LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: 'I am a girl': The plight of Tammy, the adopted son of two lesbians who started sex change aged 8 because he has always maintained he is a girl
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... ormone-blocking-treatment.html
Published: Sep 29, 2011
Author: John Stevens
Post Date: 2011-09-29 22:29:04 by Sebastian
Keywords: None
Views: 126651
Comments: 212
A boy who started the process of changing sex at age eight has told how he always knew he was meant to be a girl. Thomas Lobel, who now calls himself Tammy, is undergoing controversial hormone blocking treatment in Berkeley, California to stop him going through puberty as a boy. His two lesbian mothers, who adopted him aged two, say that they have been criticised by friends and family, but insist they have not forced their son to become a girl. Scroll down for video Therapy: Thomas Lobel, who now calls himself Tammy, is undergoing controversial hormone blocking treatment No pressure: The boy's two lesbian adopted mothers, Debra, left, and Pauline, right, say that they have not forced their son to become a girl They say that one of the first things he told them when he learnt sign language aged three, learned because of a speech impediment, was, 'I am a girl'. Tammy, now 11, wears dresses and effectively lives as a girl. His parents, Pauline Moreno and Debra Lobel, say that their son, who they claim was depressed at a younger age and threatened to chop of his own penis, is now much happier. The couple were married in 1990 by a rabbi, according to Pauline's Facebook page, and have two older sons and grandchildren. PROUD MOM: Two photos of Tammy from one of Pauline's Facebook albums called 'My Sweet Sweet Princess' Here is Tammy with her mothers and older brother Edgar at his recent bar mitzvah. Mother Pauline said Tammy was shy and unhappy as a boy when compared to her older, outgoing brothers Unlike his older brothers who are both described at outgoing and athletic, Thomas liked to read Wonder Woman comic books and play with dolls. He shunned baseball hats, preferring rhinestone hair accessories. At age seven, after threatening genital mutilation on himself, therapists and psychiatrists diagnosed Tammy with gender identity disorder. A year later his parents allowed him to start the first step of his transition to becoming female by letting him pick his own clothes and wear bras. Tammy favor headbands to baseball hats and picked out bras and dresses to start wearing when given choice in clothing to wear 'As soon as we let him put on a dress, his personality changed from a very sad kid who sat still, didn't do much of anything to a very happy little girl who was thrilled to be alive,' one mother Pauline told CNN. This summer, Tammy started taking hormone-blocking drugs, which will stop him from experiencing puberty. The hormone-suppressant will postpone the 11-year-old developing broad shoulders, deep voice and facial hair.The diagnosis has been hard to accept for Tammy's parents, but they insist their sexuality has nothing to do with it. As Pauline said, people think 'we're pushing her to do this. I'm a lesbian. My partner is a lesbian. That suddenly falls into the fold: "Oh, you want her to be part of the lifestyle you guys live".' Unhappy: Tammy was adopted aged two by Debra Lobel and Pauline Moreno But they insist that is not the case and the decision has been difficult. His parents say the hormone treatment will give him time to figure out if he wants to fully transition to being female or go through puberty as a boy. If he chooses to stop taking the drugs, he will undergo natural male puberty at a later stage and his future fertility would not be impacted. Should he decide to transition to an adult female, he can take female hormones as well, which would raise his voice, grow breasts and develop other feminine physical characteristics. Pauline and Debra have been married since 1990, when they were joined in a commitment ceremony by their rabbi San Francisco, right by Berkeley, is one of four cities in the United States with a hospital that has a program for transgender children. The University of California San Francisco is home to the Center of Excellence for Transgender Health. Children are seen at length by mental health professionals and then treated by pediatric endocrinologists. Others cities with youth programs are Boston, Seattle and Los Angeles. Watch the video report: 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 155.
#11. To: Sebastian (#0)
Two moms. No he doesn't have two moms. You can only have one mom. By the way that isn't a picture of a family. It is a picture of two sex perverts destroying a little boy. Gee I wish Jerry Brown would have them executed for crimes against this innocent little boy.
Do you actually think Jerry Brown is going to do anything about this???? If he did he would be pissing off almost everyone who voted for him.......
Tell me, what should he do about Cher? After all, Chaz was her daughter originally. Should she be executed, too? Are you in favor of governors executing people just because they feel like it, like Stone is?
