The other day I saw this post on Instagram. The author is someone I went to college with, but didn’t know there. (He was anointed the next Walker Evans while my advisor, with her shock of electric white hair and violet eyes, drawled in her patrician accent: “You’re not a writer.”) But coincidentally we have non-college friends in common, and the other day I heard him on the radio, discussing how anti-trans hate is riling the Republicans. Thus, well, I responded, even though it’s probably not good for my social life to do so.

It went as expected. “I’d love to hear more about what you think the life-threatening elements are, if you’d be willing to discuss,” I wrote. (Did I, though, or was I just trying to lay the groundwork for my consistent argument that how to treat gender issues shouldn’t be framed as left/right?) He said he’d written a book about it. I pushed back a little.

He responded with: “as I say, I’ve written a book about the threats I’ve seen firsthand as a reporter, and faced at the wrong end of a gun. They are many. Against trans folks is one. I’ve seen and heard it firsthand. I’m not talking Brooklyn, I’m talking armed people. I try to stay available for conversations, but with respect for others I’m just not available for a discussion on the realness of threats against trans people, including my kid and my dearest friends. I don’t have it in me. I believe this is, unfortunately, a which side are you on moment. There are men with guns outside libraries. There are kids inside. Which side are you on? Are ‘questions’ more important than standing with those who literally have guns pointed at them? I’m not talking Brooklyn.”

Below is my response, which I posted in parts on Insta (because there must be a word minimum). I hope that this kind of plea, along with articles like Helen Lewis’s recent one in The Atlantic, which features me pleading for a bipartisan commission and to stop fighting and get data, will eventually sway some media-makers—and some lefties. As I say in Lewis’s piece, “Staking your claim on supporting drag-queen story hour, as opposed to a $25 minimum wage, is really silly.”

@xxxx: I share your fear of the far right, and especially extremists on the right, rolling back decades of progress with respect to gender and sexuality. It’s why I want to wrest the issue from politics, and from the hands of the extreme left: I don’t want to replace rad with trad. I want liberals to reform the medical, educational, psychological and legal fields that have been overtaken by a radical minority of bad actors—not with guns, but with policies, guidelines, fear, intimidation, and threats to families under the guise of “affirmation.”

That said, I would never lump old school “compassionate conservative” types in with the radical militias you’ve observed, nor would I discount the way the radical left has inflamed those militias through our support of unscientific and dangerous gender ideas that we should be scrutinizing ourselves. There is bipartisan objection to those ideas and the policies and laws they lead to—from liberals and LGBT folks, as I’ve documented.

We—liberals and the reasonable left—need to be the ones to reform, to pull back, to be honest and to stop stoking the flames by imposing quasi-religious ideas about gender onto people who do not want them and, according to you, will stop at nothing to combat them.

The Proud Boys displays you refer to aren’t happening in Brooklyn, you and I both admit. Indeed, I would love for you to understand what’s happening in places like New York City, or states like California and Oregon where laws have been passed in the name of protecting vulnerable children, but which do the opposite. I’ve been interviewing kids and their families all across America for years now—kids and families given terrible care under the affirmative model. I’d love for you to hear their stories.

I’d love you to talk to Abigail Martinez, whose daughter was taken from her by the state because of her reluctance to “affirm;” the daughter later committed suicide.

I would love for you to read the Cass Independent Review, which explains the issue of diagnostic overshadowing—kids with complex mental health problems not getting the support they need once gender comes into the picture. The doctors who wield suicide stats in ways that should get them fired, but instead they testify at state hearings—doctors who have told children to their faces that they will kill themselves if they don’t transition.

I would love you to talk to the detransitioners who have had breasts removed, whose bodies are forever changed from testosterone, who realized later that they were autistic, depressed, lonely, and/or confused and never should have been allowed such medical interventions.

I would love for you to talk to the desisters, who socially transitioned and realized even that was a massive, controversial psychological intervention—one being facilitated, in secret, by schools.

I’d love you to read about the shift in perspective and policy in many European countries—based on evidence, on the new cohort of teen girls with no history of childhood gender dysphoria, on detransitioners. I would love you to strip politics away and look at what’s happening.

Your response underscored my point that accusations of moral failing are not arguments—rather than explain, you said it’s a question of which side I’m on, the assumption being that you’re on the right side, and I’m on the wrong.

I’m on the side of kids and families, of schools and doctors helping them thrive, rather than triangulating between them and unraveling the family fabric. I’m on the side of science and evidence, which does not support medical transition. I’m on the side of real journalism, telling people what they need to know so they can make informed decisions. I’m on the side of gender nonconforming people, who need space to be different, not to be interfered with medically so they conform, who are deeply misunderstood by both the left and the right, and who are told constantly by well-meaning lefties that they are hated and in danger, ignoring that, as The New York Times actually admitted the other day, “This is the best time in American history to be L.G.B.T.Q.” I’m on the side of not telling children they are fragile and helpless because of their innate sexual orientation, or because of an identity they’ve chosen—even as I understand that it is gender nonconformity, not gender identity, that sometimes does instill anger, hatred, even violence.  

I’m on the side of truth, which is neither left nor right. Anyone with a child with gender-related distress owes it to that kid to be fully informed. Any pundit telling other people on the left how they should understand these issues owes it to all of us to be fully informed. That’s why I spend all my time trying to inform journalists, and why I have reached out to you.

Which side are you on?  

As a senior citizen of Mendocino County, CA, who is currently struggling with the care available to gender-nonconforming individuals, I have serious reservations about the language of AB2218.

