“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?

 

Apparently, not.

 

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.

andy-nesting-art

66 Responses to ““They Looked Beautiful. They Looked Normal.” Dr. Norman Spack- TED talk on creating transgender children”

  1. cerulean blue Says:

    Off label use of drugs should be illegal. That would nip behaviors like Dr. Quack’s in the bud. A doctor should not be allowed to experiment on his/her patients outside of a rigorous study with ethical supervision. As you wrote, Gallus, Dr. Quack did this for danger. And, I would guess, for the notoriety. And probably also for the power he feels when he manipulates other peoples’ lives.

    What’s the joke about the difference between God and a doctor?

    God doesn’t think he’s a doctor.

    But Dr. Quack does.

    I have to say, as someone who was a “late bloomer” I find it galling that this man thinks that delaying someone’s puberty for years will have no ill psychological effects. I can say that it was humiliating to be the flat-chested girl, not only in the locker room before gym but also to deal with the harassment in the classroom and street by boys (and men) who very much notice these things. It’s humiliating to have to lie when female classmates bring up the topic– that or be ostracized for being different and still a kid. And it’s hard to wonder constantly if there is something wrong with your body for not following the same trajectory as everyone else. I can’t speak for every woman who went through the same, but those I’ve talked to have similar things to say. And this is for “normal” puberty, just one at the very tail end of the age distribution.

    And although I can’t speak for the male side of the equation, I can say that my little brother went through something very similar. Humiliation from other kids about not having chest hair or muscles, and locker room talk that was painful. And when he finally got his growth-spurt in junior year of high school he grew over a foot in a year. He was in pain every night.

    Who would wish this on a child?

    And despite Dr. Quack’s words to the contrary, trans* kids DO change their mind and quite often. So the counterargument, that delaying puberty is less painful than dysphoria is simply more BS.


    • Delaying puberty has also negative effects on the brain (for example synaptic pruning). Then there are also the health damages because of the drugs. The best example would be Lupron. No need to explain how dangerous it is – its easy to find many cases and explanations on the internet. Speaking of Lupron: http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence/top-10-biggest-biopharma-marketing-fines-2014-edition/77900021/

      quote: “TAP pleaded guilty and agreed to pay criminal charges and civil liabilities in connection with fraudulent drug pricing and marketing of the prostate cancer drug Lupron. TAP also agreed to settle federal civil False Claims Act liabilities and pay the federal government $559,483,560 for filing false and fraudulent claims with the Medicare and Medicaid programs as a result of TAP’s fraudulent drug pricing schemes and sales and marketing misconduct.”

    • Annoyed Bi Chick Says:

      I don’t agree that all off-label uses of drugs should be illegal — I take a first-generation anti-depressant at a normally subtherapeutic dose for an off-label indication, treating fibromyalgia pain and sleeplessness; they know perfectly well that the drug has this particular mechanism of action which produces certain side effects (I’m taking the drug essentially for its side effect), but it’s relatively harmless as drugs go. That indication just hasn’t been approved in my country. I think there’s basically tons of that out there, most of it pretty innocuous.

      With things that can have permanent or lasting physical effects, though, the doctors should at least have to answer to some kind of an ethics board, not unlike the one, say, Great Ormond St. hospital in London, England has for approving experimental pediatric surgeries. I don’t mean some kind of hopped-up self-created IRB like the one made by cronies of that quack Rashid Buttar, who prescribes Lupron for autism, because he believes mercury causes autism and mercury binds to testosterone (and who killed a kid with chelation because of this); I mean a real hospital- or university medical school-affiliated ethics board. That’d shut them down quick, not to mention vultures like Buttar.

      So much quackery, so few woodchippers…

      • Granger Says:

        It’s different if you take a medicament but for its secondary effects or if you apply an untested treatment (with untested doses !) to a sensitive population. Medicine weighs pro and con on treatments for a reason.
        I also took an unrelated medicament as painkiller. It worked wonder.

  2. whitebait Says:

    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.”

