My youngest is two years old. She loves trucks and tools and blocks, and if something in the garage needs attention, she’s out there like a little mechanic trying, alongside us, to “fix” it. It’s sweet, and we’ve really lucked out here, too, because she loves to wear the “boy” hand-me-down pajamas with the forklifts, bulldozers, and what-have-you. I’m sure a lot of the “feminists” would be proud – she’s breaking through gender-norms or some such.
The thing is, though, that as much as she enjoys the “boy” stuff, she’s all girl. Having both male and female children, it’s quite interesting to see how this plays into how they encounter the world.
There’s a case in Texas that has gotten some national and international attention (particularly in Russia). I linked to the related crowdfunding appeal here: https://orthodoxhelp.wordpress.com/2019/10/08/save-james/. In short, it’s a case where the parents are divorced, and mom believes that one of the children was showing signs of being transgender at three – and she’s petitioning the court to have the dad’s rights over the children curtailed so that she has control to allow one of the boys to start “transitioning” to female. Dad is adamantly opposed, but seems to have lost his bid for conservatorship this week.
This is frightening on a number of levels. Yes, I know that there are people who really struggle with their identities, and that it is a long, grueling, and painful struggle. However, with children, the large majority who “take on” an identity of the opposite sex will grow out of it on their own before they hit puberty. Furthermore, in this instance, it seems like the child is happy being a boy away from his mother’s influence, but puts on the female persona around her – which is not the typical behavior of someone with “gender dysphoria”.
The thing is, too, that the makers of television shows for kids and toys have been trying for years to break away from things being called “boys” or “girls”. Target and McDonald’s have both come under fire for toys labelled “boys” or “girls”. Right and left one hears about toy-makers being asked to make things less gender-exclusive, from the Easy-Bake Oven to little green soldiers.
Yet there is a duplicity about this. I’ve written a little bit about this before, again, in regards to my youngest, talking about how although she loves a typically “boy” show, and there’s a girl featured on it, there is no merchandising of that character. However, again, as a girl who likes “boy” things, she’s the type of girl who would be championed by the feminists.
The danger happens, though, when boys like the typically “girl” things. On one hand, they’re being taught that there are no “boy” or “girl” toys and that it’s a good thing to let little boys experience the more “feminine” things. On the other, when you do have little boys who then show affinity for the “girl” things, instead of it being taken in stride, the first thought is that somehow they must be gay or transgender or something. In the Texas case, the mother testified that she first suspected that her son might be transgender because, at age three, he picked the “Starfire” toy at McDonalds over the “boy” choices. I think my kids even have that toy, and if it’s the same one, Starfire is dressed as a ninja, all in black. Yes, there’s a shock of a pink ponytail in back, but for a little kid who probably thinks ninjas are cool, and that boy or girl doesn’t matter, why should this choice determine so much of the rest of his life?
Right now the West is being bombarded by a barrage of insanity under the guise of being sensitive to the LGBTQ+ crowd, and particularly in the last couple of years by the transgender “movement”. Yet when one looks at the mainstream media who are pushing this hard, it’s apparent that they don’t believe in the nonsense themselves – they’re still using standard pronouns on air, they still talk about political polling based on binary gender, they still talk about “men” and “women” and “boys” and “girls” without asking each person for affirmative consent on their preferred pronouns. (And, barring this consent, such as in the matters of small children, they don’t make an effort to talk about the child in a gender-neutral way.) Look at the Democrat forum on LGBTQ+ issues, where Kamala Harris announced that her pronouns were “she, her, and hers” and Chris Cuomo responded, “Mine too“. He felt free to do that because for so many “champions” of LGBTQ+ causes, it’s a joke; it’s not serious, they’re not serious about it themselves, but it’s a handy weapon to try to bludgeon the rest of us “rubes” with.
The judge’s final decision in Texas is due tomorrow. Just knowing that the jury ruled against the father is very discouraging for a lot of people, in particular because all he’s asking is that there be no medical intervention to transition his kid until the kid is old enough to have some idea of the ramifications. How is that not the most sensible course of action? The interesting thing is that there was a neutral advocate assigned to the case and the advocate’s thinking seemed to run roughly along the lines of the father. One would hope, then, that perhaps, considering the animosity between the parents, maybe the judge would rule that the advocate be party or have to approve any life-changing medical procedures for the boys.
Is it a long shot? Perhaps. But the thing is that even in the midst of the greatest discouragement, we are told not to give up hope and to cling all the more tightly to God. We do not understand the times or the ways, but with faith, He has a way of bringing miracles out of great evil. One of the reasons that the mother here can do this is because, at present, no state has any laws about the minimum age for a child to start “transitioning”. Maybe this case is a call for people to start contacting legislators to start writing some laws about this. Who knows. But I find it interesting – the family in Texas here is Orthodox, and the boy in question is named James after James, the brother of Jesus. The judge’s ruling is set for tomorrow, which also happens to be one of the feast days for St. James. Coincidence? Maybe. But for those of us of faith, let us continue on in prayer.