Younger Brothers Make Father’s Day Gifts for Jeff

James’ rocket blasts off for Father’s Day!
Jude maneuvers to say “Happy Father’s Day!”
Jeff’s drawing of James and Jude.

Having fun times with art, crafts, some applied geometry, and learning poetry! Next: soccer in the park.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Interview with Jeff Morgan

See the full playlist. We cover a lot of topics from transgender child abuse to no-fault divorce to judicial corruption to the role of the church in civil marriage.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Fun with Best Friends!

We need your help to Save James, save thousands of children.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

The Pattern of Expansion (Part 4)

George Orwell

This is an extended series on how the Left expands its power over culture, especially on transgender issues. See the previous parts of this series below.

To combat transgender child abuse, we need to take language more seriously, says Deion A. Kathawa.

A mere five years ago, transgenderism was a fringe phenomenon. Back then, many Americans would have scoffed at the idea that a biological male could be a woman simply because he declared himself to be one, and vice versa. They would have been right to scoff. Because it’s patently absurd. […]

What to make of transgenderism was once an open question; perhaps even a sensible debate could have been had about it. But in a few short months, we went from groping for the beginnings of a discussion on the topic to fighting a desperate rearguard action: defending the validity of sex-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms […]

We debate the people pushing this delusion. We accept them as conversation partners who are engaged in a good-faith pursuit of truth. That’s the power of the megaphone. It forces us to take nonsense seriously. […]

It doesn’t get more ridiculous than that. Until the Right wises up, and starts challenging this rigged game, the Left will keep control of the megaphone. And we’ll deserve it.

People who support transgender child abuse are not pursuing truth in good faith. Rather, they seek to use language to create power. This leftist language-power imposes intellectual limitations in the form of liberation. Truth is rejected. Consistency is rare. But it goes by unnoticed and unchallenged by the Right.

Consider how transgender advocates use contradictory discourse as a political and pseudo-scientific strategy:

  • Trans says: Gender is socially constructed. But, transgenderism is biologically innate and immutable.
  • Trans says: Gender is unrelated to biological sex. But, it’s imperative to halt the development of a child’s genitals, and perhaps even remove them.
  • Trans says: Our views are based on science. But, any challenge to transgender theories is bigotry and irrational.

The common pattern is to mix subjective relativism on the one hand and dogmatic absolutism on the other. Transgender child abusers are well aware of these contradictions. Their opponents, like us, continually raise this objection.

Since they know the objection, one wonders: to which side of the contradiction is the transgender child abuser most committed? There are three possibilities.

  1. Relativism is primary, but with some absolutist qualifications.
  2. Absolutism is primary, with some relativistic qualifications.
  3. Relativism and absolutism coexist in the transgender child abuse ideology, but it has no psychological effect on the professional child abusers themselves.

One notable feature of the transgender child abuse movement is the uniformity of ideology among all of its adherents. This rules out the first option. The second option is incompatible with the main arguments given by the trans child abusers. They understand gender as a relative, and purely subjective, attribute that anyone should be free to take upon themselves at any age.

That leaves only the third possibility. It fits well with what we observe. The transgender child abuse movement is a political movement. It is neither scientific, nor a theory of psychology, nor limited by patterns of scientific discourse. Transgender child abuse advocates are not seeking the truth. Transgender child abusers are trying to impose a political policy on us.

They do not seek to resolve the tension of their contradictions. To be motivated to find the truth, to resolve the contradictions — children have to matter. The nihilism of the transgender child abuser is never far from the surface. Children don’t matter to them because nothing maters. More than any other ideology, transgender child abuse embodies the politics of ressentiment.

We will not reason our way to a compromise with these professional child abusers. There is no middle way. They must be defeated. Our next installment will explain why they haven’t yet been defeated.

James’ father is locked in a struggle to defeat this wicked ideology of child sexual abuse. Please help him. Donate today.

Save James – save thousands of children.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

It’s Transgender Child Abuse

Dr. John Whitehall offers a sensible take on the bizarre transgender child abuse phenomenon:

Most kids grow out of gender dysphoria. If kids are going to grow out of it, what’s all the fuss?

Well that’s the big issue. that’s the big problem, because the first step of this medical pathway in which many children are now being entered.

Might I add more often than not by a mother. I couldn’t believe that when I first heard it. A mother who becomes so enmeshed, so enthusiastic, so committed that she becomes a cheerleader for this process, driving the child to become the poster boy of the school […] the social transition, the changing of the names, the wearing of the dresses, the changing of the pronouns.

All of this is the first stage […] of the medical pathway.

It ends is forced sterilization, chemical and physical castration, then social banishment, despair, and suicide. The transgender child abuse community calls this “therapy.”

Stop them. Donate to Save James, save thousands of kids.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

The Pattern of Expansion (Part 3)

This is an extended series on how the Left expands its power over culture, especially on transgender issues. See the previous parts of this series below.

The World Health Organization is forcing normalization of transgenderism.

The World Health Organization (WHO) initiates the process of political coercion leading to mandatory transgender child abuse.

The World Health Organization has officially decided to stop classifying transgender people as mentally ill.

WHO member states adopted the new edition of the International Classification of Diseases during an annual assembly in Geneva on Saturday. It is the first update of the illness list in 29 years.

They now describe gender identity disorder as “gender incongruence” and it is no longer listed in the chapter of mental disorders.

