Bookmarks

You haven't yet saved any bookmarks. To bookmark a post, just click .

The transgender movement has been called the new civil rights issue of our time. If so, it would be the first to usurp millions of years of evolution and hundreds of thousands of years of human cultural development and replace it with a pseudo-scientific politically revolutionary gender ideology. It would also be the first to turn human sexuality and reproduction into a marketable commodity. With proper medical care, adults can make informed decisions about their sexuality and they should be free to live lives congruent with their identity. Recently there has been a push to introduce children as young as 18 months to questionable sexuality assessment methods which can lead to untested and biased therapeutic approaches. The current state of transgender medical assessment and treatment places non-trans children, gay and straight, at risk of being misdiagnosed by an overzealous although ostensibly well-meaning medical industry.

Transgender individuals believe that they are a member of the opposite sex. The whole ‘man trapped in a woman's body’ trope, and vice versa. While some transgender folks have no issues acknowledging their own biology, many are convinced that they are literally members of the opposite sex. They view biology, their very DNA, the inherited wisdom of millions of years of human evolution, as immaterial to their inner identity as a man or woman. Often transgender adults will choose to live lives as members of the opposite sex and should be free to do so. This process is called socially transitioning and may be done without medical treatment. Others prefer to make more substantial enhancements to their appearance with cross-sex hormones and surgery. Perhaps grow some breasts, for the transitioning guys, or for the ladies they can start taking steroids and grow facial hair, that sort of thing.

For many the discrepancy between the inner image, their inner identity as a man or woman and their actual body is so intolerable that they are in absolute mental agony. These men and women suffer from gender dysphoria (GD), and for them medically transitioning is the only method the medical profession has found to relieve them of this particular bit of personal psychic suffering. To be clear, GD does not mean that you are psychotic. According to the American Psychiatric Association, it is a psychiatric disorder, unlike gender non-conformity which is not. In fact, Gender Dysphoria is also uniquely different from being gay. After all, it doesn’t take a team of doctors and surgeons to keep the gay community afloat. They understand very well the fact that they are men and women with a refreshing degree of clarity. Gender dysphoria is delusional in one particular way if you accept, as the vast majority of the human race does, that your biology determines your sex.

This is the kind of ‘delusion’ that Rachael Dolezal suffers from. If you haven’t heard of her, she is the white woman who literally pretended to be a black woman for decades. She even headed up an NAACP chapter! She was quoted in a story in The Guardian on February 25, 2017, saying;

"I feel like the idea of being trans-black would be much more accurate than 'I'm white'. Because you know, I'm not white."

And yet of course, she is. She just has some unusual, unresolved and unrequited childhood issues to deal with. And she does love to sunbathe! The black community didn’t take much of a shine to a genetically Caucasian woman dressing in blackface and claiming to be a sister. Some even called her mentally ill. But if that is the case, particularly when one can actually be of mixed race genetically, then how much more so for sex? There is a universe of difference between men and women at the genetic level that cannot be brushed aside as a social construct.

So while it is clear that GD is not a psychosis, they do suffer from uniformly higher rates of other mental health problems including higher depression and suicide rates as well as autistic traits. This is unsurprising considering that at its essence GD is a particularly focused problem of mental perception which most people are free of. None of these comorbidities are helped by medical transition, which is a regimen of surgeries and hormone treatments designed to give biologic men and women the superficial appearance of members of the opposite sex. So when transgendered people are described as at-risk populations, I heartily agree. But it is clear from the research that many of their vulnerabilities are internal fragilities, and not solely the result of societal oppression, nor even necessarily the result of gender dysphoria itself. This is not to say that they aren’t the victims of prejudice and discrimination! But not every disagreement about school bathroom policy is motivated by hate. With a less strident tone and good fiber intake, potty break debates could be made much smoother.

Transgender people, in spite of the enormous amount of attention paid to them in the news and media alike, are a very tiny slice of the population; less than 1%, closer to .6%. Until recently, medical care for GD patients has been a cottage industry, with modest profitability, catering to adults. Insurance didn’t cover treatment, and transgender patients got a whole lot of static just trying to get the care they needed. Recently public awareness of transgender issues has become far more prominent than market need would seem to warrant. Over the last decade or so care for gender dysphoric patients has grown into what I can’t think of as anything other than the transgender industrial complex. Part of this was no doubt due to the increasing variability of gender roles in our society since the 1970’s which, in many ways, has been a good thing. The gay rights movement also created a broad cultural awareness of the rights of people to own and be able to freely live their own sexuality, culminating in the marriage act which passed a few years ago. Bravo, I say. But recently young children have been subject to irresponsible and in my opinion medically negligent pressure to identify as transgender. From what I have seen some of this is the result of a transgender political ideology that is building a political power base from which to remodel society, as well as an obvious attempt to make more money under the umbrella of medically experimenting on young children, rather than an effort to provide the best medical care to all children, transgender included.

