blogs by Gio

The Génocidaires: Laws

So, we’ve talked broad strokes. Here’s where we start seeing specific policies emerge as part of the agenda.

Genocide as a core of the platform🔗

In the last year or so the mainstream political attitude towards transgender people has gone from generalized bigotry to trans genocide becoming a pillar of the republican political platform.

Right off the bat, here’s Trump boosting the “activist teachers are infecting your children” social contagion rhetoric while emphasizing “parents’ rights” to… keep their children from wanting to be trans, I guess? To raucous applause, of course:

The republican party loves the tribalist us-vs-them mentality. When the democrats are painted categorically as sexual predators and threats to children, family, and the American way, that only helps them. Here’s Rebecca Boone connecting some of the dots in “Right-wing extremists amp up anti-LGBTQ rhetoric online”:

A toxic brew of hateful rhetoric has been percolating in Idaho and elsewhere around the U.S., well ahead of the arrests of the Patriot Front members at the pride event Saturday in Coeur d’Alene.

A “massive right-wing media ecosystem” has been promoting the notion that “there are people who are trying to take your kids to drag shows, there are trans people trying to ‘groom’ your children,” [extremism researcher] Lewis said.

The rhetoric has been amplified by right-wing social media accounts that use photos and videos of LGBTQ individuals to drive outrage among their followers.

Because I literally can’t write fast enough to keep up with the horrors, here’s the Texas GOP Report of the Permanent 2022 Platform & Resolutions Committee. As of 2022, the core platform (which is a hodgepodge of christian nationalist nonsense, in addition these bits) includes:

Add penalties in Texas law for corporations operating in Texas who lead boycotts against Texas due to legislative action to protect the rights of Texans to decline vaccination, protect the unborn, stop the teaching of Critical Race Theory in schools, compete in sports with those of their own biological gender, or to protect children and juveniles against sexual organ mutilation and hormones and puberty blockers designed to fake transition from one gender to another.

We support passage of a law more comprehensive than the Florida law that prohibits instruction in sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools. We advocate for those who violate any of the above to have their educator’s certification revoked and be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law where appropriate.

The official position of the Texas schools shall be that there are only two genders: biological male and biological female. We oppose transgender normalizing curriculum and pronoun use.

Gender Identity: We oppose all efforts to validate transgender identity. For the purpose of attempting to affirm a person age 21 or under if their perception is inconsistent with their biological sex, no medical practitioner or provider may engage in the following practices:
a. Intervene in any way to prevent natural progression of puberty.
b. Administer or provide opposite sex hormones.
c. Perform any surgery on healthy body parts of the underage person.

Counseling Methods: Therapists, psychologists, and counselors licensed with the State of Texas shall not be forbidden or penalized by any licensing board for practicing Reintegrative Therapy or other counseling methods when counseling clients of any age with gender dysphoria or unwanted same-sex attraction.

So, ignoring all the factual inaccuracies in the language (“gender” isn’t biological, the word for that is sex) and just looking at the policy positions, that’s

  • Explicit law to ban companies from speech on specific sides of certain issues
  • A full ban on teaching sexual education or theories of gender in schools
  • A decree as to how gender (not sex!) works, as well as a blanket ban on… pronoun use.
  • A blanket ban on medical treatment for gender dysphoria
  • A blanket ban on therapy for trans people

In addition, there’s

  • Special legal liability for doctors who have ever practised trans medicine in the past
  • Multiple condemnations of homosexuality
  • A legal carve-out for Christians followed by a condemnation of legal carve-outs

This is honestly maybe the most disgusting thing I’ve had to read as part of research for this article, and that’s saying something. I’ve only been noting the gender things, but this document is so thoroughly cruel to so many different groups of people it’s astonishing. It’s “full MAGA” theocratic extremism. You’ve seen some of this already above, but it’s full of attempts to decree as fact statements that are patently wrong2 and to reenforce those lies through repetition.

Neidert: let's start rounding up people

This document comes out of the Texas republican party convention, which is disturbing in its own right. See Nathan J Robinson’s “The Incredibly Disturbing Texas GOP Agenda Is a Vision For a Theocratic Dystopia”, which describes the “apocalyptic tone” set during the convention and the absolute siege mentality against the left, who are “destroying America”. To the GOP, whose leadership thoroughly believes in fully legalized discrimination against queer people for making an “abnormal lifestyle choice”, proper opposition to that attack looks like a repeal of hate crime laws, not recognizing marriages from other states, banning sex education “in any grade whatsoever”, and a full ban on trans-affirming medical care for both children and legal adults. I’m using Texas and its platform as a case study here, but Florida’s agenda is similar in tone and radicalism.

This isn’t threatening to become mainstream, this is all-the-way in the main stream.

New, angry law🔗

That was the platform: the statement of intent. It’s not law yet. But it’s not hard to find clear, well-documented cases of this ideology formalizing itself in American legal policy.

These laws are “angry law”. They’re categorically driven by ideologues. The policies they codify are overreaching and don’t hold up to scrutiny, because they’re born from the extremist, obliterationist ideology. They often include special extralegal provisions to exempt their policy from normal due process and regulation, like setting up legal immunity. And usually there is a reasonable alternative on the table that has been intentionally left out of the policy discussion in order to railroad the most extreme solution in.

Trans medicine rundown🔗

If “genital mutilation of children” were the first thing you ever heard about trans healthcare, you might think the child abuse argument had a point. That’s intentional; this rhetoric relies on you focusing on the harms it discusses instead of checking to see if the point they’re making is legitimate. It isn’t.

I want to talk more about some of the abject cruelty seen in anti-trans legislation, but to understand how divorced from reality it is you’ll need a quick medical primer. You know, facts.

