Itâs incredibly easy to criticise Susie Green, the influential and, as of Friday, ex-CEO of Mermaids. But Iâd like to say this in her defence: she never lied about who she was.
From her early interviews in 2012, when her trans daughter, Jackie, then 19, became a Miss England finalist, Green, then an IT-manager, was utterly open about how she first knew her child was trans: âAs a toddler, Jackie always headed for the dolls in toy shops.â And if a four-year-old looking at dolls werenât evidence enough that this child should be committed to a lifetime of medicalisation, Green added, â[Jackie] loathed having her hair cut.â Green put Jack â as he was then known â on puberty-blockers and flew him to Thailand for a sex change operation when he was 16, making him the youngest person in the world to undergo that surgery.
She merrily recalls in a YouTube interview that because Jackâs penis hadnât developed due to the blockers, âthere wasnât much for the surgeon to work withâ when constructing their vagina. âSorry, Jackie!â she laughs.
During her time at Mermaids, Green has been advising parents, schools, the police, the media and NHS trusts about how to deal with other children who dare to not be gender stereotypes. She was their first staff member â before Mermaids was run by volunteers â and under her leadership, she has transformed the organisation from a quiet, low-key charity to an energetically active lobbying group, and her theories about childhood and gender have been at least as influential as Judith Butlerâs. Mermaids has been endorsed by the Be Kind brigade, including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jameela Jamil and Emma Watson, accrued a slew of corporate sponsors and been awarded ÂŁ500,000 by the National Lottery. Progressive newspapers advise readers to contact the service should they have any concerns about their child.
Since 2017, I regularly asked editors at the newspaper where I worked if I could write about Mermaids in general and Green specifically, because it was so obvious that something was very wrong here. The answer, always, was no, but the reasons given were fuzzy: it wouldnât be right in that section, they couldnât see the news peg, it felt too niche. A more likely reason was one articulated to me with some passion on social media any time I tweeted anything sceptical about Green or Mermaids: to question either was to wish trans children would die. Doubt the charity, hate the cause, in other words. Weirdly, this attitude seems to hold true only for charities connected to trans issues: no one, as far as I know, screamed that The Times hates starving people when they investigated Oxfam in 2018 about allegations that some of its workers paid for sex.
I do have some sympathy with those who were too scared to question Mermaids. Under Greenâs leadership, the organisation has done its utmost to evade scrutiny, trotting out â even in parliamentary committees, even in the 2018 ITV drama Butterfly, starring Anna Friel, and for which Green was the series lead consultant â the claim that 48% of young trans people attempt suicide. A terrifying statistic for any parent of a gender dysphoric child, and almost as scary for any organisation that cares more about being kind than being accurate. Happily, the statistic is bunkum, as the researcher behind the study itâs based on has said, because the study involved 27 self-selecting trans volunteers, and therefore its findings should not be widened out to all gender dysphoric young people, as Mermaids had done.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeâBecause Green never once hid who she was.â – I had a friend recently go on tear about child abuse in the Catholic Church and how awful it was that our parents generation didnât stop it. My response was that the abuse was 1) hidden and 2) denied. I then pointed out that our generation is not only tolerating child abuse that is publicly acknowledged and right out in the open – many – maybe most – of our generation are openly celebrating it. Medically transitioning children is simply evil. Everyone knows this – yet many champion it anyways.
Yep, and as we all know a large portion of the kids who get caught up in this insanity are gay. Itâs homophobic to its core. How progressives unquestioningly support it staggers me.
Because being gay is now passĂ©. Trans is where it’s at. Just think of the Alison Bailey case: just a few years ago she would have been unassailable, siting at the intersection of three ‘oppressed’ groups – woman, lesbian, and black. But those were all trumped by trans, hence the discrimination she faced at her place of work.
It also emboldened the privileged, expensively educated journalistic mediocrity that is Zoe Williams to righteously chastise an articulate and principled Nigerian female survivor of abuse for her concern about women’s safe spaces. “I’m not having that!” said the bold Ms Williams.
Am I the only one to find this quote (not that easy) and realise that it is taken completely out of context. She is absolutely not chastising the Nigerian lady for concern, she is pointing out that her generalisation that ALL women have the concerns that she has is totally wrong, which it obviously is. Read for yourselves: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/nov/28/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-bbc-reith-lecture-freedom-truth-trans-rights
Next time the Nazis turn up they won’t be blokes in Hugo Boss designer uniforms…(to paraphrase Churchill or Orwell or whoever). Nowadays we know what they will look like; Ever so nice, furrowed brow narcissists with permanently slightly hurt expressions.
Am I the only one to find this quote (not that easy) and realise that it is taken completely out of context. She is absolutely not chastising the Nigerian lady for concern, she is pointing out that her generalisation that ALL women have the concerns that she has is totally wrong, which it obviously is. Read for yourselves: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/nov/28/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-bbc-reith-lecture-freedom-truth-trans-rights
Next time the Nazis turn up they won’t be blokes in Hugo Boss designer uniforms…(to paraphrase Churchill or Orwell or whoever). Nowadays we know what they will look like; Ever so nice, furrowed brow narcissists with permanently slightly hurt expressions.
