Thank you. This is so important. My 18 year old son was shocked when he saw the journalist guidelines for writing on this issue. He had recently read 1984 in high school and saw little difference in the attempts to control and change language.
I don’t think journalists and news outlets appreciate the amount of damage they do their credibility on ALL topics when they do openly and obviously take a biased and activist stance in their reporting
I hope more journalists are willing to listen and brave enough to inventory their assumptions and get curious about the inconvenient truths the transgender activists have been so frantically trying to suppress all these years. But I fear that the histrionics and belligerent tone coming out of outlets appealing to traditional conservatives is going to make most journalists (as most tend to lean in a more liberal direction anyway) remain in too much of a defensive crouch to open up to much more nuance. And it is too easy for individuals to insulate themselves from information that pokes holes in their preferred delusions . . . and most of us monkeys are of the hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil variety. Meanwhile, two very caring and enlightened local doctors will continue poisoning my daughter. I can hear her voice changing . . . her beautiful, beautiful voice will be lost soon.
The real loss here, for both the mental health field and for the patients, who are the cross-sex ideating teens and young adults, is the sacrifice of truth. The TJA approach buttonholes all confusion regarding the sexed body-to-mind connection as immutable and unchangeable once it has been expressed. This is a completely false assumption (Dr. Stephen B. Levine, expert testimony) We've known about the desisting contingent and about growing ranks of detransitioners for decades. They are the current day shadows of the 80-85% drop out rate the earliest studies published. The "ideology" explains that away, claiming without proof of any kind, that societal disapproval and the bigoted parents are the reason. Ideologues will not contemplate a simple solution: a return to a healthy body-to -mind connection, usually what occurs for teens who didn't take hormones or get surgeries. It's called puberty.
There are no studies of those who desist, to follow up whether suicide attempts increase, whether general happiness is arrived at later. The story of the detransitioners is tragically complicated, because of the irreversible effects of "transition." The surgeries became more common as use of opioid pain medication made recovery from the surgeries tolerable. It's all of a piece and completely political. The Trans Journalists Association Style Guide has my ex-husband's fingerprints all over it. I'll never know--there are no credits, no authorship is claimed.
Their strawman ambush of us, with claims we are far right, ultra-religious, racist nut jobs, to be skewered with a lance from their high horse, is predictable and scripted. I dealt with this on a one-to-one scale with my enraged, pill-popping husband 30 years ago. It's been quite a ride. Thanks Lisa, for your focus on these influences. Pieces of Levine's testimony in this link:
I think it would also help to challenge the “ROGD is debunked pseudoscience” narrative with talk about the population cohort of the original Dutch study versus the demographic of kids presenting to gender clinics following the spike in cases.
This is an excellent idea, and I really appreciate the way you are going about it--centering the science and staying away from “editorialized” terminology. This is exactly what is needed, and I hope journalists will take you up on it. Thank you for everything you do.
How do we get this printed in the Washington Post? That's what I want to know. They've printed two articles on JK Rowling. One outright defamatory. The other a pan and innuendo-stuffed attack. Who calls the editorial shots there?
I wish I had the magical keys to the PR treasure chest.
Thanks, Lisa, as always. There is a lot more MSM reporting! I'm wondering what the style-guide approach to referencing "the right" (as in, the political right) might be? Recent reporting (SF Chronicle on Chloe Cole, First Person on Utah, the New Yorker) all refer to the culture war aspects of this, while not reporting on the more nuanced mix of political positions among, for example, concerned parents. I am a longtime Democrat, but I resonate with some of what David Remnick calls "the rhetoric of the right". How can we shift this in the reporting?
So it seems that the activists have had an inroad in style guides too? It would be interesting to know the history or progression of this; what editors kowtowed to the trans journalists, what time period and why. Wouldn't editors want to be as objective as possible?
I am a therapist who works with a number of adolescents who present with gender dysphoria. The great, grand, and good news is that their rhetoric over the last three years has settled down quite a bit. Fewer of them come in policing my language and attempting to direct our session with dramatic language. As the pendulum finally swings more to the middle, my adolescent clients are able to look at this issue in a much more rational way. I hear less about a”death name” and pronouns and we focus more on who they are becoming. Over the last few years I have had several clients be able to say.” I am just me.”Gender affirming therapy is rather new. I so thankful there are researchers and seasoned professionals who are able to help create balance, so young people can be heard and even pulled back a bit when they are in the midst of adolescent struggles.