While there are slight variances in the Standards of Care documents published by different organizations, the American Psychological Association, The Endocrine Society, The Pediatric Endocrine Society, The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, The American Collages of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, The Center for Disease Control and more (MJA, AAP, AMA, the APA again…) agree that:

  • Nonstereotypical gender expression is not pathological (relating to or caused by disease) per se and should not be treated as such
  • Gender dysphoria in adults should be treated progressively by mental health counselling, non-medical social steps, hormone therapy, and finally surgery if necessary.
  • Fully-reversible treatments (hormone blockers) are preferable to semi-reversible treatments and irreversible treatments (surgery), and all patients should be counselled on options before beginning any treatment (which requires informed consent)
  • Medical intervention for transgender youth and adults is effective, safe (when appropriately monitored), and has been established as the medical standard of care
  • Treatment plans put together by qualified doctors in cooperation with informed patients suffering from gender dysphoria are medically necessary, not cosmetic or optional
  • Failure to treat gender dysphoria is known to induce severe health risks far in excess3 of the risks associated with treatment
  • Conversion therapy or other direct hostility toward the patient was attempted in the past but is now known to be both ineffective and extremely dangerous (conversion therapy is often literal torture)

As is the case with all medicine, policy for minors is more cautious:

  • Extra emphasis is placed on the importance of requiring evaluations before beginning any treatment, “to ensure patients make a fully informed decision that protects their future well-being
  • Psychotherapy (affirming) is recommended to reducing distress related the gender dysphoria and ameliorating any other psychosocial difficulties
  • Children in particular should not be pressured to express their gender in a way contrary to their self-identification
  • If a minor is determined to need physical treatment, fully reversible hormone blockers should be used to temporarily prevent the development of sex characteristics that are difficult or impossible to reverse in the future
    • Hormone suppression is a temporary process and does not inevitably lead to pursuing sex reassignment
    • Studies show that young children with gender dysphoria are less likely to have that continue throughout adulthood than adults: see 2001 Cohen-Kettenis letter and studies cited therein
  • Withholding treatment (specifically puberty suppression) is not a neutral option. Puberty suppression is specifically used to prevent the need for more serious treatment or surgery later in life
  • Gender-affirming genital surgery should never be be carried out on minors
    • Genital surgery is never to be given to patients under the age of majority.
    • Even for adults there are strict limits on this; dysphoria must be diagnosed, well-documented, and persistent. Patients must already be living in their gender role for more than a year to even be candidates for surgery (although some argue these restrictions are too strict for adults giving informed consent)

Trans children are treated differently than trans adults, they’re treated with much more care and caution. But for adults, too, the emphasis is on caution through. (So much so that, in practice, it’s often difficult for even adults to get prescriptive care, even after years of diagnosis and treatment.)

Again, Gender-affirming genital surgery is not performed on minors. For it to be would be medical malpractice, as has already been clearly established by the mainstream medical community. And even in adults it is well understood that it is only for a subset of patients that “relief from gender dysphoria cannot be achieved without modification of their primary and/or secondary sex characteristics to establish greater congruence with their gender identity.” In other words, nobody is running around snipping things off willy-nilly.

The people who say otherwise are bold-faced liars.

What is recommended for minors suffering from dysphoria — after consultation and diagnosis, of course — are puberty blockers. Puberty blockers have been used safely to delay puberty since 1981, with 30 years of data showing them to be safe and effective. Cisgendered children with have been treated for puberty blockers for decades without any serious concerns about sterilization. (Who would toss around baseless claims about sterilization? Just you wait!)

They are especially valuable in trans healthcare; see the famous Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., & van Goozen, S. H. M. (1998). Pubertal delay as an aid in diagnosis and treatment of a transsexual adolescent. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 7(4), 246–248. paper about a twelve-year-old who wrote a suicide note explaining how he’d rather die than be forced to go through the wrong puberty. One of the latest studies, published just February of this year, shows that in a sample group of adolescents, “receipt of gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones, was associated with 60% lower odds of moderate or severe depression and 73% lower odds of suicidality over a 12-month follow-up”. A 73% reduction in suicidality. That’s astonishing. And that’s the truly crucial thing: the deaths caused by dysphoria are suicides, and medical care reduces suicide across the board.

Speaking of the ol’ snip-snip, that’s not what trans healthcare looks like for adults, either. Some people do get cosmetic surgery, but in most cases for fully transitioned adults, “trans healthcare” looks like a sustained regimen of painful hormone shots. Trans people can’t just get a one-off operation, they need a continuous regimen of care, somewhat parallel to the diabetics who require insulin to self-regulate. I say this to point out two things. First, that this treatment is difficult and physically taxing for the patient. It’s not fun and it’s not minor; people are only going on this medicine because they need it. But second, I want to point out that transgender adults need continuous care. Banning trans medical care doesn’t just stop people from transitioning, it cripples the entire trans population overnight. That’s why attacking healthcare is so dangerous, but it’s also what makes them such attractive targets to the genocidalists who want the trans population in agony and — really — want the mass suicides such a ban induces.

I really can’t emphasize this enough: literally all relevant major medical organizations disagree entirely with the anti-trans agenda and its talking points. The republican anti-trans stance in particular seems almost antagonistic towards science in general, as part of a general mistrust of intellectuality.

So now, with reality firmly behind us, back to our story where everyone involved deliberately ignores all this, because lawmakers’ feelings don’t care about facts.

Texas Opinion No. KP-0401🔗

The Texas KP-0401 opinion is a blatant example of angry anti-science law, and the one nearest to my heart. It also represents both the spirit of the genocidal ideology and the willingness of the assailants to write awful law in order to achieve their ideological goals.

It started August 6, 2021, when Governor Greg Abbott (R, governor since 2015) wrote the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) asking them to clarify whether — under current state law — gender reassignment surgery constituted child abuse. DFPS commissioner Jamie Masters replied August 11 in a letter that concludes reassignment surgery is abuse when not medically necessary, which is mostly correct. This letter only seems concerned with gender reassignment surgery (so that fun word “mutilation” can be thrown around as much as possible), and not other trans healthcare practices.

At this point, Rep. Matt Krause(R) enters. You might remember Krause as the man who wrote the demand that Texas schools audit and report the physical locations of everything on his manifesto-like list of books about topics he personally dislikes, like human rights and women. He’s also the one who requested an opinion from AG Ken Paxton as to whether Texas “has the sovereign power to defend itself from invasion” as an approach to border security (because Operation Lone Star had too much oversight for him, I guess), or his support for nationalist historical revisionism. Matt’s true passion, though, is the Gays. Before his appointment, Matt worked with a group identified by the Southern Poverty Center as being anti-LGBTQ extremist organizations and continues to push their ideology from office with his legal activism to strongly regulate areas relating to gender and sexuality, including pushes to expand Texas’s already-absurd obscenity laws. He’s a crazy person, but also completely representative of the Texas republican party.

This Matt Krause wrote another request (he writes many) to Ken Paxton arguing for a formal expansion of the notion of child abuse to include gender reassignment procedures. Paxton responded on February the 21st by writing the now-infamous KP-0401 opinion, which more specifically advises that a broad range of medical treatment for gender dysphoria (explicitly including non-surgical medication and procedures that risk, but do not intentionally induce, infertility, and even implicitly including therapy) categorically constitute child abuse. Note the escalation.

