>>47159981The circumcsion was botched which happens all the time. They could have left it. Instead Money advocated his wishes to have it removed and the parents listened because of Money's influence. Money was directly responsible no matter how you look at it. The child's testicles were 100% fine but they too were removed. Why? Money just wanted his sick experiment regardless of the child's well being or not.
>the concept of transgenderism existed long before John MoneyLike what? Greek cross dressers? Yes, we all know homosexual deviants of varying flavors have always existed. Eunuchs? They existed for class reasons and religious reasons. There's really nothing like the modern political cult of transgenderism today.
It's worth noting too that (at least in english) the term gender was histortically used only and strictly in the context of grammar. But Money started using it interchangeably with sex and now we have this can of worms today.
