This is the best explanation I have found. Trans are the new cash cow for a medical industry that is designed to make people ill, to treat them for life.
Lots of good stuff in that post, and it's great that he kept updating. Agree that pharma is behind everything.
But early in that post he grossly overshot the degree to which Second-Wave straight feminists bought the idea of gender being a social construction. That was a big fault since he was building his argument. So, as good as it was/is (I have no beef with him, and we're all on the same side) I wouldn't call it a 'best'.
Why would someone who is lesbian, gay or bisexual need puberty blockers? The answer is that they don't. Unfortunately we now see gender non-conforming children, most of whom would grow up to be L, G or B, being included as part of the ever expanding trans umbrella. The medicalization of young people who are dealing with feelings of same-sex attraction is gay conversion therapy. The bigger the trans umbrella, the bigger the profits for the doctors, clinics, medical device and pharmaceutical companies participating in one of histories greatest medical scandals.
Pharmaceuticals make money off of drugs even when said drugs are passed through a non-profit. And non-profit doesn't mean no one at the business profits, or even that the business itself doesn't profit. I think the CEO of PP makes of 500k a year. And, for what it's worth, I'm passionately pro-capitalism and gender critical (though I don't like the term). I agree with you that there is some "groomer" type behavior in the trans ideology world, but I don't think the Ls, Gs, and Bs can be fairly blamed, at all. On the contrary, T ideology is very anti L&G. Lesbians complain about the trans-identified men claiming to be women and pressuring them for sex, and how the numbers of lesbians are plummeting, as girls think they can become boys. I believe the trans-train is powered by dark money (astro-turfing) that comes from Big Pharma, and cheered on by what you might call pervy groomers. A person can like capitalism and simultaneously be concerned that we've had a huge failure of antitrust law and an ensuing horrific concentration of wealth in few hands, and that some industries do horrible things with their power. Many gender critical people are socialist, many are not. I'm also open to the idea that trans-train is in part to divide people, divide families, to make people more susceptible to totalitarianism, but I'm not convinced.
Bravo, that alone was worth $50+/year. I urge you to tighten up the references a bit, and submit your analysis to a peer-reviewed journal...this is not my field, but there must be some still practicing science.
Another strikingly odd fit between the historical science laid out here is all about Behavior and today's activists have pulled it into the Physical world which in turn flies in the face of many of the arguments that they are "born this way". You're unable to change who you're attracted to e.g. strait/gay, but able to change your physical form to match a cultural stereo type of Man or Woman based on the feeling that you're in the wrong body?
So being straight isn't a choice by that argument. Strange how you get a choice when you decide to be gay, but you're stuck with your sexuality when you're straight.
One of the best articles I’ve read on the transgender explosion, and what a great observation (that GNC kids have been told they are transgender), backed by studies over decades. Wow!
Hi Marek. It's interesting that you leave these thoughtful comments on other people's substacks while coming to mine to yell "get back in the closet, pervert". A bit sanctimonious and hypocritical, if you ask me.
This is excellent, Colin! Additionally, all of the studies you cite are from Western attitudes and conventions, behavioral expectations for females vs. males. I can't imagine how variances of "gender conformity" were measured. First, there is no such thing as meta-data in these studies. The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Also, there is no discussion of the pharma combinations being prescribed. Often Finasteride, a very dangerous drug (look up Post-Finasteride Syndrome Foundation) is given to females taking testosterone, to "prevent male pattern baldness." Then there's abilify, wellbutrin, lorazapam, etc.
As the ex-wife of a man who THINKS he is a woman, who, with the help of Dr. Christine Wheeler, deceived me and abandoned our family life for many weekends/evenings for 26 months, I can tell you there is no science. I can write this practitioner's name publicly, regarding her practices, because she wrote it all in a sworn affidavit, with dates and theories, and conjectured about what I felt and thought without ever having met me or spoken to me. It is all there, in her own words, signed and delivered to the judge in the custody case. I paid my attorney plenty to just calm down and respond.
My former husband "thought" that I was "rather masculine" for a woman, (because I'm physically active and like to carry my own suitcase?) and this even fit into his insane mindset that he must have a "feminine brain." Interesting, he's now married to a woman, as the fantasies to have a male lover didn't pan out.
