By Mathew Goldstein
I once believed that information dispensed from liberal sources and institutions is more accurate and reliable than the blatantly and frequently distorted and misleading information dispensed from conservative sources and institutions. I no longer believe that. Leftist oriented commentators are also a major source of systematically biased, one-sidedly selective, story telling, the shameless dissemination of misinformation, and as committed to using almost any opportunity to politicize almost everything as rightist oriented commentators. This article published in the Atlantic magazine aligns completely with my perspective: THE LIBERAL MISINFORMATION BUBBLE ABOUT YOUTH GENDER MEDICINE.
For decades doctors have been prescribing puberty blockers to treat precocious puberty. To argue that therefore it is a double standard to not treat gender dysphoria with puberty blockers requires overlooking the substantial difference between short term use of puberty blockers to delay puberty and a longer term use to cancel puberty. From a biological perspective it should be self-evident that delaying early puberty is less likely to have long lasting negative health impacts than preventing puberty from progressing. Equal protection before the law is not a compelling argument for reaching a conclusion that puberty blockers must be prescribed to treat gender dysphoria for minors without better evidence of no harm.
Here is an excerpt from Colin Wright’s Substack “Reality’s Last Stand” about the University of Pennsylvania’s new ban on men participating in women’s sports that is worthy of being read and considered regarding the too frequently biased reactions embedded within supposedly objective journalist news reports:
These headlines aren’t just misleading; they’re false. Lia Thomas wasn’t barred from female sports for being “transgender”; he was barred for being a male. Any other male, whether he identified as transgender or not, would be barred for the same reason. Trans-identifying males remain fully eligible to compete in UPenn athletics—on the men’s team.
Instead of focusing on the women who benefit from the university’s course correction, the media has centered its attention on Thomas. Headlines have emphasized that Thomas was “stripped of titles,” and have largely overlooked the women whose titles were restored: Anna Kalandadze, Virginia Burns, and Kayla Fu, whose records in the 500-meter, 200-meter, and 100-meter freestyle, respectively, have now been reinstated.
Predictably, proponents for allowing males to compete in women’s sports have wasted no time distorting scientific evidence to denounce UPenn’s decision. Two CNN reporters, for instance, claimed that the idea “transgender athletes have an unfair advantage in sports” is “not what the research shows.” They pointed to a 2017 review, which claimed that there was “no direct and consistent research to suggest that [trans-identifying males] . . . have an athletic advantage in sport.” But that conclusion flowed largely from the lack of studies on the question—an issue driven less by uncertainty than by the assumption that the answer was self-evident. Since then, hard data have emerged confirming what anyone with functioning eyes already knew: that trans-identifying males’ use of testosterone-suppressing drugs and cross-sex hormones only moderately reduces, but comes nowhere close to eliminating, the performance gap between male and female athletes.