KP-0401 is 13 pages, relatively long for a AG opinion. It primarily consists of rhetorical prose and standard anti-trans assertions mixed with the childbirth-fetishistic ideas also seen in the Texan anti-abortion movement. (See also S.B. 8, etc.) The opinion derides the choice to “destroy a fully functioning sex organ” and spends an immense amount of time lauding the danger posed to the right to procreate. It even goes so low as to wield historical eugenicist campaigns against minority groups as an argument in favour of preventing sterilization procedures even — as in this case — when medically advisable. Yes, really: one of his key arguments for law denying individuals bodily autonomy is the history of governments denying individuals bodily autonomy: “violations”, in his own words.

Paxton directly compares parents of trans children, who he calls facilitators throughout, to abusers a la Munchausen by proxy, and uses that to argue for a suspension of the parent’s right to consent to a child’s medical treatment for this particular treatment.

The lip service paid to importance of consent is a familiar little hoax. Consent should be a crucial issue to consider, one of the most important when discussing any medical treatment. But in regards to trans healthcare, anti-trans legislators’ concerns are never really about the patient’s consent or anyone else’s. To the ideologue, “[Person X] should choose” is a card that to play when that would make the choice you want made. If you think they’d make a different decision than you, well, it can’t be a matter of consent anymore, you have to argue it’s abuse. Any reasonable conversation about an established medical treatment would need to divide consent somewhere between the patient, their guardians, and the prescribing physician. Paxton doesn’t trust any of those parties to always prevent gender transition — which, again, is his only real goal here — so he grants the responsibility of consent to the state, instead of anyone involved. It’s a sham.

Many of the assertions in the opinion are blatant factual inaccuracies, even in addition to the deceit that child genital surgery was ever seriously an issue in the first place. For example, Paxton lists an increased risk of mental health issue as a dangerous side-effect of transitioning, when the studies overwhelmingly show the opposite. The UCLA Suicide Risk and Prevention for Transgender People: Summary of Research Findings - September 2021 found that factors related to not transitioning — religious and social rejection, conversion therapy, discrimination — drastically increased suicidal tendency. There has been an enormous amount of serious, peer-reviewed medical research on this issue, and there is no evidence to suggest the act of transitioning is harmful to mental health. But, in case you thought there might have been even the slightest amount of sincere care about suicide, after this was published Texas removed information about its trans suicide prevention hotline from is website. It’s… really not subtle.

This was done — rather conspicuously — immediately before the Texas primary elections and the relatively competitive AG race. Paxton won by a wide margin despite (or, realistically, due in part to) having an active indictment for multiple counts of first-degree securities fraud, being endorsed by insurrection leader Donald Trump, and violating Texas public records law by refusing to turn over documents relating to January 6th. Gillian Branstetter of the ACLU described the Texas election as a “race to the bottom on trans rights”, commenting on how anti-trans policy is exceedingly popular among Texas republican voters.

This doesn’t come as a surprise to Texas GOP leadership: several different reporters reported hearing on a call that attacking trans families was polling at 75%-80%:

Between February 21st and the 22nd, there was optimism from some due to the fact that this was a nonbinding interpretation of existing law, and did not constitute any sort of new legislation. But that analysis fails to see how the letter and opinion and later the executive order exist as meditated pieces of a political movement. The goal was eradication of trans people, and the goal will continue to be eradication of trans people. None of it is happening in a liberal constitutional vacuum.

Febuary 22nd, one day after the Paxton opinion, Greg Abbott wrote DFPS commissioner Jamie Masters instructing them to “conduct a prompt and thorough investigation of any reported instances of these abusive procedures in the State of Texas”, where the antecedent of “these abusive procedures” explicitly includes puberty blocking drugs (which, again, is not abuse, and is in fact the universally recommended treatment).

Note that Abbott called this a “ruling” which isn’t true — it’s a nonbinding opinion issued by the AG. In fact, it’s so not a law that the hyper-partisan Senate Bill 1646 which would have codified the policy that trans healthcare is child abuse into actual law went up before the Texas senate and failed repeatedly over the course of two days before dying, because literally only republicans would vote for it.

Which, actually, looking at it now, I got angry about way back when it was first introduced, apparently.

Texas Fallout🔗

Investigations into families began immediately starting with an investigation into an employee of DFPS with a trans daughter, who was also put on suspension after being investigated by her own employer. This was a choice, not a coincidence. Targeting social workers specifically acts as intimidation against the people in the best position to help — “we won’t have you supporting transgenderism in your community and we’re not afraid to go after you directly if you do”.

That case also revealed that transgenderism was specifically being used as cause to weaponize an abuse investigation independently from any specific evidence or even claims of harm: according to the promptly-filed ACLU lawsuit, the state’s investigator told the parents that the only allegation against them was that their transgender daughter might have been provided with gender-affirming health care and was “currently transitioning from male to female.” This can be a purely social decision — there may be no medicine involved at all — but this was enough to trigger taking children away from their parents.

Harris County attorney Christian Menefee of DFPS called the investigation “a complete misrepresentation of the definition of abuse in the family code” and released a statement saying that “Governor Abbott and General Paxton are ignoring medical professionals and intentionally misrepresenting the law to the detriment of transgender children and their families.”. Dr. Alex Keuroghlian denounced it as “legislating in a manner that is entirely divorced from medical evidence, consensus and mainstream practice.”

But parents aren’t the only ones at risk. As Abbott explicitly outlined in his letter, because Texas is calling all trans children abused, this triggers mandatory reporting requirements. All licensed professionals in Texas who interact with children — doctors, nurses, teachers — are legally obligated to report for child abuse the parents of any child they think are receiving gender-affirming treatment. This is an onerous requirement on decent people, but it also grants an incredible amount of power to anti-trans professionals to hunt down and attack trans families. To trans children, this means all the adults they’re supposed to able to trust and confide in have been weaponized against them, and saying the wrong thing may mean forcible separation from their parents.

If you’re a family with a trans child in TX your only options are to either get the recommended medical care and treatment, which is now presumptively child abuse, or abruptly stop your child’s medical treatment, which is known to be physically dangerous (in addition to dramatically increasing suicide risk), which is also child abuse in TX. Although, unlike the first option, the child abuse of abruptly stopping your child’s treatment plan is real. So in Texas… having a trans child just is child abuse, even though every action you took was both legal and medically advisable. This is an effective ban on transgender children in Texas, ex post facto and all. The policy isn’t tied to preventing any abusive action, it’s just meant to be as destructive as possible in order to remove the population.

