1 Comment

RS: "Sex hormones function not only as reproductive messengers but also as neuromodulators—powerful chemical signals that help neurons in the brain grow, prune themselves, and connect."

Powerful drugs with far-reaching effects; rather presumptuous of us to be messing with them, particularly during the developmental processes of barely pubescent children. But fairly thorough analysis, though I wonder whether testosterone has similar regulatory effects:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone

But particularly liked your "de-sexing young girls" -- and young boys -- for calling a spade an effen shovel. Far too many of us don't have a flaming clue what odious crimes lurk beneath euphemisms like "gender-affirming care" and "sex-change operations". Case in point of the former in this tweet criticizing US representative Dan Crenshaw who was, quite reasonably, objecting to "doing a double mastectomy on a 12-year-old girl", to castrating a 10-year-old boy":

https://twitter.com/FPWellman/status/1680216416836804610

Though one might reasonably ask how accurate Crenshaw's examples were.

But a case in point of the latter is this Fox News segment with Laura Ingraham talking to a de-transitioner. Nice that Ingraham asks some pointed questions and argues that "gender affirming care" boils down into "mutilating children", as I think she put it. But what is rather "exasperating" is that Fox News has a headline under that story that asks, "Why is the left normalizing sex changes for kids?"

https://www.foxnews.com/media/progressive-journalist-breaks-left-warns-puberty-blockers-cause-irreparable-harm-children

But no human changes sex -- at least unless we're going to go with the Kindergarten Cop definitions: "boy's have penises and girls have vaginas". "Change your genitalia, change your sex! Act now! Offer Ends Soon!" 🙄 But by standard biological definitions for the sexes, such operations and procedures only "de-sex" children, just turn them into sexless eunuchs. Fine if adults want to do that to themselves for fun and profit. But to trick dysphoric and autistic children into doing so? Crime of the century.

However, such sloppy or self-serving language is, sadly, rather ubiquitous. Which is why it should be called out whenever and wherever it raises its noxious head. Case in point here in the context of a bit of good news:

"Female transgender athletes banned from women’s events by world cycling’s governing body

https://globalnews.ca/news/9833371/transgender-athletes-world-cycling-womens-races/

Global News: "Female transgender athletes who transitioned after male puberty will no longer be able to compete in women’s races, world cycling governing body the UCI said Friday."

Though I get quite peeved at phrasing like "female transgender athletes" -- they're male transvestites if they still have their nuts attached, and sexless eunuchs if they don't. Truth in advertising; "not through me":

https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/50709343-live-not-by-lies

Expand full comment