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:
November 5, 2013
Draw your own conclusions. Posted on Reddit.
submitted 2 hours ago by GrannyAndP
Prelude of our story to understand details
I am a grandmother with full custody of my grandchild. I have raised the child since 3 months old. the child is now 5.5 years old in senior kindergarten . the child was born with an intersex birth condition known as micro-penis. the child since age 2 has identified as female. In October of 2011 I found myself facing homelessness, due to a slumlord landlord refusing to deal with bedbugs for 8 months. What with not knowing what we would face in entering our local YWCA shelter I made the choice to place the child in to temporary foster care with Family & Children’s Services.
After 2 months during which there was an incident of sexual touching by another child towards the child , I requested & was given care back with the child joining me at the shelter. I agreed to keep Family & Children’s Services in our lives on a voluntary agreement as I found my workers emotional support very helpful.
In March of 2012 we moved into a new home. the child continued to be making comments of being a girl, but I had kept thinking the child was just confused. (I have documented all of the childs comments). – Age 4 – Sept 4 2012 , 1st day of school – At school the teacher asked the child are you a boy or a girl , the child responded saying “I am a boy but i want to be a girl, so today I will be a girl”, as he tried to place his name star onto the girls side of the chalk board. Read the rest of this entry »
October 24, 2013
The following is a list written by a detransitioning woman outlining the missing factors in the care they were provided by medical practitioners, advocates, and the trans-supportive community at large.
Much lip service is paid in transgender political lobbying around the difficulties in accessing “care” for transgender people. Yet this “care” is profoundly, singularly directed towards modalities that proscribe misogynist, heteronormative, and indeed transphobic(!) adherence to sex-based gender roles and the pathologization and medicalization of sex-role nonconformity.
Increasingly, this narrow focus of “care” is being directed towards children as young as 18 months old who are being diagnosed as medically disabled and “gender defective” and are celebrated as such for their “bravery” in the face of developmental sex-role deformity by the mainstream LGBT community as if they were contestants in a queer “special gender olympics” version of Toddlers and Tiaras.
What of the individuals like Nathan Verhelst for whom such treatments abysmally fail to diagnose or cure? What treatments are available for gender dysphoric individuals for whom cross-hormone and cosmetic surgical options are medically contraindicated? What “care” is available for those many individuals suffering after “transition”?
When Joel Nowak of Retransition.Org contacted WPATH (the premier medical lobbying group for transgender psychiatric and medical care) regarding resources and information for those who need to discontinue cross-sex hormones for various reasons they were told that WPATH had “no idea”. NO IDEA. “That is a very good question” he was advised. This organization has presented itself as the worldwide cutting-edge authority in medical and therapeutic treatment for transgender individuals for decades, and is recognized as such by legal and medical and governmental agencies globally. Yet they had “no idea” how to advise transgender medical consumers on how to safely desist cross-sex hormone therapy, and “no idea” where to refer such transgender persons.
While continually citing the suicidality, morbidity and psychiatric and medical emergency of gender dysphoria, the carers and advocates for transgender persons- including those of the highest professional, therapeutic, academic, political and activist standing- have decided that care should be confined to those who can (and want to) medically and psychologically tolerate gender normative “treatment” and all other transgenders who suffer from sex or gender dysphoria can literally be damned.
Transgenders who medically detransition, or whose dysphoria is uncured after “treatment” – and the percentage is large- are not only completely rejected from care but are shunned, and even attacked by those claiming to promote care for sex and gender dysphoric (transgender) persons. Supportive medical and therapeutic care for these particular transgenders is considered non-imperative as their distress is deemed inconsequential and their experiences and outcomes disposable.
Below is the list provided by a detransitioning woman (now negotiating medical and social de-transition without care or support, because none exists) listing the elements that she identifies as missing in her pre-transition care.
Sadly, this woman has been subjected to a barrage of harassment and intimidation by individuals (also identifying themselves as transgender) who want to silence any sex or gender dysphoric individuals who share information on gaps in existing care for transgender people.
Anyone who is genuinely concerned about providing care for transgender individuals – perhaps especially families struggling with “transgender children”- would do well to take note of the items on this list.
