re: Jury rules against dad trying to save his 7-year-old from gender ‘transition’

I get that. But there are some real, justified outrages. This child emotional abuse definitely qualifies. I would not say that is hyper emotional bullshite at all.

quote:

---

Wrong. He didn't have the money to fight it the first round.

---

This.

Mr. Younger had signed a pre-nup because Mommy Dearest is worth a lot of money. She has done everything she can to ruin him because her feelings are hurt and she's a complete wack job. Plus her being a pediatrician and having the resources to hire a good attorney willing to go with this she was able to get it so he couldn't make any decisions on psychological issues. Surprise surprise, she was able to find a counselor willing to say the boy wants to be a girl despite the child not doing so when he's with dad.

You know, I used to think the whole MGTOW movement was a bunch of basement dwelling nerds who couldn't' get laid. After my own personal battles in the family court racket, they start to make sense. Even then I was able to afford a decent attorney and had a few wins. Still nobody should have to go through it because women think they will hit the jackpot and think they can ruin a man's life because their ego was bruised.

quote:

---

to diagnose and address transgenderism than professionals who have spent their entire careers studying the matter. Such is life.

---

However much truth there is to this, no amount of studies will convince me that biological determination at a DNA level is wrong when gender is determined in the womb. Gender fluidity still continues to be a mental health issue, not a biological one.

quote:

---

This is nothing like climate science.

---

Meh

Regardless of your opinions on the subject, it is just flat out not debatable that if you are studying climate at the University level and do NOT conclude what the majority have concluded..........you better fricking have tenure and A LOT of leverage...........and even then...........you're going to be treated like you've proposed bringing back slavery.

On that front, it's EXACTLY like climate science.

quote:

---

Liposuction?
Boob Job?
Nose Job?
Tattoos?
Stomach Staple?

---

We can add the tattoos and clitoral circumcision (CC) raised by other posters.

Again, I have not come across these questions in my professional life, so I cannot claim to be certain of the law, but I am not aware that Texas has any legal prohibitions against any of these procedures for minor children, except the CC. I suspect that all the others are available with parental consent.

In my view, this is AS IT SHOULD BE.

I do NOT want an authoritarian State making those decisions, either. I trust parents more than I trust the State. A few parents will make bad decisions, but that is a cost of limited government.

Everyone in this thread is advocating for the nanny state, and they do not even seem to know it.

The clitoral circumcision (CC) question is the most interesting and most problematic. Obviously, I think it is a horrific procedure which serves no medical purpose,. The distinction seems to involve whether there is medical benefit, but the majority on this thread see no medical benefit in the Younger case either. At this child’s age, I agree with them and with Dr. Soh re transition, so that would seem to end any disagreement, but that does not answer the broader question OR the CC question.

My gut tells me that prohibition of CC is acceptable because there is absolutely zero evidence that it serves ANY legitimate medical purpose (as compared to significant dispute on medical gender reassignment), but even in that case the libertarian in me still rebels against a government prohibition.

In the end, I accept a prohibition on CC because I see ZERO chance of medical benefit (making CC a form of assault or battery), where as I would leave the decision to a parent in cases where the science is ambiguous. I suppose that is one distinction between a pragmatic libertarian and an anarchist ideologue. I have never claimed to be the latter.

quote:

---

The state did take the decision away from a parent. You wrote an awful lot to contradict yourself.

---

No, the State determine which parent would make the decision. It did not usurp parental decision-making in favor of making the decision itself from Austin.

Remember that Mr. Younger lobbied the Legislature for a law precluding medical reassignment before a certain age, and he had no success with a GOP legislature.

quote:

---

So, should the State step in and take this medical decision away from a parent?

---

This isn't a medical decision. We're talking about elective procedures that are actually not beneficial to the child even if you completely believe the transgender nonsense.

quote:

---

What other medical decision should the state take away from parents?

---

The state should step in and halt literally any elective procedures that are nothing more than child abuse.

Defending this lack of action by the state is disgusting. I'm not even sure how you could possibly defend the state deciding that someone who wants to do this to a child should be in charge of that child.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The mother (non-biological mother at that) began telling James he was a girl as early as age 2. frickING TWO YEARS OLD!

She would put him in "timeout" (lock him in his room) and tell him, "The monsters only eat little boys, not little girls."

She would withhold affection from him and punish him whenever he acted like a boy, but then praise him and coddle him whenever he acted effeminate or agree he was a girl.

This was essentially the catalyst for their divorce when James turned 3. They had been fighting about her doing this for over a year before the father moved out.

The mother continually dressed James up like a girl just before the father's custody days just to piss him off.

Then at age 5, at James' birthday party, in front of a ton of people and other kids, the mother had James' "coming out party" where she named him "Luna" and told everyone from that point on he was a girl for good. She enrolled him in school as a girl named Luna. AGE FIVE!

---

Did this actually happen, or is it what someone heard happen? If it actually happened, then how on earth could anyone give this woman custody over a hamster, much less a child?

---

experience tells me that the father testified to all of this, with no corroboration from any other witness.

quote:

---

experience tells me that the father testified to all of this, with no corroboration from any other witness.

---

Does your experience tell you that he made it up out of whole cloth?

quote:

---

My gut tells me that prohibition of CC is acceptable because there is absolutely zero evidence that it serves ANY legitimate medical purpose

---

Neither does cosmetic surgery or tattoos (you might could argue for liposuction) and you're ok with parents having those procedures performed on small children.

I don't necessarily disagree with you but I'm not following your logic here.