Now Even Infants Are Being Sacrificed In The Name Of Trans ‘Affirmation’
A few weeks ago I did a monologue on a couple of medical "case reports" that trans activists have been promoting all over social media. According to these case reports, if you inject men with a drug called domperidone, then they can produce a substance that vaguely resembles breast milk, which they can then feed to children.
There were a lot of problems with these case reports. There was contradictory data, the sample size in each case was one person, the authors were trans activists themselves, et cetera. But the really disturbing thing was that neither of these case reports seemed concerned at all about what might happen to these infants who are forced to consume this gross, chemical-laced, milk-like discharge. Domperidone is banned in the United States by the FDA, for all purposes. It's been shown to cause fatal cardiac arrhythmias in adult women. And multiple studies have shown that the drug is excreted in breast milk.
But for some curious reason, the authors of these case reports — including physicians at Mount Sinai and UCLA — glossed over the many risks that this drug poses to children. And in recent weeks, it's become clear that these physicians aren't alone. Many members of the medical community have made it clear they have no problem with endangering the lives of children, in the name of affirming transgenderism.
For example, here's a recent interview that aired on Newsmax featuring two guests: a self-described "gender justice" PhD named S.J. Miller, along with a sane physician named Greg Marchand. Watch what happens when the gender justice PhD claims that it's totally normal for men to lactate and breastfeed. It's a fascinating exchange:
So the gender justice trans PhD S.J. Miller tries to pass off the idea of men lactating as the most natural thing in the world. But he has no medical studies to back that up. So he flails a bit and asks Greg for assistance, at which point Greg tells him that men lactating is actually a symptom of a serious medical problem like cancer.
It's beyond parody. And the whole interview went on like this. The gender justice PhD just sits by as the real doctor repudiates everything he says. This isn't to pick on one activist PhD because again, this is happening everywhere, from Mount Sinai to UCLA. Everyone knows what's going on here. Activists who support the idea of male lactation don't actually care about the life or wellbeing of the infant. What they're concerned with is promoting the fundamental tenet of the religion that is transgenderism — which is that nothing is more important than the affirmation of the trans person’s feelings. All other humans on Earth, including and especially their families and children, exist primarily to affirm them. If children have to die, or have their lives ruined, to validate the delusions of mentally ill men, then so be it. They're a necessary sacrifice. That's their view.
It used to be that trans activists and medical professionals would never say anything like that out loud. For a long time, deliberately hurting children was a red line in American politics and in American medicine — and even trans activists weren't dumb enough to cross that line. They were happy to worship "indigenous people," including tribes that conducted human sacrifices on children, but they would never come out and endorse those human sacrifices themselves. Or if they did, they would call it “reproductive health care” and hope that nobody asked any more questions. But we are now getting to a point where the drive to sacrifice children on the altar of affirmation isn’t even being papered over with euphemisms anymore.
Now our supposed "public health experts" are coming right out and admitting what they've wanted to do all along, which is to harm and even kill children to make self-identifying trans people feel better. A new report in the Substack "Reality’s Last Stand” makes this very clear. You should definitely read this, because what they found is hard to believe unless you see it with your own eyes.
Here's the broad outlines of the story. A new paper is set to be released this year in the journal "Qualitative Research in Health." This is a peer-reviewed journal in the field of public health. The paper is called "Medical uncertainty and reproduction of the 'normal': Decision-making around testosterone therapy in transgender pregnancy." The authors include a bunch of social justice PhD's, such as Professor Carla A. Pfeffer (she/her) of Michigan State University, as well as Professor Sally Hines at the University of Sheffield, and several other academics in the field of sociology. None of the authors have medical degrees.
In this paper, the authors suggest that the feelings of supposedly "transgender individuals" -- and their subjective mental states -- could potentially outweigh any considerations concerning the health of infants. Specifically, the authors acknowledge that taking testosterone while pregnant or breastfeeding might cause severe, permanent damage to infants. But they imply that you're not supposed to worry about that, because many "transgender people" also suffer from serious mental and physical problems, and we wouldn't want to stigmatize them.
