How Automatic Gender ‘Affirmation’ Hurts Girls and Women

Danish comedian Sofie Hagen, one of the founding members of The Guilty Feminist podcast, announced in 2019 that she was “non-binary,” giving as reasons that people in comedy paid a lot of attention to her sex, which felt wrong, and that wearing trousers “felt so right.” In societies that value males more, and that give opportunities to males that are not given to females, is it any surprise that women and girls would come to dis-identify with femaleness in this way, and identify more with maleness?

Okay, please don’t shout at people for referring to me as ‘she’. My pronouns are whatever. She/they/he, whatever you want. I also heard that someone had been shouted at for calling me trans, as if that’s a slur? I *am* trans because I am not cis. I’m non-binary.— Sofie Hagen (@SofieHagen) July 3, 2020

In a 1946 poll, a quarter of the women respondents said they wished they’d been born the opposite sex. Are we to believe that a full quarter of women were transgender then? Radical feminist Shulamith Firestone made this point in 1970 (in the section this passage comes from, she’s giving a feminist reinterpretation of Sigmund Freud):

As for the ‘penis envy,’ again it is safer to view this as a metaphor. Even when an actual preoccupation with genitals does occur, it is clear that anything that physically distinguishes the envied male will be envied. For the girl can’t really understand how it is that when she does exactly the same thing as her brother, his behaviour is approved and hers isn’t. She may or may not make a confused connection between his behaviour and the organ that differentiates him.

Firestone’s point is that what Freud called “penis envy” wasn’t literally envy of the penis, but rather envy of males’ superior social status. Simone de Beauvoir made the same point in 1949 when she said, “If the little girl feels penis envy, it is only as the symbol of privileges enjoyed by boys. The place the father holds in the family, the universal predominance of males, her own education—everything confirms her in her belief in masculine superiority.” Clara Thompson and Karen Horney made the point as early as 1939—summarized a little later by Thompson to the effect that “cultural factors can explain the tendency of women to feel inferior about their sex and their consequent tendency to envy men; that this state of affairs may well lead women to blame all their difficulties on the fact of their sex.”

Feminists have been making this point for a long time, but back then they were making it against insufferable male theorists such as Freud and Jean-Paul Sartre, not—as they must do today—against clinicians, mental-health professionals, counsellors, teachers, and all the other professionals who support the affirmation of any young girl’s claim that she is really a boy. Radical feminist Janice Raymond criticized the medicalization of what was, at her time of writing, “transsexualism” rather than “transgenderism” (the difference being whether mere self-identification, as opposed to having undergone sex reassignment surgery, was taken to be sufficient for trans status) as being an individual solution to a social problem.

‘Gender-Critical’ Feminists Pay a Price for Speaking Out. But the Price of Silence is Higher epistolary article by Libby Emmons @li88yinc is everything. Letters are real. Names have been changed.— Maya Forstater (@MForstater) December 30, 2019

Gender-critical feminists do not find it surprising that girls wouldn’t identify with their gender. On the contrary, that is exactly what a gender-critical understanding of gender predicts and explains. If all women were naturally inclined toward femininity, there wouldn’t need to be so much effort expended in policing conformity, in offering social and economic rewards for conformity and punishments for non-conformity.

Some women might get lucky, and happen to genuinely prefer what they would be pushed into even if they didn’t prefer it. But we can expect many women not to be in this position. Those women are not all transgender. Gender non-conforming women, that is, women who are not feminine in every or even any respect, are not a minority variation on the statistically normal feminine woman. Gender non-conforming women are normal.

We seem to have utterly lost sight of this basic feminist point today. Clinicians, school counsellors, mental-health providers, and other professionals are being increasingly encouraged to “affirm” the beliefs of children who claim to be the opposite gender. In Victoria, Australia, for instance, a law was recently introduced “to denounce and give statutory recognition to the serious harm caused by” the failure to “support or affirm” a person’s gender identity. But an affirmation-only approach makes it more difficult, when a female child claims to be a boy, to question them about other aspects of their life, in order to try to rule out other possible explanations than that they are transgender for why they might be thinking of themselves this way. There are high rates of mental health issues, family dysfunction, childhood sexual abuse, autism, and same-sex attraction within cohorts who identify as trans, any of which might be a better explanation of their wish to transition than that the individual is, in fact, trans.