From her post:
“As someone who views transsexualism as a medical condition, I believe everyone should exhaust other alternatives and transition only as a last resort. That is what I did. The thing is, I didn’t have the resources to utilize that I could envision in a better world. Transition was the best option at the time for me, but I can think of a lot of things that would have allowed me to make a better decision. Some of these things are:
- Knowledge of the existence of detransition
- Realistic, accurate, and honest information about detransition
- Visibility of detransitioned folks sharing their story
- Information on alternative options for dealing with dysphoria such as meditation and exercises to re-align my self of self with my body
- Knowledge of radical feminism
- Knowledge of how trauma can influence one’s sense of self
- Trained, knowledgeable support for my trauma
- Someone to guide me into addressing my trauma, instead of letting me go through therapy thinking it really didn’t affect me in any significant way
- Better role models to look up to who exemplify living confidently as a gender non-conforming woman
- More accurate information on the effects of testosterone
- Honest discussion on the mental effects of testosterone
- Parental support in being gay
- Parental acceptance of my being gender non-conforming
- Better support by non-parental figures in being gay and gender non-conforming
- Knowledge of how deeply misogyny can affect females
- Acknowledgement and information about internalized misogyny within the FTM spectrum
“Last resort” is a misleading phrase here. I think virtually all trans folks are in a compromised position where better resources could be available, but are not. Detransition has been entirely taboo to talk about anywhere. It has been dismissed by trans folks and framed as cautionary bullshit coming from transphobic people. That one aspect alone puts anyone considering transition at a significant disadvantage if they are ignorant of the possibility of detransition.
Am I against transition altogether? Until these sorts of support and resources are available to the majority trans people, that question does not apply. We do not live in a world where these things are prerequisite to transition, so how could anyone know if transition would still be necessary if better support and resources were available? Sexual trauma is completely ignored as an influence of transsexuality by most therapists in an effort to be “PC”, and that is appalling.”
Read the rest of her post and more of her thoughts here: http://twentythreetimes.tumblr.com/
[Bolding by me not the author- GM]
October 12, 2013
“I knew when she was little. She was I’d say 3, 3 and a half. And like any typical parent we would read the story books and fairy tales and all kinds of stuff. And we ended up reading Cinderella, she wanted to read Cinderella, so we were reading Cinderella and at the end of the story she told me that she was gonna grow up and marry herself a handsome prince. We tried to convince her that she was gonna grow up and marry a princess and she was adamant that no, she was going to marry a prince. So at that point, yanno we’d kinda thought it was a phase and she would grow out of it. And it turns out it wasn’t a phase. So when she came to us when she was seven and said that this isn’t how she wanted to live and if she had to live this way she didn’t want to… we went looking for help. And got in touch with family services of york region, met Barbara, and one thing after another after another and here we are and we have “Danielle”.
We didn’t know for the longest time what we were gonna be faced with. We knew that there was something there. So we chose to basically ignore it for a little while to see where things would go. But she got very behavioral, withdrawn, yanno tended to not wanna come out and play, she just wanted to sit in her room. So we kept trying to talk to her and ask her like what’s going on, how are you feeling, why are you feeling this way, and most of the time it would end up with her in tears shutting down, wouldn’t talk to us. And then the one day I was cooking dinner and she came out and told me flat out- I don’t wanna live like this anymore. I want to be a girl. I am a girl. And so the choice was made to… let her make the choice. You’re either Daniel, or you’re Danielle. You make the choice.
And obviously… what her choice was.
Look how the hack reporter Carys Mills lazily re-frames the actual words mom says into the “typical transgender narrative”, and uses that narrative to shill for the “Sick Children” facility for “Sick Children Who Are Flaming Homos” where Daniel will be “treated” by retarding his pre-pubertal gonads followed by sterilization to correct his defect of wanting to marry a prince. WAKE UP Gays and Lesbians and so-called supporters. WAKE UP. This is happening ON YOUR WATCH.
DO something. SPEAK UP in your COMMUNITY, on websites that post this shit, to your government representatives that you VOTE for, at the BAR, at the bus stop, at your CHURCH, to your family and co-workers, to your BARBER, at the grocery store, at your LGBT CENTER, at your pride march, on your FACEBOOK, to the news agencies.
Seven year old kids ARE NOT CONSENTING TO THIS. It is THEIR PARENTS who are DOING SO. Stop them from transgendering boys who WANT TO MARRY A PRINCE. Speak up for seven year-old Daniel. SPEAK UP FOR DANIEL. This is BULLSHIT! HOMOPHOBIC BULLSHIT! This could have been YOU. And you KNOW it. So STOP THIS SHIT. Fuck some shit up. Do it FOR DANIEL.
Speak up and say “LET KIDS BE KIDS”. And “GAY KIDS ARE NOT SICK KIDS”. Including GAY KIDS who want to marry a FUCKING PRINCE.
September 22, 2013
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.
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”.