A bit of the bill text:

This bill would establish the Transgender Wellness and Equity Fund, under the administration of the office, for grants to transgender-led (Trans-led) organizations and hospitals, health care clinics, and other medical providers that provide gender-conforming health care services and have an established partnership with a Trans-led organization, to create, or fund existing, programs focused on coordinating trans-inclusive health care, as defined, for people that identify as transgender, gender nonconforming, or intersex.

As you may be aware, "transgender" thought and policy is currently engulfed in an irrational battle between "the affirmative model" (under which no one is allowed to question the "feelings" of someone who thinks they might be "trans"), and the "gender critical" viewpoint (which says that certain aspects of life, like chromosomes and internal reproductive organs, are immutable).

I'm "bi-gender," a midpoint where I realize I will always have male chromosomes and male organs, but find the mental and emotional effects of female hormones wonderfully liberating after seventy years of failing to "pass" as a "real man." But when I ask my local clinic for help, they are forced to classify me as "MTF transgender" and note my sex as "female" in their patient record.

I'm an unusual case, but I illustrate how far the system is already prejudiced toward the "affirmative model." Specifying that providers "have an established partnership with a Trans-led organization" will only increase this bias. The very term "gender-conforming health care" writes this bias—the idea that the solution to gender issues is forcing people to conform to the opposite binary—into law!

There is a glaring need for funding assistance to ALL gender-nonconforming individuals, whether or not they are helped by the "affirmative" "Trans Women are Women" model. In particular, "detransitioners" who have tried "affirmation" and found it did not solve their issues, need support—and will never get it from partisan "Trans-Led" groups. There are many new groups supporting detransitioners, with views opposing those of the "Trans-Led". Including them would be a start toward fairness.

But the government should not be funding advocacy groups on either side of the "gender wars." Please remove that concept from the bill, and base support on medical credentials and peer-reviewed research. I realize there is little applicable research—supporting more would be a good use for your funds! (Provided it is not required to be led by "trans" partisans.)

Finally, please remove the mention of "intersex" from the bill. It refers to an entirely separate medical condition which has nothing to do with transgenderism. Its use by Trans-led organizations to support their concept of a "gender spectrum" insults people with "intersex" conditions.

We have gone to great lengths and personal expense to reach an agreement with [SCHOOL NAME] that, for the sake of our daughter’s wellness, she is to be referred to by her legal name (XXX) and female pronouns. We understand that this may strike you as unusual at the least—and possibly unsupportive or politically motivated at the worst. On the contrary, our thoughtfully considered rationale for this directive is tailored to XXX’S clinical presentation and is supported by her mental health team.

XXX presented as transgender suddenly and without warning, with no history of signs or symptoms of gender dysphoria. This identity emerged amid severe psychological turmoil, and only after a long period of close contact with similarly presenting peers in the inpatient mental facilities she had been in. XXX’S presentation is known as “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” or ROGD. Her presentation is a new and increasingly common phenomenon that vastly differs from cases in which gender dysphoria has been evident since childhood—the classic presentation on which recommendations to affirm are based. In XXX’S case, affirming is neither benign nor neutral, as explained by her treating psychiatrist:

XXX’S “affirmation” practices are an obstacle to XXX’S progress and continued recovery and undermine the recommendations of both her inpatient and outpatient therapists and the wishes of XXX’S parents. For the sake of XXX’S current and future mental and physical health, the “affirmation” of her as anything but a normal female student must stop at once.

The term “social affirmation,” commonly used to describe the approach taken by XXX with XXX, connotes kindness and consideration. But in cases such as XXX’S, involving an emotionally disturbed girl who seeks to escape her biological reality, it is a misleading euphemism: “affirmation” is neither kind nor considerate to XXX. In this letter I therefore place it in quotation marks.

Misrepresenting XXX as male or nonbinary could have dangerous consequences for her mental and physical health. Having reviewed her psychiatric medical records as well as the letters sent to XXX from her previous clinicians, it is my professional judgment that formally or informally identifying XXX as XXX, he/him or they/them puts her recovery at risk of regression to self-harm and could arrest her natural adolescent identity development. In addition, this practice is creating conflicting environments between school and home, adding to XXX’S confusion, and compromising her relationship with her family.

We are aware that XXX reached out to you covertly requesting that you violate our legal agreement; we can appreciate the uncomfortable position this puts you in. It is equally uncomfortable for us to battle the school over this, but we have a responsibility to our daughter. XXX has a stable home life with dedicated and protective parents who love her unconditionally. We have more than earned the right to direct her medical care and have proven ourselves capable in this time and again in the face of extraordinary and often dire circumstances.

We ask for your renewed dedication in respecting and adhering to both the letter and spirit of our legal agreement. If XXX contacts you about this again (verbally or in writing), please direct her to speak with us. In addition, we are always open to answering any questions you may have about our approach.

Sincerely,
XXX

We, the parents of XXX, first want to thank you for the ongoing, individualized support you have given XXX and our family during the mental health crisis she has been experiencing over the past year and a half. We are truly grateful for the care and hard work you have put in to provide her with a customized plan that best fits her unique educational and emotional needs.

As you know, although XXX has made tremendous progress, she continues to receive regular psychological and psychiatric treatment in the outpatient setting for ongoing mental health challenges, including (but not limited to) gender dysphoria. Based on our recent discussions, we are requesting an urgent meeting with the CSE to discuss adding further stipulations to XXX’s IEP to protect her from being referred to as anything other than her legal name and female pronouns, based on clinical concerns expressed by us and her healthcare team (and explained in further detail below). We recognize this may not be possible prior to the start of school on Thursday. Therefore, to make XXX’s transition back to the public school setting as seamless as possible, we request that all staff consistently refer to by her legal birth name and female pronouns (consistent with her current IEP) both verbally and in writing, including all documentation, both formal (transcript, etc.) and informal (e.g., concert programs, yearbook, etc.)—effective immediately.