I could look forward to the passing of trans as the Current Big Thing, if I didn’t fear the coming of the Next Big Thing. What monster is now waiting in the wings for its introduction?
The destigmatising of ‘minor attracted people’ is one possible contender.
That was actually once supported by the German Greens Party but probably didn’t get them too many votes..
“Germanyâs Greens, Europeâs most influential environmentalist party, have been obliged to open a detailed investigation into past policy and practice amid revelations that in the 1980s, its members actively supported paedophile groups which campaigned to legalise sex with children”
(The ‘Independend’ 18 May 2013)
Advocating for simple, plain old homosexuality was also fringe at one time.
Still is in , probably, in most of the world.
funnily enough, its not… still illegal if you do your research?
funnily enough, its not… still illegal if you do your research?
Your point?
Still is in , probably, in most of the world.
Your point?
Advocating for simple, plain old homosexuality was also fringe at one time.
It was supported by the Labour Party 4 decades ago
Hi Ethniciodo, please could you provide a link that supports your claim? Many thanks
Hi Ethniciodo, please could you provide a link that supports your claim? Many thanks
Heaven forbid, but I fear you are correct.
I think that one has been and gone. The Paedophile Information exchange is now the object of ridicule and horror.
It appears to have been rebranded as Mermaids.
It appears to have been rebranded as Mermaids.
That’s out there amongst wokey marxist types who never forgot that to undermine the state you have to undermine the family.
That was actually once supported by the German Greens Party but probably didn’t get them too many votes..
“Germanyâs Greens, Europeâs most influential environmentalist party, have been obliged to open a detailed investigation into past policy and practice amid revelations that in the 1980s, its members actively supported paedophile groups which campaigned to legalise sex with children”
(The ‘Independend’ 18 May 2013)
It was supported by the Labour Party 4 decades ago
Heaven forbid, but I fear you are correct.
I think that one has been and gone. The Paedophile Information exchange is now the object of ridicule and horror.
That’s out there amongst wokey marxist types who never forgot that to undermine the state you have to undermine the family.
It’s useful to scrutinize the rave critical reviews of the ‘brilliant’ (WaPo) play “Downstate”, which pleads for sympathy for convicted sex criminals, including a child molester.
The Observer likens their cruel & unusual oppression – the regulation of where offenders can reside and the regular checking of their ankle monitors – to the lynching of innocent black men in US history.
There seems to be an attempt to normalize the most basic, fundamental societal taboos. Cultural Marxists understand this trend quite well…
It would seem unthinkable that anyone might try to soften our disgust at the idea of cannibalism, but…Welcome to 2022.
…youth in asia, for those who don’t listen to the experts.
What’s coming next? This book out early next year might give you some clues: https://www.dukeupress.edu/circuits-of-the-sacred
Brace yourselves!
The cover of that book is enough to put you off. God help us.
The cover of that book is enough to put you off. God help us.
âAnd what rough beast, its hour come round at lastâŠâ Seems like weâre stuck on historical repeat again. Horrid thought though.
Sex with children….that is the next boundary they want to cross.
You are seeing all the hints of it already. Academics publishing that pedophiles require “understanding”.
Ads for clothing and other items.
THAT is the next thing. Should scare the crap out of you.
Pedophilia is next, it has already begun.
After that will be either bestiality or necrophilia, they are already practicing their lines.
Tho, snuff could make a big comeback, esp as euthanasia is being normalized.
The destigmatising of ‘minor attracted people’ is one possible contender.
It’s useful to scrutinize the rave critical reviews of the ‘brilliant’ (WaPo) play “Downstate”, which pleads for sympathy for convicted sex criminals, including a child molester.
The Observer likens their cruel & unusual oppression – the regulation of where offenders can reside and the regular checking of their ankle monitors – to the lynching of innocent black men in US history.
There seems to be an attempt to normalize the most basic, fundamental societal taboos. Cultural Marxists understand this trend quite well…
It would seem unthinkable that anyone might try to soften our disgust at the idea of cannibalism, but…Welcome to 2022.
…youth in asia, for those who don’t listen to the experts.
What’s coming next? This book out early next year might give you some clues: https://www.dukeupress.edu/circuits-of-the-sacred
Brace yourselves!
âAnd what rough beast, its hour come round at lastâŠâ Seems like weâre stuck on historical repeat again. Horrid thought though.
Sex with children….that is the next boundary they want to cross.
You are seeing all the hints of it already. Academics publishing that pedophiles require “understanding”.
Ads for clothing and other items.
THAT is the next thing. Should scare the crap out of you.
Pedophilia is next, it has already begun.
After that will be either bestiality or necrophilia, they are already practicing their lines.
Tho, snuff could make a big comeback, esp as euthanasia is being normalized.
The more this insanity evolves, the more I am convinced that we are victims of a cruel media loop strategy, which has become an industry in and of itself. Someone starts a completely insane idea/movement, organizes it and morphs a non-profit organization, employing many rubes, it is then catapulted into the mainstream by the willing media, who sees the potential click bait, fans the flames with vicious attacks on any dissenters, then it comes full circle with an entire cohort of willing participants decrying the insanity of the original movement. I’m hereby jumping off this modern day, dystopian, cyber merry-go-round.
I am planning to become both, as to save tiresome expensive dinners and dates, I can stay at home and have sex with myself AND go outside for a cigarette afterwards and not have to moan at myself, or then get myself a taxi home.
Won’t you miss the morning ‘walk of shame’?
Won’t you miss the morning ‘walk of shame’?
It also emboldened the privileged, expensively educated journalistic mediocrity that is Zoe Williams to righteously chastise an articulate and principled Nigerian female survivor of abuse for her concern about women’s safe spaces. “I’m not having that!” said the bold Ms Williams.
I could look forward to the passing of trans as the Current Big Thing, if I didn’t fear the coming of the Next Big Thing. What monster is now waiting in the wings for its introduction?
The more this insanity evolves, the more I am convinced that we are victims of a cruel media loop strategy, which has become an industry in and of itself. Someone starts a completely insane idea/movement, organizes it and morphs a non-profit organization, employing many rubes, it is then catapulted into the mainstream by the willing media, who sees the potential click bait, fans the flames with vicious attacks on any dissenters, then it comes full circle with an entire cohort of willing participants decrying the insanity of the original movement. I’m hereby jumping off this modern day, dystopian, cyber merry-go-round.
I am planning to become both, as to save tiresome expensive dinners and dates, I can stay at home and have sex with myself AND go outside for a cigarette afterwards and not have to moan at myself, or then get myself a taxi home.
Yes. If gender roles are purely socially constructed then there’s no link between them and physical sex. There can be no right or wrong body. If on the other hand playing with dolls makes a ‘girl’ and with cars a ‘boy’, then gender roles are immutable and from nature. Of course the truth is nuanced, but in the trans ‘debate’ today there is no nuance, so which is it? Relative or absolute? Or just each by turns as suits the ideological subversion of human relations and individual identity as we descend into nonsense?
Both homosexuality and the wish to transition are quite serious psychological disorders and the fact that one of these disorders has been accepted by a large portion of the population as “normal” does not alter the fact.
The incessant warfare between the two is worrying, as neither seem to have much to gain from victory
Homosexuality which was illegal in my youth, has now been widely accepted, but people who practise it are afraid that the general hetero public lump it together with the even more questionable transitionism and begin to re-examine both.
Fear drives this battle, but we should be examining our values and their effect on our children.
Homosexuality was not illegal, sodomy was.
I’m sure I remember reading of many homosexuals who were arrested and fined for soliciting.
Promiscuity appears to be an intrinsic part of the behaviour, which also seems to have links to addiction.
I’m sure I remember reading of many homosexuals who were arrested and fined for soliciting.
Promiscuity appears to be an intrinsic part of the behaviour, which also seems to have links to addiction.
Homosexuality was not illegal, sodomy was.
Because being gay is now passĂ©. Trans is where it’s at. Just think of the Alison Bailey case: just a few years ago she would have been unassailable, siting at the intersection of three ‘oppressed’ groups – woman, lesbian, and black. But those were all trumped by trans, hence the discrimination she faced at her place of work.
Yes. If gender roles are purely socially constructed then there’s no link between them and physical sex. There can be no right or wrong body. If on the other hand playing with dolls makes a ‘girl’ and with cars a ‘boy’, then gender roles are immutable and from nature. Of course the truth is nuanced, but in the trans ‘debate’ today there is no nuance, so which is it? Relative or absolute? Or just each by turns as suits the ideological subversion of human relations and individual identity as we descend into nonsense?
Both homosexuality and the wish to transition are quite serious psychological disorders and the fact that one of these disorders has been accepted by a large portion of the population as “normal” does not alter the fact.
The incessant warfare between the two is worrying, as neither seem to have much to gain from victory
Homosexuality which was illegal in my youth, has now been widely accepted, but people who practise it are afraid that the general hetero public lump it together with the even more questionable transitionism and begin to re-examine both.
Fear drives this battle, but we should be examining our values and their effect on our children.
Why, do you think? How could it happen in the open, as you say? If itâs the MSM, then why? If itâs social media, then why? How could a generation fail to understand whatâs wrong and right?
This is an afterthought; what does this generation want?
What does this generation want? In the immortal word of Samuel Gompers, nineteenth-century labor leader, “More.”
A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see. The way my family looked but didn’t see what my oldest brother was doing to me. Because abuse is that thing that always, always happens to others. We all need to slow down, look more closely, and not be afraid to ask the questions we don’t really want answers to.
âA generation didnât fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didnât see.â
That is not quite true in relation to P Johnsonâs comment. What happened to you was confined to family and kept that way. How much closer do we need to look to witness what is being publicly displayed, and not only that but approved of and supported publicly? So a generation has actually given approval for these acts against children. Why?
âA generation didnât fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didnât see.â
That is not quite true in relation to P Johnsonâs comment. What happened to you was confined to family and kept that way. How much closer do we need to look to witness what is being publicly displayed, and not only that but approved of and supported publicly? So a generation has actually given approval for these acts against children. Why?