The WHO says the right of people to receive medical services, such as surgical operations to make them sterile, should be guaranteed.

World events force me to reprise some ideas from an earlier post, The Pattern of Expansion. In that post, I explain the steps used by the Left to expand their power into all areas of life, including transgender child abuse.

  1. Identify a tradition.
  2. Create a grievance class, no matter how small, in opposition to the foundational practices of the tradition.
  3. Get organizations of influence, usually professional bodies or government agencies, to recognize the grievance class.
  4. Create a plausible case that the practices of the grievance class are normal human variation and should be more tolerated. Suppress any discussion of potentially anti-social problems with the grievance class’ practices.
  5. Convert the practices of the grievance class into a status. This is usually accomplished by claiming something innate and immutable about the grievance class.
  6. Convert the discussion from one of toleration to one of rights.
  7. Use “professional” bodies and the courts to construe the new status and rights as within the bounds of existing rights laws.
  8. Force everyone to accept the previously anti-social practices of the grievance class.

The WHO brings us to step 5. They officially recognized transgenderism as a normal human type, step 4. Then they infer that transgenderism is a status with special rights, step 5 and 6.

A representative from Denmark welcomed the latest changes, saying that it is a big step forward to allow everyone to lead a life with dignity.

The WHO hopes that the action will help to eliminate discrimination against transgender people and promote public understanding of them.

The Who hopes that this action will lead to step 7, the application of anti-discrimination and hate speech laws against anyone who opposes normalizing transgenderism.

Soon you will lose your kids and be jailed for even speaking against transgender child abuse.

I’m fighting this abomination. By saving James, we can stop this in the courts and save thousands of children. Please help us with litigation costs and to provide care for James.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Eminent Endocrinologist Against Transgender Child Abuse

Dr. Paul Hruz criticizes institutionalized transgender child abuse.

[Treatment can do] very serious harms to their bodies throughout the rest of their life — without even considering whether there are alternative options to help them and even recognizing that a large number of children that question their gender identity are going to, if merely left alone, are going to realign their identity with their biological sex.

For a good overview of what the research actually shows, see Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological and Social Sciences. As you encounter people who support transgender child abuse, have these facts handy:

● The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” — is not supported by scientific evidence.

● According to a recent estimate, about 0.6% of U.S. adults identify as a gender that does not correspond to their biological sex.

● Studies comparing the brain structures of transgender and non-transgender individuals have demonstrated weak correlations between brain structure and cross-gender identification. These correlations do not provide any evidence for a neurobiological basis for cross-gender identification.

● Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.

● Children are a special case when addressing transgender issues. Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.

● There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex characteristics of adolescents, although some children may have improved psychological well-being if they are encouraged and supported in their cross-gender identification. There is no evidence that all children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior should be encouraged to become transgender.
DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Transgender Children and Young People: Born in Your Own Body

Even secular feminists and leftists agree: this is transgender child abuse.

Editors Heather Brunskell-Evans and Michele Moore have published a new book Transgender Children and Younger People: Born in your Own Body.  Though grounded in secular post-modern perspectives, it offers a withering critique of the transgender ideology.

The Rev. Dr. Michael F. Bird has written a smashing review of the book:

[…] this book does not deny gender dysphoria, nor that transitioning and even gender reassignment surgery is often an effective treatment for extreme cases of dysphoria. It is rather, a critical and scientific critique of the transgendering of children as part of a discursive sociological project.

[…] Against this transgender activism and its enabling state actors the editors claim that “transgender children don’t exist ( italics original) and their collaborative venture “examines the theories and politics of transgenderism, and the medical, psychological, legal and educational practices associated with it, for the ways they discursively construct ‘the transgender child’’.

[…] Their prima facie objection to transgendering children are: (i) Transgenderism treats biology as a social construct, while asserting that gender is a real thing located somewhere in the brain, soul, or body. To the contrary, they insist, it is gender not biology that is constructed. (ii) Transgenderism restricts children to traditional views of gender and the only escape mechanism is to reject pre-social notions of identity [i.e. biological notions of identity].

James’ father, Jeff Younger, has made these points many times to the court and the custody evaluator, Dr. Albritton. Advocates of transgender child abuse privilege abnormal gender self-expressions while aiming to suppress normal ones!

James presents as a girl with Anne Georgulas (on Facebook, on Twitter), but James presents as a boy with everyone else. James has a choice: normal gender or abnormal gender. The psychologists and psychiatrists have clearly privileged the abnormal gender expression. They do this full well knowing that it’s possible Anne Georgulas conditioned James to present as a girl in her presence. It’s preposterous, and profoundly dangerous for the children of Texas.

Bird goes on with his review, giving one of the book’s contributors a detailed treatment:

First, transgenderism is a socio-political movement with the characteristics of a religious cult […].

Second, the drive towards transgendering is driven by the normalization of crass stereo-types, boys like boy toys and girls like girl toys, so if a boy likes girl toys, then the boy must be a girl […].

Third, a further problem with transgender ideology is that it assumes a “child-knows-best” model of parenting where children are deemed competent to determine their identity and medical needs […].

Fourth, teaching children that their true and authentic self is disassociated from their body entails [unwarrranted] acceptance of a mind-body dualism […].

