Mick Hartley

The latest iteration of the gender debate is taking place in Texas – and, being in Texas, it's weird. This is one of the earlier references to the case, from The Texan last Friday:

At this week in Dallas, a jury listened to witness after witness testify in a trial between two parents arguing whether or not their seven-year-old son is transgender and what their response to the situation should be.

Although only scheduled through Thursday, lawyers spent so long questioning witnesses that the judge will resume the trial on Monday.

The father, Jeff Younger, contends that his son, James, identifies with his biological sex. The mother, Anne Georgulas, contends that James is a girl and calls him Luna.

Younger and Georgulas were married in 2010 and later decided to have children through in vitro fertilization (IVF). They requested male children through the IVF process that was successful, and their twin boys were born in 2012.

Because of a family tradition to name the male children with the initials “J.D.Y.,” and because of the biblical reference to the brothers of Jesus, Younger and Georgulas decided to name the children James and Jude. At the time, both parents were members of the Orthodox Church.

Conflict arose in the next few years and their marriage was eventually annulled. While the court made the parents joint managing conservators, Georgulas was given exclusive rights and duties, while Younger’s were limited.

Georgulas said that James first wanted a girls’ toy from McDonald’s and soon after started imitating the female characters from Disney’s Frozen and asking to wear dresses.

She said she contacted the GENecis clinic at Children’s Hospital Center, and they referred her to Rebekka Ouer for counseling. Ouer recommended a process of “affirmation” and thought that a “social transition” for James to begin going to school dressed as a girl named “Luna” would be in his best interest.

When the father learned that Georgulas was “socially transitioning” James, it wasn’t long before their disputes escalated.

Younger is being represented by Logan Odeneal, while Georgulas has a legal team consisting of at least five people, with lawyers Jessica Janicek and Laura Hayes leading the questioning of witnesses.

Phew. The inescapable impression is that the poor boy has become a battleground between the two parents. The father is conservative, Christian. Was the mother pressurised into going for male children, and is she now getting her own back? The lad wanted a girls’ toy from McDonald’s? So he's really a girl?

Well, I have no idea about the grim dynamics between the two parents – though of course it's tempting to speculate – and I hadn't considered writing about it before. I mean….who knows? But, interestingly, the case does seem to have become something of a touchstone. Donald Trump Jr, Senator Ted Cruz, plus all manner of conservative commentators, have weighed in on the side of the father. The dispute, then, is now being presented – as for instance in this BBC report, dateline this Friday – as a battle between the forces of dark reaction, and the sunny enlightened progressive forces on the side of the mother:

A Texas judge has given joint custody to two parents locked in a bitter dispute over the gender identity of their child, in a case that has provoked wider debate over the appropriate age for gender transitions.

During the trial, Anne Georgulas said her child – named James at birth – identifies as a girl and wishes to be called Luna.

But the father, Jeffrey Younger, claimed Dr Georgulas has pressured their child to identify as female, and charged his ex-wife with child abuse.

Judge Kim Cooks ruled on Thursday that decisions over issues like medical procedures and psychiatric treatment should be reached by Mr Younger and Dr Georgulas together.

In doing so, she overruled a prior decision by a Dallas jury that voted 11-1 to give Dr Georgulas sole control of the child's medical and physiological care. In Texas parties in custody disputes can opt for a trial by jury, but a judge can review the decision.

The case has sparked outcry on the political right, with conservatives echoing Mr Younger's claims of child abuse.  […]

Dr Georgulas, a paediatrician, said her child – who has a twin brother – began to express a desire to be a girl in 2015, when the child was three, asking to wear dresses and look like the female characters from the Disney movie Frozen.

Mr Younger and Dr Georgulas' four-year marriage was annulled in 2016, at which point Dr Georgulas was given exclusive control of decisions regarding medical, psychological and educational issues.

"[The child] has been dressing as a girl in public, going to school in public as a girl, and requests that she be named Luna," a lawyer for Dr Georgulas, Kim Meaders, told a court last year.

At the child's five-year-old medical check-up, the doctor diagnosed the child with "gender identity disorder", Dr Georgulas testified.

After the next annual check-up, the doctor wrote that child was "still referring to self as female".

At trial, Dr Georgulas said psychologists had recommended that she allow the child "to present in whatever way they wish".

