Reddit reviews My Princess Boy

Here is the book! I forgot to link it in my original comment. It's a really great story about acceptance and love😍

My Princess Boy https://www.amazon.com/dp/1442429887/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_buBQzbQJ9B3WE

My Princess Boy

Just wanted to add another thumbs up for the way you're handling this, respecting his wishes without making it into a big deal either - he's lucky to have you for a mom! Also wanted to recommend a couple picture books he might relate to, Jacob's New Dress, Morris Micklewhite and the Tangerine Dress, and My Princess Boy; there's also 10,000 Dresses, which others might recommend, but be aware that the family in that story is NOT supportive and also the child does change pronouns, which might not be a conversation you want to have with your son at this point. The nice thing about the other books is that they present a boy wearing dresses as just one of "many ways to be a boy", as Jacob's mom says, rather than putting a label on it or suggesting that kids have to know exactly who they are at this age. The books also do a good job showing the reality of how other kids may react, and model ways to handle bullying. I'd also recommend the song We Are Who We Are, and the CD Rainbow Train, both about gender-nonconforming kids.

There's a story book called My Princess Boy.
My Princess Boy https://www.amazon.com/dp/1442429887/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_e1QAxbJGVRJ62

Some of my very favorites:

ELL/Immigrant:

The Name Jar

My Name is Yoon

My Name is Sangoel

Ability:

Jessica's Box

My Brother, Charlie

ZOOM!

My Three Best Friends and Me, Zulay

LGBTQ+:

And Tango Makes Three

Worm Loves Worm

Introducing Teddy

My Princess Boy

For some reason u/Hirste-Lukov's latests comment has disappeared from the thread, so I'll reply to myself I guess.

"source for pro-sodomy books"

"source for chemicals in the water which turn animals into sodomites"

Thank you for these. Now, I must refer back to your original comment:

"The UN admitted in documents they released that they literally dump chemicals in the water which have been proven to turn animals gay"

This article does not mention the United Nations at all, nor any documents published by any research body whatsoever, as such your original claim is disproven. Please refrain from making things up in the future if you would ever even dream of being taken seriously in any kind of argument ever, which admittedly you may not want to be and solely want to inflate your ego, however I'm not here to judge that. Incidentally, I actually did find this Infowars article myself, but thought too blatantly fantastical and lacking in discrete evidence (no links to any papers or statistics) to ever possibly consider it grounds for any serious opinion, so I discarded it to look for something concrete. I'm sorry for mistakenly having any faith in you to find reliable sources of information, I'll try my best to correct this in future.

Furthermore, this article specifically talks about Atrazine and Simazine. To quote the US EPA,

"There were no risks of concern identified for the chlorotriazine 4-day cumulative dietary (food only) exposure and risk assessment or for the 4-day dietary cumulative aggregate (food + drinking water) exposure and risk assessment. There were no cumulative risks of concern for the chronic dietary (food only) or screening level aggregate (food + drinking water) assessment for the hydroxytriazines."

(Source https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0266-1160&contentType=pdf)

So there: The supposed Gay Bomb which is turning Bonobos and frogs around the world gay has no risks of concern. To quote another document on Simazine,

"There is direct evidence that simazine is associated with neuroendocrine disruption. Direct measurements of serum hormones such as certain steroid hormones and luteinizing hormone, as well as changes in estrus cycling and histomorphic changes in hormone responsive tissues, indicate neuroendocrine disruption. EPA has responded, in part, to simazine’s known neuroendocrine disrupting capacity by regulating on endpoints based on neuroendocrine disruptor effects and requiring risk mitigation measures, label amendments, and additional confirmatory data to reduce potential risks to below the Agency’s levels of concern. The Agency has determined that, with label amendments and changes as specified in this document, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general U.S. population, infants, children, or other major identifiable subgroups of consumers, from the use of simazine"

(Source https://archive.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/web/pdf/simazine_red.pdf)

So, no, Atrazine isn't harmful, and although Simazine has an effect there is "reasonable certainty" that it doesn't cause harm. I appreciate that the latter of these documents is rather old, however from what I know Simazine is used much less frequently than Astrazine, so I think that from both of these it can be concluded that they are safe. As an addendum, I generally disagree with the high-intensity, high-chemical farming practiced in the United States on principle, so I can partially understand your concern, but I can't disagree with multi-million dollar papers made by people with far more expertise in agriculture than I could possibly ever posses.

​

As for the "pro-sodomy" books, the first is "And Tango Makes Three", a story about how two male penguins who love each other adopt a daughter and live happily together. The most notable aspect is that it features NO SEX at all. No heterosexual intercourse, no homosexual intercourse, nothing! How can a book with no sex possibly advocate sex? In the video, the argument given (by both the interviewer and the interviewee, and never challenged by either) is that by telling young children stories about gay couples, they're being implicitly teaching them about sex.

no.

They are NOT teaching children ANYTHING about sex in these books. If reading children story books about gay penguins is teaching them about sexual intercourse, then every storybook that's ever involed a mother and a father has done so too! There are thousands, if not millions of books aimed at very young children which talk about straight married couples within a typical nuclear family which have been read to children for decades, and nobody seems to have a fault with them pushing their heterosexualisation of children because they don't heterosexualise children, just as 'And Tango Makes Three' doesn't homosexualise them either.

The second is "My Princess Boy", which is about a very feminine boy who wears very feminine clothes. It's quite notably written in the third person from the perspective of the mother of the eponymous boy. You only need to look at the preview pages on Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/My-Princess-Boy-Cheryl-Kilodavis/dp/1442429887) to see that it doesn't idolise the boy anymore than a mother would talk highly of her own child, rather it only says that HE EXISTS. It talks about how he loves his family, how they love him, and how he loves playing with his friends and he can be free to dress and acts as he likes! What part of that is perverse! Why shouldn't boys be allowed to do something as innocuous as wear a dress? It's not like he's having sex with anyone, or even taking any hormones; it's just a pink skirt! And despite what the interviewer says, the boy isn't trans. If the books was about a boy who was trans, it wouldn't have "Boy" in the title.

Books I like (and so does my daughter):

My Princess Boy by Cheryl Kilodavis and Suzanne DeSimone

In Our Mothers' House by Patricia Polacco

The Family Book by Todd Parr

William's Doll by Charlotte Zolotow

It's Perfectly Normal by Robie H. Harris and Michael Emberley

And pretty much everything Leslea Newman has ever written for kids. :)

It's your lucky day.

http://www.amazon.com/My-Princess-Boy-Cheryl-Kilodavis/dp/1442429887

Totally let him. There have been so many recent stories about this in the news, a book was even written! (http://www.amazon.ca/My-Princess-Boy-Cheryl-Kilodavis/dp/1442429887)