Cloverstardropper On Toddlers, Transsexual Documentaries And Yes, TALKING BLOODY HEADS AGAIN!

Yes, so soon after the previous post, but You Know Who has been very busy this week (no, not Voldermort) – must be their new year’s resolution:


Okay, so we lied!

slaplol  smiley-lol

One thing certainly hasn’t changed, Cloverstardropper’s obsession with David Byrne of Talking Heads:


Yes indeed, same as it ever was!

wiggle tongue  wiggle tongue

Which is more than can be said for Sims 4 after yesterday’s news:


Elsewhere, some good news for Nintendo:


That will be their sales in the USA up by a quarter if Cloverstardropper buys it!

Now onto less fun matters:


facepalmhy2    shakehead

To say Switch was a bit pissed off was putting it mildly.


Very pissed off.


Yes, it’s that time again…

this is sidney poitier serious

If there’s one thing we always stress here at The Mare’s Nest, it is don’t take others words for fact, find out for yourself first at the primary source, as some people out there have ulterior motives for keeping you in the dark, stretching the truth or even downright lying.

Anyone telling you that the BBC 2 broadcast was in any way a hatchet piece against transsexuals is a downright barefaced liar.

We watched the said documentary, and it was remarkably well balanced –  to the extent both of us agree entirely (one of us very much to their utter shock) that on the balance of what the programme had to say, it’s a very good idea allowing children to undergo gender correction surgery before puberty even for reasons that are psychological rather than physiological.

Yes, you read that right.

There was a little bit of a fuss about this documentary in the press over here, but not much – the main fuss has been by those whining creeps in The Guardian who as always weren’t ones to let facts get in the way of a bit of ‘oh the humanity!’ for anyone or anything that doesn’t fit with their brittle metropolitan liberal humanist ideology.


‘Very scared and very worried’ – perhaps because they knew it would mean the full story of Dr Zucker’s department being closed as part of an ideological pogrom might show them in a less than ‘victim’ light…

The transgender community was ‘very scared and very worried’? And where did this official appointed voicepiece for the transgender community come from exactly – strangely The Guardian does not elaborate.

Ironically, this is the same Guardian newspaper which published an original piece from their resident agony aunt on Friday 14th August 2015 about someone whose daughter wanted to change sex. Read it for yourselves and see if you spot the parallels with what Dr Zucker has been getting crucified for by – amongst others – The Guardian!

Even more strange, despite a worldwide petition demanding that British viewers were not to be allowed to watch a programme made with their TV licence money (which was all over Twatter, Dumblr and the like), the show went ahead – and said petition failed to meet it’s miserably small target of 15 000:


Less than 15 000 despite attempts to get every Tom, Dick and Sally on the planet to sign it. How embarrassing for you Lucas Johnston.

facepalmhy2  point

Let’s get the facts straight about Dr Kenneth Zucker. Over thirty years he and the staff turned Toronto’s Centre for Addiction and Mental Health into a world leader in child gender identity development studies which up until that time was regarded worldwide as pseudo-science at best, mental illness at worst (ironically the very charge labelled against him three decades later) rather than a distinctive branch of developmental psychology which back in those days seemed to be all about getting babies to walk on increasingly higher panes of glass to see what height they’d get to before they freaked out. Dozens of clinics and research subspawned – some taking a far more radical line – because of Zucker and co, not in spite of.

In that time he had referred scores of patients for gender correction surgery. Detractors often liked to spindoctor this by saying that Zucker’s department were refusing to give surgical treatment – the truth is they could no more do this than they could do jumbo jet mechanics: like most clinics their role was to see if there was a need for surgery – and then refer on – not do the surgery itself. If Zucker was trying to stop kids getting such surgery altogether, he’s had a funny way of showing it these last three decades.

