Organization Intersex International: Transgender people using “brain sex” theories damage the Intersex community’s ability to organize
July 26, 2014
By Morgan Carpenter, new Director of Organization Intersex International Australia:
Intersex, brain differences, and the transgender tipping point
5 June 2014.
Over a decade ago, intersex and trans activist Raven Kaldera wrote that trans people seeking classification as intersex might be seeking legitimisation, as if a physical cause is necessary to obtain social or familial validation. He said that trans people using brain sex theories to claim intersex status were basing a political stance on unproven science and damaging the intersex community’s ability to organise.
We might hope that times have changed, with the amazing Laverne Cox appearing on the cover of Time magazine, as it declares The Transgender Tipping Point. This is great news (also, we can’t wait for the next series of Orange is the New Black) but, sadly, a high proportion of enquiries that we get at OII Australia, a national intersex organisation, are still from trans folk seeking biological validation for their identity.
Intersex is a term for innate physical differences in sex characteristics, known controversially to medicine as “Disorders of Sex Development” and historically as hermaphroditism. At least 30 or 40 genetic differences causing intersex traits are known to science. Intersex is not defined as a gender identity. Intersex people have all sorts of gender identities, just like trans and other people. Some intersex people have non-binary gender identities, just like some trans people, but most intersex people are men or women.
Correlations between brain sex differences and same sex attraction in men, and trans gender identities in women, have been widely reported over a long period of time – yet there’s still controversy even regarding the notion that men and women have different brains. Given the known biological basis of many intersex variations, much of the research on causes of homosexuality has been carried out on live foetuses and infants with intersex traits.
Late last year, a neuroscience study inspired headlines proclaiming, “hardwired difference between male and female brains could explain why men are “better at map reading” (And why women are “better at remembering a conversation”)”. Cordelia Fine writing at The Conversation shows how the reporting and the study itself, of nearly 1,000 people, inflated very modest differences into something “tediously predictable“. In reality:
In an larger earlier study … the same research team compellingly demonstrated that the sex differences in the psychological skills they measured – executive control, memory, reasoning, spatial processing, sensorimotor skills, and social cognition – are almost all trivially small…
the social phenomenon of gender means that a person’s biological sex has a significant impact on the experiences (including social, material, physical, and mental) she or he encounters which will, in turn, leave neurological traces.
The more research that is conducted, the more clear is the evidence that brains are plastic. Differences are often over-stated, especially where results fit social preconceptions, but brain structures change according to circumstance and repeated activities.
Studies in recent years have found that a short eight-week mindfulness meditation program changed the brain structures of 16 participants, while other studies have found brain differences in active longer-term meditators. Scientific American has collected some good links.
More recently, a study in Israel has found that parenting rewires the male brain, particularly those of gay men: “the experience of hands-on parenting, with no female mother anywhere in the picture, can configure a caregiver’s brain in the same way that pregnancy and childbirth do“. In heterosexual men, brain differences were “proportional to the amount of time they spent with the baby“.
Laverne Cox said in that Time interview (via The Guardian):
If someone needs to express their gender in a way that is different, that is OK, and they should not be denied healthcare. They should not be bullied. They don’t deserve to be victims of violence … That’s what people need to understand, that it’s okay and that if you are uncomfortable with it, then you need to look at yourself.
It’s time for a bit more pride, and time for phone calls seeking validation based on brain sex to stop.
Biological validation doesn’t improve access or quality of healthcare. Testing for biological differences creates its own risks. Basing a human rights campaign on being “born that way“, or not being able to help being different is undeniably seductive, but we all deserve human rights whether we’re born a particular way or not. It shouldn’t depend on your genetics or your brain structure any more than your gender expression or what you choose to wear.
- Raven Kaldera (c.2000-2004) Dangerous Intersections
- Katy Steinmetz (29 May 2014) The Transgender Tipping Point in Time Magazine
- Simon LeVay (30 August 1991) A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men in Science 30 August 1991: Vol. 253 no. 5023 pp. 1034-1037. DOI: 10.1126/science.1887219
- OII Australia (29 April 2014) Submission on the ethics of genetic selection against intersex traits, includes material on research on the causes of homosexuality using foetuses and infants with intersex traits.
- Christie Nicholson (22 January 2011) Meditation Correlated with Structural Changes in the Brain in Scientific American
- Eileen Luders, Arthur W. Toga, Natasha Lepore and Christian Gaser (15 April 2009) The underlying anatomical correlates of long-term meditation: Larger hippocampal and frontal volumes of gray matter in Neuroimage, 15 April 2009; 45(3): 672–678. PMCID: PMC3184843, NIHMSID: NIHMS90659
- Scientific American (31 October 2013) Taking a Closer Look at How Meditation Improves Our Brains [Video], collected research on meditation and brain structure.
- Cordelia Fine (4 December 2013) New insights into gendered brain wiring, or a perfect case study in neurosexism? at The Conversation
- Elizabeth Norton (27 May 2014) Parenting Rewires the Male Brain, American Association for the Advancement of Science.
- Amanda Holpuch (30 May 2014) Laverne Cox heralds ‘transgender tipping point’ on cover of Time in The Guardian.
[Bolding by me. Images added by me.-GM]
“They Looked Beautiful. They Looked Normal.” Dr. Norman Spack- TED talk on creating transgender children
January 28, 2014
There’s a reason not a single trans website, blogger, or journalist has reported on, commented on, or re-posted the “Dollmaker” Dr. Norman Spack’s recent TED talk. It is, as they say, “problematic”. He is completely clueless about women, sex politics, transgenderism, and the medicalization of gender. Frighteningly uninformed and ill-spoken by any measure.