For God's sake, I was nursing our baby and taking care of our three year old by myself while this outrageous charade they call "the true life test" was going on in bars in Greenwich Village. I don't know why he was scouting heterosexual men there, but that's what he wrote about.
Bravo to you Colin Wright, for exposing the researcher bias, financial conflicts of interest and utter non-science of this "speciality" in psychology. It was all politics in 1992, when I found the diaries, and it's all politics now, 30 years later. This made my day, man~
Ute Heggen, author, In the Curated Woods, True Tales from a Grass Widow (iuniverse, 2022)
Quote: "The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Jay Greene's study published by the Heritage Foundation has been thoroughly debunked.
After "clarification" by Jay Greene, the data might just as easily "prove" that in states with (ASSUMED) easy access to cross-sex hormones, suicides go DOWN.
It is basically just nonsense and is best ignored as it only serves to undermine the credibility of properly evidenced studies:
Greetings to you Shannon Thrace, and congrats on the October 6 publishing date on your trans widow memoir, 18 Months. Our stories need to see the light of day~Ute Heggen
Brilliant article. I have tweeted a line from one of the paragraphs. We need more sensible scientists to keep writing sense and logic. We do live in a post-truth World but eventually things will prevail. @Mark_Kasozi
Ok, this was an excellent, highly analytical, data filled article. A related vein to excavate on this has to do with the evolution of feminism, and of humanity's confusion and prejudices about the very difficult multiverse women live in (giving birth, being a mother, being a spouse, being a head of household, being a worker or breadwinner, having a career). Phetasy wrote a heartfelt column about a recent book on this topic with a provocative title about regretting sleeping around. Humanity let's males off the hook, but not females. None of this negates anything in your article, but I'm plenty confused as a grown heterosexual male who's never been troubled in my confused state with additional overlays of confusion about my gender, related gender roles or how society feels about my performance of same (about which IDGAF, which is easier for a male, at least this one, to say). If I had all of that going on at the same time my head would pop off. It's hard enough just clocking in and paying my damn taxes. Humanity gives women a harder time, and more ways to be considered (wrongly) dysfunctional, than it does men. People are great, humanity not so much. Did any of that make sense? Talk amongst yourselves.
Actually, I'm gay. I'm also here because I'm concerned about children being forced down a pathway that includes puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones. I don't really care about your views on homosexuality. I've heard them all before. However, I think we can agree on our concern for the welfare of children.
For puberty blockers the Wpath soc7 only requires gender nonconformity, not gender dysphoria (page 19). Insane. [correction--need long lasting and intense gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria.
then *also* need gender dysphoria to emerge or worsen with puberty--sorry to get that wrong!]
What does "intense" even mean? A little girl likes all the plaid not just the red buffalo? Sure isn't a quantifiable scientific term. I swear psychiatry is trying to discredit itself.
"[I]t has been long observed that the sexes differ in the extent to which they display sex-typical behaviors; when there is significant between-sex variation, it is almost always the case that girls are more likely to engage in masculine behaviors than boys are likely to engage in feminine behaviors."
"This is an odd fact given that for most traits males tend to exhibit higher variation than females..."
This is not an odd fact, because femininity and masculinity do not take equal effort. Let's say a bunch of girls and a bunch of boys are lazy and/or can't manage to care about their appearance or clothes. The girls who do that will be deemed masculine. The boys who do that will be deemed masculine. Likewise, when people don't shave anything, it's masculine. When they don't shop or fuss with fashion, it's masculine. People, male or female, roll out of bed looking masculine. They have to go put something on to look feminine.
Let it be noted that these are society's typical opinions on what's feminine and masculine, not mine.
“one of the most striking findings in the present study is the comparatively greater preference that boys show for the masculine role than girls show for the feminine role, a difference that is large and significant.”
Again, this might not be so striking, if, for example, femininity demands deference, takes more effort to perform, restricts the pursuit of interesting activities, etc., as feminists have forever argued.