Are you in favor of governors executing people just because they feel like it, like Stone is? Personally I could care less about Cher and her daughter, they can be as messed up in the head as they want..... They can also keep their problems to themselves and deal with them without soliciting tolerance/approval/pity from others!!!! That right there is the reason why most people don't care/like gays.... As far as the governor executing people well it's up to him or her if they let court mandated justice take it's course, or pardon the offender..... If the court decides it's your time to assume room temperature for some crime you've commited then so be it..... So let me ask you a question, do think think pedophilia, necrophilia and pederasty should be socially acceptable like homosexuality????
I saw no mention of the courts in Stone's response, did you? As to your question, no I don't.
As to your question, no I don't. No I didn't and I figured you knew when someone was pulling your chain, guess not!!!! As it stands right now it is beyond his power to execute people, and as far as I'm concerned it should stay that way... Then you should be against open homosexuality too, because a lot of them commit those heinous acts I mentioned in my last post......
Homosexuals are very normal people who have a different preference for partners than you, that's it. The status was destigmatized in 1972 precisely because homosexual people matched heterosexual people in every aspect of life but for one minor difference. Your problem is your unreasonable and malicious bigotry that just makes someone like you the afflicted one here.
Do you seriously believe the ability to procreate and propagate the species versus an inability to procreate and propagate the species is 'one minor difference'?
Plenty of gays and lesbians have children. They make as good guardians or parents as anyone else. Besides, the species has cuccessfully procreated and thrived with homosexuality as part of the human sexual makeup since there were humans, so why should that suddenly change now? Your statement makes as little sense as lamenting older man/woman couples past the age of child bearing, or infertile people having sex thus endangering the survival of the species. Your argument is a red herring and stinks like one that has been stuck in a car's heater vent for a week.
The fact remains that homosexual activity cannot produce off-spring. You may enjoy sodomy but it will not result in pregnancy.
And your point fails to take into account for the many gay and lesbian people who have indeed produced children and who make great adoptive parents and guardians for children needing a stable and protective home. By your logic sex should be illegal unless a couple can bear young. Which is a short step from criminalizing any sex not reproductive in nature.
If so, then it was done through heterosexual sex or artificial insemination. If tomorrow, every human practiced homosexuality exclusively, the species would fail. Homosexuality is a failed lifestyle. Enjoy it as you will, homosexual sex acts between humans cannot result in pregnancy and thankfully, do not contribute to the gene pool.
You think I didn't know this? So? Just as many heterosexuals experiment with homosexuality, homosexuals often have had heterosexual relationships. They contribute all the time. And they give others the chance to contribute to the gene pool too. In the 1980s I provided the material for friends of mine to have a child who is a very healthy and happy little girl who loves her two Moms. She knows me casually but we have never shared this knowlege with her as there is no need to her having two excellent parents and role models to love and charish as parents. Eugene, Oregon has a huge number of lesbian couples and it is not generally known for this large community. I have three women couples within two blocks of my place and this is not an uncommon thing here. There are many lesbians on the Eugene Police Force, some in high leadership positions, and they have been city councilwomen, and it is illegal to discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgendered people in Eugene, Oregon in any way including in housing and employment. Being openly homophobic here is not a good idea. It is very much a good way to wind up in jail in a hurry. Especially if you do it in the Whiteaker Neigborhood.
Homophobia is a crime in Eugene? I would think people who are homophobic (that is to say, people who have a fear of homosexuals and/or homosexuality would actively avoid being around homosexuals so as to avoid the stress caused by their phobia. You know, the way people with acrophobia avoid high places?). Why would that be illegal? Or do they fine folks of Eugene simply enjoy the abuse of police power?
Sounds like the leftist Thought Police are in firm control there,doesn't it? The good news is they are more than happy to ALLOW you to have all the Free Speech THEY THINK YOU NEED. Typical of the hypocrisy of the left. Or do they fine folks of Eugene simply enjoy the abuse of police power? I suspect some are more than happy to pay extra for it.
Eugene is a university town and was an enclave for the counterculture that has molded it's character and the flavor of life here quite a bit. But it is also an old logging and mill center at the base of an agricultural valley. THe old can clash with the more recent layers of culture here. We have an independent police oversight board and the citizens actually have better oversight of the police here then in some places. It's like any other place with things that are good like the law against discrimination, and bad things like drunken student riots on campus on Halloween.