    Wow, just… I never accepted having breasts or periods. I swallowed down my shame, I wore baggy shirts to hide my breasts (didn’t work, I was a big lass), I hid my tampons. I intentionally harmed myself, and dreamed of ripping off these chunks of fat off my body. But this is considered “acceptance”, because I didn’t insist I was a boy?

    • Over9000 Says:

      Yup. Dr. Norman has clearly never talked to any actual “tomboys.”

    • babaszep Says:

      I’m baffled by that thought. Are there women that, if given the choice in junior high, wouldn’t have happily stopped menstruating forever? I would have in a heartbeat, with zero thought for the system it’s supposed to regulate.

      • Barmaid Says:

        Me, for one. I was super stoked to get my first period, and twenty some odd years later I (maybe weirdly, I don’t know) like menstruating. It reinforces that I’m a healthy female.

        But to assign what should be appropriate psychological reactions to puberty across ALL women, ALL girls is just so… Christ Almighty it’s just so fucked up I can’t even begin.

        And hey, I guess according to the good doctor here I’m more female and womanly than adolescents who didn’t throw a fucking party when they realized they could now become forcibly impregnated against their will.

      • babaszep Says:

        A-HA! Found one! I’m glad to hear Judy Blume wasn’t full of it and there really were such girls.

        I’ve found things to like about it over time, but no way to tell if that’s maturity or a result of howling at the moon or just plain adapting to the inevitable. I suspect it’s mostly about not being in Junior High (which some girls also mysteriously enjoyed. Go figure. It’s almost like we’re different people from each other or something!)

  3. Jane Says:

    Thank you for posting this, Gallus. It’s of utmost importance to have a record of this. TED’s slogan is “Ideas Worth Spreading”.

    Just wait, when all the people who listened to Dr. Quack start filing lawsuits, MSM outlets like the NY Times will tut-tut about the need to stop this barbaric practice and compensate the victims. They will conveniently leave out the fact that they were out in front pushing this child abuse.

    • cerulean blue Says:

      The sad thing is, no matter how much money these families win from their eventual lawsuits, the health of these children will have been damaged irreparably.

    • hearthrising Says:

      The medical, psychological and social work professions will also try to forget their part in all this child abuse. But I doubt the victims will.

  4. Jane Says:

    Dana Beyer writes casually of giving children untested hormone blockers in the comments here:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-beyer/shezow-bam-pow-children-t_b_3402269.html

    Preman T.: The article could have made it clearer that “transitioning as children” does not mean surgery, but puberty-blocking hormones until the child is old enough for an informed decision.

    Beyer: True. I presumed people would know that.

    Beyer mentions John Money’s experiment in the article. How is this pharmacological experimentation any better than what Money did?


    • “but puberty-blocking hormones until the child is old enough for an informed decision.”

      God this fucking idiot. If you block the puberty the child WILL NOT MATURE! Not only this but brain and health will be permanently altered because the drugs are fucking dangerous. It’s pure insanity to block the puberty for YEARS!

      For example when it comes to Lupron doctors recommend taking it only 6 times in ones whole life! Not for 3 or 4 years! Even just ONE shot can fuck up your health! Oh and the argument that they already use it for children with precious puberty without any problems is false. You just need to use google to find parents that are worried because their children suffer from the consequences of Lupron usage.

      I never understood how trans activists can get away with the lie that drugs like Lupron are totally reversible and don’t damage the childrens health.

      • Adrian Says:

        They use it to treat precocious puberty, sure, but only when the effects of the precocious puberty are judged to be worse than potential side effects of the meds – like when kids are going through obvious puberty at age 5 or 6, and will end up seriously stunted and the like as a result. Even then, as far as I know they only use it to get the kid to the extreme tail end of normal early puberty, and yeah, there’s worry over side effects. At least those people fully admit it’s a “pick your poison” sort of horrible choice to be faced with.

        This guy (and so many of his followers) truly seem to believe it’s just some magical time machine, don’t they?