For both safety and mental health reasons, she must also not be allowed to use opposite sex facilities (i.e., bathrooms, locker rooms). If XXX makes any request (verbally or in writing) that runs counter to these requests, please inform us immediately. Although we were unable to find any policy specific to this on the XXX website, our requests are not in any way at odds with efforts to be inclusive of all students, regardless of sex or gender identity (which we applaud and support). In our recent discussions, you acknowledged the legitimacy of our concerns about affirming XXX (ie, using her preferred name and pronouns) and the clinical appropriateness of this request, but expressed legal concerns. We have consulted with XXX (an educational attorney), who confirmed that these requests do not violate any laws designed to protect students against discrimination, including Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Dignity for All Students Act (“DASA”). Although the affirmative approach may be the standard guidance, rigidly applying a “one size fits all” approach to XXX’s case—against the advice of her mental health providers and the wishes of her parents—is in direct opposition to The New York State Guidance to School Districts for Creating a Safe and Supportive School Environment For Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students:

“This guidance cannot anticipate every situation in which questions may arise relating to transgender and gender non-conforming students. Therefore, the specific needs of each transgender or GNC student should be assessed and addressed on a case-by-case basis.”

As we and mental health providers have conveyed, we have compelling reasons to believe that calling XXX by a male name and male pronouns would be detrimental to her psychological development and in opposition to goals of providing a safe environment for our child. Affirmation is a clinical intervention that is not necessarily the optimal way of supporting a child having a gender identity crisis. In XXX’s case, using an affirmative approach fails to consider her emotional disturbance and individual psychological needs, as well as the valid concerns of us (her parents), and the recommendations of the members of her recent and current mental health team, including XXX, (Executive Director of XXX, the therapeutic boarding school where resided for the entire 2020-2021 school year), and XXX( current outpatient therapist), and in consultation with XXX, an internationally renowned expert on gender dysphoria in children and adolescents, in conjunction with our own scrupulous research.

Evidence to support an affirmative approach is lacking for students such as who presented as transgender suddenly in adolescence (rather than in childhood), with no prior history of signs or symptoms of gender dysphoria. Furthermore, this identity emerged in the midst of severe psychological turmoil, and with heavy influence from similarly presenting peers in the inpatient mental facilities she had been in. presentation is also known as “rapid-onset gender dysphoria,” or ROGD. (See ROGD Resources at the end of this letter.) There is mounting evidence (both published and anecdotal) of high contagion and particular vulnerability for adolescents with comorbid mental disorders (anxiety, depression, etc.) surrounding ROGD. For many adolescents with ROGD (including XXX) the transgender identity becomes yet another maladaptive coping mechanism, similar to self-harm and disordered eating (both of which XXX has also experienced). This cohort is considerably different from those who have been experiencing childhood gender dysphoria that persists into adolescence—a subset that is better studied and on which affirmative recommendations are based. Those recommendations, therefore, cannot be extrapolated to XXX’s case. In cases of ROGD, there is evidence to suggest that social transition (including use of opposite sex name and pronouns) is both damaging and difficult to reverse. This point is underscored by an abundance of testimonies from young women who experienced ROGD and then decided to detransition; detransitioners often note the difficulty of changing their minds when those around them went along with their male names and pronouns for months or years.

Affirming a male identity for XXX, who struggles with black and white thinking, imperils her exploration of the deeper issues at play and sets her on a path toward harmful and irreversible medicalization at the end of her high school career, when she will be of an age to make such decisions without our consent. It is imperative that we actively intervene now, before XXX is of age to make decisions that may be associated with long-term negative consequences and possibly life-long regret. Although we continue to work diligently with XXX’s therapist to help her explore these issues, we are much less likely to be successful if we do not have a consistent approach being used across all facets of life, including school, where she spends a high percentage of her time. We continue to support XXX’s exploration of gender identity, while setting boundaries within our home, in extracurricular activities, and with extended family, regarding the use of her legal birth name and pronouns and facilities that align with her sex. Although it is not XXX’s preference, she is accepting of this, and we continue to have positive interactions using this approach.

As always, we appreciate your time and attention to this important matter. Please let us know whether there is further information you need from us to enact our request immediately, prior to the start of the new school year.

Sincerely,

XXX

Clinical Resources on Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria

Websites

 Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria: A Primer: www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7FI6 OKrzc
o If you are not already familiar with ROGD, this is an excellent primer in a discussion with

Dr. Lisa Littman, the researcher who published a seminal peer-reviewed study identifying this phenomenon (see Littman 2018 under the Studies and Articles section below), and Sasha Ayad, a licensed therapist with extensive expertise working with ROGD children. (See Inspired Teen Therapy website in this section.)

•   Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine: https://segm.org/

•   Pediatric and Adolescent Gender Dysphoria Working Group: http://gdworkinggroup.org/

•   Genspect: https://genspect.org/team/

•   Stella O’Malley: www.stellaomalley.com/

•   Inspired Teen Therapy: https://inspiredteentherapy.com/

  Podcast

•   Gender: A Wider Lens: https://gender-a-wider-lens.captivate.fm/episode/rapid-onset-gender- dysphoria

o Episode 2 is specific to rapid-onset gender dysphoria, but all episodes I’ve listened to have been excellent. A new episode is released each week.

