At the heart of a conservative outrage nightmare and a vicious custody battle is a child. The parents, Jeffrey Younger and Anne Georgulas, can’t even agree whether their seven-year-old offspring is a boy or a girl. Conservative media has already made up its own mind, relying on lazy dogma and outright lies to sell a narrative. This report will correct the record by cutting through the bullshit.
In our disinfecting the story, using simple processes such as actually reading verified case documents, citing credible sources and engaging their claims honestly, we hope to offer readers a clear perspective on a case so muddied in bias, controversy, and propaganda. Considering we’re dealing with a media that’s both fallen asleep at the wheel and drove head-first off the crazy cliff, there’s a lot of lies to unpack and a lot of voices to put on the public propagandist watch. And while my accusations would seem unfair, I only say this given a staggering number of conservative and religious publications are engaging in bad faith tactics to report on the story, while mainstream media has done almost zero to fact-check their smears.
All of them repeat a story of how a liberal mother is abusing her youngest child into transgenderism, meanwhile, the conservative father is an everyman who wants to keep them safe from harm. While this line is mass-reproduced by the likes of National Review, Breitbart, The Daily Wire, Church Militant, The Christian Post, Blaire White, PJ Media and more, they all rely on the claims made by a single opinion article from The Federalist, an online magazine decidedly biased towards conservatives, written by a former transexual turned born again Christian named Walt Heyer. When you tow the party’s biased rumors as facts without question, this is propaganda in action.
From Heyer and company, we’re given simplistic details of how the child is treated in their parent’s separate homes. When they’re living with the mother, they’re given no choice but to live their life as a girl named Luna. When they’re living with the father, however, the child has the option to live as whichever identity they want, opting for a life as a boy named James. We’re told the child was given a “misdiagnose” by one “trans-friendly” doctor known as a “rainbow counselor”, signifying a self-fulfilling plan organized exclusively by the mother without proper oversight or fatherly involvement. We’re told the family friends the child doesn’t exhibit these signs of gender dysphoria, and that it’s based a potential “Munchausen syndrome by proxy”, as claimed by Heyer’s biased anti-trans pediatrician Michelle Cretella.
“What this mom is doing to James looks very much like what my grandmother did to me by affirming me in the purple dress,” Heyer writes. “My grandmother didn’t intend to harm me, but her actions destroyed my childhood and my family and consumed nearly 50 years of my life. James has no idea what he is in for or how his gender journey will play out, but with an incorrect diagnosis it will be ugly.” And if we were to be lazy thinkers, assuming the entire narrative as laid-out here is indeed factual, this would be a strong case of both ideological gender coercion and modern child abuse by the trans community.
There’s just one small problem: It’s all bullshit. Thanks to a recent video investigation made by Timbah.On.Toast, an independent political commentator, it turns out the entire narrative made by Heyer and his colleagues is a fictionalized fabrication of the court case, even going by the father’s sworn testimony. Although his blog SaveJames.com no longer exists, Timbah archived nearly a dozen court documents showcasing how the story is almost the exact opposite of how Heyer and the media portrayed the story. Given none of the above outlets or commentators cite their sources, it’s no wonder upon further review of the available evidence.
The most pivotal document is from July 10th — a transcript of testimonies given by the parents, the children, the friends, a child therapist, a child protective services agent and more — which indicate the media has failed to detail even the most basic of facts regarding the case, framing both parents as being more pro-trans than they’ve sworn under oath. Although we won’t rely too much on Georgulas’ testimony outside chronological reasons, it bears acknowledging that she told the court she “prefer [her] child not be transgender” at all, informing the court that she’s basing her decisions purely on her knowledge as a practicing general pediatrician.
Throughout the transcript, we’re told of another pediatrician by the name of Dr. Pape. During both Georgulas’ and Younger’s testimony, we’re given corroborated details of how the diagnosis of gender dysphoria came to be. In court, both parties admit this wasn’t made by the so-called “trans-friendly rainbow counselor” only employed by the mother but was rather a regular pediatrician of their mutual choosing. In Timbah’s video, we’re told Pape is married to their local Christian pastor and they have no specialization in the area of some biased gender studies field. Heyer and company’s assertion of a false diagnosis now relies on the faults of two sources, one of which rejected by the idolized father only upon hearing medical results he found disagreeable.
The records show the father was later contacted by Georgulas and Dr. Pape to schedule further appointments, refusing to continue seeking their advice. The mother, however, sought a second medical referral from GENECIS, a child medical center offering children of all genders treatment, which confirmed the child’s suffering of gender identity disorder. Instead of complying with the appointments, it’s revealed the father was the one who made the accusations of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, writing several letters and issuing phonecalls to medical staff, child protective services, and the police with claims of the mother forcing the child to be a girl and undergo hormonal drugs designed for adults.