June 9, 2013
Since January of this year, the word ‘transphobia’ has been bantered about in mass media and social networking circles to such intensity that its definition has been expanded and in some instances grossly misrepresented. ‘Transphobia’ has been used in recent months to indicate everything from the range of negative attitudes and actions towards transsexualism and transgender people to the overt censorship of any expression that takes issue with the theoretical and political expressions of the transgenderism or certain trans activists. Even to undertake a strictly political analysis of the trans community one risks being labeled ‘transphobic’ especially if one is a radical feminist. As a result of this assault on dialogue, the true violence of transphobia (ie. assault, rape, murder and many other forms of discrimination) is cheapened and diluted in the larger space of discursive disagreements with feminists. Conterminously, the mislabeling of dialogue under the guise of ‘transphobia’ masks another type of violence perpetuated towards radical feminists who speak about these discursive differences with trans activists.
Relative to this debate is that each group views the other as having ‘privilege’—the trans activists accuse the feminist of having ‘cis-privilege’. The term ‘cis,’ a prefix that trans activists often use to designate one who is born in the body of the gender the subject ‘identifies with’ (as if all people identify equally or in the same manner with their bodies). As a result the word ‘cis’ is often circulated to underscore the ‘natural state’ of privilege that many trans activists project onto women born women, for instance. And the feminists accuse the trans women of having ‘male privilege’ since they claim that one cannot simply take hormones or undergo surgery and claim oppression. While it is remarkable to note how impetuously this term ‘transphobia’ is thrown about in the attempt to silence one’s interlocutor, it is likewise deplorable that in recent months there has been an escalation in threats and attacks on these feminists with the sole desire to silence their voices. This article attempts to examine the ways in which some feminists view discourses of transgenderism specific to trans women as problematic and harmful to women because transgenderism conflates sex and gender as a means to creating a superficial construction of woman by relying on gender stereotypes while erasing the very real violence and oppression that is part of the social reality of women. Conterminous to the erasure of real world women’s experiences, these feminists feel that transgenderism forces the subject into a prescribed way of perceiving trans women that works against logic (ie. what if the viewer simply does not see a woman?) and acts against the ultimate goal of these feminists which is the expunction of gender.
Samantha Berg, anti-prostitution activist and feminist, experienced harassment while putting together the Radfem Reboot Conference in Portland, Oregon in 2012. There were threats of disruption and violence and a local group made bomb threats in the name of transactivism which materialised in a molotov cocktail being thrown into a local bank. Lierre Keith of Deep Green Resistance has also been outspoken about her views as a feminist in radical opposition to the transgender movement criticising the collapse of sex (male/female) with gender: ‘They think that gender is somehow natural or biological and for feminists we are critiquing this, that gender is biological. When you look at what is ‘woman’, trauma is used to turn girls into women. This is a corrupt and brutal political arrangement and we are now not allowed to say that. We cannot make a political movement if we cannot name the class conditions of what is happening to women because they are so attached to the idea that gender is innate.’ Keith, like other radical feminists, fervently opposes the trans community’s creation and reification of gender: ‘To think that you can be a woman because you want to shave your legs and wear lipstick are daily insults to our physical integrity. It hurts the entire class of women if you take the social construction out of the practices of torture that create women.’ Discussing the language of the trans movement which attempts to erase biological difference Keith tells me of a discussion she had recently which poignantly demonstrates the problem at hand: ‘There is one guy who insists that not only does he have a vagina, but he has a cervix. How could he have a cervix? Yet he believes it and yet we are supposed to believe that he is not mentally ill? If I was being asked to have compassion for someone who is mentally ill, I have no problem. But I find it frightening that we cannot object to this.’ Because of her views and work in radical feminism, Keith has been threatened, labelled a transphobe, and has lost several speaking gigs over the past months. Keith claims that those who do not speak out are ‘compliant victims’: ‘We are not allowed to say it out loud and this is the new McCarthyism. People need to be really frightened by this.’
Last year’s Radfem conference in London was organised by Julia Long who views the attacks on the conference as part of a larger dynamic of patriarchy: ‘The patriarchal structure works on a very individual level in terms of domestic violence—it could be physical and economic violence, or control of her movements. A big part of this is his demand to have access to her as he see her in some way as his property and even as an extension of himself. The attack on the conference, is very much in line with this demand of access: ‘We demand that you recognise us as female and if you don’t you will be attacked.’ So even if someone uses an unacceptable pronoun, you are attacked. I just think the whole thing is misogynist in its intent and its effect. What they are doing is trying to stop us from forming a movement. And if there were ever a moment for women’s movements, it is today. What these trans activists are demanding is that we acknowledge that we have this ‘cis’ privilege.’ She negates this notion of privilege as she maintains that women are simply not privileged in today’s world noting how the oppression of women today is naturalised and ‘seen as inevitable’: ‘it is only when you shift it to a different frame such as race or disability—where men are also discriminated—that it renders it intelligible to people, otherwise they don’t see it at all. I think so much of it about access because women are not allowed to set boundaries and men set boundaries all the time and they violate our boundaries.’
