Henry Makow, Gender Transitioning and Child Abuse by Mrs Vera West
The latest in the Safe Schools program saga is that a Year 4 primary school student is “transitioning,” that is undergoing a gender transition, all with the help of the Safe Schools coalition. (The Australian, September 9, 2016, p. 7) A workshop will be held at the pupil’s class, and then the pupil plans to change to their new gender. It reminds me of some sort of frantic religious revivalist movement, or of the metaphorosis of insects. And it makes as much sense, since a child in Year 4, is in no position to be making such decisions.
This ideology, as has been noted in these pages, has been criticised by the American College of Pediatricians, claiming that the “Gender Ideology Harms Children”. We can add in the present context an important quote that was not noted previously, and which supports my remarks made above:
“A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V). The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.”
In particular, puberty-blocking drugs are dangerous and can have numerous side-effects: “children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.”
I therefore wonder if all of this has been disclosed by the Safe Schools program; if not, could it be that in the future the governments and schools, along with the individual proponents, may find themselves subject to litigation? Full disclosure of health risks would surely be a legal requirement in such an area. Is it being made?
Henry Makow at his Save the Males site (http://www.henrymakow.com), commented back on October 1, 2011, on the issue of the use of hormone-blocking treatments for “gender confused” children. He observed that some of these children threaten self-harm, but in all other cases of self-harm, treatment of the causes of self-harm are addressed. Thus, a child who wanted to live in France, to use his example, and threatened self-harm, would not automatically be able to live in France, but rather, the causes of the behaviour, and treatment, if possible would be sought. However, that medical model is being abandoned in favour of political correctness.
The aim of all of this is to “completely discredit the Family Unit and to assume full control of the sexual behaviors and reproductive activity. Here we see the inversion-destruction process in action, at full tilt. Children – not parents – call the shots; gender reversal is given special treatment; human reason is turned upon itself and imploded.”