Each of the three stages of “gender affirmation” therapy — social, medical, and surgical — leads to the next. If a child’s parents, teachers, and peers have all “affirmed” him in his belief that he is a girl, he is more likely to pursue puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. And once these hormonal changes set in, he is more likely to seek out genital surgery.
Before the cultural mainstreaming of transgenderism, gender-distressed children were not socially transitioned. Rather, they were treated with observational talk-therapies aimed at helping them feel more comfortable with their sex. These were very successful. A small but strong body of research consistently demonstrated that 80 percent of these children grew out of their gender distress by the end of adolescence.
Accepting one’s sex was considered the ideal outcome because it is obviously easier for a child to change his thinking than to chemically and surgically alter his body — and in so doing become a lifetime medical patient.
But what would happen if gender-distressed children were given therapies aimed at encouraging them to reject their sex?
The New York Times reports:
Young children who transition to a new gender with social changes — taking on new names, pronouns, haircuts and clothing — are likely to continue identifying as that gender five years later, according to a report published on Wednesday, the first study of its kind.
Of course, trans activists will use this to argue that they are right. “See! Our way works!” Yes, it works in achieving their preferred outcome. But for everyone else, all this really does is show us what we already knew: that social transitioning puts children on a pathway to medical harm. This is precisely why the dangers of social transitioning ought not to be underestimated.
Soon, that oft-cited “80 percent” will be a distant memory — a reminder of an alternative, better way.