#protectjamesyounger

[Risastorstein]

Should I give more examples of trans kids committing suicide because of parents who suppressed their gender identity?

Should I give examples of mothers who primarily kill their male children instead of their female ones?

Stop medicalizing gender in kids. Stop affirming what is mostly play pretend. The main justification behind this case is fricking Frozen.

[Vassenor]

Sounds more like Younger manipulating his daughter to suit his own transphobic agenda.

Then you cant read.

Did you miss the long list of abusive behaviours the father has engaged in?

[Israeli Empiratic Commonwealth]

Then you cant read.

Apparently you can't read because the court transcripts and the father's own words indicate exactly that.

The mother told the boy he is a girl.
She dressed him.
Painted his nails.
Wake the fuck up.

[Israeli Empiratic Commonwealth]

Should I give more examples of trans kids committing suicide because of parents who suppressed their gender identity?

Should I give examples of mothers who primarily kill their male children instead of their female ones?

Stop medicalizing gender in kids. Stop affirming what is mostly play pretend. The main justification behind this case is fricking Frozen.

Well said.

[Thermodolia]

I’m not denying that. I just tend to believe that therapy works better long term.

You're free to believe that, but it's incorrect here.

Wouldn’t be the first time

[Bear Stearns]

That the IPO was unjustifiable.

Ok

Handle the blocking and tackling, I'll socialize it with the board. Don't boil the ocean on this and then we'll give the investors a peak into the kimono.

[Vassenor]

Should I give more examples of trans kids committing suicide because of parents who suppressed their gender identity?

Should I give examples of mothers who primarily kill their male children instead of their female ones?

Stop medicalizing gender in kids. Stop affirming what is mostly play pretend. The main justification behind this case is fricking Frozen.

Stop engaging in whataboutism because you don't want to address the father's abusive behaviour.

[Vassenor]

Apparently you can't read because the court transcripts and the father's own words indicate exactly that.

The mother told the boy he is a girl.
She dressed him.
Painted his nails.
Wake the fuck up.

So yes, you're ignoring the father's actually abusive behaviour because you support him.

[Risastorstein]

Stop engaging in whataboutism because you don't want to address the father's abusive behaviour.

Stop medicalizing gender is not a whataboutism. And give me some examples of his abuse (instead of just cutting hair and not using "Luna").

[Vassenor]

Stop engaging in whataboutism because you don't want to address the father's abusive behaviour.

Stop medicalizing gender is not a whataboutism. And give me some examples of his abuse (instead of just cutting hair and not using "Luna").

I did. You ignored it.

You mean telling the little dude to dress appropriately and to use his real name? Then yes.

"In a video posted to the dad’s website, James is asked, “You’re a boy right?”

“No, I’m a girl.”

“Who told you you’re a girl?”

“Mommy.”

The child said Anne also put James in dresses. “She buys me headbands. She gets me hair clips…she paints my nails.”"

Messing with her boy's gender in order to satisfy her own desire for some kind of living doll is abuse too.

1) Petitioner and Respondent were married on December 5,2010.
2) Respondent induced Petitioner into marriage by fraud.
3) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about former marriages.
4) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about former relationships.
5) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his education.
6) During the marriage. Respondent mislead Petitioner about being a Professor by having mail sent to him as "Professor Younger."
7) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about being a teacher at the University of North Texas.
8 ) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his service in the Marines.
9) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his military experience in the Army.
10) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about his prior income and earnings.
11) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about his sources of income.
12) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his debt
13) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner in failing to disclose extensive
student loans.
14) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about working for Fortune 500 companies.
15) Before the marriage, Respondent lied about his employment
16) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his unemployment.
17) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about not taking unemployment compensation.
18) Respondent lied to Petitioner about taking government assistance.
19) Petitioner did not cohabitate with Respondent since learning of the fraud and lies listed above in No. 3 through 18.

