Trump's plans for day one: ending child sexual mutilation and having just male and female genders

This is untrue, and a fallacy.

1. Informed consent cannot be given if all risks and information is not given; very many trans people who have suffered disabling complications and outcomes say in their own words that they were not given the full detail of the risks
2. In fact, a shocking number of trans children and their parents were never informed that blocking puberty is irreversible, and results in disablement, cognitive damage and chronic illness
3. In fact Joanna Olsen Kennedy, a trans healthcare spokeswoman, said at a conference that mastectomies are essentially reversible
4. Patients with severe mental health conditions cannot give informed consent (I say this as a recovered anorexic who was hospitalised twice for my condition and on the second occasion fed against my consent. My consent wasn't informed consent, because I was dying of starvation)
5. People with certain ND conditions may not be able to give fully formed consent...
6. ....as cannot many people with PTSD from sexual abuse.

The consent trope is a reflection of the trans movement's hypercapitalist, libertarian aproach to dangerous bodily modification. It utterly fails to protect and safeguard the most vulnerable in our society. In fact, it exploits them.

Trans surgery is not abuse given the person receiving it not only consents (thus is not abuse) they seek it. The only issue is it too readily available.

Circumcision - genital mutilation - of babies, that is abuse. They did not consent to having their genitalia disfigured.

I think a lot of them are operating out of fear because they are being told that their child will DEFINITELY commit suicide if they don't allow the treatment.

I subscribe to the PITT substack which is written by parents of transitioning children who are against the transition. Other common themes I see are:

1. Parents without college education who feel 'railroaded' by the 'clever' professionals
2. Conversely, parents with multiple postgrad degrees who swallowed the postmodern neomarxist theories on which trans rests and so feel their principles mean they have to go along with
3. Coercion from the child - threatning suicide, going NC, self harm
4. In some US states it appears that until recently children were able to get hormones and binders from Planned Parenthood without their parent' knowledge

Why do the parents of these children think changing sex, name, wearing pre conceived ideas of gender clothing, taking puberty blockers, chest binding and then surgery is the way to go. Why not treat the underlying hatred of their bodies? Its odd.

I would go further and say that the trans surgery machine is institutionalised child abuse. Because it's explicitly taking mentally ill, abused, autistic, eating disordered and otherwise vulnerable children, drugging and mutilating their genitals, and even forcing a No Contact separation between them and their families if the families don't comply. This is absolutely the predator's playbook and so in 30 years I believe we'll look back on this period with the same horror that we use to look back on Jimmy Savile's career.

Indeed the Savile parallel is quite a useful one because the dominant attitude to him today is one of carefully constructed bemusement, like "How could he have done all of this in plain sight? Why did no one stop him? Thank God we're more enlightened now about these matters!"

Well our smug self-congratulation will have to be torn down because from 2015 - 2024 we allowed a far worse form of abuse (worse because it resulted in permanent disablement and disfigurement) in plain sight and in fact even bien pensant celebrities like Emma Watson and David Tennant cheered it on.

This.

Treat the mental illness that makes them hate their own bodies instead of butcher them. One day we will look back on horror at this madness. Poor mentally ill children thinking they can change their bodies, pick a gender and all is good. They have been sold a lie

Show me the evidence that Trump is planning to ban ante-natal care.

It's hard for UK residents to wrap their head around the limitations of what the federal government can decree as distinct from what is under state control.

Is this unique to the UK though? Kamala Harris campaigned on protecting abortion rights. She pretended that if elected as a federal government she would protect abortions rights, but it seems voters knew that that was bullshit, and the states would always have primary control over that, and looked at other issues to decide their vote.

In the fallout post-election, people seemingly couldn’t understand why voters in certain states didn’t prioritise what is a state issue over issues the federal government actually has control over, like the budget and immigration.

So maybe a lot of Americans don’t understand this too, or don’t understand how other citizens think on this.

I'm in Maine, which has a Democrat governor and has abortion rights enshrined in the state constitution, though technically we are a purple state since District 2 (northern Maine) tends to vote Republican and District 1 tends to vote Democrat. We are one of the two states, along with Nebraska, that splits their electoral college vote. The atmosphere here is generally still TWAW but I'm sensing a vibe shift starting. I have heard nothing whatsoever about banning ante-natal care and I frankly don't believe it because there are too many OB/GYNs making a living out of it, though it wouldn't surprise me if the feds brought in some restriction on how contraception is paid for.

It's hard for UK residents to wrap their head around the limitations of what the federal government can decree as distinct from what is under state control.

I'm in the USA at them moment, and I don't think that he concern you're dismissing is unreasonable or invalid. Can you elaborate on how and why you dismiss it?

How will he do that? I'm having a hard time imagining it but you must have something in mind.

He will ban ante natal care? Aye right…

Trump derangement syndrome very active in here!

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
You seem determined to view one part of Trump's programme in utter isolation to the rest.
But that is not how politics works.

He'll define gender in law in the same breath as he bans ante natal care

Trump will do a few things that GCs are happy about
and many others that every sane woman will be livid about
he will also forget to do stuff he does not care about

He's definitely supported/ been seen supportive of activists advocating banning gay people from being able to adopt.

I mean, is it all big news to you people that Trump supports religious fundamentalists and extreme right wingers who are not exactly gay-friendly?

Im afraid it not just the "left" who is teaming gays with trans.

Are you aware that one of the things Trump wants to change is gay marriage and adoption laws?

Im all up for changes to the law and banning of medical transition of kids etc. All I'm saying is that in case of Trump's govermnent it wiil mean that gay righs will be eroded, too.

What other policies do you think he's looking to change then?

I don't see DT as any great intellectual, not even close, but I am pretty sure he's been around the block and knows the difference between a homosexual person and someone saying they are the opposite sex.

You cant' separate it though. Yes, stopping trans nonsense. Yes, restoring male and female. And at the same time, reducing overall gay rights to nothing. In Trump's eyes, gay and trans are the same thing. You cant get away from that.

Yes.

To own?

ffs, he's now added Greenland to the list.