He extols on various sexist stereotypes then reports how he diagnosed pediatric UK trans “chicken circuit” celebrity Jackie Green as being “destined to become six foot five inches tall”. This caused him to dose the child with cross-sex hormones AT THE AGE OF THIRTEEN, against all medical advice. The child then underwent surgical removal of his testes and inversion of his penis into a cavity designed for other males to sexually penetrate AT THE AGE OF SIXTEEN, with Dr. Spack’s approval, by a surgeon in Thailand, where such procedures were then legal. These procedures have now been criminalized as medical crimes against children.
In related news, Dr. Spack was quoted in an article this week titled “Uncertainty Surrounds Medical Treatments For Transgender Youth” He offered this clueless gem: “The difference between a tomboy and a trans-male who starts puberty is that the tomboy accepts having breasts, accepts having periods.” Has the eugenics doctor never spoke to a single pubertal female, tomboy or not? Has the Docktor never heard of anorexia, bulimia, cutting, breast ironing, or THE ENTIRE ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INDUSTRY marketed to women who DO NOT WANT to menstruate EVER?
Dr. Spack began transgendering children because he “wanted to do something dangerous” with his medical credentials. He has succeeded in that alone, and that is how he will be remembered by history.
The following is an excerpt from the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) “Model District Policy for Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming Students”, produced in conjunction with Mara Keisling’s National Center for Trans Equality.
Full PDF here:
From the GLSEN website:
UK “Transgender Chicken Circuit” pre-teen Leo Waddell denied puberty blockers: Doc says long term effects unknown
September 10, 2013
12 year old Leo (formerly Lily) Waddell’s hopes were put on hold last week in her bid to become one of the rarest of breeds: a marketable female “transgender child”. Leo and her hairdresser mother Hayley have been making the rounds in the UK this year publicizing the child’s transgenderism and her participation in another rare breed: an experimental program of chemical castration for gender nonconforming children using “puberty blockers”.
Why, what’s so rare about that, the reader asks? Dutch clinics do this, Australian clinics. In the US there are such clinics in Boston and Los Angeles and Chicago and at least a dozen other places. In the US there are doctors like Dr. Michelle Forcier in Rhode Island who will even wave all psychological evaluation for these kids, and surgeons like Dr. Beverly Fischer who perform “sex-change” surgery on children as young as twelve. Administering chemical castration to gender nonconforming children is a gosh-darn bonafide medical trend, a tsunami, the reader exclaims!
Well, here’s the difference. It’s all in the word “experimental”. For something to be experimental, data has to be collected about the subject. Unlike all those other clinics who are administering drugs to stop the growth of children’s sex organs the one in the UK, -funded by the National Health Service- claims to be actually keeping records of the experiments they are doing on children. None of the other physicians administering these off-label unapproved drugs have bothered. Dr. Marvin Belzer who oversees the pediatric transgender clinic at Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles says he was “too busy treating” the children and “never had the time to do the research”. None of the children who have been subjected to these treatments have been followed into adulthood, nor the results of such treatments tracked, even though they have been going on for nearly two decades. No follow-up data of any kind, physiological or psychological, has ever been collected.
The problem with medical data collection and oversight is that it tends to introduce accountability: the dreaded paper trail. Which is what inconvenienced our twelve-year-old friend Leo last week when her mother approached her family doctor to administer the experimental pre-pubertal chemical castration injections. Her physician performed due diligence and researched the medication. What she found is that the long-term effects of puberty blockers have never been studied. The manufacturers of the medication warn that the long-term effect on children is unknown. Side effects can be profound, disabling, and irreversible. Transgender activist and Philadelphia Trans Health 2012 keynote speaker Ryan Cassata reports becoming so violently ill on the medication that she was forced to abandon “treatment”. Leo’s doctor reached the reasonable clinical conclusion based on this information and protected the health of her patient by not administering the medication. Leo and her mother went to the news media. To the Mirror. To the Mail. To the daytime TV talk circuit.
From the Mirror:
Leo, who underwent extensive psychological and hormone tests before being prescribed the medication, would have been one of the youngest in the UK to receive the drug. But his family doctor refused to give him the injections because she did not know how they would affect Leo in later years.
Leo from Lowestoft, Suffolk, said: “I’m devastated. This was the one thing that would’ve made a massive difference to me and it’s been taken away.”
Mum Hayley, 48, also slammed the GP’s refusal. She said: “We asked why and she said because she didn’t know anything about the long-term effects.
“But that’s why they’re researching it. Leo has a disorder, and needs treatment. He’s been showing signs of puberty for a while now and it’s upsetting for him. He needs to have treatment.”
Hayley is now approaching other surgeries in the hope of finding one to give Leo the monthly injections.
The Sunday Mirror revealed earlier this year how Leo was to take part in the study by University College London Hospital and the specialist Tavistock and Portman clinic in West London.
In a statement, Leo’s GP Dr Jennie Morrison said: “I have had no previous experience of administering this specialist medication to young people and have already sought advice from my prescribing authority.
“Any clinical decision I make always gives consideration to every aspect of the patient’s wellbeing. My priority has always been, and continues to be, the welfare of the patient.”
The Tavistock and Portman clinic said: “We respect different views, which have at their heart a concern for the long-term welfare of young people.”
