From Jackie Mautner at Liberation News, newspaper of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL):
The recent death of transgender teen Leelah Alcorn has sparked discussion about the need to “fix society,” in the words she used in her tragic suicide note. Her story is one that is all too common for girls like her who struggle to find acceptance among family members, friends, teachers, and of course society in general.
Her family refused to accept her for who she was, forced her into so-called Christian “conversion therapy,” and even pulled her from school and isolated her from her friends for long periods of time. Even after her death, her mother continues to misgender Leelah by using the wrong name and pronouns. But as cruel as her family may seem, they are a symptom of a much larger issue—that being the society we live in, a society which treats trans people as second class, as sexual objects, and ultimately as disposable beings.
Living as a trans person isn’t easy. Our families, who we might rely on for support, may be ignorant about the issues we face, or even hostile towards us. Medical professionals may not be educated about us, making visits to the hospital or clinic uncomfortable at best. Even walking outside can be dangerous as reactions vary from catcalling, being laughed at, to threats of violence that could escalate at any moment.
“The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren’t treated the way I was, they’re treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights,” Leelah wrote. As fighters for trans liberation, it is our duty to make that dream of a better future the reality of our present. But what are the concrete ways in which we can do that right now?
Leelah offered some ideas, such as teaching about gender in schools. Schools are often the battleground where trans students are denied access to the bathroom or the sports teams that matches their identity, even despite the U.S. Department of Education’s guidelines, which explicitly state that trans students are protected from sex-based discrimination under Title IX. Conservatives have often used fear mongering to try and block such protections, arguing that this would protect mischievous children who might claim to be “trans for a day.” And yet that very misconception—that one could be “trans for a day”—underlines the need for education about gender in schools.
Gender education
Gender is not binary—it is not either/or—and yet we’re taught from the moment we are born that there are boys and there are girls, and as we grow up we learn to differentiate the two based on certain physical characteristics. The reality is that human bodies are diverse, and people have about as many ways of identifying themselves as there are people existing in the world.
Some people are cisgender—meaning the sex they were assigned at birth (male or female) is the sex that they feel comfortable being identified as. Some people are intersex, meaning they cannot be classified as clearly male or female because their bodies may have attributes of both, or lack some characteristics considered necessary to be defined as one or the other. And still others identify as transgender, which is an umbrella term denoting a person whose gender identity does not align with the sex they were assigned at birth.
Educating people on the diversity of gender could allow us to move beyond mere tolerance and into acceptance and even appreciation for the multitudes of gender identities and expressions. Or in the words of Leslie Feinberg, “We have a right to live openly and proudly … where our lives are suppressed, everyone is denied an understanding of the rich diversity of sex and gender expression and experience that exist in human society.”
We need laws protecting us so that we may live openly and proudly. We need laws that recognize anti-trans violence as hate crimes in every state. We need laws such as the proposed Leelah’s law that seeks to put a stop to Christian “conversion therapy.”
We need better access to health care such as mental health care and trans health care, as well as knowledgeable medical professionals. In Cuba, trans specific health care—like all health care in that country—is completely covered.
We need to change so much, but we should also recognize that society will never change unless we use our voices to raise awareness and demand change.
Promises made to Leelah at New Haven Justice for Jane vigil
At a vigil that took place in New Haven, Conn., on Jan. 10 hosted by Justice for Jane, Leelah was memorialized through promises to her. The following are selected quotes from the vigil:
“I want to make a promise that I will keep fighting for our community, no matter how hard the struggle gets. Jane is 17 just like you, Leelah. I promise to fight to make sure she lives the life you deserved, and to fight for all young people who are being abused like you and Jane. We will keep the struggle alive for you, and we will tear down the system that took your life, keeps our community down and discourages us from living.”
—IV, Party for Socialism and Liberation/J4J
“We need to fight to end conversion therapy, but I have little faith that the state will enforce a law against it.”