Studies and Articles

•   Outbreak: On Transgender Teens and Psychic Epidemics [Marchiano 2017]

•   Parent reports of adolescents and young adults perceived to show signs of a rapid onset of

  gender dysphoria. [Littman 2018]

•   ‘Taking the lid off the box’: The value of extended clinical assessment for adolescents presenting

  with gender identity difficulties [Clarke 2019]

•   Sex, gender and gender identity: a re-evaluation of the evidence [Griffin 2020]

•   One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria [D’Angelo 2020]

•   Gender Dysphoria Resource for Providers [D’Angelo 2020]

•   Why I Resigned from Tavistock: Trans-Identified Children Need Therapy, Not Just 'Affirmation'

  and Drugs [Evans 2020]

•   First, Do No Harm: A New Model for Treating Trans-Identified Children [Evans 2021]

•   Transgender Teens: Is the Tide Starting to Turn? [McCall 2021]

  Books

•   The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity in Our Society by Debra Soh

•   Material Girls: Why Reality Matters for Feminism by Kathleen Stock

I am a lifelong liberal. I support legislation which affords protection for all, no matter their race, religion, or sexual orientation. However, it is incorrect to state that all those who express concerns about HB6638, to revise the state’s anti-discrimination policies, are proponents of a far right, fringe, QAnon moral panic. It is true that some are, but it is also true that a far left fringe group of activists have proposed that MAP  (Minor Attracted People) be classified as an identity or gender. It is not unreasonable to consider how, if at all, this proposed legislation will include, or not include, this newly identified "gender."

Sadly, there are fringe elements on both the far right and far left. They feed each others' outrage and thrive on fear and ignorance. They threaten our ability to act cooperatively and productively as we attempt to move forward in the democratic process. Those of us who wish to defend the rights of all citizens have an obligation to discuss these important issues with calm, rational, fact-based evidence.

Sincerely,

XXXXX

I wrote the following letter to my daughter’s school at the beginning of her first year of high school, after she spent most of 8th grade identified as a boy. As you will read, we made many changes over the summer, and saw a big difference in our child’s mental and physical health. The head of school replied to my letter, ensuring me that pronouns would not be asked for at the start of classes and that gender would not be a focus in school. She said that we would be notified if our child asked for alternate names and pronouns, which happened a few weeks later. She said she would remind teachers of this part of the school’s stated belief, which reads:

“We believe in parental choice and that we are here to serve families. As we strive to build upon connections with our families, we leave the job of parenting to our parents. They are responsible for imparting morals and values taught in their homes including practiced political, religious, and social viewpoints. We trust that they know what is best for their student as the student grows and develops into an adult.”

This school does not lean in any political or religious direction, but is instead focused on preparing kids for college or technical studies.  They don’t allow clubs with politically charged intentions, only ones with an academic or hobby-related focus. Yes, there are trans identified kids at this school, some of whom are being supported by their parents, and the school supports these parents too.  Because my daughter’s school does what school is supposed to do—prepare kids for college and the working world, while parents are allowed to do the parenting.

I had hoped that the beginning of high school would mark a new start for her, and I can joyfully report that it has, indeed, with the support of her school administrators and teachers. I’m sharing it in hopes that it will provide a ray of hope for distraught parents, a template to use for writing to their own children’s schools, or a policy to propose to schools still following secrecy guidelines.  

Dear School Leaders,

We are writing with some concerns about our child's experience in school around the issue of gender.  We understand this is a challenging and controversial topic in schools, and respect that different children and their families have different needs and beliefs regarding gender identity.  We fully support the school’s belief statements and appreciate the thoughtful attention given to these ideals.

In 8th grade, our daughter became involved with a small group of other young biological females who identified as transgender, and subsequently wanted to adopt a transgender identity herself.  She began using a male name and pronouns at school with both her peers and teachers.  

As deeply involved parents who know our child well and have educated ourselves extensively on this subject, we are certain this sudden identity change is driven by a desire for peer acceptance and not by any inherent gender identity disorder.  D suffered from anxiety and depression in middle school, and it seemed only to be exacerbated by fixation on gender identity. Among D’s friends, body hatred was a main topic of conversation, and her friends advised her on breast binding, which constricted her breathing and worsened her anxiety and difficulty focusing. Over the summer, without any focus on gender or access to internet or social media, we have seen D’s mental health improve dramatically.  We have concentrated instead on participation in healthy activities and building positive relationships, and this has been clearly beneficial for D. Though we will support and love her no matter how she identifies in her life, we believe she is still too young to decide her gender and sexual identity.  

On the first day of class, many teachers now ask children to introduce themselves with their name and preferred pronouns. While this has become a standard inclusion practice for adults, it doesn’t always have the intended effect for children and teens, who are still figuring out who they are.  For many teens, this practice creates an on-the-spot social pressure to label themselves with a gender identity, which is hard for them to reverse socially once they have identified themselves.  This is especially difficult for a child like ours, who has deep social anxiety and fear of peer rejection.  

May we ask that:

1. Our child’s teachers do not focus on identifying pronouns, especially early in the semester?

2. Our child’s given name and pronouns be used by teachers and administrators?

We work closely with each other as well as mental and physical health professionals to ensure our child’s well-being.  With much care and evaluation, we are supporting D to stay focused on health, self-care and learning for the time being, rather than gender identity. We ask also that the school support us in our parenting decisions and let us know if any issues arise with D, gender-related or otherwise.  And we are always open to more conversation and new ideas and solutions.

Thank you,

___

Hi Robert.

As a mother, grandmother, and great grandmother of children with Haitian, Puerto Rican, African American, Irish, Italian and Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry (yes, A NYC melting-pot), I love your chapter about the fallacy of racial identity and how you backed that up with genetic science.