When it comes to sex and gender identity there is an intrinsic anti-Western, anti-male and even anti-science current behind the rejection of biologic sexual reality in favor of subjective experience. This is probably a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to the excesses of Western masculinity which brought us two World Wars, and the continuing bad behavior of powerful men now brought to light by the #metoo movement. It is a recoiling away from masculine excesses. At the collective level, masculinity in the West and America in particular is in transition. Pun intended! It is not transitioning into femininity; women are the undisputed masters of that realm, no matter that some men fancy themselves to be their equals. As a society, we are on the verge of throwing off the exhausting shackles of regressive and narrowly defined sex role behaviors that have long since become unnecessary in our modern technologically based civilization.

Despite the growing egalitarianism between the roles of men and women, I fear that the negative excesses of the male spirit are still alive and well in the political and business arm of the transgender world. Transgender women (biologic men) have simply picked a new battle to fight: beating biologic women at their own game by being braver and more stunning. “Anything you can do, we can do better!” The transgender industrial complex has become the avatar for the worst excesses of the male will to power and dominance through the intersection of power and money, with the seemingly mandatory exploitation of the most vulnerable members of society. This time around it is our own children. These biologic men seek to transmogrify society with all of the hardwired ferocity with which we fought the wars of the 20th Century. I am not saying that trans men, who are biological women, aren’t also players in the game, but most of the controversy revolves around men ‘turning into’ women. Not too many guys are afraid of a biologic girl in the boy's locker room, or at least I wouldn’t have been in High School.

Let us take a look at the sudden interest in weaponizing the sexuality of our children. At an existential level, this recent push to capture their minds and bodies is not a civil rights issue, or even a medical or psychiatric issue. It is a primal competition for dominance within our society, and for the power to reimagine it in a way that will increase the power of the transgender movement at the expense of the dominant, biological hierarchy bequeathed by nature herself. The great Howard Bloom, in his book The Lucifer Principle, made the observation that humans compete with each other for dominance mostly by forming social groups that are organized around a compelling idea, like a religion or a political party or even gender ideology. These groups strive for dominance based on the instinctual drive of the pecking order. This process is ruthless and amoral, hence the brutal barbarism of the competition. Crusader or Jihadi, Yankee or Rebel, Democrat or Republican, Cis or Trans, it’s all a competition to convert (or destroy) people in one group and turn them into the cells of a new collective and then, to mobilize the material resources of the world to further their agenda.

In spite of the compassion we feel for the suffering transgender person, who deserves respect and the best medical care possible, at the existential level the movement is an anti-male, anti-western political ideology that seeks to assert its dominance in the American landscape by converting susceptible minds to its cause through gender reassignment whether or not that mind has gender dysphoria or not. The school administrators, politicians, doctors and health professionals may well be working with the best of intentions. The broader social movement opposes the biologic reality of sexual identity and claims that humans are as programmable in regard to gender as a cell phone. This movement views individual people, and children in particular, as blank slates upon which may be imprinted virtually any identity they choose. They consider one's sexual identity as little more than a female or male application which was randomly assigned to you at birth, and which can just as easily be re-assigned without any moral qualms whatsoever. Hence the early push by this movement to penetrate the public school system. For any group to grow, it needs new members. Exposing the lovely blank slates of children to their doctrine and subtly influencing those susceptible could cause a baby boom of straight or gay children being led down the transgender primrose path:

“The beginning is the most important part of any work, especially in the case of a young and tender thing; for that is the time at which the character is being formed and the desired impression is more readily taken.” - Plato, the Republic.

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) is an international organization dedicated to promoting the transgender agenda. According to them (WPATH Standards of Care, Version 7, p. 11), of all the school children sent for a gender dysphoria evaluation, only 6-23% will have the condition persist into adulthood. That means that at best somewhere around 90% of all school-age children with a so-called initial transsexual “interest” are merely experiencing temporary, self-limiting symptoms caused by some other problem, or may be just experiencing normal childhood behavior, having yet to learn about the very strict rules our society imposes on the behavior of men and women, for all of our liberal boastings. The point here is that from a business perspective if every child sent for evaluation could be influenced to stick with the program and eventually to medically transition, you would go from 213,000 school aged trans kids (.6% of about 35.6 million kids) to well over 1.5 million kids!

Another way to advance the transgender cause and bump the numbers is to lower the age and behavior standards for diagnosing gender dysphoria. WPATH standards of care on page 12 notes that children as young as two years old may show signs of being transgender. Wow! My son hadn’t even decided if he was right-handed by 24 months old. Of course, WPATH does note that;

“In most children, gender dysphoria will disappear before or early in puberty.”