—Erika, vigil co-organizer
“I’m a Native American person, and I pledge to give my solidarity to all Two-Spirit people. I promise to keep fighting. We can gather here today, tomorrow, next week, every month, but if we don’t make a commitment, each of us, in our hearts, to be out there at all times, fighting to tear down this system, people will keep dying and we will keep having to have vigils.”
—Norman, PSL
“I promise to continue learning about the struggles the trans community faces and educate others about them. I promise to stay in the streets fighting for you all.”
—Justin, PSL
On Dec. 28, 2014, we lost a beautiful human being, full of potential. “My death needs to mean something,” she said. Let’s fulfill that hope; let’s fix society by dreaming of—and demanding—a better one.
Given possible factors in both directions it’s not clear whether it would lead to more or fewer rapes. For that matter going to one seaters, aside from the high cost, would also not clearly lead to more or fewer rapes. On one hand it would make it much less likely that someone would walk in while someone else is in the bathroom and rape them, but if they drag them in there or push in at the same time they don’t need to worry about someone else coming in after them and putting an end to it.
Well, it logically follows that more rapes may occur (sorry, been studying for the LSATs.) But my point was that eliminating sex-segregation creates less situations where rape can occur, not more.
I agree in general, and instrumentally, with local rule. That is, I don’t think local rule is some moral imperative; I don’t see a moral distinction between a bureaucrat in my town hall, a bureaucrat in Hartford, and a bureaucrat in Washington – the only moral distinction that I see is between “self-rule” and “other-rule.” But, in any case, local rule is frequently useful and promotes liberty, and to that extent, I support it.
“Ultimately, the decision rests with the school.”
This should read “Ultimately, the decision should rest with the school.” A bureaucrat from Sacramento or Austin or whatever should not tell the schools what to do. I believe in local rule.
As for the other issue, if you create additional situations in which rape can occur then it logically follows that more rapes will occur.
Take it as an assumption that most people obey the signs. For some reason, take it as an assumption that most rapists would be stopped by the signs. I claim that more rapists would be stopped by realizing that it’s quite likely for another male to walk into the room.
I agree with the comments above that gender-segregated bathrooms are a much better idea than sex-segregated bathrooms, although neither might be totally ideal since it’s still imposing a gender-binary.
Put shortly – I find the claim that I’m putting ideology ahead of safety to be wrong-headed, since I don’t see any safety improvement from the segregated bathrooms. In fact, I pointed out at least one reason that safety would be enhanced by unsegregated bathrooms.
The only plausible way to claim that safety is enhanced by segregated bathrooms, as far as I can see, is to believe that there is a serious risk of a person going into a bathroom with no intent to rape, realizing that his penis is out while using a urinal and that one of the stalls might, possibly, contain a woman in a state of partial undress, and deciding on the spur of the moment that this is a good reason to rape someone. This person would also have to not consider whatsoever the fact that a male can walk in at any time. I don’t buy this as a serious risk.
On the other hand, a person who intends to rape someone can certainly find a womans room, know that it likely contains women in various states of undress, and that it’s highly unlikely that anyone with the physical strength to oppose them will be present or will enter soon. I think that’s the greater risk.
I’m not sure that is true. There’s such a stigma around male on male rape that it is far less likely to be reported. And all the nightmare scenarios that Saturn conjures up about girls getting raped in bathrooms already exist in sex-segregated bathrooms for male on male or female on female rape, even if rapists cared about signs on doors.
Yeah, that would be fine.
Right. Some people will walk an extra half mile to cross at a crosswalk and wait until the sign says walk when there are no cars coming. Others will run from the cops. They’re usually not the same people.
We’re supposed to believe that boys who will ignore a girl screaming, crying, begging him/them to stop, twisting to get away, kicking, punching, clawing and/or biting and the possibility of being caught in a public bathroom will be stopped by a girls sign on the door?
Being in various stages of undress is kind of besides the point. Someone who is willing to commit a sex crime is going to be stopped by pulling down a zipper or two? Yeah, about as much as by a sign on the door. There are all kinds of places a girl might be alone – car, piano practice room, gym, stairwell, etc, etc. And as for a bathroom, a group of girls or a boy or group of boys who are not OK with rape or perhaps even a teacher, security guard or staffer could walk in at any time. But they’re going to be stopped by a sign on a door and a zipper.
