The sexual revolutionaries have done more to destroy culture, society, marriage, family and all that has made the West great than perhaps any other radical activist movement. Every day we find the bitter fruit of this wrecking crew. And sadly it is children who are so often the biggest losers.
Here in Australia children have been targeted big time by the sexual activists especially in the form of the so-called Safe Schools Coalition, and social engineering groups like Early Childhood Australia. I have written about both a number of times now, exposing their militant pro-homosexual, pro-trans everything and anti-heterosexual agenda.
These groups do not run with the evidence and the research, but run with social activism, pushing radical agendas. And I am not alone in my concerns about all this. Miranda Devine has just written about both groups and rightly asks:
Why are national programs being imposed that take away parental discretion in teaching their own children about such intimate issues. Each family is entitled to pass on its own values, at a time of its own choosing, whether they are religiously based or not. It was bad enough when we heard 11-year-olds were being advised to bind their breasts and tuck in their penises to practice being a member of the opposite sex. But the thought police invading preschools is positively Orwellian. Has the world gone mad?
Since these activist groups refuse to deal with the actual science and evidence (all of it, not just those bits which seem to make their case), it is up to others to bring this into the debate. Here I will again do just that, with two recent pieces we all should be aware of.
The first is by Margaret A. Hagen, JD, PhD, Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences at Boston University. Her vitally important piece “Transgenderism Has No Basis in Science or Law” should be read by everyone. Let me quote just a few parts of it:
Where Is the Evidence?
More fundamentally, there is no consensus on the etiology of the diverse expressions of “gender identity variants.” Some LGBTQ advocates theorize that nonconforming sexuality is caused by certain family dynamics in the context of a bi-gendered patriarchal society. Others postulate that unidentified genetically based sex-hormone abnormalities cause transgenderism or homosexuality, even when there are no abnormalities of the reproductive anatomy.
Evidence-based conclusions are utterly lacking, whatever the claims of activists. Without clear distinctions not only among categories of the potentially mentally disordered but also between the mentally disordered and the normal population, how are diagnosis and treatment decisions to be made? It is hardly possible to pass disability laws without reliable diagnostic categories.
Most proposed legislation is driven not by medical research or theoretical differences but by the desire to make private or government insurance money available for hormone and surgical “treatment” for nonconformists experiencing psychological distress. The American Psychiatric Association has stated this unambiguously in its DSM-5, the current diagnostic manual. Pathologizing states of mind – even distress – simply to make insurance money available for attempts to change those states through surgical, medical, and cosmetic alterations to the body is simply not sound science. Neither is it just to the larger community that pays for medical insurance and funds the Affordable Care Act. Surely, in a domain with such drastic proposed “therapy,” it is not too much to ask for a solid evidence-based statement of who is being treated, for what, and why, before writing the prescription.
Our society cannot reasonably be expected to unquestioningly accept psychiatric “treatments” that strain our concepts of medical ethics, standards of care, and malpractice up to and past the breaking point.
She concludes:
Many both in and out of the mental health community see the conviction of oneself as “transgender” as a delusion – a technical term referring to a fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence.
The larger community should not accommodate this delusion by pretending to accept it as reality. A deluded person is not “treated” by requiring everyone who encounters him to accept the validity of his or her delusion, contrary to all reality.
Up until the very recent past, reality testing was a fundamental component of psychotherapy. The opposite approach is irrational and indefensible. Indeed, one prominent psychiatrist in this field has termed this accommodation “collaborating with madness.” That is what American society is being asked to do by people who are well-meaning but profoundly confused about the realities of transgenderism.
We expect our legislators to have rational bases for the laws they enact. We expect our judges to have rational bases for the decisions they reach. Even amid political pandering by those seeking reelection, we expect at least a veneer of rationality in the exercise of legislative and judicial powers. There is simply no rational basis for the laws being proposed and imposed in the realm of transgenderism. There is very little knowledge at all – no common definitions of terms, no accepted methodology, no outcome analyses, no testing and rejecting of hypotheses, no agreed-upon standards, no science. There currently exists no reliable foundation for making these laws that will shape the actions of the larger community as they relate to sexually nonconforming individuals.
Laws that restrict our freedoms and direct our actions should never be passed without a clear definition of the interests and parties to be affected and a precise explication of the ways the laws will serve those interests. At present, we have no such definitions or explanations. Put the brakes on transgender lawmaking until we do.
The next expert to call upon is The American College of Pediatricians. It has recently put out an important statement called, “Gender Ideology Harms Children”. Let me offer it to you in full:
The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.
1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sexual differentiation (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V). The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries. What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.
Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians
Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist
Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital
This is the sort of information and evidence we need in this debate, not the emotional stories and political activism of the sexual revolutionaries. For the sake of our children, our families, and our society, we must get this truth out there, and say no to the ugly agenda of the gender benders.
8 Replies to “Gender Benders Harming our Children”
Thanks Bill. Hard to argue with that second one. But of course there are none so blind as those who consciously and deliberately make it their lifetime’s ambition not to see.
These two well documented statements by experts would, one would think, effectively stop sexual activists and social engineers in their tracks. And yet, sadly, it seems there is such a deep denial of reality that, even in the fact of undeniable evidence, they will continue to propagate their warped ideology.
