By Diogenes (articles ) | January 28, 2007 4:25 AM
This is vile even by progressivist standards. German quacks started pumping a 12-year-old boy, now 14, full of female hormones so as to make him "the world's youngest transsexual." For legal reasons, castration and other surgical mutilation must be delayed until "Kim," born Tim, turns 18.
Tim was diagnosed as a transsexual two years ago, when doctors and psychiatrists concluded that his claims to be "in the wrong body" were so deeply felt that he required treatment. The therapy involves artificially arresting male puberty, with a series of potent hormone injections before the administration of female hormones to initiate the development of features such as breasts.
"Diagnosed" as a transsexual? A compound fraud. Transsexuality is a creation of Leftist politics, not medicine, and to "diagnose" it means nothing more or less than to impose one's morbid political agenda on a conveniently vulnerable victim. The victim in question, being 12 years old and profoundly conflicted at the time the procedure began, seems to have acquiesced in the treatment. Surprised?
Dr Bern Meyenburg, the head of a clinic for children and adolescents with identity disturbances at Frankfurt University, concluded that the child was serious. He wrote in his diagnosis: "Kim is a mentally well-developed child who appears happy and balanced. There is no doubt of the determined wish, that was already detectable since early childhood. It would have been very wrong to let Kim grow up to be a man. It is rare to have such a clear-cut case."
The doctors also tell us that at the onset of puberty the child was "terrified of growing facial hair and her [sic] voice breaking." And we're to understand that the same child is "happy and balanced." Right.
In the absence of a coherent view of what human nature is, there is no common notion of what it means to be a healthy human person (as opposed, say, to what it means to be a healthy kidney). Hence any well-spoken crank with a doctorate and a white lab coat who can manipulate the language deftly enough can, in order to gratify his own covert desires, get society's permission to create any kind of monster he wishes.
Dr Achim Wuesthof, an endocrinologist specialising in children and adolescents, who is treating the teenager at a clinic in Hamburg, said the procedure had been a success so far.
"They are not freaks, nor do they suffer mental illness. They are simply trapped in the wrong bodies. That is why it is best to help them as early as possible and reduce the trauma for them and their families."
"Trapped in the wrong bodies." Utter rubbish. That's sentimentalism without a rag of scientific legitimacy. Using the expression should ipso facto constitute sufficient cause for yanking a physician's credentials. But all the professions, psychology and medicine as much as law, are in such philosophical disarray that even practitioners uneasy with the fraud will be incapable of obstructing it. The words of Lee Harris below are to the point:
The essential nature of a culture war is invariant: A set of traditional values comes under attack by those who, like the Greek Sophist, the French philosophe and the American intellectual, make their living by their superior proficiency in handling abstract ideas, and promote a radically new and revolutionary set of values.
It's not that there isn't a philosophically cogent rival to the new sophism. There is -- but an extremely potent taboo has been attached to it. Any attempt to protest the sexual manipulation of Tim on the grounds that it violates goods necessary to integral human fulfillment would be shouted down with the cry of "Natural Law!" And judges, physicians, psychologists, and academics generally would stop their ears and all join in the shouting. Because Natural Law philosophy has been shown defective? No, because too much is riding on its acceptance or rejection.
Progressivist intellectuals such as deans and editors and high court judges see the indefensible puerility of a phrase like "trapped in the wrong body" as clearly as we do. But they tolerate it -- and, at need, defend the mutilation it purports to justify -- as the price of deflecting the force of Natural Law reasoning, which, if permitted to direct their deliberation and choice, would mean they'd have to forfeit altogether the project of protean sexuality (self-created, free-form, non-judgmental sexual liberty) which is the keystone of their public philosophy. Such a forfeiture is unthinkable. Sooner than put that project at risk, they're willing to put up with incoherence and cruelty.
The political alliance between abortion rights and gay rights absolutists bears this out. Gays claim that unitary human nature is a fiction and that the individual has absolute dominion over his own trajectory. Why? Because it allows them total liberty of sexual indulgence. Abortion partisans claim that a woman has absolute dominion over her own body. Why? Because it allows them total liberty of sexual indulgence as well as the liberty to disencumber themselves of the undesired consequences of that indulgence. Robert Bork points out that an absolute right over one's body was not recognized by law (the law didn't permit a surgeon, he says, to amputate a man's healthy arm even if he asks him to -- say, to settle a bet), but there's no question today that judges will pretend it's absolute wherever the project of moral self-determination -- what Scalia calls "the sweet mystery of life" jurisprudence -- is imperilled.