Might I humbly suggest that we have lost the habit of Christian belief or am I being too naive?
Iâm not sure about that. The people who support these extremes seem to think in a very moralistic way. It seems simple enough to them; this is good, that is wrong. Things are viewed as either black or white. Thatâs a very primitive and uneducated way of viewing the world, but also very similar to the superstitious way the church, in the past, has controlled its members, and those who were not. Theyâre like a mob, caught up in the excitement of chasing devils and heretics, conferring with the relics of saints and the bleeding virgin, receiving the answers they want.
Iâm not sure about that. The people who support these extremes seem to think in a very moralistic way. It seems simple enough to them; this is good, that is wrong. Things are viewed as either black or white. Thatâs a very primitive and uneducated way of viewing the world, but also very similar to the superstitious way the church, in the past, has controlled its members, and those who were not. Theyâre like a mob, caught up in the excitement of chasing devils and heretics, conferring with the relics of saints and the bleeding virgin, receiving the answers they want.
What does this generation want? In the immortal word of Samuel Gompers, nineteenth-century labor leader, “More.”
A generation didn’t fail in knowing right from wrong. They looked but they didn’t see. The way my family looked but didn’t see what my oldest brother was doing to me. Because abuse is that thing that always, always happens to others. We all need to slow down, look more closely, and not be afraid to ask the questions we don’t really want answers to.
Might I humbly suggest that we have lost the habit of Christian belief or am I being too naive?
Yes, Green had her son castrated and sterilized. I’d count that as abuse. At 16 did he really understand the consequences?
Why has this Green person NOT been charged with inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) may I ask?
Is not FGM illegal? Then why not MGM?
We could start a crowd funding page to fund a private prosecution
Before we do that, please understand that my daughter accused me of the heinous crime of raising her as a Christian during her childhood. She “discovered” at college that she had been lied to all along and was seriously upset with me for years. It might not be long that I, too, will be someone worth prosecuting. And to think that I paid for 4 years of this “education”.
Before we do that, please understand that my daughter accused me of the heinous crime of raising her as a Christian during her childhood. She “discovered” at college that she had been lied to all along and was seriously upset with me for years. It might not be long that I, too, will be someone worth prosecuting. And to think that I paid for 4 years of this “education”.
We could start a crowd funding page to fund a private prosecution
More than that, did he really have the agency to accept or reject? It sounds like momma had him thoroughly programmed.
I recall a news article a few years back about a young man who was raised as a girl by his mother who wanted a daughter. The truth of his sex wasnât revealed to him and society until he was around 8-9 years of age. Mother was sectioned, young man put into care and then received years and years of counselling to help him come to terms with not being female and mother being nuts. I suspect there is going to many more instances like this to come.
Great illustration.
Great illustration.
I recall a news article a few years back about a young man who was raised as a girl by his mother who wanted a daughter. The truth of his sex wasnât revealed to him and society until he was around 8-9 years of age. Mother was sectioned, young man put into care and then received years and years of counselling to help him come to terms with not being female and mother being nuts. I suspect there is going to many more instances like this to come.
We’re told by the woke Left that, yes, of course he knew what he was doing! But, then again, no, he possibly couldn’t – hence their defence of Shamima Begum. So, when it suits their politics, the woke Left ‘inform’ us that minors know exactly what they’re doing; when it doesn’t, they obviously don’t. Discombobulating Marxist theory rides again! Go figure, as our American friends would say.
Why has this Green person NOT been charged with inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) may I ask?
Is not FGM illegal? Then why not MGM?
More than that, did he really have the agency to accept or reject? It sounds like momma had him thoroughly programmed.
We’re told by the woke Left that, yes, of course he knew what he was doing! But, then again, no, he possibly couldn’t – hence their defence of Shamima Begum. So, when it suits their politics, the woke Left ‘inform’ us that minors know exactly what they’re doing; when it doesn’t, they obviously don’t. Discombobulating Marxist theory rides again! Go figure, as our American friends would say.
Although separate cases the Savile story also involved hidden abuse, denial, and the reluctance of those in authority to challenge a celebrity narrative.
There’s a theme here – how many people strive to build fame and celebrity to hide their failings from others (including themselves).
The virtue hides the sin⊠as they say
The virtue hides the sin⊠as they say
The abuse in the Catholic Church was hidden in plain sight. Same as Jimmy Savile. And now, the same as Mermaids and this whole child-mutilation scandal.
Not everyone in the Catholic Church is a child abuser, however everyone who worked for Mermaids is involved in enabling child abuse because that is the only point of Mermaids.
Thanks for making this necessary distinction.
Thanks for making this necessary distinction.
It was furtive and there was a disconnect between what they preached and what they practised. The trans ideologues are open about what they do.
Yes, but everyone knew… but they were afraid to say anything. Same with “Mermaids” and the like.. hiding in plain sight, but people afraid to say anything in case they got cancelled / fired. A chilling effect. Case in point is the author of this piece, who was hounded out of “The Guardian”.
