Victoria, Australia-parents: consent to puberty blockers or be prosecuted

OP unfortunately we do get posters trying to disrupt and make feminists look bad on here. So I would take some posts with a pinch of salt. If it sounds like an outrageous and extreme take, it may well not be in good faith.

As for bringing up children with strict gendered stereotypes - the effects are likely to vary given various different variables, but they're unlikely to be positive in any situation, I'd say.

It's not just the effect on the child itself, it's also how they then view the opposite sex. If a girl is told only boys play with cars and she is not allowed to then not only is she disempowered and her horizons lessened and her worldview narrowed, but she is also going to see males as further removed from her - mysterious entitities. Instead of humans with different biology who are nevertheless quite likely to share many interests and abilities with her.

On a societal level it could go some way towards creating various issues that we then have to try and unpick - which are probably harder the more entrenched they were in childhood. Male violence, women's socialisation, to name only two. I can see both of those issues as nascent tendencies in gender stereotypes. Of course not the only factors, but potentially feeding in or adding to them.

This seems extreme

Also I am firmly GC but it’s important to me my dc can choose whatever they like without judgement. Be it dd with shoes with planes on or Ds choosing pink. The hyper gendering of toys and clothes is something I appreciate many have moved in from.

Maybe your dd would like to play with dinosaurs and wear something else

describes Turing as "one of the first Gay men to go on estrogen."

That is so callous it takes my breath away. They're taking a man's tragic, homophobic persecution and trying to turn it into some kind of celebratory trans milestone. Absolutely abhorrrent. I see the same when Lily Elbe's tragic life is celebrated as the 'first womb transplant' (Lily died from the botched operation).

This all makes a lot of the 'gender affirmation' look disturbingly like 'conversion therapy' by any other name, as Necessary notes above.

It's an interesting idea, how to nurture a healthy attitude towards gender stereotypes. Before gender ideology I really thought that's where we were going, it being cool for boys to play in Frozen dresses, girls being tomboys.

Will it make a difference nurturing play in children to embrace girl stuff and boy stuff, and have less gender stereotype hang ups? Who knows, but that's my approach.

The premise of this is incorrect. The legal ruling Re: Imogen means that puberty blockers cannot be given if there is disagreement between parents and it has to go to court. This is a federal family court matter. I do not believe the parent who does not want puberty blockers would in any way be deemed in contravention of any other law.

I think they feel like they have hit the jackpot with this realisation to be honest.

They can pretend they are revolutionary whilst being completely homophobic, in plain sight and nobody can say anything about it.

@Vitsyra , if you are a real person, your attitude to your daughter's toys is the sort of thing that got us into this mess in the first place.

I wish people would stop referring to these medical interventions as treatments. They are not treatments, which implies a physical problem which is susceptible to alleviation by intervention. They are physical impositions for a psychological problem.

these drugs do not ‘ block’ puberty, in the sense that once they are discontinued, ‘normal service will be resumed’. Children’s bodies are not radios, you can’t turn them off and expect the same programme to resume if you turn them on again.

the normal process of adolescence will have been halted, and normal progression may be irrevocably limited. The ‘side’ effects of such medication, sterility, osteoporosis, and probably other problems which we just do not have sufficient timescale data to understand are the result of puberty being not deferred, but cancelled or changed.

shame on the prescribers. Shame on the legislators. Shame on the ‘educators,’ and the campaigners. It will be required of you.

I don’t think Victoria is particularly religious on balance

Melbourne is more creative and culturally mixed, farming communities to the west might be light touch

Just speaking from being there in university days

Victoria is a Labor state is that right

I wonder if the new Labor federal government will start implementing more on same lines

I'd be more concerned that my child would be converted to this sort of religion than about puberty blockers.

Why? Do you fear for their immortal soul if they join the wrong religion? Because it seems very strange that you would rather they joined the evangelical religion of genderism and be less worried about them taking medication that would leave them sterile, unable to experience sexual pleasure as an adult, unmatured brains, isolated from their peers, osteopenia, no improvement in mental health etc, than you would be about them attending a Bible study.

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

Blog post that explores the idea of transing the dead as an extension of baptism of the dead:

williamaferguson.substack.com/p/trans-out-your-dead?s=r

That's a particular horrible example and the author correctly identifies that one enthusiastic baptiser of the dead describes Turing as "one of the first Gay men to go on estrogen."

Turing was given DES as a form of chemical castration - and that was presented as an option to imprisonment.

Alan was prosecuted under the Labouchere Amendment of 1855, a law that made homosexuality (“gross indecency”) a crime. In an arranged plea deal, Alan accepted chemical castration by way of Diethylstilbestrol (DES) in lieu of prison and upon conviction he was stripped of all security clearances and forbidden entry into the United States.

The ignorance and indifference to the reality of history is breathtaking.

Australia can be an intensely religious society with a lot of churches that seem very extreme to me

I do not recognise this as being the case at all. Hillsong is small despite its loud voice. The dominant religions are very mainstream.

