New Executive Order: Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation

It’s disconcerting agreeing with Trump….

It's not Trump I'm agreeing with Trump, though, it's Trump's team.

I doubt whether Trump has the cognitive ability to do more than repeat some simplified phrases he's been taught, as he signs these orders.

It's members of his team who draft the orders, or choose people to draft them.

And I only agree with them on certain things.

Is this the one thing that they will refuse to ask a Drag Queen their opinion on?

It really is like opening the bloody curtains and smelling that beautiful, clear smell after the rain has stopped and the sun is just coming out

And it's not just the clarity of language, it's the wholesale, unequivocal, and far reaching assumption that these people are men, none of what they say is true, and targeting children is what they are doing.

They're not even trying to spell it out. It's just a given.

They're just writing as though everyone knows it, there's no argument, there's no discussion, there's no clauses, sub clauses, apologies, nods to the ideology. None of it.

It's been completely swept aside.

I have sometimes noted the clarity of speech in America.

Eye glasses, seeing eye dog, and the one that used to make me laugh, because it was so descriptive, La-Z-Boy chair.

I'm generally in favour of things doing what they say on the tin.

Trans ideology has gained such traction because of the mangling of language. See all the numerous references to George Orwell. It really is a highly significant part of the whole issue.

And it's been used against us for so long, it's absolutely delightful now seeing it so effectively employed in our favour.

Yes, they really are astonishingly well written and clear. It's quite refreshing.

This is really excellent news.
The clarity of language used throughout will make it very hard for TRAs to argue that children with precocious puberty, men with prostate cancer or women with gynaecological conditions will not be able to access these drugs. There is no wiggle room, although no doubt they will try.

Oh for that degree of clarity here!
It’s disconcerting agreeing with Trump….

The tightness of the drafting of these EOs is quite something. They absolutely mean business.

@mitogoshigg
The EO appears to clearly state this is relevant only to the use of PBs in children undergoing normal puberty, or to prevent them doing so, in order to facilitate changes to their physical bodies that allow them to look more like the gender they identify with.

It is incredibly clearly written and just as here in the UK children who need these drugs for precocious puberty should have no accessing them as they always have done, under appropriate specialist care.

I love the title of the EO. The language is so clear and cuts through the bullshit. It makes it clear what gender affirming care is. Good luck with arguing for Child Mutilation. They will no doubt try.

I feel it's changed the conversation completely.

The arguments will have to be made all over again for why it's a good idea to halt children's puberty.

But this time, these arguments will be made out in the open, in front of everyone, with a much more educated population able to push back, and much less scope for bullying and coercion.

It won't be plain sailing by any means, but I cannot see them ever getting back to how it was a year ago. Too many people have woken up.

Yes.

Although, between our tactics here, and Trump's tactics there, I can see the entire ideology falling out of favour with the public.

And since convention and custom was what made a big difference, that's going to be very meaningful.

That suggests to me that they were hired and had already started drafting long before the election, because Trump's team knew this was important and one of the factors that would beat the Democrats.

As long as the use of blockers in the case of precocious puberty isn't affected. I'm concerned that drs will be reluctant to prescribe to very vulnerable young girls as they are concerned they could be accused of breaking new laws (just as happened with some of the abortion laws) certain genetic conditions etc can cause very early onset of puberty and these drugs can essentially allow the girls to have a more normal childhood, I'm talking about 6 year olds here.

Bloody hell! That is incredible, well done to whoever wrote that. And though it pains me to say it, well done Trump, on this he is absolutely correct. It seemed like the US was really lost on this issue and way behind us here in the UK but this makes it clear there was a lot going on behind the scenes. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, the backlash to these two EOs will be huge, remains to be seen whether this works better or worse than the steady but slow pace of change here.

and whoever knew that the people writing them had to be hired in good time so that everything could be checked and signed off on. The election was won a little under three months ago. Helluva job.

The clarity of these Executive Orders is so refreshing, no mangled language, nothing left open to interpretation just clear, unequivocal, simple and straightforward. Whoever is writing them deserves high praise.

Trump has nuked the 'affirmative care' industry. By increasing the statute of limitations and allowing children harmed by gender affirming care to sue, no insurer will touch this with a barge pole. Once the money has gone this circus will collapse and the ghouls pushing it will move on.

Can't see it on the BBC's breaking news but expect they've got an important drag queen story to cover 😑

All of this!
Well done to all the women across the world working to safeguard children. Quite a tragedy that it's taken someone like Trump to do what responsible politicians should have been doing all along - but so be it.

If ever there was a paragraph that was the written equivalent of the Emperor's new clothes, that's it.

Yes, it's great that this is specifically mentioned.

"(e) prioritize investigations and take appropriate action to end child-abusive practices by so-called sanctuary States that facilitate stripping custody from parents who support the healthy development of their own children, including by considering the application of the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act and recognized constitutional rights."

Fuck me, that looks incredibly comprehensive. Coming at from quite a few different angles.

And yes, everyone has always felt that money is behind a lot of this, so a long statute of limitations is really going put the frighteners on insurance companies.

And sticking it to WPATH! Junk science, yes. But I hope that if there is any pushback about that organisation, their connection to castrating children and pornography is plastered all over the media. There's no coming back from that.

And yes, too, to whoever has been beavering away in the background lining this up. That's a lot of work, a lot of scrutinising of the wording, and, to the untrained eye, the closing of every bloody loophole possible.

As Alison said

All the women who gathered 'across the aisle' in the legal sector have been putting this together for a fair old while. All those so called feminists who demonised other feminists for 'working with the right', turns out it was the only way to get this done.

What an important development. So thoroughly written as well.
Excellent news in the battle to safeguard children.

Blimey. Well, if there's going to be a silver lining to Trump's in, it may as well be a mine of purest gleaming ingots.

Some lower profile GC campaigners have, for some time, claimed that the biggest hit to the progression of gender ideology would be to ensure that medical insurance companies were liable for costs associated with treatments that had gone wrong/had adverse side effects and for life long costs lined to the original 'gender treatment'. They felt that once insurers pulled the plug, WPATH would collapse as there would be no money to be made, and those with money would move on. The goal was to get to a situation where effective treatment that reduces distress and enables acceptance of healthy bodies.

If the EO means funding for physical treatment is not provided through Medicaid, other insurers might follow suit. I haven't read the order - I hope it covers the above points

I think this is the very definition of 'getting your ducks in order'.

All the women who gathered 'across the aisle' in the legal sector have been putting this together for a fair old while. All those so called feminists who demonised other feminists for 'working with the right', turns out it was the only way to get this done.

This isn't a half arsed scrabbled together piece of work.