News

Hasbro Pushes Political Correctness on Consumers with Genderless Toys

Apparently, political correctness may be the new priority for toymaker Hasbro when it comes to marketing strategy.

In a recent interview, CEO Brian Gardner claimed:

We look at our brands more inclusively than ever. In fact, we eliminated the old delineation of gender.

While most would find it odd to see Hasbro brands like “My Little Pony” and “Disney Princess” in the boys’ aisle of the toy section, this move seems very much in line with retailers like Target who have done away with gender labeling in this department.

Interestingly, Hasbro has invested considerable effort in improving it’s standing with LGBT advocacy groups like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) over the past few years. In 2014, Hasbro earned a score of only 25 on HRC’s Corporate Equality Index (CEI). However, that number jumped to a perfect 100 in the 2017 CEI. A perfect score indicates a company’s full compliance with HRC’s requirements for LGBT-specific engagement and prohibitions on philanthropic support for organizations that don’t adhere to HRC’s ideology.

See more on HRC’s goals and agenda here.

Furthermore, HRC has been been a leading advocate for the type of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) accommodation laws that raise safety concerns and essentially force businesses to allow anyone to use bathrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms on the basis of “gender identity” instead of biological sex. Given Hasbro’s desire to stay in HRC’s good graces, it stands to reason that the elimination of gender differences in toys may indeed be part of a larger strategy to align with HRC’s gender ideology politics.

Here are two ways to contact Hasbro and let them know what you think about the elimination of gender references for marketing toys:

Send Hasbro an Email! Reach Out to Hasbro on Facebook!

 

Does 2ndVote’s information help shape your shopping decisions? Please consider becoming a 2ndVote Member to help us reach more conservatives with our message. Click here to join today.

  • libsrtheh8ters

    I’m a Pediatrician. How
    Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced
    Large-Scale Child Abuse.

    Michelle Cretella

    Transgender politics have taken Americans by surprise,
    and caught some lawmakers off guard.

    Just a few short years ago, not many could have
    imagined a high-profile showdown over transgender men and women’s
    access to single-sex bathrooms in North Carolina.

    But transgender ideology is not just infecting our
    laws. It is intruding into the lives of the most innocent among
    us—children—and with the apparent growing support of the
    professional medical community.

    As explained in my 2016 peer reviewed article, “Gender
    Dysphoria in Children and Suppression of Debate,”
    professionals who dare to question the unscientific party line of
    supporting gender transition therapy will find themselves maligned
    and out of a job.

    I speak as someone intimately familiar with the
    pediatric and behavioral health communities and their practices. I
    am a mother of four who served 17 years as a board certified
    general pediatrician with a focus in child behavioral health prior
    to leaving clinical practice in 2012.

    For the last 12 years, I have been a board member and
    researcher for the American College of Pediatricians, and for the
    last three years I have served as its president.

    I also sat on the board of directors for the Alliance
    for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity from 2010 to 2015.
    This organization of physicians and mental health professionals
    defends the right of patients to receive psychotherapy for sexual
    identity conflicts that is in line with their deeply held values
    based upon science and medical ethics.

    I have witnessed an upending of the medical consensus
    on the nature of gender identity. What doctors once treated as a
    mental illness, the medical community now largely affirms and even
    promotes as normal.

    Here’s a look at some of the changes.

    The New Normal

    Pediatric “gender clinics” are considered elite centers
    for affirming children who are distressed by their biological sex.
    This distressful condition, once dubbed gender identity disorder,
    was renamed “gender dysphoria” in 2013.

    In 2014, there were 24
    of these gender clinics, clustered chiefly along the east
    coast and in California. One year later, there were 40 across the
    nation.

    With 215 pediatric residency programs now training
    future pediatricians in a transition-affirming protocol and
    treating gender-dysphoric children accordingly, gender clinics are
    bound to proliferate further.

    Last summer, the federal government stated that it
    would not require Medicare and Medicaid to cover
    transition-affirming procedures for children or adults because
    medical experts at the Department of Health and Human Services
    found the risks were often too high, and the benefits too unclear.

    Undeterred by these findings, the World Professional
    Association for Transgender Health has pressed ahead,
    claiming—without any evidence—that these procedures are “safe.”

    Two leading pediatric associations—the American Academy
    of Pediatrics and the Pediatric Endocrine Society—have followed in
    lockstep, endorsing the transition affirmation approach even as
    the latter organization concedes within its own guidelines that
    the transition-affirming protocol is based on low evidence.

    They even admit that the only strong evidence regarding
    this approach is its potential health risks to children.