The CPS investigation found no evidence of these chemical castration substances, not even puberty blockers which have been misrepresented as sterilizing drugs. Abuse by the mother was ruled out. Under the advisement of the pediatricians, the parents are supposed to affirm their child in “letting them present whatever way they choose”, whether it’s a boy or a girl. If we simply believed Heyer’s sketchy report, it’d appear the father is the one complying with the medical prescriptions of the doctors, not the mother. When you read the transcript, however, both Georgulas and Younger present themselves in completely different roles.
Whereas the mother appears to allow choice in the household, both parents confirm the father doesn’t allow the child to dress in feminine clothing, maintain long hair or referred to by the name of their child’s choosing. This is presented in multiple instances, such as photographs presented to the court showing the father only cut the hair of the trans-child (not the cis-children) to potentially cause alienation and the mother’s description of an argument over Luna’s clothing for an August parent-teacher conference (which led to the false CPS report). The father later confirmed the events below as true.
What’s more confronting is the contradictory statements from the father himself. In speaking out of both sides of his mouth, Younger makes the appearance of having “wait-and-see” freedom of choice for his child, yet later admits he lays out a self-fulfilling, coercive lifestyle for his children. “The father reported [to CPS] that he “does not mind his son dressing like a girl, however, he just wants to make sure it is his choice and not the mother forcing it upon her.”
When the lawyer cites emails showing he forces the child to present as a boy in public, forces the child to wear only boy clothing in his house and says the child is “too young to make this choice”, the mask of this tyrannical father starts to slip. Timbah also cites several speeches and interviews from the father showcasing how his religious bias deeply places his child’s medical health on gender issues into question. Keeping in mind the father’s witnesses amounted to a Christian pastor who only contacted the child on three occasions and the organizers of the SaveJames blog. To say religion doesn’t play a factor in his children’s upbringing, overriding the judgment of his family, teachers and the medical sphere, is to simply deny reality.
When you exclusively read Heyer’s piece and his conservative copycats, the narrative is the exact opposite. “When James is away from his mother, he consistently rejects the idea that he is ‘Luna girl’ or that he wants to be a girl,” Heyer writes, citing the father as a credible source. “In the father’s home, James appears to be a normal boy and doesn’t identify as a girl. He has a choice of boy’s or girl’s clothes there, and he chooses to dress as a boy. The fact that James changes gender identity depending on which parent is present makes the diagnosis of gender dysphoria both dubious and harmful.”
Not only is this a factual lie by the father’s own admission, Heyer and company discount the most important resource which controls for parental intimidation factors — the testimony of the CPS agent. In court, the agent was asked to read notes during an interview with the child at their school. When none of the parents were in the room, Luna revealed the children are afraid of the father because he called the police on the mother and that he “doesn’t let [them] dress in girl’s clothes because he thinks it’s all about their bodies and it’s not”, whereas the mother allows the child to dress however they choose and that “no one is making them”.
When the CPS agent interviewed both the child’s teacher and twin brother, wit neither parent being in the room, they confirmed the child prefers to be called Luna in class and at home. “[The brother] states that Luna has always wanted to be a girl and his mum lets her, but doesn’t make her,” the agent testified. “[The brother] states that his dad tries to make Luna be a boy by making her dress in boy clothes. [The brother] states this makes Luna feel sad.” From these controlled statements, we can see the father is placed in a negative light once the children are in safe conditions. This neither a fatherly slamdunk nor fifty/case of misunderstanding. The child claims they’re safer in the mother’s care, given the freedom to choose their life, whereas the father’s case is a life of intimidation.
The omission of such key evidence, selectively picking witnesses and reversing case details to simply smear their opposition, is an example of the propaganda machine in action. And it worked. On Thursday, a Texas judge ruled that Georgulas — despite being awarded sole custody of the child — must comply with a new shared custody agreement where the father has equal say in medical decisions he denies from the jump.
The public, consuming a manufactured version of the very court events we’ve described, believe justice has been served and the child is in a perceptually safe environment. Media pundits and dogmatists like Heyer and Cretella reap the benefits of this story without paying the cost now being placed onto the child. And without proper fact-checkers in Timbah and myself, this revenue cycle will continue until it is exposed for what it is — an ideological parody of what the news should be.
“It is unfortunate to see this situation being politicized, rather than focusing on what is in the child’s best interest,” she said. “The Trevor Project told the Daily Beast, releasing their National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health which found that 76% of LGBTQ youth felt suffered from the toxic political climate and disinformation around trans issues. “When the lives of transgender youth are sensationalized and treated like political footballs, the reality of their personal struggles and needs is lost in the shuffle.”
Thank you for reading. This article was published for TrigTent, a bipartisan media platform for political and social commentary. Bailey Steen is a journalist, editor, and designer from Australia. You can read their work on Medium and previous publications such as Janks Reviews and Newslogue.
For updates, feel free to follow Bailey through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and other social media sites. You can also contact through firstname.lastname@example.org for personal or business reasons. Stay honest and radical. Cheers, darlings. 💋