Rushed
Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, the nation’s leading practitioner of transgender youth medicine, faces a medical-negligence lawsuit for the irreversible treatments she administered to a former patient, who has since detransitioned.
It’s interesting that even the National Review endorses trans ideology by using trans ideology language. What exactly is “transgender youth medicine”? In what sense is it “medicine”? Why is TNR calling it medicine in the same breath as “medical-negligence lawsuit” and “irreversible treatments”? Also whaddya mean “treatments”?
It’s nuts. How can we even talk about this if the language is so corrupted that even critics get it wrong? Shocker: maybe puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones aren’t always “treatment” at all.
Kaya Clementine Breen, 20, alleges Olson-Kennedy, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA), and numerous other defendants rushed her into transitioning to a male in spite of her struggles with mental health and history of suffering sexual abuse. The plaintiff’s transgender treatments involved puberty blockers at age 12, cross-sex hormones at 13, and finally a double mastectomy at 14. The complaint was filed Thursday in Los Angeles, where the pediatric hospital is located.
Olson-Kennedy, who serves as medical director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at CHLA, allegedly performed no psychological assessment, failed to ask Breen about her past trauma and mental state, and diagnosed gender dysphoria without consulting any other physicians. Furthermore, Olson-Kennedy allegedly did not adequately take into account the detrimental effects that puberty blockers would have on Breen’s bone density.
There’s a reason we don’t let children drive cars. There’s a reason we don’t let toddlers play with loaded guns. There’s a reason we shouldn’t chop off children’s breasts or genitals on request.
The lawsuit accuses the primary defendant of outright lying in several instances. Olson-Kennedy lied to Breen and her parents that puberty blockers were “completely reversible,” according to the suit. The pediatric doctor also allegedly lied about Breen’s purported suicidal thoughts to her parents when trying to convince them about hormonal therapy.
The young girl had no suicidal thoughts, the lawsuit says, nor did she express that she had any during her medical appointments.
So then why was Olson-Kennedy so eager to cut off her breasts and block her puberty?
Olson-Kennedy then allegedly lied that Breen would commit suicide if she did not receive cross-sex hormones. Confronted with their daughter’s hypothetical death, the parents relented and agreed to the testosterone treatment. Breen also hesitantly agreed.
It’s kind of like talking people into buying a house they don’t really want, only worse. Much much worse.
Olson-Kennedy has come under intense scrutiny for refusing to publish the findings of a nearly $10 million study funded by the National Institutes of Health that found no evidence that puberty blockers improved the mental health of children.
In a revealing interview with the New York Times in October, she admitted that the long-awaited study would be “weaponized” by critics of transgender youth treatments and that the findings would be used in court to argue against puberty blockers. The study began in 2015.
Note how completely backward she has everything. “Oh no, we mustn’t publish the study, it will inform people that ‘transgender youth treatments’ are harmful quackery, and we don’t want that, we want transgender youth to keep getting the harmful quackery.” She wanted reasons for not handing out puberty blockers concealed so that she could keep handing out these destructive meds.
Yeah, you can sell the house. And why double mastectomy if they were reluctant? I can see getting people to believe that puberty blockers are reversible (especially if they bully them enough that they agree on the spot and don’t go out and research). Surely no one would think a double mastectomy is reversible; breast tissue doesn’t grow back.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail; and that seems to be the attitude of the psychopaths who jumped on the ‘transition’ gravy train early, to make a fortune before everyone woke up to what was actually going on.
It’s amazing that what they probably think is “neutral” terminology is in fact decidedly partisan. Ideology is baked into the styyle guides used to report this. They’ve absorbed so much of it by osmosis that they don’t realize they’re spouting it themselves. I wonder if any of this is due to a refusal to accept that what they’re reporting on is so horrific, and that they can’t believe that it’s as awful as it really is? Or maybe they’re afraid of potential lawsuits? But, put into plain, “uncaptured” language, these “treatments”, as I’ve noted previously, are torture and butchery.
