Friday, March 22, 2019

Modern-day Parable

 Sometimes a story is the best way to convey an idea. So, today, let's try a modern-day parable.

A young teen, age 14, goes to her parents and says, “I never want to have children. I need to get a hysterectomy to make sure I never can.”
image from here
The parents are heartsick. Why would their beloved daughter have this strange view? Where had they gone wrong as parents? And will this mean they never even experience the joy of grandchildren? 
And they feel tremendous concern for the daughter’s wellbeing. Are the long-term consequences of such a surgery even known for a woman so young?
They say to her, “Let’s wait on this for a while. You might change your mind. This isn’t something you should decide now, when you’re not even old enough to be ready to have a baby. And there will be other effects, hormonal and physiological, that will affect your overall health.”
“I want it. I want it. I want it! And you can’t stop me. And you have to pay for it!” says their little darling.
Unfortunately, the family lives in a world that doesn’t recognize the right of parents to see to the care and upbringing of their child. Plus, this surrounding milieu has a knee-jerk reaction favoring a philosophy that is pro-sex without consequence. Getting rid of the possibility of procreation suits that agenda.
The girl goes to a counselor at school, who puts her in touch with a doctor willing to do the surgery. When the parents object, this connection of authorities intervenes and takes the girl from the home—for her protection.
The parents are powerless to protect their child. Their insurance refuses to pay, since the surgery is elective, as well as controversial. But the parents nevertheless are forced to pay; the sizable sum is automatically deducted from their bank account.
After the surgery and convalescence, plus a few months, the girl decides she’d rather be at home in her own room than dealing with foster parents. Her heartsick but still loving parents welcome her back home.
She finishes high school. Struggles through college. And then works a series of jobs. She gets close to marriage, but her purposeful choice to never have children gets in the way, multiple times, when she would have liked a more permanent relationship. Temporary relationships with men who want sex without responsibility are plentiful—but strangely unsatisfying.
In her 30s, while friends are marrying and having children, or sharing their angst over the ticking clock of their chance to have a family, she has frequent regrets. She doesn’t feel the same way about things that she did at age 14—although she never admits these regrets to her parents.
She spends the rest of her erstwhile childbearing years taking hormones to make up for the organs that were removed. She ages more quickly than she would have liked. Eventually, she needs additional surgery to handle the displacement caused by the hysterectomy. These are health problems she would not be having, if she hadn’t acted rashly—and if society hadn’t facilitated her rashness—several decades earlier.

To my knowledge, such a scenario hasn’t actually taken place. But our world is showing signs of being that warped. On another issue it is that warped.

If a child, who cannot take a prescription without a parent’s consent, or get ears pierced, or get a tattoo even with consent, decides to be the opposite gender from reality, what sane parent wouldn’t be concerned? 

A sex change means mutilation, disfigurement, and permanent sterility. And sex change does not mean overcoming the gender dysphoria. It doesn’t decrease tendency to suicide. It does nothing real. But it pretends to change the world to go along with a delusion—a delusion that can be treated and often resolves on its own without physiological intervention.

It seems to me that a thoughtful parent would want to get mental healthcare for the child. But the world has made it practically illegal for a therapist to deal with the underlying issues; only positive, enthusiastic affirmation of the erroneous belief is allowed. So the parent can’t turn there.

And authorities are stepping in.

There’s a story from the UK, showing that government has begun taking kids away from parents who don’t want to go along with gender “transitions.” 

Commenting on this situation, blogger Jonathon Van Maren says: 

As the numbers of children identifying as transgender soar, parents have often been left at a loss as children have been swept away by what some experts are referring to as a social contagion. Numbers in the United Kingdom have now risen by over 4,000 percent, prompting a government investigation and urgent warnings from health experts, while the number of young people being referred to the National Health Service for gender reassignment has risen by 1,000 percent. Many parents feel that their child’s struggles may have nothing to do with gender dysphoria, but feel powerless to object as transgenderism is trendy and anything but full-hearted support for hormone treatments and life-altering surgeries is condemned by activists as hateful bigotry.
My guess is that this “trend” will look strange indeed as we look back half a century ahead. Van Maren notes that officials claim the issue is complex, and children aren’t removed simply because they are transgender. But…

