I told you this was coming in September of last year (California to Hand Children to the Queer Lobby and the Medical Industrial Complex). Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, recently enacted legislation that puts children and adolescents at significant risk of medical mistreatment for millions children and adolescents. The SAFETY Act (AB1955) invalidates and prohibits any administrative regulation or adopted school board policy that requires “forced outings,” a euphemism used by trans activists to obscure the practice of school administrators, counselors, and teachers keeping parents in the dark about the sexuality and gender identity of their children. Those defending the law claim that it does not limit the ability of parents or students to discuss sexuality and gender identities within their own families in the manner that they choose. That trans activists feel the need to reassure the public that the state is not going to police home life is disturbing. But then the whole concept of the SAFETY Act is disturbing. The law doesn’t protect children. It endangers the health and safety of children and adolescents in several ways.
Adults who keep secrets with children about sexual matters engage in an explorative and manipulative practice known as grooming. Grooming involves establishing a relationship of secrecy and trust to control and exploit a child. By creating an atmosphere where sexual topics are discussed privately and away from the scrutiny of parents, the perpetrator fosters a sense of complicity in the child. Trepidation is instilled in the child that telling his parents about the secret could get the adults with whom he is keeping secrets in trouble. Undermining the child’s ability to disclose the abuse to others creates a distorted sense of normalcy around inappropriate behavior and untoward thoughts. Such manipulation is a critical tactic in preparing the child for ongoing abuse and ensuring that the perpetrator can maintain their control and avoid detection. (See (See Seeing and Admitting Grooming; What is Grooming?)
Trans identifying children and adolescents face a significantly higher risk of suicidal ideations and self-harm compared to their peers. We’re told that this elevated risk is largely attributed to the intense social stigma, discrimination, and rejection trans identifying youth encounter. Many transgender youths experience bullying, family rejection, and a lack of support from their communities, leading to feelings of isolation and despair. (Note the way refusing to “affirm” a child’s false perception is portrayed as abusive.) At the same time, gender dysphoria is associated with higher rates of various psychiatric conditions, including anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and personality disorders. There are correlations between gender dysphoria and conditions such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and cluster B personality disorders (borderline, narcissistic, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders).
Knowing the child is trans identifying can alert the parent to the child’s digital activity. Too many parents learn too late the necessity of developing an awareness of online interactions and the content their children are consuming. Children are groomed online. Online communities also glorify or encourage self-harm. This knowledge can also alert parents to grooming in the school environment, such as detecting the presence of queer propaganda, which appears in the form of activities, argot, flags, posters, and pornography or other age-inappropriate materials of a sexualized nature. By maintaining vigilance and being proactive, parents can provide the necessary support and intervention to help their children resist cult induction and the indoctrination. Really, parents shouldn’t wait until the signs are present, but the normalization of the queer praxis of transgressing the normative boundaries between adults and children has made parents feel like they’re in the wrong for harboring concern over child sexualization. Grooming is not just about pulling children into the circle of those sexualizing them; grooming also involves manipulating parents.
Recognizing the greater risk of suicidal ideations and self-harm among certain groups of children is vital for parents. Open communication with the child and with schools is therefore crucial. Parents who do not know what is going in their children’s lives may miss the warning signs for self-harm and suicide. Parents should be vigilant for signs such as changes in appetite, behavior, mood, and sleep patterns. Noticing expressions of hopelessness, withdrawal from activities or social interactions, and talk of self-harm or suicide can be crucial indicators. Context is everything; knowing that that one’s child is trans identifying allows parents to make sense of the signs and to seek professional help, as gender identity disorder is a serious psychiatric condition. In seeking this help, parents must learn all they can about the services available to avoid putting their child in the hands of those who push “gender affirming case,” i.e., the road to simulated sexual identities. (See Simulated Sexual Identities: Trans as Bad Copy; Making Patients for the Medical-Industrial Complex; Disordering Bodies for Disordered Minds; The Body as Primary Commodity: The Techno-Religious Cult of Transgenderism.)
California new law thus removes a crucial element of standard child safeguarding norms by preventing public schools from disclosing a student’s gender identity to their parents thereby enabling child sexualization. This exposes children to potentially irreversible and lifelong medical mistreatment. As Michael Shellenberger points out, these medical practices are predicated on “the pseudoscientific idea that some children are born into the wrong bodies and that we can change a person’s sex through drugs and surgery.” Shellenberger reminds us of crucial developments in the United Kingdom, where pediatrician Hillary Cass was tasked with evaluating the ethics of blocking puberty, administering cross-sex hormones, and performing surgeries on minors to alleviate gender dysphoria, the current designation for gender identity disorder. She concluded that these practices are unethical. She moreover determined that the practice of “social transition,” where a child adopts the identity of the opposite gender, is not a neutral act. It carries psychological implications and is often the first step on the path to medical transitioning.
California’s new law prevents schools from notifying parents when their children are placed on this medical pathway. This represents a serious infringement on the rights of both children and parents. Puberty is a fundamental part of human development, and children have the inherent right to it. No adult should have the authority to block puberty (except in the case of precocious puberty) or engage in any unnecessary medical intervention. Children and adolescents lack the maturity to fully comprehend the long-term consequences of “gender-affirming care.” They therefore cannot provide informed consent. (See Thomas Szasz, Medical Freedom, and the Tyranny of Gender Ideology). Parents have the right to be informed if their child believes they are the opposite gender or feel they were born in the wrong body not only for morality’s sake, but so they can perform their parental duty to safeguard their children. As Shellenberger and others have exposed, internal documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) reveal that these medical interventions—hormones, puberty blockers, and surgeries—not only are irreversible but also result in sterilization and loss of sexual function. These are atrocities (see The Persistence of Medical Atrocities: Lobotomy, Nazi Doctors, and Gender Affirming Care.)
freedom and reason 