You may or may not have noticed that although females comprise the majority of children being administered off-use maturity-stopping puberty blockers, the females themselves hold little celebrity cache on what transsexual BenGirl blogger Elizabeth calls “the Transgender Chicken Circuit”. Marketable “transgender children” are almost solely male. Female (F2T) representation seems to dilute the popular narrative. Jazz, Coy Mathis, Nicole Maines, “My Princess Boy” : all male. Girls who want to wear pants and have adventures and avoid being raped are a dime a dozen and they are not a marketable commodity.
The “Transgender Chicken Circuit”, for the uninformed, is a patchwork of media appearances, news and feature articles, talk shows, documentaries, convention and seminar appearances that savvy parents can weave together into a modest cottage industry of transgender child celebrity. Think of it as a Munchausen-marinated transgender version of “Toddlers and Tiaras” whose fans are aging cross-dressing male autogynephiles in possession of both a wistful longing for an unexperienced girlhood, and a generous disposable income. These men are the funders of the agencies and lobbying groups promoting the medicalization of childhood gender nonconformity. The best known example is billionaire financeer and lifelong closeted crossdresser (and father of three) James “Jennifer Natalya” Pritzker whose Tawani Foundation single-handedly funds the experimental pediatric transgender drug clinic at Children’s Hospital of Chicago.
There is a disturbing element of pedophilia exhibited by many “fans” of the “Transgender Chicken Circuit,” as evidenced by plentiful transgender adult male YouTube channels featuring dozens of videos of these children, creepy-ass fetishized “fan sites”, and expensive glossy coffee table photography books of the sort that would get Calvin Klein into trouble. Add the transgender pornography sites which track the children’s “progress” and it’s pretty clear that sexualizing these children is a large part of their marketability.
Leo is due to star in an upcoming documentary funded by her mother Hayley under the “MyGenderation” imprimatur owned by transgender reality show “star” Raphael Fox . The pre-teen disturbingly brands herself as “Leo Sexy Waddell” on her Facebook page.
Beyond the overt pedophilia, and the marketing of a fetishized version of “girlhood” to adult male fantasists, the transgender movement “needs” to create transgender children (as activist Autumn Sandeen has explained) to “take the sex out” of the transgender equation whose most dominant practitioners are adult male sexual fetishists. But perhaps the most important reason to impose transgender labels onto children is to publicize a “born this way” narrative like the one the gay liberation movement used to pacify critics.
The transgender politic supports, celebrates and covets sex-based social stereotypes, a value undermined by their own sex being in opposition to the role they wish to occupy. The only solution to this dissonance is to frame sex-based social stereotypes as innate but reproductive sex itself as malleable. Transgender activists forward the pseudoscience of “brain sex” to posit sex stereotypes as inborn and have tried to co-opt the experiences of child victims of reproductive birth anomalies (“intersex”) to destabilize the concept of human reproductive dimorphism. Intersex activists invented terms like “assigned male at birth” to discuss the medical procedures performed on them as infants. The transgender movement colonized the experiences of intersex children and adopted these terms for themselves, insisting that having ones gonads surgically altered or mutilated in infancy is the identical experience that every healthy child goes through every time their reproductive sex is identified.
Intersex activists have for decades resisted attempts by the transgender movement to use the experiences of children born with disorders of sexual development as correlative evidence of an inborn defect causing certain men to experience sexual excitement by inhabiting a female sexual “object” or “form”. Harry Benjamin, the “father of transsexualism” claimed that transvestitism, transsexuality, and homosexuality all result from unidentified developmental disorders of the reproductive system (Of course, he also believed irradiating women’s sex organs would “rejuvinate” them, among other things.) Intersex advocates have been forced to withdraw from and disband their own organizations, even cease using the word “intersex” in order to prevent their programs from being colonized by the transgender movement’s bid for “born this way” legitimacy. They ultimately succeeded (mostly) in divorcing themselves from trans rhetoric due to the fact that their movement goals are increasingly in opposition to that of the trans politic. The intersex/DSD movement lobbies AGAINST nonessential medical treatment on children designed to cosmetically “normalize” their gender before the age of consent. Their philosophy OPPOSES the very concept of “congruity” between cosmetic biological sex morphology and social gender role that is the core value of the transgender movement. This year the DSD movement saw the United Nations declare that medicalization to promote gender “congruity” is a human rights crime against children. Last month a ruling in the US opened the door for cases involving the medical treatment of sex/gender incongruity in children to be tried on the basis that such treatments infringe the constitutional rights of a dependent population. Which is exactly opposite to the aims of the transgender politic.
With the failure of the transgender movement to destabilize reproductive dimorphism in the public sphere by relating their experiences to the experiences of children with DSD the trans lobby attached themselves to the very same population the gay movement had used to gain “born this way” legitimacy: lesbian and gay children. Sixty years of research shows that the largest demographic of transgenders- heterosexual men- are in no way gender-nonconforming as children. Gay kids are. You won’t see adorable pictures of these heterosexual transgender men as toddlers wearing tiaras and being fabulous. Their “gender identity” started at puberty with an erection while wearing mother’s panties. Such men have little interest in the concerns of girls like Leo but they will use them to promote the “Born This Way” meme when they can.
September 6, 2013
“The toy store has bowed to pressure from campaign group Let Toys Be Toys to stop promoting toys as gender specific over concerns about the impact this has on children when they are growing up and developing their personalities.
Toys R Us will now draw up plans for how to make its marketing more inclusive, and remove explicit references to gender in store. Adverts will eventually show boys and girls playing with the same toys, such as kitchens, toy guns and lego.
Let Toys Be Toys, a campaign group run by parents, has called for the removal of gender bias, saying it restricts children’s choices.
