Fox News’ Promotion of Transgenderism Can’t Be Defended

T he Fox News ecosystem works in mysterious ways. Only weeks ago, Daily Wire columnist Matt Walsh was on the Tucker Carlson Show to promote his new documentary What Is a Woman? The provocative film follows Walsh on a quest to find just one person who can answer the title question for him, to bleakly hilarious effect. Along the way, Walsh encounters academics, therapists, and doctors whose answers are in eerily independent lockstep. These include one blue-haired pediatrician who hymns the praises of “completely reversible” puberty blockers for dysphoric “kiddos” who are “panicking.” During the interview, Carlson paused the clip to note that this is a lie, and such drugs are, in fact, not reversible.

Strange, then, that Tucker Carlson’s network would turn right around and run this profile of a “transitioning” child in honor of Pride month. The story of “Ryland,” a girl whose parents claim she identified as a boy “before [s]he could speak,” is not new. The family came to fame eight years ago when the mother chronicled their journey in the memoir Raising Ryland. Ryland, six years old at the time, is now a teenager whose female puberty has clearly been delayed. Fox bathes her story in a soft rainbow glow of positivity. The mother even cites “faith” as a contributing factor to their decision — the faith that “God created Ryland just the way he is.” She reports that as a toddler, Ryland showed distress at having to wear girls’ dresses, which in hindsight she takes as a significant early clue.

Of course, as Matt Walsh has pointed out in commentary on the story, by this logic, nearly every baby girl is really a boy. And, indeed, vice versa, for it is a truth universally acknowledged that most little girls and boys go through a phase where they rebel against getting dressed. Particularly if the clothes are as hideous as the leopard-print monstrosity showcased in Ryland’s baby picture. Perhaps, Walsh suggests, we can simplify this whole thing by trading places. “There are no girls left in the world, except boys. The only girls left in the world are boys, and the only boys left are girls.”

Walsh is well aware that this may “destroy” his own relationship with Fox News. But he believes it is all the more imperative to call out trans ideology from one’s “own” side. Ben Shapiro launched a similar backlash on Twitter, calling Fox’s story “a complete betrayal of anything remotely resembling conservatism or decency.”

In replies to Shapiro’s thread, Andrew Sullivan begged to differ. If conservatism is about “accepting reality,” then he argues that this should extend to accepting Ryland’s reality. “Trans people exist. They’re real. They’re not lying. How do we best integrate them into society? That’s the question. The answer is complicated. But this family is real.” When someone pushed back that there is no such thing as a trans five-year-old (Ryland’s age when “he” supposedly “came out”), Sullivan replied that, while it seemed “counterintuitive,” such early confidence makes it more likely that children like Ryland are “genuinely” trans. But he added that this doesn’t mean childhood is the best time to make a medical transition. Adulthood is preferable — “for most.”

This is a sleight of hand. Nobody denies that there are some people who identify as “transgender,” just as there are some people who identify as “transabled.” And to the degree that such people seem to suffer true dysphoric distress, nobody accuses them of “lying” about that distress. The “reality” at issue is whether it is morally humane or medically sound to enable that dysphoria, to the point of normalizing chemical and surgical castration. Sullivan appears to have no firm basis within his own framework for delaying such a process. If he is truly convinced that little Ryland has always been “genuinely” trans, then what is his coherent argument for not making her transition as streamlined as possible? Why allow her to go through female puberty at all? Sullivan’s own logic would seem to indicate that transitioning earlier is better.

His April 2021 Substack on the subject is much longer, but not much clearer. One moment, he’s asserting that “early intervention” has proven helpful for many children, “leading to good outcomes and happier trans lives.” The next moment, he’s sounding a cautionary, moderate note about over-hasty transitions, even saying that he would be open to a ban on surgery and hormone therapy until ages 18 and 16, respectively. His guiding thesis is that “Treatment of minors should be safe, limited and rare” (emphasis in original). This slogan has rather a familiar ring to it — no doubt done intentionally.

But this slogan is no more substantial or sustainable for the trans issue in 2022 than it was for the abortion issue in 1992. “Safe” begs the question here as it did there. “Rare” is as incoherent here as it was there. Either the unborn fetus is a human life, or it is not. Either way, there is no logical reason for abortion to be “rare.” Either a child can be “genuinely” trans, or he cannot be. Either way, there is no logical reason for transitioning to be “rare,” except in the sense that a trans self-understanding is generally rare.

At least Sullivan recognizes that numerous children are being ushered into irreversibly damaging medical decisions when they should instead be treated for autism, mental illness, or some other cofactor. He also recognizes the social contagion that has inflated alleged cases beyond the proportion he would regard as “genuinely” trans. One could say that all of this is useful, as far as it goes. But from a conservative perspective, how far does it actually go? As the trans agenda marches on, what vital role will self-styled “moderate” co-belligerents such as Sullivan actually have? The answer to that question is increasingly vague.

Ryland Whittington is 14 years old. Six years ago, when she was eight, the family appeared on CBS Mornings. At the end of the segment, the parents walk along the beach with the interviewer. “It’s a little while before puberty sets in now,” he says, “but you’ve gotta be thinking about that.” Mother Hillary notes that they “haven’t done anything that isn’t reversible,” which she thinks is “really important.” In another spliced-in interview clip, she hopes that the family can “plant a seed of little conversations” all around the world.

Meanwhile, father Jeff praises other families who are becoming more willing to go public with their own children’s transition stories and try to help others understand. “So I think we’ll get there,” he says, nodding. “We’ll get there.”