"He was one of the most talented writers I've ever worked with," said Times Sports Editor Mike James, adding that Penner covered numerous beats including the National Football League and sports media during his more than two-decade-long career at the paper."He was a gentle man, a kind man," James said. "It's just a tragedy."
What makes this suicide especially newsworthy was that Penner had a much-publicized, celebrated, and self-chronicled "transition" to "Christine Daniels". What wasn't as well publicized or celebrated was Mike Penner dropping the Christine Daniels identity and reverting back to Mike Penner.
Were those actions by Penner a cry for help?
[Much more after the jump.]
Now, I'd like to ask our LGBTQQUAIP??? readers to put aside their activism, for a moment, to sit back and think about this. Even if we were to all agree that "gender reassignment" was generally a good and legitimate thing, could it ever be possible... possible... that every so often, a person who seeks such a change could be doing so out of some problem that could be addressed in some way other than gender reassignment?
I'll choose a less politicized situation as an analogy. A guy goes to a doctor and says, "I have back pain. I need pain pills." But maybe that specific patient doesn't need pain pills. Maybe the patient just needs a massage, or a chiropractic treatment. Maybe the patient is sleeping in a chair and should be sleeping in a certain kind of bed, instead. Even though the pain pills may dull the pain, would it be good to the doctor to continually write the patient prescriptions for the pain pills and not address the other things?
Okay, so there are supposedly experts in gender reassignment. But experts sometimes make mistakes.
The problem is, this issue has been so politicized that when Penner went to his boss and coworkers with his announcements (first the "switch" to Christine, and then the "switch back" to Mike), they risked lawsuits and firings if they didn't go along with it. They pretty much were forced to encourage these changes. If any of them took Penner aside and implied that perhaps his identity as a male or female wasn't the heart of what was ailing him, and reassignment wasn't the way to go and that he should get some other help, that could have easily been the end of their career.
Clearly, Penner wasn't happy. Happy people do not kill themselves. I didn't know the guy, but perhaps that unhappiness has been there a long time, and Penner thought he'd be happier as "Christine". Apparently, he wasn't happy as Christine, since he reverted back to Mike. The gender confusion activists will want to deny that the "gender reassignment" trial was a symptom of something that was wrong with Penner. Most likely, they'll blame his suicide on any negative responses he got from his "courageous" move. But by Penner’s own account, his employer was supportive. All you have to do is read the comments being left, and you can see a lot of people were supportive. Being "Christine" opened a lot of doors for Penner, and got him a lot of applause. I can't recall the name of another newspaper sports writer.
But is that what he really needed?
I am a follower of Christ. I would love it everyone was a follower of Christ. Yet, I can see, from time to time, people who have come to church or announced their conversion to Christianity or who respond to an altar call because they think it will solve some issue in their lives – depression and other mental health issues, or a bad marriage. To be sure, I'm convinced God can heal people and relationships, and I do think people should place their cares at the feet of Jesus, and that Jesus does take care of the issue of sin. But usually, someone who approaches the situation with the wrong attitude or wrong expectations is in for rude awakening. In my experience, Jesus often asks us to do some things ourselves and face some of the consequences of our actions.
While I do believe in God and the benefits of prayer and following Christ, if someone is uncomfortable, unhappy, or disturbed, neither the Sinner's Prayer nor the surgeon's scalpel removing genitalia is going to guarantee happiness, comfort, and mental health in the here and now.
Is that so hard to see?
My sympathies to Penner's loved ones and coworkers. This is a very sad situation, and it pained me to read that he's dead. From what is being written about him, it sounds like he was talented and well-liked. It is a shame he didn't get whatever help he really needed. This could very well have been a death by political correctness.
Here is the obit by Keith Thursby of the Los Angeles Times.
Here is the obit by Associated Press writer John Rogers, and here is the obit by Dan Whitcomb of Reuters.
It is absolutely impossibly to answer any question you asked for one simple reason: we have no idea why this person killed themselves. You assume that (s)he did so as a direct result of regretting gender reassignment, but I see no proof of that in this article. You simply state that was the reason for the suicide and jump off into the point you wanted to prove all along. Logic and argumentation fail.
ReplyDeleteAlso, to "revert" means to "go back", therefore, to "revert back" would be to "go back back".
Classic PF: "It is absolutely impossibly to answer any question", followed by grammar advice.
ReplyDeleteAnd...
You assume that (s)he did so as a direct result of regretting gender reassignment,
I see no reason to believe the author blamed the surgery or made any such assumption. But it is safe to conclude that the surgery did not fix whatever was going in with the poor guy.
PF, thanks for correcting my word usage.
ReplyDeleteOn Lawn is correct - my point was that the surgery, crossdressing, name change, or whatever steps Penner took did not fix what his problem was, and may have been a sign he needed help other than "Go ahead!"
But now that I think about it, his ordeal could have also disappointed him enough to add to the factors that contributed to this sad outcome.
No major medical center, for instance the John Hopkins center, do gender reassignment surgery anymore. They have found that (like the situation here) that the patient ends up with a different “gender” but the same problems as before.
ReplyDeleteGender reassignment was at its height in the 1970’s as far as being an established and reputable medical treatment. It is now only performed by individual doctors and clinics as a money making scheme. The years of intense therapy that preceded such surgery often falls by the wayside.
It's true that no major medical centres do surgery any more.
ReplyDeleteJohns Hopkins for example has a list of half a dozen surgeons who they refer patients to, as those have the best track record.
Genital Reconstruction doesn't solve all problems, any more than releasing someone from a Death Camp resolves the trauma of being in one. But it's a necessary step along the way.
Rather than Gender Reassignment having its hayday in the 1970's, it's now recognised as the only treatment that's ever had any success in long-term follow-up.
It's not 100%. It is 98%, for FtoMs. Rather better than, say appendectomy as a treatment for appendicitis. For MtoFs, it's not as good, though still in the mid 90's. Vs 0% for anything else in 5 year follow-ups.
Without treatment, about 30% die. With treatment, about 1/20 of that.
It appears that Mike didn't have surgery BTW.
ReplyDelete"Genital Reconstruction doesn't solve all problems, any more than releasing someone from a Death Camp resolves the trauma of being in one."
ReplyDeleteThat's a bit of an extreme comparison, isn't it? Exactly how is someone harmed by keeping their natural genitalia and hormones, and dressing accoudingly, and keeping their name?
"Rather than Gender Reassignment having its hayday in the 1970's, it's now recognised as the only treatment that's ever had any success in long-term follow-up."
How is success defined?
"Without treatment, about 30% die. With treatment, about 1/20 of that."
Transgenders? Or did I misread you? And all of us die. What kind of time frame are we talking about?
"It appears that Mike didn't have surgery BTW."
My guess was that he hadn't. I wonder if the steps he did take were a misguided attempt to deal with whatever the problem really was, or if they even hasted his suicide, even if only because they didn't mitigate whatever problems he was experiencing, and thus were a disappointment to him.