        Also they act as if a kid who is put on these “blockers” and allowed to live life as the other sex are truly free to decide in a few years, “eh, not for me, I’ll just switch back now.”

        Physical issues completely aside, they’re talking kids are who are 16 or 17 years old, been on these “blockers” for a few years (so, let’s just say all of junior high and high school up to that point, if they’re truly starting at 12 as they suggest in the video). To a 16 year old, that’s FOREVER. And your friends, your social circle, all that, is FOREVER, and utterly completely binding, and that’s before we consider the parental pressure that is happening.

        Just how easy will it be to just “change your mind” at that point? After all the crazy expensive treatments and all the insisting that you’re really a girl and this isn’t a phase, you’re going to turn around and say “yeah actually it was a phase?”

        I thought a lot of things at 16, thought plenty of stuff was forever and that I was so old and wise already.

        And yet I’m happy that I never got a TATTOO, never mind radical surgery on my bits.

  5. AreUSayingWhatUThink Says:

    I’m sorry to jump here on this thread about one mad scientist, but I thought you’d like to see this. Guess what, trans want money diverted from reproductive choice issues, to researching uterine transplants for them!! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alice-wilder/why-im-pro-choice-transgender_b_4675060.html

  6. Bev Jo Says:

    Thank you for yet another excellent post and a very timely one since yesterday another trans cult follower who “works” with girls insisted that many of those girls were really boys. So many people are making money off child abuse and/or adding to their status and ego. It’s disgusting, horrific, and evil.

    And no, that doctor has no clue about girls and women at all. In this objectifying female-hating world, what girl who is already under siege for being a girl and reaching puberty wants suddenly to have on her body the image of females horribly pornified throughout the media? Who in her right mind would want a period in this female-hating world? I never accepted the male image of girls and women, but I sure never wanted to be a boy. Or a man.

    • Teal Deer Says:

      I just want to spit whenever I hear a dislike of periods held up as supporting evidence of transgenderism. Sure, there are women out there who claim to love their periods, be extremely tuned into their cycles, and whatever Mother Goddess woo-woo can be tied in with. The fact of the matter is, woman-hating attitudes or no, periods are a complicated business, what with the mess, pain, and hormone swings, and many women dread them. That doesn’t mean they want to be male or think they are men.

    • Adrian Says:

      Hear, hear.

      I too HATED my breasts. I resisted wearing a bra, because of what it meant, and how my world was going to have to change, how it meant I was “a woman now” and all that loaded language. You get to be a certain age and a certain size and all of a sudden the clothes in the store are about being revealing, and 99% of the dress shoes are high heels. All of a sudden it’s “well you need to realize you’re sexy now” and there’s this simultaneous pressure to both wear the pornified stuff, and yet resist always the supposedly inevitable come-ons of men, because That’s Just How It Is.

      I did not want ANY part of that. I didn’t want to carry a purse, either, again because of what it means and this pressure to be “ladylike.” Hated. It. Refused to wear the clothes.

      And yet, like you, I never wanted to be a boy either. Well, I wished I were one plenty of times when it came to the “you can do [whatever], you’re a girl” but I certainly didn’t “feel like a boy inside.” I wanted (and still do want) people to let girls also do what they want and stop with the “well, women are inevitably sex objects for the consumption of men because they’re weak, it’s only the thin veneer of a polite society that prevents full on 24/7 rape” type talk.

  7. Adrian Says:

    My my my, where to even start.

    I see the most important part of being a woman is to look like a hot model. As always, there is the comment, “hey look at this M2T, does it better than all the born women, amirite?” Has there ever been a trans article that did NOT say that somewhere in it??

    Then there’s the idea that the neovag technology now is so good that it supposedly fools gynecologists!! ORLY? Usually the gynecologist is interested in looking inside there to check out what’s at the other end, and… sorry Charlie, nothing there. Plus, according to some sites I was reading last night (ended up there on some link trail from here via the BBC…) it’s not all that uncommon for there to be HAIRS inside there, left. Or things to otherwise “degrade.” I don’t even really wanna know… well, maybe I kinda do…

    Meanwhile, the case of the twins. I remember reading about them in the Boston Globe, yeah. But, if they’re identical twins, that means they have identical DNA. They also had an identical maternal environment – so theoretically whatever “hormone bath” they were getting would be the same, right? Or at least not radically different?

