Mick Hartley

This would be funny if it wasn’t so serious. From the Times:

A clinical trial giving puberty blockers to children will ask participants from the age of 12 if they identify as “two spirit”.

“Two-spirit”, for those at the back, is a label coined in 1990 at a Native American gay and lesbian conference in Winnipeg, Canada, for indigenous North Americans who identify as having both a masculine and a feminine spirit, fulfilling a third gender role in their communities. And, because it lends a kind of lovely indigenous native vibe to gender talk, it’s been generally adopted as part of the cult-speak. Does it have any significance for 12-year-old UK children? Of course it doesn’t. They won’t have a clue. But it does show how this whole farce is drenched in gender ideology.

The children will be asked “what best describes” their gender identity and given a series of options to tick including “definitely” a boy or girl, “mainly” a boy or girl, “neither a boy or girl”, “not sure” and “none of the above”.

In addition, those over 12 years old will be asked about “gender identity labels” and again given a range of descriptions to tick.

These include “cisgender”, “transgender”, “non-binary”, “agender”, “genderfluid”, “genderqueer”, “two spirit” and “other”.

In a serious study, ticking any of those would be seen as a clear demonstration that the poor children had been coached into this by parents/teachers/social media. But this isn’t a serious study.

Dr Louise Irvine, a GP and co-chairman of the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender, a group of clinicians concerned about the rise of gender ideology in healthcare, said that the “labels” being presented to children were ideological in themselves.

She said: “It’s absolutely ridiculous. It shows that the whole trial is imbued with gender affirmatory ideology. What this question will do is reinforce the ideology in the eyes of the children.

“They shouldn’t make any suggestions — the question should just be open. The questionnaire should be as neutral as possible because a scientific trial should be neutral, not ideological.”