This article is about a little kid named Coy Mathisa. At a mere six years of age, both parents and “professionals” have deemed this child as qualifying for transgender treatments. Yes, your eyes are not deceiving you, they are seeking transgender treatments for a six year-old.
From the linked article: "We started noticing when Coy was about 18 months, as soon as she started expressing herself, she was really expressing that she was a girl. Of course, our thought at the time was that she was a little boy who liked girls' things. It wasn't until she started becoming depressed and anxious that we knew there was something else going on and took her to medical professionals, who then, in fact, told us she was transgender," Mathis said.
Exactly who started “noticing” what and when? The foregoing simply reeks of imprinting by the parents, if not by whatever “professionals” as well. At eighteen months of age, this or any other child is hardly more than an infant. The term “toddler” doesn’t even seem to apply. It is very difficult to imagine how an infant is capable of overtly and unmistakably expressing itself in a gender-based manner.
What’s more, this child is one of a set of fraternal triplets—only one of which was indisputably a boy—and is bracketed by older and younger sisters. You can almost smell the estrogen from here. How likely is it that young Coy adopted the mannerisms of his sisters simply out of role modeling or seeking attention? Nor is there any open consideration as to how either or both parents were simply more comfortable treating this infant like just another one of their daughters.
Unfortunately, there is scant information readily available online about any legal age limits in America regarding when persons qualify for sexual reassignment. Logic dictates that the age of majority (i.e., eighteen) or, at least, physical onset of puberty would qualify as a de facto boundary. The notion that a child’s gender identity is firmly recognized by its own self at age six, much less at eighteen months, defies all imagination. A child of that age is still responding more often in terms of parental cues to where there is little room for such deeply individualistic expressions to manifest. This is especially the case when there is so little, if any, opportunity for age-appropriate discussion or delineation of sexuality.
Furthermore, the entire concept that a child of such tender years is, somehow, fully sexualized is both repugnant and challenges the very limits of credibility. Some infrequent and tentative sexual exploration of outward anatomical differences …? Perhaps, but a fully cemented internal notion of gender designation—correct or incorrect—is largely out of the question at that age. After all, even the most basic statistics indicate how exceptionally rare this sort of situation is.
I’m going to go way out on a limb here and hazard a guess that Coy Mathis is not the product of a Christian or Conservative household. A risky assumption, I know, but there is an almost unmistakable odor of Liberalism involved here. For one thing, sexuality aside, reading so much into the reactions and behavior of such a young child totally reeks of projection that too often characterizes much of Leftist thought. Liberal mainstays such as moral or cultural relativism consistently rely upon heavy doses of projection. Additionally, those two mindsets depend upon one central trait, cognitive dissonance; the ability to hold contradictory beliefs without psychological discomfort. While there may be some accompanying psychological discomfort carried with them, sexual identity crises also bespeak a degree of cognitive dissonance.
In the case of Coy Mathis, when one integrates the possibility of encouragement or even just a subtler selective acceptance of girlish behavior in a predominately female home, questions rise to the surface like bubbles in Champagne. For one thing, far too many Liberal men demonstrate a substantial degree of emasculation. It remains a relatively common trait in husbands who seek the approval of feminist mates. Taken to extremes, there are guys who are so supportive of “women’s rights” that they voluntarily label themselves as “male lesbians”.
Evidently, since the time, several years ago, when I first encountered this concept of a “male lesbian”, things have gotten so unbelievably warped that the term now refers to, “… a heterosexual man who wishes that he had been born a woman, but who (even if he had been a woman) could only make love to another woman and never to a man.” All of which is even more distorted and out of kilter than it first seemed to be.
Media personality, Katie Kouric, devoted an entire program to the transgender issue. In her online article, she asks:
What should you do if your son only wants to wear dresses, or if your daughter insists she’s a boy? Parents of transgender children have to make a difficult decision: face potential criticism if they allow their child to transition or face the unhappiness of their child if they don’t.
Something Kouric fails to address is what happens later in life when Coy Mathis feels an overwhelming desire to have children. How much anxiety and depression will await this prematurely sterilized adult? There is also the more basic issue of even considering sexual reassignment—a favored term among the LGBT set is “sexual confirmation”, as if it is some sort of religious ceremony—before a child enters puberty. Finally, nowhere does Kouric mention or even hint at the drastic issue of post-operative remorse and high suicide rates among transgendered individuals.
Clearly, the entire notion of “gender bending” is a favorite plaything of the Liberal set. In lots of Leftist venues, it and many other psychosexual disorders are greeted with approval, if not outright encouragement. Again, there is little reason to doubt the possibility that the surrounding psychosocial environment at home only exacerbated Coy Mathis’ own problems with self-identity—regardless of internal or external origin. That said, one quote indicates more than a little external influence:
She started saying things like, ‘When are we going to go to the doctor to get me fixed?’
— Kathryn Mathis —
Plenty of young children know that a medical doctor can ‘fix’ an illness. But maladies like colds or coughs are light years distant from sexual reassignment. In the absence of external coaching, how on earth would any child less than six years of age know about or even understand the entire concept of a surgically facilitated sex change? It strains all credulity and only points even more closely to parental cuing.
