The politics of science is evident.
For decades the pro-homosexual lobby has labored under a mighty handicap. They claim a false premise is true. Their goal is to prove – or at least make people believe – that there is a biological or genetic cause for homosexuality. To promote that end yet further, they heavily invest in research about so-called transgenders – those who claim something other than their biological sex, determined at conception.
Over the last decade, the pro-homosexual lobby has claimed the cause of the sexually confused as their own since it is yet one step further down the road of total sexual liberation.
The lack of a biological cause hinders their quest to claim “minority” legal status. Other groups favored for special protection exist because of natural factors. The “women’s movement” is based on the obvious biological differences between men and women. Biology also determines the ethnic or racial identity of individuals.
On the contrary, a homosexual man is biologically indistinct from a heterosexual man. Affirming the contrarty is a not a scientific, but a political conclusion.
Until 1973, according to Psychology Today, the profession officially classified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The change came about through a political process. “In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) asked all members attending its convention to vote on whether they believed homosexuality to be a mental disorder. 5,854 psychiatrists voted to remove homosexuality from the DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders], and 3,810 to retain it.” Does a majority vote make science?
The biological situation facing “transsexuals” is equally evident. The official diagnosis of the condition is “gender dysphoria,” which is still on the APA’s list. A girl who wishes she were a boy is still a girl. Every chromosome in her body testifies to that fact. No matter how much she might want to be a boy, she will always be a girl. Hormone treatments do not make her a boy. Doctors can mutilate her body, but it is still deception. Denial of the obvious is one sign of a mental disorder.
There are also two medical facts about gender dysphoria that no one – least of all those who trumpet their adherence to “science” should forget.
First, there is no objective test to diagnose the disorder. The doctors rely only upon the emotional state of the patient. For instance, consider that many fathers play no role, or only a peripheral part, in their children’s lives. A young boy might be so angry at an absent father that he wishes to be more like his caregiving mother. However, the child’s minds may well change as they age and come to see their situations more objectively.
Second, the effects of gender dysphoria treatments are often harmful and irreversible. A 2018 statement from the American College of Pediatricians sums up the situation well. “We are concerned about the current trend to quickly diagnose and affirm young people as transgender, often setting them down a path toward medical transition…. We feel that unnecessary surgeries and/or hormonal treatments which have not been proven safe in the long-term represent significant risks for young people.”
The Endocrine Society
Enter the Endocrine Society. It is a medical association composed of those who specialize in research and disorders of the endocrine glands. The Society actively supports many aspects of the “sexual revolution.” Among their seven “policy priorities” is “protecting access to care for women and transgender patients.”
To obtain this end, one of its statements promotes no-cost access to hormonal contraception. “New data supporting the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these options underscore the necessity of protecting the availability of contraception to women through provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and funding of women’s health organizations.” Ill-effects of contraception go unmentioned. The bias becomes even more apparent when examining the statement’s twenty-one footnotes. Eleven of them came from Planned Parenthood’s research arm, the Guttmacher Institute.
The Society’s statement on “Transgender Health” begins with the information that this phenomenon was once known as “gender identity disorder.” It states that “Today, however, this attitude is no longer considered valid. Considerable scientific evidence has emerged demonstrating a durable biological element underlying gender identity.” Thus, the malady is biological, not psychological.
The conclusion becomes hasty when considering the sources of “evidence” that back up the claim. First, it say that attempts to bring a patient’s “gender identity” into line with fundamental biological realities (“external genitalia and chromosomes”) have been unsuccessful. There is an internal contradiction between the assertion and the evidence.
Turning to the journal article that the Society uses as evidence shows how groundless that position is. It is a “literature review.” The authors read a lot of different articles that back up their basic premises. However, the studies do not seem to have through a full peer-reviewed evalution. The abstract from the journal expresses uncertainty saying that “Although the mechanisms remain to be determined, there is strong support in the literature for a biologic basis of gender identity.”
Thus, the existence of a “biologic basis” is purely speculative. It is the rough equivalent of saying, “We want there to be something. We are not really sure what it is, but we believe that it is real and we are going to act as though it is.”
A Pretense of Charity
This is the state of politically correct “science.” Despite the contentions of the left, “science” is never “settled.” Political positions often prevail. Unpopular ideas are never studied. Radically treating gender dysphoria is politically popular, even though the most apparent evidence directly refutes it.
So, in many state legislatures, the hasty approach of the Endocrine Society prevails. “Support” for the “rights” of transsexual children is the political price of the support of LGBT-promoting organizations. The mainstream media is quick to publicize any defections from the leftist, anti-family agenda.
Defenders of the family and childhood innocence cannot afford to lose this fight. Indeed, the fact that the debate is taking place shows how much ground has been lost.
© Adobe Stock/Pixel-Shot