The Transgender Ideology
In the final sections of this series we will examine the claim made by critics who believe we are witnessing a push to divide the public using the gender identity issue, specifically by promoting a narrative that transgender people and gender identity questions are much more prevalent than they actually are.
An exhaustive list of those promoting and benefiting financially from the various industries involved in transgender health services would include everyone from endocrinologists and surgeons, pharmaceutical companies producing hormones and puberty blockers, and various non-profits and foundations. We have named a few of the players in this brief 4-part series.
Strangely enough, some of the highly educated doctors appear to have convinced themselves what they are doing is genuinely for the health of the patient. In the Swedish documentary Trans TrainDoctor Olle Soder is interviewed about his work as an endocrinologist at Karolinska University Hospital. When discussing why he prescribed patients hormones and other treatments while knowing the potential consequences he said, “you must weigh the suffering the patients would go through without that treatment.” He also acknowledges he was giving out hormones without follow up on the long-term effects before lamenting, “well, these people are suffering and they are asking for help.”
We also have the case of Dr. Deanna Adkins, a professor at Duke University School of Medicine and the director of the Duke Center for Child and Adolescent Gender Care. Dr. Adkins provided an expert testimony to a federal district court in North Carolina concerning a state law governing access to sex-specific restrooms. In her testimony, Dr. Adkins contradicted accepted biology and revealed an ideological bent by stating, “From a medical perspective, the appropriate determinant of sex is gender identity.” Dr. Adkins argued that gender identity is the preferred basis for determining the sex of an individual and “the only medically supported determinant of sex.” Adkins also claimed it was “counter to medical science” to use chromosomes, hormones, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia to override someone’s chosen gender identity.
When examining the various players involved in the promotion of transgender treatments, we ought to distinguish between those who are benefiting financially from providing various health interventions to adults and children, and those who are benefiting from the promotion of transgender ideology itself. I believe these groups are separate but also occasionally their paths overlap. Both are involved in normalizing these dangerous procedures but their motivations and goals appear different.
For example, a doctor diagnosing a young adult with gender dysphoria may be genuinely stating their medical opinion without a bias or ideological motivation. At the same time, you also have teachers, parents, or family friends who may be motivated by an ideology that says gender is fluid, or — a term I am hearing more recently — gender-expansive. This distinction matters because the idea that every individual involved in the gender dysphoria-to-transgender pipeline is ideologically motivated is not currently supported by the evidence.