This is what the second-wave feminists were on about when they talked about femininity as "performance". The default is male/masculine; it is the natural state. In contrast, you have to *become* female/feminine.
Western standards are very skewed, especially in the aesthetic sense. Little girls are expected to start shaving their legs and armpits as young as 10, doing their hair, dressing nicely and so on. Is it any wonder that as social expectations have relaxed, many can't be bothered?
I disagree. True gender nonconformity is more than appearance. Its interests, attitudes, level of activity. I shaved my legs because I didn’t want my hairy legs showing when I wore my shorts to play football with the boys in my neighborhood. My sisters were inside reading a book. I became a doctor. One of them is a secretary, the other an accountant. I’m still active and a tomboy. Have three kids. I cared about my appearance. I wear makeup. Because I like men. But not a lot of makeup. But no dresses. I don’t feel comfortable in a dress. I prefer male friends. I prefer male conversations.
Gender ideology is such a quintessential example of magical thinking that it's difficult to believe these organizations can sign on to it. I'm all for people acting and dressing any way that pleases them, but there's an element of make-believe to this stuff that I can no longer stomach.
Also, I feel terrible for gay boys and lesbian girls, who may be told that same-sex attraction and gender non-conforming behavior means that are straight trans women or men. Back in the 80s and 90s, liberals like me were all like, "I am who I am...don't put me in a box!" These days it's "Put me in that box! Label me! Categorize me!"
Is there anything much we all do agree on these days? Impressive how opinions reflect such utter polarities. Seems to reflect which sort of media people consume. But the gulf Is enormous.
The opinions of gender ideology reduce us all to a caricature. These ideologies reduce people to caricatures of what out of touch movie and tv producers imagine. It’s ridiculous.
By these new definitions all the women in my law school class would have been "transgender", especially those of us who chose to become litigators. As it is, we are all happily married to men and have a bunch of kids.
All this "trans care for minors" is both obscene and ridiculously tragic -- as well as criminal.
From the 16th to the 19th century the Catholic Church castrated boys to sing in church choirs and in popular operas. I have a recording from the "Last Castrato," that I bought at a subway station cd store ages ago.
By the end of the 19th century all involved agreed that castrating boys was horrific and banned the practice.
It may be that, since all is accelerated in our current society, we will again reach this consensus in another 20 years instead of two centuries.
By then there will be an epidemic of adults who cannot reach orgasm, cannot have children, their bones breaking easily -- and, they will all look like old freaks while sitting in their wheelchairs. Yet another sad chapter in human social evolution.
But, in another 20 years untold numbers of doctors and pharmaceutical shareholders will be greatly enriched as they make billions on this latest version of neutering.
Interesting theory, and thoughtful article. If I follow you, the data shows that girls are more gender variant on average than men, and the data has consistently shown this for decades, so I assume you attribute the uptick in female referrals to gender clinics to the expanding definition of transgenderism to include gender nonconformity, which was a more recent development? Otherwise, it's hard to account for the new patient population since 2015. I guess I'm curious about when the definition of transgenderism began to include gender non-conformity, which is a point I feel like isn't typically granted too much attention, but is important for the reasons you outlined.
I read it as saying that gender non-conformity has been unofficially redefined by the trans ideologues to mean transgender (vs. non-conforming). Which is absurd, but as pointed out in another comment this has become a multi-billion dollar industry that cares not a whit for kids, especially GNC kids (who virtually always found their way in the past).
https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/trans-messaging-is-too-sophisticated
This is the best explanation I have found. Trans are the new cash cow for a medical industry that is designed to make people ill, to treat them for life.
Lots of good stuff in that post, and it's great that he kept updating. Agree that pharma is behind everything.
But early in that post he grossly overshot the degree to which Second-Wave straight feminists bought the idea of gender being a social construction. That was a big fault since he was building his argument. So, as good as it was/is (I have no beef with him, and we're all on the same side) I wouldn't call it a 'best'.
Not arguing against you; just discussing.
