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?