7 Comments

Colin, some critical feedback: you need more serious scrutiny of the quality of your sources.

Epoch times, which is lead by a character that believes in supernatural medical treatments is bad enough. Quoting from the Catholic led “The Lamp” on HR as a negatively impacting function implying that “feminization” and “the HR lady” function is damaging masculinity of companies is another bizarre thing.

But the “American College of Pediatricians” is atrocious, why not quote VDARE or American Renaissance or the American Family Association.

Gender-critical press is prevalent enough without associating it with far right-wing or Christianist stances.

The “American College of Pediatricians” is a rancid right-wing Christian organization masquerading as a legitimate medical organization.

As an anti-reproductive rights group is spreads rank medical misinformation about abortion - for instance that abortion might in some way causebreast cancer:

https://acpeds.org/position-statements/reproductive-choices-of-young-women-affecting-future-breast-cancer-risk

And a host of other junk:

https://acpeds.org/search-results?q=Abortion

It is a vaccine denial organization:

https://acpeds.org/press/college-opposes-mandatory-humanpapilloma-virus-hpv-vaccination

https://acpeds.org/search-results?q=HPV

Supports Gay Conversion Therapy ( https://acpeds.org/position-statements/psychotherapy-for-unwanted-homosexual-attraction-among-youth )

Is against same-sex marriage ( https://acpeds.org/position-statements/defending-traditional-marriage )

Is against same-sex parents raising children ( https://acpeds.org/topics/marriage-and-family-matters/same-sex-marriage )

Simply because a rabid organization is critical of gender doesn’t mean their position is worth of quoting or distribution. I enjoy a variety of viewpoints, since I like to track the quality of thought other than my own. But uncritical engagement with these viewpoints is really counter productive to a reality project.

Expand full comment

Women and infants are in danger from the porn-saturated men, who fathered these babies. In my data, a constant so far is that 1/3 of women in relationships with men who demand "role play" and like to dress themselves as oversexed lacy "trans" identities, are sexually assaulted. How can this be dangerous to babies, you ask? These men attack the mothers shortly after the birth, because these men "wish they were women" and are most jealous after the mother of the child has given birth. This online nonsense about "the good ones" ignores the dangers. Babies have a soft spot on top of the skull for months. A raging, sex-obsessed "trans woman" in the home is the case for 1/3 of women in these relationships, based on my data, the only in the world. Why is that? Why isn't some social scientist keeping data on the wives and children? One story of an escape, infant involved:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZViL3sZeII&t=57s

Expand full comment

Thank you for your science- based information and the wonderful work you do to help prevent harm to distressed young people.

Expand full comment
Feb 11·edited Feb 11

This should never have to be a big deal. If a 'transitioned' person is indeed 'accepted' as that new sex they want to become and then they want to transition to a different sex yet again then that's how the patients should put it to their doctor! You accept me as a female now and now as a female I want to be a male and visa versa. And, if they want to do this dozens of times, so be it! It should be just as acceptable doing it 'once' as doing transitioning multiple times. Just don't call it 'detransitioning' and let the games begin!!!!!!!! ;)

Expand full comment