When I ask Long about why the conference is not open to trans women, she replies that there are symposiums that offer trans women’s inclusion, adding ‘Radfem is simply not one of them.’ Long expresses her dismay over the aggressive attempts to shut down this conference: ‘Nobody is trying to stop them from having their movement in their own spaces which exclude others. The whole premise of transgender politics and transgender movement is a view of gender is antithetical to radical feminists’ view of gender. As far as I am concerned, gender is harmful to everybody because gender is the cultural wing of patriarchy. It maintains all the codes of male supremacy and female subordination, so that’s what masculinity is and what femininity is. I think we have to get rid of it and the way to that is through radical feminist projects of ending patriarchy. In fact, in that scenario transgender people would be equally protected. I just feel it is so offensive to say to us, ‘We get beaten up and raped as well—worse than you.’’ Present in the online discussions are the comparative battles of oppression—who is more oppressed than the other. This line of discussion is tiring for certain but it does point to some of the underlying issues of contention between these two groups that seems never to be resolved. Long, like other feminists, does not deny that trans women suffer, she just distinguishes that the suffering of women is radically distinct from that of trans women and there should be allowed the choice for women to organise and meet separately to discuss the issues of oppression specific to them.
This year’s Radfem Conference is to take place this weekend in the Camden Centre after the Irish Centre was forced to cancel after three men’s men’s rights activists yelled at the staff, threatened them, and then published the Irish Centre staff’s personal information on their blog. They didn’t have the resources to deal with the intimidation but were helpful in getting Radfem 2013 established in its new location. However, not everyone was welcoming the Radfem 2013 Conference at the Camden Centre. Nigel Harris, director, for the Camden LGBT Forum, is quite critical of the radical feminists who are due to hold conference in the Camden Centre this weekend: ‘The Radfems have stated that they don’t want trans women to attend their conference and Jeffreys has come out saying discriminating things against trans people. She wants the NHS to ban any spending on gender dysphoria so that it becomes impossible for trans people to transition.’ When I ask Harris why he does not wish for the conference to be held at the Camden Centre he replies, ‘The Camden Centre in the Town Hall has a sticker that says that this centre is safe for trans people.’ Harris claims he has no personal issue with the radical feminists but claims that his mandate is to protect equal access for trans people claiming that one of this year’s Radfem conference organisers has put up inflammatory comments online. I have been unable to find any such comments made by the organisers of this year’s conference. When I ask Harris if all events of the LGBT Forum are open to all people and that there are no workshops that would exclude certain groups, he tells me that there are meetings for trans women which would exclude any women born women.
Read the rest of this article here:
[Image added by me- GM]
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.]
“I saw the breasts and I saw the long hair and I thought, like, that’s what I wanted.” – Jait Jr., former transgender teen now a gay man trying to undo the damage to his body done by hormones and silicone.
“I’m always walking around with a secret”.
MTV “True Life” runs a segment on transgender teens- one male, one female, now forced to undo the damage as they grow up and change their mind about believing they should medically alter their bodies into looking like the opposite sex. “I’m questioning my gender again”- Full episode here:
The incredible sexism of their home environments (“Boys who play with Barbie must be girls”) is astounding and illuminates some of the cultural forces driving the “transgender children” trend. Both of these former trans teens were fully supported into transitioning by their families, and both families cautioned the (now young adult) transgenders against switching back.
“This is what I was afraid of. They don’t get it. They feel like I’m not being true to myself. I don’t know… I just feel like they think that I’m making a mistake.”- Jait Jr on his family’s lack of support for his de-transition.
“Right now I just want to shave off all my hair and be a man so that’s what I’m going to do”- Jait Jr, formerly “Daniella”.
“Detransitioning is what is going to make me happy”- Jait Jr.
“Growing up, I never really felt super-girly and I couldn’t put my finger on why.” -Amanda, former teen transgender “Anthony” now quitting testosterone and undergoing electrolysis to remove her beard.
“I guess my biggest fear is that right now I’ve got it all figured out but that I’m going to get confused again and not know what I’m doing or who I am. Forever.”- Amanda
“I just hope that this is the last transition I make. I don’t want to keep doing this”. -Amanda
“I hope I’m done with gender related surgeries for good this time”.- Jait Jr.
“I guess I kind of feel reborn”.- Jait Jr.
“I haven’t felt this comfortable in a while”. -Jait Jr.
“I think I prefer make-up to shaving because it’s easier and a lot more fun”- Amanda, still a strong believer in gender roles.
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: