Trans Mis/Disinformation

---

What the evidence shows: Trans women are women and there is no evidence that allowing people to use bathrooms corresponding with their gender identity increases sexual assault or other safety incidents. 

Researchers examined police reports from Massachusetts communities with and without gender identity inclusive public accommodations laws, as well as reports from before and after communities adopted those protections. Safety and privacy incidents in restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms were rare, and researchers found no evidence that inclusive laws increased their frequency  (Hasenbush et al., 2019).

A common argument used is that cis male perpetrators could pretend to be trans women in order to prey on women and girls. However, if bathroom bills require trans women to use the men's restroom are enacted, it would simultaneously force trans men (many of whom have been on testosterone therapy for years and look profoundly more masculine) into the women's restroom. By that same logic, a cis male predator could (more easily) claim to be a trans man and do the same predatory behaviors.

Research also indicates that trans youth may face danger when their bathroom/locker room access is restricted. In a national study of 3,763 trans and non-binary adolescents, school restroom and locker room restrictions were associated with a higher risk of sexual assault for several groups of trans youth. (Murchison et al., 2010)

Hasenbush, A., Flores, A. R., & Herman, J. L. (2019). Gender identity nondiscrimination laws in public accommodations: A review of evidence regarding safety and privacy in public restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 16, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

Murchison, G. R., Agénor, M., Reisner, S. L., & Watson, R. J. (2019). School restroom and locker room restrictions and sexual assault risk among transgender youth. Pediatrics, 143(6), e20182902. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-2902

What the evidence shows: A small number of transgender or non-binary people have committed mass shootings. That fact doesn't constitute an epidemic, establish a pattern of "trans terrorism," or justify attributing collective responsibility to trans people. Data from the major datasets on this are clear: the overwhelming majority of mass shootings are committed by cisgender people, not trans people.

Using the Gun Violence Archive's broad definition of mass shooting (four or more shot, excluding the shooter) FactCheck.org identified 5 confirmed transgender or non-binary perpetrators out of 5,748 from January 2013–September 15, 2025. 5 out of 5,748 is less than 1/10 of 1% of the incidents. Even including three additional cases in which the perpetrator's gender identity was disputed or unconfirmed would leave the rate at ~ 0.14%.

The Violence Project applies a more narrow definition focused on public mass killings. Its database contained 201 perpetrators from 1966–2025: 196 cisgender men, 4 cisgender women, and 1 trans perpetrator. 1/201 = ~.005% These figures don't support claims that trans people are driving mass shootings.

Lists circulated online frequently give a different impression through selectively choosing trans-involved incidents, counting people as trans based on rumors or abstract social media information, or changing the definition of mass shooting to create an extremely small and unrepresentative sample. The overwhelming majority of mass shooters identified in established datasets have not been transgender.

Sources:

FactCheck.org. (2025, September 17) Few mass shooters have been transgender

The Violence Project. Mass Shooter Database

Gun Violence Archive. Gun Violence Archive

What the evidence shows: The person accused of killing Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson, has not been identified as transgender. Reporting that described Robinson's roommate and romantic partner as exploring gender transition was repeatedly transformed online into the false claim that Robinson himself was transgender.

Robinson has been charged but, as of this writing, has not been convicted. Prosecutors allege that he targeted Kirk because of Kirk's political views, including views in relation to LGBTQ+ people. Robinson's attorneys dispute whether the available evidence establishes that motive. Litigation is ongoing.

Even if prosecutors ultimately prove that Robinson acted because of Kirk's politics, that would establish the alleged motivation of one individual. It wouldn't demonstrate that a trans organization directed the killing, that a coordinated "transgender movement" was responsible," or that trans people collectively share responsibility. Just because one has a relationship with a trans person does not mean that someone is transgender. Neither association is evidence of participation in an organized political conspiracy.

This matters because false identifications following prominent acts of violence have the potential to spread rapidly, subjecting uninvolved trans people to harassment and--particularly in this case--turn one criminal act into propaganda against an entire group of people.

Sources:

Associated Press. (2025, September 16). Suspect left note saying he planned to kill Charlie Kirk, later confessed in texts, prosecutor says.

Reuters. (2026, July 29). Prosecutors say Charlie Kirk was attacked for his politics, cite anti-LGBT views.

What the evidence shows: Inclusive access doesn't mean unrestricted access or the elimination of laws governing behavior. Laws against harassment, assault, exposure, and other forms of behavior apply to everyone. A person's trans status doesn't make somebody exempt from those laws. Being trans itself is not some form of misbehavior. 

The Massachusetts study of public accommodations laws found no increase in safety or privacy incidents after protections based on gender identity were adopted. Meanwhile, research involving trans adolescents found that restricting access was associated with greater exposure to sexual assault among several groups of trans youth (Hasenbush et al., 2019; Murchison et al., 2019).

Privacy in and of itself is a legitimate concern, however it should be addressed accordingly through protections that apply to the entire population rather than treating an entire group of people as inherently suspicious--especially when there is no supporting evidence.

Sources:

Hasenbush, A., Flores, A. R., & Herman, J. L. (2019). Gender identity nondiscrimination laws in public accommodations: A review of evidence regarding safety and privacy in public restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 16, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

Murchison, G. R., Agénor, M., Reisner, S. L., & Watson, R. J. (2019). School restroom and locker room restrictions and sexual assault risk among transgender youth. Pediatrics, 143(6), e20182902. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2018-2902

What the evidence shows: U.S. Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon directed this accusation specifically at the Biden administration, claiming that it had "allowed schools to secretly 'transition' students without parents' knowledge." The claim is misleading and combines two very different things: social support at school and medical transition. 

Schools do not have the capability (or time or funding) to provide a student with different bodies or medical treatment. Instead, they may support a trans student by using a requested name or pronouns, allowing different clothing, or allowing access to an appropriate bathroom.  These are forms of social transition, which refers to changes in how a person presents themselves or is recognized socially. Social transition doesn't involve medication or surgery and doesn't permanently alter a student's body. 

There is a genuine debate about whether schools should automatically notify parents when students use a different name, pronouns, or gender presentation at school. Policies vary by state and district. Some policies direct employees to involve families, while others allow limited confidentiality when a student hasn't disclosed their identity at home--particularly when the student expresses concern that disclosure could result in rejection, abuse, homelessness, or other forms of harm. Describing every such situation as a school "secretly transitioning" a child erases the student's own role. In these cases, the student has typically disclosed an identity or requested support; the school didn't create the situation.

Schools should work to build safe, trusting relationships between students and their families whenever possible. However, involuntarily disclosing a student's trans or LGBTQ+ identity isn't a neutral act and can carry serious repercussions. Research involving trans youth has found that being able to use a chosen name across more areas of life, including at school, was associated with lower depression, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior (Russell et al., 2018).

Parents generally have rights under FERPA to inspect their child's educational records, but whether a particular conversation, observation, or informal usage of a name constitutes an "educational record" can depend on the circumstances. 

Sources: 

Russell, S. T., Pollitt, A. M., Li, G., & Grossman, A. H. (2018). Chosen name use is linked to reduced depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior among transgender youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(4), 503–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.02.003 

Associated Press. (2025, March 28). Trump administration investigates Maine for claims of withholding gender transitions from parents.

Reuters. (2026, April 27). U.S. Supreme Court rejects Florida school gender-identity policy challenge.

U.S. Department of Education (2026, August 24). Secretary McMahon joins President Trump to deliver back-to-school remarks at the White House. 

What the evidence shows: This claim is made in bad faith and has no basis in reality. Schools do not and cannot perform gender-affirming surgery. A teacher, counselor, or adminstrator cannot decide to medically transition a child. Surgery involves medical facilities, clinicians, medical evaluation, informed-consent procedures, scheduling, and post-operative care--not a visit to a classroom or school classroom. The phrase sex-change surgery is misleading as there is no single procedure by that name. Gender-affirming surgery tends to encompass multiple different procedures and surgical care for trans minors is exceptionally rare.

A 2024 study examined insurance claims covering approximately 22.8 million U.S. minors in 2019. Researchers identified 0 gender-affirming procedures associated with a trans or gender-diverse diagnosis among children aged 12 or younger. The rate was 0.1 per 100,000 among youth aged 13–14 and 2.1 per 100,000 among youth aged 15–17. Of the 85 procedures identified among minors, 82 were chest-related, and only 3 were not. The study didn't include uninsured or self-paid care, but its national insurance data demonstrate just how uncommon these procedures were within a very large population (Dai et al., 2024).

The same study found that 97% of breast reductions performed on male minors in its dataset were provided to cisgender boys--primarily treatment for conditions such as gynecomastia--rather than transgender boys. Political rhetoric (and now Presidential executive orders) frequently labels procedures "mutilation" only when trans patients receive them, even when there are comparable procedures available to cisgender patients.

Regardless of one's opinion as to who deserves medical care, the idea of a child being sent to school and unexpectedly returning having had surgery is pure fiction.

Source:

Dai, D., Charlton, B. M., Boskey, E. R., et al. (2024). Prevalence of gender-affirming surgical procedures among minors and adults in the US. JAMA Network Open, 7(6), e2418814. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18814

What the evidence shows: Learning that transgender people exist may give a young person language for feelings they already have, however merely being able to name already possessed feelings does not equate with creating them. There is no credible evidence that a lesson, teacher, book, or even a transgender classmate can convert a cisgender child into a transgender child.

One version of this claim is the social contagion or rapid-onset gender dysphoria hypothesis, which proposes that peer or social media influence is producing a sudden increase in transgender identification--particularly among adolescents who were assigned female at birth. A study using nationally representative Youth Risk Behavior Survey data tested a core piece of that proposal. It found that transgender and gender-diverse adolescents who were assigned female at birth didn't become a larger percentage of the trans population between 2017 and 2019, In fact, that percentage actually decreased. The researchers concluded that the observed ratios didn't support social contagion as the explanation proposed by the hypothesis (Turban et al., 2022). In other words, theories like social contagion and rapid-onset gender dysphoria appear to be untrue.