I like the term “gender colorful.”
I think my work as a therapist is somewhere between gender affirming bobble head and 2 gender regression. Heather, your words are powerful. It’s so hard to be a mom in such a complex world. You are in a difficult position. I do believe things are changing a bit, and we are the changers.
Thanks Lisa, I always find your work valuable. This is off topic but I'd like to know what you think of this piece in the New Yorker which seemed to me more nuanced than many...
"Rights to gender affirming care". Ex - Minnesota governor protects rights to gender affirming care.
Kids have a human right to go through puberty without being tricked into permanent loss of sexual function to address temporary psych issues most grow out of. Every gender biz stat and claim is a lie, and provable as such. falsely claiming that gender meds will improve anything for kids while omitting critical facts is fraud and abuse. reframing child abuse as a human right extrapolates the false idea that there are magic kids called "trans". nearly all kids referred to as trans are either opting into it without any dysphoria or have dysphoria due to psych issues most grow out of.
Both groups are being manipulated via a bucket of false claims, as are the adults who support this fraud.
"Banning youth gender care makes life miserable and more dangerous for people who are "trans". "
Actually its the opposite. 85% of kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it and ID as thier birth gender with unmedicated puberty. Once this happens kids are happier - their dysphoria goes away. But once they take puberty blockers, their dysphoria continues. Almost all kids who take puberty blockers go onto harmful hormones that causes permanant loss of sexual function. Systematic reviews (which all cited US medical groups have never done) show gender meds dont help gender dysphoria,
mental health, social heath. nothing, nada, zero. Amsterdam says people on these meds long term are miserable and die early 2x more than ave.
Thank you. This is so important. My 18 year old son was shocked when he saw the journalist guidelines for writing on this issue. He had recently read 1984 in high school and saw little difference in the attempts to control and change language.
I don’t think journalists and news outlets appreciate the amount of damage they do their credibility on ALL topics when they do openly and obviously take a biased and activist stance in their reporting
I hope more journalists are willing to listen and brave enough to inventory their assumptions and get curious about the inconvenient truths the transgender activists have been so frantically trying to suppress all these years. But I fear that the histrionics and belligerent tone coming out of outlets appealing to traditional conservatives is going to make most journalists (as most tend to lean in a more liberal direction anyway) remain in too much of a defensive crouch to open up to much more nuance. And it is too easy for individuals to insulate themselves from information that pokes holes in their preferred delusions . . . and most of us monkeys are of the hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil variety. Meanwhile, two very caring and enlightened local doctors will continue poisoning my daughter. I can hear her voice changing . . . her beautiful, beautiful voice will be lost soon.
The real loss here, for both the mental health field and for the patients, who are the cross-sex ideating teens and young adults, is the sacrifice of truth. The TJA approach buttonholes all confusion regarding the sexed body-to-mind connection as immutable and unchangeable once it has been expressed. This is a completely false assumption (Dr. Stephen B. Levine, expert testimony) We've known about the desisting contingent and about growing ranks of detransitioners for decades. They are the current day shadows of the 80-85% drop out rate the earliest studies published. The "ideology" explains that away, claiming without proof of any kind, that societal disapproval and the bigoted parents are the reason. Ideologues will not contemplate a simple solution: a return to a healthy body-to -mind connection, usually what occurs for teens who didn't take hormones or get surgeries. It's called puberty.
There are no studies of those who desist, to follow up whether suicide attempts increase, whether general happiness is arrived at later. The story of the detransitioners is tragically complicated, because of the irreversible effects of "transition." The surgeries became more common as use of opioid pain medication made recovery from the surgeries tolerable. It's all of a piece and completely political. The Trans Journalists Association Style Guide has my ex-husband's fingerprints all over it. I'll never know--there are no credits, no authorship is claimed.
Their strawman ambush of us, with claims we are far right, ultra-religious, racist nut jobs, to be skewered with a lance from their high horse, is predictable and scripted. I dealt with this on a one-to-one scale with my enraged, pill-popping husband 30 years ago. It's been quite a ride. Thanks Lisa, for your focus on these influences. Pieces of Levine's testimony in this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FENgXNaldnA&t=293s
Stop calling them trans kids!