Eighth, transgender activists claim that biological sex is irrelevant to one’s true self and yet biological sex characteristics must be prevented from developing and be cosmetically altered […]. If biology and physical characteristics do not shape who I am, then what is the point in changing it with pharmaceutical treatment?

Finally, Bird summarizes his impressions and takeaways:

[…] transgenderism is riddled with incoherent claims:

  • Gender is a purely a social construct, but transgender is an empirical reality to be protected;
  • Sex is irrelevant to gender, but it is imperative to alter the sexual organs of bodies to match a person’s perceived gender; […]
  • Science is the alleged basis of transgender ideology, but scientists who espouse a sexual binary based on biology or point to evolution as shaping facets of gender behaviour are engaging in either biological essentialism or hetero-normative stereo-types.

transgenderism can be dangerous in that:

  • […] we must ask whether transgender children are found or whether they are (in many cases perhaps) created by social environmental factors […]
  • […] Transitioning children prematurely is further dangerous considering: (i) There is no evidence for a biological cause of gender dysphoria, it is a psychological condition as far as we know; (ii) The negative long-term effects of puberty blockers; and (iii) the stories of de-transitioners, people who have experienced chemical or surgical transitioning, and have profoundly regretted it, are routinely dismissed or silenced by transgender activists.

Jeff Younger, James’ father, has made the same arguments to Dr. Benjamin Albritton in the Save James Dossier. One of the problems Mr. Younger faces is credentialism, the belief that credible arguments come only from people who’ve attained some number or type of educational credentials.

But the arguments I’ve given, like the arguments above, are logical arguments. Their truth is independent of any credential.

Will the court’s custody evaluator, Dr. Benjamin Albritton listen? Will he see the plainly obvious problems with child transgender theories? Does Dr. Benjamin Albritton have the will to oppose the most dangerous and most aggressive ideological movement in modern psychology?

Will he consider seriously whether Anne Georgulas (on Facebook, on Twitter) has intentionally socialized an innocent boy into a mental disorder about his gender identity?

We have to prove it in court. Please contribute to our efforts. Click the donate button below.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

James and Jude at Play

James is an innocent, normal, rough-housing little boy. He loves archery, tracking animals, and wrestling.

We’re trying to save his life. Please help us.

Save James – save thousands of kids.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Now They’re Taking 4-year-olds

Queens Counsel David Williams, who allowed a dysfunctional foster family to destroy a child’s life.

Judges in the UK order the transition fo a 4-year-old, ignoring social services counselors and clinic experts who objected. The transgender cild abuse movement is not about medicine or psychology. It’s a political movement to radically alter or destroy the traditional family.

Read this, and then get the final kicker below the fold.

A judge in the United Kingdom ruled that a couple may send their 4-year-old foster son to school in girl’s clothing after allowing him to identify as a girl.

High Court Justice David Williams of the Royal Courts of Justice in Westminster decreed that despite objections by social services of Lancashire County, which had argued that the unnamed couple had “acted in a precipitate manner in relation to perceived gender dysphoria,” the boy should not be removed from his parents’ care as had been requested by Lancashire council officials. […]

In late 2018, staff at the NHS Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at London’s Tavistock Clinic asserted that some cases of children claiming gender dysphoria had not been adequately assessed. Some patients agreed with senior staff about these concerns, leading to an investigation. In February 2019, the governor of the NHS trust who operated Tavistock resigned, having denounced its ”‘blinkered” attitude to the concerns.

Five former NHS clinicians who resigned from Tavistock allege that “life-changing medical intervention” for children and teens had been granted “without sufficient evidence of its long-term effects.” Some children, they said, were misdiagnosed as “transgender” because they had experienced same-sex sexual attractions.

The Kicker: This same foster family transitioned their own 3-year-old, and they claim that another foster care child in their care has signs of “gender dysphoria.” Is this family inducing psychological problems in toddlers in their foster care?

The same thing is happening to James. We need your help!

Please donate to pay for expert witnesses, litigation costs, and care expenses for James.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

The Pattern of Expansion (Part 2)

This is an extended series on how the Left expands its power over culture, especially on transgender issues. See the previous parts of this series below.

In the first Pattern of Expansion post, we explained how the Left takes power over our social environment. Wonder how we got to the point that courts would entertain chemically castrating an innocent little boy? Check out the link and review the eight steps, to see how it happened.

Let’s look at some examples of global institutions of social power cooperating with this dark process of cultural destruction.

The leftist schools will force your children to adopt transgender ideology, or even to “change gender.”

The parents of an elementary student suing the Woodburn School District for almost a million dollars say a second-grade teacher kept their son from recess and educated him without their permission about being transgender. […] [Note the use of the word ‘educated’. This wasn’t education.]

The then-second grader at Nellie Muir Elementary School and his parents had made arrangements with the school for him to use the staff restroom because of a digestive-related medical condition.

His teacher assumed the boy was not comfortable using the public boys’ restroom because he was transgender [The teacher just ‘assumed!’!], according to the lawsuit.

The complaint also alleges the following:

In April 2018, without notifying the parents and without any authorization from the school district, the teacher began developing a lesson plan to help the boy understand what it meant to be transgender

She then began keeping the student inside the classroom alone during recess at least three times to show him videos and teach him “it is acceptable to become transgender.” […]

The books and show, which were recommended by an “unknown non-school employee transgender individual,” exposed the boy to sexual topics and sexual discussions, according to the lawsuit. 

