Opinion
Transgender ideology has enabled people to ‘identify’ as amputees
Jørund ‘Viktoria’ Alme, a Norwegian man who believes he is a paralyzed woman
From LifeSiteNews
Those who challenge the view that a person can identify as an amputee despite being healthy must also challenge the assertion that one can simply identify as the opposite sex.
Almost ten years ago, I wrote a column in this space on the phenomenon of the so-called “transabled” – people who identify as amputees or suffer from a mental illness that causes them to loathe one of their healthy limbs. In 2022, a high-profile (alleged) example of this emerged when a 53-year-old healthy, non-disabled Norwegian man began identifying as a woman paralyzed from the waist down and took to a wheelchair to give media interviews.
Those who found his claims to be somewhat suspect were in a bit of a bind – which of his assertions, after all, is more ridiculous – that he is a woman, or that he is paralyzed? Our culture has accepted that he can claim to be a woman, and that we must all nod solemnly in response. “How brave of her,” we must all say in unison as his loyal wife pushes him away from the cameras in his wheelchair. “No, not the wife. The other one.”
A grimmer but no less disturbing profile was published recently by the National Post titled “Quebec man has two healthy fingers amputated to relieve ‘body integrity dysphoria.’” It’s a sad story; the young man said he had “intrusive thoughts about his left hand’s fourth and fifth fingers, the sensation they weren’t his, that they didn’t belong to his body” since he was a child and would even have nightmares about them. He fantasized about cutting them off himself. From the Post:
Instead, a surgeon at his local hospital agreed to an elective amputation in what is being called the first described case of ‘digits amputation’ for body integrity dysphoria, or BID, a rare and complex condition characterized by an intense desire to amputate a perfectly healthy body part, such as an arm or a leg. The Quebec case involved an ambidextrous 20-year-old whose attempts at ‘non-invasive’ relief, including cognitive behavioural therapy, Prozac-like antidepressants and exposure therapy, only increased his distress.
What is significant about this case is the way it was described by Dr. Nadia Nadeau of the department of psychiatry at Université Laval in a case study published in the journal Clinical Case Reports. Nadeau describes the young man’s mental and emotional distress, and notes that this distress apparently ceased after the “elective amputation” and that “he was able to pursue the life he envisioned as a complete human being without those two fingers bothering him.” One month post surgery, he had no regrets.
The particularly significant conclusion came towards the end of the report. According to Nadeau: “He is now living a life free from distressing preoccupations about his fingers, with all his symptoms related to BID resolved. The amputation enabled him to live in alignment with his perceived identity.” This, of course, is precisely the argument used by transgender activists making the case for sex change surgeries, cross-sex hormones, and puberty blockers – that these “treatments” will help the recipient “live in alignment with his perceived identity.” Although they wouldn’t call it a “perceived” identity – they’d call it his real identity. This perceived identity, however, was considered real enough that a surgeon removed two of his fingers.
The justifications for these “treatments” that include bodily mutilation are similar, as well. The Post noted that “Nadeau’s patient, after doing some research, ‘related his condition to gender dysphoria’… People with BID often feel their physical body doesn’t align with the image of the body they have in their minds.”
Furthermore, although “cutting off healthy, functioning body parts for psychological distress raises ethical concerns, BID sufferers sometimes resort to self-mutilation or ‘black-market’ amputations, risking their lives.”
A similar argument is made for “transgender care”: if extreme medical intervention does make the mentally ill person’s body resemble the image of reality in their minds, they might harm themselves. That’s the catch-22, of course. Isn’t surgical mutilation also harm, by definition? Not if you redefine it – that’s why trans activists no longer refer to sex change surgeries, but “gender-affirming care.” According to Nadeau: “Recognizing and addressing the unique needs of (BID) patients can lead to a future where they can live with more dignity, respect and optimal well-being.”
Who can disagree with a campaign to increase understanding and dignity for the mentally ill? I wonder, however, what the limiting principle is here. If a young man who believes himself to be a woman can get himself legally castrated by a surgeon, why can’t a man who believes he is an amputee have a leg removed? Or an arm? If we have accepted that people’s self-perceptions are more important than actual reality, where does it stop?
‘UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER’: Trump Warns Iran as Israel Kills Top General
In a dramatic escalation Tuesday, President Donald Trump issued a direct and unprecedented warning to Iran’s leadership, stating that U.S. intelligence has positively identified the location of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and could kill him—though, for now, the U.S. is choosing not to.
“We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there — We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,” Trump posted to his Truth Social account Tuesday afternoon. “But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Minutes later, Trump posted again: “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”
The remarks came after Trump met with top national security officials in the White House Situation Room, following fresh reports from the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence agencies indicating that Iran is preparing further ballistic missile launches after Israeli strikes rocked key military sites in Tehran.
The president’s language—a blend of strategic ambiguity and a raw, public threat against a sitting head of state—appears unprecedented in modern diplomatic history, and marks the clearest signal yet that the United States is prepared to intervene militarily if Iran refuses to abandon its nuclear enrichment program or if American forces come under attack.
