Butler & Hutchinson: Detransition


Part 6.

This paper was referenced in part 5 of this series. You can read part 5 here: 👇

Detransition 5

PDF of the paper below: 👇


The paper was published, in November 2020, in the Journal for Child and Adolescent Mental Health.



This paper is jointly authored by Anna Hutchinson and Catherine Butler. Dr Butler is an academic, based in the psychology department, at Bath University. Dr Hutchinson has impeccable academic credentials and has held senior, clinical, posts including a stint at the Tavistock centre. 👇


The common theme in all the pieces I have done, on the topic of detransitioners / desisters, is a lack of current data. Desistance rates have, historically, been found to be as high as 98% for children who present at Gender Clinics. Even a desistance rate of 85% should call into question the practice of giving Puberty Blockers to children. Which, let me remind you, in the United Kingdom, are given to children as young as 10.


We also know that over 98%, of children, given puberty blockers, progress to cross-sex hormones (CSH). This suggests we lock these kids into a medical trajectory. Trans-activists argue the near ubiquity of progression to cross sex hormones is evidence of solid diagnostic criteria; which I find implausible. Here a Clinician, from the Tavistock, admits uncertainty adding that this is why it is important to get the parents to take responsibility for putting a child on puberty blockers. 👇 ”Because we dont have the evidence base” . {Dr Aiden Kelly}.


The near certainty these kids will progress to CSH also undermines the argument that blocking puberty allows a ”pause” for the child/family to weigh up their options.

Detransition Denial.

Rising rates of referrals to gender clinics is a worldwide phenomenon. There is also a concomitant rise in detransitioners. At the same time there is a widespread reluctance to acknowledge desisters/ detransitioners. The authors speculate, correctly in my view, that the dismissal of detransitioners’ testimony is driven by fear; a fear their stories delegitimise medical responses to Gender Dysphoria. This, I would add, threatens the profits of the Gender Industrial Complex. Suppressing information about post-transition regret, in this cohort, distorts the evidence available to judge the success rates of medical transition. It also doesn’t allow for any, evidence led, improvement in diagnostic criteria by identifying commonalities in the detrans community.

Furthermore disregarding detransitioners means medical professionals are poorly equipped to deal with regret. There is currently no guidance to address the consequences of post ”transition” regret; whether psychological or medical.



Despite the reluctance to acknowledge this community it has become increasingly difficult to deny post-transition regret. Some transgender activists now, implicitly, acknowledge the phenomenon but claim this is all part of a “Gender Journey” . This paper uses similar language, below, calling it a “development trajectory”. I am extremely wary of this framing which smacks of spinning regret for public relations purposes. It is, nevertheless, the case that some detransitioners say they may have been left with doubts had they not tried medical transition. However, we shouldn’t discount the possibility these responses are driven by a, subconscious, desire to salvage something positive from the experience. Either way I think we need to be cautious about this language which may serve to mask bad diagnostic techniques and normalise regret as an acceptable outcome.


As with the other studies I have reviewed, the experience of homophobic bullying is identified as a factor leading to adoption of a trans-identity. We could see this as a mal-adaptive coping mechanism. The other recurrent themes are isolation; poor peer relations and family difficulties. Factors which appear related to desistance also recur. Understanding commonalties in desisters could also assist with better screening of those who present at gender clinics. This cautious approach has been cast aside with the current ”affirmation only” policy; which is being rolled out in new pilot clinics under this government.


The authors are keen to highlight research that stresses the importance of family support for “transitioning” . They also suggest the corollary can be feelings of shame, if the outcome is regret and re-identification with birth sex. In fairness parents, like me, who think our teenagers are making a mistake, may find our children are similarly inhibited from expressing regret. There is a natural reluctance to confirm your parent’s were right and admit you made a mistake.


The authors point out the development of diagnostic criteria, for children, is a relatively recent development. This allows trans-activist to argue earlier cohorts may have swept up children who were merely ”gender non-conforming”. This argument is used to dismiss earlier research, showing high rates of desistance, as historic failures in diagnosis. Trans-activists argue that diagnostic techniques have improved and earlier data is not relevant to the current cohort. I am cynical about this argument.