    The transition-affirming view holds that children who
    “consistently and persistently insist” that they are not the
    gender associated with their biological sex are innately
    transgender.

    (The fact that in normal life and in psychiatry, anyone
    who “consistently and persistently insists” on anything else
    contrary to physical reality is considered either confused or
    delusional is conveniently ignored.)

    The transition-affirming protocol tells parents to
    treat their children as the gender they desire, and to place them
    on puberty blockers around age 11 or 12 if they are gender
    dysphoric.

    If by age 16, the children still insist that they are
    trapped in the wrong body, they are placed on cross-sex hormones,
    and biological girls may obtain a double mastectomy.

    So-called “bottom surgeries,” or genital reassignment
    surgeries, are not recommended before age 18, though some surgeons
    have recently argued against this restriction.

    The transition-affirming approach has been embraced by
    public institutions in media, education, and our legal system, and
    is now recommended by most national medical organizations.

    There are exceptions to this movement, however, in
    addition to the American College of Pediatricians and the Alliance
    for Therapeutic Choice. These include the Association of American
    Physicians and Surgeons, the Christian Medical & Dental
    Associations, the Catholic Medical Association, and the
    LGBT-affirming Youth
    Gender Professionals.

    The transgender movement has gained legs in the medical
    community and in our culture by offering a deeply flawed
    narrative. The scientific research and facts tell a different
    story.

    Here are some of those basic facts.

    1. Twin studies prove no one is born “trapped in the
    body of the wrong sex.”

    Some brain studies have
    suggested that some are born with a transgendered brain. But these
    studies are seriously flawed and prove no such thing.

    Virtually everything about
    human beings is influenced by our DNA, but very few traits are
    hardwired from birth. All human behavior is a composite of varying
    degrees for nature and nurture.

    Researchers routinely
    conduct twin studies to discern which factors (biological or
    nonbiological) contribute more to the expression of a particular
    trait. The best designed twin studies are those with the greatest
    number of subjects.

    Identical twins contain 100
    percent of the same DNA from conception and are exposed to the
    same prenatal hormones. So if genes and/or prenatal hormones
    contributed significantly to transgenderism, we should expect both
    twins to identify as transgender close to 100 percent of the time.

    Skin color, for example, is
    determined by genes alone. Therefore, identical twins have the
    same skin color 100 percent of the time.

    But in the largest study of twin transgender adults,
    published by Dr. Milton Diamond in 2013, only 28 percent of the
    identical twins both identified as transgender. Seventy-two
    percent of the time, they differed. (Diamond’s study reported 20
    percent identifying as transgender, but his actual data
    demonstrate a 28 percent figure, as I note here in footnote 19.)

    That 28 percent of
    identical twins both identified as transgender suggests a minimal
    biological predisposition, which means transgenderism will not
    manifest itself without outside nonbiological factors also
    impacting the individual during his lifetime.

    The fact that the identical
    twins differed 72 percent of the time is highly significant
    because it means that at least 72 percent of what contributes to
    transgenderism in one twin consists of nonshared experiences after
    birth—that is, factors not rooted in biology.

    Studies like this one prove
    that the belief in “innate gender identity”—the idea that
    “feminized” or “masculinized” brains can be trapped in the wrong
    body from before birth—is a myth that has no basis in science.

    2. Gender identity is malleable, especially in young
    children.

    Even the American
    Psychological Association’s Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology
    admits that prior to the widespread promotion of transition
    affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of pre-pubertal children who were
    distressed by their biological sex eventually outgrew that
    distress. The vast majority came to accept their biological sex by
    late adolescence after passing naturally through puberty.

    But with transition
    affirmation now increasing in Western society, the number of
    children claiming distress over their gender—and their persistence
    over time—has dramatically increased. For example, the Gender
    Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom alone has seen
    a 2,000 percent increase in referrals since 2009.

    3. Puberty blockers for gender dysphoria have not
    been proven safe.

    Puberty blockers have been
    studied and found safe for the treatment of a medical disorder in
    children called precocious puberty (caused by the abnormal and
    unhealthy early secretion of a child’s pubertal hormones).

    However, as a groundbreaking paper in The New Atlantis points
    out, we cannot infer from these studies whether or not these
    blockers are safe in physiologically normal children with gender
    dysphoria.

    The authors note that there
    is some evidence for decreased bone mineralization, meaning an
    increased risk of bone fractures as young adults, potential
    increased risk of obesity and testicular cancer in boys, and an
    unknown impact upon psychological and cognitive development.