Megan Perryman, Let Toys Be Toys campaigner, said: “Even in 2013, boys and girls are still growing up being told that certain toys are for them, while others are not. This is not only confusing but extremely limiting as it strongly shapes their ideas about who they are.”
Toys R Us announced the move after meetings with the campaign group. Roger McLaughlan, managing director of the toy store, told the Independent: “We will work to ensure we develop the best plan for our customers.”
Harrods also launched its toy collection last summer based on theme rather than gender.
Last year the Swedish branch of Toys R Us launched a gender neutral advertising campaign at Christmas, showing girls shooting a toy gun and boys and girls playing together in a kitchen.”
Let Toys Be Toys was formed by a group of feminists that met on the parenting website Mumsnet. Read about (and join!) their mission here:
Abbott Laboratories: Studies have not been completed in children to determine the full reversibility of fertility suppression
July 20, 2013
Driven by the transgender lobby, a cluster of extremely well-funded physician providers have for the past several years been prescribing fertility-suppressing drugs on an FDA unapproved, “off use” basis to halt the maturation of children deemed as failing to conform to social stereotypes based on sex. These physician’s rationale is that studies show a tiny percentage (around 2%) of these sex-role non-conforming children will end up seeking surgical “sex change”, and a larger minority (around 15%) will report some form of continued distress with sex-roles post puberty. Providers who pioneer this “cosmetic medicine” protocol among a pediatric population operate from the belief that the distress of those 2% of children who may go on to identify themselves as transsexual later in life will be alleviated by administering puberty-preventing drugs before the children reach sexual maturity. This protocol is followed by the administration of sterilization and lifetime cross-sex hormone medicine and reconstructive cosmetic surgeries intended to disguise their reproductive function as that of the opposite sex.
This clinical practice is in opposition to multiple long-term studies which show that such treatments do not decrease morbidity rates for transgender people post “treatment”. Physicians administering these drugs also operate from the conclusion that the severity of the distress of those 2% of children (those who later go on to request medical cross-hormone and surgical treatments to appear socially as opposite-sex persons) is so profound that it should be prioritized above the harmful outcomes for the majority lesbian and gay children referred for these experimental treatments.
Dana Beyer, middle-aged heterosexual male, father, and Executive Director of Gender Rights Maryland posits that sex-role nonconformity is a pediatric disease process. Beyer speculates that gender malaise may be caused in children by ecological contamination. “There are probably many reasons for the increase in prevalence, including the increased dumping of environmental pollutants known as endocrine disruptors..” Beyer notes.
Beyer acknowledges that most children referred for medicalized sex-role “treatment” would mature into well-adjusted lesbian, gay, or non-conforming heterosexuals if left untreated (objectively evidenced by their failure to require psychological care as adults). Repeated multi-decade research has established this as undeniable fact. Nonetheless, Beyer believes such childhood behavior is “diseased”. Beyer, like many mainstream transgender medical lobbyists asserts that the potential distress of a tiny minority of children who may end up in middle age like him (attempting the impossible task of cosmetically undoing the biologic signifiers of maleness) – justifies the experimental medical maiming, sterilizing, and lifetime drug dependence of any number of lesbian, gay or otherwise “birth defected” sex-role nonconforming children.
“..if a child grows up and decides to de-transition, then what of it? The harm done is minimal..” Beyer says. How does Beyer justify these priorities, and the transgender medical lobbying for these experimental protocols on children? Believe it or not the foundation for this practice is the hope that children who are subjected to cross-sex cosmetic surgical/medical treatments prior to maturity may “pass” better than people like Dana Beyer as the opposite sex. Dana can imagine no better outcome for the future than that.
Yet what of the majority of children who are clinically referred for treatment to medical professionals for gender variance who would self-resolve during maturity as well-adjusted lesbian or gay adults if left medically “untreated”? We know this occurs because these outcomes have been studied over decades prior to the recent experimental drug treatments, and those studies have been duplicated and confirmed. In contrast, the only, singular study of children who received experimental medical “correction” of sex-role incongruence (in the Netherlands) terminated upon administration of cross-sex hormone treatments. Alarmingly, every child who was medical-tracked for this “disorder” proceeded onto sterilization. Since the study was arbitrarily aborted at that point (presumably to cover the potential liability of providers) long-term outcomes are unknown.
In May, international transgender lobbyists met to codify and update genderism into the World Health Organizations IDC medical codes. The committee’s objective was to advocate for genderist representation and the medicalization of distress caused by sex-roles. Even so, the committee on “transgender children” ended up splintering and causing a standstill of the entire council. Why? Because the gays. The research is undeniable. Medicalizing gender nonconformity in children is explicitly and undeniably anti-gay. From the trans-lobbying committee:
“…attaching a medical diagnosis to gender diversity in childhood contradicts WHO’s commitment to respecting rather than pathologizing sexual diversity. Specifically, research indicates it is impossible to reliably distinguish between a gender-variant child who will grow up to become trans and a gender-variant child who will grow up to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual, but not trans.12 As such, by conflating gender variance and sexual orientation, the proposed GIC category amounts to a re-pathologization of homosexuality.”
Mainstream Media coverage on “transgender children” loves to follow the drumbeat that children are carefully screened, given counseling, no surgery is done on children. But that isn’t true at all. Are trans activists ill-informed? Reporters incompetent? Doubtful. Dana Beyer repeats this wholly false assertion: “Let me make it clear: There is no surgical intervention done in this country before the age of consent, at 18.” That is simply not true, and no one with a glancing interest in the transgender child trend would make such a claim in good faith. Providers who are willing to “treat” children surgically as minors and medically without psychological screening aren’t exactly hiding. They are openly celebrated in the transgender community. Surgeon Beverly Fischer does gender surgery on children as young as twelve. Everyone knows it, and genderists love and support it.