Here's a passage straight from the article: "The logics guiding current medical advice around precautionary testosterone cessation in pregnancy involve potentially troubling assessments of the sorts of risks testosterone exposure in the prenatal and postpartum environments may pose for later child and adult development: namely, potentially heightened likelihoods of autism, obesity, intersex conditions, being lesbian and/or trans. In this way, precautionary practices of protecting the offspring of trans people become, paradoxically, a method of social control through safeguarding against reproduction of some of the very same characteristics held by some transparents themselves."
I'll repeat that last part. The "precautionary practices of protecting the offspring of trans people become, paradoxically, a method of social control through safeguarding against reproduction of some of the very same characteristics held by some transparents themselves."
What these academics are saying is that, if you want to protect infants from exposure to drugs that might cause permanent disabilities, then you're engaging in a form of "social control.” Now, if preventing babies from developing debilitating disorders is a form of "social control," then it’s a form of social control that any normal person would support. But the authors of this article aren't so sure. Why? Because they say that if you're thinking along those lines, then you're "offspring-focused." You're too fixated on the wellbeing of children, instead of the wellbeing of transgenders.
I'm not making this up. Here's what the authors say, word-for-word: "Ultimately, we argue that in the context of lacking and uncertain medical evidence (HRT with testosterone during pregnancy and chest feeding) in a highly gendered treatment context (pregnancy and lactation care), both patients and providers tend to pursue precautionary, offspring-focused treatment approaches."
It's an incredible paragraph. For one thing, they're calling pregnancy a "gendered treatment context," as if pregnancy has nothing whatsoever to do with biology. They're saying that transphobic bigots are trying to spread this crazy idea that only women can get pregnant and have babies.
Then, the authors go on to say that the "gendered treatment context" of pregnancy amounts to "offspring-focused treatment." Imagine that. People are fretting over the health of young children, instead of spending all their time affirming the delusions of self-identifying trans people. According to this paper of super serious academics, that's a "precautionary, offspring focused” approach.
What is this? Among other things, this is yet another manifestation of the unholy alliance between transgenderism and the abortion movement. Only in a society that has already dehumanized the unborn could “fetal health” be considered a secondary concern in pregnancy. Only a fundamentally deranged culture could prioritize the feelings of adults over the health of children. But that's what these authors, in this peer-reviewed journal, are suggesting is a good idea. They don't leave any doubt about it. They surveyed a bunch of doctors and here's what they found: "In this context of medical ambiguity and uncertainty in the hyper-gendered context of pregnancy and lactation care," the authors write, "both health care providers and trans patients engaged in precautionary approaches that prioritized potential fetal and infant health and wellbeing (and imaginaries concerning future offspring’s normative development) over adult trans patient health (particularly mental health) and wellbeing in the present. "In other words — these sociology professors are suggesting the "mental health" of adults could, in some twisted version of reality, somehow outweigh the physical health of children. If kids have to deal with excess testosterone in their breast milk or in the womb — which can cause precocious puberty, and a host of other physical problems — then so be it.
Actually, it’s even worse than I’ve already described. Go back to that first paragraph we mentioned one more time. The authors say that exposure to synthetic hormones in the womb, along with potentially causing a host of other disabilities, might also increase the likelihood that the child turns out trans. They are implying that this is a benefit of a mother taking synthetic hormones. That hormones in pregnancy are good because they perpetuate transgenderism.
We are rapidly approaching the point where woke mothers will take hormones in pregnancy for the express purpose of trying to make their kids trans. We thought designer babies were bad enough when the assumption was that parents would design their children to possess desirable traits like intelligence or athletic ability. But we forget that we live in a culture not only morally debased but also insane, so “designer baby” will mean a baby with intentional design flaws. They will be designed to be broken.
Now as shocking as this is, we shouldn't be surprised by it. After all, it was just a few weeks ago that self-described LGBT demonstrators marched in the streets, announcing "We're coming for your children." NBC News went out of its way to defend them for saying that. Shortly before that, corporate media downplayed the slaughter of men, women, and children at a Christian school in Tennessee. In fact, the Biden administration used that massacre to attack Christianity.
And as you've heard by now, the Biden administration has also appointed a man, Richard Levine, aka Rachel Levine, to lead the HHS. In that capacity, Levine gives interviews like this one, in which he explains that children are at risk of undergoing the wrong puberty:
Because kids think they are going through the "wrong puberty," Levine says, we need to sterilize them, and chop off their body parts immediately. That's the guidance from the leading public health official in the United States, who's definitely not trying to rationalize his own poor decisions in life.