One clinician, interviewed anonymously by Michele Moore, an honorary professor in Health and Social Care at the University of Essex, and Heather Brunskell-Evans, who was a senior research fellow at King’s College London, said:

You don’t just see one child and understand gender identity is not innate, but once you’ve seen a hundred you’ve seen ‘the Reddit kid,’ you’ve seen ‘the teenager with autism,’ ‘the one who might be gay,’ you’ve seen ‘the girl who was sexually abused and hates her body,’ or whose mother has been sexually abused and hates her body and doesn’t want the same for her child. We know that by not examining what is behind the onset of dysphoria, and going straight for ‘self-affirmation’ that the patient is transgender, we are subjugating children’s needs to an ideological position.

“The Reddit kid” here refers to the likelihood of a social contagion around identifying as transgender. In a 2018 paper, Lisa Littman introduced what she called “rapid onset gender dysphoria”—identification as trans that appears suddenly during or after puberty (rather than from a very young age), and generally after exposure to transgender-identifying peers or transgender social media content. In the friend groups reported in Littman’s study, the average number of friends in the same group who began to identify as transgender was 3.5, and about 61 percent of those adolescents and young adults who announced that they were transgender experienced increased popularity among their peers.

In the UK, there has been a 4,400 percent increase in girls being referred for transitioning treatment in 10 years, with drugs (specifically puberty blockers) being offered to children as young as 10. In the five years between 2015 and 2020, there was a 400 percent rise in referrals to the Tavistock centre in the UK, which is the country’s only public health clinic treating children with gender identity issues.

“A number of my patients had gone through reassignment surgery & often angry at the loss of sexual functioning..also were aggrieved with psychiatric professionals who they believed had failed to adequately investigate underlying psychological difficulties”— Quillette (@Quillette) January 21, 2020

The majority are girls who identify as boys, generally without having shown signs of dysphoria in childhood. In Sweden, there’s been a 1,500 percent rise between 2008 and 2018 in the diagnosis of girls aged 13–17 years old as having gender dysphoria. This suggests we’re going to be seeing more and more “trans kids,” mostly identifying as boys. It is unlikely that these kids would have met older diagnostic criteria.

In February 2020, the well-known gay Australian writer Benjamin Law tweeted (from his account with more than 100,000 followers): “And even if there were more trans people in 2020, what would be the problem exactly? Let’s face it: so much of this conversation stems from an aversion to—and hatred of—the existence of transgender people.” This makes use of a familiar idea from the gay-rights movement, namely that when people worried about “social contagion,” or gay adults influencing children to be gay, there was no real explanation of why it should be objectionable that there are more gay people unless there’s something wrong with being gay.

But as we’ve just seen, there are a lot of different explanations for why people might wish to transition. Now imagine there’s a similar range of explanations available for why people claim to have feelings of attraction to the same sex, many of which suggest that they are not actually gay. Perhaps of all the people claiming to be gay, some of these were only bisexual, some were straight but just experimenting, some were rebelling against their parents, some were avoiding partners of the opposite sex because of past sexual abuse by people of that category, and so on. Imagine there were peer-group incentives to claim to be gay, and this was especially appealing to people who had no other marginalized identities and were sick of being accused of being “privileged.” Suppose there was a kind of social contagion where groups of kids were coming out as gay at the same time, in groups of friends, after exposure to online information about gay communities.

What’s the worst that can happen during a period of a person thinking they’re gay when they’re not? They experiment with some people of the same sex, who they will later end up ruling out as sexual or romantic partners. Is this a bad thing? It doesn’t seem so. Experimentation, sexual and otherwise, is commonplace. There’s no harm at all to affirming as gay people who are not gay. On the other hand, there is risk of serious harm in refusing to affirm such people. At worst, there is “conversion therapy,” where gay people are subject to attempts to make them straight. This has been linked to depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, low self-esteem, sexual dysfunction, harm to interpersonal relationships in particular with partners and parents, alienation, loneliness, and social isolation.