Dr. Forcier, quoted below, administers puberty blockers to kids in her pediatric practice with no psychological evaluation, no counseling or screening whatsoever, and says that pediatric endocrinologists who require them are “gatekeeping” children from lifesaving medical care.
Respected mainstream transgender activists like (middle-aged heterosexual father and military careerist) Autumn Sandeen claim that the trans movement needs pre-sexual children in order to “take the sex out” of the public face of a movement which largely serves men whose sexual orientation is autogynephilic. Puberty blocking androgen Lupron and antecendents are so toxic that their use among adult transgenders is not advised. Yet the cluster of physicians who prescribe them for children ( unapproved and “off use”) and trans lobbyists (and sadly, parents) continue to present false information to the public and media that is wholly at odds to all pediatric endocrinological medical research. They know it’s untrue, yet they march to the drumbeat of: “Completely safe” “Harmless” “Reversable”…
No. Just no.
“The effect of the puberty-blocking drugs is reversible” – Daniel Metzger, MD, FRCPC, a pediatric endocrinologist at BC Children’s Hospital in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and a clinical professor, division of endocrinology in the department of pediatrics, University of British Columbia in Vancouver.
“It’s important to note that puberty blockers are completely reversible” – Mary Moss, gender activist and mother of a “transgender child”.
““Puberty blockers are completely reversible, allowing children to return and develop in the puberty of the natal gender without known adverse sequelae.”- Dr Michelle Forcier, pediatrician at Hasbro Children’s Hospital Clinic RI who administers the drugs to children without any prior psychological evaluation, screening, or counseling.
“There are no side effects or long term effects and they are 100% reversible and it’s given as either a shot or an implant.” – Michele Laurin, gender activist and mother of a “transgender child”.
“Trans kids can take puberty blockers, which are completely reversible and have been being used for years to treat the condition called Central Precocious Puberty. It’s perfectly safe, and it puts puberty on hold for a couple years so they don’t get the negative effects.” – Jenn “NeoGal99” Burleton, a male transgender and founder of TransActive, which bills itself as “the only transgender youth nonprofit in the country with actual office space”.
“The use of puberty blockers (GnRH analogues) allows reversible suppression of ‘puberty hormones’ and the associated pubertal changes.” – Dr. Louise Newman, Professor of Developmental Psychiatry, Monash University
“Supression of pubertal sex steroid production and thus secondary sexual characteristics can be effectively and safely accomplished using gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa)- an intervention that is both temporary and reversible” – Dr Peter Lee and Dr Christopher Houk, pediatric endocrinologists
“Children’s offers reversible medical intervention to a select group of at-risk transgender patients in order to suppress their production of estrogen or testosterone, but only after these patients have entered puberty. This reversible treatment gives patients time to reach an age when they can decide, with their families, whether to begin cross-sex hormone therapy.”- Children’s Hospital, Boston
“Studies have not been completed in children to determine the full reversibility of fertility suppression.” –Abbott Laboratories, 2013, manufacturer of Lupron
Marvin Belzer Md, Director of Adolescent Medicine at Saban Research, one of the top five federally funded pediatric institutions in the country explains: “I never had the time to do the research”.
May 29, 2013
The mother of a “transgender child” who blogs at TransformingFamily.net authors a long and thoughtful response to a few comments that were left about her blog by GenderTrender readers last week on this post: http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/from-dirt-trans-trending-who-is-transitioning-the-violence-against-lesbians/#comments
Trans*forming Mom – who is “transforming” her 15 year old daughter into a lifetime program of dependency on sterilizing medical treatments designed to disguise her true sex, as well as “transforming” her into a 15 year-old recipient * of a medically-unnecessary double mastectomy- classifies the comments left on the GenderTrender post as “the most harsh criticism” she has ever received.
[*According to information on the TransformingFamily blog, Dr. Beverly Fischer of Baltimore MD performs “cosmetic” double mastectomies on healthy girls as young as 12 ]
Trans*forming Mom describes her background being raised as a Christian Fundamentalist and relates her experience of receiving a lifetime of violence and abuse from men. “I had not only experienced violence, objectification, abuse, and assault from men beginning at the earliest stages of my life, but i had seen other important women in my life experience this too,” she writes.
Mom writes about her daughter’s distress at her failure to adequately perform, or find satisfaction in, oppressive sexist gender roles assigned to females. “He has shared that, because he didn’t feel comfortable as a girl, he didn’t have an identity. So, he threw himself into ballet and “being the perfect daughter” as a way to distract himself from the reality of his male-ness. He has told me that there is only one thing that he ever felt that he had to do, and that was to be a girl, and when he allowed himself to accept that he was not one, he felt that he failed. This breaks my heart. And he wasn’t taught or told that he had to “be a girl” in any certain way, or be any type of girl. He just knew he was expected to be a girl because that is what we told him and how we raised him based upon his birth assignment, and he knew he was not one,” she writes.
Trans*formingMom makes repeated analogies between the medicalization of gender and homosexuality. She compares irreversible pediatric sterilization and surgeries on dysphoric children to young children who identify themselves as homosexual and implies that feminists should get right on board. For the record, I don’t know any feminists, gays, or lesbians including myself who suggest that children or adolescents should make permanent lifetime decisions regarding their future sexual interests or self-concepts. Trans*formingMom compares trans people who de-transition or come to reject genderism with the “ex-gays” of religious fundamentalism.