    If that’s the case, how come one twin supposedly got the (physical! Always physical! Has to be physical!) “laydee brain” while the other twin didn’t?

  8. Motherhood Says:

    The twins are destined for tragedy. Maybe I am ignorant but where is the human subjects committee on this. The Good Doctor makes Mengel look like a real healer and for better or worse and worse Mengel was a far more of a real scientist. He added to the vast depository of human knowledge. We know how many times a human bone can be broken before it will no longer heal. We know the effects of acid in open wounds or exactly how long it takes a person to die in icy water–ground breaking work compared to this. This guy hate males and wants to create his ideal fuck. We know he wants to fuck his own creations–not sure how that serves society. Take away: Sadism is less sick and kinder.

    • Morag Says:

      Motherhood–yes, Dr. Spack is a pedophilic, prurient, mutilating, greedy non-scientist and a liar. He also seems mild and ordinary: evil, as they say, is banal. So I don’t think it’s wrong to draw a couple of parallels between him and Dr. Mengele.

      But the unspeakable pain, suffering and utter dehumanization of Mengele’s victims cannot be outdone. Ever. Though I’ve very little doubt there are men who are trying, as we speak, to do just that. But it’s just more sadism, just more victims. For victims, for each one, it’s complete torture, dehumanization, despair and death. That can’t be outdone in any qualitative sense.

      I would argue that any useful products of torture and murder, like a body of scientific knowledge collected via torture and murder, is knowledge we have no right to. That we’re forced to redeem that knowledge because it’s “there” cannot, in any way, lessen Mengele’s sadism or make another’s sadism (if it’s without a useful scientific product) greater. 


  9. This physician is advocating for the sterilization of healthy children which is generally viewed as a human rights abuse.

    He prattles on with the standard trans talking points. For instance, in reference to GnRH agonists (the same class of drugs given to patients with advanced prostate cancer and endometriosis), he states, “they are reversible”. If cross gender hormones are given after the GnRH agonists, these children are infertile. Infertility is an issue with GnRH agonists. Even if the GnRH agonists aren’t followed by cross gender hormones at age 16, there is still no way of knowing the long term effects of GnRH agonists on children.

    When we sit down and think about it, it does seem ghoulish in an Orwellian sort of way. Think carefully about this. Endocrinologists are intentionally delaying a normal part of human development, adolescence based on a psychological diagnosis. It’s a scientific fact that the prefrontal cortex, sometimes called the judgment center of the brain, isn’t fully developed until the early twenties. Any parent intuitively knows this because teenagers are often impulsive.

    “neuroscientists have caught up and brain scans show clearly that the brain is not fully finished developing until about age 25”

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708

    These children simply do not have the capacity to make informed decisions. The fact that they feel different doesn’t mean that they have the judgment to make informed decisions. This is being done to them.

    Endocrinologist make a handsome profit by prescribing GnRH agonists and cross gender hormones. In the U.S., the GnRH agonists are expensive, and this doesn’t even include the cost of blood work. If they get these kids when they are 12 years of age, with the GnRH agonists and cross gender hormones for life, endocrinologists have a patient for life.

    I noticed that Dr. Quack, I mean Spack , didn’t take questions after this lecture. Or, if he did, it’s not shown on the video.

    • Adrian Says:

      That’s the true dilemma for this guy and his supporters – if they wait long enough for the patient to be able to make an informed decision (even if one others might disagree with) then the patient will never have a chance at being conventionally “hot and sexy” and “looking even better than a born woman!”

      And as we can see from the talk in the video, that’s what really matters to him.

      So many of the supporters around the net, too, a lot of them are M2T who are more obviously “men in dresses” looking, and they go on and on about how they’re so jealous of these new young kids coming up, who never developed the Adam’s apples or big feet and hands and whatever else.