Your anti constitutional beliefs are showing again. What do you have against free speech and free association?
The U.S. Constitution protects minorities against the whims and caprice of majorities. I If you associate and organize to harrass and harm people because you don't like what two consenting adults do in the pricacy of their bedroom, it is you who go against the spirit and purpose of the U.S. Constitution. Free speech works because people are respmnsible for their words. So if I organize to harrass the dog shit out of people for the purpose of stealing their social status, housing or job because I hate say blue eyed people, I would be jus as wrong as someone doing the same for a triviality concerning the private relationships of people. Conspiring to do criminal harm to people andto destroy them is not protected by the First Amendment any more then yelling fire in a crowded theater is. It is you who have the disease of hatred and intolerence. Twisting the Constitution to serve your problems concerning hatred and immaturity gets you no where. Homosexuals have the right to speak freely about who they are and their relationships, and they have the right to form associations to fight haters and baiters like you. Why do you hate the Constitution so much you would deny them these rights if you could? And it's strange to see someone who will change someone else's words and replace them with twisted words of hatred and intolerence, which is what you do to the people who own the intellectual rights to a piece and you change so much as the title for it they have given it. I would say the first thig you need to do is to stop stealing the words of another and replacing them with your own. Because on that count alone you have no room to lecture anyone else about the First Amendment.
Yes,it does. It ALSO protects the majority from the whims and caprices of minorities. Somehow you and the other leftists always seem to overlook THAT. Probably because not a single one of you has the guts to look at the horrors of a democracy because democracy is the root of your foolish belief system. Conspiring to do criminal harm to people andto destroy them is not protected by the First Amendment any more then yelling fire in a crowded theater is. You don't believe that,or you wouldn't support shit like the Civil Wrongs Act of 1964,busing,minority preferences in hiring and promotions,quotas,affirmative action,etc,etc,etc. Twisting the Constitution to serve your problems concerning hatred and immaturity gets you no where. No,it doesn't. Why do you do it?
Somehow you and the other leftists always seem to overlook THAT." A small religious minority is more in danger of a large one, and the Constitution addresses that. The majorities often have more then enough means to defend themselves and to flourish. The Constitution in this sense just levels the playing feild and makes things fairer for all. I support and have supported Civil Right Legislation, and preferences were meant to be a temperary measure to help make up for some of the injustices of the past. You may not agree with this point of view, which is your right. I also support further legislation to help protect people against bigotry directed at homosexuals, transgendered folks and other people who get turned into wedge issues. And that sort of support is not limited to people on the left side of the political spectrum, it is a great place for righties to reside too.
Nice spin. All those words and you STILL manage to ignore the rights of the majority while still defending the special un-Constitutional "rights" of minorities. DOES the majority have the same rights as minorities or not,and if they don't HOW can you justify special laws promoting women when they are a majority? I support and have supported Civil Right Legislation, and preferences were meant to be a temperary measure to help make up for some of the injustices of the past. Uh,huh. I suspect those laws will end once whites become a minority,since they were never about anything other than holding whites back from the start. I guess you feel good about that? I also support further legislation to help protect people against bigotry directed at homosexuals, transgendered folks and other people who get turned into wedge issues. M0RE leftist bullshit. They are ALREADY protected by the Constitution. What you and the other leftists want is SPECIAL protection given to them. And that sort of support is not limited to people on the left side of the political spectrum, it is a great place for righties to reside too. WRONG! Those of us on the right support EQUAL treatment for all citizens,but do NOT support "special rights". You can NOT give one class of citizens special rights without trampling on the rights of the other citizens.
I've followed this thread with interest and, at times amusement as you fall over each other trying to "define" words. The "majority" to the Framers had nothing to do with raw numbers and everything to do with WHO COULD CONTROL THE LAWS AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM. It's why they rejected democracy, or "majority" rule, and opted for a system of both proportionate representation - the House - and disproportionate, yet co-equal, representation - The Senate as the means for law making. Our whole system was designed to be one of consensus in which the majority would prevail WITHOUT trampling or diminishing the rights of the minority. Do you get it? MAJORITY being the consensus that emerged and prevailed. MINORITY being those who were not part of the process or who did not prevail. And while I can accept the argument that the Framers never anticipated a society in which gays and lesbians could live openly, they were wise enough to craft a system that allowed FUTURE generations to determine what laws, protections and immunities were necessary to their CONTEMPORANEOUS needs.