During the lessons, the student was not allowed to go outside for recess until he finished the videos or books. [He was coerced into watching the sexualized videos – by a teacher!]

The leftist courts will jail you for refusing to participate in the abuse of your own child.

Last week, Justice Francesca Marzari of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, declared a father guilty of “family violence” against his 14-year-old daughter on the sole basis that he had engaged in “expressions of rejection of [her] gender identity.” These “expressions” revolved entirely around his polite refusal to refer to his daughter as a boy in private, and his steady choice to affirm that she is a girl in public.

While many might take this to be an honest statement of biological fact, Marzari quoted it as a prime example of Clark’s “family violence of a public denial of [Maxine’s] gender identity.” Marzari convicted Clark of this violence, and issued a “protection order” preventing him from speaking to journalists or the public about his case.

Kari Simpson, [… said] “This is extreme and dangerous,” arguing that the court was forcing Clark to embrace a “delusion” about his daughter’s gender and her “abuse” at the hands of doctors, or else be arrested.

Companies will fire you for stating obvious biological facts, if you disagree with the expansionist transgender agenda.

An internationally renowned researcher on tax avoidance is believed to be the first person in Britain to lose her job for saying that transgender women are not women.

Maya Forstater, 45, was told by her managers that she had used “offensive and exclusionary” language.

She was accused of “fear-mongering” for tweeting her concerns about government proposals to allow people to legally self-identify as the opposite sex.

James’ father, Jeff, endures the risks of job loss and arrest every day. James’ case is the tip of the spear. If he loses, thousands of kids will lose.

Help us win.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Happy Birthday Boys!

This past weekend the boys got to enjoy another haircut party! They enjoyed themselves so much and were very pleased with their new “dos”!  It was a huge and expensive ordeal to get approval for the haircuts but I know that Jeff agrees it was absolutely worth the happiness.

James and Jude turned 7 on Tuesday. They got to spend the evening with their dad and had a blast playing in the water on a hot Texas evening.

  • A pre-trial hearing is scheduled before Judge Kim Cooks on 22 May 2019. 
    • The hearing helps Judge Cooks understand what issues still need to be resolved at trial and to set a final trial date.
    • The trial date can be up to a year away, which adds to the legal fees.
    • Judge Cooks could require costly legal activities before trial, such as mandatory arbitration, a final settlement conference, or other legal activities.
  • Associate Judge Scott Beauchamp meets with counsel after the pre-trial hearing to discuss the issues relating to Anne Georgulas’ motions.
    • It is not an evidentiary hearing, so the lawyers only will probably meet in his chambers to review.
    • The judge says he is not inclined to seal the records and that the haircut issue has already been adjudicated.
    • We expect a flurry of costly legal activity by Anne Georgulas and her lawyer.
  • The custody evaluation is still going. We have no further updates from Dr. Albritton.

Obviously the need is still very great.

As soon as we know when that pre-trial is set we can really move forward and work towards getting these boys home with Dad all the time!

Thank you all for your continued prayers and support to help us Save James – Save Thousands of Children.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Legal and Legislative Update

Jeff and James looking sharp!
  • James got his haircut, after expensive legal approvals from the court.
    • Anne Georgulas (on Facebook, on Twitter) is trying to hyper-feminize James before trial. She administers biotin to make James’ hair grow abnormally fast and long.
    • Jeff is trying to keep the status quo and maintain James’ hair as it is.
    • The courts require Jeff to get approval before cutting James’ hair. Jeff has to send pictures, and videos. It costs a great deal of money in legal fees.
    • Anne Georgulas increased legal opposition against cutting James’ hair. This time, Amicus Attorney and the Custody Evaluator had to get involved in the approval process. Jeff has to pay for all of these approvals. It’s very costly for Jeff to get approval for haircuts.
  • A pre-trial hearing is scheduled before Judge Kim Cooks on 22 May 2019.
    • The hearing helps Judge Cooks understand what issues still need to be resolved at trial and to set a final trial date.
    • The trial date can be up to a year away, which adds to the legal fees.
    • Judge Cooks could require costly legal activities before trial, such as mandatory arbitration, a final settlement conference, or other useless legal activities.
  • Associate Judge Scott Beauchamp meets with counsel after the pre-trial hearing to discuss the issues relating to Anne Georgulas’ motions.
    • It is not an evidentiary hearing, so the lawyers only will probably meet in his chambers to review.
    • The judge says he is not inclined to seal the records and that the haircut issue has already been adjudicated.
    • We expect a flurry of costly legal activity by Anne Georgulas and her lawyer.
  • The custody evaluation is still going. We have no further updates from Dr. Albritton.
  • The Texas Legislature failed to outlaw child sex changes. Read that again. Republicans have not outlawed transgender child abuse in Texas.
    • Rep. Jay Dean introduced reasonable legislation to the Juvenile Justice & Family Issues Committee.
    • Democrat James Talarico killed it in committee with the assistance of Republican Andrew Murr.
    • Rep. Talarico also killed an equal parenting bill in the same committee.

James is fighting for his life. The Texas Legislature isn’t going to protect him. Our last hope is in the courts, and the most expensive court battle approaches.