Short of conversion therapy, refusal to affirm may cause a gay person to experience shame and self-loathing, to remain “in the closet” for a long period, to feel unconfident about trusting others—which can negatively impact the quality of their interpersonal relationships, and to miss out on caring romantic and sexual relationships. Ultimately, there is no reason at all to refuse to affirm claims about sexual orientation on the basis of wanting there to be fewer gays. More gays, fewer gays, it doesn’t matter. No one is harmed by being gay (except, of course, by people who don’t like gays and are willing to act on that).

But the idea doesn’t apply to trans people as straightforwardly as Law seems to assume. The potential harms of affirmation are very different when it comes to gender non-conforming kids who consider themselves trans.

First of all, they may fail to receive support for possible underlying issues of the kinds mentioned already, including autism, histories of childhood sexual abuse, mental health problems, family dysfunction, and same-sex attraction. Second of all, they may start taking harmful drugs. Kids who consider themselves trans may be prescribed puberty blockers (these do what they say, and block the onset of puberty) and later, cross-sex hormones.

In the UK, cross-sex hormones have been prescribed to kids as young as 12. Much of this medical treatment is experimental. Despite the World Professional Association for Transgender Health recommending the use of puberty blockers, there is disagreement among paediatric endocrinologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and ethicists about whether they should be used. The UK National Health Service (NHS) website once described the effects of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRHa) treatment as “fully reversible,” but this was changed in late May 2020 to say, “little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria,” “it is not known what the psychological effects may be,” and “it’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones.”

What about the harms of refusing to affirm as trans people who are in fact trans? There is little data on this. Although legislation is being introduced in multiple countries to prevent “conversion therapy” on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, the legislation seems to be justified with reference to research that is disproportionately about sexual orientation.

"I spent years campaigning for a law that would protect gay youth from the ‘corrective’ abuse that I’d once endured. Then the trans-rights lobby got involved." -- @PeterGajdics— Quillette (@Quillette) June 4, 2022

Furthermore, refusal to affirm a gender identity is not equivalent to rejection or outright disbelief. The clinical alternative to the “gender-affirmative” model is the “watchful waiting” model, which explores with the child in therapy their other issues, and makes sure to affirm a trans identification only if and when other explanations are ruled out.

As Diane Ehrensaft—Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), and Director of Mental Health at the UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Child and Adolescent Gender Centre—explains, “Since a large majority of gender nonconforming young children seeking services at gender clinics desist in their gender dysphoria by adolescence, best practices would be to wait and see if the child persists into adolescence before making any significant changes in the child’s gender identity.” The harms of affirming kids who are not trans as trans are likely to far outweigh the harms of failing to affirm as trans kids who are trans, especially if the alternative is watchful waiting.

If being trans were just like being gay in that it didn’t impact a child’s health, then affirming everyone who considers themselves trans as trans might not be a problem. More trans people, fewer trans people, who cares. But it’s not like being gay, because it tends to involve medical interventions, invasive and painful surgeries, and uncertain long-term health impacts. Kids who consider themselves trans are at risk of being put on a conveyor belt to a lifetime of medical dependency.

And these negative outcomes are now disproportionately impacting girls. A 2017 UK government survey on 108,100 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) or intersex individuals in the UK found 57 percent of trans respondents under the age of 35 to be non-binary, 26 percent to be transmen, and 17 percent to be transwomen. Other studies have found between two and five times more females than males identifying as non-binary. The authors note that the percentages are in line with referrals to gender-identity services, “where the majority of [UK] referrals in 2016–17 were for people assigned female at birth (1,400 of the 2,016 referrals—or 69 percent).” This reveals a generational shift in trans identification, with more girls than boys now considering themselves trans.