Again, this isn’t theoretical. From the ACLU lawsuit, a 16-year trans boy tried to commit suicide the same day that Abbott issued the child abuse directive in part because of the letter. He was admitted to a psych facility, but when facility staff learned he was undergoing hormone therapy, they turned his family in for child abuse. That atrocity is the system is working as intended. Removing support increases suicides, and Abbott is getting his suicides. If you’re trans, or you let your children be trans, the state destroys your family. It’s a system designed to prevent the existence of alive trans people. This is the environment the policies were made to create: a genocide where all choices lead to trans deaths. Victory.


But what of the trans children who are separated from their parents and put into the child support system? Well, that’s where Texas sends kids to die.

Texas’s child support system is known to be insufficient and abusive. Over the course of less than two years, at least 23 children died in Texas foster care, at least 6 due directly to abuse or neglect. There are more children in the system than it can handle, as more children are taken from their parents and pumped into facilities that are being shut down for being wildly unsafe. Texas puts children in environments that “create an unreasonable risk of serious harm” “repeatedly, with serious, harmful consequences to the children in its care.”

The Texas state-sanctioned The Refuge Ranch, the self-proclaimed largest long-term live-in rehabilitation facility for child survivors of sex trafficking in the US, systematically abused the children under its care, sexually and medically. (Additional coverage: 1, 2, 3) The Refugee Ranch had a ring of more than nine staff members involved in the abuse ring, which shot pornography of the minor girls, sold the porn, and used the money to purchase illegal drugs to give to the children. A preliminary investigation by Texas police claimed there was no evidence of abuse, but an actual investigation found that to be false (although there may be no special circumstance here: unfortunately, negligence in investigating sex abuse cases is typical of law enforcement).

Taking healthy children from loving families and putting them into the Texas DFPS system — which Abbott and Paxton know is grossly unfit — is child abuse, full stop. It’s an inexcusable cruelty done to children and families to further a genocidal agenda.


In Florida the most obvious anti-trans legislation is the Don’t Say Gay bill, forcing schools to discriminate against trans youth. It’s already having serious impacts on children: according to reports Orange County teachers will be required to remove stickers of support and will be banned from wearing any pride-supporting clothing, including lanyards the district itself distributed just one year prior. (This is all wildly contrary to any notion of free speech, but as I continue to remind, the blatant hypocrisy is to be expected here.) Teachers will be forced to report students’ health concerns to their parents without the consent of the child, and faculty will be required to use the pronouns “assigned at birth” (which pronouns aren’t, but whatever) regardless of the wishes of teacher, parents, or children. But this bill has had extensive coverage already, so I won’t rehash the details further.

But on June 2, right off the heels of its anti-LGBTQ Don’t Say Gay victory, Florida released a press release declaring all gender affirming care to be “experimental” so that trans health care would no longer be covered under Medicaid. (Gender affirming care is, of course, not experimental; this is a lie. The corpus on gender transition, including minors, includes more than 90 years of scientific research and best-selling medical books published as far bask as 1966.) While this doesn’t yet ban healthcare for trans adults outright, it explicitly lays out the groundwork and makes it clear that it intends to do so (see page 38), with restrictions on private insurance (disallowing private health insurance from covering treatment) as a next policy step.

What’s interesting about the Florida Medicaid decision is that it claims to be based on science. It’s filled with links to scientific sources that come to the same conclusions it does. It also points out the US Department of Health and Human Services guidance has some specific problems, which it links a rebuttal of.

So what’s going on here? This seems almost credible. Look at all those science words! Maybe I got this whole thing wrong, and it’s the gays who were the baddies the whole time. Instead of just guessing though, let’s actually look.

“Let Kids Be Kids”’ Science🔗

Right out of the gate there’s a problem with the decision letter: it cites six sources, but all but two of those are duplicates. They just kept linking to the same studies to make the decision look thorough. But if you look up their web page they do give a list of five scientific sources, so I’ll be generous and treat the PDF as an error.

Not counting the summary published by the state alongside the press release, those five medical sources are:

First of all, no, that isn’t a copy-paste error. Every single study Florida came up with to support its premise was written within a span of two days. The batch was commissioned and published by the Florida Agency For Health Care Administration’s “Let Kids Be Kids” campaign — as confirmed by Brignardello-Peterson et al — specifically to legitimate anti-trans policies. There doesn’t appear to have been any oversight conducted in the “research.” Not a single source was peer reviewed in any capacity or even published in any sort of medical journal, just the campaign’s own web page.

The sources in the state’s report themselves are generally underqualified.

  • Patrick Lappert is a catholic deacon and devout member of outspoken anti-trans organization Catholic Medical Association who speaks religiously against trans medicine, citing the usual ideological slurry of the gendered soul, trans people being a liberal plot, and of course “grooming”. Here he discusses cosmetic surgery, but only after spending his overview asserting an expertise over child psychology and endocrinology that he does not have, by his own later admission. As such, his “expertise” has been recently disqualified in federal court. His views stem directly from his personal religious beliefs in “Christian anthropology” and specific catechisms by individual bishops that make specific (unfalsifiable) claims about how supernatural entities prescribe genders on human souls prior to conception, which of course have no business being anywhere near public policy.
  • G. Kevin Donovan makes the extremely basic error of assuming inaction in the face of treat able illness is the safest course of action, and fails to address not only the evidence that this is untrue in the case of trans medicine, but is also untrue in the case of the vast majority of medicine: intentionally failing to treat a condition is wrong if that condition is an infection, too. But it’s easy to see why he’s willing to make so many errors in order to make his point; In Strangers in a Strange Land: How Our Founding Principles and a Bitter Pill Undo the Assimilation of US Catholics, Donovan argues that transitioning — alongside contraceptives, marriage equality, and oral sex — existing in modern society is antithetical to Catholic values, and the fact that “society insists [behaviors] must be tolorated” is a threat to Catholic physicians. Donovan has applied his “our values are under attack” philosophy to the courts on multiple occasions, including a Dobbs brief arguing that human life begins at fertilization.
  • Quentin L. Van Meter spends his time imagining how gender affirmation “tears the fabric of the patient’s life into pieces- pitting family members against each other, ruining child friendships and it introduces the child to a fantasy world, much of it on the internet” [sic]. In real life, Quentin spends his time denouncing transgenderism as an elaborate social experiment and advocating for the discredited and dangerous practice of conversion therapy. Van Meter is the president of the “American College of Pediatricians” anti-LGBTQ hate group, and was recently disqualified as an expert by a Texas judge for refusing to offer a fact-driven opinion..
  • James Cantor’s credibility as a clinical psychologist has been destroyed after being kicked out professional societies for anti-trans bullying, and he has since been a paid expert witness for such anti-trans groups. His testimony has been thrown out in these cases, with courts deciding he is unqualified to speak on this issue due to bias and having “no clinical experience in treating gender dysphoria in minors and no experience monitoring patients receiving drug treatments for gender dysphoria.” Cantor’s report itself is copy-pasted from his “paid expert testimony” in a case where anti-trans activist group “Alliance Defending Freedom” paid him to support legislation baring athletes from sports teams.
  • Romina Brignardello-Peterson is a writer for discredited activist organization “The Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine”, but more importantly, literally a dentist. I like to imagine DeSantis overheard her telling someone else her only real qualification was diagnosing oral decay, and everyone was just too scared to correct him.