As I was reading, I wondered what you would say about sexual differences? My sense is that just as there is no race, there is no sex. We are told from the time we are born what our sex is and we either identify appropriately or we are in conflict with it. I don't see why we need to have any identity--racial or sexual. How do you see this?

Abrazos! Ellen
———

Hi, Ellen.
Race, as I have pointed out, has historical and social implications, but is not easily defined scientifically. Take skin color for example, which is a common way of judging someone’s so-called "race." A pigment called melanin is produced in the skin in response to ultraviolet radiation from the sun. In human evolution, the closer a particular group lived to the equator, the more melanin would be produced on average, and following Darwin's theory, offspring with better protection against radiation would be more likely to thrive and reproduce. Hence, equatorial groups tended towards darker skin with more melanin while those groups far from the equator tended towards lighter skin. But regardless of skin color, all those humans belong to the same race--the human race.

Sex is a different matter. It is easily defined scientifically. Like many other animals, we humans reproduce sexually. One individual carries the egg that will, when fertilized, develop into a new individual, and another carries the sperm cells that fertilize the egg. This distinction is entirely binary with no middle ground.

There are only two sexes, female and male, and the sex of a newborn baby is almost always immediately apparent. In rare cases, the sex of a newborn is ambiguous, usually because the genitals appear abnormal in one way or another, but this does not mean that sex is nonbinary or nonexistent, nor does it mean that there are more than two sexes. The rare cases of intersex births are genetic defects, exceptions that prove the binary rule.

Many transsexual activists attempt to muddy these waters, not to inform, but to baffle. Their agenda aims at replacing the word "sex," which is an either/or, with the word "gender" that can mean whatever anyone says it means, and to sell the idea that someone born male can, through chemicals and surgery become female, or visa versa. This is hot air. A male human cannot become female, nor a female become male.

Conflating the words "sex" and  "gender" is an underhanded word game--a kind of manipulation that has particular power because there was a period in all our lives when the words sex and gender were used interchangeably to mean male or female.

That is no longer the case. Nowadays, gender means the personal feelings, psychological tendencies, and behaviors that women, men, girls, and boys can identify with or perform. Unlike sex which is binary, in this new meaning, gender is fluid, and can be expressed in countless ways.

This is a complex subject that has been politicized so systematically that speaking about it clearly carries social and professional risks. Since my days of caring about such risks (if I ever did) have come to an end, I feel free to speak factually without regard to political agendas and will have more to say about this.

In particular, I would like to suggest that what needs alteration is not bodies and pronouns, but antiquated ideas about how men and women differ and what roles they are expected to assume. But that is deep water. For now, Ellen, sex is a basic fact of animal existence, while gender, in its revised meaning, is a matter of feelings and social mores, not a basic fact.

A human female can express her humanity in countless ways but she will always be a human female just as a human male will always be a human male regardless of behavior or how he feels about it.

A male human who with surgery and chemicals has altered his appearance and then performs or enacts being a woman using dress and other social cues is not a woman, but a transwoman. To say that a human male can become a woman is nonsense. The trans activist mantra--"a trans woman is a woman"--is Orwellian doublespeak, an outright lie posing as so-called "inclusivity."

Further, the claim that any identity I want to adopt must be accepted without question is entirely new and completely outrageous. If I say that I identify as Jesus Christ, does that mean you must worship me? Until lately, one’s identity was part of an intersubjective process, partly in the mind of the one asserting the identity and partly in the eye of the beholder. Now, according to trans dogma, the beholder no longer counts. I am whatever I say I am, and anyone who won’t buy it is “phobic.”

I hope I have made this clear.

———

But, Robert, if you identify with your race or culture or sex, isn’t that all the same mechanism. Identification and differentiation may at times be needed for functioning, but at a certain point, they are not really necessary. I don't care what pronoun people use for me.

———

This is not about pronouns, Ellen. For reasons of civility, I will probably call you whatever you ask me to, but sex is not an identity one chooses, but a biological fact comes into being soon after conception. A human primate body is either male or female and that cannot change no matter how one feels about it or what language is demanded.  

Identification comes into play when considering how one fits into a system of gender roles. If you are a man, you might feel more comfortable in roles that are more typically occupied by women and you may go as far as using chemicals and surgery as an aid to "performing" what you consider a typical female identity so as to be regarded as if you were female, but that does not make you a woman. Nothing can make a man into a woman or a boy into a girl.

The word woman means a mature human female who was once a girl. If you are born male, you cannot become a woman. The word man means a mature human male who was once a boy. If you are born female, you cannot become a man. All the weasel words in the world cannot change that because biology is not a matter of language or opinion.

Many trans activists use deceitful language to attack biological reality. Through threats and intimidation, they have managed to coerce medical institutions into substituting the deceitful phrase "pregnant people" for the factual phrase "pregnant women," which implies that a human male could somehow be pregnant. That is simply a lie. No man has ever been pregnant, and no man ever will be. Only women can be pregnant.

Another case of trans doublespeak alleges that sex is “assigned” at birth. More flimflam. Sex has to be assigned only in rare cases of ambiguity when efforts are made to choose the best outcome for an intersex infant. Otherwise, sex is clearly present in utero and is not “assigned,” but observed at birth, and can be observed much earlier if desired via ultrasound around the eighteenth week of pregnancy. And speaking of deceitful language, babies are nursed by breastfeeding, not “chestfeeding.”

Another nasty bit of language manipulation is the word "cisgendered." I am not cisgendered. I am a man—end of story. If I prefer sex with women, I am a straight man, and so-called “gender” has nothing to do with it. If I prefer sex with men, I am equally a man, but then I am a gay man and “gender” has nothing to do with it. If I like sex with both men and women, I am still equally a man, but a bisexual one and “gender” has nothing to do with it.. Straight, gay, and bi are not “genders,”, as the trans activists want us to believe, but the various sexual preferences of women and men.