They are kids confused about their sex and about sex stereotypes and gender role playing.
I think it would also help to challenge the “ROGD is debunked pseudoscience” narrative with talk about the population cohort of the original Dutch study versus the demographic of kids presenting to gender clinics following the spike in cases.
This is an excellent idea, and I really appreciate the way you are going about it--centering the science and staying away from “editorialized” terminology. This is exactly what is needed, and I hope journalists will take you up on it. Thank you for everything you do.
Thank you, Lisa. Thank you so much for this and all you do.
How do we get this printed in the Washington Post? That's what I want to know. They've printed two articles on JK Rowling. One outright defamatory. The other a pan and innuendo-stuffed attack. Who calls the editorial shots there?
I wish I had the magical keys to the PR treasure chest.
It’s a reflection of the utter institutional capture. The distortion of language. This is a great article.
Thanks, Lisa, as always. There is a lot more MSM reporting! I'm wondering what the style-guide approach to referencing "the right" (as in, the political right) might be? Recent reporting (SF Chronicle on Chloe Cole, First Person on Utah, the New Yorker) all refer to the culture war aspects of this, while not reporting on the more nuanced mix of political positions among, for example, concerned parents. I am a longtime Democrat, but I resonate with some of what David Remnick calls "the rhetoric of the right". How can we shift this in the reporting?
This is so good.
So it seems that the activists have had an inroad in style guides too? It would be interesting to know the history or progression of this; what editors kowtowed to the trans journalists, what time period and why. Wouldn't editors want to be as objective as possible?
I am a therapist who works with a number of adolescents who present with gender dysphoria. The great, grand, and good news is that their rhetoric over the last three years has settled down quite a bit. Fewer of them come in policing my language and attempting to direct our session with dramatic language. As the pendulum finally swings more to the middle, my adolescent clients are able to look at this issue in a much more rational way. I hear less about a”death name” and pronouns and we focus more on who they are becoming. Over the last few years I have had several clients be able to say.” I am just me.”Gender affirming therapy is rather new. I so thankful there are researchers and seasoned professionals who are able to help create balance, so young people can be heard and even pulled back a bit when they are in the midst of adolescent struggles.
I like the term “gender colorful.”
I think my work as a therapist is somewhere between gender affirming bobble head and 2 gender regression. Heather, your words are powerful. It’s so hard to be a mom in such a complex world. You are in a difficult position. I do believe things are changing a bit, and we are the changers.
Please look at this similar attempt to get media to not go along with transgender ideology in reporting: https://womensdeclarationusa.com/wdi-usa-journalism-style-manual/
Thanks Lisa, I always find your work valuable. This is off topic but I'd like to know what you think of this piece in the New Yorker which seemed to me more nuanced than many...
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-trans-rights
here are some other common ones.
"Evidenced based". Example -
"A bill that would ban evidence-based health care for transgender minors in West Virginia".
Gender "care" isnt "evidenced based". BMJ analysis report explains why its false to claim gender "care" is evidence based.
https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj.p382
"Rights to gender affirming care". Ex - Minnesota governor protects rights to gender affirming care.
Kids have a human right to go through puberty without being tricked into permanent loss of sexual function to address temporary psych issues most grow out of. Every gender biz stat and claim is a lie, and provable as such. falsely claiming that gender meds will improve anything for kids while omitting critical facts is fraud and abuse. reframing child abuse as a human right extrapolates the false idea that there are magic kids called "trans". nearly all kids referred to as trans are either opting into it without any dysphoria or have dysphoria due to psych issues most grow out of.
Both groups are being manipulated via a bucket of false claims, as are the adults who support this fraud.
"Banning youth gender care makes life miserable and more dangerous for people who are "trans". "
Actually its the opposite. 85% of kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it and ID as thier birth gender with unmedicated puberty. Once this happens kids are happier - their dysphoria goes away. But once they take puberty blockers, their dysphoria continues. Almost all kids who take puberty blockers go onto harmful hormones that causes permanant loss of sexual function. Systematic reviews (which all cited US medical groups have never done) show gender meds dont help gender dysphoria,
mental health, social heath. nothing, nada, zero. Amsterdam says people on these meds long term are miserable and die early 2x more than ave.