If it's heaven spelled backwards isn't that actually anti-Christian? Witches were historically accused of saying the Lord's Prayer backwards as a way of summoning or honoring the devil.

describe interest and fascination with sexual organs sexual awareness is a stretch. I was commenting on the very disturbing notion that a child believes to be fully who they are they should "smash their penis with a hammer". I don't care how progressive and open minded you are that is not a healthy statement to make at any age.

Of course it's disturbing. Now imagine hating your own body so much that you would make that statement. Do you think transpeople endure surgeries and societal disapproval "just cuz" they got bored one night?

For folks who are still skeptical that children as young as three can experience gender dysphoria (earliest memories often go back that far), I recommend the book "True Selves". It's kind of a "Trans 101" and you'll understand these issues a bit better.

The kindest thing for this child is to allow them their gender expression. If they wake up one day and decide it was just a stage (unlikely, IMHO), no harm, no foul. They have a number of years before they need to make any medically permanent decisions in that respect.

Funny that all the same people who are eager to jump on that bandwagon in this particular case spend a lot of the rest of the time arguing that the similar gender based instincts, when expressed by normal children in a normal fashion, are a production of a sexist, patriarchal society.

And when you assume, you make an ass of you and me. Having trans friends and family has made it abundantly clear to me that some things are a matter of nature, not nurture.

...he looks very much like a man, a scientific man to boot. If its so easy to implant hair like that, wouldn't more bald men do it? ...Or can male hormones really take over a female body so well?

That's exactly what male hormones do. It takes awhile, but the majority of FtMs can grow a reasonable amount of facial hair.

To work effectively with this group, I've had to tone down my natural openness and honesty (it's interpreted as weakness) and tread lightly in any political discussion.

Honestly, if I'm working with someone, the last thing I'm looking for is "openness" or intense political discussions. It's just likely to produce awkwardness or worse.

When you perceive as your coworkers being "noncommittal", they may see themselves as deftly avoiding uncomfortable conversations.

I don't think Salon is into corporate responsibility for the young. And years back, I thought I'd found my, well...salon.

Years back? You mean when Salon had a regular column written by a Manhattan callgirl? Articles by Susie Bright? A regular column called "Naked World"?

We owe the kids not to satiate ourselves in public forums where they'll wander.

Who's this "we"? If you're "satiating" yourself while reading Salon, that's strictly between you and your keyboard.

Maybe my "we" doesn't apply to anyone else. But something's wrong...and as an example, I do see Salon as using sex to sell ads and tarting up its headlines and burying serious sexual politics in Broadsheet and I am likely naive but it aggravates me.

Is this a matter of, "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts"? As a number of us have pointed out, Salon has ALWAYS run articles with mature and sometimes explicit material.

We don't object to your right as a parent to choose suitable media for your children. We do object to your re-writing of history and appalling ignorance of a web site you claim to be one of your favorites.

Maybe this part of life is one where we lefties and righties could find some...some...note, some...common ground?

This is the sort of "reasoning" that leads to Andrea Dworkin making nice with Jerry Falwell. Been there, done that, got the button.

At least in the sense that's being talked about here. It's virtually impossible to make it so a donor cedes all parental rights. I don't think I need to spell out how this could potentially complicate things if any one of the three of you suddenly decides they want to re-visit the original deal.

That said, a far better option is to use a sperm bank that specializes in known donors. Some banks insist that the donor remain anonymous until the child turns eighteen, at least one (Rainbow Flag Health Services) allows for disclosure at much earlier ages. This gets rid of the "great mystery" in the child's life of not knowing, but provides legal protection for all parties.

Now, my understanding all of this changes *if* you live in California. It is my understanding that you can use a sperm bank as a sort of intermediary between you and the donor in order to essentially render the sperm anonymous in the legal sense.

But honestly, if you're not familiar with the legal implications that apply to your situation, you need to research that first. Cary is engaging in some heterosexual privilege here, because gay and lesbian families don't have the luxury of simply "feeling our way" through these matters.

Being human, and coming from a species that reproduces sexually, children are both male and female and they need both male and female role models to bring them up successfully. And by that, I mean they need the man and the woman who created them from their own genetic material.

I never knew the donation of genetic material had such curious social repercussions. Next you'll be saying that heterosexual couples who require medical assistance will somehow be depriving their children if the fertility doc isn't made the child's godfather.