Mom also seems to have confused me with Dirt, since the post in question was re-blogged from Dirt’s excellent site.
The saddest part of her post for me was in the comments where she explains the lengths she went to convincing her daughter not to seek out and read the comments, and the blog, that Mom is writing about. Her daughter is old enough to opt into lifetime medical dependence and cosmetic disablility and sterility and breast removal, but is not old enough to be exposed to the world of feminist thought on “Gender”.
Unlike Trans*formingMom (and many gender believers), feminists aren’t afraid of exposure to other points of view. Her post is re-blogged here: http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/criticisms-and-misconceptions-from-people-who-just-dont-know-what-theyre-talking-about/
[Note: The comment from “GenderTrender” on the post is not me. That is “Manfeminist” Natalie Reed – yes THAT one!- who enjoys harassing lesbians and feminists by running imposter accounts.]
Massachusetts State Education Board issues unprecedented Gender Guidelines : enforcing legal sex-stereotyping in all public schools across the state
February 19, 2013
The State of Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education released late Friday ( in a classic move used to avoid news cycle coverage) an 11 page document containing mandated guidelines on the implementation of legal “Gender Identity” which effective immediately- replaces legal sex of children with state-mandated sex “roles” based on outdated sex stereotypes, a practice which the Federal government has already rendered illegal and discriminatory(see Price Waterhouse).
It’s no wonder the Governor-appointed Board timed the release of this document to avoid media and public scrutiny: it contains possibly the most widespread state-sanctioned codification and enforcement of sex-role stereotyping enacted on the populace by a government body since the passage of Federal Title VII regulations which were specifically designed to prevent such a practice.
Specifically, as of Friday, legal sex of all primary and secondary students is eliminated and replaced with a legal category based on student adherence to sex-role stereotypical behaviors classified as feelings, thoughts, behaviors that the State of Massachusetts deems “male feelings” or “female feelings”. “Male behaviors” and “Female behaviors”, “Male thoughts” and “Female thoughts”. Truly remarkable.
“A gender marker is the designation on school and other records that indicates a student’s gender. For most students, records that include an indication of a student’s gender will reflect a student’s assigned birth sex. For transgender students, however, a documented gender marker (for example, “male” or “female” on a permanent record) should reflect the student’s gender identity, not the student’s assigned sex. This means that if a transgender student whose gender identity is male has a school record that reflects an assigned birth sex as female, then upon request by the student or, in the case of young students not yet able to advocate for themselves, by the parent or guardian, the school should change the gender marker on the record to male.”
The State of Massachusetts now officially subjects all students who fail to conform to sex-role stereotypical feelings, thoughts, and behaviors, to the state classification “transgender”.
“Transgender: an umbrella term used to describe a person whose gender identity or gender expression is different from that traditionally associated with the assigned sex at birth. “
Further, the guidelines eliminate all Federal sex-based protections for female students (example: Title IX which guarantees equal funding of educational programming based on sex; female rights to sex-segregated showers, locker rooms, toilets).
The guidelines mandate that female students must shower with and undress in the presence of male students during mandatory physical education programs. If the girls refuse, they are to receive state-mandated counseling sessions designed to overcome their resistance. Should the girls persist in refusal to shower and change clothing in the presence of male students or if they fail to pretend a male is female they will receive state-sanctioned disciplinary actions against them which will effect their participation in the public educational system.
“In all cases, the principal should be clear with the student (and parent) that the student may access the restroom, locker room, and changing facility that corresponds to the student’s gender identity. “
“Some students may feel uncomfortable with a transgender student using the same sex-segregated restroom, locker room or changing facility. This discomfort is not a reason to deny access to the transgender student. School administrators and counseling staff should work with students to address the discomfort and to foster understanding of gender identity, to create a school culture that respects and values all students. “
“The student John Smith wishes to be referred to by the name Jane Smith, a name that is consistent with the student’s female gender identity. Please be certain to use the student’s preferred name in all contexts, as well as the corresponding pronouns. It is my expectation that students will similarly refer to the student by her chosen name and preferred pronouns. Your role modeling will help make a smooth transition for all concerned. If students do not act accordingly, you may speak to them privately after class to request that they do. Continued, repeated, and intentional misuse of names and pronouns may erode the educational environment for Jane. It should not be tolerated and can be grounds for student discipline. “
All female sports teams in the State of Massachusetts will henceforth be open to male students, on the condition that the male student professes an “earnestly felt belief” that he conforms in some way to stereotypical sex-roles traditionally assigned to females (at least sometimes: his sex-role feelings may wax and wane throughout the day and the guidelines explicitly support this).
“Where there are sex-segregated classes or athletic activities, including intramural and interscholastic athletics, all students must be allowed to participate in a manner consistent with their gender identity. “
“The statute does not require consistent and uniform assertion of gender identity as long as there is “other evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of [the] person’s core identity.” “
“Confirmation of a student’s asserted gender identity may include a letter from a parent, health care provider, school staff member familiar with the student (a teacher, guidance counselor, or school psychologist, among others), or other family members or friends. A letter from a social worker, doctor, nurse practitioner, or other health care provider stating that a student is being provided medical care or treatment relating to her/his gender identity is one form of confirmation of an asserted gender identity. It is not, however, the exclusive form upon which the school or student may rely. A letter from a clergy member, coach, family friend, or relative stating that the student has asked to be treated consistent with her/his asserted gender identity, or photographs at public events or family gatherings, are other potential forms of confirmation. “ [Photographs illustrating what? One presumes illustrating the child engaged in some form of culturally sex-stereotypical dress or behavior-GM.]