Some key themes about difficulties with research on detransition are covered below. Those who regret the treatment they received are less likely to return to the clinic who they may feel harmed them. Loss to follow up is a major stumbling block to getting accurate data. Worryingly the length of follow up times is quite short. If, as Dhejne says, we are looking at an average of eight years, before regret emerges, we are only at the beginning of this wave of detransitioners. Given there are already over 23,000 in the detrans reddit forum that is horrific to contemplate.



This section is critical in understanding the changing demographic referred to Gender Clinics. The scale of referrals; increase in females; emergence of different types of identities; the impact of socially transitioning children as well as the phenomenon of teenage onset gender dysphoria are all salient factors.


Our understanding of the above phenomena is limited and yet clinical practice has embraced an affirmation model with seemingly little reflection.


Autism and same sex attraction are features of the current, young cohort and we should all be heartbroken so many don’t feel comfortable with their homosexuality. It is for this reason that I describe what we are doing as a from of Eugenics/Gay Eugenics.


Clinicians will need to develop a whole range of different skills to deal with the emerging cohort of detransitioners. Some may have undertaken medical treatment which means they can no longer produce the appropriate hormones for their sex. Young women who can no longer have children may need counselling. As covered in my previous piece many detransitioners were very critical of the inability of psychologists and doctors to address their needs.


I doubt a young man who emerges with no testicles/penis or a female with no breasts/womb would regard this as a period of creative exploration. 👆

The advice below is likely appropriate for therapeutic approaches to working with clients. I also argue, we should be extremely wary of introducing permanent, medical intervention whilst, simultaneously, paying lip service to the idea of ”gender fluidity”.


I also object to the idea that we accord the description of ”acceptance” to the families going along with the idea our children should become medical patients for life. The parents who are supportive of our gay offspring, and their variant expressions of masculinity /femininity, are the ”accepting” parents.

The paper presents some practical advice for clinicians who are increasingly likely to encounter detransitioners. I would add that doctors who have prescribed treatments, which have resulted in regret, will need guidance and support. They may be defensive in their response to detransitioners who could be very angry. Detransitioners have identified peer support as invaluable and clinicians need to be aware of the networks available.


The themes emerging from the growing body of research on detransitioners make it clear we need to start looking critically at medical responses to a psychological phenomena. We should stop normalising permanent dependence on synthetic hormones/ surgery on healthy bodies. We need to face up to the real regret we are seeing and stop cloaking a medical scandal in the language of ”Gender Journey” or using phrases like ”creative exploration”. If gender is fluid why are we accepting permanent interventions for children and teens?

Guilting families into going along with this by applying the term ”acceptance“ to “affirming” parents is emotional blackmail. How is agreeing your son /daughter needs hormones and surgery, to be authentic, acceptance? Surely it is the exact opposite?


We need more research to better predict outcomes and develop guidance so clinicians know how to deal with the needs of detransitioners. Work to understand this new demographic is still in its infancy. Once doctors have to face the consequences of post transition regret maybe this will re-engage their critical faculties. Right now I see only reckless endangerment.


I do this full-time and have no income. If you want to support my work, and can afford to do so, here is one way.

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.


Detransition Survey: Four


You can read the full paper below. 👇. This is an excellent piece of work and echoes many of the themes found in the earlier studies I looked at for this series.

Detransition Related Needs and Support A Cross Sectional Online Survey

This paper is focussed on the support needs of detransitioners but also covers their motivations to both transition and detransition. It also offers a distinction between those who medically detransition and re-identify with their birth sex and those who end any medical treatment but maintain, or perhaps cling, to a trans-identity.

The first point to make is the paper is published in the Journal of Homosexuality!


The location of the publication may, or may not, be a significant development but it gave me significant satisfaction. Below is the abstract for the paper:


First of all it is crucial to determine the definition of a detransitioner. Not all transition medically so first of all the study defines ”social” and ”medical” transition. It is not always the case that people cease to identify as transgender after they stop medical transition. I am also, personally, aware of a post-operative, de-medicalised male who still uses the term ”transsexual” as he feels it best describes his experience. In this case it serves as shorthand to signal the surgery they underwent and also may be a label maintain community links with fellow travellers.