Lately I’ve been thinking about novels written in the last century such as ‘Brave New World’ and ‘1984’. As a child I read these books and thought they must surely be pure fantasy. Now, however, I’m beginning to think they were tame compared with today’s distortion of reality. In fact, the truth is so much simpler than the lies and complex ideologies that are being fed to society today.
Yes quite right Ann.
Bill, we are indebted to you for this kind of objective information. Thank you
It’s sad how many mainstream media outlets, especially parenting sites, are ignoring the science on this and promoting “false gender” stories constantly. If you comment with the facts you get told off and so many sheep are commenting with “support” to show how “enlightened” they are. NOT.
What is also really upsetting, is that if it weren’t for Mr Muehlenberg and perhaps a few others from church, I’d be very much unaware that this is happening to children in schools.
This social engineering comes very subtle, and a sexual perversion could take just one day at school while parents are away, and the child may end up scarred for life…
Curious to know if the more liberal politicians, like Daniel Andrews, Bill Shorten, and even Obama… would truly be ok with their children going through the safe schools system. Something in me tells me that they wouldn’t be 100% comfortable with everything in it, for the sake of their children.
While in the newspeak we use these days gender is different to sex I would remind people that the term gender has an etymology that relates to terms like generation, genesis, genus and gene (from the Greek genos or kin) i.e. it has to do with biology and reproduction and birth. The whole idea of changing the meaning of the words we use is to control how people think. If we start talking about gender being different to sex then we are submitting our thought processes to these confused ideologies. This is exactly what George Orwell tried to warn us about.
It is important to love and accept yourself in order to love and accept someone else. If you covet being the opposite sex, or feel you are trapped in the wrong body, despite being fully equipped with male or female sex organs, then it’s likely that when you self-determine who you want to be, you will still be unsatisfied. Everyone has male and female hormones and time is needed to settle into who we are. To mutilate yourself to simulate the appearance of the opposite sex means you are not genuine. When does gender fluidity end and become stable? If a man and a woman marry and have children, then say the man becomes a woman, he has changed the factors in the equation for the woman and betrayed the trust of the bond and added to the general deficit of trust in human interaction. Of course there are those who call anyone who disagrees with gender fluidity because of potential harm to children, “the far Right who should be silenced”, Fortunately we do not live in a repressive regime where women are rendered invisible and men turn to boys to replicate women. It’s the soul of a person that defines who we are.
Since these activist groups refuse to deal with the actual science and evidence (all of it, not just those bits which seem to make their case), it is up to others to bring this into the debate. Here I will again do just that, with two recent pieces we all should be aware of.
Thanks Bill. Hard to argue with that second one. But of course there are none so blind as those who consciously and deliberately make it their lifetime’s ambition not to see.
These two well documented statements by experts would, one would think, effectively stop sexual activists and social engineers in their tracks. And yet, sadly, it seems there is such a deep denial of reality that, even in the fact of undeniable evidence, they will continue to propagate their warped ideology.
Lately I’ve been thinking about novels written in the last century such as ‘Brave New World’ and ‘1984’. As a child I read these books and thought they must surely be pure fantasy. Now, however, I’m beginning to think they were tame compared with today’s distortion of reality. In fact, the truth is so much simpler than the lies and complex ideologies that are being fed to society today.
Yes quite right Ann.
Bill, we are indebted to you for this kind of objective information. Thank you
It’s sad how many mainstream media outlets, especially parenting sites, are ignoring the science on this and promoting “false gender” stories constantly. If you comment with the facts you get told off and so many sheep are commenting with “support” to show how “enlightened” they are. NOT.
What is also really upsetting, is that if it weren’t for Mr Muehlenberg and perhaps a few others from church, I’d be very much unaware that this is happening to children in schools.
This social engineering comes very subtle, and a sexual perversion could take just one day at school while parents are away, and the child may end up scarred for life…
Curious to know if the more liberal politicians, like Daniel Andrews, Bill Shorten, and even Obama… would truly be ok with their children going through the safe schools system. Something in me tells me that they wouldn’t be 100% comfortable with everything in it, for the sake of their children.
While in the newspeak we use these days gender is different to sex I would remind people that the term gender has an etymology that relates to terms like generation, genesis, genus and gene (from the Greek genos or kin) i.e. it has to do with biology and reproduction and birth. The whole idea of changing the meaning of the words we use is to control how people think. If we start talking about gender being different to sex then we are submitting our thought processes to these confused ideologies. This is exactly what George Orwell tried to warn us about.
It is important to love and accept yourself in order to love and accept someone else. If you covet being the opposite sex, or feel you are trapped in the wrong body, despite being fully equipped with male or female sex organs, then it’s likely that when you self-determine who you want to be, you will still be unsatisfied. Everyone has male and female hormones and time is needed to settle into who we are. To mutilate yourself to simulate the appearance of the opposite sex means you are not genuine. When does gender fluidity end and become stable? If a man and a woman marry and have children, then say the man becomes a woman, he has changed the factors in the equation for the woman and betrayed the trust of the bond and added to the general deficit of trust in human interaction. Of course there are those who call anyone who disagrees with gender fluidity because of potential harm to children, “the far Right who should be silenced”, Fortunately we do not live in a repressive regime where women are rendered invisible and men turn to boys to replicate women. It’s the soul of a person that defines who we are.