Really, there is an inner logic to this kind of scandal. In the beginning phase, the institution / individual is strong, it’s socially advantageous to turn a blind eye. Cracks in the alibi start to appear, but there are pile-ons, lest the society’s self-belief is harmed. Scapegoats are found. But still the allegations continue. In “alternative” media first. Eventually, a prime-time documentary. Then plink, plink, plink, and the avalanche happens. Court cases. Inquiries. A state apology. The end-point of it all is that it becomes socially advantageous to castigate the institution / individual that did the abuse.
With the Catholic church we have come to the end of the process. With the mutilation of children caught up in the gender cult, it looks like we are about half-way through.
Yes, but everyone knew… but they were afraid to say anything. Same with “Mermaids” and the like.. hiding in plain sight, but people afraid to say anything in case they got cancelled / fired. A chilling effect. Case in point is the author of this piece, who was hounded out of “The Guardian”.
Really, there is an inner logic to this kind of scandal. In the beginning phase, the institution / individual is strong, it’s socially advantageous to turn a blind eye. Cracks in the alibi start to appear, but there are pile-ons, lest the society’s self-belief is harmed. Scapegoats are found. But still the allegations continue. In “alternative” media first. Eventually, a prime-time documentary. Then plink, plink, plink, and the avalanche happens. Court cases. Inquiries. A state apology. The end-point of it all is that it becomes socially advantageous to castigate the institution / individual that did the abuse.
With the Catholic church we have come to the end of the process. With the mutilation of children caught up in the gender cult, it looks like we are about half-way through.
Rule by homosexuals will be as successful for us, as it has been for the Catholic Church
Not everyone in the Catholic Church is a child abuser, however everyone who worked for Mermaids is involved in enabling child abuse because that is the only point of Mermaids.
It was furtive and there was a disconnect between what they preached and what they practised. The trans ideologues are open about what they do.
Rule by homosexuals will be as successful for us, as it has been for the Catholic Church
Sorry, I’m piggy backing on another comment again, but I have a question for others on this site – does anyone else find that they can reply to someone’s comment, but cannot add comments? This has been happening frequently to me recently, and to say that it is annoying is an understatement.
Yes, and I see the problem on some articles and not others – I think there’s a bug in the web page code đ
Be good to have it fixed
Yes, all the time!
Yes! Same for me. I’ve been in contact with the Unherd Help section and they claim to be working on it but offer no explanation of why it’s happening.
Yes. It very unfair to the commenter on whose back we have to piggy, but there is no other way in. We pay to comment, so UnHerd owes it to subscribers to fix this immediately.
I agree Allison. At least half the attraction of UnHerd is the comments section. If I can’t respond to an article or someone else’s comment because of a technical bug, I feel very short changed.
The commenters are all very intelligent on this site. Even when I don’t agree with them, I want and appreciate their opinion. No trolls, no bomb throwers, no personal invective – just well-considered argument. Well-worth the subscription price, so get it together, UnHerd!
The commenters are all very intelligent on this site. Even when I don’t agree with them, I want and appreciate their opinion. No trolls, no bomb throwers, no personal invective – just well-considered argument. Well-worth the subscription price, so get it together, UnHerd!
I agree Allison. At least half the attraction of UnHerd is the comments section. If I can’t respond to an article or someone else’s comment because of a technical bug, I feel very short changed.
This happened to me a few months ago. Contact [email protected]
Yes – happens all the time
Yes, same problem, I contacted UnHerd and was advised to refresh the page, which works.
It does not work for me, though
Oh, sorry to hear that. It is very trying.
Oh, sorry to hear that. It is very trying.
It does not work for me, though
Yes, and I see the problem on some articles and not others – I think there’s a bug in the web page code đ
Be good to have it fixed
Yes, all the time!
Yes! Same for me. I’ve been in contact with the Unherd Help section and they claim to be working on it but offer no explanation of why it’s happening.
Yes. It very unfair to the commenter on whose back we have to piggy, but there is no other way in. We pay to comment, so UnHerd owes it to subscribers to fix this immediately.
This happened to me a few months ago. Contact [email protected]
Yes – happens all the time
Yes, same problem, I contacted UnHerd and was advised to refresh the page, which works.
There’s a clear tell re Freeman’s suspicion that Green’s interest is in her own rights to subject her child to hormones and surgery: her aside about his p***s – “Sorry, Jackie!”.
Poor Jack! Given that he was doomed to a micro p****s by his mother, he was only left with the choice of seeing though the transformation instigated by his selfish mother. No wonder there are concerns of suicidal tendencies amongst the trans community. Surely itâs only going to grow as young people come to terms with what is being done to them and that so many in society are celebrating it!
Most chaps have growers or show-ers.
Most chaps have growers or show-ers.
Poor Jack! Given that he was doomed to a micro p****s by his mother, he was only left with the choice of seeing though the transformation instigated by his selfish mother. No wonder there are concerns of suicidal tendencies amongst the trans community. Surely itâs only going to grow as young people come to terms with what is being done to them and that so many in society are celebrating it!
â. . . constructing their vaginaâ. This author buys into the absurd misuse of the correct, accurate pronoun âhisâ. Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy. The singular surgeon was also he or she. If itâs incredibly easy to criticize Susie Green, itâs necessary to dismiss writers who mangle language in the same way.