      It’s clear they’re more than happy to err in the one direction only. Must have the hotness. Always.

      I do think it will be interesting to see who of these very early transitioners starts regretting in ten years or so, maybe 15, when they’re entering their 30’s. They’re on hormones FOREVER (unless of course they detransition, but whatever surgery they did is there to stay).


      • Also it will be interesting how their mental and physical health will be like. If they take Lupron it can damage their brain (other gnrh agonist have nearly the same side effects).

        On Lupron victims hub there is a pdf document on how gnrh agonists/analogs influence the nervous system.

        Quote: “gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs are not like any other medication currently available for treatment of disease. As we continue to learn more about these analogs’ mechanisms of action, it is increasingly apparent that they do not just affect the gonadal hormones, but are powerful modulators of autonomic neural function.”

        http://lupronvictimshub.com/NLVN.html

        Also I recommend looking at this:
        http://lupronvictimshub.com/risks.html
        Here can you find many studies of Lupron and other gnrh analogs/agonists and their health consequences.

  10. survivorthriver Says:

    Any institution in which these potential human rights abuses of children are conducted should be subject to an Institutional Review Board review by their legally responsible IRB. The IRB must legally review all human experimentation, and ethics of practices conducted on patients treated at all hospitals/clinics.

    The Belmont Report requires: It is important to distinguish between biomedical and behavioral research, on the one hand, and the practice of accepted therapy on the other, in order to know what activities ought to undergo review for the protection of human subjects of research. The distinction between research and practice is blurred partly because both often occur together (as in research designed to evaluate a therapy) and partly because notable departures from standard practice are often called “experimental” when the terms “experimental” and “research” are not carefully defined.”

    Since there has not been accurate research on these children for obvious ethical reasons, ALL the TENETS of the rights of patients and the rights of children and the rights for ethical conduct of medicine and research are being violated.

    I believe elements of the Nuremberg Code could also be questioned regards this experimental treatment, especially of children the most vulnerable.

    Do we have any class action lawyers in the house? What do you weigh in with here?

  11. DD Says:

    From the “Uncertainty Surrounds Medical Treatments For Transgender Youth” article at http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2014/01/transgender-teenagers-medical-transition:

    “Zucker says there is a noticeable increase in teenage girls who say they want to become boys. He isn’t sure why, but says there is some indication that these girls “develop the perception that being a lesbian is heavily stigmatized. They realize that if they present in the male gender role and have a girlfriend they are left alone more and it’s safer.”

    Ya think?

  12. Jane Says:

    OT:

    http://janetmock.com/2014/01/30/janet-mock-sex-work-experiences/

    Janet Mock frames his experiences as an underage prostitute as empowering:

    Yet my economic hurdles were real and urgent, and I couldn’t deny that witnessing the women of Merchant Street take their lives into their own hands, empowered me. Watching these women every weekend gathered in sisterhood and community, I learned firsthand about body autonomy, about resilience and agency, about learning to do for yourself in a world that is hostile about your existence.

    These women taught me that nothing was wrong with me or my body and that if I wanted they would show me the way, and it was this underground railroad of resources created by low-income, marginalized women, that enabled me when I was 16 to jump in a car with my first regular and choose a pathway to my survival and liberation.

    He makes selling your ass sound like a week at MichFest. Sisters are doing it for themselves!

    Apparently nothing is wrong either with men who feel entitled to use the bodies of 16 year old boys. Then again, as the former web editor of People Magazine Mock is complicit with the abuse and rape that are common in Hollywood.

    Mock is being heavily promoted as a great example for and leader of young women!

    Fifty percent of black, 34% of Latin@, and 16% of Asian trans people have made a living in underground economies, including sex work, compared to 11% of white trans people, according to Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.

    Just wait. Objecting to the normalization of prostitution will get you denounced as a racist or self-hater by the cultural leftists. With special dispensation for Muslims, of course.