You’ll notice that the wording here carefully says that a child being transgender doesn’t get them pulled from the home—but preventing transition could very well do so, especially now that LGBT activists are claiming that anything but vociferous affirmation of the desire to transition is harm.
Another story from the UK tells of parents of a 14-year-old, who temporarily lost custody of their son because they hesitated to support his taking irreversible hormone blockers. They believed his gender dysphoria was related to his Aspergers, and that therapy should be tried first, before irreversible damage could be done.

It is a sign of the craziness of our world that government officials step in—not to protect a child from irreversible damage that deranged parents want to impose, but to overrule caring, protective parents in order to impose the irreversible damage.

Lest you think we’re safe here in America, further in the story, they mention the Texas dad, Jeffrey Younger, of a 6-year-old whose ex-wife is transitioning the son into a girl, against the will of the dad, against the will of the son as expressed to the dad when the mother is absent, and the dad is being threatened with loss of his child if he doesn’t go along. Regardless will be forced to pay for it. 

Younger says,

I want you to imagine having electronic communication with your son on FaceTime, and imagine that your ex-wife has dressed him as a drag queen to talk to you. He has false eyelashes and makeup. His hair has got glitter in it. He’s wearing a dress.
Now imagine how you would feel seeing what I believe is actual sexual abuse—I believe this is not just emotional abuse but is the very, most fundamental form of sexual abuse, tampering with the sexual identity of a vulnerable boy.
Jeffrey Younger at TX State Capitol
screenshot from video
posted on Facebook by Norma Jeter for
Concerned Women for America of Texas
I shouldn’t have to point out this obvious fact, but six-year-old girls do not wear false eyelashes and makeup unless it’s Halloween, or maybe a misguided princess pageant. And these days girls seldom wear dresses, except for church or special occasions. In a typical first grade classroom you might not see any dresses worn as regular daywear. If someone were helping this boy “be” a girl, shouldn’t that be a normal girl in normal girl attire?

I think the father is right; his ex-wife is abusing this child. Getting him away from her, and getting him some therapy to recover from the confusing abuse, would likely lead him to a normal life—most likely as the boy he was born to be.[i]

This dad spoke recently at the Texas State Capitol. His story is heart-wrenching. We’re fighting multiple attacks from SOGI (sexual identity and gender identity)[ii] laws in the current legislative session.

Meanwhile, right here in Houston, the public library recently admitted they had hired a convicted sex offender to read to children—because somebody had an agenda to push transgenderism by having drag queens read to small children. And that agenda was so overridingly important that they failed to do a background check on the multiple drag queens they hired. 

Is there a way to fight the craziness? I’m not sure. But standing up to it is a start.
screenshot from here

In Pennsylvania, a female HS student has filed a lawsuit claiming her rights were violated when she had to suffer a male (transgender) watching her change clothes in the school locker room.

Her attorney, Andrea Shaw, makes this argument:

Opening up restrooms and locker rooms to members of the opposite sex is sexual harassment. Like most forms of sexual harassment, the girls in this school have little power over their situation. The school's only solution for my client was for her to wait outside the locker room until the individual of the opposite sex was finished changing, and then she went in and was late for gym class and also late for her second period class.
The school made the young girl out to be the problem. Shaw adds,

Women have fought long and hard for privacy rights under Title IX, for equality, for equal access in education. And now we are telling these girls that they no longer have a voice. The privacy rights of these girls don’t change based on what a male believes about their gender; their privacy rights belong to them. And it is the school’s duty to protect those girls’ privacy rights.
It seems to be a clash between world views. But only one view is in touch with reality. That’s the one that’s likely to prevail. Truth has an inexorable weight that enforced pretense can’t overcome for long.

[i]  There's a Save James website, here:   
[i] A good piece to understand SOGI laws is “Ten Years of International Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Laws: Lessons Learned” by Daniel Moody:

No comments:

Post a Comment