"The interviews with teachers, the counsellor's notes and records, Luna herself and Luna's brother all state Luna has always wanted to be a girl… It's not being forced upon her," Ms Meaders said.

Therapists and counsellors who testified confirmed Dr Georgulas' account. Teachers at school call the child Luna.

But Mr Younger argued that his ex-wife had pressured their child to identify as transgender, saying in court that his child had been "perfectly happy as a boy".

He has been outspoken about the harms he believes are caused by a child beginning a gender transition.

But Mr Younger – being a conservative Texan yahoo and all – is not familiar with the latest progressive thinking on these matters.

The "wait-and-see" approach, advocated by Mr Younger has been described as "outdated" by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

Treating children's chosen gender identities as "possibly true" can deny "critical support", according to the AAP….

During the trial, Dr Georgulas said she would consider hormone suppression once the twin reaches puberty, and only if the child "persists" in identifying as a girl. Dr Georgulas had requested that the court demand written consent from both parents before any treatment involving hormone suppression, puberty blockers and transgender reassignment surgery.

Hormone suppression prevents the development of sex characteristics such as periods, breasts or voice-breaking.

Critics have argued that such treatment would be inappropriate for so young a child.

But health professionals stress that hormone suppressors are never used for a pre-pubescent children. They emphasise that hormone suppressors are only prescribed at a certain stage of puberty ("Tanner Stage 2" – typically between the ages of 10-14) and that the drugs' effects are reversible.

Laura Edwards-Leeper, a clinical psychologist at Pacific University who specialises in gender identity says he finds it astonishing that "people believe that medical providers are offering treatment to young children".

"When there are headlines about sex changes in children, that is completely not true," he told the BBC.

In addition to a physician, many patients will also be seen by a therapist for an assessment, like Dr Edwards-Leeper, before being prescribed puberty blockers.

Echoing Dr Edwards-Leeper, psychotherapist Wesley Parks said at trial that it "wouldn't be possible" for Ms Georgulas and Mr Younger's child to take hormone blockers at the age of seven.

Puberty blockers are "critical" for children who are struggling with their gender identity, Dr Edwards-Leeper said. It "alleviates the distress that puberty causes for many of these kids before they have to make a decision about possibly irreversible interventions".

Even for the "handful" of her patients who have chosen to go off the hormone blockers, Dr Edwards-Leeper has observed no psychological harm to the temporary delay in puberty.

"It's completely false to say supporting a young child in their affirmed gender is child abuse," Dr Edwards-Leeper said. "It's in the child's best interest."

So all's well. Nothing to worry about here. Thanks Dr Laura Edwards-Leeper. [Though the BBC reporter, confused perhaps by all this gender stuff, keeps calling her "he" – even though, on her website, she specifies that her Preferred Pronouns are: She/Her/Hers. Blatant misgendering, I'm afraid.]

But, to paraphrase George Orwell ("Some things are true, even though the Daily Telegraph says they are true"), some things are true even though Donald Trump Jr and Ted Cruz say they're true. They may have been guilty of exaggeration. No one's threatening surgical intervention…yet. But the safety of hormone treatment on pubescent children is far from uncontroversial. 

Mainly, though, it's that old gender business. Here's the helpful last line of the BBC piece:

A transgender person is someone who experiences a gender identity which differs from that of their assigned sex at birth.

The concept of gender refers to social and cultural ideas of masculinity and femininity. It's a way of talking about the behavioural expectations associated with the sexes. Back in the day, feminists and gay activists used to campaign about overthrowing gender norms. But now, somehow, gender's become reified…become a thing. A gender identity is some mystical entity that we're born with, that may or may not match our sex. If it does…fine. If it doesn't – if you're a boy and you choose a girls’ toy from McDonald’s for instance – then there's a problem. And as gender is the deep-down reality, and sex is just something you're "assigned" at birth, then you need to transition. It's just that, in our current sad state of dependence on old-style thinking, those present at a child's birth are only able to see the gross physical sexual characteristics of the baby. What they can't see – yet – is the inner essence of the baby, its true gender identity. So they make mistakes. Which need to be rectified as soon as the child manifests its true identity by its choice of toys and its choice of clothes.

I don't see this as progress. I see this as a load of mystical regressive bullshit. But hey, I'm not a trained health professional, so what do I know.