Children
39) Respondent engaged in inappropriate and hurtful treatment of the Girls.
40) The Girls were good, sweet, hardworking well-mannered children.
41) Respondent forced the Girls to do plank push up for extended periods of time while reaing the "house rules" until the Girls cried.
42) Respondent would lock down the Girls* room and remove all their possession from their rooms and would not let them participate in family activities.
43) Respondent would put the Girls in "silent treatment" and they could not talk unless spoken to for many, many days.
44) Respondent's actions caused barm to the Girls.
45) One of the Girls developed a suicide plan
46) The other Girl was cutting herself.
47) Based in large part on his treatment of the Girls, Petitioner asked Respondent to move
out of the Petitioner's residence.
48) Both Girls improved after Respondent moved out of Petitioner's residence.
49) Respondent lied to the Petitioner about the Girls.
50) The Girls have a very good, safe and healthy relationship with the Boys.
51) Respondent failed to co-parent with the Petitioner.
52) Petitioner made repeated attempts to co-parent with Respondent.
53) Respondent failed to keep any agreements made with Petitioner during Parenting

Facilitation sessions.
54) Respondent treated the Petitioner and the Girls in a disparaging, derogatory, abusive and insulting manner.
55) Respondent is pejorative.
56) Petitioner works flexible hours and part-time on some days of the week.
57) Petitioner was the primary parent of the Qiildren even before the parties separated.
58) Respondent regularly failed to take possession time with the Boys granted to him in Temporary Orders in this matter.
59) Respondent regularly failed to take the Boys to school during his periods of possession.
60) Respondent regularly failed to allow the Petitioner electronic communication with the Boys.
61) Respondent lacked insight into how behaviors by him may be repeated with the Boys.
62) Respondent had 3 mattresses in one room on the floor for his bed and the Boy's beds.
63) Respondent admitted he had not slept in a bed for the 12 years before marrying
Petitioner.
64) Respondent admitted he could not recall the addresses of where he lived or who he lived with for the 10 years before meeting Petitioner.
65) Respondent failed to attend counseling as ordered by the Court.
66) The Respondent will say or do anything to get his way.

Other
99) Respondent lied and misrepresented facts to his employers and potential employers during the pendency of this matter.
100) During the marriage, the Respondent failed to seek employment.
101) After separation, Respondent lied about his role as a primary parent.
102) Respondent was not a stay-at-home dad as he alleged.
103) The Respondent made false allegations about the Girls potentially abusing the Boys.
104) The Respondent falsely asserted that the counselor (Gina Galloway) called CPS.
105) Gina Galloway (the counselor) denied notifying CPS about alleged abuse of the Boys by the Girls.
106) The Respondent does not have any college degrees, which is contrary to his representations.
107) The Respondent was never a Professor, which is contrary to his representations..
108) The Respondent was not a Professor at UNT, which is contrary to his representations.
109) The Respondent was discharged from the Army for "Admission of Homosexuality."
110) The Respondent denies being a homosexual at the time of discharge from the Army.
111) The Respondent lied to the Army about being a homosexual.
112) The Respondent admitted he had a difficult time finding a job that will accommodate
his child care schedule.
113) The Respondent's psychological profile suggests an opposition to authority figures and
lack of constraint.
114) The Respondent's psychological profile indicated interpersonal difficulties, difficulty with authority and convention, and that he externalizes blame for his problems onto
others.
115) The Respondent's psychological profile indicated he lacks insight into how his actions negatively affected the Girls, stating, "So I made them do push-ups... whoop-difreaking-do!"
116) Dr. Blake Mitchell was ordered to conduct a psychological exam of the parties.
117) After conducting a psychological exam and testing. Dr. Mitchell found Respondent's lack of insight into how his behaviors affect others raises a concern that he may repeat these behaviors with James and Jude (the Boys).
118) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found Respondent demonstrated a lack of willingness to effectively co-parent with Petitioner.
119) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found the Respondent's reluctance to co-parent with Petitioner could potential have negative outcomes for the Boys and interfere with making decisions that are in the best interest of the Boys.
120) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found Petitioner put forth significant effort to effectively co-parent with Respondent.
121) The collaterals presented by Petitioner described her and her parenting style in positive
terms.
122) Petitioner would not have married Respondent had she known about his fraud and misrepresentations.

So you support all of this, particularly the bolded?

[Marxist Germany]

The mother told the boy he is a girl.
She dressed him.
Painted his nails.
Wake the fuck up.

So yes, you're ignoring the father's actually abusive behaviour because you support him.

