The NHS is treating nursery-age children who believe they are transgender after watering down its own guidance, The Telegraph can reveal.
Some goodly portion of kids at that age will think they are dinosaurs too.
Sigh.
Lock up the parents, that’s what I say.
‘Some goodly portion of kids at that age will think they are dinosaurs too.’
Obviously the kids have better sense than their parents then.
Lock up the “doctors” as well.
Far more likely that the parents be locked up for denying their child’s true gender.
Trans toddlers are vegan cats – we all know they aren’t making that choice.
Lock up the parents, that’s what I say.
It’s usually the mothers who are mental and the father, if any is present, always has that utterly defeated look.
There are three major possibilities. Either kids mentally are boys or girls because that’s what they are told and taught by their parents and the people around them (nurture), or because hydroxytestosterone in the womb changes their brain development in differing ways characteristic of male and female minds (nature), or they think about the pros and cons of each and form an opinion about it (choice). The nature vs nurture debate is an old one.
Mental characteristics in general can be the result of any of them. So, your nationality and national character is clearly nurture. You are raised an Englishman; it’s not something in the blood. Whether you are extravert or introvert is nature – the D4DR gene codes for a dopamine receptor, different versions change your sensitivity to dopamine and therefore preference for dopamine or acetylcholine generating activities. Whether you like strawberry ice cream is probably a choice, although genes for taste receptors are known to have an effect on food preferences. Different mental characteristics can have different causes, or mixtures of causes.
And then of course there is play-pretend and suspension of disbelief, where people with one characteristic can mentally simulate having a different characteristic.
The view that mental sex differences were entirely due to the way you was brought up was popular with radical lefty feminists in the 70s. (The ‘War of the Sexes’ was seen as a more popular substitute for the Marxist ‘Class Struggle’ as a path to a popular revolution.) Girls only liked playing with dolls and boys with cars and guns because of society’s expectations. They were taught it. and in particular, girls were *taught* to be less assertive and to prefer nurturing activities, which resulted in different life choices later. If we raised boys and girls equally, they said, the sex differences in their characters would vanish and we would get social equality as adults. Matt Ridley talks a bit about the history of the debate in his book ‘The Red Queen’.
The question is, how do you tell the difference? Do your kids really like strawberry ice cream or are they only pretending? Do they only like it because their parents taught them to or told them they did? Do they only like it because of marketing, or to fit in with their friends at school? Can you make a different choice, and choose to dislike it? Or to prefer broccolli? How many parents have had this “eat your vegetables or you won’t get any pudding” fight? Do the kids really know? How likely is it that so many kids make the same choices? Are the kids who act differently and say they don’t like ice cream only pretending? Is this preference for ice cream over celery a social trend? Did we evolve to eat strawberry ice cream in the wild? Should parents beat their children to make them conform to society’s expectations and rules? Is it all the parents’ fault?
Yes, Mr Grist, we will operate on that tumour in a while. You’re in the queue behind little Daisy having her breasts removed as part of her transition to Daniel and David who is having his penis and testicles removed as part of his transition to Mildred. Yes, we know it’s urgent Mr Grist, but as a result of our legal department’s guidance on the Supreme Court judgement we’ve rearranged our priorities…
@ Jonathan
It’s usually the mothers who are mental and the father, if any is present, always has that utterly defeated look.
Esther Ghey and Peter Spooner – https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/02/brianna-ghey-father-new-relationship-transgender-child/
eat your vegetables or you won’t get any pudding
People have pudding?
If the child’s imaginary friend is also transgender will they doctors be treating the friend as well?
Doctors mutilating children should lose their license.
Then long prison sentence.
Jonathan – It’s usually the mothers who are mental and the father, if any is present, always has that utterly defeated look.
Many such cases!
The former head of the infamous “trans children” “charity” Mermaids, took her 16 year old son to Thailand to get him castrated.
The boy’s father was unable (?) to prevent this:
Green’s apparent eagerness to send children down a medical pathway stemmed, many believe, from her own personal experience. In a YouTube video from 2017 — which has since been deleted — she reveals that the moment her toddler son could express himself he was gravitating towards ‘things that were stereotypically female’. She was happy that his favourite outfits were a tutu and a Snow White costume, and concluded that he was ‘very sensitive, quite effeminate and probably gay’.
However, the boy’s father, Tim, did not approve of their young son’s behaviour. It created tensions within the marriage and the couple went to counselling.
The result was that the little boy’s ‘girly toys’ such as Polly Pocket and My Little Pony were put away and he was made aware they were ‘not appropriate’. Heartbreakingly, in Green’s words ‘a suddenly confident, happy little boy became quiet, withdrawn, very clingy and tearful’.
The result was that the little boy’s ‘girly toys’ such as Polly Pocket and My Little Pony were put away and he was made aware they were ‘not appropriate’. Heartbreakingly, in Green’s words ‘a suddenly confident, happy little boy became quiet, withdrawn, very clingy and tearful’.
But what happened next perhaps explains Green’s dogmatic approach to trans issues in later life. She returned the toys to her son and, by the age of four, he had announced to his mother that ‘God had made a mistake’ and he was supposed to be a girl.
Aged seven, he was referred to the Tavistock clinic and diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
By the time he was 12, he was living as ‘Jackie’ and his warring parents had separated.
Imagine thinking a toddler can be “gay” or that a 4 year old can be “trans”. This is what we’re dealing with.
Baron Munchausen wept.
Does no-one tell these people that their fake cosmetic surgery new genitals won’t work, in any shape or form? And that as a result of this simple fact thy cannot be considered to have changed sex, because they will not gain the other sex’s functionality?
NiV – Should parents beat their children to make them conform to society’s expectations and rules?