We also find disproportionate impacts when we look at sexual assault in trans communities. As we might have expected given what we know about the differential rates of sexual assault outside of trans communities, female people face disproportionate impacts. An Australian survey from 2018 showed that trans people experienced sexual violence at higher rates than the general public, but it was transmen and female non-binary people who experienced the highest rates, with 62 percent of those respondents answering “yes” to the question, “Have you ever been forced or frightened into doing something sexually that you did not want to do?” (Of the transwomen and male nonbinary participants, 39 percent answered “yes” to this question.) Female non-binary people were the most at risk (66 percent), followed by transmen (54 percent), then male non-binary people (44.5 percent), and finally transwomen (36 percent). Feminists who consider transmen to be men cannot consider this to be a specifically feminist issue, even though it is a rate of sexual coercion three times higher than that experienced by female people who are neither trans nor non-binary.

The UK government survey mentioned above found something similar, asking trans people about their experience of “incidents” including verbal harassment, coercive or controlling behaviour, physical harassment or violence, and sexual harassment or violence. They found that “trans men were notably more likely to have experienced an incident (58%) than trans women (40%) and non-binary respondents (47%).”

Accepting the redrawn boundaries of “woman”—and therefore the new constituency of feminism proposed by those feminists who think that gender is an identity or a performance—would therefore lead to the dismissal of significant harms at the intersection of being female and being trans-identified, as not being feminist issues. Gender-critical feminism accommodates the interests of the most vulnerable people in the trans community. Trans is a feminist issue, just not in the way that most feminists today think it is.

This essay has been adapted from the author’s newly published book, Gender-Critical Feminism.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at
1 Like

An excellent, well-presented piece. Well argued without being ‘argumentative.’ I have a daughter who, from elementary school thru high school, would often express the thought, "I’m confused – not specifically about gender, but about how to get through group dynamics, assignments which depended on cooperation with others, unclear objectives, unclear that the basis for evaluation and approval might be. How to find one’s own role and status.

In retrospect, the fact that she could express, in words, “I’m confused”, might have been a positive. It invites a response, “you can figure it out, we can help you, but in the end you figure it out for yourself.”

It is quite natural to be confused by challenges we run into. And even if the external system might be creating some of the confusion, claiming agency is better than on the one hand blaming the systemand on the other hand demanding that the system provide you the cure.

My problem with an article like this is its ideological solipsim. It takes for granted that there is only one view of the world, that of the educated-class writer and all the experts.

I maintain that there are three kinds of people in the world: Subordinates, Responsibles, and Creatives. Almost everyone who is anyone has such a Three Level Theory: even lefty Allies, who believe that the world is composed of Allies, Oppressed Peoples, and White Oppressors.

In this article the author’s world is the world of Creatives, people who believe that the meaning of “life, the universe, and everything” is to be creative. And especially, it seems, about sex, or gender, or whatever the approved word is today that won’t get you canceled. In my view, the creative life is a life of incredible difficulty, most likely to end in failure on the border between Order and Chaos. To pretend that it can ever be easy, or can often be mediated by helpful experts, I think, is a lie.

And then there is the question of Responsibles and Subordinates, whose existence is completely ignored by the writer. Where do they fit in?

BTW. I am in the middle of rereading George Eliot’s Middlemarch in which her three heroines – Dorothea Brooke, Rosamund Vincy, and My Girl Mary Garth – completely run the table on the men in their lives. I wonder what Eliot means by that.


Of 1,069 patients referred to the Tavistock clinic in the UK, 372 exhibited severe or moderate autistic traits. Even if we accept that there is a link between autism and trans without reservation or scientific scepticism, with as many as 6.5% of the gender-diverse population on the autism spectrum, these figures are still alarming. 6.5% is not 35%.

1 Like

And herein lies the key. The rest is filler.
Desperate girls and boys trying desperately to be popular…


This theory falls apart on the basis of gender equality being predominantly culturally & legally accepted for many decades. To posit the notion that women can’t know their own minds if there’s any departure from ‘acceptable’ norms must be ‘delusional envy based self hatred’ showcases how anti feminist these gender critical ‘feminists’ actually are. Men & women share gendered traits of masculinity & femininity so the likelihood of organic variation is highly likely. A genuine feminist understands this that’s why it’s used to underpin the demand for gender equality.