The author is part of the media loop that is being foisted upon us.
UnHerd should change their style guide to always refer to sex-change cases by their original pronouns.
‘Its style…’? Unherd is singular.
A couple of years ago I complained to Unherd about a couple of instances of the woke racist capitalisation of “black”. To their credit, Unherd explicitly undertook to desist from this practice, and have kept their word.
‘Its style…’? Unherd is singular.
A couple of years ago I complained to Unherd about a couple of instances of the woke racist capitalisation of “black”. To their credit, Unherd explicitly undertook to desist from this practice, and have kept their word.
UnHerd should change their style guide to always refer to sex-change cases by their original pronouns.
“Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy.”
He still is.
The author is part of the media loop that is being foisted upon us.
“Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy.”
He still is.
What is the equivalent term to “misogyny” that would capture the deep hatred of everything male and masculine that seems to be present in some of these my-little-boy-wants-to-be-castrated mothers?
Misandry?
The word you are thinking of is misandry.
As a general comment about Hadley Freeman’s article, the newspaper that was censoring her is The Guardian. All this has happened under Katharine Viner’s editorship. So much for “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” (C. P. Scott).
It always seems to be the mothers pushing the trans madness, fathers don’t seem to be as enthusiastic
So, of course, Smaltime J describes attempts to push back against the madness as the definition of the patriarchy. Itâs a womanâs right to persuade her son to castrate himself.
Hmmm. Perhaps the entire written history of mankind had something after all?
Sounds exactly like Nazi anti-Semitism, transferred to gender.
Sounds exactly like Nazi anti-Semitism, transferred to gender.
Very interesting point.
So, of course, Smaltime J describes attempts to push back against the madness as the definition of the patriarchy. Itâs a womanâs right to persuade her son to castrate himself.
Hmmm. Perhaps the entire written history of mankind had something after all?
Very interesting point.
The term in this case is homophobia. A young boy who was not ‘male’ or ‘masculine’ enough, one who didn’t fit society’s ridiculous male stereotype. Someone recently asked me when did all of this homophobia come back again? My response was that it never left, it has been here all along.
Quite right. Humankind has been aware of this defect for eons. It’s only been about the last 30 years that the concept of “homosexual rights” has been promulgated.
Strictly speaking, there are no such things as homosexual rights â or as heterosexual rights either, for that matter. The phrase âhomosexual rightsâ or âgay rightsâ is simply a piece of verbal shorthand, used to indicate that ordinary human rights, which are a matter of natural justice, apply to homosexuals just as they do to everyone else, and are not a privilege reserved to the heterosexual majority.
Strictly speaking, there are no such things as homosexual rights â or as heterosexual rights either, for that matter. The phrase âhomosexual rightsâ or âgay rightsâ is simply a piece of verbal shorthand, used to indicate that ordinary human rights, which are a matter of natural justice, apply to homosexuals just as they do to everyone else, and are not a privilege reserved to the heterosexual majority.
homophobia is a non word that means fear of single
The word âhomophobiaâ is philologically unsound â and its root meaning is not âfear of singleâ but âfear of the sameâ â but the phenomenon which it was coined to denote is only too real, although it is thankfully becoming ever less common.
The word âhomophobiaâ is philologically unsound â and its root meaning is not âfear of singleâ but âfear of the sameâ â but the phenomenon which it was coined to denote is only too real, although it is thankfully becoming ever less common.
Quite right. Humankind has been aware of this defect for eons. It’s only been about the last 30 years that the concept of “homosexual rights” has been promulgated.
homophobia is a non word that means fear of single
And given that culturally men are being taught to despise themselves, is this having an impact?
Misandry?
The word you are thinking of is misandry.
As a general comment about Hadley Freeman’s article, the newspaper that was censoring her is The Guardian. All this has happened under Katharine Viner’s editorship. So much for “Comment is free, but facts are sacred” (C. P. Scott).
It always seems to be the mothers pushing the trans madness, fathers don’t seem to be as enthusiastic
The term in this case is homophobia. A young boy who was not ‘male’ or ‘masculine’ enough, one who didn’t fit society’s ridiculous male stereotype. Someone recently asked me when did all of this homophobia come back again? My response was that it never left, it has been here all along.
And given that culturally men are being taught to despise themselves, is this having an impact?
Hear hear
Anyone advocating interfering in the sexual development of a child is by definition a pervert.
Not necessarily. Early onset (formerly precocious) puberty has been recognised for centuries and impairs social and pyschological development. Today, treatment with anastrazole is common, particularly while the underlying aetiology is established.
But w/ the medical intervention of puberty blockers used in gender clinics we are talking about developmentally normal kids, puberty blockers have never been approved for that use.
But w/ the medical intervention of puberty blockers used in gender clinics we are talking about developmentally normal kids, puberty blockers have never been approved for that use.
Not necessarily. Early onset (formerly precocious) puberty has been recognised for centuries and impairs social and pyschological development. Today, treatment with anastrazole is common, particularly while the underlying aetiology is established.
