Gender Ideology Harms Children - The American College of Pediatricians

Gender Ideology Harms Children

The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of male and female, respectively – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.¹
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.^2,3,4
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).⁵ The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.^2,4,5
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.⁶
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.⁵
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.^7,8,9,10
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBTQ – affirming countries.¹¹ What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing that a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.


Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians
Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist
Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital


For a PDF version click here: Gender Ideology Harms Children.

CLARIFICATIONS in response to questions regarding points 3 & 5:

Regarding Point 3: “Where does the APA or DSM-V indicate that Gender Dysphoria is a mental disorder?”
The APA (American Psychiatric Association) is the author of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition(DSM-V). The APA states that those distressed and impaired by their GD meet the definition of a disorder. The College is unaware of any medical literature that documents a gender dysphoric child seeking puberty blocking hormones who is not significantly distressed by the thought of passing through the normal and healthful process of puberty.
From the DSM-V fact sheet:
“The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition.”
“This condition causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”
Regarding Point 5:  “Where does the DSM-V list rates of resolution for Gender Dysphoria?”
On page 455 of the DSM-V under “Gender Dysphoria without a disorder of sex development” it states: “Rates of persistence of gender dysphoria from childhood into adolescence or adulthood vary. In natal males, persistence has ranged from 2.2% to 30%. In natal females, persistence has ranged from 12% to 50%.”  Simple math allows one to calculate that for natal boys: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 2.2% = 97.8% (approx. 98% of gender-confused boys)  Similarly, for natal girls: resolution occurs in as many as 100% – 12% = 88% gender-confused girls
The bottom line:  Our opponents advocate a new scientifically baseless standard of care for children with a psychological condition (GD) that would otherwise resolve after puberty for the vast majority of patients concerned.  Specifically, they advise:  affirmation of children’s thoughts which are contrary to physical reality; the chemical castration of these children prior to puberty with GnRH agonists (puberty blockers which cause infertility, stunted growth, low bone density, and an unknown impact upon their brain development), and, finally, the permanent sterilization of these children prior to age 18 via cross-sex hormones. There is an obvious self-fulfilling nature to encouraging young GD children to impersonate the opposite sex and then institute pubertal suppression. If a boy who questions whether or not he is a boy (who is meant to grow into a man) is treated as a girl, then has his natural pubertal progression to manhood suppressed, have we not set in motion an inevitable outcome? All of his same sex peers develop into young men, his opposite sex friends develop into young women, but he remains a pre-pubertal boy. He will be left psychosocially isolated and alone. He will be left with the psychological impression that something is wrong. He will be less able to identify with his same sex peers and being male, and thus be more likely to self identify as “non-male” or female. Moreover, neuroscience reveals that the pre-frontal cortex of the brain which is responsible for judgment and risk assessment is not mature until the mid-twenties. Never has it been more scientifically clear that children and adolescents are incapable of making informed decisions regarding permanent, irreversible and life-altering medical interventions. For this reason, the College maintains it is abusive to promote this ideology, first and foremost for the well-being of the gender dysphoric children themselves, and secondly, for all of their non-gender-discordant peers, many of whom will subsequently question their own gender identity, and face violations of their right to bodily privacy and safety.
Please visit this page on the College website concerning sexuality and gender issues.
A PDF version of this page can be downloaded here: Gender Ideology Harms