Longitudinal research doesn't support this claim either. Olson et al. (2022)  followed 317 children who had socially transitioned, beginning the study at an average rate of 8 years old. When they followed up with the children 5 years later, 94% identified as binary transgender (trans boy or trans girl), 3.5% identified as non-binary, and 2.5% identified as cisgender. Some participants changed identity more than once. The findings suggest that the identities of this particular group were generally stable and simultaneously show that social support didn't prevent children from later identifying differently.

Sources:

Turban, J. L., Dolotina, B., King, D., & Keuroghlian, A. S. (2022). Sex assigned at birth ratio among transgender and gender-diverse adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics, 150(3), e2022056567 https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-056567

Olson, K. R., Durwood, L., Horton, R., Gallagher, N. M., & Devor, A. (2022). Gender identity five years after social transition. Pediatrics, 150(2), e2021056082. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-056082

What the evidence shows: Just because somebody's gender identity or sexual orientation differs from the "norm" of cisgender and straight, it does not mean that their identity is inherently sexual. A children's book that depicts two mothers (many other examples of family-friendly books can be found in Trans/LGBTQ+ Media), a history lesson mentioning Harvey Milk, or a teacher simply using a trans student's pronouns no more sexualizes children than similar references to cis/straight parents, historical figures, or students. 

Grooming has a specific meaning. It describes behavior in which somebody builds access, trust, or control in preparation for abuse or exploitation. Using the term simply because of the mere presence of trans or LGBTQ+ people (or information about them) strips the word of that specific definition, equating it with an entire population with sexual predators without any evidence.

Should books and lessons be assessed for age appropriateness, educational purpose, and exploit content? Yes, and they should be. However, the existence of LGBTQ+ characters or themes doesn't make content sexually explicit, and concerns about the content of one book (or more) doesn't establish that LGBTQ+ inclusion equates to grooming.

Research has associated LGBTQ+ inclusive curricula with more supportive school environments. Snapp et al. (2015) found that inclusive curricula were associated with greater perceived safety at both the student and school levels and with less bullying at the school level. Later, a review of school safety research likewise identified inclusive curricula alongside enumerated anti-bullying policies, trained educators, and student-led organizations as evidence-supported approaches that were associated with safer school climates (Russell et al., 2021). 

Sources:

Snapp, S. D., McGuire, J. K., Sinclair, K. O., Gabrion, K., & Russel, S. T. (2015). LGBTQ-inclusive curricula: Why supportive curricula matter. Sex Education, 15(6), 580–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2015.1042573

Russell, S. T., Bishop, M. D., Saba, V. C., James, I., & Ioverno, S. (2021). Promoting school safety for LGBTQ and all students. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(2), 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322211031938

What the evidence shows: There isn't any evidence of a coordinated effort to make everybody transgender, nor is there evidence that education or exposure can somehow transform the population into trans people. The purpose of trans inclusion is to allow people who are trans, or questioning their gender, to be able to live their lives, and learn and participate in school without discrimination.

Greater visibility can increase the number of people able to describe themselves openly. It can also give people more precise language, including terms like non-binary. Any increase in reported trans identity doesn't by itself demonstrate the people are being "converted." No research has shown that teachers or advocates created trans identities. In the longitudinal study by Olson et al. (2022), most trans kids who had socially transitioned continued to identify as transgender after 5 years had passed, while a smaller number later identified as non-binary, and only around 2.5% identified as cisgender.

Telling children that trans people exist and they will be respected if they're transgender gives them permission to be honest. Telling them that they must either be trans or cis would pressure them in a profoundly unethical way. Research based school recommendations consequently emphasize providing students with safety, accurate information, anti-bullying protections, and access to support (Russell et al., 2021). What they don't do its try to force being trans on anyone.

Sources:

Olson, K. R., Durwood, L., Horton, R., Gallagher, N. M., & Devor, A. (2022). Gender identity five years after social transition. Pediatrics, 150(2), e2021056082. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-056082

Russell, S. T., Bishop, M. D., Saba, V. C., James, I., & Ioverno, S. (2021). Promoting school safety for LGBTQ and all students. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8(2), 160–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322211031938

What the evidence shows: Gender-affirming genital surgery is not routinely performed on young trans children. A 2024 study (Dai et al., 2024) examined gender-affirming surgical procedures among more than 22 million insured minors in the U.S. Researchers found 0 gender-affirming procedures for children aged 12 and below. Procedures were exceptionally rare even among older minors (0.1 per 100,000 for 13-14 year olds, and 2.1 per 100,000 among 15-17 year olds). Of the 85 procedures researchers identified among all the minors, 82  (96.4%) of them were chest-related, and not genital related. 

The same study found that breast reductions among cisgender boys were considerably more common than gender-affirming procedures among TGE minors. Of the 151 breast reductions performed on cis boys and TGE minors, 146 (97%) were performed on cis boys, and only 5 were on TGE minors. 

Does this mean that no minor has ever received a gender-affirming genital surgery? No. But it does help show that stories of doctors commonly or routinely performing genital surgery on young trans children bears no resemblance to the available national data. When adolescents receive any kind of gender-affirming surgery, which is already exceptionally rare, it generally occurs later in adolescence and is overwhelmingly related to the chest, not the genitals.

Sources: 

Dai, D., Charlton, B. M., Boskey, E. R., et al. (2024). Prevalence of gender-affirming surgical procedures among minors and adults in the US. JAMA Network Open, 7(6), e2418814. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18814

What the evidence shows: Puberty blockers (AKA gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, or GnRH analogues) are well-established medications that have been used for decades to treat conditions such as central precocious puberty. Their use for gender dysphoria is generally considered to be off-label, meaning that the medication is being used for a purpose not specifically listed in its regulatory approval. However off-label prescribing is common throughout medicine and isn't the same as experimental treatment.

Puberty blockers temporarily suppress the hormone signals that produce puberty-related changes. Their effects are not "Immediate body destruction." If the medication is discontinued without beginning gender-affirming hormones, a "normal" puberty typically resumes. However, to universally describe puberty blockers as completely reversible may obscure some questions in medicine.

Research has identified possible effects on bone mineral accrual while treatment is ongoing, and there are some longitudinal effects that remain about longer-term bone health, fertility, sexual function, and out outcomes, particularly when pubertal suppression is followed by gender-affirming hormones. Those effects do require clinical monitoring and informed consent. They provide evidence for continued evaluation and research, but do not provide evidence that blockers instantly and/or permanently destroy the body.

A 2024 systematic review found that GNRH analogues consistently suppressed puberty, but found that evidence concerning many psychological, psychosocial, and longer-term physical outcomes was limited or inconsistent. Many available studies were small and observational or at risk of bias. Currently, like many medications, puberty blockers have potential benefits, risks, uncertainties, and monitoring requirements. Individual decisions  about their use should, however, remain between medical professionals, patients, and their families, and not be rooted in political opinions and inflammatory rhetoric.

Sources: 

Hembree, W. C., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Gooren, L., et al. (2017). Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: An Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 102(11), 3869–3903. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2017-01658 

Taylor, J., Mitchell, A., Hall, R., et al. (2024). Interventions to suppress puberty in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence: A systematic review. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 109(Suppl. 2), s33–s47. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2023-326669

What the evidence shows: Gender-affirming care is an umbrella terms and it is not one single treatment. Depending on a trans person's age, needs, or goals, it can include communication, family support, counseling, social changes, treatment of unrelated physical or mental-health concerns, puberty suppression, hormone therapy, or (primarily for adults) surgery. Many TGE people don't want or receive every possible intervention.

"Affirming" doesn't mean that a provider must unquestioningly accept every initial statement made by a patient, predict a particular outcome, or direct every child towards undergoing a medical transition. It means that a person's experiences should be approached respectfully rather than being predetermined to be false or pathological that must be eliminated.

Current clinical standards recommend individualized assessment before adolescents begin medical treatment. Relevant considerations include whether gender incongruence is marked and sustained, whether the adolescent understand the treatment and can thereby participate in informed consent, whether physical or mental health concerns that could affect care have been substantively evaluated, and whether puberty has begun before puberty suppression is considered. Depending on the intervention, parents or guardians are generally involved in consenting to medical treatment for minors.

National prescribing data contradict the claim that medication is given automatically. A study of more than 5.1 million privately insured adolescents from 2018–2022 found that puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones were rarely prescribed. No child younger than 12 in the dataset received gender-affirming hormones.

Sources:

Coleman, E., Radix, A. E., Bouman, W. P., et al. (2022). Standards of care for the health of transgender and gender diverse people, Version 8. International Journal of Transgender Health, 23(Suppl. 1), S1–S259. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644

Hughes, L. D., Charlton, B. M., Berzansky, I., & Corman, J.D. (2025). Gender-affirming medications among transgender adolescents in the US, 2018–2022. JAMA Pediatrics, 179(3), 342–344. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2024.6081

What the evidence shows: Gender-affirming care has a well-established evidence base. As it includes multiple interventions, evidence varies across different treatments. For example, evidence supporting social and psychological support is different from evidence concerning puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or certain surgeries. Outcomes also vary depending on patients' ages, health, treatment goals, family supports, and exposure to discrimination.

A 2023 systematic review examined 46 studies of psychosocial functioning among transgender people receiving gender-affirming hormones. Across the literature, hormone therapy was consistently associated with reductions in depressive symptoms and psychological distress. Evidence concerning quality of life and several other outcomes was less consistent. The authors identified substantial limitations, inconsistent measures, variable risks of bias, and in some cases inadequate adjustment for factors that might influence outcomes.

A separate study followed 315 trans and non-binary youth for two years after they began gender-affirming hormones. On average, participants reported increased appearance congruence (their bodies aligned with who they perceived themselves to be), increased positive affect, and increased life satisfaction, along with decreased symptoms of depression and anxiety. 

Systematic reviews of puberty suppression have characterized the evidence as more limited and uncertain, particularly on a longitudinal basis in relation to physical and psychosocial outcomes. More research is needed, but it does not mean that no evidence exists.

Sources:

Chen, D., Berona, J., Chan, Y.-M., et al. (2023). Psychosocial functioning in transgender youth after 2 years of hormones. The New England Journal of Medicine, 3888, 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2206297

Doyle, D. M., Lewis, T. O. G., & Barreto, M. (2023). A systematic review of psychosocial functioning changes after gender-affirming hormone therapy among transgender people. Nature Human Behaviour, 7, 1320–1331. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01605-w

Taylor, J., Mitchell, A., Hall, R., et al. (2024). Interventions to suppress puberty in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence: A systematic review. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 109(Suppl. 2), s33–s47. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2023-326669

What the evidence shows: Currently there is no available evidence that supports the claim that most transgender people regret transitioning or opt to detransition. Both experiences occur, and deserve more study and support, but neither appear to represent the experiences of most of the people who transition. 

Estimates vary considerably because researchers don't always use the word detransition to mean the same thing. Depending on the study, the term may include stopping hormones, discontinuing treatment because of cost or side effects, changing one's gender presentation, returning to a previous identity, or seeking to reverse physical changes. Treatment discontinuation, detransition, identity change, and regret are related outcomes, but each markedly distinct.

A study using the 2015 US Transgender Survey found that 13.1% of respondents who had pursued some form of gender affirmation reported detransitioning at some point. This was a broad measure that included temporary experiences. Among those who reported a history of detransition, 82.5% identified at least one external influence (e.g., family, social stigma, employment difficulties, or discrimination). In other words, in the majority of cases there was at least one negative influencing outside factor that played a role in their detransition--it wasn't solely internally motivated. There are statistical limitations in the percentage in regards to reflecting precise population estimates, but it helps give important information.

Regret after surgery appears to be substantially less common. A 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis examined 27 studies that in their totality involved 7,928 patients and estimated a surgical-regret prevalence of approximately 1%. One. More long-term research is needed (like always), especially concerning people who began medical treatment during adolescence. But what the existing evidence does show is that "most transgender people eventually regret transitioning or detransition" is simply not supported by research. At all.

Sources:

Bustos, V. P., Bustos, S. S., Mascaro, A., et al. (2021). Regret after gender-affirmation surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery–Global Open, 9(3), e3477. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003477

Turban, J. L., Loo, S. S., Almazan, A. N., & Keuroghlian, A. S. (2021). Factors leading to “detransition” among transgender and gender diverse people in the United States: A mixed-methods analysis. LGBT Health, 8(4), 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0437

What the evidence shows: There are definitely people who detransition and their experience is not invalid or fictional. However their experience doesn't establish by default that every other person's transition is false, nor does it justify denying gender-affirming care to everyone who may benefit from it. 

People detransition for different reasons. Some determine that another identity fits them better. Some experience medical complications or undesired outcomes, while some simply cannot afford continued care. Others face rejection, discrimination, employment problems, family pressure, housing instability, or threats to their safety. Some of them regret part or all of their treatment, whereas others don't regret transitioning and understood detransition as another stage in exploring or expressing their gender.

All of this variability matters. A person who stops hormones because they lose insurance has a fundamentally different experience from someone who concludes that treatment was medically or personally wrong for them. Counting both individuals as identical cases of "transition regret" produces a misleading statistic and prevents healthcare systems from understanding what support each of them actually needs.

Detransitioners and people who experience regret should have access to evidence-informed medical and psychological care. Their experiences can help clinicians improve assessment, informed consent, treatment planning, follow-up, and support for patients whose identities or goals change. 

But at the same time, regret is a recognized possibility throughout medicine. Its existence generally leads to better consent processes and clinical practices. Regret doesn't, however, lead to the prohibition of a treatment for every other patient. A small number of people regret getting knee replacement, cosmetic surgery, or cancer treatment, but we do not take those peoples' regret to dictate that those treatments are imaginary or shouldn't be available to others. Using detransitioners as proof that no trans person should be permitted to transition is simply another form of erasure. This is not a binary of one "right" and one "wrong" experience, but instead, it's indicative of a more blurry reality.

Coleman, E., Radix, A. E., Bouman, W. P., et al. (2022). Standards of care for the health of transgender and gender diverse people, Version 8. International Journal of Transgender Health, 23(Suppl. 1), S1–S259. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644

Turban, J. L., Loo, S. S., Almazan, A. N., & Keuroghlian, A. S. (2021). Factors leading to “detransition” among transgender and gender diverse people in the United States: A mixed-methods analysis. LGBT Health, 8(4), 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2020.0437

What the evidence shows: This claim is demonstrably false. The terminology used to describe gender diversity has changed across cultures and historical periods, meaning that contemporary words such as transgender cannot simply be projected onto every person in the past. However, there's a slew of historical, medical, and autobiographical records, that document people living outside of their sex assigned at birth long before social media or the internet even existed. Examples from various cultures include the mahu in Hawaii, hijras in India, fa'afafine in Samoa, travestis in Brazil, and the many various Indigenous identities that expressed or reflected gender diversity (often referred to with the umbrella term of two-spirit). These are just a small selection present in history.

