Puberty blockers trial: Only the vulnerable need apply

I tried a bit of satire on X and told everyone Kings College were going to put paedophiles and children together to see what positives there were for the kids. I think I’d already heard of the Kentler experiment, but had forgotten the details. I was surprised that so many believed my post! Today I read through the experiment and the parallels of the Kentler experiment and this puberty blocker trial is worth exploring. I hope I’ve explained myself clearly here as it’s difficult to fully articulate the hairs on the back of one’s neck.

If you want to come and share your feelings about this trial we will be in close proximity to Kings College London, 9th December 1-3pm, all are welcome.

There is something profoundly wrong in a society when the state decides to run live medical experiments on its most vulnerable children in order to answer questions it should have asked twenty years ago. And there is something even more disturbing when doctors, people who should know better, comply without protest.

To understand the scale of this disaster, we have to start with the foundation of the whole enterprise: the concept of “gender incongruence” in ICD-11. Strip away the pseudoscientific bull and you are left with a definition that would be laughed out of any serious medical textbook, or rather would have been ten years ago. It is nothing more than a child feeling uncomfortable and focussing that discomfort on their sex, for a sustained period. That’s it. No biological markers. No developmental criteria. No differentiation between temporary adolescent distress and a fixed identity. A feeling. A child’s feeling. And on that basis alone, the NHS is now running a ten-million-pound clinical trial on puberty blockers.

A feeling is not a diagnosis. And yet it has become one, because the gender industry needed something that sounded clinical but required no scrutiny. The definition is designed to include vulnerable children, because that’s the only population that presents to these clinics. Well-adjusted children do not spend years hating their bodies or wishing they could become someone else. The only children who meet the criteria for “gender incongruence” are children who are already emotionally overwhelmed, already struggling, already hurting. That is the entire logic of the system. Vulnerability isn’t a side issue. It’s the very basis of the entire thing.