There is some methodological discussion about how a detransitioner is defined. Some data is based on only those who underwent medical interventions. This paper looks at social as well as medical transition but provides research on which medical steps were undertaken by the survey respondents.


For the purposes of this study the author has chosen to focus on those who claimed the label ”detransitioner”. However, they did include 8 people who rejected the label but whose experience was deemed to be sufficiently analogous to include as a ”detransitioner”.

It is also important to note that there are some trans-identified people who feel they have followed an irreversible path. They believe to re-identify with their birth sex is simply not socially, or medically, achievable. I know both males and females, who find themselves in this sort of limbo or no wo/man’s land, if you will. The author is aware of this complexity but it is outside of the scope of this study.


Survey participants were identified by targetting people in on-line forums, where detransitioners were known to seek suport. They were asked a simple question about whether they had ever socially/medically transitioned and stopped. Details of the survey sample are below 👇. As you can see females are over-represented. I suspect this not only a function of the new demographic being predominantly female. It may also be indicative of female openness to seeking community. Perhaps, it also suggests males are less likely to, publicly, admit they made a mistake. Note that males also seem to take longer to find their way back, to their sex, so this pattern may change in the future.

The survey had global reach with majority representation from the United States followed by Europe.


The majority transitioned socially and medically. As this comment reveals there is further complexity in that someone asked about a category for ”Med-trans” only. I assume this is people who didn’t disown their birth sex but did have medical interventions. This may be a niche issue but note that the current WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health ) guidelines have a section on Eunuchs. No I am not kidding!


Below the author delineates the reported experiences revealed by the survey: 51% started socially transitioning under the age of 18. Average age of Medical transition was 20 for females and 26 for males. Brain maturation estimated to occur around age 25. Detransitioners emerging from cohorts who did this at the age of legal majority, the majority, are in danger of being left unprotected in any future which restricts irreversible treatments, in under 18’s.


The sample of males was not large but the age of onset of medical transition mirrors what I have seen on other de-trans surveys. Girls tend to start earlier and spend less time transitioning. Not for the first time, I am struck by how sex matters even in communities which furiously deny the significance of biological sex.

Next up the profile of the respondents. The high % of co-morbidities is also a familiar finding. The rates of surgical interventions is also staggeringly high (46%), especially given the length of time the respondents, particularly, the females, identifed as ”trans”.

The table showing co-morbid conditions lays it out rather starkly. I would have preferred to see sex recorded against these conditions but as the number of males was small it may not have revealed any, statistically, significant differences. Sorry, not sorry, I am wedded to the sex binary. 😉


Now we come to look at reasons for detransition, that are also, inevitably, reveal the reasons for transition. I notice that, in marked contrast to studies funded by Trans Lobby groups, lack of social acceptance/ discrimination scores quite low. A staggering 70% realised their Gender Dysphoria was rooted in other issues.

The kind of support needs the detransitioners identify reflects further on reasons for their initial decision to transition. Many 👇were wrestling with internalised homophobia. See also the comment about a shift in Gender Identity. It is logically incoherent for Trans Activists to argue for the recognition of “Gender Fluidity” whilst defending irreversible interventions for children and adolescents. I am also pleased to see the discovery of radical feminism makes an appearance. It has also appeared in earlier surveys of detransitioners.


The survey also allowed for open comments which I have reproduced in full in part (4 a) to this blog. Well worth giving voice to all the detransitioners who opened up about their experience: You can read their comments here 👇.

Open Comments Detrans Survey 4

The open comments reveal the ostracism, from the LGBT community, experienced by those desisting from the trans-narrative. They also speak of the betrayal and mistrust they now feel towards Medical professionals. The difficulties of finding therapists able to deal with detransition also features in the open comments.

The survey


The survey also provides a helpful table which compares and contrasts the sources of support respondents enjoyed while transitioning and detransitioning. As you can see the LGBT community and trans specific organisations largely leave the scene of the crime; once people realise they made a mistake.