All five of the sources either make a vague complaint that the data contradicting their theories is “weak” in some ambiguous way or just ignore it outright. They all complain that there isn’t enough hard evidence while simultaneously campaigning for a criminalization of the very medicine that would produce that data. The documents are riddled with basic errors; there are typos, even unbalanced quotes, and you can see above how Van Meter just changes tense in the middle of the sentence. I guess if Florida tells you it needs a letter tomorrow you don’t bother proofreading.

A review from qualified experts Anne L. Alstott, Prof. Jacquin D. Bierman, Prof. Hussein Abdul-Latif, M.D., Susan D. Boulware, M.D., Rebecca Kamody, PhD (Clinical Psychology), Laura Kuper PhD (Clinical Psychology), Christy Olezeski, PhD (Clinical Psychology), and Nathalie Szilagyi, M.D. (seven scientists and a law professor at Yale) strongly opposing the change described the report, summarizing:

We are also distressed as scientists and stewards of public health by the shoddy quality of the purported scientific report offered to justify the Proposed Rule.

Our comments [focus on] the absence of any persuasive scientific or medical justification for the Proposed Rule. The June 2 Report purports to be a review of the scientific and medical evidence but is, in fact, fundamentally unsound from a scientific perspective. The June 2 Report disregards established scientific knowledge, ignores longstanding clinical practice recommendations developed by authoritative bodies of medical experts, and unaccountably dismisses the medical recommendations of more than 20 medical societies.

… Not only is the study not formally peer-reviewed, the BPW authors violate scientific norms and standards by failing to engage at all with their peers or with actual experts in the subject matter.

… When a reader looks past the jargon, however, the BPW authors adopt a method that violates scientific standards and appears to be jury-rigged to reach a foregone conclusion. The authors convey their conclusions in misleading language. Contrary to the BPW authors’ claims, their study does not call into question the scientific and clinical importance of the established science that supports medical care for gender dysphoria.

Our analysis demonstrates that the June 2 Report carries no scientific weight. The report disregards established clinical guidelines and peer-reviewed studies and instead relies on purported “expert” reports that raise major red flags for lack of expertise, close ties to advocacy groups, and financial conflicts of interest. The report makes repeated errors about scientific research and medical regulation, and it engages in ungrounded speculation and stereotyping. Accordingly, the Proposed Rule is ungrounded in scientific research and is arbitrary and capricious. Further, because the June 2 report violates Florida’s own standards for scientific review, it cannot support the Proposed Rule as an interpretation of the existing Florida regulatory scheme.

I’m not going to stop here and meticulously disprove all this garbage or I’d be here forever; you really can just drill anywhere and hit coal with these people. None of it holds up to even cursory scrutiny. In fact, if you’re an aspiring skeptic I invite you to use these as practice. Debunking this slop is like having training wheels to learn how to think.

It’s transparent nonsense: hastily manufactured pseudoscience in order to give an entirely illegitimate political campaign a semblance of respectability in the eyes of people who don’t look too closely at things. The medical literature flatly contradicts the agenda the Florida GOP wants to push, so they put together a stable of anti-trans advocates and just manufactured their own fake reports over the length of a weekend.

Sadly, Florida didn’t kickstart the fake science industry, they just tapped into it. There’s a whole Doubt-is-Their-Product industry that manufactures disinformation about LGBTQ medical science that caters itself to these extremists grasping for scientific justification. There’s an excellent summary in Aviva Stahl’s “Meet The “Fringe Extremists” Pushing Flawed Science To Target Trans Kids”:

A small number of highly controversial doctors and researchers have been pushing these anti-trans bills. Representing organizations with seemingly professional names like the American College of Pediatricians or the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine, they have effectively accomplished for gender dysphoria what anti-vaxxer medical professionals have sought to do for their cause: give credence to the notion that no scientific or medical consensus exists regarding the relative safety and efficacy of a given treatment, despite the clear and growing evidence to the contrary.

“Proponents of these bills claim that they are advocating in the interests of transgender children, which is actually ludicrous,” said Hannah Willard, the vice president of government affairs at Freedom for All Americans, a bipartisan group pushing for protections against LGTBQ discrimination nationwide. “These fringe extremists are trying to push a narrative that transgender people need saving from the medical experts.”

[in regards to claims that the risks of transitioning outweigh the benefit] these assertions are either misleading or verifiably false, according to experts in the field. Studies have consistently shown that providing gender-affirming care to gender-diverse children — which includes allowing them to socially transition and access puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones — is correlated with lower rates of suicide and mental illness. Studies have also shown that children who aren’t supported, such as those who undergo therapy with the aim of eliminating their trans identity, have worse health outcomes and are more likely to have thoughts of suicide.

Turban, the Stanford researcher, has described ACP as a “small but clever anti-LGBT group [that] created a legit-sounding name.” He told BuzzFeed News that ACP is not the country’s leading organization for US pediatricians; that group is known as the American Academy of Pediatrics. In 2002, the AAP issued a statement in support of parents of the same sex, prompting a small number of socially conservative physicians to leave the group and found ACP. Since then, ACP has issued many controversial anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ statements. It is currently designated as an anti-LGBTQ hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

I do especially recommend reading that article. It goes in-depth with more examples of laws driven or influenced by these phony pesudomedical paper-mills, and thoroughly they’ve infiltrated the lawmaking process.

Back to Florida, I also want to look at Florida’s “fact check” of the federal LGBTQ medical guidelines. The “fact check” — in its entirety — is a defaced version of an OASH fact sheet with basic summaries of medical research highlighted and stamped with a red “FALSE”, with assertions written in the margin labelled as green “TRUTH.” Most of these annotations are related to points on the sheet, but some are just recitations of talking points or just fragments like “Lack of credible evidence for adults and children” apropos of nothing. Every single medical claim in green is uncited and either irrelevant or flatly contradicted by mountains of high quality, peer-reviewed medical research. Trans healthcare is clearly evidenced to be beneficial by every level of study short of double-blind tests, which obviously don’t apply here. The original fact sheet shows its sources, but the Florida version goes out of its way to obscure the citations with a giant stamp to keep you from verifying that. It’s an incredibly juvenile tantrum of a document, and tying this in any way to a discussion of real policy is just embarrassing.