That is an important distinction. One's status as a man or a woman does not depend on actions in bed or otherwise but on the body’s inborn role in human reproduction. That is why I think it is time to reject the concept of gender entirely and just understand that a man can wear a dress and lipstick if he likes, but will still be a man. He can submit to castration and have his penis converted into a simulated vagina and he will still be a male human being, but now, aiming at being regarded as a woman, can accurately be called a transwoman--not a woman, but a transwoman.

I know some people will disagree with this view, and some may even see it as "transphobic," a preposterous word that was created to besmirch and damage anyone who will not at least pretend to accept the assertions of the trans activists. By that standard, even examining those assertions and considering their implications will be called transphobia. But objecting to insincere distortions of biological facts and the intentional destruction of natural language is not a phobia. It’s a sane and informed refusal to kowtow to disingenuous political interest groups with money and power agendas but no commitment to factual discourse.

We have been coming to your practice for almost 19 years and have always been pleased with the care you have shown our two kids.

Our most recent appointment was quite a shock to me, however. Our son is sixteen and autistic. He has also had numerous surgeries almost since birth. XXX is a kid who has always struggled to fit in with his peers, most likely due to his autism. He began toying with the idea he might be transgender around his15th birthday and in a matter of weeks he became convinced that this was the answer to why he struggles. If you are familiar with autistic thinking, it is often very black and white.

We found him a therapist who focusses on his autism and works on his social skills. This seems to be helping him feel better overall. We are trying to get him to stop obsessing about his feelings and instead do things that make him happy such as music, cooking etc.

This brings me to his appointment April 10^th at the XXXX office. After almost an hour with the doctor, he came out with a sheaf of information on the gender clinic. I am shocked and truly appalled that there is so much capture of the medical profession, our schools and the general population by the transgender ideology. I understand that the AAP approach is to treat our kids as though this is normal but I have to ask each one of the doctors in your office, “Do you, in your hearts believe this is normal?  What does your conscience tell you? Do you feel this is in line with your hippocratic oath to go along with this? Transgender ideology is often compared with Anorexia Nervosa in the sense that you would not accept as normal, a skinny child telling you they are fat. So why would you accept a child telling you they were born in the wrong body? Especially, knowing what you all surely know about the effects of cross sex hormones on a kid’s body. I imagine at least some of you must know that surgeries are not without major health risks and in between hormones and surgeries, the kids who take these steps will likely be lifelong patients.

I will also add that the AAP is not above reproach. They are funded in part by the pharmaceutical industry and trans activists most certainly hold sway over this organization as well as others.

I am not placing the blame on your practice. I know this is widespread and not just in the US and Canada, although the  UK, Sweden, Finland and Norway are among some of the European countries to have pulled back from these protocols. I am asking those of you who are disturbed by this to stand up to the AAP. Please speak out for these vulnerable kids who are being harmed. It is not kind to lie to kids about biology in order to avoid hurt feelings. Allowing kids to essentially self-diagnose seems deeply inappropriate and to go a step further and coach them on steps to take towards medicalization, goes even further over the line. Please ask yourselves if this is truly acceptable to you as pediatricians. If we are silent in the face of  this, both parents and doctors, we will be complicit.

I would hope that any future appointments with our son would be conducted with the usual compassion while bearing in mind, what I have told you in this letter.

Thank you,

XXXX

Thank you for the work you do to support our country's health. I am a mother of a trans-identifying young adult who was a patient at the XXGender Clinic in XX. I have grave concerns about the state of so-called "gender affirming care" in the US and by what seems like the lack of evidence behind procedures offered both to minors and young adults. The extreme politicization of this issue and what is described as the "capture" of our institutions has led to resistance to investigate, which, in turn, hurts children like mine.

In other countries - England, Finland, Sweden, Norway, France - centralized medical agencies have completed systematic reviews of the evidence and, as a result, scaled back or stopped pediatric gender treatments.  Why aren't we doing that here in the US?  

Are you the Director to initiate such a review in the US?  If not, who is?  What would it take to undertake a centralized, thorough review of the research into pediatric gender medicine, of the kind undertaken by Dr Hilary Cass in England?

Thank you and best,

XXXX

I am an enormous admirer of your writing and just about always share the perspective (and passion) you bring to political reporting. I’m a social psychologist, and have written op-eds for the Times for many years, many of them in the era of the great Bob Berger. I’m co-author of Mistakes were made (but not by ME), on the dissonance we all feel when a deeply held belief or practice is disconfirmed by the evidence. The left experiences this just as the right does. 

That’s why I writing to you, in hopes of instilling some dissonance in you about “gender-affirming” clinics. The left has a clear narrative about them—they are only good, only “2% of the adolescents later desist” (a number you reported in one of your essays), they save lives, etc.—and thus we open-minded people must fight tooth and nail against those loathsome, bigoted, transphobic Republicans who want to shut them down. I agree about the Republican motives, but not about the goal, which is why I’m hoping progressives like you will consider the evidence to date. It’s a hell of a story, but one that has been largely invisible in liberal media. Now, with the closing of the prestigious Tavistock Gender Clinic in London, the major revamping of “gender-affirming” interventions in Sweden, Finland, Norway, and elsewhere recommending against puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for young teenagers, and the rise of thousands upon thousands of desisters, it’s time for our side to understand what is happening without assuming it’s all a right-wing backlash.  The Tavistock clinic is facing a lawsuit from 1,000 desisters protesting the treatments they received and the harms they suffered as a result.