References:
1. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development, “Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development in Childhood.” Intersex Society of North America, March 25, 2006. Accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.dsdguidelines.org/files/clinical.pdf.
2. Zucker, Kenneth J. and Bradley Susan J. “Gender Identity and Psychosexual Disorders.” FOCUS: The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry. Vol. III, No. 4, Fall 2005 (598-617).
3. Whitehead, Neil W. “Is Transsexuality biologically determined?” Triple Helix (UK), Autumn 2000, p6-8. accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexuality.htm; see also Whitehead, Neil W. “Twin Studies of Transsexuals [Reveals Discordance]” accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transs_stats.htm.
4. Jeffreys, Sheila. Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism. Routledge, New York, 2014 (pp.1-35).
5. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013 (451-459). See page 455 re: rates of persistence of gender dysphoria.
6. Hembree, WC, et al. Endocrine treatment of transsexual persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3132-3154.
7. Olson-Kennedy, J and Forcier, M. “Overview of the management of gender nonconformity in children and adolescents.” UpToDate November 4, 2015. Accessed 3.20.16 from www.uptodate.com.
8. Moore, E., Wisniewski, & Dobs, A. “Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: A review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects.” The Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2003; 88(9), pp3467-3473.
9. FDA Drug Safety Communication issued for Testosterone products accessed 3.20.16: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm161874.htm.
10. World Health Organization Classification of Estrogen as a Class I Carcinogen: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/ageing/cocs_hrt_statement.pdf.
11. Dhejne, C, et.al. “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.” PLoS ONE, 2011; 6(2). Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Accessed 3.20.16 from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885.

Books / Reading List

I have been meaning to keep a list of books TBR for a while. First post.

Summer Reading List

Posted on 2016-06-26 by Lawrence Murray

All right goyim, summer is here! Get ready for standard pool parties and of course, summer reading assignments. Here is a list of political and historical books I have found valuable and which could be considered part of an alt-right canon of sorts:
Patrick J. Buchanan, Suicide of a Superpower — Paleoconservative commentator Pat Buchanan has a number of titles dealing with American decline, but this one is the most relevant in my opinion. Much of his analysis of what is happening to the United States culturally and politically is very spot-on. The weakest point of the book is the emphasis on preserving the Christian identity of the United States, a statistical reality which will ironically survive the demographic changes Buchanan draws attention to elsewhere in the text. And considering how devoted the churches are to our colonization by the third world… He is still a very accessible author with good instincts about what is going wrong, but keep in mind that he gets to be a public figure because he stays just within the Overton window. Still a great read.

