There’s an annoying story going around now:
Texas Jury Rules Seven-Year-Old Boy Can Undergo ‘Gender Transitioning’
‘This is barbaric’: Texas jury rules that 7-year-old boy’s (non-biological) mother can forcibly transition him — and his father can’t stop it
Basically the mother of twin boys has decided the one is actually a girl because they were interested in wearing dresses and liked the movie Frozen. As she is a pediatrician the orthodoxy of her profession takes precedence therefore the child was diagnosed with gender dysphoria, the sex of the body doesn’t match the gender of the brain. This is often explained to the child as God having made a mistake, thereby instilling a lifelong certainty that God is far from infallible and makes lots of mistakes just like humans do so worship has neither point nor purpose.
While there is plenty of outrage available with the transgender mania swirling about, there was a much more nuanced piece about the testimony before the verdict published in The Texan, worth reading: Hearing in Custody Battle Over Alleged Transgender Seven-Year-Old Will Resume Next Week
You can see the mother could very well be thinking she is doing the right thing, because she is promulgating harmful negative Eurocentric stereotypes. Great job promoting the wealthy white patriarchy, lady.
Worldwide, throughout many cultures over time, men have worn and still do wear dresses. Real men who look like men. Jesus wore a dress. Sure, we use the term tunic so it doesn’t sound girly. Then we can talk about short tunics which are shirts. Sometimes dresses are called robes, which covers a lot of garment types. But come on, it hangs from the shoulders and it’s covering the legs, it’s a dress. Over the breadth of recorded human history, men wearing dresses and skirts is the norm, as with Normans.
Why are trousers now so much a guy thing? They were a sign of wealth. Before sewing machines an experienced seamstress could take 14 hours to makes a man’s dress shirt, while a woman’s dress took 10 hours. When wives spent several days a month making and maintaining clothing by hand, a man wearing a separate shirt and pants was a costly expense. The history of leg coverings show poor people might have some form of simple leggings, but pants of different types were upper class accouterments.
So as developing countries getting cheaper food is accompanied by rising obesity rates as being fat is still considered a sign of wealth, the sewing machine’s rise in the late 18th century contributed to the popularity of men’s trousers. Which are usually practical clothing in colder regions, good for physical work and for showing off your package. But in warmer climes and hot jobs from roofing to blacksmithing, men realize the equipment prefers ventilation. Thus dresses and skirts are popular for men in many countries, and Utilikilts with durable construction are found from job sites to smithies to offices.
Where does this leave an innocent 7-yr old boy? With an ignorant mother thinking the kid is a girl for wanting to wear dresses. Seriously. We’re supposed to be in this great new age of wokeness where women have penises and men have periods. The old gender norms are smashed, be and do whatever feels right to you, it’s your life. Newsflash, real men do wear pink. Dresses can be sturdy and suitable for hard work.
This mother, a pediatrician, has pushed her child, because of upper class and predominantly European (aka white) concepts about male and female clothing, to be a girl. Currently it’s the “affirmation” and “social acceptance” stage where they get everyone in the kid’s life, including the father by order of the court, to tell them what a great girl they are because of course they are a girl and God just made a mistake, and they are teaching the kid to act even more girly because that’s how girls act. Permanently screwing up their physiology and wrecking their life may happen soon, but it’s all good because stereotypes from the wealthy white patriarchy tell the mother the kid is a girl. Who should act like a girl. Not acting like a boy because girls who act like boys grow up to be, well, you know. And boys who act like girls without being girls grow up to do Monty Python skits.
Why not just keep it simple and work on the social acceptance of males wearing dresses, who look like males? As The Texan article points out, there’s the principle of “desistance” where you don’t make an issue of it, let the kid do what they want without medical intervention, and 80 to 90% of the time they really do “grow out of it” during adolescence and accept they are their biological gender, the “persistence” of thinking they’re the other gender goes away. As read elsewhere, sure they might turn out to actually be gay, but parents aren’t allowed to complain about that anymore so it’s not a problem.
Let boys be boys wearing dresses. Anyone wants to complain, a parent can quickly pull out hundreds of examples historical and contemporary that show there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s just clothing, feel free to have it be a tunic or sarong or perhaps a lavalava. It was good enough for Jesus. But those who would take the flesh that God hath wrought and bang it into a passable facsimile of what they think it should have been, they should contemplate what would be the true mistake.