The Catholic Church is a powerful government lobby group however. That would be true to say.

I cannot remember, but Grace Tame got the Tasmanian bill changed.

I live in Victoria. Ever since I learned about this it keeps me up at night. I live in fear of my DD telling me she believes she is a boy. She is only 3yo, so I have some time still. To combat her thinking she is a boy, I have made a point to make her extra girly, she now wears jewellery and pretty dresses, she plays with dolls and her pink kitchen. I got rid of her dinosaurs and basically anything seen as too masculine.

How does it combating her thinking to impose gender ideology on her? To insist she must conform to gendered stereotypes of sex in order to be a girl? Surely if you embed this thinking in her then you are setting up the circumstances whereby when she wants to play with garages or soldiers or football like many many girls do then she will either decide she must be a boy or wish she was one because then she could play with them? Why not teach her that girls can play with any toys, dress in traditionally boys clothes, have short hair and still be a brilliant girl because girls aren't defined by their toys or clothes or feelings.

I could be wrong, but one of the reasons professionals are not speaking out is that the Victorian government also has harsh laws around ‘hate’ that could be twisted here too.

There are professionals in other states speaking out though. There is apparently studies underway as well if I have read this correctly.

www.ranzcp.org/news-policy/policy-and-advocacy/position-statements/gender-dysphoria

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists updated their guidance last year.

They are now warning that there is not enough evidence to recommend affirming only treatments or indeed any particular treatment plan. They now say that underlying health issues should be treated at the same time. And warn that medicalisation of children and teens be very careful and thoroughly explored considering the ‘paucity’ of evidence at this time.

Other states have also slipped through bans on conversion therapy that may be problematic but may not have the extreme position that Victoria has. QLD got conversion therapy laws through during covid. ACT has conversion therapy laws too (and ACT women’s rights campaigners do have to be extra careful in their activity. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8712169/amp/Canberra-radio-broadcaster-Beth-Rep-pay-10-000-transgender-activist-Bridget-Clinch.html )

Gender Identity legislation has become a politically hot topic in Victoria particularly. There is a state MP, Andrew Meddick, who has a transitioned male adult child. That ‘child’ seems well known as an extreme trans activist and not a stranger to perpetuating violence but that is often overlooked and selectively reported for sympathy.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10226895/amp/Victorian-MPs-daughter-seeks-refuge-bar-hit-head-spray-can.html (the actual story seems to be quite unclear here but Meddick junior was caught spraying graffiti, passerby told them to stop, Meddick threw can intending to harm/scare passerby and passerby threw it back. Scomo told it was ‘politically motivated’ and all confusion breaks loose.)

Either way, the Victoria government has indeed brought in laws that have made it very hard to ensure children and teens are receiving appropriate health care for their long term future health.

Where is this coming from as legislation?

Is it the Victorian state government

I have made a point to make her extra girly, she now wears jewellery and pretty dresses, she plays with dolls and her pink kitchen. I got rid of her dinosaurs and basically anything seen as too masculine.

You are obviously being flippant but there is an interesting point within your comment. When listening to the stories of trans people (and detransitioners) they often report that they come from families where their parents had forced them to be gender conforming. Young girls not allowed to get their hair cut short and forced to wear dresses until they said they thought they were a boy. Boys who were bullied by their parents for being effeminate until they claimed girlhood. It is quite clear that enforcement of gender roles does not keep gender ideology at bay and there are some pretty high profile examples of this such as Susie Green's (of Mermaids) child who was clearly given a hard time as a child by their parents when they weren't behaving in the way their parents expected a little boy to behave.

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

No it's just that "gender-affirming care" is obviously totally different from "conversion therapy".

Look at the names!

You'd think that people would pause for thought about the homophobia of the trans movement when they realise that the preferred treatment for transgenderism is the same as that which was used in the past as a conversion 'treatment' for gay men.

Or have they not realised that chemical castration with drugs like puberty blockers is what used to be done to gay men to try to stop them from being gay?

I assume that Australian parents have to be ready to crowdfund the defence of any parent who is caught by this.

This shouldn't be necessary. What is happening to our agreement of what a democracy is.

"Consent: that is illegal to withhold" is not consent. It makes a mockery of the very idea of consent. This needs a judicial review. With this law in place, effectively they are saying that for every other possible medical treatment or intervention, the parents should have the right to weigh the risks of treatment (which is rarely risk-free) against the risk of not treating or pursuing different treatment options, and deciding what is in the best interests of the child. But somehow for this one kind of treatment the parent cannot have this role and are not allowed to consider the balance of risks and benefits as they affect any specific individual, but any child can just have the treatment on demand. That is perverse. It needs a legal challenge and that shouldn't wait for a specific case to be appealed, that would be too traumatising for an individual family.

Is it still illegal for women who have been raped to talk about it in Victoria?