The survey continues to identify the kind of support the respondents would like to be available. These cover psychological, medical, legal and social categories. Counselling to deal with issues such as internalised homophobia, sexism and feelings of regret. Medical support to deal with stopping/changing cross sex hormones or complications from surgeries. Social support covered the need to hear other stories of their fellow travellers and the need to meet up, on-line and in real life.


The legal support mainly related to the need to re-establish their legal identity as their correct sex but a small percentage wished to take legal action for the injuries caused by the medical interventions. 👇 Those of us waiting for legal action, to put an end to this cannot, in my view, expect detransitioners to shoulder this burden. But, if those 13% do take up the legal fight there will be an army provided to support and fundraise for them.

Politicians need to do their jobs and start legislating. They also, in the United States, need to close loopholes relating to Statute limitation. Many live in states where the average length time before detransition means they are already out of time to get any legal redress.


I do this full-time and unwaged. If you can afford to support my work you can do so here.

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.


DeTransition: 4th Wave Now (3)


This post is based on work done by a detranistioner. It was linked to the paper I covered in this post:

Detransition: Cambridge Study (2)

As stated in my earlier pieces getting access to detransitioners requires seeking them out on the social media apps they use. The research was published on Tumblr:


The work provoked a furious reaction from within the Trans Industrial complex, which you can read about here:


Dan Karasdic likens the work to previous research done by Evangelical Christians and then follows up with a claim the detransitioners were “never really trans” 


Judge for yourself.


Cari, the author reached out to people who had desisted from a trans-identity with a survey opened for only two weeks, in 2016, which attracted over 200 responses.


The resulting data garnered some real insight into motivations for a medical transition and subsequent detransition. The survey allowed for the inclusion of people who had ended a medical transition but remained ”trans-identified”. The vast majority identified as female with quite a few rejecting the prefix ”identified” ,as female, to state they simply ”are female”.


This is what the graphic representation illustrates:


For those who did not claim a female identity the breakdown was as follows together with a graph of how they had identified while transitioning. As you can see the majority identified as “trans men” closely followed by “non-binary/gender queer”


The survey also tracked the ages of both embarking on a “transition” and detransitioning: The average age for coming out/starting transition was 17 years old and beginning detransition was aged 21.


The research also looks at what kind of dysphoria the women experienced. The majority reported they had both social and physical (Sex) dysphoria. That is they desired to have, facsimile, male sex characteristics and a desire to be treated as male or, at least, as other than female. This group constituted 74% of the surveyed.


The report goes on to detail that 88% experienced ”sex dysphoria” ; something often denied by those who do not want the topic to be discussed. A claim also rejected by those who argue that detransitioners were never really ”trans” and didn’t have dysphoric feelings.


The research also questioned the particpants about their experience of detransitioning and its impact on their well-being.


The majority found an improvement in their dysphoric feelings after detransition, some reported these feelings had completely gone. There was also a small minority finding their dysphoria had worsened since they began detransitioning.

The survey uncovered some serious concerns about a lack of counselling with a mean duration of less than three months, even for those who did get therapeutic assistance.


Of those undergoing a medical transition the figures for those who had zero counselling was a whopping 65%. These women had no therapy whatsoever before embarking on medical transitions.


Next up the participants were asked what led them to detransition. The top answer was due to political/ideological concerns. The next popular answer was finding an alternative coping strategy. 30% had concerns about their mental health and over one in five reported medical concerns.


The survey provided space for open comments which allowed participants to expand on the reasons for their answers. They were asked to state their position /feelings about their own transition and on the idea of transitioning more generally. The study found participants were generally more negative about their own experience than they were about the idea of transitioning, more generally.

60% were more or less negative about their own experience with a slightly lower percentage more or less negative about transition for other people.


The open comments were revealing. Discovery of radical feminism is mentioned, as a positive, by a few of the participants. Support from Lesbian communities, or lack of such a community is referenced. Some felt they had been pushed into transition. Lack of alternatives presented by therapists also cropped up. Here are some comments on their own transition: Here reports of pressure, feeling duped, crops up. Also one woman feels she has so altered her body with hormones, mastectomy and hysterectomy she feels as if she is no longer allowed to identify as a woman, or a man.