20180411_223400_0001

TRUE! But that didn’t stop them from bringing up socially transitioning very young children again on page 17. In spite of acknowledging the controversial nature of encouraging a four or five-year-old to live as a member of the opposite sex, they still subtly encouraged it with the excuse that it could finally give us some research data (since virtually none exists now). That’s called child medical experimentation.

WPATH isn’t the only prominent group rushing to lower the age of gender dysphoria diagnosis as well as the professional credentials required for providers who treat these at-risk children. The University Of California Center Of Excellence for Transgender Health believes that even babies can express their budding sexuality in ways that would make Freud blush.

“Children as young as 18 months old have articulated information about their gender identity and gender expression preferences….For some children, this may include a social transition - changing of external appearance (clothing, hairstyle) and possibly name and pronouns to match one's internal gender.”

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is onboard as well with their little checklist that makes it so easy to ‘diagnose’ children even a Physician's Assistant can do it. A child can be called transgender by scoring 6 of the following 8 criterion:

A strong desire to be of the other gender or an insistence that one is the other gender

A strong preference for wearing clothes typical of the opposite gender

A strong preference for cross-gender roles in make-believe play or fantasy play

A strong preference for the toys, games or activities stereotypically used or engaged in by the other gender

A strong preference for playmates of the other gender

A strong rejection of toys, games, and activities typical of one’s assigned gender

A strong dislike of one’s sexual anatomy

A strong desire for the physical sex characteristics that match one’s experienced gender

Based on this subjective and easily manipulated list, a little boy who prefers to play with his female friends and their toys, and who wears ‘girls’ clothes (who doesn’t want to wear leggings?) meets criterion 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 automatically! That’s 5 out of 6 just for not being a toxic, sexist little boy. God help him if he has trouble potty training because that could be construed as a strong dislike (whatever that means) of his gender and he would then hit the very low diagnosis bar for gender dysphoria. It’s a methodology specifically designed to make the diagnosis easy, quick, and accessible to professionals with absolute minimal expertise or training. That’s why the San Francisco Center holds the view that a Nurse Practitioner or even a Physician's Assistant is qualified to manage the treatment of Gender Dysphoria. This, despite the extraordinarily high levels of suicide and comorbid psychological conditions often found in transgendered persons.

If the stakes weren’t so high, it would be almost comical that the medical profession has signed on to codifying 1950’s gender stereotypes as a prop to support experimental medical treatment of children. Instead of pushing for a society where girls and boys are free to be themselves (page 350), the APA called the writers of Leave it to Beaver to come up with 5 of their 8 judgement calls: Boys should dress as boys (#2), boys should only pretend to be or play as boys (#3), boys should not play with girl’s toys (#4), boys should prefer to play with other boys (#5), and boys must always prefer to play with the toys assigned to boys (#6). Or else, you’re not a real boy! Obviously the same applies to girls, with the subtle point being that there is simply no room in this world for gay or lesbian children. It is almost as if some parents would prefer to have a straight transgender child that a budding homosexual, p350-351. That’s how they deal with homosexuals in Iran, for example, which goes to show how regressive our cultural standards remain.

Keep in mind that even these modest diagnostic standards are really just suggestions. If a child hits 5 of those qualifications, you can rest assured that in today’s political climate most providers will diagnose gender dysphoria. Most doctors will uncritically accept whatever standards of care they’ve been told are appropriate. Exceptional doctors will investigate their cases with care because they can see that uncritically accepting a child's sexual ideation is a failure of their obligation as a physician to first do no harm. And then there are a few lazy doctors who will rubber stamp pretty much anything that gets them paid. In addition, the diagnosis is based not just on what a child says that they declaratively believe, but also on whatever the kid can be talked or peer pressured into, even if unintentionally. For example, there is a recent phenomenon of social clusters of children all becoming gender dysphoric at nearly the same time without any previous history. Social contagion like this has been observed in suicide and obesity as well. Whether deliberate as a result of political advocacy on the part of the local medical providers, or unintentional as a result of psychic contagion, children are extremely susceptible to being externally influenced in an unhealthy way.

Once the impressionable child has been sucked into the gender dysphoria pipeline, the next step would be to get them to commit to the process of transitioning genders as adults. Most of the money in the transgender business is generated during and after medical transition. Due to the increasing ease and sales efficiency of the screening process, many children who aren’t transgender will have been identified as such before they are old enough for medication, which is started at the onset of puberty. To maximize conversion rates children must be kept in the program until they start puberty. So transgender camps for children and after-school social groups and school affirmation and praise from the community and the clothes and all of the frenzied and slightly creepy attention and enthusiasm of all the child’s peers and the authority figures in a young child’s life will synchronize to compel most kids (and their parents) to persevere until puberty.