Why would someone who is lesbian, gay or bisexual need puberty blockers? The answer is that they don't. Unfortunately we now see gender non-conforming children, most of whom would grow up to be L, G or B, being included as part of the ever expanding trans umbrella. The medicalization of young people who are dealing with feelings of same-sex attraction is gay conversion therapy. The bigger the trans umbrella, the bigger the profits for the doctors, clinics, medical device and pharmaceutical companies participating in one of histories greatest medical scandals.
Pharmaceuticals make money off of drugs even when said drugs are passed through a non-profit. And non-profit doesn't mean no one at the business profits, or even that the business itself doesn't profit. I think the CEO of PP makes of 500k a year. And, for what it's worth, I'm passionately pro-capitalism and gender critical (though I don't like the term). I agree with you that there is some "groomer" type behavior in the trans ideology world, but I don't think the Ls, Gs, and Bs can be fairly blamed, at all. On the contrary, T ideology is very anti L&G. Lesbians complain about the trans-identified men claiming to be women and pressuring them for sex, and how the numbers of lesbians are plummeting, as girls think they can become boys. I believe the trans-train is powered by dark money (astro-turfing) that comes from Big Pharma, and cheered on by what you might call pervy groomers. A person can like capitalism and simultaneously be concerned that we've had a huge failure of antitrust law and an ensuing horrific concentration of wealth in few hands, and that some industries do horrible things with their power. Many gender critical people are socialist, many are not. I'm also open to the idea that trans-train is in part to divide people, divide families, to make people more susceptible to totalitarianism, but I'm not convinced.
All hail pharma?
Big Trans is pharma funded. Thank yer buddy Bourla.
Anybody who claims to know so much knows who Bourla is.
Bravo, that alone was worth $50+/year. I urge you to tighten up the references a bit, and submit your analysis to a peer-reviewed journal...this is not my field, but there must be some still practicing science.
Another strikingly odd fit between the historical science laid out here is all about Behavior and today's activists have pulled it into the Physical world which in turn flies in the face of many of the arguments that they are "born this way". You're unable to change who you're attracted to e.g. strait/gay, but able to change your physical form to match a cultural stereo type of Man or Woman based on the feeling that you're in the wrong body?
What's 'acting' gay look like, Marek?
So being straight isn't a choice by that argument. Strange how you get a choice when you decide to be gay, but you're stuck with your sexuality when you're straight.
Literally all over nature.
One of the best articles I’ve read on the transgender explosion, and what a great observation (that GNC kids have been told they are transgender), backed by studies over decades. Wow!
Hi Marek. It's interesting that you leave these thoughtful comments on other people's substacks while coming to mine to yell "get back in the closet, pervert". A bit sanctimonious and hypocritical, if you ask me.
This is excellent, Colin! Additionally, all of the studies you cite are from Western attitudes and conventions, behavioral expectations for females vs. males. I can't imagine how variances of "gender conformity" were measured. First, there is no such thing as meta-data in these studies. The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Also, there is no discussion of the pharma combinations being prescribed. Often Finasteride, a very dangerous drug (look up Post-Finasteride Syndrome Foundation) is given to females taking testosterone, to "prevent male pattern baldness." Then there's abilify, wellbutrin, lorazapam, etc.
As the ex-wife of a man who THINKS he is a woman, who, with the help of Dr. Christine Wheeler, deceived me and abandoned our family life for many weekends/evenings for 26 months, I can tell you there is no science. I can write this practitioner's name publicly, regarding her practices, because she wrote it all in a sworn affidavit, with dates and theories, and conjectured about what I felt and thought without ever having met me or spoken to me. It is all there, in her own words, signed and delivered to the judge in the custody case. I paid my attorney plenty to just calm down and respond.
My former husband "thought" that I was "rather masculine" for a woman, (because I'm physically active and like to carry my own suitcase?) and this even fit into his insane mindset that he must have a "feminine brain." Interesting, he's now married to a woman, as the fantasies to have a male lover didn't pan out.
For God's sake, I was nursing our baby and taking care of our three year old by myself while this outrageous charade they call "the true life test" was going on in bars in Greenwich Village. I don't know why he was scouting heterosexual men there, but that's what he wrote about.