Please help us Save James – Save Thousands of Children.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Spring Update – time with boys

Last night we had the privilege of having dinner and playtime with James and Jude. A sweet friend from Switzerland brought all the kids these amazing personalized soccer jerseys from Germany and they were thrilled. It is such a joy to see these boys happy and healthy and running together.

Many of you have been asking for an update. As you can see from the pictures, James is due for a haircut – and THANKFULLY (after waiting several weeks for confirmation) Jeff was given permission to cut his hair this weekend. It looks like another haircut party is in the works!

A hearing has been set to set the pre-trial date. This is very good news! As soon as we know when that pre-trial is set we can really move forward and work towards getting these boys home with Dad all the time!

Thank you all for your continued prayers and support to help us Save James – Save Thousands of Children.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Latest Research on Puberty Blockers – Ryan T. Anderson

This article posted in its entirety below by Ryan T. Anderson tells about the Latest Research on Puberty Blockers

Increasingly, gender therapists and physicians argue that children as young as nine should be given puberty-blocking drugs if they experience gender dysphoria.

But a new article by three medical experts reveals that there is little scientific evidence to support such a radical procedure.

The article, “Growing Pains: Problems with Puberty Suppression in Treating Gender Dysphoria,” published in The New Atlantis, discusses over 50 peer-reviewed studies on gender dysphoria in children.

It is co-authored by Dr. Paul W. Hruz, a professor at Washington University School of Medicine; Dr. Lawrence S. Mayer, a scholar in residence at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a professor at Arizona State University; and Dr. Paul R. McHugh, university distinguished service professor of psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Last year, Mayer and McHugh published an extensive report on sexuality and gender in general. Now, working with Hruz, an expert on pediatrics, they focus on children.

As I explain in my forthcoming book, “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment,” the best biology, psychology, and philosophy all support an understanding of sex as a bodily reality, and of gender as a social manifestation of bodily sex.

Biology isn’t bigotry, and we need a sober and honest assessment of the human costs of getting human nature wrong. This is especially true with children.

And yet, pediatric gender clinics—and therapeutic interventions on children—are on the rise. In the past 10 years, dozens of pediatric gender clinics have sprung up throughout the United States.

In 2007, Boston Children’s Hospital “became the first major program in the United States to focus on transgender children and adolescents,” as its own website brags.

Seven years later, 33 gender clinics had opened their doors to our nation’s children, telling parents that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones may be the only way to prevent teen suicides.

Never mind that according to the best studies—the ones that even transgender activists themselves cite—80 to 95 percent of children with gender dysphoria will come to identify with and embrace their bodily sex.

Never mind that 41 percent of people who identify as transgender will attempt suicide at some point in their lives, compared to 4.6 percent of the general population.

Never mind that people who have had transition surgery are 19 times more likely than average to die by suicide.

These statistics should stop us in our tracks. Clearly, we must work to find ways to effectively prevent these suicides and address the underlying causes. We certainly shouldn’t be encouraging children to “transition.”

The sad reality is that while the number of pediatric gender clinics is growing, very little is known about gender identity in children—and many therapies amount to little more than experimentation on minors.

Professional standards of care are being promulgated that state children should receive puberty-blocking drugs at as young as age 9, and cross-sex hormones at age 16—but there have been no controlled clinical trials on puberty blocking for gender dysphoria, and the Food and Drug Administration has not approved these drugs for treatment of gender dysphoria.

Meanwhile, despite claims by advocates, there is no evidence that puberty blocking is “reversible,” nor that it is harmless. Most concerning of all is that these treatments run the risk that children may persist in their gender dysphoria.

Blocking Puberty Could Cause Children to Persist in Gender Dysphoria

In their new article, Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain that transgender-affirming treatments of children “may drive some children to persist in identifying as transgender when they might otherwise have, as they grow older, found their gender to be aligned with their sex.”

As the doctors note, “Gender identity for children is elastic (that is, it can change over time) and plastic (that is, it can be shaped by forces like parental approval and social conditions).”

As a result, if “the increasing use of gender-affirming care does cause children to persist with their identification as the opposite sex, then many children who would otherwise not need ongoing medical treatment would be exposed to hormonal and surgical interventions.”

Whereas 80 to 95 percent of children with gender dysphoria will come to identify with and embrace their biological sex, none of the children placed on puberty blockers in the Dutch clinic that pioneered this treatment came to identify with their biological sex. All of them persisted in their transgender identity.

Indeed, as Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain, for children placed on puberty blockers, “[r]ather than resuming biologically normal puberty, these adolescents generally go from suppressed puberty to medically conditioned cross-sex puberty, when they are administered cross-sex hormones at approximately age 16.”

The doctors worry that transgender-affirming treatment, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones “may have solidified the feelings of cross-gender identification in these patients, leading them to commit more strongly to sex reassignment than they might have if they had received a different diagnosis or a different course of treatment.”

The Dutch doctors who pioneered puberty blocking as a treatment for gender dysphoria argue that it would give a child “more time to explore their gender identity, without the distress of the developing secondary sex characteristics.”

This is an odd argument. As Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain, “It presumes that natural sex characteristics interfere with the ‘exploration’ of gender identity, when one would expect that the development of natural sex characteristics might contribute to the natural consolidation of one’s gender identity.”

The rush of one’s natural sex hormone and the bodily development that takes place during puberty may be the very thing that helps a developing boy or girl come to appreciate and identify with their bodily sex. And yet puberty blockers would prevent this from taking place.

Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh highlight the possibility that “the interference with normal pubertal development will influence the gender identity of the child by reducing the prospects for developing a gender identity corresponding to his or her biological sex.”

>>> For more on this, see Ryan T. Anderson’s forthcoming book, “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.”

So the treatments proposed by transgender activists—social transition followed by puberty suppression, cross-sex hormones, and possibly surgery—make it more likely that children will engage in self-reinforcing activity that may make desistance less likely. Anything that would encourage a child to persist in identifying as transgender should give us pause.

As Hruz explained to a federal court:

Desistance (i.e. reversion to gender identity concordant with sex) provides the greatest lifelong benefit and is the outcome in the majority of patients and should be maintained as a desired goal. Any intervention that interferes with the likelihood of resolution is unwarranted and potentially harmful.

Puberty Blocking Is Experimental 

Not only does a trans-affirming therapeutic approach run the risk of prolonging transgender identities in children who otherwise would have grown out of them, so too it is entirely experimental. It is not supported by any rigorous science. And there is no way of knowing if it is even safe, let alone effective.

Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh respond to the promotion of these standards of care by various activist—and, sadly, professional—organizations:

Reading these various guidelines gives the impression that there is a well-established scientific consensus about the safety and efficacy of the use of puberty-blocking agents for children with gender dysphoria, and that parents of such children should think of it as a prudent and scientifically proven treatment option. But whether blocking puberty is the best way to treat gender dysphoria in children remains far from settled and it should be considered not a prudent option with demonstrated effectiveness but a drastic and experimental measure.

Experimental medical treatments for children must be subject to especially intense scrutiny, since children cannot provide legal consent to medical treatment of any kind (parents or guardians must consent for their child to receive treatment), to say nothing of consenting to become research subjects for testing an unproven therapy. In the case of gender dysphoria, however, the safety and efficacy of puberty-suppressing hormones is not well founded on evidence … Whether puberty suppression is safe and effective when used for gender dysphoria remains unclear and unsupported by rigorous scientific evidence.

The sad reality is that prolonged puberty suppression as a treatment for gender dysphoria has “been accepted so rapidly by much of the medical community, apparently without scientific scrutiny, that there is reason to be concerned about the welfare of children who are receiving it, as well as reason to question the veracity of some of the claims made to support its use—such as the assertion that it is physiologically and psychologically ‘reversible.’”

Puberty Blocking Isn’t ‘Reversible’

Indeed, the way that activists talk makes it seem like normal human development is an irreversible problem, but interfering with development is a cautionary and fully reversible step.

But actually the opposite is true, as Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain:

This turns the normal language of reversibility on its head, speaking of the natural process of biological development as an irreversible series of problems that medicine should seek to prevent, while presenting the intervention—puberty suppression—as benign and reversible.

But doctors have no way of knowing whether these treatments truly are reversible, because very few people have ever sought to have them reversed: “There are virtually no published reports, even case studies, of adolescents withdrawing from puberty-suppressing drugs, and then resuming the normal pubertal development typical for their sex.

Or, at least, perhaps not in a normal way. After all, as Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain, “In developmental biology, it makes little sense to describe anything as ‘reversible.’”

Going through a developmental process at age 20 that should take place at age 10 is not the same thing. So talk about these treatments being reversible is inherently misleading.

And yet all of the major activist groups—and many professional groups—perpetuate this claim.

But as Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh illustrate, “If a child does not develop certain characteristics at age 12 because of a medical intervention, then his or her developing those characteristics at age 18 is not a ‘reversal,’ since the sequence of development has already been disrupted.”

In essence, doctors are engaging in a giant experiment on minors by blocking their maturation, and they are doing this without even coming close to the ethical standards demanded in other areas of medicine.

So while the “claim that the initial treatments are reversible may make them seem less drastic,” this claim “is not well supported by evidence.”

As Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh explain, “It remains unknown whether or not ordinary sex-typical puberty will resume following the suppression of puberty in patients with gender dysphoria.”

Puberty Blocking May Have Long-Term Health Consequences

There are also long-term health risks associated with the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria, though no one really knows all of the potential consequences, since this use has not been rigorously studied.

Nevertheless, as the doctors explain, “some of the known effects of puberty suppression on physiologically normal children are what you would expect from alterations made to that critical stage of human development.”

In both boys and girls, it negatively impacts their growth rates in terms of height. Children placed on puberty blockers also have an increased risk of low bone-mineral density. Hruz notes that “[o]ther potential adverse effects include disfiguring acne, high blood pressure, weight gain, abnormal glucose tolerance, breast cancer, liver disease, thrombosis, and cardiovascular disease.”

And, of course, all of the children who persist in their transgender identity and take puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones will be infertile.

Here’s how McHugh, Hruz, and Mayer, citing sources for each claim, put it in their Supreme Court brief:

Puberty suppression hormones prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics, arrest bone growth, decrease bone accretion, prevent full organization and maturation of the brain, and inhibit fertility. Cross-gender hormones increase a child’s risk for coronary disease and sterility. Oral estrogen, which is administered to gender dysphoric boys, may cause thrombosis, cardiovascular disease, weight gain, hypertriglyceridemia, elevated blood pressure, decreased glucose tolerance, gallbladder disease, prolactinoma, and breast cancer. Similarly, testosterone administered to gender dysphoric girls may negatively affect their cholesterol; increase their homocysteine levels (a risk factor for heart disease); cause hepatotoxicity and polycythemia (an excess of red blood cells); increase their risk of sleep apnea; cause insulin resistance; and have unknown effects on breast, endometrial and ovarian tissues. Finally, girls may legally obtain a mastectomy at sixteen, which carries with it its own unique set of future problems, especially because it is irreversible.