I am taking the liberty of attaching an essay I just wrote for Skeptic, on the Tavistock story and its larger context. (I am also sending this email without the attachment, as a Times editor told me in the past that sometimes messages with attachments are deleted.) Below, I also include a message from Lisa Selin Davis, a journalist who has been writing often about problems getting the Left to hear the full story. I would be happy to give you more information or introduce you to experts who are on the forefront of these issues. Or send you another piece I’ve written, “We didn’t know there was another side.” There is.

With my best regards,

Carol Tavris, Ph.D.

Dear Senator _________:
I’m a lifelong Democrat, and I am writing about the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2023, S. 613.

I am asking you to support this bill, subject to appropriate amendments, as described below. I have read the bill and do not see anything about it to which Democrats should object in principle. It is certainly not transphobic, and any issues with its wording can be addressed by amendments codifying reasonable, science-based exceptions, for example, in the case of pre-puberty intramural athletics. With regard to post-puberty athletics, and particularly competitive athletics, however, it has been flabbergasting to see my own Democratic Party take positions that descend into abject science denial. This needs to change now.

Powerful scientific evidence, provided in study after study, has demonstrated that male puberty brings with it insurmountable advantages that cannot be overcome, even with suppression of testosterone. And certainly Democrats, past champions of women’s rights, should not be in the business of destroying any semblance of a level playing field for natal women and girls in order to cater to natal boys and men who simply raise their hands to self-identify as women.

I urge you to lead the way to a return to following the science. Excellent models abound that the Democrats might use, including that proposed by Martina Navratilova, under which there would be two competitive categories, one for natal females only and the other open to anyone. Other excellent proposals include those offered by the Women’s Sports Policy Working Group and Seb Coe and World Athletics.

At present, however, the position Democrats are currently wedded to turns girls’ and women’s athletic ambitions into a joke. We’ve already seen what this looks like when natal males are allowed to compete against, and take medals and so many other opportunities away from, natal female athletes.

Please don’t let the right run away with these issues under the pretense that it has the high ground. Of course, I’d be delighted if the amendments pass and a scientifically sound amended bill passed into law. I suspect strongly, however, that, if the Democrats amend the bill in ways like those I suggest, the right will refuse to adopt them. This alone will allow Democrats to retake the high ground on these issues without continuing to throw natal women and girls under the bus.

Natal women and girls need your support, now more than ever. Please don’t fail us.

I’m a lifelong Democrat, and I am writing to share my concern that you voted no on the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act of 2023, H.R. 734. I have read the bill and do not see anything about it to which Democrats should object in principle. It is certainly not transphobic, and any issues with its wording could easily have been addressed by amendments codifying reasonable exceptions, for example, in the case of pre-puberty intramural athletics. With regard to post-puberty athletics, and particularly competitive athletics, however, it is flabbergasting to see my own Democratic Party take a position that descends into abject science denial.

Powerful scientific evidence, provided in study after study, has demonstrated that male puberty brings with it insurmountable advantages that cannot be overcome, even with suppression of testosterone. And certainly Democrats, past champions of women’s rights, should not be in the business of destroying any semblance of a level playing field for natal women and girls in order to cater to natal boys and men who simply raise their hands to self-identify as women.

I ask you, as my representative, to lead the way to a return to following the science. Excellent models abound that the Democrats might follow, including that proposed by Martina Navratilova, under which there would be two competitive categories, one for natal females only and the other open to anyone. Other excellent proposals include those offered by the Women’s Sports Policy Working Group and Seb Coe with World Athletics. At present, however, the position Democrats are currently wedded to turns girls’ and women’s athletic ambitions into a joke. We’ve already seen what this looks like when natal males are allowed to compete against and take medals away from natal female athletes.

I urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider your position on this issue and return to following the science. Natal women and girls need your support, now more than ever.

Sincerely,

XXXX

November 5, 2022

Dear Senator ____,

I have put off voting long enough.  I need to pull out my mail-in ballot and do it today.  I will be voting for you.  It should be a joy and privilege to cast my ballot and vote for public servants I believe are working for me and all Americans.  But although I used to admire you, in 2022 I only feel immense sadness and anger about voting for anyone with a “D” beside her name.  

You need to know my vote does not confer a mandate to the Democratic party platform. 

It is emotionally painful to vote for you.  Why?  It is because you actively and enthusiastically support the institutionalization of gender identity ideology in law.  You have told me as much in responses to my emails, pleading for you to look more deeply into the issue of how legislation such as the deceptively-named “Equality Act” destroys the sex-based rights of women as a class.  You have made your public stance abundantly clear. 

But the Democrats are dead wrong on this issue.  These laws are causing great harm to all Americans, including trans-identified Americans.  You must see at least a hint of that truth by now. 

Because of your party’s policies, women are being raped in prison by trans-identified men.  Here in Washington State, a bill was passed by Democrats to hide information about males in women’s prisons.  I testified publicly against it, along with other lifetime Democrats.  Rapes, sexual assault, and an atmosphere of fear are reported by the women who live there.  Because of a bill passed unambiguously by Democrats, it is now harder than ever to find out the results of a DOC policy change that allows males into the women’s prison.  These are men who simply SAY they are women, whether they have had surgeries or taken hormones or not.   Don’t you see how truly predatory men can exploit this policy pushed by Democrats? Are you really okay with that? 

