It is not altogether surprising, in an age of increasingly freelanced newspaper production, to find that journalists, in order to make a crust, need to be versatile: one day writing for the vaguely progressive press; the next, rebranding as a right wing bigot for the sake of a salary.
So violent are the gyrations performed that i wonder, at times, if the NHS is not secretly funding political re-assignment surgery, to enable those trapped in a liberal body to discover the true reactionary within.
How else to explain this paean to intolerance, penned in the pages of the Daily Mail, by Liberal Guardianista Carol Sarler?
Oh. On the surface, its plausible. A regular political-correctness-gone-mad diatribe about how the gender industry, is trying to force a new lack of boundaries on us all. Case in point: a poor five-year-old who is victim of this approach imposed on them by those evil money-motivated folk over at the Tavistock – unlike journo’s, who only ever write articles out of the goodness of their heart, natch!
Cue various spewings about how gender identity is almost the only condition where the NHS funds cosmetic treatment and we’re off: the inspiration for a comment-fest in which the current transphobic memes can be given full rein. Think of the poor cancer patients. It isn’t natural. They’ll never be a “real” man/woman/parent. If my child wanted to be a dog, would we treat them as a dog? And so on.
Except, what Ms Sarler has rather overlooked in all this is that just possibly they ARE thinking about the child. What is happening right now is NOT some massive flight from gender norms, but a final willingness to treat the infinitesimally small number of children who present with potential gender identity problems at the point when they present.
No-one is imposing anything. Not least because the sorry lessons of attempts to do so by the likes of George Rekkers prove just how difficult it is to sway someone from their inner sense of gender identity – and how that may end in disaster.
In this case, the child has been reported as SO determined in their gender identification that they have attempted self-harm: which means that whatever else is going on, it is inevitable that they would come to the attention of the NHS and mental health support services.
It is not clear whether Ms Sarler thinks that they should be denied that…left, basically, to inflict untold (expensive) damage on themselves for the sake of NOT appearing to be politically correct.
And then what?
A plea for tolerance
We-ell, the parents are merely asking that people accept that for now, the child’s gender presentation is at variance with what is on their birth certificate. Don’t take the piss. Don’t bully them for it. And don’t do anything irrevocable until the child is older – old enough either to have grown out of a “passing phase” or to decide to continue down this path.
The alternative? Er: create a child that is unhappy, self-harming, likely to be bullied anyway and give them good cause to hate school, society and everyone in it. Mmmm. That’s an absolute genius idea, Carol!
Espesh if she has any experience of the turnaround so often seen in teens whose GID IS finally recognised: from anti-social and sub-criminal to model society member in a trice.
No. All that the Tavistock, the parents and the “political correctness industry” are asking is that a child with a difference not be bullied for it. No big spend. No major disruptions.
Except to Ms Sarler’s sense of gender righteousness. Which is therefore reason enough to pen an undoubtedly well-remunerated article for the Daily Mail.
Nice one, Carol!
P.S. Remember this one? You know: the one where you wrote about how potentially life-saving research was sometimes thwarted by public moral outrage. You made some good points.