    They’re really pushing this punter liberation thing. How long before they allow pimps to start recruiting in high schools, as strip clubs do in Canada? Outsourcing, insourcing and automation are leaving many people permanently jobless. They’re grooming the population to accept having their their daughters fed into the meat grinder of the sex industry. I’m amazed at how fast this is going. They’ve got libfems completely hoodwinked into doing the pimps’ work for them.

    Liberals are fond of using the word “systemic” until conversation turns to male entitlement to the bodies of women and minors. Then it’s all about individual choice.

    • Gertrude Carlyle Says:

      melissa harris parry calls herself one of janet mock’s “fangirls” and says her whole staff is “fangirling all over the place” every time mock appears on her show. (several times now) mock is a role model for young black women, according to mhp.

      u hardly ever see feminists besides maddow on msnbc, but they got plenty of room for j mock. whenever i see her on mhp’s show, i change the channel– since its all the same bullshit you get on tumblr.

      do the trannies print out weekly talking points, like the state dept?

    • Adrian Says:

      Sadly this is par for the course among so much of the trans rhetoric on the internet – there’s a strange phenomenon where this “sex work” (and always, always it’s “sex work,” not “prostitution”) is presented as dangerous when it’s used to talk about how trans people are at such high risk for murder (because they are supposedly so discriminated against that this is the only work available to them) and yet at the same time it’s also very much glamorized, in the same way that so much other “edgy” or “gritty” “street” things are glamorized, as a smart individual choice that only people who are certain amounts of “tough” can manage.

      When it comes to the glamorization, there are people who actually try to portray themselves as being “sex workers” and jump to use that blanket term, when it turns out that what they are doing is basically letting people view them naked via webcam from their own homes for money. Now, I’m not claiming that that is any sort of remotely healthy and great empowering thing to do either, nor that it’s happening in a vacuum, but there’s a sort of “see, I’m a sex worker and it’s great, it’s easy money, and you can’t say I’m exploited” thing going on, where people are deliberately blurring the lines to get this simultaneously “tough” and yet “you’d consider me oppressed (and so I get to call you privileged and ignore your arguments), but I don’t” image going.

      …which ends up with those people talking over the voices of trafficking victims and prostitutes of the “had actual sex for money on the orders of a pimp and am not free to refuse due to debts and violence” sort.

      Often it’s “feminists are so sheltered and prudish and privileged, they shouldn’t have any voice or say in my fabulous swinging career” sort of thing. The Happy Hooker, indeed.

      • Gertrude Carlyle Says:

        YES!

        this:

        “in the same way that so much other “edgy” or “gritty” “street” things are glamorized, as a smart individual choice that only people who are certain amounts of “tough” can manage.”

        Its a very masculine thing, isnt it? it says “look how tough i am”

        the more they try to be women, the more they show their manhood. and they have no embarrassment or self awareness about this what so ever

      • Anon Male Says:

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/guatemalan-transgender-woman-schoolteacher-prostitute_n_1903863.html

        Has money and a middle class job, still prostitutes because hey, it makes you feel like a real woman.

        It is interesting with all the cracker trans blabbering on about all those other cultures that MUST have some sort of 3rd gender thing going on because of Mystical Shit, that in so many of those places, trans people drop in and out of being trans all the time.

        Obama’s nanny in Indonesia stopped being a woman (or dressing as a woman) for some 20 years without killing himself and seems to have only started on the she/her thing once he became a celebrity amongst white people and no longer had to act like a reasonable person to make a living. (Articles citing how he was a nanny as a male but tried on Obama’s mother’s lipstick, ostensibly without permission, never describe that as a horrific lack of boundaries or professionalism, just as a cute anecdote of young Barack stumbling onto diversity).


    • “Liberals are fond of using the word “systemic” until conversation turns to male entitlement to the bodies of women and minors. Then it’s all about individual choice.”

      Yep.

      I tried so hard to believe that the left was smarter than the right and that they were much better people and also that men were not so bad.

      Yeah…no.