Meanwhile, Germany’s political leadership broke its relative silence with statements backing the U.S.-Israel alliance and condemning Tehran. Chancellor Friedrich Merz, still at the G7 meetings in Alberta that Trump abruptly left Monday night, said in a blunt interview with ZDF: “This is the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us. We are also victims of this regime. This mullah regime has brought death and destruction to the world.” Merz warned that unless Iran backs down, “it will mean the total destruction of its nuclear program — which Israel cannot achieve alone, not without the United States.”
The conflict, now in its fifth day, has reportedly claimed nearly 300 lives—about 240 in Iran and more than two dozen in Israel. Israeli military sources say a “third wave” of operations is underway, focusing on Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps units and missile launchers in western Iran. The Israeli Air Force has reportedly conducted deep-penetration strikes using U.S.-built F-35 stealth fighters.
Meanwhile, Israel claimed Tuesday that it had killed another top Iranian military official, and international monitors said Israeli strikes had inflicted greater damage to a key Iranian nuclear facility than previously understood. Since Israel began bombing Iran on Friday, it has effectively crippled Iran’s military leadership—killing at least 11 senior generals—and disrupted command-and-control operations tied to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
On Tuesday morning, the Israel Defense Forces announced it had killed Maj. Gen. Ali Shadmani, describing him as the most senior military commander in Iran. Shadmani had reportedly been appointed to his position just four days earlier, replacing another general killed in an Israeli strike on the first day of hostilities.
While Israeli bombardment shows no signs of slowing, Iran’s retaliatory missile barrages appear to have diminished in intensity over the past 48 hours.
The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
This article supplied by Troy Media.
By Kris Sims
The CBC is draining taxpayer money while Canadians tune out. It’s time to stop funding a media giant that’s become a political pawn
The CBC is a taxpayer-funded failure, and it’s time to pull the plug. Yet during the election campaign, Prime Minister Mark Carney pledged to pump another $150 million into the broadcaster, even as the CBC was covering his campaign. That’s a blatant conflict of interest, and it underlines why government-funded journalism must end.
The CBC even reported on that announcement, running a headline calling itself “underfunded.” Think about that. Imagine being a CBC employee asking Carney questions at a campaign news conference, while knowing that if he wins, your employer gets a bigger cheque. Meanwhile, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has pledged to defund the CBC. The broadcaster is literally covering a story that determines its future funding—and pretending there’s no conflict.
This kind of entanglement isn’t journalism. It’s political theatre. When reporters’ paycheques depend on who wins the election, public trust is shattered.
And the rot goes even deeper. In the Throne Speech, the Carney government vowed to “protect the institutions that bring these cultures and this identity to the world, like CBC/RadioCanada.” Before the election, a federal report recommended nearly doubling the CBC’s annual funding. Former heritage minister Pascale St-Onge said Canada should match the G7 average of $62 per person per year—a move that would balloon the CBC’s budget to $2.5 billion annually. That would nearly double the CBC’s current public funding, which already exceeds $1.2 billion per year.
To put that in perspective, $2.5 billion could cover the annual grocery bill for more than 150,000 Canadian families. But Ottawa wants to shovel more cash at an organization most Canadians don’t even watch.
St-Onge also proposed expanding the CBC’s mandate to “fight disinformation,” suggesting it should play a formal role in “helping the Canadian population understand fact-based information.” The federal government says this is about countering false or misleading information online—so-called “disinformation.” But the Carney platform took it further, pledging to “fully equip” the CBC to combat disinformation so Canadians “have a news source
they know they can trust.”
That raises troubling questions. Will the CBC become an official state fact-checker? Who decides what qualifies as “disinformation”? This isn’t about journalism anymore—it’s about control.
Meanwhile, accountability is nonexistent. Despite years of public backlash over lavish executive compensation, the CBC hasn’t cleaned up its act. Former CEO Catherine Tait earned nearly half a million dollars annually. Her successor, Marie Philippe Bouchard, will rake in up to $562,700. Bonuses were scrapped after criticism—but base salaries were quietly hiked instead. Canadians struggling with inflation and rising costs are footing the bill for bloated executive pay at a broadcaster few of them even watch.
The CBC’s flagship English-language prime-time news show draws just 1.8 per cent of available viewers. That means more than 98 per cent of TV-viewing Canadians are tuning out. The public isn’t buying what the CBC is selling—but they’re being forced to pay for it anyway.
Government-funded journalism is a conflict of interest by design. The CBC is expensive, unpopular, and unaccountable. It doesn’t need more money. It needs to stand on its own—or not at all.
Kris Sims is the Alberta Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
conflict1 day ago“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
-
Health1 day agoLast day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert
-
Energy1 day agoCould the G7 Summit in Alberta be a historic moment for Canadian energy?
-
Energy20 hours agoKananaskis G7 meeting the right setting for U.S. and Canada to reassert energy ties
-
Aristotle Foundation1 day agoThe Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine
-
Business2 days agoCarney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty
-
Business19 hours agoCarney’s Honeymoon Phase Enters a ‘Make-or-Break’ Week