Discover more from Adventures of Bad Hijabi
The Right to Thrive
what does that even mean?
Your intrepid Bad Hijabi is doing a deep dive into this report from the BC Representative for Children + Youth, Jennifer Chatsworth. First of all, why did the taxpayers of BC need this report? The short answer? Retail therapy. Yes. Simply put—Ms Chatsworth felt like it. From the Executive Summary on page 4 of the report:
Around the world, shaming, abuse and invalidation of 2STNBGD people has been documented and reported and is on the rise. This situation, coupled with a review of injuries and deaths of 2STNBGD children and youth reported to the Representative, provided the catalyst for this report … Under s. 20 of the Representative for Children and Youth Act (RCY Act), the Representative can release a special report with recommendations to relevant ministries.
The Representative for Child and Youth Act, Section 20(1) states the representative may make a special report to the Legislative Assembly if the representative considers it necessary to do so. By the RCY’s own admission the focus population accounts for a very small portion of the general population—1% for indigenous population and 2.5 percent for the non-indigenous population — they include kids who self-report as “gender questioning” — a meaningless projection attached to a child in care (and therefore a child with a high ACE score or a neuro-developmental disorder or both). When we encourage a child to create an identity out of the dissociative state they experience due to adverse childhood events or family of origin attachment rupture or the alexethymia1 and diminished interception of autism, we remove from her the opportunity for healing a transformative growth.
When you look at the critical injuries data (page 22 of the report), you can see a glaring problem — female injuries are largely borne by the indigenous population and gender diverse injuries are largely borne by the non indigenous (ie settler) population. When you look at the selected injuries (page 25) you can see that more female children and youth have gone missing than gender diverse. Are we really prioritising settler colonial theybies and ignoring indigenous girls? What happened to MMIW? Did that token get boring and dull, so the progressives needed a new toy to play with? This sounds like colonialism 2.0 not inclusivity, doesn’t it?
The report also notes that gender diverse kids are in care under voluntary orders more often than under involuntary orders. Voluntary removal typically means parents collaborating with the state to provide extensive care their child requires that lies beyond the resources of parents and families of origin. Involuntary removal indicates family of origin trauma, the most accurate and powerful predictor of negative long term outcomes such as severe mental illness, autoimmune disorders, metabolic disease, chronic physical illness and shortened life expectancy. Children in care have contexts and this report, like everything politically leftist-progressive, strips developmental context away from children.
When you look at injuries by living arrangement (page 33) you can clearly see that gender diverse kids really belong at home with their parents and not in residential care families. We affirm no child when we pretend that the family unit is not the first thing we should try to preserve and protect and promote for each child wherever physically safe to do so. When you look at the Complex Developmental Behavioural Conditions (CDBC) diagnoses (page 36) you can see what is going on with this supposed gender diverse group of kids. Of particular interest to Bad Hijabi was the report noting on page 34 that eating disorders are not a lifetime issue of interest tracked in gender diverse kids.
To give the RCY credit, she did pay lip service to the fact that her fabulous report may not really be giving us the accurate picture of what is happening to kids in care in BC. She buried that important detail on page 18, though.
It is important to note that youth participants were not sampled using a population-based approach and may not fully represent the entire population of 2STNBGD young people with these experiences. (page 18)
Moving right along like a herd of turtles.
The critical injury data in the report do reflect the inception of self harm created inside the minds of gender diverse youth and children by the SOGI propaganda and this discourse it generates — affirm the child’s gender or they will kill themselves. Kids are hearing all about how they will kill themselves if they do not get their “identity affirmed”.
Bad Hijabi has to ask, how is this not the most egregious abuse of a young person?
It is important to note that it is not a young person's gender identity or expression that leads to self-harm or suicidality but their individual experiences and the situation in which they are living and growing up that compounds the negative effects of stigma, contributing to a lack of gender-affirming care, support, and awareness among health care providers and society in general. (page 5, footnote 9)
Do you notice the incessant themes of fear + shame + coercive control in the material written about and for gender diverse and discordant kid? The progressive discourse continues to take on a darkly zealous tone. Death cult much? On closer inspection the researchers behind this report look far from objective and unbiased. The Right to Thrive report references the Kristina Olson TransYouth data. The head of the research unit conducting The Right to Thrive analysis and literature review, Elizabeth Saewyc, served as a researcher on the Canadian TransYouth study.
You might recall Olson wrote in the LA Times about a young patient: when John was born his parents and his doctors said he was a girl. You might also recall that Olson reported the preliminary results of a 20 year longitudinal study after 2 years. You might also recall that Olson is plagued by a case of magical thinking or a compulsion to deliberately misrepresent the facts—a Buzzfeed article quotes her as saying the data is misleading, which indicate children grow out of their dysphoria.
Dr. Olson’s study was rushed to publication after two years into the study to give the transgender activists a ‘success’ story. The results were anything but scientific. The assessment of anxiety and depression was done by the parents. The kids in the study were those whose families were recruited from their transgender clinic[s] and did not include all [types of] patients and their families. . . . Olson’s plan is to affirm everyone and see how they look 20 years out. The already published Swedish study has shown what will happen: appearance of happiness until 10 years out, and then a precipitous dive into depression with a 19-fold increase in suicide completion. — Dr. Quentin Van Meter
You might also recall that Olson’s (American) TransYouth study, as well as data from a CIHR-funded TransYouth (Canadian) study which the report references, involve kids recruited (opt-in) from gender clinics. Elizabeth Saewyc, Director of the Stigma and Resilience among Vulnerable Youth Centre, the UBC-based policy research unit which conducted the literature review, the interviews, and wrote a companion report to The Right to Thrive, serves as Media Advisor to the UBC on Transgender Children and Education. Saewyc also served as a researcher on the Canadian TransYouth study. You may recall that the principal investigator of the Canadian TransYouth study claims to have debunked ROGD.
What’s this mean?
▶️ It means the BC Representative for Youth and Children had uncomfortable feelings about the ongoing public backlash to the coercive control + intolerance + abuse of the SOGI ruling class and it’s gender affirmation secular religious colonial project and so, decided to produce a piece of government-funded propaganda to make herself feel better. This report is the high-ranking civil servant version of woke retail therapy. Jennifer Chatsworth conducted a review of gender diverse kids in care and selected researchers with a pro gender affirmation bias—including an ROGD denialist—on the team to develop Right to Thrive.
▶️ It means stonewalling tactics to fudge the data and ensure the truth cannot emerge. It means no transparency and a lot of fear-based secrecy. A secret circle of advisors guided the Right to Thrive project. The public cannot know the identity of this circle of advisors because it would trigger haters to have accountability for the taxpayers who are paying for this report. Yes, the people paying—that’s you and me, my Canadian tax paying reader—for this report cannot know the names of the advisors circle who guided its development process and its findings.
The political and activist nepotism matters more than democratic accountability.
Bad Hijabi is quite certain she hasn’t milked all the articles she can from this report, this stuff relates very closely to my Lupron research, it is all one ball of yarn to detangle and I will keep doing so here.
Alexethymia = inability to identify emotions