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.
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: https://savejames.com/all-about-james/
[i] A
good piece to understand SOGI laws is “Ten Years of International Sexual
Orientation and Gender Identity Laws: Lessons Learned” by Daniel Moody: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/03/18897/.
No comments:
Post a Comment