Bravo to you Colin Wright, for exposing the researcher bias, financial conflicts of interest and utter non-science of this "speciality" in psychology. It was all politics in 1992, when I found the diaries, and it's all politics now, 30 years later. This made my day, man~
Ute Heggen, author, In the Curated Woods, True Tales from a Grass Widow (iuniverse, 2022)
uteheggengrasswidow.wordpress.com
BTW, this article is not too long, not too pedantic and is only the start of the revelation of a medical scandal to rival thalidomide.
Quote: "The only example I have for meta-data on this is Jay Greene's analysis of suicide rates in states with easy access to cross-sex hormones, where suicides go UP, not down "after transition."
Jay Greene's study published by the Heritage Foundation has been thoroughly debunked.
After "clarification" by Jay Greene, the data might just as easily "prove" that in states with (ASSUMED) easy access to cross-sex hormones, suicides go DOWN.
It is basically just nonsense and is best ignored as it only serves to undermine the credibility of properly evidenced studies:
"Misleading Stats From Heritage"
https://voidifremoved.substack.com/p/misleading-stats-from-heritage?s=r
Hi Ute!
Greetings to you Shannon Thrace, and congrats on the October 6 publishing date on your trans widow memoir, 18 Months. Our stories need to see the light of day~Ute Heggen
It's October 16! Thank you!
💛
Brilliant article. I have tweeted a line from one of the paragraphs. We need more sensible scientists to keep writing sense and logic. We do live in a post-truth World but eventually things will prevail. @Mark_Kasozi
This is a very well done, insightful analysis, Colin. I sincerely appreciate all the efforts put into this piece. Sincerely, Frederick
Ok, this was an excellent, highly analytical, data filled article. A related vein to excavate on this has to do with the evolution of feminism, and of humanity's confusion and prejudices about the very difficult multiverse women live in (giving birth, being a mother, being a spouse, being a head of household, being a worker or breadwinner, having a career). Phetasy wrote a heartfelt column about a recent book on this topic with a provocative title about regretting sleeping around. Humanity let's males off the hook, but not females. None of this negates anything in your article, but I'm plenty confused as a grown heterosexual male who's never been troubled in my confused state with additional overlays of confusion about my gender, related gender roles or how society feels about my performance of same (about which IDGAF, which is easier for a male, at least this one, to say). If I had all of that going on at the same time my head would pop off. It's hard enough just clocking in and paying my damn taxes. Humanity gives women a harder time, and more ways to be considered (wrongly) dysfunctional, than it does men. People are great, humanity not so much. Did any of that make sense? Talk amongst yourselves.
Do you know anyone who's gay yourself, Marek? You seem to know a lot about gay fantasies.
Actually, I'm gay. I'm also here because I'm concerned about children being forced down a pathway that includes puberty-blockers and cross-sex hormones. I don't really care about your views on homosexuality. I've heard them all before. However, I think we can agree on our concern for the welfare of children.
For puberty blockers the Wpath soc7 only requires gender nonconformity, not gender dysphoria (page 19). Insane. [correction--need long lasting and intense gender nonconformity or gender dysphoria.
then *also* need gender dysphoria to emerge or worsen with puberty--sorry to get that wrong!]
100%. Insane.
What does "intense" even mean? A little girl likes all the plaid not just the red buffalo? Sure isn't a quantifiable scientific term. I swear psychiatry is trying to discredit itself.
Great job with your interview with BB. Your work is a touchstone.
"[I]t has been long observed that the sexes differ in the extent to which they display sex-typical behaviors; when there is significant between-sex variation, it is almost always the case that girls are more likely to engage in masculine behaviors than boys are likely to engage in feminine behaviors."
"This is an odd fact given that for most traits males tend to exhibit higher variation than females..."
This is not an odd fact, because femininity and masculinity do not take equal effort. Let's say a bunch of girls and a bunch of boys are lazy and/or can't manage to care about their appearance or clothes. The girls who do that will be deemed masculine. The boys who do that will be deemed masculine. Likewise, when people don't shave anything, it's masculine. When they don't shop or fuss with fashion, it's masculine. People, male or female, roll out of bed looking masculine. They have to go put something on to look feminine.
