A Dallas, Texas jury on Tuesday awarded custody of a seven-year-old child to his mother, who is on course to give him transgender hormones in a year or two that will render him sterile for life.

A Dallas, Texas jury on Tuesday awarded custody of a seven-year-old child to his mother, who has the boy dress as a girl while in her care because she believes he is transgender. The child’s father, Jeffrey Younger, has been fighting the child’s mother, Anne Georgulas, in court to prevent her from ultimately chemically and possibly physically castrating the child, which is now the politically correct way to treat gender dysphoria.

Younger says young James is comfortable as a boy while in his care, choosing boy clothes, preferring his male given name to his mother’s transgender moniker “Luna,” and describing himself as a boy. Witnesses his mother paid to appear during the trial explained this by calling him “gender fluid” and saying he “does not identify with only one gender.”

Georgulas sued to reduce Younger’s contact with his sons (James has a twin brother, Jude), and Younger requested a jury trial. Georgulas has had James diagnosed with gender dysphoria and marked on medical records as female, and has brought him to medical personnel who have recommended he begin puberty blockers perhaps in the next year or two, which will ultimately render him infertile. Puberty blockers have other side effects, according to Mayo Clinic, including high blood pressure, blood clots, weight gain, diabetes, and heart diseases.

During the court proceedings, LifeSiteNews reports,

the amicus attorney shared that James initially came to his mom asking to be called ‘Starfire,’ a female character in Teen Titans Go! …Dr. Schumer, a pediatric endocrinologist specializing in gender ‘transitioning,’ was flown in from Michigan to testify. In his testimony, he said that children begin developing the concept of gender between six and seven years old, but later also stated it occurs between five and seven years old. James first reported to his father that his mother told him he was a girl when he was just three years old.

A mother of three boys who are “James’ and Jude’s best friends” posted publicly her planned court testimony that she was prevented from giving during this case. It included the following observations about James based on her sons’ relationship with him and spending more than “150 hours with them in the last year.”

Over the past year, I have observed that James is blissfully happy as a boy. He loves to march around outside and yell, ‘we are the only boy scout troop’ or ‘I’m the Leader of the wolf pack!’ He is always the ring leader, even though he isn’t the oldest of the group. He loves dressing as a super hero and sword fighting. One day we all walked to a playground near my house and on the way home James slipped in some mud and got his clothes dirty. He asked if he could borrow some of my kids clothes and I could wash his. Of course I said, ‘no problem’ and grabbed him a pair of shorts from the chest of drawers and tossed them to him. I said, ‘hang on while I grab a shirt from the closet’. He immediately said, ‘Mrs. Sarah, I don’t need a shirt! It’s hot! And boys don’t have to wear shirts if they don’t want to! Isn’t that awesome!’ He was so cute. I said, ‘yes that is awesome!’ As he ran off to play. I did eventually get him to put on a shirt. It was gray with lizards on it and he loved it! He also likes having his hair cut a certain way but told my son Grayson that his mom wouldn’t let him get it too short even though he wanted it to be spikey.

I am also the den mother to a little wolf pack. My sons roll into and out of our house and neighborhood with some portion of approximately a dozen little boys all day, every day. I have seen just about all of them at some point put on a skirt, play with a doll, or do some other stereotypically female thing. Yesterday the neighbor’s four-year-old boy ran around the whole day in a bee dress (striped black and yellow) — while wielding swords and doing ninja kicks. I am very familiar with this little boy. He is in no way gender fluid or questioning. He doesn’t even know what gender is. He is just playing dressup.

So was my three-year-old son when he put on his sister’s sparkly pink princess dress and laughed uproariously at himself for half an afternoon sometime last year. He knew and knows he is a boy, as they all do. He thought — rightly — that it would be hilarious and kind of fun to try something else out for a bit. It’s called playing. That’s what children do. There are no sexual, political, or religious connotations. It’s innocent. Remember innocence?

The person who looks at a three-year-old playacting as a female cartoon character and decides he needs a trip to the gender clinic and possibly chemical castration is the problem, not the child. The person who tries to take a son away from his perfectly normal, loving father is the problem, not the father.

Our society has laws against child mutilation, and for good reason: Because it is evil. It’s evil when it’s female genital mutilation, it’s evil when it’s double mastectomies on healthy 13-year-olds, and it’s evil when it’s the slow chemical castration of a perfectly healthy eight-year-old boy whose only crime was to playact as the wrong cartoon character in front of his mother.

The only reason this mother is being rewarded instead of punished for wanting to mutilate her child is because her actions fit a particular political and anti-religious ideology. Tell me, what is different about thousands of underage children being mutilated in the United States right now in the name of transgenderism and the sex trafficking ring in England that was not investigated because its leaders were nonwhite immigrant Muslims? Both scandals involve minors who were brutalized while adults looked the other way because of political correctness. Their ignored existence is a mark of shame against every single person, especially those with legal authority, who refuses to protect children.

If any mom threatened to mutilate her kid without claiming the shield of gender identity, child protection laws would be applied, and rightly so. So the only reason child protection laws are being suspended here is ideology. Again, how would this be any different from legalizing female genital mutilation inside the United States? Why is the gender identity rationale considered superior to the religious one?

If I or any mom decided our sons wearing a princess dress a few times was a reason to cut off their penises, we should be hauled away from those kids as fast as possible for their safety, regardless of the reason we claimed for doing so. This Dallas jury decided to do the opposite: To put this vulnerable child more completely under the care of his clearly manipulative, dishonest, and unstable mother and her cadre of false “experts” who profit from destroying children’s lives.

You see, if every child who ever pretended to be someone he was not was a potential patient for some “clinic,” that “clinic” sure would have a massive potential clientele. If many perfectly healthy children were given a lifelong regimen of surgery and drugs, that sure would make a lot of money for whoever makes the drugs and surgeries. And if every child who playacted was told that means he’s actually part of some identity politics group that has no choice but to vote a certain way for life, because he’s a victim, that would be a lot of political power for a party that doesn’t mind getting votes by wrecking human beings.

Republicans, that’s a lot of political power that will never accrue to you. So if you don’t give a damn about the fact that child mutilation is sick and evil, maybe you could give a damn about the fact that all of this only creates more clients for the other political party and its goal of unstoppable government power — which always decimates a weak opposition.