Could prove extremely beneficial
Let’s get them even younger says “charity.”
A leading charity for young people has called on the SNP to allow children as young as 12 to legally change their gender without their parents’ consent.
Let’s also allow them to drive, fly planes, perform surgery, cut down trees, fight fires, join the military. What could go wrong?
Children in Scotland, which receives more than £1 million a year in public money, said allowing pre-teens to obtain gender recognition certificates could prove “extremely beneficial” and would help “normalise trans identities”.
Ah there it is – it’s not about benefiting the children at all, it’s about normalizing the ludicrous claim that men become women by saying “I’m a woman.”
Under current Scottish Government plans, the legal age at which someone can change gender is to be reduced from 18 to 16.
How alarming this is depends on whether they really mean gender or in fact mean sex. Changing gender needn’t be irrevocable, but trying to change sex causes physical changes that can’t be entirely reversed. Journalists apparently haven’t learned to be clear on this point.
“Lowering the age at which people have the opportunity to apply for a gender recognition certificate to 12 would ensure that far more children and young people are able to undergo this process, should they wish to,” the Edinburgh-based organisation said.
Yes, obviously it would, but it would also ensure that far more children who are way too young to know how to question claims about gender and sex and identity and all the rest of the ideology will be able to “undergo this process,” which is not necessarily a good outcome. There is such a thing as social contagion, even though the ideology furiously denies that social contagion plays any role in the surge of children and adolescents claiming to be trans. If social contagion plays no part then what is this “charity” even for? Get real: the “charity” is all about promoting the trans ideology, in other words, it’s all about social contagion.
“Parents provide a vital support to children and have a key role to play in this process for their children. However, we do not believe they should have a final say on whether their child can apply to have their lived gender legally recognised.”
But children age 12 should. Cool. Again: bring on the 12-year-old pilots and bus drivers and surgeons. We can’t wait for the new utopia.
Advocates of the changes, including Nicola Sturgeon, say the moves are intended to support a marginalised minority group in which mental health problems are rife.
Great, and people with mental health problems are definitely always able to tell what’s best for them, because that’s what mental health problem means: superior wisdom and insight on complicated subjects.
You know who else has mental health problems rife in the population? Women. Strange no one seems to be noticing that.
So, to ask an unpopular question (which I suspect has been asked and answered already), does the rife mental health issues lead to the the trans identity, or does the trans identity, mental dissonance, and hardships that come with it result in mental illness?
Rob, those aren’t mutually exclusive.
Rob,
Co-morbidities of all sorts are deliberately ignored by this industry. That ought to be a major scandal all by itself. As we know, a lot of young people seeking to transition are on the autism spectrum. Are we supposed to believe that’s a coincidence? That autism causes transness? That transness causes autism?
Or is it possible that people on the autism spectrum have more reason than most to want to believe in a pathway that (falsely) promises to easily fix lifelong problems?
Exactly the same is true of mental health problems, of course. More so, I’d expect. But the autism example is a lot more stark, because we know it to be a physical, developmental condition, which has societal and relationship implications.
And it is deliberately ignored. The Tavistock made a particular, concerted and persistent effort to ignore it.