New Executive Order: Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation

[NotBadConsidering]

Here we go…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-children-from-chemical-and-surgical-mutilation/

*GAC interventions not GAF.

What worries me is that enough minds haven't been changed in this issue and now they will dig their heels in rather than being persuaded this is right.

There have been some very good EO's coming from the USA recently, like the Cass Report gave ammunition to those who were fighting this insanity, so these very clearly written EO's can be used to inform the fight in this and other country's.

The more bullets the better. 🤞😁

Who has co-ordinated the production of these EOs and commissioned the writers of them? I have only read the ones on gender issues so have no idea whether the others are equally well written (regardless of intention). I don't think President Trump was sitting there organising this for the last year, but someone clearly was.

Like that section taking aim at "sanctuary states" (looking at you, Tim Walz's Minnesota)

This is fantastic. But I’m worried that it will all be pitched as the US Section 28.

As far as I’m concerned, trans ideology is Section 28 on steroids. However homophobic it was, Thatcher’s government never suggested that children who didn’t conform sufficiently to the social stereotypes of their own sex should be reassigned to the opposite sex, and men who joked about being lesbians back then were rightly regarded as creeps.

But I can still see it happening.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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."

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

@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.