Not surprisingly, given how little we know, the use of drugs for puberty suppression for children with gender dysphoria is not FDA-approved. But the off-label prescription of such drugs is legal.

The bottom line for Hruz, Mayer, and McHugh is that “we frequently hear from neuroscientists that the adolescent brain is too immature to make reliably rational decisions, but we are supposed to expect emotionally troubled adolescents to make decisions about their gender identities and about serious medical treatments at the age of 12 or younger.”

This new article in The New Atlantis should make all of us pause before embracing radical medical treatments for children.

As I explain in “When Harry Became Sally,” the most helpful therapies focus not on achieving the impossible—changing bodies to conform to thoughts and feelings—but on helping people accept and even embrace the truth about their bodies and reality.

Rejecting human nature has real human costs.

Save James – Save Thousands of Children

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Dangerous Drug Trial to be tested on Children – Urgent Press Release – Call to Action


NIH Study Harming Young Children – New Parent Coalition Urges Immediate Moratorium

April 9, 2019: In an urgent request sent just four days ago to​ ​Dr. ​Jerry Menikoff, ​Director of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP), the ​Kelsey Coalition​ called for an immediate moratorium on a $5.7-million taxpayer-funded NIH study, ​The Impact of Early Medical Treatment in Transgender Youth.

This NIH study is a five-year observational experiment in which children are treated with powerful drugs to treat a non-medical condition. The basis for inclusion in the study is little more than a child’s self-identification as transgender. There is no control group.

The OHRP responded yesterday that the Office will “start a review.”

Young children in the study are given puberty-blocking drugs; older children, cross-sex hormones. There is neither FDA approval, nor a single safety study, to support the use of these medications by healthy children and adolescents. According to Dr. Michael Laidlaw, medical consultant to the Coalition,“These drugs will radically alter their endocrine systems, impact sexual function, and fertility, while putting them at increased risk of developing other serious medical health conditions.”

Dr. Laidlaw sent Dr. Menikoff information that he obtained through a recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request:

In 2017, the protocol was changed mid-study: the minimum age for cross-sex hormone inclusion was decreased from age thirteen to age eight. According to the 2018 progress report, 19 children have been recruited into the new 8-12 year-old cohort.

The Kelsey Coalition contends this trial is unethical and violates laws protecting human subjects. Dr. Michael Laidlaw, Dr. William Malone, and Mr. Hacsi Horvath signed the letter to OHRP on behalf of the Coalition. A copy of the letter is available upon request.

The Kelsey Coalition urges concerned citizens to support their call for an immediate moratorium. A ​detailed action plan​ can be found on their website.

The Kelsey Coalition is​ a national group representing hundreds of parents whose transgender-identifying children have been harmed by physicians, therapists, and clinics.​ Dr. Michael Laidlaw is a board-certified endocrinologist practicing in California and serves as the medical consultant for the Kelsey Coalition. Dr. William Malone is the Medical Director of the St. Luke’s Endocrinology and Diabetes Clinic. Mr. Hacsi Horvath is an expert in research synthesis methods, critical appraisal and public health guideline development. During his career at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), Horvath managed the Cochrane Review Group on HIV/AIDS, and worked closely for many years with World Health Organization (WHO) colleagues to develop and update global HIV guidelines.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Super Boys!

Had a great weekend with these kids. What a joy to see rough and tumble boys being super heroes. It is a joy and a privilege to be a part of their lives.

Save James – Save Thousands of Children


DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

Russia TV 1 Tries to Make Sense of Transgender Child Abuse

English Transcript (via Google Translate)

In the United States, in one of the most conservative states, Texas, with the cult of traditional values, there is a loud family scandal. Who is a six-year-old child – a boy or a girl – to be decided by the court. About this story Channel One told in the fall.

According to statistics, in the USA almost 1.5 million adults and 150 thousand teenagers consider themselves to be transgender people. How many such children are not specified. Doctors of special clinics willingly accept young patients – the sooner they begin therapy, the better.

For a fashionable short haircut father of James, he is in the next barber’s chair, can go to jail. And it’s not a joke. James has a middle name, Luna. So the child is called by the mother, who believes that her son is a daughter.

“I am obliged to use only the female pronoun“ she ”, only the name Luna. If I refuse to do this, I may be prevented from seeing my child and even arrested. Just for calling my son James, ”says Jeff Younger.

So decided the court, which turned the former wife of Jeff. After the couple divorced, the woman began to inspire the boy that he was a girl. The video was shot three years ago, when the child was three years old:

Father: You’re a boy, right?

James: No, I’m a girl.

Father: Who told you that you are a girl?

James: Mama.

Father: Why?

James: I like girls.

James is now six. All this time he has a double life. The court supported the demand of the mother, even though the child behaves like a normal boy with his father – he wears men’s clothes, loves to hit the ball, boyish games. The first channel was convinced of this:

Yulia: What kind of sport do you like?

James: I love wrestling!