Olson-Kennedy should be asked same questions that Rowling put to Sally Hines:
If she cant answer them, she shouldn’t be let anywhere near children.
This is the biggest lie of all, that these “treatments” can change somebody’s sex. No regime of drugs, hormones and surgery on Earth can do that. They can only ever produce a crude approximation of the opposite sex, leaving the recipients of such modification stunted, drugged, and mutilated specimens of the sex they were born and the only sex they will ever be. That anyone suggested to her that she could become male was lying, as it is not in anyone’s power or ability to perform such a feat. Passing for male is entirely different. Appearance is not actuality; naming is not becoming. As we’ve seen, corrupting the language can work wonders in changing policy, but euphemism and camouflage don’t change the nature of material reality.
Trans identified people can sometimes pass as the sex they are not because our inherited ability to determine the sex of others is not perfect, and can be fooled by clever mimicry. But mimicry is all it is. A dishonest signal is still dishonest. The organisms that escape predation by adopting the appearance of toxic or dangerous species do not become those species. They remain “sheep in wolf’s clothing.” The “eyespots” of a butterfly do not make it an owl; those on a caterpillar do not turn it into a snake. These phony signals themselves aren’t perfect; they only have to be good enough to fool or startle for a moment. The mimicry is also part of these craetures’ genetic heritage; they’ve got no choice in the matter. They’ve got the spots whether they want them or not. If they don’t work, they’re lunch.
The ability to pull off a longer bluffing game requires more “effort,” like that employed by the many species of ant-mimicing spiders, which are like tiny wolves in sheep’s clothing. The degree of visual and behavioural similarity can be quite striking. Again, it’s instinctive. The spiders don’t choose this life style. But even though they truly are “born this way”, they’re never going to mate with ants.
Similarly, the more “work” a trans identified person has done (depending on their original body size and shape), the greater potential for passing. But there’s an important difference; while the psychological conditions from which this arises are real, they’re not so much a material state of being as a miswiring or misfiring of the brain. Nobody is “born in the wrong body”. Nobody goes through the “wrong” puberty.There are strong elements of social construcytion and indeed choice that are completely absent in animal mimicry. Despite the claims of trans activists and gender ideologues, it’s not a life or death situation. Or at least it isn’t one until the activists convince their marks that it is.
In humans, the needs and strategies behind trans deception are going to differ between the sexes, with interesting parallels to the non-human examples noted above. Trans identified females, trying to escape sexist, stereotypical “womanhood”, are going to try to look like men. They represent no threat to the demographic into which they’re trying to blend. The threat is going to be in the other direction. They’re like “sheep in wolf’s clothing,” avoiding male predation by trying not to look like prey. TiFs might have a slightly easier time, as men aren’t usually judged and policed for their appearance as much as women are. They’re not going to be subject to as much scrutiny. Most men aren’t going to notice, or care, or give a shit.
Trans identified males are invading female spaces. They are the intruders and the agressors. Beause they are male, they will always represent a threat to their target demographic. Their insistence on disregarding female boundaries is a huge red flag. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are the predators trying to look like prey. TiMs have a higher bar to clear, as women have historically been under a microscope for every choice made regarding their appearance, both from men, and from other women. The stakes for women are higher in potentially having men in their spaces. TiMs are going to have a harder time passing, as a (statistically) taller, bulkier male frame is going to tend to be harder to pass off as a female one. Ditto male facial features. Plastic surgery can help amplify the false signal, but it’s still a false signal. Fooling isn’t being. Passing isn’t belonging, or being permitted. It will always be illicit. It will always be decption. Those who fail to overcome the trans version of the “uncanny valley” are left yelling “It’s MA’AM! at those who remain unconvinced. Though given the degree of institutional capture, women have less recourse for complaint and redress from male intrusion, however blatant. Advatage wolves.
I hope Breen sues them all into the ground. I hope that she can show that one of these ghouls promised to be able to turn her into a male. I hope more such suits follow and that the media learns to report them in a truthful manner that doesn’t take the genderist side as some kind of given or neutral position. Fingers crossed.