We note that a California family plans to ‘transition’ a four year old ‘boy’ to female, at the boy’s request. It makes perfect sense, given the California political mindset. Gender-bending is in fashion on the Left. Boys and girls may use each others’ restrooms at will, now. And if we remember high school, they probably will, though not necessarily as intended. Not to worry though, schools now provide IUD’s and abortions and parents need never know, right?
We do wonder though, what this particular family might do had the boy wanted to play basketball: stretch him upon a rack, perhaps? Basketball players must be tall, right?
But at four years of age? What sort of parental judgement is that? We recall our four year old demands vaguely but well enough to know that we are well rid of them now. If four year old whims/demands (How can one be sure of the difference?) had controlled the rest of our life … We fear to approach the possibilities!
‘Transition’ is scary, too. Where will the line be drawn? And when? At what age will ‘corrective’ surgery be performed? How will the child be forced (it will require compulsion once the kids at school catch on and lean upon him/her) to follow his ‘chosen’ path? What if he unchooses it? Will the parents honor that too? What if he/she flip-flops back and forth? Will the school support or just tolerate the project? Will the Child Services do-gooders step in? Could this be considered abuse? Or a parental duty?
Will the kid have friends? Or just torturers? What will this lab rat grow up to be; what sort of life will he/she lead? (No bets!)
Of course, it will be thought to beat having been aborted, a common fate of nascent kids these days. Or maybe not.
The thing that we notice most readily, is the parental mindset today. It seems to recognize everything from the parent’s view; the child’s view appears discounted. Similar to the way politicians treat voters, perhaps. Pledge to their welfare and then, do what pleases you. Very human.
We suppose that the parents want what is best for the child as most do. But they seem as confused about that as the kid is represented to be about his gender. We feel sympathy for them, playthings of political forces as they seem to be. We feel more sorrow for the child, who has neither the strength nor the judgement to defend himself from this.
If we see the parent’s program as wrong (and we do) what would we do in their stead? We admit that we don’t know that. We assume that these are reacting to the child’s ambivalence, not seeking attention. We don’t know that, either.
But stepping back a pace, we might wait longer to react; it seems early to impose such experiences upon the child. We know the result of ignoring youthful sexual ambiguity; we have been doing it that way since prehistory. We know rather less of charging ahead as these parents appear to be doing. We recall the doctors’ mantra: “First, do no harm.” It seems to us to fit here. We wonder whether anyone has it in mind?
We worry too about how the schools and the child’s peers will react as time and the ‘transitioning’ proceed. Felicitously, we hope. No bets, though. An acquaintance of ours chose sex-change surgery as an adult, male to female. She told us, years later, that she regretted the decision. She said that beforehand, she felt misplaced, that she was unwanted by normal folk. But since the change, she laments: “Now, nobody wants me.” At least, the decision was hers, not something inflicted by parents.
We recall too a child’s TV show featuring a frog that sang: “It isn’t easy being green.” It appears to us that sometimes, it isn’t easy being human, either.