Because of your party’s policies, children who are far too young to provide fully informed consent are being medicated, sterilized, and subjected to irreversible surgeries.   It is beyond shocking to me that you and all your Democratic colleagues support this medical malpractice.  Yes.  I am well aware that the medical establishment also supports these policies--but that will change, because they support it without solid evidence.  Many doctors and nurses have been sounding the alarm for years while children are being hurt and the pharmaceutical companies and surgeons make money hand over fist.  Some of this damage will take years for us to understand, as these children grow into adulthood.  Did you listen to the testimony in Florida by Chloe Cole, an 18-year-old detransitioner who had her breasts removed at 15 and has been harmed by testosterone use?  There are many more like Chloe.  Are you really okay with that?

Because of your party’s policies, important parental rights are being removed as schools hide information about their children.  In some cases, kids are even taken from their parents if the parents do not “affirm” the child’s announced gender identity.  Don’t you think most parents know their own kids?  How is this morally better than what happened on our Southern border under Trump?  Are you really okay with such aggressive and harmful state interference in families?

You have long been a champion of education.  But because of your party’s education policies, parents are revolting.  Children are being taught dangerous, confusing, and anti-science nonsense in schools about sex and gender.  The well-understood principals of biology have not changed.  Humans are a dimorphic species, nobody is born in the “wrong” body, and a person cannot change his or her sex.  Children don’t know any better because they are children who believe all sorts of fanciful things.  They are deeply confused.  That confusion puts them in danger, as they cannot correctly identify which adults could harm them.  Are you really okay with that? 

You and the other Democratic leaders in the US have handed the moral high ground on a silver platter to what I believe to be a very dangerous political party:  the US Republican party as shaped by Donald Trump.  Conservative Americans who watch Fox News are so fearful of bad Democratic policies such as gender ideology that they support Republican leaders doing whatever they can to keep Democrats from power.  Including destroying elections and the democratic process.  But sadly, not everything that Americans hear on conservative media is “misinformation.”  Some of the policies pushed by Democrats, such as gender ideology, really are that terrible.  People of all political stripes are right to recoil, as I have.  Part of this peril is your fault, not just dangerous and power-hungry Republican leaders. You can screech and moan and blame the Big Bad Republicans all you wish, but you are complicit in the danger our country faces:  that we may lose the precious right of free and fair elections. 

I wish, just for once, you would start by admitting this truth. 

You haven’t listened.  You, who have prided yourselves on being the party of science, have abandoned science.  You, who have long claimed to champion women’s rights, have abandoned women.  Ruth Bader Ginsberg would be turning in her grave.  You, who claim to care about children, are actively promoting the biggest medical scandal of all time against American children.

Do you know about the over 40,000 detransitioners (and growing daily) on Reddit?  Do you know that Sweden, Finland, and the UK have all pulled back from “gender affirming care” (social transition, puberty blockers, cross sex hormones, and surgeries) because there is no clear evidence that it is helpful and mountains of evidence it is hurting children?    Do you know about the Cass Report that shut down the only gender clinic at the previously renowned Tavistock in the UK because this practice is harming kids? 

Do you know that Reuters reported that it is a LIE that children are not getting surgeries in our country?  It turns out Fox News has been telling the truth.  MSNBC has not.

I first voted for president when I cast my ballot for Jimmy Carter.  I have never voted for a Republican in my life, so I am not even a “swing voter.”  It is not much reported on, but one of the reasons you are likely to lose control of Congress is this issue of gender ideology.  It’s not just a bad economy.  As you no doubt know, polls show that voters no longer trust the Democrats on education.  So many people, women especially, who have been life-long Democrats are voting Republican for the first time in their lives.  I know of many.  One friend of mine in Kirkland who did not vote for Trump will be voting for your opponent. Women will not lay down and continue to support you when their own children and grandchildren are so much at risk.  Because you won’t help them and their families.  You won’t hear the many, many pleas because it is politically impossible for you to hear them. 

I don’t blame them for voting Republican.  But upset as I am, I am even more fearful of what could happen to our country with a Republican takeover.  Not only the destruction of free and fair elections, but further erosion of women’s rights, gay and lesbian rights, and further environmental degradation.  And yes, I am also deeply concerned about the safety and well-being of trans-identified people of all ages, who deserve full protection under the law and the basic human rights we all deserve.  They too are at risk from a Republican takeover.   They will take the heat from your terrible instated policies that have resulted in such deserved anger.  Anger always needs a target, and innocent people are at risk. 

You will be partially at fault for that result. 

I have joined the increasing ranks of the politically homeless, people from both “sides” who no longer see any leaders who represent us.  But, yes, although I have deleted all the frenzied texts from Democrats, I am voting for you.  I take the Republican leaders and candidates at their word when they vow to never let Democrats rule again.  I take them at their word as they insist the 2020 election was a fraud, and that they wish to destroy Democrats.  I want sanity and political peace to prevail.  I do not wish to see the further erosion of American democracy, fragile as it is.  Even as I also see authoritarian and anti-democratic trends on the left, I don’t think the threat is as great.  From my best understanding, by voting for you I see a slightly better chance of preserving some semblance of democracy and forestalling a new order where perpetual violence rather than elections determines who has power.

I would be happy to meet with you to talk about these issues so you truly can understand them.  I worked for Democrats in our state for 12 years and met you a few times when I was working for the Senate Majority Leader in the Washington State Senate.  Senator, it would go a very long way for you to stand up to this and admit the Democrats have been wrong, even if it destroys your political career.  Some things are more important than politics.  You first ran as a “mom in tennis shoes.”  Please consider the moms in 2022 trying to protect their children who have been caught up in a faddish and dangerous cult, leading to such dire and irreversible consequences.  This really is a crisis.  Strong leadership is needed. 

Whether you win or not, we need you to seek the truth and stand up for women and kids now more than ever.  It is not too late to save your legacy.  It is not too late to learn. 

Sincerely,

Your name here