That can happen a lot of places, not just a bathroom. And the world really won’t end if she sees a penis, even if it’s not one she wants to see.
They aren’t places of privacy unless they are one person bathrooms. News flash: boys get raped and sexually harassed too. It happens all the time, eve though it’s less likely to be talked about or reported. And “places of advocacy”? Are you serious?
Not if it’s a government school. And private schools should still not be allowed to abuse children, for example by forcing trans girls to use the boys bathroom.
Suicide can be a rational response to physical or emotional pain. On the other hand, it can also be the product of a severe mental illness. Similarly, mental illness can be the result of abusive treatment or traumatic experiences. On the other hand, it can also be caused by purely biological factors, such as chemical imbalances. Often, it is a combination of both.
As far as this specific case, I honestly don’t know that much about the details, other than what has been said on this thread, so what I am about to say is largely speculation on my part. Having said that, I seriously doubt that Leelah’s parents were intentionally trying to drive their daughter to suicide, or even really considered that possibility. Rather, I would guess that they actually thought they were helping their “son” by exposing “him” to a “tough love” approach, which, as is so often the case, ended up backfiring, and in a characteristically tragic fashion.
Now, it is difficult to say whether this “tough love” approach was the primary catalyst that drove an otherwise stable person to suicide, or whether it merely exacerbated some preexisting mental illness. Regardless, however, it clearly contributed to the feelings of hopelessness and despair that led to her death. Hopefully, other parents of transgender children (and other children with sexual identity issues) will learn from this, and regardless of their own cultural or religious beliefs, they will avoid emulating the misguided “tough love” approach of the Alcorns.
We don’t know much about William, but I suspect he doesn’t have a wife or daughter. Perhaps he even means well, at least for heterosexual children.
And as far as sympathy for Leelah’s parents, of course I have sympathy. They made some very wrong parenting calls,. and they’ll never get over it. Their child won’t either. I sure as heck don’t give them a free pass, though. Anyone with kids know they turn out differently than you had hoped. Maybe they don’t get as good grades as you’d hoped or maybe they’re a terrible athlete, when athletics are a family tradition. A good parent unconditionally loves their child, even as they try to point the child in the right direction. If Leelah had known unconditional love from her parents, it’s likely she’d still be alive.
“According to Amnesty International they should be segregated by sex. This is a right of girls.”
I find that to be a very strange statement. I think a more accurate statrment would be: “All children should be kept as safe as possible. That is a right of all children (including transgender children).”.
Surprisingly to some maybe, I think segregated bathrooms in public schools is fine. I don’t think there should have been legislation, as there was in CA, demanding how transgendered students be treated. I think each school should have the arrangement that works out best for them. Perhaps the transgendered child could have been allowed to use a rarely used bathroom on campus, or perhaps there’s a nearby handicapped stall. Each transgender personality is different, and a school administration should handle each case as works best for everyone.
William, all three of the scenarios above are absurd. Those situations can happen anywhere, not just in de-segreated bathrooms. They perpetuate the myth that females are fragile little things who need to be sheltered. No, little girls need to be taught from day one to SCREAM when something starts that she doesn’t like. Rape is something we understand is a threat and a possiblity, but it shouldn’t become crippling to anyone. I heard this rumor that boys can be, and often are, raped. It’s a human threat, although I know it happens more often to females. Would this be the case if females were raised less as victims, and were taught to defenc themselves from a young age? I think possibly not.
I consider rape as a threat just like I might consider having a heart attack as a threat. I do what I reasonably can to lessen the risk, and otherwise live my life. I never needed to be sheltered or coddled any more than my brothers were.
I’m actually fine with sex-segregated bathrooms, as long as we realize that a trans woman IS a woman, not a boy pretending to be a girl, not a boy who thinks he’s a girl; she is a girl who happens to be in the body of a male. This is not difficult to understand. The rape argument is a red herring & a result of bigoted & outdated views by small-minded people with no multicultural values, like Billy Saturn here.