What Levine didn't address is kids who, for whatever reason, think they have other defects with their body. What about kids who think they have the wrong liver or the wrong left kneecap? What if they have the wrong eye color? What if they have the wrong DNA? These and many other questions make sense if you're a delusional schizophrenic, or someone laboring under some other serious mental health condition. There's something called "body dysmorphic disorder," for example. If you walk into your doctor's office and demand that they cut off your arm, they'll diagnose you with it. They won't respond by cutting off your arm. They'll get you help. On the other hand, if you're a teenage girl and you want your breasts cut off because you say you're really a boy, then according to the fake admiral running HHS, your delusions should be affirmed.
It's not hard to see how our medical, governmental, and media institutions have completely set their own credibility on fire in service to the trans agenda. And yet, it's still somehow shocking that one of our top health officials in the country would claim with a straight face that a child might accidentally go through the “wrong puberty,” which is like saying someone has grown to the wrong height or that they have the wrong middle finger on their left hand. The wrong puberty? I mean, really, think about this. This isn’t an idea coming just from random wacky left-wing Twitter accounts. The top health officials in the nation are telling us that it’s possible for a child to experience the wrong puberty.
This has become the default position of mainstream media outlets in this country. Inside Edition for example just aired this sympathetic report about a young child abuse victim from Indiana, who's being injected with cross-sex hormones. They interviewed this poor child and his evil mother and broadcast it on national television. Watch:
This is not coincidental parallel thinking, by the way. This child didn’t come up with the “wrong puberty” idea on his own, anymore than he came up with that line about building a bridge between saying that he’s trans and being trans. An idea that, by the way, confirms that transgenderism is not a natural phenomenon but rather a construct of the pharmaceutical companies. A theme we have seen come up a few times in this segment. But the point is that this boy is very clearly regurgitating the ideas that have been fed to him. He has memorized a script. He has been brainwashed.
The message of that clip is as explicit as it could possibly be. They're saying that if you think that boy shouldn't be sterilized, then you believe in "exclusion" instead of inclusion. You're a negative force instead of a positive one. The governor's the bad guy because he's preventing this young boy from getting sterilized for life, they tell you.
No sane person could watch that clip and agree with the framing of Inside Edition, which is why that clip has been scrubbed from Twitter. It was taken down for "copyright" reasons, presumably because trans activists realized how damning it is. Megan Brock, who uploaded it, says Inside Edition apparently demanded that Twitter pull that footage off the internet. Megan Brock uploads footage of news clips all the time, and she says this is the first time anything like this has ever happened to her. She sent us a screenshot of an email she got from Twitter, explaining that Inside Edition is the copyright owner, and it needs to come down.
This is panic. The producers at Inside Edition, who put this video package together, know they made a mistake. Like Levine and the professors who put together that deranged sociology paper, they said too much. They made the mistake of thinking that sane people would watch this clip and sympathize with trans activists. They were wrong. The reality is that the goal of trans activists is now out in the open, for everyone to see. There's no hiding it anymore. They want to satisfy the insane, perverse whims of deranged adults, no matter what happens to innocent children who have no say in the matter whatsoever. They're admitting it — in academic papers, in packages that air on mainstream media, and in televised interviews. Copyright takedown requests are never going to cover this up, no matter how hard they try.
This is a demonic movement that demands your total and unquestioning obedience to the cult of child sacrifice. They're now acknowledging all of this — not because it helps them politically, but because they want this power more than anything else, and they can't help themselves anymore. They know they're losing, and they're getting desperate. Their religion requires that you and your children submit to them, but increasingly, they're realizing that's never going to happen.
That's worth celebrating — because the more activists reveal what they actually believe, the more normal, well-adjusted people recoil in total, abject disgust. With every insane paper these activists publish, and every unhinged interview they post on social media, they're losing more and more ground. These are demons who believe that the "mental health" of "trans people" matters more than the health of children. They are modern Aztecs. And like the Aztecs, they will lose — they'll be forgotten and maligned forever, like the barbarians they are.
Matt Walsh
Host, The Matt Walsh Show