Yulia: Which one?

James: Hand-to-hand combat!

When a child with his mother Anna – he reincarnates into a girl. In the church and school, James is known as the moon, even in school documents the name is changed.

“She dresses him in women’s clothes, paints his nails, buys women’s shoes. When I talk to him on Skype and he and his mother, he is in makeup. His eyelashes and lips are made up, ”says Jeff Younger.

Since Jeff refuses to consider his son a daughter, his ex-wife is now trying to limit his parental rights through court. And at the same time obliged to pay the process of changing the sex. In Texas, the first in the Wild West clinic for transgender children has recently opened.

Texas is one of the most conservative American states. Remember the movies about cowboys and wild west saloons? Texas has always been associated with the place where real macho live.

Now, in promotional videos, teens tell how a boy becomes a girl and vice versa. Jeff claims that his son is already registered at the clinic. To communicate with our film crew of Channel One, its representatives refused.

“They offer a procedure for the hormonal suppression of puberty. They use hormonal drugs. Boys stop growing genitals, “- says Jeff Younger.

In fact, the son of Jeff in the case of a positive decision of the court faces chemical castration. This is an exclusive interview for Channel One as a cry of despair!

“In the West, there is a huge campaign for the normalization of all types of abnormal manifestations of gender. In fact, it is undermining traditional values. In my opinion, this goal is the same – the destruction of the family. In my case, this led to the woman single-handedly deciding to make a girl out of a boy and wants to castrate him. And I can do nothing. It seems incredible, but it is, ”explains Jeff Younger.

His ex-wife, by the way, a well-known pediatrician in the city, avoids the attention of journalists in every way. While Channel One was filming her workplace, she called the police. Residents of a small Texan town in which the child lives are shocked by what is happening.

Joe and Sarah Scott even created a website in defense of James on the Internet.

“You can’t drive a car until you’re 16 years old. You cannot get a tattoo until you are 18. You cannot buy alcohol until you are 21 years old. Why is sex change wrong? After all, it changes all my life. A child should not make such decisions, ”stresses Sarah Scott.

That is what Jeff is trying to prove in court. And since American law is a precedent, the fate of not only six years old James from Texas, but also a huge number of children in modern America depends on the outcome of this process.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children

I Was Told There Would Be No Math: The Culture Wars and Statistical Significance

Want to know how we got junk transgender science? Psychologists know how to do math, but they don’t know how to judge math.

It would be funny, but it’s children they’re torturing.

Finally, scientists and statisticians revolt against the tyranny of p-values as a measure of statistical significance.

Let’s be clear about what must stop: we should never conclude there is ‘no difference’ or ‘no association’ just because a P value is larger than a threshold such as 0.05 or, equivalently, because a confidence interval includes zero. Neither should we conclude that two studies conflict because one had a statistically significant result and the other did not. These errors waste research efforts and misinform policy decisions.

Amrhein, Valentin, Sander Greenland, and Blake McShane. “Scientists Rise up against Statistical Significance.” Nature,567, no. 7748 (March 2019): 305.

Trust me, you have no idea how many bad ideas are justified by the sizeless stare of statistical significance. But none even approach the level of abuse that p-values engender.

Just look at the history of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. The Manual determines the editorial standards for thousands of journals in psychology, education, and related disciplines. It sets standards in criminal forensics, social work, and large parts of psychiatric research. It’s the tax-code of psychological research.

The fifth edition of the Manual still enforces the error of rejecting research if p > 0.5 or t < 2.0. That’s math gobbledegook for “it’s probably mere chance or there’s not much difference between populations.” Neither of those claims are justified by p- or t-values alone. Yet, they are the main criteria for publishing in psychology research journals.

And you can always meet these tests! It’s called p-hacking. The basic error is to shirk the responsibility for producing a causal theory for claims. P-hackers assume that significance is in the numerical description rather than in causes. Try it interactively yourself. You too can hack p-values for fun and profit!

As you manipulated all those variables in the p-hacking exercise above, you shaped your result by exploiting what psychologists Uri Simonsohn, Joseph Simmons and Leif Nelson call “researcher degrees of freedom,” the decisions scientists make as they conduct a study. These choices include things like which observations to record, which ones to compare, which factors to control for, or, in your case, whether to measure the economy using employment or inflation numbers (or both). Researchers often make these calls as they go, and often there’s no obviously correct way to proceed, which makes it tempting to try different things until you get the result you’re looking for.

Aschw, Christie, and en. “Science Isn’t Broken.” FiveThirtyEight(blog), August 19, 2015.

That’s how you get grown-up men claiming that we must chemically castrate James to save his life. Experts testified about James. They said if we don’t say he is a girl and get him ready for chemical castration, he would die. Seriously. They testified to that.

These transgender child-abusers masquerading as scientists cherry-pick observations, populations, and variables until they get the result that furthers their anti-family ideology – a result completely at odds with direct observation, normal ideas about causation, and common sense.

 Anne Georgulas (on Facebook, on Twitter), James’ “mother”, has experts. They have hacked the statistics against all common sense. We have to hire experts to show how they have misinterpreted and lied about the data.

It’s expensive. Please help us overturn the ridiculous research practices in psychology that are abusing children. That’s the only way we can Save James.

Save James – Save Thousands of Children. Please donate.

DonateSave James - Save Thousands of Children