Guillaume Faye, Archaeofuturism — A French New Right author who I mentally refer to as William Fay, Guillaume Faye wrote Archaeofuturism almost twenty years ago. The book does not feel dated (except when he talks about 1980s far-right intellectuals in France and why they failed) and indeed many of his predictions are eerily correct, especially on Islamic terror (the book was published in 1998) and troubles in the eurozone. The French perspective is particular useful because they have no hangups about being critical of the United States, which is something we must be, and are based in Europe (obviously). If we are truly to build a nationalist order, the very American alt-right should remain informed of ideological developments in the homeland. Continental Europe and the Anglo-Saxon satellites have long seen the world very differently, and nowhere is this more obvious than in Faye’s zeal for European integration, an issue that remains deeply contentious.
David Hackett Fischer, Albion’s Seed  — I have written about this very long book before and I cannot recommend it enough. Fischer’s opus describes how four main ethno-religious and regional migrations out of the British Isles in the colonial period laid the foundations for the early United States. The history itself is interesting—I always wondered why astrology was more popular among Southerners and now I know why—but perhaps more important is the bigger picture, which is that the people you settle a land with are central to the culture that is created on it. This sounds obvious but has been buried by postmodern ways of thinking. While Fischer is largely fair in his assessment of the four regional cultures, I do feel he has a preference for the Puritan and Quaker societies over the Southern and Appalachian ones. For a more contemporary, shorter, and slightly pozzed version of this work, see Colin Woodard’s American Nations, which breaks the US into a whopping 11 deracinated regional cultures.
Gregory Hood, Waking Up from the American Dream — This is the newest book on the list, and one I recently reviewed. Hood is one of the most talented writers on the alt-right, and this book collects many of his recent essays related to issues of White identity and American politics. Hood offers a well-needed identitarian criticism of the American Dream, the conservative movement, and civic nationalism.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Democracy: The God that Failed  — I only read this book after becoming a nationalist, but for the meme value alone this fairly brief and often repetitive anarcho-capitalist treatise against democracy is worth a read. Hoppe represents the remnants of right-wing libertarianism, and as such emphasizes that we do not have to tolerate every sort of degeneracy foisted unto us by equality, or equality itself. Nor should we tolerate neighbors we didn’t ask for and which have no ties to our communities. An ever useful observation of the increasingly defunct libertarian movement, however, is that people respond to incentives, which is why Hoppe believes those who impugn society need to be threatened with physical punishment, if not physical removal. Looking ahead, Hoppe sees the Holy Roman Empire as a potential model for a disintegrating United States—an outcome of free cities and a loose affiliation of statelets is often overlooked by doomists. Interesting read even if you have no background in LARPy ancapistani fantasies.
Greg Johnson, New Right Versus Old Right — The flagship book of Counter-Currents, NROR is a succinct introduction to what the North American New Right is about, its metapolitical aims, and the importance of identity. With a philosopher’s attention to logic, Johnson makes his case premise by premise for why we need a homeland and why we aren’t villains for wanting one. Perhaps most importantly, Johnson addresses the issues of the failed Old Right that many overlook out of their contempt for our present situation.
Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique — No list would be complete without this formational text. McDonald provides one of the most well-researched and well-written takes on the JQ that’s ever been penned. Read it.
Benjamin Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations — I know this sounds like a bizarre choice to include, but bear with me for a moment. This is a book written in defense of the world’s most maligned extant ethnostate and settler colony by one of the most successful right-wing nationalist politicians in history. Zionism is a lot of things to a lot of different people, but one thing it isn’t is a failure. There is a lot of quality rhetoric and framing here that is worth learning from and even appropriating. The combination of history, romanticism, ethnocentrism, logistical awareness, and personal commitment that inform the likudnik worldview are all important to its enduring success in Israeli politics.
T. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy — Almost nothing in this classic text is outdated. The predicted collapse of European imperialism, the rise of China and radical Islam, and the anticipated demographic pressure and migrations from the colored global south all came true. Another interesting facet of Rising Tide is that its narrative of Western decline predates WWII, which so many theorists tend to focus on. It was WWI that saw the huge use of colored levies in Europe and mass racial suicide first, both of which spiritually and materially broke Europe. Stoddard also makes the crucial distinction between rule and settlement of a territory, the idea of outer and inner dikes of our racial patrimony. A well-populated settler colony like the United States is an extension of Europe in a way that the British Raj was not. In our times, the outer dikes have been torn down and the inner dikes are undergoing the same process. If you read anything, read this.
Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf — There aren’t many books which can lay claim to having altered the course of world history, but this is one of them. AH isn’t a particularly great writer either, but the observations, insights, tactics, and paradigms in here are worth looking at. And like any narrative which has transcended time and history there is an impulse for the reader to fit it to their own circumstances. One might argue that the Austria-Hungary and Weimar Republic that AH railed against have met their match in the United States, which seems to combine the worst traits of both, minoritization of the core nation and entrenched social and moral rot. No matter how much of Mein Kampf or its derivative NS you agree (or disagree) with, I think it will have an impact on how you view the crises of our era. Many on the alt-right find it useful to be familiar with cultural marxism and its canon, but I think it also important to be familiar with what cultural marxism is a reaction against, national socialism, which itself was a reaction to judaeo-bolshevism. This struggle has  been going on for a long time.

No Right To Whites

No Right To Whites

Max Wifeschild


You don’t have the right to white people.
You don’t have the right to denigrate our history and traditions and then lay claim to what we’ve built.
You don’t have the right to ruin our children in your social experiments called public schools.
You don’t have the right to ruin our lives and livelihoods with your imported savages.
You don’t have the right to us.
We are going to determine our own future. We are going to determine our own lives.
Our lives are not improved with diversity. Our lives are not improved with multiculturalism. Our lives are not improved by those spreading these poisonous ideas. We are going to stop you.
We gave you our cities. We gave you our infrastructure. We gave you our neighborhoods. Now, you want our nations, children, and even our lives.
We are not giving you any more. Fuck you.
You don’t have a right to us. You can have your crappy culture. You can have your crappy communities. You can have your crappy way of life you made for yourselves. You can have your broken, backwards cultures that created your broken, backwards nations. But no, you can’t have us.
We are done with you and your enablers. We are not going to retreat any longer. Our numbers are growing each day with a righteous hatred of what has been done to us. We are going to fight and we are going to win