“Should bathrooms be segregated, by the way, by sex or by gender, in your view?”
According to Amnesty International they should be segregated by sex. This is a right of girls. I agree with this view. It protects privacy and against sexual violence.
Children generally obey the signs. They learn it by a young age and respect it once they grow older. If that custom goes away, a few unwanted scenarios seem more likely to arise:
1. A teenage boy is alone in the bathroom. A girl enters a stall. Nobody else is there and both are in various stages of undress. He sees an opportunity and proceeds to enter the girl’s stall and rape her.
2. A girl is in the bathroom alone. A group of boys go in there and proceed to gang-rape the girl.
3. A girl goes into a bathroom and a boy at a urinal exposes himself to the girl against her will
Yes, this all could still happen with sex-segregated bathrooms, but it is less likely to happen in a sex-segregated bathroom society because the students are more likely to respect the sign on the door. Bathrooms should remain places of privacy, not places of advocacy.
I see it as an easy value judgement between two policies: a new policy that negatively affects 50% of the school body or a standard policy that theoretically negatively affects 1/500 of the school body.
This is the argument I would make if I ran a school. If you want to run your school differently that is your business. Ultimately, the decision rests with the school.
Well, boys do, but really, let me see if I follow this.
I am standing at a urinal pissing. So a girl walks in. First thing that goes thru my head is “well, since I have it out anyway, I may as well commit a sex crime.” Because what stops rapists is the inconvenience of pulling down a zipper. That, and a “girls” sign on the door?
I wasn’t commenting on the grammar of not using a possessive; I was pointing out that there’s no such thing as a girls room, punctuated however you like, without sex-segregated bathrooms.
As Paulie said, people don’t expose their genitals in bathrooms either, they use stalls. Also, the mere presence of genitals without fabric over them is not a cause of rape. I really don’t understand this argument at all, to be honest. Is it that guys are incapable of being exposed to women using a bathroom (unlike men, women uniformly use stalls, by the way) without raping them? Or is it that sharing a bathroom presents an opportunity? I can only assume that latter – but if so, the opportunity is actually lessened by doing away with sex-segregated bathrooms. A person who intends to rape someone, and goes into a womans room, with sex-segregated bathrooms, is reasonably sure that no other men will enter while he’s in there. Not so without sex-segregated classrooms.
Should bathrooms be segregated, by the way, by sex or by gender, in your view?
Girls normally don’t expose genitals in bathrooms, they go in stalls. And rapists would be stopped by a little stick figure in a dress drawn on a door? Really, you are seriously trying to insist that is a real point?
It’s a personal decision, and physical health is just one of the many factors to consider.
No, the suicide was due to being driven to that point; the ideas are outgoing advice with the hope that fewer people will be driven to that point in the future. There’s a difference.
Wow! Is this jump on William Saturn Day?
“It was a completely rational”
Wrong. Right there. Suicide is never rational for a person in (presumably) good physical health.
“That’s far different from it being a political point.”
Perhaps I should have quoted where the article says, “Leelah offered some ideas, such as teaching about gender in schools [etc.] . . .” – These are proposed policy changes so it is a political point.
Joshua Katz,
If you are going to nitpick my grammar at least pick at something I actually do wrong. “Girls bathroom” is the proper usage since the bathroom is for girls. Girls do not possess the bathroom. Yes, I see the flaw in that girls bathrooms will no longer exist if bathrooms are no longer sex-segregated, but I am referring to the bathroom once used by girls or commonly used by girls. The point remains the same.
You say: “When you talk to people who are used to segregated classrooms, this is what they imagine goes on with non-sex segregated classrooms.”
Perhaps, but students do not normally expose their genitals in classrooms.
>Without sex-segregated bathrooms, high school age boys will be allowed to enter the girls >bathroom in which they can easily commit rape against vulnerable girls.