Fact check I’d put a big decal over the whole thing marking how the green bits are lies, but that would be gaudy and childish.

Florida really hates that federal fact sheet, too. In April 2022, Florida’s office of the surgeon general sent out a response memo to that fact sheet that rejected both federal guidance and medical best practices in favour of… well, just eradication, really. In addition to insisting that adolescents not be prescribed puberty blockers (which is so counter to all medical guidance that the actual studies the Florida memo cites concludes in favour of the treatment), it decrees that “Social gender transition should not be a treatment option for children or adolescents”.

So what’s this “social gender” we don’t want adolescents to transition? Well, that’s going by your chosen name. Picking out your own clothes. Choosing your own hairstyle. Speaking about yourself the way you choose. Extrordinarily fundamental freedom-of-expression and social autonomy stuff. Of course, literally everyone expresses their gender socially. You can’t somehow ban “performance of social gender” as if that were somehow unique to trans people. (I’ll talk more on how queerness is seen as foreign and sexual later.)

What does government policing of social gender look like? Stonewall. Laws criminalizing garments. Cops stationing themselves at bars and checking the genitals of patrons they don’t like. Arresting men who weren’t manly enough, or women who weren’t feminine enough. The state deciding what social behaviour and expression is acceptable and what is not. The totalitarian social atrocities that kicked off the LGBTQ rights movement in the first place. That’s what Florida wants to bring back in force.

Federal law🔗

Most of the anti-trans laws we see are at the state level, but there are some federal pushes. (So much for states’ rights to make their own laws, huh? You guessed it, that’s not a real principle republicans hold either.)

The “Protecting Children From Experimentation Act of 2021”, sponsored by 21 republicans and 0 democrats, is a simple but extreme bill that would unequivocally criminalize all gender care for minors everywhere in the US:

Whoever knowingly performs any gender reassignment medical intervention on a minor shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

This includes criminalizing the use of the puberty blockers I discussed earlier, which makes this a proactive choice to subject trans adolescents as old as 17 to the wrong puberty, even if they have medical and parental concurrence. This arguably also criminalizes “social transition” and simple psychological therapies, as states try to argue that affirming counselling is child abuse.

The “Empower Parents to Protect Their Kids Act of 2022”… god damn, that title. HB8170 accuses school districts of “violating parental and familial rights by encouraging or instructing staff to deceive or withhold information parents” by having (good) policies that treat student health information with confidentiality, and in some cases not exposing it to people likely to abuse the children if their confidentiality were violated. I have more to say about the “parents’ rights” angle, but I’ll come back around to that. The proposed law requires school employees to not “facilitate, encourage, or coerce students to withhold information from their parents regarding the student’s “gender transition” or the student’s purported “gender identity”, where the student’s purported “gender identity” is incongruous with the student’s biological sex.”

As usual, we have the telltale signs of angry law, like special provisions exempting a need to seek administrative remedy, so parents can sue without even attempting to resolve disputes in good faith. You’ll also see some deliberately ambiguous wording there. What involves “facilitating” a child keeping a secret from their parents? Are teachers required to interrogate children? Where does it end? (It doesn’t.) Astonishingly, this law defines the “designated violations” that constitute grounds for a suit as including perceived threats to possibly violate the law in the future. If you think a teacher might, someday, not tell a boy’s mom about a flower he drew in his margins, that’s grounds for a suit under this rule.

The bill blames “powerful teachers unions and activist organizations” [sic] for allowing and encouraging “an experimental social and psychological intervention” (lie) “that has immediate effects on a child’s psychology and a high likelihood of changing the life path of a child”. This is a lie and republicans know it: when they do occasionally cherry-pick science, they grab the factoid that early social experimentation is usually reversed. Experimenting with self-expression does not somehow lock you into a track, because people are responsible for themselves. Which is something you would think republicans believed if they believed anything, but they don’t.

If you look through the language you’ll see the usual mess of rhetoric. “Irreversible consequences” is there. At one point in the preamble the bill just asserts “Any policies that attempt to circumvent parental authority are a violation of parents’ constitutionally protected rights to direct the care, custody, and upbringing of their children as recognized by the Supreme Court” which a) no, and b) they literally just assert that and move on. No explanations, no limits on “parental authority”, certainly no referenced court case establishing precedent that they’re demanding exists. It’s just a garbage fire.

This is another bill that lumps “social transition” in with the kinds of behaviour it wants to eliminate. This polices gender roles, including clothing, hair, names, nicknames, voice, class choice, handwriting, friendships, occupation choice… there are limits placed on this power, just carte blanche for schools to demand control over children’s behaviour in service of eradicating trans kids.

But what happens if a kid is trans at a school? Well fuck me, the school has to pay for the child’s complete and successful conversion therapy.

(4) NATURE OF RELIEF.—In an action under this section, the court shall grant—
    (A) all appropriate relief, including injunctive relief and declaratory relief;
    (B) to a prevailing plaintiff, reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs; and
    (C) payment for treatments or therapy needed to repair harm to the child perpetuated by pursuit of "gender transition" determined necessary by the parent and the child’s medical providers. 

I have no words. Or, I really wish I didn’t have to have words, but here I am two months into a writing project, so I guess I have to remind you that conversion therapy is harmful, causes emotional [and] physical harm to LGBT individuals, particularly adolescents or young persons and has little or no potential for achieving changes in orientation1.

Conversion is sold to parents as a miracle cure to turn LGBTQ children into the straight, cis, “normal” children the parents wish they had had instead. In practice, conversion therapy is literally administered torture and the only change it makes to people is inflicting intense psychological trauma. Conversion therapy is abuse, torture, an atrocity. It also doesn’t work, which in context of this bill, I guess, means schools have to keep paying to torture the trans kid until they die.

There’s a great bit in the deposition of Stephen Levine for this. Conversion therapy advocate Stephen Levine is a professional expert witness hired by various states to argue for anti-trans policies. This deposition revealed he was paid $5,000 — paid, not a grant — to publish articles against informed consent by… The Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine, as part of an attempt to hijack the Cochrane review committees for puberty blockers and HRT. You’ll remember SEGM as the non-NIH fringe anti-trans extremist organization from Aviva Stahl’s “Meet The “Fringe Extremists” Pushing Flawed Science To Target Trans Kids”.