The fact of the matter is most people are gender conforming in their expressions. A transgender person expressing themselves as man/woman stereotype or /male female archetype is only doing what most non trans people do. They hardly made the gender construct up.

The discredited methodology of Littman’s study now being widely known isn’t conducive to the author’s credibility. Surveys of parental opinion on notorious anti trans forums hardly qualify as a smoking gun for the contagion theory. And as of yet the clinical evidence doesn’t support the contagion theory either.

Surgery regret is very low which perhaps indicates that current standards of medical gate keeping are successful.

1 Like

An Australian survey from 2018 showed that trans people experienced sexual violence at higher rates than the general public, but it was transmen and female non-binary people who experienced the highest rates, with 62 percent of those respondents answering “yes” to the question, “Have you ever been forced or frightened into doing something sexually that you did not want to do?” (Of the transwomen and male nonbinary participants, 39 percent answered “yes” to this question.)

Yeah, but how many of the yesses here came in the context of some form of prostitution? Come on, I don’t trust those statistics for a second. Your average rapist isn’t going for the MtF transgender who might still have a dick and the muscle mass to outfight them. Self-reported survey info like this is notoriously unreliable.


We can expect de-transition to lag. The number of people who regret their mutilation at the moment is to be compared with the numbers mutilated, say, 10 years ago, not with the number being mutilated right now. And given that trans is all the rage, admitting to regret at the moment is like a 12 year old girl in 2008 admitting that she doesn’t really like Justin Bieber. I predict an avalanche of lawsuits in the next decade. At least that will prove correct or not on the basis of hard numbers, not speculation.


Canada’s turned a blind eye since his first criminal record, so I won’t hold my breath. If he can keep his powder dry - and multi-jurisdictional charges off the table - he’ll probably get off with reckless imprudence and a small fine.

1 Like

Who, the real Bieber? I was just using him as a comparison. The lawsuits will be against the mutilation industry?

Oh I know. I’m dry and pugnacious today. That was my dry, pugnacious version of “his music’s not that bad.”

I know full well where the lawsuit avalanche is headed, and it can’t come soon enough.

Ah! Actually, that’s quite funny, I wish I’d gotten it.


The insanity of people trying to reason through this hideous form of child abuse is bizarre, radical and deeply-deeply disturbing. Additionally, Quillette is obsessed with this topic. Claire Lehman was confident in taking a position on covid vaccines. Why so much silence Claire on what’s being done to children?

That’s puzzling. As you say she’s focused on the topic and nothing we’ve ever read here is anything but condemnation. QC could hardly be less silent.


What’s the expectation? This is a discussion forum, not a social justice one is it not?

No expectation, but I do think Futermans is simply wrong – QC/Claire has been very vocal on this subject, both a long list of articles, and all the discussion (with the exception of Ella) has been strongly anti-transmania.


It’s more crypto-social justice.

The adolescent years are marked by one stand-out behavioural driver - to belong to a group. Thanks for the very clear insight into a person’s response to dominant ‘others’ like men. Even among men there is an adolescent identity response relating to finding the sync between what a male thinks and feels and believes AND the groups of males who have dominant appreciation such as sportsman. So the geeks do bond together. And there are many men who sit across both athletic and intellectual prowess. They become doctors (well a little facetious but the talent among male doctors sometimes blows me away). With a burgeoning conversation about that a person can be non-binary, that becomes source material for a ‘belonging’. And yes, as you state, it could come off badly. The alternative of course is for families to practice strong diverse inclusive social lives especially based on contribution to each others lives. I would like to see research done that identifies the level of non-binary identification among families who have diverse active social lives and those who are mono-culture both around age group, gender interactions and ethnic groups.
On ‘non-binary’ itself. The word conveys a state of being that is unbelievable. In otherwords, while I get it epistemologically, I am unable to reconcile the word with an ontological state. If binary means that there are two different states of being, what would non-binary mean, that there is a state that is neither male nor female? I get that they mean a person is both male and female or masculine and feminine. Yet still I find myself with a sense that it is inauthentic to claim that.