Let it be noted that these are society's typical opinions on what's feminine and masculine, not mine.
“one of the most striking findings in the present study is the comparatively greater preference that boys show for the masculine role than girls show for the feminine role, a difference that is large and significant.”
Again, this might not be so striking, if, for example, femininity demands deference, takes more effort to perform, restricts the pursuit of interesting activities, etc., as feminists have forever argued.
This is a very relevant comment.
This is what the second-wave feminists were on about when they talked about femininity as "performance". The default is male/masculine; it is the natural state. In contrast, you have to *become* female/feminine.
Western standards are very skewed, especially in the aesthetic sense. Little girls are expected to start shaving their legs and armpits as young as 10, doing their hair, dressing nicely and so on. Is it any wonder that as social expectations have relaxed, many can't be bothered?
I disagree. True gender nonconformity is more than appearance. Its interests, attitudes, level of activity. I shaved my legs because I didn’t want my hairy legs showing when I wore my shorts to play football with the boys in my neighborhood. My sisters were inside reading a book. I became a doctor. One of them is a secretary, the other an accountant. I’m still active and a tomboy. Have three kids. I cared about my appearance. I wear makeup. Because I like men. But not a lot of makeup. But no dresses. I don’t feel comfortable in a dress. I prefer male friends. I prefer male conversations.
Thanks for this.
Gender ideology is such a quintessential example of magical thinking that it's difficult to believe these organizations can sign on to it. I'm all for people acting and dressing any way that pleases them, but there's an element of make-believe to this stuff that I can no longer stomach.
Also, I feel terrible for gay boys and lesbian girls, who may be told that same-sex attraction and gender non-conforming behavior means that are straight trans women or men. Back in the 80s and 90s, liberals like me were all like, "I am who I am...don't put me in a box!" These days it's "Put me in that box! Label me! Categorize me!"
Drug me!
How do we mute you? You are really spoiling this conversation.
Horrible thought. The female average is going to shift left as genderism snips off the outliers to the right.
Yeah, I've also been wondering about the dysgenic effects.
Is there anything much we all do agree on these days? Impressive how opinions reflect such utter polarities. Seems to reflect which sort of media people consume. But the gulf Is enormous.
The opinions of gender ideology reduce us all to a caricature. These ideologies reduce people to caricatures of what out of touch movie and tv producers imagine. It’s ridiculous.
By these new definitions all the women in my law school class would have been "transgender", especially those of us who chose to become litigators. As it is, we are all happily married to men and have a bunch of kids.
All this "trans care for minors" is both obscene and ridiculously tragic -- as well as criminal.
From the 16th to the 19th century the Catholic Church castrated boys to sing in church choirs and in popular operas. I have a recording from the "Last Castrato," that I bought at a subway station cd store ages ago.
By the end of the 19th century all involved agreed that castrating boys was horrific and banned the practice.
It may be that, since all is accelerated in our current society, we will again reach this consensus in another 20 years instead of two centuries.
By then there will be an epidemic of adults who cannot reach orgasm, cannot have children, their bones breaking easily -- and, they will all look like old freaks while sitting in their wheelchairs. Yet another sad chapter in human social evolution.
But, in another 20 years untold numbers of doctors and pharmaceutical shareholders will be greatly enriched as they make billions on this latest version of neutering.
Once again: caveat emptor.
Interesting theory, and thoughtful article. If I follow you, the data shows that girls are more gender variant on average than men, and the data has consistently shown this for decades, so I assume you attribute the uptick in female referrals to gender clinics to the expanding definition of transgenderism to include gender nonconformity, which was a more recent development? Otherwise, it's hard to account for the new patient population since 2015. I guess I'm curious about when the definition of transgenderism began to include gender non-conformity, which is a point I feel like isn't typically granted too much attention, but is important for the reasons you outlined.
I read it as saying that gender non-conformity has been unofficially redefined by the trans ideologues to mean transgender (vs. non-conforming). Which is absurd, but as pointed out in another comment this has become a multi-billion dollar industry that cares not a whit for kids, especially GNC kids (who virtually always found their way in the past).
The conceptual incoherence, as I'm sure you already know, is astounding lol