    With regard to the latter,
    while we currently don’t have any extensive, long-term studies of
    children placed on blockers for gender dysphoria, studies
    conducted on adults from the past decade give cause for concern.

    For example, in 2006 and 2007, the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology
    reported brain abnormalities in the area of memory and executive
    functioning among adult women who received blockers for
    gynecologic reasons. Similarly, many studies of men treated for
    prostate cancer with blockers also suggest the possibility of
    significant cognitive decline.

    4. There are no cases in the scientific literature
    of gender-dysphoric children discontinuing blockers.

    Most, if not all, children
    on puberty blockers go on to take cross-sex hormones (estrogen for
    biological boys, testosterone for biological girls). The only study to date to have followed pre-pubertal
    children who were socially affirmed and placed on blockers at a
    young age found that 100 percent of them claimed a transgender
    identity and chose cross-sex hormones.

    This suggests that the
    medical protocol itself may lead children to identify as
    transgender.

    There is an obvious
    self-fulfilling effect in helping children impersonate the
    opposite sex both biologically and socially. This is far from
    benign, since taking puberty blockers at age 12 or younger,
    followed by cross-sex hormones, sterilizes a child.

    5. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous
    health risks.

    From studies of adults we know that the risks of
    cross-sex hormones include, but are not limited to, cardiac
    disease, high blood pressure, blood clots, strokes, diabetes, and
    cancers.

    6.
    Neuroscience shows that adolescents lack the adult capacity
    needed for risk assessment.

    Scientific data show that
    people under the age of 21 have less capacity to assess risks.
    There is a serious ethical problem in allowing irreversible,
    life-changing procedures to be performed on minors who are too
    young themselves to give valid consent.

    7. There is no proof that affirmation prevents
    suicide in children.

    Advocates of the
    transition-affirming protocol allege that suicide is the direct
    and inevitable consequence of withholding social affirmation and
    biological alterations from a gender-dysphoric child. In other
    words, those who do not endorse the transition-affirming protocol
    are essentially condemning gender-dysphoric children to suicide.

    Yet as noted earlier, prior
    to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95
    percent of gender-dysphoric youth ended up happy with their
    biological sex after simply passing through puberty.

    In addition, contrary to
    the claim of activists, there is no evidence that harassment and
    discrimination, let alone lack of affirmation, are the primary
    cause of suicide among any minority group. In fact, at least one study from 2008 found perceived discrimination
    by LGBT-identified individuals not to be causative.

    Over 90 percent of people who commit suicide have
    a diagnosed mental disorder, and there is no evidence that
    gender-dysphoric children who commit suicide are any different.
    Many gender dysphoric children simply need therapy to get to the
    root of their depression, which very well may be the same problem
    triggering the gender dysphoria.

    8.
    Transition-affirming protocol has not solved the problem of
    transgender suicide.

    Adults who undergo sex
    reassignment—even in Sweden, which is among the most
    LGBT-affirming countries—have a suicide rate nearly 20 times greater than that of the general
    population. Clearly, sex reassignment is not the solution to
    gender dysphoria.

    Bottom Line: Transition-Affirming
    Protocol Is Child Abuse

    The crux of the matter is that while the
    transition-affirming movement purports to help children, it is
    inflicting a grave injustice on them and their nondysphoric peers.

    These professionals are using the myth that people are
    born transgender to justify engaging in massive, uncontrolled, and
    unconsented experimentation on children who have a psychological
    condition that would otherwise resolve after puberty in the vast
    majority of cases.

    Today’s institutions that promote transition
    affirmation are pushing children to impersonate the opposite sex,
    sending many of them down the path of puberty blockers,
    sterilization, the removal of healthy body parts, and untold
    psychological damage.

    These harms constitute nothing less than
    institutionalized child abuse. Sound ethics demand an immediate
    end to the use of pubertal suppression, cross-sex hormones, and
    sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents, as well as
    an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and
    legislative policies.

    It is time for our nation’s leaders and the silent
    majority of health professionals to learn exactly what is
    happening to our children, and unite to take action.

    • James Bryson

      Praise God for your courage and clarity. As a grandfather, father, and as a male, I will do anything to protect my children and grandchildren. This gender identity madness has to be stopped.

      THANK YOU for a superb post-disclosure. We all must stand fast.

    • Bettina McQ

      Thank you so much for such a well-outlined response.

  • Angelo G

    Going to be pretty funny when all the bathrooms have piss on the seats from us guys, women are going to be asking for there own bathrooms again

    • Bettina McQ

      I’m already pretty insistent of my own bathroom, thank you very much!

  • membership_ad.jpg

guncam

guncam