Many of the accusations labelled against him, in particular that he encouraged parents to engage in the old psychology trope of ‘aversion therapy’ with their child to deter them (in particular physically or verbally punishing ‘incorrect’ gender behaviour) were simply wish fulfilment fantasy: copied verbatim from the activities of the earlier George Rekers: a Southern Baptist minister and all round All American Bumnugget With Extra Cheese, famous for starting the ‘pray the gay away’ lunacy who was also a child psychiatrist.

(Rekers is a major figure in Les-Bi-Gay-Trans-Inter-Pan Wash-Spin-Dry demonology after the infamous Kreig case – boasting ‘Kraig’s feminine behaviours have apparently ceased entirely.’ Just a pity Kraig was a mental wreck the rest of his life and eventually committed suicide, a few years before Rekers was himself caught with a rent boy… you couldn’t make it up!).


In short, Zucker’s ideological opponents indulged in a campaign of demonisation that grew arms and legs: one of which was a claim by a former patient Zucker had rejected for treatment that he’d called him ‘hairy little vermin’. Witnesses confirmed no such conversation took place, but that didn’t stop CAMH – now in blind panic over the pitchfolk and torch brigade whipped up by ‘rainbow’ activists looking for their next ‘thoughtcrime’ target to bully – from sacking Zucker and closing down the entire child gender identity department.

(See the following New York Magazine article for the full story).

What Had Zucker Done That Was So Wrong?

The problem with Zucker is any patient referred to him had to prove over a number of years that they truly felt trapped in the wrong body and wanted this to be medically corrected – the classic psychologist dictum since the days of Sigmund Freud that the patient must really want to change.  The situation is further complicated when dealing with children, who as the law stands in most nations are under an adult’s guardianship (where directly or indirectly, ie. local state department).

Getting the kid on board with your proposed treatment without also getting their guardians on board (who may well be against it) is a waste of time – and they’re often the far bigger battle where you have to show them you have exhausted all other lines of treatment and that surgery and pills are the only solution. Without doing so, it could mean a lawsuit for criminal assault, especially if the patient ‘changed their mind’ after the deed was done and along with their parents got some other psychologist’s report ‘proving’ they weren’t of sound mind and judgement when they consented which should have been picked up by Dr Zucker or whoever.

And meanwhile that old biological clock is tick-tocking towards puberty, where quite frankly anything can happen… the wimpy boy who played with the girl next door’s dollies turns into a hulking jock, the mousey church going girl goes into full blown Hell Vixen of the Lesbian Apocalypse. Or the biological boy/girl is still adamant they’re a girl/boy after all – and now they’re going to start the treatment after the body’s own hormonal damage has been done – but more on that later.

Ah, now you see where the problem lies too. Hereby lies the crux of the grand argument at the centre of the debate – when is the time for intervention?

Back To The BBC Programme


This was what much of the excellent programme Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? centred around.

In the first interview Zucker has given since he was fired and his department shut down (the whole business is now with lawyers, and the world of psychology has largely been in uproar over the matter ever since over what smacks of political interference for ideological reasons and vote touting by politicians of failing political parties from minority pressure groups), he was clearly cross – if in a weary wouldn’t-expect-anything-less sort of way –  at the manner politicians and institutions were kowtowing to demands with as much scientific basis as your average ‘alternative remedy’ huckster or fundamentalist religious nutcase, although his statement ‘a four year old might say he’s a dog, do you go out and buy dog food?’ was a good point made in the crassest possible manner.

(Or should that be ruffest?)

rimshot  tomato

But largely, the programme focussed on actual transsexuals and their families, and was all the better for it.

Sarah Ditum – a WordPress blogger as well as a journalist for Britain’s primary thinking leftie’s magazine The New Statesman (and a book reviewer for – wait for it! – The Guardian) – wrote a glowing piece about the documentary (you can read it here or here). Gerard O’Donovan in the very conservative (culturally, politically and socially) Daily Telegraph meanwhile gushed that it was:

‘among the most even-handed I’ve seen on the subject, looking at the issues from all sides, but particularly that of parents… this was an engrossing and enlightening film that didn’t so much seek to convince one way or another as to lay out the arguments clearly, succinctly and sympathetically. In all three respects it was successful.’

Whilst the ‘Daily Dreadnought’ (usually the first to jump down the BBC’s throats at anything with the whiff of left-wing bias to it) nodded sagely, the reaction of the ‘rainbow’ community meanwhile left something to be desired. Either like The Guardian it was met with a stonewall silence (sorry!) knowing deep down the producers could not have been more even handed if they tried and they’d called it wrong; or like Paul Desson-Baxter – appropriately in the Huffington Post (emphasis on the first syllable…) throwing the sweet succulent granny of all temper tantrums over the show. How dare a contrary opinion to his own world view be allowed – pass the smelling salts, Agatha, he’s about to swoon from the trauma of it all!

After admitting that he’d got himself worked into a tizzy over the programme for several weeks before it was even aired (the article had a lot of ‘me-me-me’ about it rather than concerning the topic), he went on to go full diva on ‘the horrific attack on the Trans+ community which just occurred’ (eh?), ‘the many trans voices screaming against the dark’ (oh the drama!), ‘I am like momma bear protecting her cubs’ (erm, yes, whatever you say, you freaking fruitloop…)

He even came with the outright fantasy that the programme ‘scare mongered to a stupid degree the idea that once a child said they were trans a vampiric group of clinicians, therapists and trans activists would descend and never let the child change their mind.’ If Paul Desson-Baxter would like to let his readers know at what time segment in the show this happened, we for one would be interested to hear.

whistling mares nest version  ehwhat mare's nest version

Quite honestly, with an ‘ally’ like Paul Desson-Baxter, British transsexuals don’t need enemies!

Certainly those transsexuals in the programme don’t need the likes of him – or for that matter the creepy Gregorina lookalike Hershel Russell who frankly made our skins crawl.

(Apologies to Blookazoo1p and the EA Gregorina Fan Club for any unintentional offence caused!)

If those making the show wanted to do a hatchet job, they remarkably passed up an open goal when interviewing Cheri DiNovo of the New Democrats (Kraftdinnerland’s version of Labour), whose ‘Toby’s Law’ (an amendment to Ontario’s human rights act to cover the transgendered) resulted accidentally in all same sex gatherings in Ontario being rendered illegal overnight because it was so badly written (obliging lesbian Nancy Ruth of the Conservatives to grumpily table a hastily drafted amendment). Again, with friends like that…


Asides from Zucker, Dr Ray Blanchard, Dr Devita Singh (both former CAMH employee) and the parent of one of Zucker’s former patients (now left without any trans care at all) gave their view on the impact of the closing of the Zucker clinic. The programme also featured Dr Norman Spack at the opposite end of the debate from Zucker (although very much like Zucker in his gruff no-nonsense style), not for the ideological reasons of slimy Russell and their ilk of it being some inalienable ‘right’ a society has to provide the free resources for, but from the pragmatic standpoint that:

‘Depending on when they started puberty, some sixteen year old genetic males would have so many severe masculinising effects – whether it is facial hair, facial bone structure, vocal change, Adam’s Apple,  you name it – that, to wait at sixteen to then give them estrogen would be just like feminising a male figure.’

bravo  scratchhead


It’s then the programme turns to Ella – one of Dr Spack’s former patients, and who is something of a classic case. At two or three years old she began to feel she was the wrong gender (this is the time most psychologists agree children start to formulate their gender identity).

In her case she had supportive parents who took her seriously from the start – actually the whole damn family were so squee-adorable they could have been characters from Gilmore Girls – whose point was if you don’t transition early enough (Ella began changing at twelve), that’s where the mental health issues can arise; the flip side of the coin to Zucker’s earlier argument that medicine has a duty of care to check first whether there’s any mental health issues that makes them feel they can never be happy unless they transition – a classic ‘chicken or the egg’ dilemma.

And this is where the real reason comes out as to why Zucker fell out with the social justice warriors. Zucker believes all gender reassignment surgery requests should be on a strict case-by-case basis rather than as a panacea. The latter believes it should be ‘on demand’. Who is right? Go watch the programme for yourselves – you may even find you can’t make up your mind but want to find out more afterwards.

(Incidentally, one part which appears to have caught flack from elsewhere was when Ella’s dad said ‘I saw Ella after she’d transitioned running off to camp, and I’m like ah that’s just like a girl running, instead of [awkward voice] look at my son, he runs just like a girl.’ Yes, we cringed, but at the same time we understood where he came from – and it’s important to appreciate that such levity is the mark of any close knit family rather than something said necessarily with any malice or gender stereotyping prejudice).

So What’s The Freaking Problem With The BBC’s Documentary?


She’s exaggerating!

Of course, there’s some for whom stone cold facts must not be allowed to get in the way of a petted lip:

Or to quote from the post Switch reposted on their Tumblr and which we reposted above:

‘it is worth noting, the former doctor in question, Zucker [WRONG! Is still a doctor, he was not struck off], was the one who was using abusive conversion therapy on trans youth to get them to not transition [WRONG! Watch the documentary], and claimed that his results (which were him traumatizing kids into submission) [WRONG! Again, watch the documentary – two parents state he did the opposite] proved that gender questioning youth were all just in a phase [WRONG! His point was that for some it is. Some, not all. See the difference?]. He is the worst kind of scum.’

It’s that other time again, dear Simmers…

manul the pallas cat says you are wrong

Dare we say what’s really pissing Stef Sanjani is that they played a very poor third fiddle to a number of other transsexuals in the BBC’s documentary? 16 minutes 35 seconds to 16 minutes 45 seconds – a whole ten seconds whilst Ella and several others got many, many minutes. Boo-f**king-hoo. Anyone else would have thought she would have been pleased they used a clip where she was explaining the pills she was taking as part of her transition and what they did, rather than cherry picked a clip to make her look bad.

She runs a heavily YouTube channel (count the number of ads which come up during any of her recent vids) since 2012 where language bordering on downright hysteria (much talk about anyone disagreeing with a single word she says as ‘fascists’, playing of the ‘suicide’ card at every opportunity as constituting damning proof of her logic, and all the other emotive button pressers so popular with Generation Snowflake).

This is where a major part of the problem lies. Far too many of the trans advocates of today such as Stef Sanjani, Jazz Jennings, etc. are all too clearly trying to carve out media celebrity careers on the back of it. Every day there appears to be a brand new book in Waterstones regarding someone’s ‘journey’ from one gender to another – then another. For all the supposed ‘solidarity’, it seems there’s some out there are more interested in looking after number one and maximising/monetarising their Z-list fame hoping to join the Honey Boo Boo/Dog The Bounty Hunter/My Cat’s An Axe Murderer reality TV freak show circuit. Come back Boxxy, all is forgiven!

(Actually, no, don’t!)

Far from being anti-transgender, Sam Bagnall and John Conroy are to be congratulated on their documentary which could not have been more beautifully balanced than if it was stew made by Bert Huggins and given a star review by the late A.A. Gill. That they chose to use ordinary families with ordinary kids gave the topic the maturity and gravity it would have otherwise lacked had it been the fame-whore element. It certainly won us over.

This was not a propaganda piece for either side, but an opportunity for both to state their cases, answer the cases of one another, and then allow the viewers to make up their own minds. In our cases it made us more sympathetic to transgender kids – and from reviews elsewhere clearly others. You really have to ask yourself just what the motley crew of transgender activists and social justice warriors were so afraid of?

Except, dare we suggest ‘freedom of speech’.

thatsit  thatsit

Comments are closed.