But we know that with the Catholic Church, investigations were made, priests were publicly named and shamed, those who were alive went to prison. What I really cannot believe is that an IT Consultant from Leeds is going to ‘resign’ from a charity that has catastrophically effected so many children and get away with it? And the same applies to a paedo sympathiser? Breslow will just continue in this job at LSE after his sabbatical without any repercussions! And I can guarantee, after the amount of money she made and the messiah complex she has, she will set up another Charity and continue her work in another form. And I have to throw in Vicky Ford the previous then Families and Children’s Minister – where was she when GIDS were operating? She is back in a high profile Ministerial job!
It’s evil, abusive and should be illegal. Today a parent can easily be supportive of a child who questions their sex until such time they are consenting adults.
then why does no one ever comment on the under 12 boys abuse, legal in so many Islamic countries? fear of ” racism”?!!!
then why does no one ever comment on the under 12 boys abuse, legal in so many Islamic countries? fear of ” racism”?!!!
Yep, and as we all know a large portion of the kids who get caught up in this insanity are gay. Itâs homophobic to its core. How progressives unquestioningly support it staggers me.
Why, do you think? How could it happen in the open, as you say? If itâs the MSM, then why? If itâs social media, then why? How could a generation fail to understand whatâs wrong and right?
This is an afterthought; what does this generation want?
Yes, Green had her son castrated and sterilized. I’d count that as abuse. At 16 did he really understand the consequences?
Although separate cases the Savile story also involved hidden abuse, denial, and the reluctance of those in authority to challenge a celebrity narrative.
There’s a theme here – how many people strive to build fame and celebrity to hide their failings from others (including themselves).
The abuse in the Catholic Church was hidden in plain sight. Same as Jimmy Savile. And now, the same as Mermaids and this whole child-mutilation scandal.
Sorry, I’m piggy backing on another comment again, but I have a question for others on this site – does anyone else find that they can reply to someone’s comment, but cannot add comments? This has been happening frequently to me recently, and to say that it is annoying is an understatement.
There’s a clear tell re Freeman’s suspicion that Green’s interest is in her own rights to subject her child to hormones and surgery: her aside about his p***s – “Sorry, Jackie!”.
â. . . constructing their vaginaâ. This author buys into the absurd misuse of the correct, accurate pronoun âhisâ. Jack, despite mother-approved medical mutilation, was a boy. The singular surgeon was also he or she. If itâs incredibly easy to criticize Susie Green, itâs necessary to dismiss writers who mangle language in the same way.
What is the equivalent term to “misogyny” that would capture the deep hatred of everything male and masculine that seems to be present in some of these my-little-boy-wants-to-be-castrated mothers?
Hear hear
Anyone advocating interfering in the sexual development of a child is by definition a pervert.
But we know that with the Catholic Church, investigations were made, priests were publicly named and shamed, those who were alive went to prison. What I really cannot believe is that an IT Consultant from Leeds is going to ‘resign’ from a charity that has catastrophically effected so many children and get away with it? And the same applies to a paedo sympathiser? Breslow will just continue in this job at LSE after his sabbatical without any repercussions! And I can guarantee, after the amount of money she made and the messiah complex she has, she will set up another Charity and continue her work in another form. And I have to throw in Vicky Ford the previous then Families and Children’s Minister – where was she when GIDS were operating? She is back in a high profile Ministerial job!
It’s evil, abusive and should be illegal. Today a parent can easily be supportive of a child who questions their sex until such time they are consenting adults.
âBecause Green never once hid who she was.â – I had a friend recently go on tear about child abuse in the Catholic Church and how awful it was that our parents generation didnât stop it. My response was that the abuse was 1) hidden and 2) denied. I then pointed out that our generation is not only tolerating child abuse that is publicly acknowledged and right out in the open – many – maybe most – of our generation are openly celebrating it. Medically transitioning children is simply evil. Everyone knows this – yet many champion it anyways.
It sounds like this woman had to believe that what she did for her son was the absolute correct thing to do. Instead of confronting the horror of her actions she tried to get others on board in order to validate herself.
Every adult who pushed this insanity on to children should be registered as a sex offender and kept away from them forever,
Yes, that was how I interpreted it too. A case of protesting too much. I also thought that one day Jackie might turn on her and that when that happened, her lifeâs work would turn to dust. Perhaps that is whatâs going on – hence the suddenness and refusal to provide any information.
At, someone has probably come close to the truth. This woman needed help but never got it, and just look at the consequences. Well said, Julian.
I find that to be the case with Covid true believers, as well. It is now proved that everything we were told about C19 was a deliberate lie, yet those who got the shots and wore the masks religiously will never admit it.
In these egotistical times it is very nearly impossible to âsorry, I was wrong â.
Something to do with the fact that âweâ are so litigious these days?
Did you ever think about anti-COVID true believers? They, too, refuse to change their beliefs, no matter what argumetns they are faced with.
So . . . the people who were right all along should change their beliefs? Oh gee, youâre right: I never got Covid so I should run out and get the shot that gives it to me? Weird take, RF.