The guidelines mandate and codify differential social role treatment of girl and boy students by all teachers and administrators based on sex and on student adherence to sex-role stereotypes.
“In most situations, determining a student’s gender identity is simple. A student who says she is a girl and wishes to be regarded that way throughout the school day and throughout every, or almost every, other area of her life, should be respected and treated like a girl. So too with a student who says he is a boy and wishes to be regarded that way throughout the school day and throughout every, or almost every, other area of his life. Such a student should be respected and treated like a boy. “
This government document explicitly equates legal protection from sex-based discrimination for women and girls as “discriminatory” to those who “profess a strongly held belief” in sex-role stereotyping and discrimination.
The government of Massachusetts, in accordance with the above premise, removes and eliminates all sex-based protections (both state and federal) for females against sex-discrimination. This policy is a stunning example of how the new legal category “Gender Identity” or “Sex-Role Identity” is directly in opposition to female legal protections and recourse against discrimination based on sex. It elevates discrimination against females to a protected category while eliminating all hard-won feminist gains against the practice of mandating legal status based on sex stereotypes.
These new guidelines, which apply to all public primary and secondary students in the public school system, are based on the Massachusetts State Legislature policy giving special legal status to individuals who profess a strongly held belief in stereotypical “Sex-Role Identifications” in its 2011: An Act Relative to Gender Identity (Chapter 199)
That law held that individuals should not be discriminated against based on their “consistent and uniform assertion” and “sincerely held belief” in sex-role stereotypes or “gender”. That is what the law states. But what it actually DOES, if one looks at the statute, is create a legal status based on stereotypical sex-based (and discriminatory!) social ROLES as a REPLACEMENT for legal sex. See the laws related to sex which were amended to replace biological sex with “sex-role” or “gender”:
SECTION 3. Section 89 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in lines 91 and 320, in each instance, the following words:- , gender identity.
SECTION 4. Section 5 of chapter 76 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 10, the following words:- , gender identity.
SECTION 5. Section 12B of said chapter 76, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in line 185, the following words:- , gender identity.
SECTION 6. Section 3 of chapter 151B of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in lines 17 and 61, in each instance, the following words:- , gender identity.
SECTION 7. Section 4 of said chapter 151B, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the word “sex”, in lines 3, 69, 82, 87, 96, 103, 136, 163, 169, 179, 226, 233, 243, 339, 349, 353, 359, 485, 495, 505, 661 and 670, in each instance, the following words:- , gender identity.
The Massachusetts law does not explicitly define “Gender”. Here is the World Health Organization definition:
What do we mean by “sex” and “gender”?
Sometimes it is hard to understand exactly what is meant by the term “gender”, and how it differs from the closely related term “sex”.
“Sex” refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women.
“Gender” refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.
To put it another way:
“Male” and “female” are sex categories, while “masculine” and “feminine” are gender categories.
Aspects of sex will not vary substantially between different human societies, while aspects of gender may vary greatly.
Some examples of sex characteristics :
- Women menstruate while men do not
- Men have testicles while women do not
- Women have developed breasts that are usually capable of lactating, while men have not
- Men generally have more massive bones than women
Some examples of gender characteristics :
- In the United States (and most other countries), women earn significantly less money than men for similar work
- In Viet Nam, many more men than women smoke, as female smoking has not traditionally been considered appropriate
- In Saudi Arabia men are allowed to drive cars while women are not
- In most of the world, women do more housework than men
The definition of“Gender” is sex-role stereotyping. Gender is “the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women”.
“Gender Identity” is “Sex-Role Identity”.
While all Massachusetts citizens are entitled to their personal sex-role beliefs or identifications, the State has no business promoting sex-role beliefs, which are by their very nature stereotyping and inherently discriminatory against women.
Sex role stereotyping is bad for women and girls. Many of the legal protections for female students that are being eliminated state-wide by this document were designed to counter some of the negative effects of sex-role stereotyping, for example the lack of equal funding given to girl athletes based on the sex-role stereotype that females are not athletic, or that females should not exhibit behaviors that are competitive. Title IX was created to counter sex-based discrimination policies enacted for decades by public educational institutions.
Feminists support the abolition of sex-role stereotypes. Feminists do not support social policies which conflate sex-role stereotypes with reproductive sex.
When the state mandates that children should be treated differently based on arbitrary, sexist stereotypes, when the state educational system declares against all known science and fact, that those who do not abide sex-role stereotypes must not actually be male or female sexed, when the government disciplines children for acknowledging biological reality and scientific fact in an educational system, when the government mandates that girls – at least one quarter of which will be sexually assaulted by a male in her lifetime- receive state-mandated psychological counseling to impress upon her that her discomfort showering with male high school students is evidence that she has a psychological dysfunction (!) and that the state will discipline her if she continues to express fear (!!) FEMINISTS DO NOT SUPPORT THIS.
Women, Women’s Rights Activists, Concerned Parents, Feminists call on the State of Massachusetts under Governor Deval Patrick to:
- Compel the State Board to develop guidelines that protect the rights of students and parents to hold strongly held sex-role beliefs
- WITHOUT codifying those personal, private sex-role beliefs into state law,
- WITHOUT eliminating sex-based protections and rights of female students (Title IX protections, right to sex-based changing rooms, restrooms and other spaces sex-segregated for female safety)
- WITHOUT inflicting state-sponsored discipline or punitive psychological “counseling” treatments on children who do NOT share the strongly held sex-role beliefs of others, and who do NOT believe that biological sex is maleable,
- WITHOUT forcing children through power of the state to comply with sex-role stereotypes,
- WITHOUT mandating that teachers, administrators, and others acting under authority of the state treat male and female students differently according to “the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women”, many of which are designed to restrict female equality.
