaids and other like organizations.
    It is hard enough as an adult, especially in this society, to make an informed and rational decision to live openly as a transgendered person. Children are incapable of it. When I was 8 years old, I was entranced by the idea that the medical profession could magically make me into a woman. Well, there is no magic. And the medical profession unfortunately can’t make me into a woman. It can make me into a sort-of-woman, a neo-woman whose replacement body parts are a far cry from the real thing, functionally and aesthetically. Is this what Mermaids tells the children and their parents who come for a consultation? You really have to understand what you are getting into when making a decision to try to live as the sex you were not born as. For me, I made the right decision. But only as an adult, who could no longer live any other way.

    1. Transgender Trend

      Thank you very much for coming on here to comment and for being so honest. Your view is especially relevant and appreciated.

    2. Diva1960

      Thank you for your comment. I have lost close friends simply because I have asked for a clear definition of what ‘transgender’ means, and because, as a human female, I refuse to equate gender and sex. The transactivist phenomenon as it is now being promoted is a kind of stalking horse, I am convinced of that now. That is, it’s being used as a test of how to drive people into polarized positions and attack one another. Rational transgender persons such as yourself show considerable courage in standing up to it.

  2. Amanda

    This worries me so much. Young children don’t fully understand consequences, so are simply are not capable of making permanent decisions about their future – if they are, why don’t we let them vote, drive, get married, or have sex? There are no long-term studies into the effects of transing children because it’s a relatively new phenomenon, and pushing children towards sterilisation and even bodily mutilation that they may later change their minds about is, I am sure, going to result eventually in an enormous backlash, and all sorts of lawsuits. Something for Susie Green to think about!

  3. E

    Clearly, Mermaids is doing a grave disservice to kids and their loved ones. Susie Green’s mind isn’t open at all! She is grafting her vision onto all comers. So sad that it is all about her, her, her.

    1. A Kaye

      Yes you’re right, she put her child through serious surgery which was unlawful in the UK and needs others to agree with her actions. She is a drunk and has unresolved issues of her own.

  4. Puzzled

    There’s a big money movement behind ‘born this way,’ with these kids in the forefront. I don’t completely understand it. I know George Soros is the top funder of trans charities, with Jennifer (formerly james) Pritzker right up there as well. I don’t understand it; I only know that there’s power in the push. This sudden “blossoming” of media and legal activity is not occurring in a vacuum. It’s not possible for it to all be completely spontaneous, this exponential growth in putative ‘transkids’ (unless, of course, there’s something in the water).

    Honestly, I’m not a conspiracy theorist. But ‘born this way’ is the clearly identified drumbeat in ALL the ‘transkid’ narratives, and ‘born this way’ is winning. ‘Born this way’ is the only argument that turns trans people into targets of compassion and justifies the transing of kids. If it’s immutable and inborn and irreversible, then there’s no choice, yeah? The sooner the better. If there are health issues, fertility issues, that is just unavoidable collateral damage, like bad side effects from necessary chemotherapy.

    Science and desistance studies be damned, apparently. Health consequences are waved aside as if they are, well, inconsequential. It is all about human rights and a progressive revolution. And maybe a touch of homophobia / eugenics in terms of lack of general public interest in the fate of these kids (particularly their reproductive capacity).

    Ironically, the more the transkid ‘treatment protocol’ is accepted and mainstreamed, the fewer kids who are going to desist, and those old desistance studies will be wiped out by newer studies that prove that these kids … never desist. Because once socially transitioned and put on blockers … in fact, they do not.

    The government’s willingness to let Mermaids drive the bus here, and to dictate policy to the degree they have, is shocking.

    1. k.jane

      It’s so ridiculous. People change their minds all the time and I don’t think a child can have an innate, immutable identity. There have been people who transitioned as adults as a result of pressure/encouragement from the queer/trans brigade and then later regretted it. So much for “immutable”. When I was a kid, I would be a different fictional character every week, and I used to think I was a cat. Should my parents have gotten me tattoos like the Cat Man? When I was in high school my friend and I used to talk about how we resembled a lesbian couple in an anime we liked. It didn’t mean we were literally those characters.

      Another trend was bisexuality. Most of my friends were bisexual in high school. Now, 10+ years later, one of two of them still consider themselves bisexual, but the rest do not. The difference is though, that bisexuality doesn’t involve being turned into a life-long medical patient. If you decide, “no, I am not bisexual” it is not really a big deal. You won’t have health problems from weird hormones and surgical complications.

      On that note, no one goes around telling children that “gay is okay”. Lesbian and gay adults know that if we suggest a kid is gay, or agree with a kid who says “I’m lesbian/gay” that we would be accused of recruiting and pedophilia. I’ve seen people who support trans because they think it’s supporting LGB say that a child can “know” they’re trans at a young age but can’t know that they’re lesbian or gay until puberty and that “even then they should try a straight relationship to be sure.”

      I am going to be 30 in a couple of years and I still have people (including ones who support the trans kid trend) tell me that I can’t “know” I’m a lesbian because I haven’t slept with a man or been in a long term relationship with one. Lesbians aren’t lesbians because we can’t have a relationship with a man, but because we choose other women. I know, so shocking for something to not be about men.

      So, I am a grown adult but I can’t know for sure that I’m a lesbian (I came out in high school too) but 5-years-olds can make an informed decision to become a lifelong medical patient in a futile attempt to resemble the opposite sex.

  5. Dogtowner

    I think your point about the money — something GenderTrender touches upon — is very important. I wish I could remember the source, but many years ago I saw something about the group of conservatives — including the Coors family — who got together to push abortion and gay rights as a way to get people to vote against their own economic interests (and in favor of the conservative corporate interests). It seems as though so-called liberals have now done something similar: pushing an agenda in order to stop people thinking, getting people to reject actual biological science (the same people who have made fun of creationists, etc), getting women in particular to support the rights of transgender in opposition to their own interests. Quite similar to getting women to support the freedom of pornographers and sex domination/exploitation.

  6. charlston

    Oh dear! This is hard to read. When will they stop thinking they know it all ? The need to take their own advice.
    Mermaids @Mermaids_Gender
    @lisasevern indeed. Astounds me how much ignorance and prejudice there still is. And how people think it’s ok to tell others how to live.
    9:18 PM – 3 Jun 2016
    Retweets 2 2 likes

  7. Third Sister

    If this was a true support group for ‘Gender Variant Kids’ (sic) then surely it should be about researching and providing counseling on why some children question whether they’re male or female?

    I constantly shocked by the peak trans of these types of organizations and how they manipulate by quoting suicide stats – shouldn’t they be looking at ways of offering counseling like any other mental illness rather than the pharma route? Isn’t this the way that modern psychology and psychiatry is evolving now?

    I blame the rise of acceptance to treat kids with drugs for ‘illnesses’ such as Hyperactivity that have resulted in us not accepting our children’s personality traits rather to expect them to fit in.

    As an attachment parenting professional I’m really shocked how many parents buy into transgender activism where they would never consider to medicate their children for being different in other ways to societies expected norms.

  8. Bob

    Great work. Does anyone know where to find their accounts? Are they a charity, a company, couldn’t find it on their website. I need to find out about them

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.