However unconscious such phrasing might be, Coy’s use of the term “fixed” speaks volumes. Should sexual reassignment take place, this young child would almost assuredly be rendered sterile (i.e., “fixed”), for life. If anything, this is a form of reproductive death as in, permanent termination of an individual’s genetic bloodline.
Among the libertine set, there exists an across-the-board fixation about death. “Bug chasing” (warning, unbelievable article about “suicide by AIDS”, excellent review here), piercing, tattooing and other “body modifications”—up to and including voluntary amputation, otherwise labeled, “Body Integrity Identity Disorder”—all point towards an anti-life attitude, especially among modern youth.
Consider just piercing. The modern version of this practice left behind ears—unless a half pound of jewelry in multiple piercings is involved—long ago in favor of mutilating some of the human body’s most sensitive areas. Tongues, nipples, lips, genitalia … no feature or extremity is out of consideration. A few readers might remember the case of Stephanie Edington who, after getting her nipples pierced, was forced to undergo a radical mastectomy when improperly sterilized instruments caused a gas gangrene infection. What does it say when an entire generation, or more, actively destroys feelings of sensation in body parts whose sensitivity is vital to survival or reproduction? This is a rejection of life on a deeply profound level. What many of these different practices have in common is potential death—sooner or later—by slow or small measures.
All of this self-destructive behavior is put into easy perspective when one considers the current prevalence of frequently fatal “body image disorders”, such as bulimia and anorexia. Below are some statistics associated with eating disorders:
• The mortality rate associated with anorexia nervosa is 12 times higher than the death rate of ALL causes of death for females 15 – 24 years old.
• It is estimated that 8 million Americans have an eating disorder – seven million women and one million men
• Eating disorders have the highest mortality rate of any mental illness
• Anorexia is the 3rd most common chronic illness among adolescents
Other statistics related to self-destructive practices such as “cutting” and binge drinking all point towards a generation of very confused and—consciously or not—suicidal individuals. That this obvious confusion should extend to sexual identity is unsurprising, to say the least. There is an endless list of androgynous media figures—think: Sinéad O'Connor, Boy George, Michael Jackson, et al—who just as often leave in their wake a trail of suicide attempts or narcotics rehab bouts. Small wonder that their adoring fans should feel any differently and there is no shortage of followers who willingly chase these celebrity train-wrecks straight towards the same dead end.
For conformation of this, one merely needs to examine the popularity of death symbols like skulls, graves, knives and other weapons, let alone the current obsession with vampires (e.g., “Twilight”) and zombies (hilarious yet indicative graphic at link). Considering the drastically increased rates of suicide among transgendered individuals, there appears to be a similar, if not greater, degree of death obsession. Determining whether that mania is a reason for or consequence of altering one’s sexual identity is less important than recognizing the fixation as an underlying cause. Some more statistics:
• A staggering 41 percent of transgender people in the United States have attempted to commit suicide, according to a new survey.
• 2.64 percent of trans people are infected with HIV — that's more than four times the national average rate of 0.6 percent in the general population.
Perhaps the Liberal mentality is capable of decoupling mind and gender. The Politically Correct insistence that intelligence has no gender basis saw Harvard President Lawrence Summers summarily fired for mentioning the well-documented fact that under-representation of women in science and engineering could be due to a "different availability of aptitude at the high end," and less to patterns of discrimination and socialization. If so, it is no great leap to consider that, somehow, mental integrity can be maintained even as physical gender is mutilated. Yes, mutilated, not “changed”. Reproductive ability ceases with sexual reassignment and that represents a fundamental physical mutilation regardless of terminology. Again, cognitive dissonance leaps into the foreground. If there is a set of brothers-in-arms with respect to ardently embracing cognitive dissonance, it is Liberals and Muslims. Could it be that the intentional maiming represented by gender reassignment is merely a Liberal variation on the sort of sexual mutilation that Islam imposes with its hideous so-called “Female Circumcision”?
A work in progress of mine deals with “The Imperative of Failure”, whereby it seems as if a substantial number of Liberal parents—unconsciously or subconsciously, sometimes even knowingly—compromise their children’s ability to cope in life and along with that, their hopes for the future. Just as often, this may be done for fear that, at some point, these offspring will finally twig to the irrational or totally dysfunctional nature of their parents’ Liberal philosophy. Whatever condemnation or refutation might ensue represents an unendurable repudiation of their entire mindset or worldview and, therefore, cannot be tolerated, least of all from their own children. How sharper than any serpent’s tooth would such criticism be.
Imagine how perfectly gender identity crisis dovetails with this Imperative of Failure. What could better induce a crippling degree of uncertainty and doubt than to cast someone’s sexual identity into question? It beggars the issue of whether Liberal immorality is a mainspring that drives a host of other chronically dysfunctional behaviors. One glance at how tightly wound the topic of sex is within modern media programming shows that this is a fundamental lever with which to motivate or confuse people, especially youth.
That this manipulation and unconscionable frustration of how a healthy mind and body develops has trickled all the way down to mere toddlers is an outrage. It stands as a harsh indictment of Liberalism’s “anything goes” attitude and presages future generations that will carry forward with them some of the most daunting challenges ever to be faced by the professional psychiatric and medical communities.
Tags: latest outrage, sexual identity, liberalism, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!