Once puberty starts the experts will then tell the parents that it would be so much better for the child if puberty were stopped! They will lie and claim that puberty will simply resume as if nothing had happened once the medicine has been stopped, should the child change its mind. Unfortunately, there are no long-term studies which support such a claim. The negative side effects of these medications, such as bone development problems, reduction in potential adult height and the complete loss of the normal brain developmental changes which occur during puberty will be minimized if not outright ignored (see here, page 352). Nor will anyone bring up the fact that it will be even harder for the child to reverse course once on medication because of the subtly coercive pressure to follow the doctor's orders. In for a penny, in for a pound. So while puberty may theoretically resume if the medication were to be stopped, that situation will very seldom arise. Almost all non-trans children who start on puberty blockers will likely start taking cross-sex hormones rather than making the gut-wrenching decision to disappoint everyone in their lives and admit that the whole charade was a costly and emotionally painful mistake (p 351):

“Therefore, the claim that blockers are ‘100% reversible’ is not accurate in practice. In fact, being on blockers appears to consolidate an investment in cross-sex identification.”

Starting puberty blockers is an excellent sales tactic, however, and helps ensure a long-term customer. Of course, the combination of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will permanently sterilize a child, but that’s just part of the cost of doing business.

Once the children turn 18 the push will be on to wrap up the production with the final money shot of transition surgery. For true transgender people, the system will have provided whatever quality of life benefits it could. On the other hand, if the transgender industrial complex had its way, 100% of all kids evaluated will move on to transition. Unfortunately for the 90% of people who weren’t transgender but were probably just gay, buyers remorse will quickly set in once the hormone-addled and surgically altered young adult enters the regular work a day world. Aside from gender dysphoria, they will still have all of the same problems they had before, plus more. Even the trans children who really needed the treatment will have found that transition did little to relieve the other comorbid psychological problems that plague their community.

There is a pot of gold at the end of even this tragic rainbow, but it isn’t for anyone but the players in the transgender industrial complex. Sloppy diagnoses and a lack of careful psychotherapeutic treatment by qualified providers before and after medical transition may well spell trouble for the transgender industrial complex in terms of post-transition regret. Since nothing will distract a person from their problems more than having kids, the search is on to research ways to enable post-transition people to have children with a bewildering range of options including uterine transplants into men, surrogate mothers, egg donors and frozen eggs and sperm. With the ability to transplant a penis just realized, who knows what kind of cut and paste scenario could be applied to the gender dysphoric person looking to get into the family way?

The medical community may have stolen the fertility of the transgendered with the one hand, but they are happy to figure out how to give it back with the other, at a profit. It’s a win-win! Consider the benefits of having transgender people be able to have kids. First, you get rid of a lot of the potential complainers who may have become part of the trans-regret crowd, or at least delay the realization that it was a mistake. Second, the mere quest to discover how to do this, such as uterine transplants into men, will act like a magnet for research money which will then pour in from the financial arm of the business as well as the Federal Government. Just look at AIDS research. Prior to the 1980’s it didn’t exist because AIDS didn’t exist in our national consciousness. Today, the United States federal budget for AIDS research and treatment is around 26 billion dollars a year, every year, with no end in sight. Now imagine the money that could be squeezed out of the American taxpayer to research the most burning medical issue of our day: how to help medically castrated trans men and women have children. I’m not saying it’s an unworthy subject, but I am saying that there is massive profit potential pushing the agenda far beyond what the market would seem to warrant. Post-transition fertility management may also be the last chance to make big money from this population of patients before they become middle-aged and unprofitable.

Individually, the doctors researching methods to bring dignity to transgender people through becoming parents (the very dignity which they stole in the first place) will not just get paid; they will also become medical research pioneers who will dominate the fertility business for the rest of their careers! And the new techniques and procedures themselves will start an entirely new medical specialty. They will be the people who control the funding, who pick department chairs, decide who gets research money, who gets published, who set the parameters of the debate and make the theories and set the standards.

All children, transgender, gay and straight, are ill-served by the current state of pediatric management of gender dysphoria. Archaic gender stereotypes, poor psychiatric management, inexpert providers and a rush to diagnose and treat demonstrate that this medical specialty is almost out of control and endangers the health of our children. If the industry will not police itself, then State and local governments should do so. However, I doubt that they will have the political courage to do so for fear of being labeled transphobic. But as a Chiropractor with over thirty years experience, I can say in all sincerity that making a careful diagnosis and proceeding with caution in the treatment of children is not “phobic.”

It is our responsibility to protect the health and well being of all of our children by holding the medical profession up to the highest standards of care and professional accountability.

Dr. James Beauchamp, DC

by Dr. James Beauchamp, DC

Doctor Beauchamp is a Chiropractor with over 30 years experience, currently practicing in Maryland, USA. He writes and speaks on a variety of topics, and has recently ventured into comedy. So there.

Washington, DC