This isn’t how words work. If there are no sex-segregated bathrooms, there will be no “girls bathroom (sic)” to enter and commit rape against vulnerable girls.
See, without sex segregated bathrooms, you don’t have the situation where we assume no rape can take place in a bathroom – even though it can, whether same-sex or by someone going into the other bathroom…laws don’t stop behavior. Same logic as gun control.
When you talk to people who are used to segregated classrooms, this is what they imagine goes on with non-sex segregated classrooms.
Of course they did, and why do you keep calling her “the child” as if she was gender-neutral?
It was a completely rational decision under the circumstances. Sometimes the pain is too much to bear.
That’s far different from it being a political point. But her point with that statement was a good one. It’s too bad you aren’t getting it, and that many other people still don’t get it and will continue to contribute to a culture of intolerance that will continue to drive too many people to suicide.
“Drove to suicide. Made life unbearable. It’s no different in practice.”
It is very different. They did not drive the child to suicide. The child made an irrational decision probably because of a chemical imbalance in the brain.
“100% through their own fault.”
You don’t have 100% of the facts so you cannot make such a proclamation. But even if you are correct, why are these parents unworthy of forgiveness?
“Bullshit. Where is this nonsense about feeling it will change society coming from?”
From the article. It says: “The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren’t treated the way I was, they’re treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights,”
“Feel free to tell them for me. It’s not anywhere on my priority list, I have plenty of other things to do and they are highly unlikely to listen to me. But yes, they are absolutely wrong.”
I believe they are correct so I would not do such a thing.
Drove to suicide. Made life unbearable. It’s no different in practice.
100% through their own fault.
Some people are stronger than others.
Bullshit. Where is this nonsense about feeling it will change society coming from?
Feel free to tell them for me. It’s not anywhere on my priority list, I have plenty of other things to do and they are highly unlikely to listen to me. But yes, they are absolutely wrong.
A few points:
1. The parents did not kill the child. Period. They did not order the killing of the child as Hitler or Stalin ordered the killing of their people. These parents believed they were helping their child. From what we know, they were wrong, but we also don’t have all the facts. Please show some compassion for these parents that just lost a child.
2. Blaming the parents only ignores the root cause of teenage suicide. Many people have terrible parents but don’t kill themselves over it. The inability to come up with solutions to problems or cope likely comes from a chemical imbalance in the brain. Suicide ideation comes to mind if such people feel it will help change society somehow.
3. If you don’t believe the lack of sex-segregated bathrooms will increase rapes then please tell Amnesty International that their list of Six Steps to Stop Violence Against Schoolgirls is wrong. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT77/023/2007/en/3a9a5645-a2ac-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/act770232007en.html
Good point. Fear of banning ideologies just for the ideas alone rather than for the actions that flow from them is legitimate, but it does not mean that ideologies are not potentially dangerous.
Each child should have his or her bubble. Rapes can also occur in stairwells, empty classrooms, janitors closets, utility rooms, parked cars, bushes outside the school, etc, etc.
Honestly, I think sex-segregated bathrooms probably do more harm than good.
It’s really just a shoehorn attempt to find a logical excuse for policies that are at their real source irrational.
Excellent point. That education works best when it starts at a very young age.
As usual, Paul, Jill, & langa are correct.
Ideology forms the basis of action, such as the sick ideology that justifies what these parents did.
They made her life a living hell and left her feeling like she had no choice.
They did in all but the physical act. Hitler and Stalin did not personally carry out the executions of the vast majority of people that most people would agree they killed, either.
If you say it a few more times maybe you’ll convince yourself.
The depression was caused by the action of the parents making her life a living hell.
Such as the actions of these parents in this case, yes.
No one is directly encouraging suicide here, but the people that are enabling the parents’ actions that drove her to suicide by minimizing those actions’ impact are indirectly encouraging more suicide.
She was a victim of her sick, twisted, sad excuse for parents.
Ideology is not dangerous.
Ideology can present a potential danger, just as a gun can. Of course, that doesn’t provide any justification whatsoever for banning either of them.