In his deposition, Levine described under oath how conversion therapy sells because “Parents would very much like me to be able to return their child efficiently and quickly to a cis state” and it’s “premised on the notion that there’s a way to dissuade someone from being transgender so that they don’t have these outcomes”. But then, he admitted in the same disposition that “To my knowledge, there is no evidence beyond anecdotal reports that psychotherapy can enable a return to male identification for genetically male boys, adolescents, and men, or return to female identification for genetically female girls, adolescents, and women.” It’s a scam. It’s torturing children and selling it to parents as hope.

The state requiring it like this is hideous abuse to the child, but it also encourages parents’ delusion that being trans is a pathological condition, which in turn encourages them to abuse their child. This clause is sickening and horrific, but that’s par. The bar is the floor, here.

Many of these and other federal bills are introduced with no chance of passing. It’s symbolic, but it isn’t just symbolic; it pushes these ideas into mainstream discourse and shifts the Overton Window towards formally codifying anti-trans discrimination into public policy.

Just a whole bunch more🔗

Those are some high-profile examples, but there are just too many for me to go in depth on the rest. Here’s a super-brief overview of what casual research turned out:

Alabama and Idaho advancing bills to make it a felony for doctors to provide trans medical care, with sentences of 10 years and life, respectively. More lies here about genital mutilation surgery and denying medical standards. (Already challenged by the justice dept.)

Proposed Oklahoma book-banning bill, fining teachers a minimum of $10,000 to be paid out-of-pocket if they “promote positions in opposition to closely held religious beliefs of the student”, which would include teaching LGBT issues as well as evolution and sex-ed. Bill’s author and anti-gender book banner Rob Standridge describes it as an emergency remedy “immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health or safety.” Oklahoma already engages this kind of classroom policing, including firing a teacher for displaying an array of flags that included a pride flag. Standridge previously advocated and passed law banning school mask and covid vaccine requirements, because it’s critical to “protect health choice”.

North Carolina excluded trans healthcare from state healthcare plans, although this was found in court to be unconstitutional discrimination on the basis of sex, as well as a Title VII violation. The state of North Carolina brought in fake expert Paul Hruz to preach his assumptions as “expert testimony”, but the court found him to be unqualified to make any sort of judgement about “the diagnosis of gender dysphoria, the DSM, gender dysphoria’s potential causes, the likelihood that a patient will “desist”, or the efficacy of mental health treatments.” In particular, Hruz peddled the “social contagion” conspiracy theory, which I’ll discuss more later. Other state testimony from multiple sources was evaluated to be “conspiratorial accusations … nothing more than rank speculation designed to distract or inflame the jury and has no business in expert testimony” and dismissed.

Parents sued a Massachusetts school district for violating those parents’ “sincerely held religious belief” that parents have the right to exclusively teach “adherence to a Biblical understanding of male and female and standards of behavior.” The sin the school allegedly committed was instructing counsellors not to discuss students’ confidential thoughts about gender identity with their parents without the student’s consent, because of how frequently outing minors triggers actual child abuse.

Backed by anti-lgbtq groups like The Family Council, Arkansas enacted a ban on transgender youth medical care overriding republican governor Asa Hutchinson’s veto. As Hutchinson rightly assessed, “This puts a very vulnerable population in a more difficult position” and the state should not “interrupt treatment that the parents had agreed to, the patient had agreed to and the physician recommended.” Hutchinson said he would have signed it if it was limited to surgery, but the bill covered all trans healthcare, including safe therapies patients were already on. Instead of writing a “more restrained approach that allows a thoughtful study of the science and ethics surrounding the issue before acting”, as the Governor requested, the republican legislators simply overrode the veto and forced the law through. After an ACLU suit, Judge Jay Moody issued an injunction because, in his words, “to pull this care midstream from these patients, or minors, would cause irreparable harm”. This was a particularly brutal session for individual medical rights. More coverage and rebuttal in Scientific American.

Another veto override in Utah with HB0011, which establishes a new commission to segregate children athletes based on gender and specifically mandates them to prevent “a student of the male sex from competing against another school on a team designated for female students”. It also carves out special immunity for the adults now sexually evaluating underaged girls on behalf of the state, because they need it. Governor Spencer J Cox wrote a thoughtful letter explaining the veto, saying “Rarely has so much fear and anger been directed at so few,” and “I want [trans children] to live,” but the legislature dismissed him and his concerns so completely that they overturned the veto on the very same day.

Yet another veto override in Indiana where the republican supermajority forced a scholastic sports ban through even when there hadn’t been a single case of a transgender student participating. Republican governor Eric Holcomb (a staunch conservative!) vetoed the bill citing the lack of a real problem, saying “After thorough review, I find no evidence to support either claim even if I support the overall goal”, but legislators overrode the veto.

Texas Superintendent Jeremy Glenn demanding librarians pull books educating people about sexuality or transgender people. He didn’t hide behind the usual “pornographic” go-to, though: he made it clear that this was entirely ideologically driven. “Here in this community, we’re going to be conservative. … And I’m going to take it a step further with you, there are two genders. There’s male, and there’s female. … I don’t have any issues with what people want to believe, but there’s no place for it in our libraries.” But of course, in his mind, this was somehow pushing back against “partisan politics”, which makes sense when you lie hard as hard about what “partisan” means as republicans do.

In Virginia, republican representatives Tim Anderson and Tommy Altman sued Oni Press and Maia Kobabe over their graphic novel, GENDER QUEER. The suit alleged it violated an unconstitutional and intentionally ambiguous obscenity law, with the only grounds being that it was “obscene for restricted viewing by minors” with no actual complaint or reason given in the motion. (Note here how intentionally ambiguously written laws give enforcers vastly increased powers to harass people on a discretionary basis while allowing people in the ingroup or otherwise powerful to skirt on loopholes.) This was after the graphic novel was singled out for scrutiny by our friend Matt Krause. Lawyers were clear that these materials do not fall under “obscene materials” under any interpretation of the law. The complaint itself fails to show cause and grossly mischaracterizes the nature and subject of the book and fails to meet the law’s own criteria on many points. This is the same complaint which names the wrong party in the complaint and — I kid you not — misspells “obscenity” in the title of the petition as “Obsenity”. Not big readers, this bunch.

Emboldened by the atrocious Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, Alabama AG Steve Marshall (R) pushed for the federal court to allow the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for trans youth using the legal basis in Dobbs that such care is not constitutionally protected, because it’s not “deeply rooted” in the nation’s history. The idea that a right must have historical grounding to be constitutionally protected is absurd, of course: the constitution doesn’t enumerate rights, but the same faulty logic being used to force through the ideologically-driven war on abortion is being used, almost immediately, in fights for other medical rights, where a rule by judges is substituted for the rule of law. This terrible rationale is now being used to lay a legal framework for the state to forcibly medically de-transition both teenagers and adults.