So,what are you trying to say? Are you saying that the the typical Dim voter is now the majority and that things are as they should be because ignorant people and even dead people vote Dim consistently?
Your leftist argument is akin to me demanding the right to go in the womans restroom. Lefty.
If you are smart you will never/ever visit a womens public bathroom!!!! I used to do janitors work on Sundays when I worked for Ponderosa as a teenager, trust me when I say "stay out"!!!!
#158. To: CZ82 (#155)
(Edited)
I used to do janitors work on Sundays when I worked for Ponderosa as a teenager, trust me when I say "stay out"!!!! Doesn't give you that familiar sense of comfort of home because there's not enough pee on the floor?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestHere is Tammy with her mothers
#21. To: A K A Stone (#11)
Gee I wish Jerry Brown would have them executed for crimes against this innocent little boy.
#23. To: CZ82, A K A Stone (#21)
Do you actually think Jerry Brown is going to do anything about this????
#27. To: Skip Intro (#23)
Do you actually think Jerry Brown is going to do anything about this???? Tell me, what should he do about Cher? After all, Chaz was her daughter originally. Should she be executed, too?
#33. To: CZ82 (#27)
If the court decides it's your time to assume room temperature for some crime you've commited then so be it.....
#49. To: Skip Intro (#33)
(Edited)
I saw no mention of the courts in Stone's response, did you?
#50. To: CZ82 (#49)
#59. To: Ferret Mike (#50)
The status was destigmatized in 1972 precisely because homosexual people matched heterosexual people in every aspect of life but for one minor difference.
#60. To: Sebastian (#59)
#64. To: Ferret Mike (#60)
Your argument is a red herring and stinks like one that has been stuck in a car's heater vent for a week.
#65. To: Sebastian (#64)
#67. To: Ferret Mike (#65)
And your point fails to take into account for the many gay and lesbian people who have indeed produced children
#69. To: Sebastian (#67)
(Edited)
"If so, then it was done through heterosexual sex or artificial insemination."
"Homosexuality is a failed lifestyle. Enjoy it as you will, homosexual sex acts between humans cannot result in pregnancy and thankfully, do not contribute to the gene pool".
#72. To: Ferret Mike (#69)
Being openly homophobic here is not a good idea. It is very much a good way to wind up in jail in a hurry.
#89. To: Sebastian, Ferret Mike, *Hypocrisy and Hypocrites* (#72)
Homophobia is a crime in Eugene?
#124. To: sneakypete (#89)
"Sounds like the leftist Thought Police are in firm control there,doesn't it?"
#125. To: Ferret Mike (#124)
law against discrimination,
#128. To: A K A Stone (#125)
"Your anti constitutional beliefs are showing again. What do you have against free speech and free association?"
#136. To: Ferret Mike (#128)
The U.S. Constitution protects minorities against the whims and caprice of majorities.
#144. To: sneakypete (#136)
"Yes, it does. It ALSO protects the majority from the whims and caprices of minorities.
You don't believe that,or you wouldn't support shit like the Civil Wrongs Act of 1964,busing,minority preferences in hiring and promotions,quotas,affirmative action,etc,etc,etc.
#148. To: Ferret Mike (#144)
A small religious minority is more in danger of a large one, and the Constitution addresses that. The majorities often have more then enough means to defend themselves and to flourish. The Constitution in this sense just levels the playing feild and makes things fairer for all.
#150. To: sneakypete (#148)
(Edited)
HOW can you justify special laws promoting women when they are a majority?
#152. To: war (#150)
Do you get it? MAJORITY being the consensus that emerged and prevailed. MINORITY being those who were not part of the process or who did not prevail.
#154. To: sneakypete (#152)
#155. To: A K A Stone (#154)
Your leftist argument is akin to me demanding the right to go in the womans restroom.
Replies to Comment # 155. If you are smart you will never/ever visit a womens public bathroom!!!!
End Trace Mode for Comment # 155.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]