In modern day, we have an increased visibility and representation of trans people, which may give people language people for previously unnamed experiences, make disclosure feel safer, or help them recognize that they are simply not alone. This increase in the number of people openly identifying as trans doesn't mean that identity is being transmitted between them.

The "social contagion" argument is often associated with the unvalidated theory of rapid-onset gender dysphoria (ROGD). The methodology of the study from which the hypothesis was derived was flawed, as the data came solely from parents on websites that were concerned or opposed to their children's trans identities. The survey did not collect any data from the young trans individuals themselves. As such, it could only document those parents' perceptions of when they learned about an identity, but not when the trans child first experienced it or understood it.

Subsequent research exploring this ROGD myth has not validated it. A study of 173 trans adolescents in Canada who were referred for gender care found that the adolescents whose parents described a more "rapid" onset didn't display the patterns predicted by the hypothesis. A separate analysis of more than 190,000 U.S. adolescents found that changes in the proportion assigned female at birth among TGE youth didn't support the particular social contagion explanation the researchers tested. 

Bauer, G. R., Lawson, M. L., & Metzger, D. L. (2022). Do clinical data from transgender adolescents support the phenomenon of “rapid onset gender dysphoria”? The Journal of Pediatrics, 243, 224–227.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.11.020

Gill-Peterson, J. (2018). Histories of the transgender child. University of Minnesota Press. https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctv75d87g

Turban, J. L., Dolotina, B., King, D., & Keuroghlian, A. S. (2022). Sex assigned at birth ratio among transgender and gender diverse adolescents in the United States. Pediatrics, 150(3), e2022056567. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-056567

What the evidence shows: Being transgender is not classified as a mental illness. Trans individuals may experience a mental-health condition(s), just as cisgender people may, but gender identity is not a delusion or form of insanity.

A delusion is typically understood as a fixed false belief maintained despite compelling contradictory evidence, occurring within the context of a psychotic disorder or other condition. A trans person generally understands what physical characteristics they have and what sex they were assigned at birth. Experiencing a gender identity that differs from that assignment isn't the same as losing contact with reality.

This has become increasingly clarified as psychology diagnoses have been refined. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, gender dysphoria refers to clinically significant distress or impairment that may accompany incongruence between someone's experienced gender and assigned sex. The diagnosis is about the distress, NOT the mere existence of a trans identity. A trans person who doesn't meet clinically significant dress may not meet the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently took a similar step in the International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11). It replaced older pathologizing diagnoses with gender incongruence and moved the classification out of the chapter on mental and behavioral disorders and into a chapter concerning sexual health. Retaining a healthcare classification can make access to treatment easier, while still recognizing that a trans identity isn't inherently disordered.

The claim also conflates nonconformity with incapacity. Trans people accurately perceive reality, make informed decisions, work, learn, form relationships, and participate in their communities. Disagreeing with how someone understands or names their gender doesn't make that person psychotic. 

Sources:

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787

World Health Organization. (2019, May 17). Moving one step closer to better health and rights for transgender people

What the evidence shows: TGE populations do experience disproportionately high rates of depression, psychological distress, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts. But the conclusion that being trans is therefore a mental illness confuses a population's exposure to harmful societal conditions with an inherent defect in the population. Groups that experience violence, rejection, poverty, displacement, or systemic discrimination frequently exhibit poorer mental-health outcomes. Those outcomes don't mean that the group's shared identity is what caused said harm.

Research on TGE mental health frequently uses the minority stress model. This model examines how external pressures including discrimination, harassment, rejection, violence, and institutional exclusion can become chronic sources of stress. Additionally, internalized stigma and the expectation of mistreatment can create additional psychological burdens.

A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis found significant associations between minority stress experiences and depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts among TGE people. This don't mean that discrimination explains every mental health condition or that all TGE people experience distress in the same way. Gender dysphoria, unrelated psychiatric conditions, financial insecurity, socio-economic status, and many other factors may also affect mental health. However, the available research contradicts the claim that these elements can be treated as proof that trans identity is somehow pathological.

Furthermore protective factors such as social support, family acceptance, affirming environments, and recognition of a person's chosen name were associated with better mental health outcomes. In one study of trans youth, the use of a chosen name across more areas of their life was associated with lower depression, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior.

As a society, we should be trying to reduce conditions producing distress on a population, not use the resultant suffering from those conditions as evidence that the population itself is somehow defective, and thereby justifies further exclusion (likewise causing more distress).

Pellicane, M. J., & Ciesla, J. A. (2022). Associations between minority stress, depression, and suicidal ideation and attempts in transgender and gender diverse individuals: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 91, 102113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102113

Russell, S. T., Pollitt, A. M., Li, G., & Grossman, A. H. (2018). Chosen name use is linked to reduced depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, and suicidal behavior among transgender youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(4), 503–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.02.003

Trujillo, M. A., Perrin, P. B., Sutter, M., Tabaac, A., & Benotsch, E. G. (2017). The buffering role of social support on the associations among discrimination, mental health, and suicidality in a transgender sample. International Journal of Transgenderism, 18(1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2016.1247405

What the evidence shows: This claim compresses several different concepts and has become a core tenet of anti-trans rhetoric. However, biology does not establish that every sex-related characteristic always neatly falls into one of two separate, uniform categories. Furthermore, just because gender is socially influenced does not mean that it is imaginary.