You may contact Governor Patrick here:
Massachusetts State House
Western Massachusetts Office of the Governor
Office of the Governor
Read the full 11 page PDF by clicking here:
Trans Activist Riki Wilchins fires “opening shot” in “conflict” with 6 year olds who won’t pretend he is female
December 18, 2012
Transexual Menace [sic] founder Riki Anne Wilchins feels bullied by six year old classmates of his daughter, a few of whom have expressed doubt that he is actually female. Wilchins, a 60 year-old man and father, says that he “feels like” what he imagines females “feel like”, and accuses the children of bullying and transphobia in an Op-ed on LGBT news site The Advocate.
Can Wilchins force other people’s children to pretend that reproductive biology does not exist? What about other parents whose beliefs run in opposition to science- creationists for example. When six year old children claim that their toy dinosaurs are creatures that existed prior to the ice age, are those children expressing bigotry against Creationists?
The activist writes eloquently of the anger he felt when a six-year old child rolled their eyes at Wilchin’s fictional claim that he gestated and birthed his daughter, and he isn’t about to let that kid get away with failing to play along. In Wilchin’s view, other folk’s kids must pretend to agree that men like him are “female”, and he relates with dismay that his usual activist tactic: picketing the six year olds outside their elementary school for their “blatant display of transphobia” – may not be well received.
“In fact all the in-your-face tricks I learned to counter intolerance fail me now. What to do when you’re a Transsexual Menace faced with a pint-sized harasser who barely comes up to your navel?” Wichins posits. “What to do when gender bigotry is aimed as much at your little daughter as you? Menace-ing a 6-year-old just doesn’t seem right somehow.
Especially since he’s not really asking a question, as making a statement, to wit: I’ve heard you’re trying to pass yourself off as a girl and Dylan’s mom and I want to confirm it firsthand so I can tell you that you’re not really a girl or a mother.
These are questions I never had to address. It strikes me now that being a parent dramatically enlarges your zone of vulnerability, while at the same time shrinking your range of response. And to be frank, at the moment I just feel humiliated and vaguely ridiculous here on the playground.”
Wilchins, who is neither a girl, nor a female, nor a woman, nor a mother, isn’t going to let another parent’s child- “this little twerp” get away with reflecting the reality of his maleness back at him. Oh hell no. What sort of Transgender Menace would he be if he can’t bully a six year old into playing along with his sex-role fantasies?
Wilchins, who refers to his daughter as “my little RG” – RG standing for “real girl”- isn’t going to brush this one off. No sir he is not. He fires off the following complaint in what he is “quite sure” is the “opening shot in a what will be a much longer conflict” with the six year olds. He writes:
But not this time. Not this morning. As soon as I get home, I write the following and send it to the entire school diversity administration. I’m quite sure this is the opening shot in a what will be a much longer conflict. Perhaps I’m finally figuring out a way to be a trans activist parent after all: This morning the fourth or fifth child in one of Dylan’s classes in the last couple years has asked me if I was a really a boy or a girl. I think honest questions, even ones which may be awkward or personal, should always be welcomed from a child. But this is seldom asked to obtain information, or clarify a point about which a child – to be frank — might reasonably be expected to be confused.
Whatever the answer, I’m informed that I really do look like a boy, or that I can’t really be Dylan’s mom. Often this is right in front of Dyl. The “really” is instructive; the point is not information but to police gender lines and particularly to stigmatize gender difference. This usually leaves Dyl in a bad space, trying to decide whether to defend me as her mom or else let it go among kids she will, after all, have to coexist with in class every day.
In a couple cases, this scenario has played out in my absence directly with Dylan, with pretty much the same result. In a sense, it’s not too much different from asking the child of two moms or two dads which one is “really” their parent.
Although given my interaction with the schools I should know by now, I confess I’m still a bit unclear how much or how little of the DCPS current anti-bullying curriculum addresses issues of gender and at what age it does so.
In any case, gender constancy – the conception that gender is fixed and that bodies are rigidly defined between male and female – begins to take hold right around age 5 or 6. It is also around this time that harassment against kids who are gender non-conforming or even (more rarely) cross-gender, begins to take root in earnest. Based on my own experience, it might make sense to begin addressing gender intolerance in their diversity and anti-bullying lessons in greater depth at this age, since whatever they are currently getting, if any, is clearly not enough.
No DCPS parent should have to be repeatedly mocked in front of their own child — and certainly no DCPS child should have to stand by and watch their parent be ridiculed — simply because he or she is gender different and children have the idea that that this sort of prejudice, unlike those based on race, sexual orientation, or religion, is a socially acceptable basis for intolerance, teasing or ridicule.
GenderTrender will be following developments in Wilchins transactivist pediatric “conflict” with interest. As Wilchins is a founding member of “Camp Trans”, an encampment set up outside the Michigan Women’s Music Festival to harass women and lesbians for “discriminating against” men who claim to “feel like” lesbians inside, GenderTrender suggests Wilchins adopt a similar tact against the children. Perhaps set up an encampment in the parking lot of the elementary school. Set up some loudspeakers and show those kids what’s what. Demand those first-graders pretend that your personal feelings about yourself override objective reality. Don’t discount a possible lawsuit against the school district- or what about the parents of the kids? Aren’t they liable? Even better: Hunger Strike! Set up a cot next to the playground so those children can see what they are making you do!
December 17, 2012
Water remains wet, Fire remains hot, Easy Bake Oven cake still tastes like crap.