The Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne has now decided to treat ‘gender dysphoria’ from the ages of three to seventeen, the ghosts of Dr. Frankenstein have come back to haunt us.
You’d think that medical doctors- surgeons and psychiatrists would vehemently oppose the perverse inversion of the most basic biological facts. Instead, they have supported it.
Doctors that partake in gender transition process for children and teenagers have blood on their hands.
Ideologically crafted legislation has driven the ‘gender transition’ is designed to silence parents.
In 2022, the Victorian state enacted the Change of suppression (conversion) practices prohibition Act. Under the new law, if a child claims to be a gender that does not reflect their biological one, parents cannot legally prevent their children from accessing puberty blockers, hormone treatments and gender transition surgeries. Now, only a GP referral is needed to proceed down the path of no return.
And the path is a minefield of ethical, legal and moral contradictions.
The claim for children under the age of three, while wrong, is an intriguing one. Institutions like the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne believe that minors have such a deep level of self-awareness, self-identity, and gender identity that they are suitable candidates for gender transition treatment. But such claims stand against the current psychological literature. From two, they are only beginning to develop a sense of self.
Moreover, if they have such a sophisticated sense of gender and self from the age of three, then why doesn’t it appear in other domains? At three, some kids are still potty training; they are learning new words; they develop fears; and they also experience emotions. They learn to distinguish between the outer and inner emotional worlds. At three, children cannot legally drive, smoke, or consume alcohol; they can barely read, write, and communicate complex things, and yet, despite the clear evidence that two- to three-year olds are only beginning to understand themselves and the world, the untenable conclusion reached would have us accept that minors understand the ghastly venture they are getting themselves involved in.
It is an astonishing claim to make, and it is astonishingly perverse to think that it is appropriate for three-year-old’s to receive gender transition treatment. This is nothing more than child grooming and child exploitation.
It may just be approved at the national level too, and under Medicare. With reckless abandon, The Australian Society of Plastic surgeons has just submitted an application to the Federal Government that aims to introduce 21 Medicare items for gender reassignment surgeries. One scalpel at a time, surgeons move towards living embodiments of Dr. Frankenstein himself.
Abigail Schrier in her book, Irreversible damage said it best:
“For those of you who have ever been an adolescent or attempted the toe-curling, hair-whitening endeavour of raising one—hold your laughter. Resist the urge to squeal out loud at the preposterous notion that a teenager in any sense knows who she is with the level of certainty sufficient to entrust her with life-altering decisions.”
We are going down a path of no return. If these surgical butchers and psychiatrists take part in state sanctioned mutilation, brainwashing, and coercion of minors as young as three, then what aren’t they willing to do?
Leaving aside consent for a moment and the serious ethical problems of a three-year-old actually understanding the complexities of ‘gender dysphoria’, what aren’t such surgeons and psychiatrists willing to do in the name of addressing a patient’s requests?
It raises an important ethical question? Does a patient giving their consent medical consent mean that any surgeon or doctor should perform the requested procedure? What if I want a reconstructive plastic surgeon to cut off my nose, ears because I wish to look more like a worm, because I feel that I am a worm? Why is this any less absurd a proposition?
Is consent the only thing that made the sickening experiments of the (Angel of Death) Dr. Josef Mengele evil?
According to what we know of his Nazi medical experiments, Mengele used concentration camp prisoners for his medical experiments. He once took a pair of Roma gypsy twins, amputated their limbs, infected the twins with typhus and then sewed the twins together to create Siamese twins. Now our immediate reaction to this would be that this is psychopathically evil. But what if, by some miracle, the twins both consented? Despite the pain, torture and sadism of his experiments, if twins requested a doctor to do this today, what would be wrong with this? According to the logic of the Victorian Royal Children’s Hospital, only consent matters. But they are wrong. We forget that in our society, not everything that is legal is moral.
Doctors have forgotten about the concept of human dignity, ‘Primum non nocere’, do no harm. In order to do no harm, doctors must have fortitude.
Sadly, surgeons who partake in this are cowardly ideological stooges who are either too afraid to speak up or themselves infected by the ideology of surgical mutilation.
And we have awakened yet another sleeping monster too. For every surgical blade that has performed the ghastly gender transition surgery in Australia, we will one day look back on this period and acknowledge that we created a generation of Frankenstein’s, women who cannot bear children and men unable to produce children. If the biological reality of sex and gender cannot dissuade us, we seek to alter it ourselves and if that immoral alteration cannot dissuade us, then perhaps, one day, we will see the monster we have created, a generation of brainwashed, mutilated, exploited, groomed, damaged and genderless individuals whose medical doctors once felt this was an excellent idea. In her classic, Frankenstein, Shelly warned us of what happens when man plays God and we must heed the lessons of Frankenstein. In a sense, surgeons play God when they undertake complex surgery, but that doesn’t mean they have the right to redefine core biological structures and remake it.
Created by Dr. Frankenstein in his quest to discover the secrets of immortality, Frankenstein was ugly, condemned to live forever. He was the living dead. A lively corpse with sinews and stitches taken from the corpses of mortal humans. Frankenstein became bitter and resentful when he realised what horrid form he took:
“‘Hateful day when I received life!’ I exclaimed in agony. ‘Accursed creator! Why did you form a monster so hideous that even you turned from me in disgust? God, in pity, made man beautiful and alluring, after his own image; but my form is a filthy type of yours, more horrid even from the very resemblance. Satan had his companions, fellow-devils, to admire and encourage him; but I am solitary and abhorred.'”
This is exactly what will happen to teenagers and children who undergo sex reassignment surgery. They will be neither female nor male, the beauties of life turned to horrors, they will be walking Frankenstein’s, incapable of producing children. Once the incision is made, the path is taken, decisions are irreversible.
All that awaits the swaths of parents, teenagers, children and adults who want to pursue the ravenous path of sex replacement surgery is existential, physiological and moral catastrophe with deep scars and a resentment towards existence itself. Three-year-old’s are innocent and our era seeks to mutilate and desecrate innocence. Doctors and surgeons should not participate in this madness. Society can cry ignorance and even be susceptible to the social contagion of gender dysphoria, but doctors have a greater responsibility: to pursue the good. There has always will be and only are two genders, male and female. If medical doctors cannot begin from this premise, then they are unfit to practice medicine.