In humans, sex is a multidimensional construct involving multiple traits, including chromosomes, genes, gonads, internal and external reproductive anatomy, hormones, secondary sex characteristics, and physiological responses to hormones. These traits are strongly patterned and usually align in ways that we classify as female or male. Reproduction involves two gamete types. However, neither of these facts mean that every sex-related trait in every person is binary or that all traits invariably align (Fuentes, 2025). 

Variations in sex characteristics can involve chromosomes, hormone production, gonadal development or other aspects of anatomy. These variations don't mean that female and male do not have their usefulness for classification, however they do demonstrate that biological sex is much more complex than selecting one characteristic (eg., genitals or chromosomes) and assuming it determines every other one. Depending on the medical, scientific, or demographic question being asked, different related variable may be relevant.

Gender describes identities, roles, expectations, expressions, and social classifications associated with (or distinguished from) sex. Calling gender a social construct does not make it any less real. Money, citizenship, language, marriage, race, law, and academic degrees all contain socially constructed meanings that additionally produce tangible consequences. Gender similarly influences how people understand themselves, how others perceive them, and how institutions organize everyday life.

Gender identity isn't a claim that anatomy doesn't exist. Being trans doesn't require someone to deny their reproductive anatomy, physical characteristics, or medical history. It means recognizing that their gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. Biology describes bodies, but it doesn't make a person's internal identity, social existence, or lived experiences disappear.

Science and medicine continue to evolve as researchers learn more about sex. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2022) recommends treating sex as a construct with many dimensions and collecting sex and gender identity information separately when each is relevant. 

For a far more comprehensive explanation of the limitations of treating sex as a binary, read anthropologist Agustín Fuentes's exceptional new book "Sex is a Spectrum: The Biological Limits of the Binary".

Sources: 

Ainsworth, C. (2015). Sex redefined. Nature, 518, 288–291. https://doi.org/10.1038/518288a

Fuentes, F. (2025). Sex is a spectrum: The biological limits of the binary. Princeton.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2022). Measuring sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26424

What the evidence shows: Transgender athletes make up an extremely small percentage of athletes in women's sports. Individual trans athletes have sometimes won competitions, just as they've also lost competitions, failed to qualify, remained on the bench, or participated without attracting public attention. The existence of a few selected victories doesn't prove, in any way, that trans athletes are "taking over" women's sports.

There isn't a national registry of trans athletes, so it makes a precise count impossible. However, NCAA President Charlie Baker testified before Congress in 2024 that he was personally aware of approximately 10 trans athletes among over 500,000 NCAA athletes nationwide. That amounts to roughly 0.002% of NCAA athletes--and it includes transgender men and women. In February 2025, the NCAA nevertheless adopted a policy prohibiting anyone assigned male at birth from competing on a women's team.

Political and media coverage frequently concentrates on a select few highly publicized athletes while ignoring a key fact: that there are millions of cisgender girls and women participating in sports and there's an exceptionally small number of trans people competing alongside them. It also produces a distorted sample by covering trans athletes most intensely when they win. A trans athlete who finishes in the middle or at the back of the field isn't likely to become national news.

Questions of fairness may differ between elementary student athletes, high school athletes, college athletes, and international elite athletes. They may differ across various types of sports. Those questions should be examined on a context by context basis with evidence and appropriately tailored responses.

Sources: 

Associated Press. (2025, February 6). NCAA changes transgender policy to limit women’s competition to athletes assigned female at birth

PBS NewsHour. (2025, February 12). What science tells us about transgender athletes

What the evidence shows: Athletic ability varies enormously within every sex and gender. No scientific evidence establishes that every transgender girl or woman will outperform every cisgender girl or woman. 

A trans girl who has not experienced a testosterone-mediated puberty wouldn't have acquired the physical effects attributed to that puberty. Among those who have experienced it, possible retained differences depend on multiple factors, including the athlete's age, genetics, body composition, training history, sport, event, duration of hormone therapy, and the particular athletic quality being measured.

Research shows that gender-affirming hormone therapy changes several performance related characteristics. A 2021 systematic review (Harper et al., 2021) found that hemoglobin levels in trans women generally decreased into the range observed among cis women relatively quickly. Strength, lean body mass, and muscle area also declined, but on average could remain higher than those of cis women after 3 years on hormone therapy. However, measurements such as lean mass or hardship strength cannot automatically predict performance in every sport.

A 2024 study of 75 athletes further illustrated that the findings don't point all in one direction. Compared with cis women in that sample, trans women demonstrated higher absolute handgrip strength but lower relative jump height and lower relative aerobic capacity. It was a small study, but it does demonstrate why the universal claim that "trans women are superior athletes" isn't an accurate summary of the evidence.

Some average physical difference may persist after hormone therapy and may be relevant in particular sports. The research remains limited. But a possible average advantage in one characteristic is not an automatic victory, nor does it automatically mean every trans athlete has some insurmountable advantage over every cis one.