Both parents are bad. Period.

[Risastorstein]

So yes, you're ignoring the father's actually abusive behaviour because you support him.

Give me some examples then. And there are also accounts from family friends witnesses that it's pushed by the mother. So you are supporting her and her abuse.

[The New California Republic]

A boy forced into being a girl to prove a shady theory or therapy?

That wasn't the case with David Reimer, and it isn't the case here.

In David Reimer's case, John Money wanted to prove that gender was purely social. In James Younger's case, they want to make medical transition the norm. It's so wrong.

It wasn't the reason for it in the first case, and it isn't the reason for it in the second.

[Page]

Stop engaging in whataboutism because you don't want to address the father's abusive behaviour.

Stop medicalizing gender is not a whataboutism. And give me some examples of his abuse (instead of just cutting hair and not using "Luna").

If a father cut the hair of a cisgender girl, called the cisgender girl by a male name and male pronouns, and didn't let the cisgender girl wear feminine clothes, would you say that is abusive?

I think you would, because the irony here is the father is the one doing what you accuse the mother of doing - forcing an unwanted gender identity on the child.

[The Emerald Legion]

Stop medicalizing gender is not a whataboutism. And give me some examples of his abuse (instead of just cutting hair and not using "Luna").

If a father cut the hair of a cisgender girl, called the cisgender girl by a male name and male pronouns, and didn't let the cisgender girl wear feminine clothes, would you say that is abusive?

I think you would, because the irony here is the father is the one doing what you accuse the mother of doing - forcing an unwanted gender identity on the child.

Children don't have gender identities.

[Vassenor]

So yes, you're ignoring the father's actually abusive behaviour because you support him.

Give me some examples then. And there are also accounts from family friends witnesses that it's pushed by the mother. So you are supporting her and her abuse.

I did. Twice. You keep ignoring them.

[The Emerald Legion]

Give me some examples then. And there are also accounts from family friends witnesses that it's pushed by the mother. So you are supporting her and her abuse.

I did. Twice. You keep ignoring them.

Repeating accusations that were made by the mother and accepted by the court =\= proof.

[Gravlen]

Kids shouldn't be allowed to have puberty blockers and transition should be reserved for adults. How is this even a debate?

Laura Edwards-Leeper, a clinical psychologist at Pacific University, said that for someone of Luna’s age, gender-affirming care would not include any kind of medical intervention until they hit puberty. Even then, she said, it’s not an automatic procedure.

After a mental-health evaluation and discussion with parents, it might encompass a range of activities to help “the child to live as their authentic gender, and with their preferred gender expression, at any given point in time, without a presumption about their future gender identity,” she said.

For a 7-year-old, that might mean speaking to experts and potentially helping them through a social transition, which might include changing their clothes, hairstyle or pronouns. At around ages 10 to 13, parents, health professionals and the child might decide to take puberty blockers, which delay the development of secondary sex characteristics, like facial hair or breasts.

Those can be stopped at any time, and puberty continues as it would normally. “It is only irreversible if the adults in the child’s life make it irreversible,” Edwards-Leeper told The Post. “If the adults can stay open to whatever trajectory the child has, then it’s completely reversible.”

[Risastorstein]

Stop medicalizing gender is not a whataboutism. And give me some examples of his abuse (instead of just cutting hair and not using "Luna").

I did. You ignored it.

1) Petitioner and Respondent were married on December 5,2010.
2) Respondent induced Petitioner into marriage by fraud.
3) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about former marriages.
4) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about former relationships.
5) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his education.
6) During the marriage. Respondent mislead Petitioner about being a Professor by having mail sent to him as "Professor Younger."
7) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about being a teacher at the University of North Texas.
8 ) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his service in the Marines.
9) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his military experience in the Army.
10) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about his prior income and earnings.
11) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about his sources of income.
12) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his debt
13) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner in failing to disclose extensive
student loans.
14) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about working for Fortune 500 companies.
15) Before the marriage, Respondent lied about his employment
16) Before the marriage. Respondent lied to Petitioner about his unemployment.
17) Before the marriage, Respondent lied to Petitioner about not taking unemployment compensation.
18) Respondent lied to Petitioner about taking government assistance.
19) Petitioner did not cohabitate with Respondent since learning of the fraud and lies listed above in No. 3 through 18.

