Dear New York Times

[mme_hardy]

If you are trying to find an expert on the cons of teenage gender transition, maybe you could find an expert who doesn't insist on referring to Caitlyn Jenner as "he" and "Bruce"?

Dr. Paul McHugh, a professor of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University Medical School and its hospital’s former psychiatrist in chief, is skeptical of the use of surgery for a psychological condition, and even more so for children. “Bruce Jenner — who cares?” said Dr. McHugh, who said he played a role in closing a transgender surgery program at Johns Hopkins about 35 years ago. “He’s a wonderfully successful person. He’s got all kinds of social networks. He’s got plenty of money. No one’s objecting to him if he wants to live as a woman. This is America, be my guest."

How kind of the good doctor to give permission.

e from transadvocate.com

McHugh himself admits to directing Meyer to conduct to further his anti-trans agenda in a 2004 article titled “Surgical Sex”. In the same article, McHugh also continues to preach the largely discredited “autogynephilia” theory of Ray Blanchard and J. Michael Bailey. McHugh is also known for filing an amicus curiae brief in Hollingsworth v. Perry, asserting that homosexuality is a choice, as well as for his participation of the campaign against Kansas abortion provider Dr George Tiller- who was murdered in 2009 by a anti-abortion activist.

I shall be writing my usual Strong Letter.

Comments

[askerian]

jeeeesus.

if you really do write a strong letter i kinda want to see it. *hisses at people* >_>

By your command

[mme_hardy]

The article on transgender teenagers looked for an opposing view. Unfortunately, the reporter chose Dr. Paul McHugh, who is notorious for campaigning against transgender identity at any age.

Dr. McHugh was responsible for shutting down the gender identity clinic at Johns Hopkins in 1979, and has consistently spoken out pathologizing transgender identity as a mental disorder.

Surely the reporter ought to have thought twice about a source that consistently referred to Caitlin Jenner as "he"? Surely an article about teenage transgender people needed an opposing advocate who was concerned about the timing of surgery, rather than about the existence of transgender people? Perhaps the reporter could have found a critic who is younger than 84?

Re: By your command

[staranise]

God knows, their "opposing points of view" could even have been trans people who talk about the benefits of transitioning early vs. the benefits of waiting!

Re: By your command

[mme_hardy]

IIRC there were multiple statements by transgender people who wished they'd been able to do it younger, before the bone changes of puberty.

Re: By your command

[kore]

Or decades of mental anguish even! But who cares about that, right. Since being transgender is a hobby for silly rich bored people or something. JESUS.

Re: By your command

[askerian]

hahaha nice ^^ i'd add a "younger than 84 or at least one whose medical opinions are not still based on theories largely discredited fifty years ago" just to drive it home but that might be too snarky idk. but jesus people =_= why give that kind of bigot a soapbox, it's not science any longer, it's a personal crusade based on "no i feel this is icky therefore i will bullshit evidence to make people agree with me and BAN IT FOREVER FoR EVERYONE YEEEE."

Re: By your command

[mme_hardy]

I sent it just after I made this post, so it's too late to change. Yeah, age isn't really the problem, it's the complete inability to assimilate ongoing research. But, HMOG, who thought it was a great idea to ask an anti-transgender activist about the appropriate age for transgender surgery?

Re: By your command

[movingfinger]

Someone who hasn't updated their Rolodex in about thirty-forty years, that's who.

Re: By your command

[mme_hardy]

Yip. Remarkably lazy reporting. I do NOT understand why the copyeditor let referring to Caitlin Jenner as "he" go through, though; the Times has been using female pronouns and her female name in all other post-Vanity-Fair articles. That should have raised a bigotry flag right there.

Re: By your command

[movingfinger]

Does the Times have copyeditors, or are they just running spelling checkers? Evidence points strongly to the latter lately.

Re: By your command

[julian]

I haven't read it, but is it possible it was written pre-Vanity-Fair and then someone didn't edit it sufficiently?

*actually reads it*

Ah. No. It's just the bigot saying it and the Times not changing his direct quotes. The writer uses she earlier in the article.

Dear Times: Get better experts, or at least label your bigots as bigots.