In the national sphere, republican senator Roger Marshall is threatens to block school meal funding over transgender policy: literally, keeping food from children and blaming it on the gays. This is in response to a Biden policy banning discrimination against LGBTQ students in schools who receive federal funding. Republicans are twisting this incredibly low bar for a standard of care into Biden “trying to deny school lunch programs for states that don’t do transgender ideology in the schools”, which is why they have to… make sure government discrimination against the kind of children they don’t like is legal, apparently.

Over in merry old wherever, the NHS commissioner suspects there might be evidence of “regret” in transitioning children — there super isn’t, by the way, regret rates are < 1% — so they’re turning over the medical records of minors to an independent group to comb through them and find ammunition. There is data for this, of course, but its findings aren’t what the NHS wants to see. And they’re not willing to do an ethical study where subjects “consent” to researchers exposing their private medical records, so instead they’ve carved out an exception to medical confidentiality laws in order to expose this particularly vulnerable group. Of course, this practice of violating medical ethics and the law to further a political agenda opens up a door to enormous amounts of future abuse, including seizure of medical records to prosecute sodomy laws or criminalize abortion. But that doesn’t stop the ruthless.

See also:

  • Supreme Court Lets Catholic Group Exclude LGBTQ Foster Parents, where laws don’t apply to religious groups, so long as they’re violating the law at the expense of the LGBTQ community.
  • Why Transgender Girls Are Suddenly the G.O.P.’s Culture-War Focus
    • “These efforts appear to be far more slick, and far more organized,” said Elizabeth A. Skarin of the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, which opposes the bill.
    • South Dakota is just one of a growing number of states where Republicans are diving into a culture war clash that seems to have come out of nowhere. It has been brought about by a coordinated and poll-tested campaign by social conservative organizations like the American Principles Project and Concerned Women for America, which say they are determined to move forward with what may be one of their last footholds in the fight against expanding L.G.B.T.Q. rights.
  • Prohibiting Gender-Affirming Medical Care for Youth - UCLA School of Law March 2022
    • Six states also include penalties for parents who facilitate minors’ access to gender-affirming medical care.
    • About half the bills would bar insurance providers from offering coverage for gender-affirming care.
    • A bill in Missouri would attempt classify gender-affirming care as child abuse similar to the order recently issued in Texas.
    • In total, more than a third of the 150,000 transgender youth ages 13-17 in the U.S. live in the 15 states that have restricted access to gender-affirming care or are currently considering laws that would do so
  • UCLA brief - Prohibiting Gender-Affirming Medical Care for Youth
    • 15 states have restricted access to gender-affirming care or are currently considering laws that would do so.
    • The bills carry severe penalties for health care providers, and sometimes families, who provide or seek out gender-affirming care for minors.
    • In five states, bills would prohibit gender-affirming care by or in government-owned or operated facilities, and by individual providers employed by government entities.
    • In four states, bills would exclude gender-affirming care as a tax-deductible health care expense

I like the summary in Dr. Jack Turban’s What South Dakota Doesn’t Get About Transgender Children:

In the past, doctors tried to force [trans people] to be cisgender, to identify with the sex they were assigned at birth. New research shows that this approach is associated with their attempting suicide. Having learned from these mistakes, we now follow new protocols that guide us to accept and affirm transgender youths in their transgender identities.

Unfortunately, huge shifts in medical literature do not always make their way to politicians. While there is broad consensus among doctors that these affirmative medical protocols are important, legislators in several states are planning to make this medical care illegal. …

The bills are about medical care, but the state representatives sponsoring them seem unfazed by the fact that all relevant major medical organizations disagree with them. … The medical profession has made it clear: This kind of legislation is dangerous and should not become law.

But it does become law. It became law, it’s becoming law, and it will become law. It’s being pushed through by ideologues who don’t care about the danger: harm done to the ingroup is an acceptable loss, and harm done to trans people was always the point.

Model Law🔗

We know what policies the Christian nationalists pushing these laws want look like too, not just what they’ve been able to get on the books so far. This is the National Right to Life Committee’s model legislation for “post-roe” sexual law: NRLC Post-Roe Model Abortion Law. And, wow, did I call the Texas GOP document bad? This is a blood-curdlingly horrific document that advocates for a full-blown police surveillance state to eradicate the practice of abortion. It goes as far as hunting down anyone who even suggests online that abortion is legitimate; there is no decency and there are no boundaries.

What we’re witnessing is a legal system entirely divorced from both reality and decency, using its power to transform conspiratorial media tropes into actionable criminal law.

So wait, what’s the goal? Is this about a threat to culture, or is it about irreversible medical procedures? Or medical consent, or child abuse? It’s not about any of that. It’s about power. It’s trans genocide.


Just for fun, here’s just, like, a billion peer-reviewed articles, all published in competitive journals. You know, real science.

Related Reading🔗

  1. This is extrordinarily well evidenced by many people much more qualified than me.
    American Counselling Association, “Ethical issues related to conversion or reparative therapy”
    Ronald M. Davis, MD; Myron Genel, MD; John P. Howe III; et al, “Health Care Needs of Gay Men and Lesbians in the United States”
    AMA Policies on LGBT Issues
    APsaA, “Position Statement on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, or Gender Expression”
    Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts Orientation Distress and Change Efforts | APA policy statement
    The School Counselor and Transgender and Nonbinary Youth | ASCA Position Statement
    NASW, “”Reparative” and “Conversion” Therapies for Lesbians and Gay Men”
    Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues
    Pan-American Health Organization, ““Cures” For An Illness That Does Not Exist”
    Just The Facts About: Sexual Orientation and Youth
    And so on and so forth. 

  2. It literally ends with “We believe that substantial election fraud in key metropolitan areas significantly affected the results in five key states in favor of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. We reject the certified results of the 2020 Presidential election, and we hold that acting President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. was not legitimately elected by the people of the United States.” 

  3. For more notes on direct comparisons with non-treatment see Padula, W. V., Heru, S., & Campbell, J. D. (2015). Societal Implications of Health Insurance Coverage for Medically Necessary Services in the U.S. Transgender Population: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 31(4), 394–401. 

Howdy! If you found my writing worthwhile, the best thing you can do to support me is to share an article you found interesting somewhere you think people will appreciate it. Thanks as always for reading!