Without sex-segregated bathrooms, high school age boys will be allowed to enter the girls bathroom in which they can easily commit rape against vulnerable girls.
By this logic, shouldn’t every child have their own bathroom, in order to prevent gay and/or bisexual students from committing rape?
There are rational arguments for sex-segregated bathrooms, but this isn’t one of them.
Give me a break! If a boy is goint to rape a girl, segregated bathrooms isn’t going to stop him.
Exactly. William’s argument is similar to the claim if we just ban guns, we can eliminate murder.
Gay and transgender kids don’t kill themselves to be a hero. Another red herring, William. They klill themselves because people around them make them feel ashamed. They most likely would prefer not to be they way they are (seriously, who would choose to put up with what gay kids put up with?), yet they have no control over something as basic as their sexuality and/or gender identity. The best hope is to educate people around them that there are individuals out there who are different than the norm, but that being different is okay. You may not believe that, William, but don’t be saying that kids kill themselves to be a hero. They kill themselves because the pain they feel is not longer something they can live with.
Oh, that was big of you to point out that those kids are mentally ill–but, but you mean depression.
Yeah right. It’s not to hard to read what you believe, and your excuses mean nothing to me.
Ideology is not dangerous. Ideology in action can be dangerous. These are two very different things.
The lack of compassion is not in me but in those accusing the parents of killing their child. These parents did not kill their child. They acted irrationally, yes, but they did not kill their child. Mental illness (depression) killed the child and that is what should concern society. People can become lonely and feel isolated for a whole host of reasons. Depression results from chemical imbalances in the brain in addition to environment. We shouldn’t encourage those on the brink to take their lives for a cause by presenting this child as a hero. The child is a victim of mental illness.
William said: “The problem is not necessary one of violence by transgender people, but violence by those who would take advantage of such a policy. Without sex-segregated bathrooms, high school age boys will be allowed to enter the girls bathroom in which they can easily commit rape against vulnerable girls.”
Give me a break! If a boy is goint to rape a girl, segregated bathrooms isn’t going to stop him. Stop making excuses for your gender. Making circumstances 1 percent easier for a boy to rape is no excuse for him to do it..
William, the utter lack of compassion in your last comment is stunning.
Bigotry is illogical, but bigots use rationalizations filled with logical fallacies to try to justify it.
In order to be a logic fallacy it would have to be flawed logic. There is no logic whatsoever involved in racism/Nazism/homophobia etc. It’s just blind hatred with no thought behind it.
Ah. Didn’t know it had to only be one or the other. Kinda thought it was both.
Well Paul keep in mind Billy Saturn doesn’t think the same ideology as that of a madman who killed millions of Jews, Slavs, gypsies, gays, communists, etc. is dangerous & insists it is a “logic fallacy”.
That’s ludicrous. No one is celebrating suicide here, and it’s way beyond “because mom and dad made them feel bad.”
As for the beyond ridiculous and despicable statement “using this death as a platform to push one’s personal agenda” – that’s exactly the mentality that caused this to happen.
Concerning the Yahoo article linked above by Mike Davis, I believe the comment on the article by Mauckery provides the best commentary on this story:
Jill is correct. Total red herring.
Jill said: “The safety of girls is absolutely a red herring”
Absolutely not. Doing away with sex-segregated bathrooms completely does away with the right Amnesty International asserts. The problem is not necessary one of violence by transgender people, but violence by those who would take advantage of such a policy. Without sex-segregated bathrooms, high school age boys will be allowed to enter the girls bathroom in which they can easily commit rape against vulnerable girls.
Amen….and shame on Grundmann and his intolerant ilk.
Thanks for your comments, Mr. Davis. It’s a shame Leelah wasn’t allowed to visit your home. Having a few hours of acceptance each week might have made a difference in her life. I’m also glad to hear that your children are compassionate, as well as you.