Children
39) Respondent engaged in inappropriate and hurtful treatment of the Girls.
40) The Girls were good, sweet, hardworking well-mannered children.
41) Respondent forced the Girls to do plank push up for extended periods of time while reaing the "house rules" until the Girls cried.
42) Respondent would lock down the Girls* room and remove all their possession from their rooms and would not let them participate in family activities.
43) Respondent would put the Girls in "silent treatment" and they could not talk unless spoken to for many, many days.
44) Respondent's actions caused barm to the Girls.
45) One of the Girls developed a suicide plan
46) The other Girl was cutting herself.
47) Based in large part on his treatment of the Girls, Petitioner asked Respondent to move
out of the Petitioner's residence.
48) Both Girls improved after Respondent moved out of Petitioner's residence.
49) Respondent lied to the Petitioner about the Girls.
50) The Girls have a very good, safe and healthy relationship with the Boys.
51) Respondent failed to co-parent with the Petitioner.
52) Petitioner made repeated attempts to co-parent with Respondent.
53) Respondent failed to keep any agreements made with Petitioner during Parenting

Facilitation sessions.
54) Respondent treated the Petitioner and the Girls in a disparaging, derogatory, abusive and insulting manner.
55) Respondent is pejorative.
56) Petitioner works flexible hours and part-time on some days of the week.
57) Petitioner was the primary parent of the Qiildren even before the parties separated.
58) Respondent regularly failed to take possession time with the Boys granted to him in Temporary Orders in this matter.
59) Respondent regularly failed to take the Boys to school during his periods of possession.
60) Respondent regularly failed to allow the Petitioner electronic communication with the Boys.
61) Respondent lacked insight into how behaviors by him may be repeated with the Boys.
62) Respondent had 3 mattresses in one room on the floor for his bed and the Boy's beds.
63) Respondent admitted he had not slept in a bed for the 12 years before marrying
Petitioner.
64) Respondent admitted he could not recall the addresses of where he lived or who he lived with for the 10 years before meeting Petitioner.
65) Respondent failed to attend counseling as ordered by the Court.
66) The Respondent will say or do anything to get his way.

Other
99) Respondent lied and misrepresented facts to his employers and potential employers during the pendency of this matter.
100) During the marriage, the Respondent failed to seek employment.
101) After separation, Respondent lied about his role as a primary parent.
102) Respondent was not a stay-at-home dad as he alleged.
103) The Respondent made false allegations about the Girls potentially abusing the Boys.
104) The Respondent falsely asserted that the counselor (Gina Galloway) called CPS.
105) Gina Galloway (the counselor) denied notifying CPS about alleged abuse of the Boys by the Girls.
106) The Respondent does not have any college degrees, which is contrary to his representations.
107) The Respondent was never a Professor, which is contrary to his representations..
108) The Respondent was not a Professor at UNT, which is contrary to his representations.
109) The Respondent was discharged from the Army for "Admission of Homosexuality."
110) The Respondent denies being a homosexual at the time of discharge from the Army.
111) The Respondent lied to the Army about being a homosexual.
112) The Respondent admitted he had a difficult time finding a job that will accommodate
his child care schedule.
113) The Respondent's psychological profile suggests an opposition to authority figures and
lack of constraint.
114) The Respondent's psychological profile indicated interpersonal difficulties, difficulty with authority and convention, and that he externalizes blame for his problems onto
others.
115) The Respondent's psychological profile indicated he lacks insight into how his actions negatively affected the Girls, stating, "So I made them do push-ups... whoop-difreaking-do!"
116) Dr. Blake Mitchell was ordered to conduct a psychological exam of the parties.
117) After conducting a psychological exam and testing. Dr. Mitchell found Respondent's lack of insight into how his behaviors affect others raises a concern that he may repeat these behaviors with James and Jude (the Boys).
118) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found Respondent demonstrated a lack of willingness to effectively co-parent with Petitioner.
119) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found the Respondent's reluctance to co-parent with Petitioner could potential have negative outcomes for the Boys and interfere with making decisions that are in the best interest of the Boys.
120) Based on his work on this matter. Dr. Mitchell found Petitioner put forth significant effort to effectively co-parent with Respondent.
121) The collaterals presented by Petitioner described her and her parenting style in positive
terms.
122) Petitioner would not have married Respondent had she known about his fraud and misrepresentations.