Sources:

Hamilton, B. R., Guppy, F. M., Pitsiladis, Y., et al. (2024). Strength, power and aerobic capacity of transgender athletes: A cross-sectional study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 58(11), 586–597. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2023-108029

Harper, J., O’Donnell, E., Khorashad, B. S., McDermott, H., & Witcomb, G. L. (2021). How does hormone transition in transgender women change body composition, muscle strength and haemoglobin? Systematic review with a focus on the implications for sport participation. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(15), 865–872. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-103106

Roberts, T. A., Smalley, J., & Ahrendt, D. (2021). Effect of gender affirming hormones on athletic performance in transwomen and transmen: Implications for sporting organisations and legislators. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 55(11), 577–583. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2020-102329

What the evidence shows: Many trans sports bans explicitly include or restrict participation in elementary, middle, and high school athletics, not just elite or professional competitions. They therefore inevitably affect children who may never win a trophy or even compete beyond their local school.

The students at the center of the 2026 Supreme Court cases are prime examples of that variability. West Virginia v. B.P.J involved a girl who first sought to join her middle school cross-country team. Little v. Hecox began when a college student wanted the opportunity to try out for university teams. She didn't even qualify for either varsity squad. Both of these girls were not professional athletes taking Olympic medals--they were students wanting to be allowed to play in ordinary school sports.

Many people participate in sports for physical activity, friendship, belonging, teamwork, enjoyment, or because it connects them to their schools. A blanket ban denies TGE students of all of the aforementioned regardless of their athletic ability or whether they actually possess some type of advantage. It may also require a trans boy to join a girls' team or prevent non-binary students from finding any category where they can participate comfortably. 

Research consistently shows that TGE youth encounter barriers to physical activity and often feel less safe in sporting environments. A 2024 scoping review (Austin et al., 2024) found that TGE children and adolescents generally reported lower participation, concerns about changing facilities, gendered uniforms and teams, mistreatment, and limited support. A 2025 study (Kaja et al., 2025) found that sports participation among TGE adolescents was associated with better mental health outcomes, but that bullying rooted in bias could undermine those benefits.

Eligibility rules are not necessarily appropriate for a 4th grade running club. Policymakers can consider safety and fairness without pretending that exclusion has no cost. When it comes to school sports, rules governing children should primarily account for their educational and developmental purposes.

Sources:

Austin, F., et al. (2024). A scoping review of trans and gender diverse children and adolescents’ experiences of physical activity, sport, and exercise participation. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 26, 100575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2024.100576

Kaja, S. M., Gower, A. L., Parchem, B., et al. (2025). Sports team participation, bias-based bullying, and mental health among transgender and gender diverse adolescents. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 96(3), 590–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2025.2465702

Sherman, M., & Whitehurst, L. (2026, June 30). Supreme Court upholds state laws banning transgender girls and women from school athletic teams. Associated Press.

What the evidence shows: Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in federally funded education. Its transformative effect on women's athletics came from requiring educational institutions to provide equitable athletic opportunities, not from excluding transgender people.

One June 30, 2026, in Little v. Hecox, the Supreme Court upheld Idaho and West Virginia laws that excluded transgender girls and women from female school athletic teams. The Court concluded that these laws didn't violate Title IX and by a 6–3 vote, rejected the constitutional equal-protection challenges before it. That decision means that states are allowed to maintain similar eligibility rules based on sex. Trans participation doesn't cause unequal athletic budgets, inferior facilities, disparities in coaching, inadequate media coverage, sexual harassment, unequal scholarships, or the loss of women's teams. Excluding a small number of transgender students doesn't require schools to redirect a single dollar toward girls' athletics or fix any of those longstanding Title IX concerns.

Broad bans can also expose cis girls and women to increased gender policing. Girls who are unusually tall, muscular, fast, strong, masculine-presenting, or otherwise outside the normative expectations of femininity may have their sex questioned (particularly by some hostile opposing teams' parents that may suspect them of being trans). Complaints and subsequent enforcement from those complaints can invite scrutiny of a girl's body or medical information, particularly affecting girls and women who have variations in sex characteristics or are gender non-conforming.

It's also important to separate protecting Title IX from using trans athletes to redefine or weaken it. Only days after the Supreme Court's 2026 decision, the Heritage Foundation published a report calling Title IX a "failed experiment" and criticized efforts to achieve proportional opportunities for women. Cis girls and women deserve meaningful enforcement of Title IX, equitable resources, protection from harassment, and genuine athletic opportunities. TGE students likewise deserve safety and equitable access to education. Excluding one marginalized group (trans girls) and justifying that exclusion by stating it's to "protect cis girls" ultimately fails to address the material inequalities that Title IX was enacted to solve.

Sources: 

Sherman, M., & Whitehurst, L. (2026, June 30). Supreme Court upholds state laws banning transgender girls and women from school athletic teams. Associated Press.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. 

https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/civil-rights-laws/title-ix-and-sex-discrimination/title-ix-key-issues/title-ix-and-athletics

Yenor, S. (2026, July 8). Title IX’s failed experiment: Why accommodating sex differences beats engineered parity. The Heritage Foundation.