      I actually saw on a popular Reddit thread (Something about the most controversial opinion you have) people championing paedophilia as an actual sexual orientation. This is not the first time I’ve seen it either.
      (http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1witn6/what_actually_controversial_opinion_do_you_have/cf2drbj)

      1681 upvotes. Over 1500 people thought that paedophilia should not be stigmatised. They were all against committing acts against children (for now) but it should be accepted as a natural sexual attraction because BORN THIS WAY.

      Never mind that there is no evidence that it’s BORN THIS WAY, never mind that children are NOT sexual objects.

      I don’t think I have to state for anyone here what paedophilia is (an “attraction” to the power over another) and that for all their spewing about how much they LOVE children it is actually about children being weak and malleable to adults. It’s about dominance, not love. They way they view children is harmful.

      Just because you think something doesn’t actually make it normal or natural.

      But forget all that shit, I’m being paedo-phobic.

      How dare I question men’s penises and what gets them hard?
      The hardness of the penis is ALL that is relevant in our world.

      *vomits*

  13. branjor Says:

    You don’t have to publish this, but why is that autogynephilia trading card thing on Radfem Central again?

  14. survivorthriver Says:

    What I dislike about the frankendokters like Dr. Spork here is that they are unscientifically and unquestioningly going along with BS about a dysphoria mental condition so they can profit.

    Where i really draw the line is on the exploitation of children. Dr. Spork and his ilk are practicing medicine without any scientific evidence base. They are conducting human experimentation without proper human rights observances. As has modern psychiatry who is bamboozling us with “mood disorders” to sell Big Pharma pills and not confronting the toxic culture that is creating so much anxiety, stress and moods.

    I hope the de-transitioners find a good class action lawyer.

  15. rethinkinggenderidentity Says:

    Reblogged this on Rethinking "Gender Identity".

  16. Mormo Says:

    I’m getting dr. mengele vibes from all this shit ( perhaps that is an inappropriate comparison and I apologize )


  17. Spack was my endo for a year or two. He wasn’t the worst endo I had (that would be the pervert Dr. Safer who works at BU Medical Center and elsewhere around Boston), but he definitely sucked. I posted some anecdotes about the dollmaker at my blog:

    http://snowflakeespecial.tumblr.com/post/76353400383/that-time-dr-norman-spack-was-my-endo-or-the


  18. […] I didn’t make any sense to him. I certainly wasn’t the beautiful doll he talks about in his disgusting TED talk! The fact that I’d already been living full time for thee years and changed all my id by the time […]


  19. http://prospect.org/article/born-way

    An article about Kenneth Zucker and gender non conforming children.

  20. lin Says:

    Boys, do you like to cook and clean just like ladies do? You are, without a doubt, transgender! This towel I saw in the supermarket is for you! It says, “When I grow up, I want to be a lady like you” http://imgur.com/5tY9Mcz


  21. He’s a sick and twisted individual. We need to teach kids to accept themselves in the body they were born with — without any drugs or surgeries, and especially without Genital Mutilation. End gender stereotypes. Teach kids that it is okay to not conform to traditional gender norms (but that they are the sex they were born and should be proud to be who they are).

  22. jeje Says:

    well i want to conform to gender norms, it my life who are you to dictate to me😦


  23. […] involved in this debauchery should be condemned for medical child abuse. Filthy perverts like Dr. Norman Spack — who was “salivating” at the prospect of sexually mutilating children’s […]


  24. […] involved in this debauchery should be condemned for medical child abuse. Filthy pigs like Dr. Norman Spack — who was “salivating” at the prospect of sexually mutilating children’s […]

  25. Dick Blac Says:

    Sad to see how many ignorant savages there are posting here.

    • Ashland Avenue Says:

      On the contrary, we see the truth, Dick. Keep reading and maybe, if you’re lucky, you’ll come around. Otherwise, sod off.


  26. […] suggestions.” Mind you, the decision-making panelists included such abusive lost souls as Dr. Norman Spack and several of the Dutch “usual suspect” researchers. Ridiculous to even make a […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: