The Saga of James Younger


Update: Video at “Mommy says I’m a girl.”

James’ father:

“I’m looking out for the best interests of James, my son. When James is with me, he shows no signs of wanting to be a girl when given the choice. Even when in female company, away from me, James rejects a female gender expression.”

Update: Judge Kim Cooks has now given Jeff Younger a say in his seven-year-old son James’s gender-transition process, but she has also placed a gag order on the father, forbidding him from discussing the case further. What’s troubling is that earlier this year, the same judge prevented Jeff Younger from getting a second opinion from an independent psychologist or psychiatrist on whether James has gender dysphoria.

. LGBTQ activists and media now fully support the view that a boy who likes dolls and otherwise doesn’t conform to masculine stereotypes should be told he’s a girl and put on the road to gender transitioning. —— Woke parents prefer transitioning their children if they don’t reflect gender stereotypes. Who will stand up and protect gay kids? From what we’re told, he sounds more like an effeminate gay boy, to be chemically castrated at age 7 (at his mother’s request, over the strong objections of his father). Is this America or Iran? It’s the woke LGBTQ activists who “don’t give a damn about this child.”

Tyler O’Neil writes:

Where did Georgulas get the idea that her son was “really” her daughter? According to The Texan, the mother said her son liked the movie Frozen and asked to get a “girl toy” from McDonald’s. She also claimed he expressing a desire to wear girl’s clothing.
[Jeffrey] Younger claims that Georgulas had started putting James in dresses and painting his nails when he was three years old. The father also claims his ex-wife locked James in his room and told him that “the monsters only eat boys.” He claims that Georgulas would withhold affection from James if he did not act like a girl.

8 Comments for “The Saga of James Younger”

  1. posted by Jorge on

    “A woke mother decides her 7-year-old son should be chemically castrated and given female hormones because he’s effeminate…”

    This is a lie.

    From the originally linked article (which is hardly sympathetic)

    “With a consensus of 11 of the 12 jurors, the jury decided not to grant Mr. Younger Sole Managing Conservatorship over his twin boys. They voted that the current Joint Managing Conservatorship should be replaced by a Sole Managing Conservatorship, but that Mr. Younger should not be that person. Judge Kim Cooks will read her ruling on possession, child support, and Dr. Georgulas’ other requests at 1:30 p.m. CST on Wednesday.

    Dr. Georgulas brought the original modification suit to the court and did not request a jury trial. Mr. Younger, in his counter-petition, asked for a jury trial. Since Mr. Younger requested the jury trial, the jury ruled on his specific request for Sole Managing Conservatorship and the judge ruled on all other aspects of the petition as brought by Dr. Georgulas.”

    In plain English

    1. An article, and this website, alleges that a jury granted a mother authority to begin a 7 year old child on chemical hormones.

    2. The source article explains that the jury was asked to resolve only one question: does Dad get to make sole decisions for child?

    3. The jury said no, the mother does.

    4. Not even Donald Trump can lie as hard as you have in this blog post.

    That’s all. Mom wants lots of other stuff, and that’s the judge’s decision.

    There is only one person on Earth who, knowing the facts of this case, believes that the mother wants to chemically castrate this (I think he’s a boy, too). That is the dad.

    He is an idiot. The village idiot who shouts “Fire!” in a crowded theater.

  2. posted by Jorge on

    Now, Mr. Jorge (I/Me/My) must go farther.

    We have an accusation on a tabloid internet news site that a consensus jury ruling of twelve community members has permitted a parent to have a seven year old child chemically castrated. It is the type of outrageous, Jusse Smollet-dethroning accusation that someone who blogs about transgender health issues, and who has an educated, center-leaning commenting base that has discussed current legal, medical, and ethical standards in transgender health for children for years, should not fall for.

    It is something that literally takes all of five minutes to look deep enough into to throw into serious doubt.

    The advocates and citizens of this country have enough problems to deal with explaining to disputing parties that you can’t always have it your way. It is annoying enough to have to oversee an increasing fracture among gays, and between gays and transgenders, when it is simply because of differences in conscience. When those divisions are spiked and by people who are trying to game the system, and encouraged by those who have the knowledge and responsibility to know better, it is a bitter poison, and it is because of a deep wrongness outside the dispute.

    To spread lies on the internet is wicked.

  3. posted by Mike and David on


    Again, I reject your attempt to depict transgender people as predatory monsters who are going after children.

  4. posted by JohnInCA on

    From what we’re told […]

    The father was back in court because he’s been violating the custody agreement for years, keeps abusing the kid, tried to out the kid to her classmates, has been videotaping children, and then went to the media with a family court matter to try and stir up national outrage.

    The fact that the kid is trans, and that their mother is okay with this and their father isn’t, isn’t actually what was on trial. What was on trial was the mother getting sole custody because the father was a continuously bad-faith actor. He lost, in a jury trial, not because the jury thinks the kid is trans, but because they think this man is a bad father.

    This entire story is bad-faith reporting from the father from the get-go.

  5. posted by Jorge on

    Oh, so now the NY Post picked it up.

    You know there’s something fishy about your conservative outrage story when even New York’s conservative tabloid has to cite two different media sources (the Washington Examiner and the Texan) to tell it coherently.

    Even the Washington Examiner article at no point makes the dubious accusation that that’s what will actually happen. But it implies it–it is still incredibly one-sided and biased. Though it makes it clear the mother wants to enroll the child in a gender therapy clinic that offers hormone transition, it includes a lot of quotes from experts who say hormone therapy for young children is unethical, nothing from any pro-LGBT voices or maybe a spokesperson from the facility who might give some appropriate context. It’s like freaking out over taking your kindergartener to the family doctor because he advises some of his patients about family planning and contraception.

    The Texan gets straight to the point:

    …jurors have been sitting through a family court trial between Younger and Anne Georgulas, who argued over whether their seven-year-old son, James, has gender dysphoria, and if so, whether they should show their parental love to him by taking an approach of “affirmation” or one of “watchful waiting.”

    Today, the jury decided to give sole managing conservatorship of the parents’ two twin sons to Georgulas, a pediatrician, who contended that James is transgender and should be affirmed by allowing him to wear dresses and taking him to school as a girl named “Luna.”

    Such an abject waste of my time.

  6. posted by Jorge on

    Look at this video where James says his mom put dresses on him, paints his nails, and *TELLS* him he’s a girl.

    Oh, nooooo! Mawmaw told Peepee he’s a girl!

    Hey, Peepee. How do you know God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve?

    “My mom told me.”

    Is a cucumber a vegetable, or a fruit?

    “A vegetable?”

    How do you know, Peepee?

    “My mom told me.”

    Gag the b****!

    Woke parents prefer transitioning their children if they don’t reflect gender stereotypes. Who will stand up and protect gay kids?

    From what? Wearing a dress and painting his nails? He likes it. What’s wrong with it?

    According to testimony at trial, the child displays “genderfluid” tendencies.

    That means he’s going to grow up to be one of those They/Them/Theirs in dresses with flat hairy chests that Catholic prim-prim woman a few topics ago (noble woman!) wants to warn her children about. And worst of all, if we don’t protect him from the woke transfaerienism rabbit hole now right now, he’s going to grow up to be a snowflake.

    The horror!

    In the real world, there are not one, but two things that are potentially dangerous.

    He could be destined to be a real boy, and become traumatized when he matures and doesn’t have a male body. Then he has to hormone-transition back.

    Or he could be destined to be a girl, and when puberty hits become traumatized when he has the male equivalent of a girl’s first period. Then he’ll have to hormone transition.

    Either way, it seems to me there’s a divine force that does not like him. His brain will go psycho, he’ll run away from home, and he’ll end up a prostitute and dead by 24.

    Since our actions in the present will not make a difference whether or not he will flunk puberty and have a horrible young death, I don’t think it’s anyone’s business but the parent’s what to do about that in the meantime. So he has two of them. That’s just too bad.

  7. posted by Mike and David on

    Homocons: transgender adults are predatory monsters. Transgender youth do not exist and anyone who says differently, hates America.

    Everyone else; Wow.

    • posted by billyb gay and proud on

      Why do you hate gay kids so much that you want them to be pressured to undergo sexual reassignment surgery so they can pretend to be heterosexuals? Why do you support conversion therapy for gender nonstereotypical kids as young as age seven? Do you wish you mommies had taken you to the doctor and made you into girls?

Comments are closed.