A Matter for Debate not Decree

Transgender Campaign Part 6

The national debate on transgenderism is at a fever pitch.  Some states have banned the chemical and surgical transition of minors and others have declared themselves sanctuary states for these treatments.  A woman who identified as a man just killed 6 people at a Christian school.  Activists scheduled a “Trans Day of Vengeance”.  The White House declared the trans community was under attack.  Meanwhile a few staunch proponents of gender ideology question the rush to medicalize children and they are verbally attacked for their efforts.    

Why has this subject become so toxic?  Primarily because proponents believe they are helping kids and detractors believe kids are being sacrificed.  There is a another subtler yet very important reason.  Much of the transgender rhetoric has an underlying presumption that gender ideology is generally accepted science.  It is not.  This presumption coupled with federal legislation and mass marketing of the idea that kids can change their sex at will has resulted in a serious societal pushback.  In response, proponents of gender ideology either assume or strategically state that transgender people are under attack.  Because this makes it personal, it also heightens emotions and feeds divisiveness beautifully.  It is also false.  Transgender people are not under attack, it’s gender ideology that people don’t like.  

Yet those who seek to ban medicalization of youth do not properly address the core issues either.  Attempts to curtail the consequences of the ideology do not speak to the important question of why more kids and young adults are spontaneously deciding they are the opposite sex.  Without public debate and action on gender ideology and the mass marketing that causes social contagion, bans on medicalization could ultimately be ineffective.  Kids will continue to be influenced.  How many will just wait till they are 18 to destroy their health with cross sex hormones? 

Let’s review several core issues:

We need a serious debate about gender ideology.  Modern gender theory is a recent idea and like all ideas, it’s a matter for debate not decree.  For example, I believe that humans are binary (male and female), sex is immutable and that biology supports this view.  I believe women and men are beautifully unique and their traits and desires exist on a wide spectrum.  I strongly oppose male and female stereotypes and believe we should embrace and celebrate the differences found within each sex.  I vehemently disagree with gender theory’s attempt to describe these differences as unique “genders” or “gender identities”.  

Throughout known history, a very small proportion of people have experienced marked and persistent identification with the opposite sex.  Before 2013 this condition was referred to as “gender identity disorder”.  As modern gender theory took root, the name was changed to “gender dysphoria”.  Medical institutions proclaimed that gender dysphoria was no longer a mental condition requiring treatment.  Fast forward ten years and state governments that support gender ideology require children be taught gender theory.  Babies have a “gender assigned at birth” and sometimes the doctors get it right and sometimes they get it wrong. All children can be a boy, a girl, both or neither and drugs and surgery are available to help them transition to “their authentic self”.  Sex is changeable.  

There is a huge gap between my beliefs, which are shared by many, and the ideas embodied by gender ideology.  It is important to recognize that belief structures are the basis for public and institutional policy.  Public policy that stems from gender ideology hardens sex-based stereotypes, encourages children to believe they can choose one of many genders or gender identities and seeks to normalize and encourage transition to the opposite sex (or other gender) via social and medical interventions.    

Public policy based on views such as mine would focus on psychotherapy for children and adults who are emotionally unable to accept their own sex, severely limit medicalization of minors, discourage sex-based stereotypes, and encourage acceptance of those who choose to manage their condition via transition.  

On the state and local level, we should educate people on gender ideology, debate the concepts and vote upon the direction of public policy.  If gender ideology is rejected then teachers’ unions and other institutions who mandate it must be neutralized.   

If the Biden administration were serious about healing the divide, they would be silent on gender ideology since much of the country disagrees with it.  What is it called when national government shoves an unpopular idea down peoples’ collective throats…authoritarianism.  

We need a serious debate on why gender ideology and “gender affirming care” have been mass marketed.  Why is it that the Obama and Biden administrations, teachers’ unions, medical institutions, TQ+ lobbies, progressive donors and activists insist that kids be taught that sex is a choice especially since a large percentage of the population disagrees with this premise?  Why do they tell emotionally vulnerable kids they might be “born in the wrong body” and then promote “gender affirming care” which includes health destroying drugs?  It is disingenuous to suggest that all kids should be taught they can change their sex so they do not bully a child who is unable to accept their own.  

We need a serious debate on the consequences of mass marketing gender ideology and “gender affirming care”.   Social contagion is one of many consequences of marketing gender ideology and has resulted in a greater number of kids, especially girls, spontaneously declaring they are the opposite sex.  It’s cool to be transsexual.  How can emotionally vulnerable children be protected without addressing social contagion and what has caused it?  

Another consequence of the trans marketing campaign is the number of social media influencers, therapists and gender clinics ready and willing to put children on a “gender journey” to resolve their emotional issues. Who is waiting with open arms when they listen?  Big Pharma.  Do you want some candy little girl?  

The influencers, Big Pharma, gender clinics and gender surgeons market themselves which helps gender ideology self-perpetuate.  

What are the long-term impacts of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones on mental and physical health?  It is a lie that puberty blockers are reversible as the Biden administration has stated.  Even a cursory examination of the side effects of sex change drugs suggests extreme caution for adults and a measure of last resort for minors.  

Marketing works.  Kids aren’t the only ones who have been influenced to accept gender ideology. How about parents who are so taken with it they overlook the dangers of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones?  How about therapists who immediately affirm and prescribe these drugs without a serious psychological evaluation?  How about schools who think it’s a great idea to socially transition a kid without telling parents?  Even assuming a belief in gender ideology, none of this makes sense until we recognize that this decades long campaign has been wildly successful.  

The data reveals young adults are electing drugs and/or surgery at a greater rate than ever before.  Why is there excess demand for sex change drugs and surgery compared to ten years ago? Marketing works.  

The well-funded gender marketing machine is entrenched in our schools, social media, institutions and federal government.  Those who disagree with gender ideology must offer a message that speaks to beliefs not just bans if want to protect the kids and young adults whose desire to transition is the result of influence.    

For the sake of the next troubled young girl who spontaneously decides she is a boy, sterilizes herself with drugs and cuts off her breasts, let’s please educate ourselves on gender ideology, focus the debate on the core issues and get serious about impacting public policy at the local level.  

Details 

• The article above began as a response to Dr Erica Anderson’s recent article “Why We Need a Serious Debate About Healthcare for Transgender Youth”.  While I disagree with Dr. Anderson’s position on gender ideology, her article is thoughtful and worthwhile.  My reaction upon reading it was that a debate about treatment will be unsuccessful without a serious debate on gender ideology and the mass marketing that drives social contagion.  

• “Missouri Senate Bill 49 is an Essential Step to Protect Missouri Children from “Sex Transition” Treatments is also a good article.  My reaction is that these efforts may not have the desired effect because they are silent on the underlying ideology that drives kids to the gender clinic in the first place.  

• This is the sixth article in the Transgender Campaign series. Previous articles include much background information and data that might be helpful.  Part 1 “Through the Looking Glass”, Part 2 “Snowballs”, Part 3 “The Marketeers”, Part 4 “Comment on Biden Administration’s Proposed Amendment to Title IX”, Part 5  “Beliefs, Biases and Bad Ideas”. 

• The photo above is from a book called “Being You: A First Conversation About Gender (First Conversations) by Megan Madison, Jessica Ralli and Anne/Andy Passchier