Anti-trans voices used this research – and it’s just been torn apart

Last week an article was published by the magazine Scientific American. 

It addressed the widely criticised concept of ‘rapid-onset gender dysphoria’ (ROGD), which theorises a link between gender dysphoria among children and young people, and being exposed to transgender identity through media or friends. 

The Scientific American article, which cited a number of experts, cast doubt on the existence of ROGD, which had been the subject of a controversial study in March this year.

That study lent apparent credence to the idea that transgender identity was a ‘social contagion’ – but it has since been retracted for failing to obtain ethics approval.

When I first saw ROGD being bandied around by anti-trans activists on social media a few years ago I couldn’t help but roll my eyes. 

The idea that you can ‘expose’ young people to LGBTQ+ issues and therefore influence them to become part of that community is a myth that it seems won’t die. 

Using a flawed study to try and minimise the lived experience of trans people seemed, to me, to perfectly illustrate the lack of understanding and empathy that defines so much anti-trans sentiment. 

The article in Scientific American quotes several experts in the field, including Eli Coleman, former president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). 

They quickly dismissed the concept of ROGD, saying it was a ‘real stretch’ to ‘even say it’s a hypothesis at this point’ – I might not be an expert, but I can’t help but agree.

I wasn’t surprised to see the article being met with an inevitable backlash online, as anti-trans activists continued to cling to the validity of this flawed concept, accusing the venerable publication of ‘extremism’ and promoting ‘dangerous trans ideology.’

I think what annoys me so much about being confronted with proponents of rapid onset gender dysphoria, is that the concept has not been recognised by any major professional psychological associations or paediatric studies.

Even the researcher who coined the phrase, Lisa Littman, corrected the methodology of her original paper to note that ROGD was not a formal diagnosis. 

But despite there being a trove of evidence against this concept, it continues to be prominent in anti-trans circles.

Not only is it routinely used in parts of the media, but it is also used as part of the foundation for anti-trans legislation being pushed in a number of states in the US, which aim to, among other things, limit or ban gender affirming care. 

Seeing anti-LGBT+ voices cling to ROGD, despite mounting evidence against it, reminds me that those advocating against trans rights often don’t have much to back up their claims, since they appear willing to ignore the scientific consensus, and that they are largely led by fear rather than evidence. 

I defy anyone to continue to be opposed to trans-inclusive care for young people once they see how happy it makes them to be able to be themselves

Despite what advocates of ROGD suggest, young people are not coming out as trans out of the blue.

There has been a huge increase of awareness of transgender issues in recent years, and young people more easily find information and resources online, and see themselves reflected in culture more. 

This means that younger people are having the opportunities to come out at younger ages, instead of having to suppress who they are out of shame and fear until adulthood. 

Far from making us nervous of a social contagion, this is something to celebrate. 

A rise in people belonging to a certain group isn’t because it’s a contagion – it’s because previous barriers or challenges have been lifted. In comparison, the number of people who are left-handed increased dramatically in the 20th century. 

That’s not because there is some sort of a rapid-onset left handedness spreading – it’s because people aren’t forced to be right-handed anymore.

The whole idea of rapid onset gender dysphoria is therefore, in my mind, simply a variation on the decades-old homophobic trope that you can ‘influence’ or ‘groom’ young people into a particular orientation or identity.

Trans people like me have put up with this accusation for years, and it is now being applied to young trans people under the guise of a pseudo-scientific concept.

When a young person comes out as trans, there is always a long process involved. This involves the young person and their family for a long time before medical professionals are brought on board to provide care.

If ROGD were to be applied in health care, this would effectively mean that young trans people, instead of being shown support and understanding, would instead risk their identity being dismissed as a ‘social contagion’.

In my mind this kind of medical gaslighting would cause serious harm, which is why flimsy concepts like ROGD have no place in modern and professional health care.

I can’t help but feel that those who so vehemently advocate against gender-affirming care for young people, and trans people in general, lack that personal connection with a trans person. 

I defy anyone to continue to be opposed to trans-inclusive care for young people once they see how happy it makes them to be able to be themselves. The sheer joy they express is so clear.

ROGD was originally proposed as a subset of gender dysphoria, which focuses on the distress that people feel about themselves and their bodies – but in my experience, being trans more about gender euphoria, the joy and happiness people experience when they see themselves reflected authentically in the mirror, and when they are able to truly express who they are.

That’s what made me sure that this was the right path for me, and I think more people need to see that and stop seeing being trans as a tragedy, and start seeing it as something to be celebrated and accepted.

Further studies and research will no doubt continue to support care for trans people, and continue to leave those siren voices opposed to that care with no scientific basis to peddle their lies. 

I can only hope the anti-trans voices will fade into obscurity.

It’s about time we started listening to trans people and their needs, accepting real medical evidence, rather than relying on pseudo-scientific concepts. 

We deserve that much.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.

MORE : Roisin Murphy addresses trans remarks after backlash and says goodbye to fans who have ‘left’

MORE : Nish Kumar blasts ‘pathological’ obsession with transgender people

MORE : Alice Cooper aware of transgender cases but ‘afraid it’s also a fad’ that ‘confuses’ teenagers