Thank you for sharing, Mr. Davis. You’re a kind soul. If only everyone was so accepting. 🙂
I am Frank “Mike” Davis, Next-Door-Neighbor of Leelah/Joshua Alcorn & Husband of Annie Davis, writing this Comment:
Leelah attended school with my children, and Leelah expressed her utter devastation when Leelah’s parents, upon learning she was “gay”, yanked Leelah from school, confiscated Leelah’s cell phone, deleted Leelah’s facebook profile, and isolated Leelah within her bedroom. She was no longer permitted to associate with my son who shared classes with Leelah at Kings High School. My son supported Leelah’s “coming out” and was one of few people who knew about Leelah’s transgender issues.
Leelah was always kind and soft spoken around me. I deeply regret that Leelah was forbidden to visit our home because my family has always wholeheartedly accepted Leelah without judgment and, maybe…just maybe…this tragedy would not have occurred if we could have shown our love and support for Leelah.
When the grief has been processed, Leelah’s parents need to admit and to believe that they made a mistake, rather than sanitize Leelah’s suicide, before any healing and closure may occur within our Community..
MUST READING for Those Who Sympathize with LEELAH ALCORN’s Struggles: https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/they-loved-their-son-so-much-they-killed-their-108292136718.html
Jill, Jed and langa are, of course, correct here.
A) This young boy was a psychotic; i.e.; he was shattered in being connected to reality. B) There is no such thing as ” transgender'” There are only psychotics who will mutilate themselves due to their soul poisoning by their resentment/hatred of their parents. C) Those who are unloving in this situation are the sick supporters of this psychotic movement who are willing to sacrifice endless amounts of children to justify their own soul pathology. D) The pathology of transgenderism is just another battle front of the war against humanity by the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement. This all boils down to what it truly is – an attack by The Enemy of God to destroy/enslave as much of Gods creation as possible. E) The transgender psychosis is just another Social Engineering attack upon our nation to claim that sick people – mentally, emotionally, and ( especially ) spiritually shattered people – are normal. The objective of such a claim is to open the gates so that such sickness can be taught to children as normal so as to mentally, emotionally, and spiritually molest them before they are physically molested. F) His parents simply were unable to cope with the magnitude of the evil which they were facing and which destroyed their child. G) There are only 2 genders. Not 3, 4, 27, 53, or 76. Anyone who claims otherwise is simply an idiot and/or a supporter of The Enemy of God. H) The writer of the above commentary on this young boy is a very sick person. I ) The sickness of the writer has also infected all political parties except for surviving portions of the Constitution Party and the GOP.
I think protecting girls is only an excuse. I’m not aware that violence is an issue with trasgender people, and, as the writer from William’s comment acknowledgedm,there really are only a few transgender kids. The safety of girls is absolutely a red herring. Having said that, I don’t think laws should have been made about this. Schools have ways to help with children with special needs. A special arrangement could have been worked out at each school without legal intervention.
My son has a transgender friend. Even though her family and friends have generally been understanding, I’ve heard Marcus talk about her personal realization that others are uncomfortable around her. She’s one of those people that you can’t quite tell if she’s a boy or, girl, and happens to have a name that could belong to either sex. Marcus said she feels like she should just hide away from going out into public because she makes people so uncomfortable.
Once in a while I’m reminded of how lucky I am that I don’t have to deal with such a confusing issue. I like to thank God for that by showing kindness and understanding to those who haven’t been as lucky as I have been. Besides, that just seems like something any decent person should do.
Any issue involving minors is always a bit tricky from a libertarian perspective, as different libertarians have different opinions on whether/how the NAP should be applied to minors.
My own personal view is that in the case of teens, their wishes should generally be respected, while in the case of younger children, the judgment of their parents should take precedence.
But in either case, more laws and more government involvement are rarely (if ever) the answer.
Concerning “transgender” children, from Saturn’s Repository:
Concerning the bathroom issue, from Saturn’s Repository:
Terrible that parents could be that cruel & heartless. Love your child for who he or she is, not for who you want him or her to be.
I disagree that more laws is the solution, making bigotry a crime doesn’t magically make it go away. I am sympathetic to the idea of banning “conversion therapy”, as it seems pretty obvious that it’s child abuse.