I, too, believe I was right all along. I guess the difference is tha I am open to the possibility that I might be proved wrong at some point. Can you say the same?
With all due respect, Rasmus, youâve been proven wrong time and time again about COVID. Itâs now coming out that lockdowns were completely disastrous for the global economy and the majority of people now dying of COVID are the vaccinated. Countries and states that didnât have strict lockdowns are now faring betters than those that did.
I believe in the existence of Wuhan Flu, mainly because I didn’t enjoy the feeling of cannabis hangover which it gave me when I had it in February. On the other hand, I completely agree with you about lockdown. If the state ever tries this on again, we will have to smack them down hard.
And the hospitals will once again have to deal with the dead bodies.they are not fictitious like some comments on here.
And the hospitals will once again have to deal with the dead bodies.they are not fictitious like some comments on here.
Julian, if almost everybody is vaccinated (and they are) then the majority of the (small number) of people now dying of covid will be vaccinated. The arguments against lockdowns and masking are very well founded but this particular line of attack against the vaccines is illogical.
Take a look at third world countries where poor people were dropping like flies because they COULDâNT get enough vaccines. How did they catch it ? Nothing has been proved about covid, only that it came from china, the only thing that ever lasted more than a month.
I believe in the existence of Wuhan Flu, mainly because I didn’t enjoy the feeling of cannabis hangover which it gave me when I had it in February. On the other hand, I completely agree with you about lockdown. If the state ever tries this on again, we will have to smack them down hard.
Julian, if almost everybody is vaccinated (and they are) then the majority of the (small number) of people now dying of covid will be vaccinated. The arguments against lockdowns and masking are very well founded but this particular line of attack against the vaccines is illogical.
Take a look at third world countries where poor people were dropping like flies because they COULDâNT get enough vaccines. How did they catch it ? Nothing has been proved about covid, only that it came from china, the only thing that ever lasted more than a month.
With all due respect, Rasmus, youâve been proven wrong time and time again about COVID. Itâs now coming out that lockdowns were completely disastrous for the global economy and the majority of people now dying of COVID are the vaccinated. Countries and states that didnât have strict lockdowns are now faring betters than those that did.
Where is the proof the disbelievers were âright all alongâ. I assume you mean yourself and that you expect others to fall for your bul**hit.
I, too, believe I was right all along. I guess the difference is tha I am open to the possibility that I might be proved wrong at some point. Can you say the same?
Where is the proof the disbelievers were âright all alongâ. I assume you mean yourself and that you expect others to fall for your bul**hit.
So . . . the people who were right all along should change their beliefs? Oh gee, youâre right: I never got Covid so I should run out and get the shot that gives it to me? Weird take, RF.
âEverythingâ, âprovedâ, âdeliberate lieâ,âreligiouslyâ, âbelieversâ – pretty hysterical statements.
My wife has a transplant and absolutely no immunity from taking the vaccines. Weâve seen the data for reduced immunity patients that shows if she catches it they probably wonât be able to save her, but they âhopeâ antivirals might do so. There are 500,000 people in the U.K. in the same boat as her – permanently exposed. And now they are withdrawing the antiviral treatment for immune suppressed people in January because they cost too much, so then there will be no treatment options for this group. Theyâre the ones who are still copping it in the covid statistics.
Itâs always interesting to see the ignorance of fanatics like you who seem to think these people are of no consequence.
You obviously never worked in critical care where patients were dying at an unheard level due to a virus some disbelievers described as a cold. They were dying at such a rate the mortuaries had the bodies piled up and there was bargaining with other hospitals involved in trying to ease the backlog. Until you have experienced it your delusions cannot be taken seriously.
In these egotistical times it is very nearly impossible to âsorry, I was wrong â.
Something to do with the fact that âweâ are so litigious these days?
Did you ever think about anti-COVID true believers? They, too, refuse to change their beliefs, no matter what argumetns they are faced with.
âEverythingâ, âprovedâ, âdeliberate lieâ,âreligiouslyâ, âbelieversâ – pretty hysterical statements.
My wife has a transplant and absolutely no immunity from taking the vaccines. Weâve seen the data for reduced immunity patients that shows if she catches it they probably wonât be able to save her, but they âhopeâ antivirals might do so. There are 500,000 people in the U.K. in the same boat as her – permanently exposed. And now they are withdrawing the antiviral treatment for immune suppressed people in January because they cost too much, so then there will be no treatment options for this group. Theyâre the ones who are still copping it in the covid statistics.
Itâs always interesting to see the ignorance of fanatics like you who seem to think these people are of no consequence.
You obviously never worked in critical care where patients were dying at an unheard level due to a virus some disbelievers described as a cold. They were dying at such a rate the mortuaries had the bodies piled up and there was bargaining with other hospitals involved in trying to ease the backlog. Until you have experienced it your delusions cannot be taken seriously.
it looks like munchausen by proxy to me
*Transhausen by proxy.
*Transhausen by proxy.
Yes, that was how I interpreted it too. A case of protesting too much. I also thought that one day Jackie might turn on her and that when that happened, her lifeâs work would turn to dust. Perhaps that is whatâs going on – hence the suddenness and refusal to provide any information.