New York Times faces searing backlash for publishing ‘harmful’ anti-trans ‘propaganda’: ‘Do better’

.pn-single-post-wrapper__content-main a { background: linear-gradient(to right, rgba(239,117,172,0.4) 0, rgba(239,117,172,0.4) 100%); background-position: 0 -0.1em; background-size: 0 100%; background-repeat: no-repeat; }

The New York Times is facing fierce backlash after it published an article full of “anti-trans propaganda” under the guise of “concern-trolling”. 

The outlet published an article titled “The Battle Over Gender Therapy” Wednesday (15 June) in its New York Times Magazine which uncritically platformed gender-critical groups, vile rhetoric and anti-trans parents. The article claimed there was a “big debate among clinicians” on how they should “respond to the thousands of teenagers who are arriving at their doors” for gender-affirming treatments. 

It claimed that a December draft of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s (WPATH) standards of care (SOC8) on adolescents raised “tricky questions” about young people accessing gender-affirming care. 

These so-called questions included if trans teens coming out today were “different from the adults who transitioned in previous generations” or if some young people “struggling with serious mental-health issues” might be “trying to shed aspects of themselves they dislike” by transitioning. 

The article also claimed the “prevalence” of young people coming out has increased in recent years, and journalist Emily Bazelon said “some clinicians” told her the “average age when a young person first comes” to a gender clinic “tends to be around 14 or 15”. 

googletag.cmd.push(function () { deployads.push(function() { deployads.gpt.display("Video_Unit_1x1"); deployads.gpt.pubadsRefresh([Video_Unit_1x1]); }); });

The New York Times Magazine article cast the ability to access gender-affirming care for minors as a simple decision despite the fact most clinics in the US have years-long wait lists, assessments can be lengthy and treatments can be costly. 

The December draft of WPATH SOC8, seen by Bazelon, recommended minors provide evidence of “several years” of identifying as their chosen gender before accessing medical treatment. 

It was then advised trans youth “undergo a comprehensive diagnostic assessment, for the purpose of understanding the psychological and social context of their gender identity and how it might intersect with other mental-health conditions”.

Several people online blasted the New York Times for publishing the “dangerous” anti-trans article and argued it cast “reactionary backlash as legitimate debate about transition care”.

var unruly = window.unruly || {}; unruly.native = unruly.native || {}; unruly.native.siteId = 1068722;

Another atrocious exercise in concern-trolling. There is no evidence that large numbers of young people are transitioning without assessment. None.
This article consistently casts reactionary backlash as legitimate debate about transition care. https://t.co/JOZi2MpBUA

— Michael Hobbes (@RottenInDenmark) June 15, 2022

Ho boy.

I'm going to read the Emily Bazelon trans kids article several times today, but just a note that multiple orgs and people quoted in this article don't just want to "be better" about trans-affirming care for kids.

They want to END it.

Thread to slowly emerge today. pic.twitter.com/WIy3gD3po1

— Heron Greenesmith, Esq. (@herong) June 15, 2022

The NYT just platformed a group made up of transphobic parents & conversion therapists who’ve written about how they have the same end goals as hardline trans eliminationists but moderate their views to try to break into the mainstream. This is dangerous & irresponsible.

— Ky Schevers (@reclaimingtrans) June 15, 2022

This anti-trans propaganda pushed by outlets like the New York Times are 100% responsible for the average cishet person feeling like they should just ignore how the fascists are trying to exterminate trans people. https://t.co/p4Tfn0MSFp

— Ana Fox