So you support all of this, particularly the bolded?

Sorry, haven't seen it earlier. Yes, it is worrying. What is the source by the way? But it doesn't remove the possibility of his mother being abusive (in other ways though) and it doesn't challenge my point about not medicalizing gender in kids.

[Page]

If a father cut the hair of a cisgender girl, called the cisgender girl by a male name and male pronouns, and didn't let the cisgender girl wear feminine clothes, would you say that is abusive?

I think you would, because the irony here is the father is the one doing what you accuse the mother of doing - forcing an unwanted gender identity on the child.

Children don't have gender identities.

Yes they do.

Did you not think "I am a boy" until you were an adult? Were you ambivalent to wearing boys' or girls' clothes. Would you have not cared whether someone called you he or she?

Cisgender kids have gender identities too, but because their gender identity is congruent with their gender assignment, you mistakenly believe that it does not exist because expression of that gender identity isn't scrutinized.

[The Emerald Legion]

I did. You ignored it.

Sorry, haven't seen it earlier. Yes, it is worrying. What is the source by the way? But it doesn't remove the possibility of his mother being abusive (in other ways though) and it doesn't challenge my point about not medicalizing gender in kids.

It's the court findings from their annulment hearings. However a lot of those are disputed by the father.

[Thermodolia]

In David Reimer's case, John Money wanted to prove that gender was purely social. In James Younger's case, they want to make medical transition the norm. It's so wrong.

It wasn't the reason for it in the first case, and it isn't the reason for it in the second.

John Money was a pretty fucked up guy though

[Alvecia]

If a father cut the hair of a cisgender girl, called the cisgender girl by a male name and male pronouns, and didn't let the cisgender girl wear feminine clothes, would you say that is abusive?

I think you would, because the irony here is the father is the one doing what you accuse the mother of doing - forcing an unwanted gender identity on the child.

Children don't have gender identities.

Again, I'll bring up the outrage this forum generated at the Canadian parents who planned to raise their kids without gender.

[Risastorstein]

Kids shouldn't be allowed to have puberty blockers and transition should be reserved for adults. How is this even a debate?

Laura Edwards-Leeper, a clinical psychologist at Pacific University, said that for someone of Luna’s age, gender-affirming care would not include any kind of medical intervention until they hit puberty. Even then, she said, it’s not an automatic procedure.

After a mental-health evaluation and discussion with parents, it might encompass a range of activities to help “the child to live as their authentic gender, and with their preferred gender expression, at any given point in time, without a presumption about their future gender identity,” she said.

For a 7-year-old, that might mean speaking to experts and potentially helping them through a social transition, which might include changing their clothes, hairstyle or pronouns. At around ages 10 to 13, parents, health professionals and the child might decide to take puberty blockers, which delay the development of secondary sex characteristics, like facial hair or breasts.

Those can be stopped at any time, and puberty continues as it would normally. “It is only irreversible if the adults in the child’s life make it irreversible,” Edwards-Leeper told The Post. “If the adults can stay open to whatever trajectory the child has, then it’s completely reversible.”

10 to 13 is way too early for a kid to take such decision and with all that work into therapy and prior social transition, the kid might feel force to pursue this route. A kid shouldn't be allowed to change gender, especially at such a young age.

[Estanglia]

Sounds more like Younger manipulating his daughter to suit his own transphobic agenda.

Then you cant read.

You mean telling the little dude to dress appropriately and to use his real name? Then yes.

"In a video posted to the dad’s website, James is asked, “You’re a boy right?”

“No, I’m a girl.”

“Who told you you’re a girl?”

“Mommy.”

The child said Anne also put James in dresses. “She buys me headbands. She gets me hair clips…she paints my nails.”"

Messing with her boy's gender in order to satisfy her own desire for some kind of living doll is abuse too.

So, the dad got her to say this. Yet the dad isn't manipulating her. Odd.