Not always, sometimes a roundhouse kick will suffice.
Gamecock
May 15, 2025 at 11:13 am
Thank you Gamecock!!
Norman – Does no-one tell these people that their fake cosmetic surgery new genitals won’t work, in any shape or form?
Not until it’s too late.
The prognosis for people who undergo transgender genital origami is shockingly awful, it’s like reading the reports of Unit 731. Lifelong complications and excruciating pain are common, so is filling the room with the smell of shit from their leaking crotch wound. In better days, we hanged Nazi doctors for crimes against their patients.
But most of them lie to each other about this. Transgenders who regret the surgery are excommunicated from tranny circles, only positive, unrealistic, and fantastical takes are allowed. (There’s hordes of eunuchs out there who insist their suppurating necrotic blood hole is indistinguishable or even superior to a woman’s vagina)
You can understand why. Misery loves company, and so do people in Hell. Admitting to yourself that you’ve made the biggest mistake of your life must be extremely painful.
Steve
I actually thought your comment in post #1.
Baron Munchausen wept.
Was ‘Sachsenshausen wept’
Your last post is so true and it’s an irony that after we (well most normal people – obviously not Richard Murphy) are commemorating the defeat of Fascism/ Nazism we actually discover that real Nazis, whether in ‘pro Palestine’, ‘DIE’ , ‘Net Zero’ or ‘LGBT Alphabet Soup Child molesters’ guise are not only present but have a significant presence in Parliament and the judiciary.
As you say, ideally anyone involved in the whole racket, especially if applying it to children, should be looking at substantial custodial sentences and if Reform were to put that in as policy it would have overwhelming support. The likes of Carrie can go to hell.
“looking at substantial custodial sentences”: wouldn’t it be juster to cut their goollies off?
VP – the Doctor’s Trial mainly concerned Aktion T4, Nazi Germany’s version of the “assisted dying” laws Labour are bringing in to further reduce the native population.
Many of those men were rightly hanged, but nb that Nazis didn’t think of themselves as the baddies. They thought they were modern, progressive and enlightened beyond the “superstition” of Christianity…
@NiV – “There are three major possibilities.” … “how do you tell the difference?”
The case of David Reimer suggests that it’s nature. Obviously it could be more complicated – a choice for some people, nurture for others, and nature for the rest. But it’s certainly a very plausible starting point that people are born male or female and this cannot be changed.
@Steve – “They thought they were modern, progressive and enlightened beyond the “superstition” of Christianity”
It is nothing but foolishness to think that you are right merely because you disagree with someone who is wrong. It should have been obvious to them that they could be just as wrong because the truth was a third possibility.
“The case of David Reimer suggests that it’s nature. Obviously it could be more complicated – a choice for some people, nurture for others, and nature for the rest. But it’s certainly a very plausible starting point that people are born male or female and this cannot be changed.”
Agreed. That was Matt Ridley’s conclusion, too. David Reimer I think was mentioned in the discussion of the evidence that social and parental pressure didn’t work in changing somebody’s mind about their gender. So, too, were a variety of cases where the biological process went wrong. The Marxist feminists turned out to be incorrect. (Surprise!) But the science that said it was nature was also the same science that came up with the ‘transgender’ theory in the first place.
If mental gender is a thing, and is wired into the brain from birth, independently of urinary plumbing, then it is possible that it can get wired wrong. Cases where people seemed mentally more like the other gender and wouldn’t/couldn’t change even in the face of the intense social pressure and upbringing demanding they conform to society’s expectations was supposedly evidence that it was wired in and not taught, or a choice. Ironic, really. Transgender theory was originally a right wing position.
“They thought they were modern, progressive and enlightened beyond the “superstition” of Christianity…”
I think that was mentioned in item 24 of the NSDAP 25 point plan announced at Nuremberg in 1920, wasn’t it?
“We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: THE COMMON INTEREST OVER INDIVIDUAL INTEREST.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program
“Positive Christianity” isn’t considered Christianity by other Christians, and it edited out the bits of Christ’s message they didn’t like. (That’s not exactly unique to the NSDAP, though.) But if we’re talking about how the NSDAP officially thought of themselves…
Charles – my point is that our society also thinks it’s modern, progressive and enlightened.
Apparently based on the high number of babies we snuff in utero, our caring approach to killing off the elderly and sick, and our determination to ensure no child is left unmolested by grooming gangs or LGBTQ++.
It is nothing but foolishness to think that you are right merely because you disagree with someone who is wrong.
I know I am right when I obey the standing orders God gave us. When you think about it, that’s the only thing we can be sure of.
NiV – “Positive Christianity” isn’t considered Christianity by other Christians, and it edited out the bits of Christ’s message they didn’t like.
Yarp, it was bollocks. Although the Nazis were usually diplomatic enough to avoid deliberately offending Christians, the Nazi leadership was decidedly anti-Christian and Hitler often spoke privately of his contempt for the followers of the Man Jesus.
A Wall Street Article quoted Hitler saying, “‘It’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion,” Hitler complained to his pet architect Albert Speer. “Why did it have to be Christianity, with its meekness and flabbiness?” Islam was a Männerreligion—a “religion of men”—and hygienic too. The “soldiers of Islam” received a warrior’s heaven, “a real earthly paradise” with “houris” and “wine flowing.” This, Hitler argued, was much more suited to the “Germanic temperament” than the “Jewish filth and priestly twaddle” of Christianity.”
Many such cases! But NB Hitler got his wish eventually.
@Steve – “I know I am right when I obey the standing orders God gave us. When you think about it, that’s the only thing we can be sure of.”
How can you be sure that the orders were given by God? Are you infallible?
Comments are closed.