Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Is There Anything Good About a Boy Wanting to Wear a Dress?
August 22, 2012  •  From theTrumpet.com
What has happened to sane parenting?
By Dennis Leap

http://www.thetrumpet.com/article/9773.3.0.0/society/is-there-anything-good-about-a-boy-wanting-to-wear-a-dress (http://www.thetrumpet.com/article/9773.3.0.0/society/is-there-anything-good-about-a-boy-wanting-to-wear-a-dress)

[...]

Let's look at this situation honestly. Intellectuals can try to pretty-up this child-rearing problem by giving this odd behavior politically correct names like gender-fluid, gender-nonconforming or gender-variant. However, let's name Alex's behavior what it is: cross-dressing!

The article explains, "When Alex was 4, he pronounced himself 'a boy and a girl,' but in the two years since, he has been fairly clear that he is simply a boy who sometimes likes to dress and play in conventionally feminine ways." So on some days Alex puts on a dress, paints his fingernails and plays with dolls. On other days, he roughhouses and pretends to be Spider-Man.

In an effort to justify Alex's parents' approval of his behavior, the author makes statements such as, "[H]ad Alex been a girl who sometimes dressed or played in boyish ways, no e-mail to parents would have been necessary." In other words, if a girl wants to throw a football or dress in a Spider-Man T-shirt—no problem. Then the logic continues, So, what's so bad about a boy who wants to wear a dress?

The answer is—everything!

-----

::) ::) ::)

That article is so full of logical errors and fallacies I don't know where to begin...nevermind that hard-core Christians lack the ability to reason (theirs is a faith-based belief, after all)...

But I will take the last sentence and ream them a new sphincter:

[ rant on]

QuoteTransgender philosophy and all its associated trappings are an abomination to God. Why? Because of the life-wrecking damage they do to human beings.

First, if we are an abomination, why doesn't G-d himself come on down and beat us severely? Oh, he doesn't do that? Then maybe he isn't the omnipotent Being he's claimed to be...or, if he is...maybe we AREN'T an abomination?

Maybe the hard-core Christians are the abomination? There is a passage in the New Testament that says (I paraphrase), "...many will cry out, Lord, Lord, did we not work miracles in your name?..." This passage tells me that most Christians are, themselves, filth of the earth and will be punished by G-d (apparently their "salvation" MAY NOT be applicable to them...?)...perhaps these very Christians who presume to know G-d's mind on ANYTHING! (The Bible is, imho, a book that teaches humans how G-d wants us to act...but it is NOT a book that tells what is on G-d's mind! It would be very dangerous--and presumptuous--to think that we humans can understand the mind of a "Supreme Being"!)

And, then the mention of "life-wrecking damage"...the only "damage" that is done by transsexuals is done TO THEIR OWN BODIES. And that's only if one believes SRS, FFS, "top surgery", etc is damaging...only to those who have NO F**KING CLUE about what it means to BE transsexual.

A tip for Christians: GET A CLUE, OR STFU.

[ /rant off]

  Another article with Dr. Zucker mentioned and his 'repairative', oops, I mean 'corrective' therapy on transgender or homosexual children again!  That don't work too well.  That therapy is a ticking timebomb when most of these children grow up. 
  I'm sitting here reading this trying to cry.  I'm still having problems getting to cry over legitimate things from decades of overt self denial.  This fellow who wrote this piece is precisely the type who kept me from going to church these 35 years.  These people get on the church council and these people and their politics are mainly the ones that caused other people I know to drop out of their church after around the Vietnam war ended.  I heard it from those people.  They were fed-up with the politics and policies formed by these fundamentalists and the additional burden on them from these politics. 
  This fellow said that the Bible says that people are born either male or female.  But he hadn't mentioned that there are people who are "eunuchs of God" as written in Matthew.  These people are usually born with ambiguous genitalia.  There are no external or in a lot of cases internal hints of true male or female gender.  The wiring of those brains are unknown at birth and only expressed when the child develops enough to be cogent.  About age 5 or 6, like the most of us here on Susan's. 
  Joelene

As I started to read the article I did find myself agreeing with the write at least to a very small degree. I do not believe that children should be allowed to do and wear anything they want whenever they want.
There should be (loose) boundaries and the child should know what sex they are. If they react strongly to this and a child psychologist can come to the conclusion that they are likely to be transgendered then the parents should do their best to help their child through it and make it as easy as possible.

However as soon as I got to the paragraph mentioning God and what he/she had made us to be I couldn't even bring myself to finish reading. I am not against religion itself, nor do I judge those who believe in it but I absolutely despise anyone who tries to force their religion on others or even their belief using only religious evidence to back it up.
I myself do not believe in God but I don't go around to everyone who does and try to convince them that their religion is wrong.


No matter what the circumstances, parents should always be acting in their child's best interests and not what some almighty being supposedly designed for them.

Look at the website name.  The Trumpet.  Total fail as it is very faith-bias.

Children need to be allowed to explore the world, even clothing.  Yes there are somethings that they should not be allowed to explore.  Drugs, smoking, sex, etc.   But clothing is just that ... clothing.

Great video ....

http://youtu.be/ezQjNJUSraY (http://youtu.be/ezQjNJUSraY)

Matthew Vines is not only a great speaker, but he is right on.

QuoteSo, what's so bad about a boy who wants to wear a dress?

The answer is—everything!

By  Dennis

Does he, the author -Dennis- forbids his wife, sisters, daughters, and mother from wearing pants?

I would say: "lets Trumpt that Mr. Man!"

You see, in our and most other societies, being born male, than being raised male is ALL about taking on MALE responsibility.

"Putting on a dress" has the fatal flavour of shirking such responsibility...

If a girl "goes for it" it is interpreted as taking on some of this "special responsibility"; play-play or not, it is never considered / flavoured as a 'cop-out'.

We can argue until the cows come home - we would simply argue against societie's values as they stand, and have been for God knows HOW LONG.

That's why -- "everything" is the answer to: what's wrong with it?

...
Axélle

One of society's values was to use blacks as slaves...what's wrong with that?

Gee, I don't know. For the longest time, blacks were seen as not being able to live as free people...they had to be cared for by "Mahstuh, yessir Mahstuh suh".

I'm trans, but have not shirked any of my "manly" responsibilities since transitioning.

If we didn't raise girls to be (relatively) helpless, there'd be no need for "men" to take care of the outside world, and let the women-folk take care of the house.

Wolves at the door aren't that much of a threat anymore...we have this neat invention called "guns" and the skill to use them. (Too bad we can't shoot prosecutors and judges who violate basic legal principles...)

Nevermind that there aren't that many trans-people to begin with...but if we did start seeing a shirking, most of the shirkers would come from straight men who just don't have a spine (or brains). We, as a society, would change to actual performance in the arena of responsibility, rather than who has the penis and who wears the pants (or dress).

Just my most humble opinion.

8)

Mr. Leap sees nothing ethically wrong with forcing someone to live as a gender different from their internal identity. I wonder if he'd still have that opinion, were he to spend a few decades living as a woman.

He's pretty vague. From reading that article, I can gather that he thinks boys wearing dresses is somehow wrong, but not why. That and bringing up Adam and Eve is kind of weird. Isn't Eve made from one of Adam's bones? How is that applicable to the subject?

The God I believe in is certainly big enough to take the blame for the Bible, but I really don't think the dude wanted or created the damage done by it's end users.