The excision of a healthy baby, like that of a healthy limb, is of a piece with the decision to addle a 12-year-old boy with estrogen on the basis of the politically expedient imbecillity that he's "trapped" in the wrong body. It has nothing to do with physiology and everything to do with Elton John's habits of oral hygiene -- which habits the Western élites have made the touchstone of public thought about civil order. If a few innocent Tims get Kim'd in the process -- well folks, we've already put orphans out to ranch in gay households and ash-canned tens of millions of unborn babies as surgical waste. It's the price of progress.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our final 2013 goal ($25,624 to go, assuming receipt of matching funds):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Novus744 -
Feb. 01, 2007 2:32 PM ET USA
I think, more than anyone in this instance, the parents of the boy need the most prayers. After them, the doctors and the boy himself. The only way he'll ever recover is through the grace of God.
Posted by: benedictusoblatus -
Jan. 31, 2007 10:06 PM ET USA
The OED renders "slut" in many ways: (1) a woman of dirty, slovenly, or untidy habits or appearance; (2) a kitchen-maid; a drudge; (3) a woman of low or loose character; a bold or impudent girl; a hussy, jade; (4) a female dog. None of these possible definitions apply to a woman who is the victim of rape per se. A boy who submits to gender transformation mutilation, however, still fits the definition of "monster." One can only hope the boy is so mentally ill as not to be morally culpable.
Posted by: Janet Baker -
Jan. 30, 2007 7:48 PM ET USA
I, too think the "monster" language is inappropriate. Does one call a rape victim a "slut"? The little boy is going through so much - let's at least tidy up our language if we expect to be able to address this matter to the world.
Posted by: -
Jan. 30, 2007 5:11 PM ET USA
Perhaps my comments seem ambiguous. I'm against "sexual reassignment surgery" as much as I abhor female genital mutilation. I think that it is cloddish to label subjects of either as "monsters," especially when the victims are children.
Posted by: Coco -
Jan. 30, 2007 11:01 AM ET USA
esalkin: Once again, witness Di prick a reader with the very sharp point on the end of the Sword of Truth...
Posted by: -
Jan. 29, 2007 1:55 PM ET USA
I'll preface this by saying that I am an American of German decent. Why should we be surprised that
Dr.Mengeleer... Dr.Meyenburg is so willing to perform such acts on a child? The Nazis experiments were carried out by many, many, people in the medical field. Only a few were every prosecuted. The rest continued to work and teach in the medical field. It would not surprise me if those who are working on this case can trace their ethical training back to Birkenau.
Posted by: -
Jan. 29, 2007 1:42 PM ET USA
medicus mentis; You are joking, right???
Posted by: -
Jan. 28, 2007 5:27 PM ET USA
And the estimated 2 million girls each year subjected to female genital mutilation? Monsters? Come on Diogenes, a retraction would enhance your credibility. Go ahead and admit that you are wrong, unless you think that such writing will further your argument.
Posted by: benedictusoblatus -
Jan. 28, 2007 9:34 AM ET USA
Be careful Di - if you ever travel in Europe you might be arrested and charged with the crime of "hate speech."
Posted by: benedictusoblatus -
Jan. 28, 2007 9:33 AM ET USA
A monster is defined as (1) something extraordinary or unnatural; (2) an animal or plant deviating in one or more of its parts from the normal type; (3) an imaginary animal; (4) a person of inhuman and horrible cruelty or wickedness; (5) an animal of huge size. This child is being turned into a "monster" according to definitions (1) and (2). This medical mutilation does not deprive the child of his soul and humanity.
Posted by: Gene Church -
Jan. 28, 2007 8:54 AM ET USA
God bless Tim, and please bring us to our senses.
Posted by: juon36 -
Jan. 28, 2007 8:35 AM ET USA
God created the child "Tim", society made the poor monster "Kim". My heart goes out to this child, & he needs all the prayers we can give him,for all his life.
Posted by: Gino -
Jan. 28, 2007 8:14 AM ET USA
We have definitely gone crazy in this world. Cruelty knows no bounds. We now absolutely have "throwaway" children. Experiment on them or kill them; what's next? Roe V Wade has really led us to the "promised Land." God help us.
Posted by: -
Jan. 28, 2007 7:44 AM ET USA
"get society's permission to create any kind of monster he wishes" Shame on you, Diogenes. Whatever happens to this boy, he will remain a child of God. Though mutilated, he doesn't deserve the added indignity of being labelled a "monster." Remember that your passions are flamed by the very fact of his humanity. Please keep your wits about you in your great efforts to do God's will.