In September 2017 the American College of Pediatrics issued a warning on the indoctrination of the gender ideology on developing children and adolescents.
Their summary on the issue was as follows: “The American College of Pediatricians urges healthcare professionals, educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of male and female, respectively – not genetic markers of a disorder.
“The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs (also referred to as “intersex”) do not constitute a third sex.”
Meanwhile in the UK on the 16th of December 2018, the Daily Mail reported that eight-year-old pupils to be told ‘boys can have periods too’ under new sex education lessons.
The article quotes Brighton and Hove Council as saying: “We believe that it’s important for all genders to be able to learn and talk about menstruation together… Our approach recognises the fact that some people who have periods are trans or non-binary.”
The teacher guidance, from Brighton & Hove City Council, states: ‘Trans boys and men and non-binary people may have periods.’ It says language about menstruation must be inclusive of ‘all genders’ and orders that ‘bins for used period products are provided in all toilets’ for children.
Trans boys or trans men are not boys or men in the natural biology of their birth. Hence why the trans is added. They are girls or women who want to identify as boys or men and as such will still have periods. It is not biologically possible for a person born as a male to have periods.
All we see here is the manipulation of language to push a gender ideology. It is not education, but mental abuse of children and should stop.
A quote from the American College of Pediatricians’ September 2017 article on gender dysphoria says: ” (American Psychiatric Association) is the author of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition(DSM-5). The APA states that those distressed and impaired by their GD meet the definition of a disorder. The College is unaware of any medical literature that documents a gender dysphoric child seeking puberty blocking hormones who is not significantly distressed by the thought of passing through the normal and healthful process of puberty.
From the DSM-5 fact sheet:
“The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition.”
“This condition causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”
On page 455 of the DSM-5 under “Gender Dysphoria without a disorder of sex development” it states: “Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.” Simple maths allows one to calculate that for natal boys: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 2.2% = 97.8% (approx. 98% of gender-confused boys). Similarly, for natal girls: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 12% = 88% gender-confused girls.
The bottom line is this: Our opponents advocate a new scientifically baseless standard of care for children with a psychological condition (GD) that would otherwise resolve after puberty for the vast majority of patients concerned.
There is an obvious self-fulfilling nature to encouraging young GD children to impersonate the opposite sex and then institute pubertal suppression. If a boy who questions whether or not he is a boy (who is meant to grow into a man) is treated as a girl, then has his natural pubertal progression to manhood suppressed, have we not set in motion an inevitable outcome?
All of his same sex peers develop into young men, his opposite sex friends develop into young women, but he remains a pre-pubertal boy.
He will be left psychosocially isolated and alone. He will be left with the psychological impression that something is wrong. He will be less able to identify with his same sex peers and being male, and thus be more likely to self identify as “non-male” or female.
(Articles reflect the views of the author, and not necessarily those of Luke Nash-Jones, The Red Pill Factory, or Make Britain Great Again.)