More comments about the lack of exploratory therapy, inaccurate information from trans-activists, no effort made to consider non-medical responses to Gender Dysphoria recurred. The therapeutic community has a lot to answer for, in respect of this unfolding medical scandal.


More comments reference the need for a stronger community for Lesbian and bisexual women. Even among the detransitioners there is still a belief in Gender Identity Ideology /Queer Theory and one also remains in a relarionship with a ”Trans man” who remains on a medical pathway. Only some are critical of medical pathways more generally, but the majority express the need for careful consideration and more therapy.


One respondent succintly states :”Burn every gender clinic down”. Many also express concern about children and teenagers put on a medicalised pathway. Lack of attention to trauma, underlying a flight from being female, is also a recurrent theme, as is the lack of accurate information from the trans community and medical professionals.

More than one respondent likens the transitioning of children and young people as a from of conversion therapy. The expressions of anger at those who colluded with this are surprisingly muted. Many seem to blame themselves but one, rather poignantly, wishes people, had been honest rather than encouraging her down this path. A few respondents do, however, blame queer theory or the trans-medical system. In general they show compassion for those who continue on this path or are about to embark on medical intervention.

I firmly believe the poster who calls this “medical recklessness” will be vindicated. Dan may rue the day he dismissed these findings. 👇


I do this work full-time and unwaged. If you can afford to support my work you can do so here: 👇

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.


Detransition: Cambridge Study (2)


Finally there seems to be some recognition of the phenomenon of people who detransition. I come to different conclusions than the authors and I have some questions but this study is worth looking at. You can read the full paper here:

Access to care and frequency of detransition among a cohort discharged by a UK national adult gender identity clinic- retrospective case-note review | BJPsych Open | Cambridge Cor

The researchers looked at rates of detransition in patients treated at a UK Gender Clinic. The method they chose was to look at all the patients discharged from the clinic over a year, via the patient case notes. Here is the abstract:


Pay attention to this. We are about to introduce a more ”streamlined” service for Gender Identity Clinics (GICs) but we do not know how many people detransition. What struck me, over and over again, was how much this report laments the lack of data in this field.

This was the methodology. They looked at all patients discharged in a period of a year. They then looked at a number of variables to see if there were any common factors in those who they determined were ”detransitioners”. This is important because they aimed for a consensus view about who met the criteria to be counted as a detransitioner. The criteria was forged, I would argue, by those who believe in “Gender Identity Ideology”.


As you can see they use a definition which is about “living in a gender role”. I flag this because a Butch Lesbian may discontinue medical intervention but may still be deemed to be living in a ”masculine” role. She may not see it this way but see herself as a woman who is not confined by sex stereotypes. Similarly a gay male may detransition and still have atypical interests for his sex. Are these two, potentially, discounted because of their ”Gender role” ?


Leaving aside this question we turn now to how many of these, discharged, patients were originally flagged as potential detransitioners. The figure they agreed on was 12 people who, it was agreed by consensus, met the criteria:


The numbers were whittled down to 12 from an original sample of 21. If the criteria they used is erroneous and those 21 would meet a broader definition of ”detransition” the figure would be 12%. This does not include the three suicides. Even excluding the suicides the percentage is nearly double the % calculated by the studies authors. In one scenario a person may not wish to abandon their identity as a ”Transman” which may be the source of their community. Given the negative responses to those openly expressing regret and coming out as a ”detransitioner”, from the LGBTQ+ community, some may remain in the closet. All of which is to emphasise the point that the definition of regret /detransition is significant in determining who counts and, crucially, who doesn’t.


Other detransition studies:

The paper highlights that other studies have set the rate of detransition from anywhere between 1% and 8%. They reference the source for both those figures. The 8% figure is from a United States, Trans Equality Survey, from 2015. That survey was funded, in part by the Arcus Foundation.


Arcus Foundation are huge funders of organisations disseminating Gender Identity Ideology as are the other foundations listed, above, as supporters. I wrote about Arcus Foundation here:


The survey explained the phenomenon of detransition thus:


The common rationale for the phenomenon of post transition regret, or detransition, is to locate the reasons in a lack of social acceptance. An alternative framing is the realisation that it is impossible to change sex it is possible that living with the psychological, and medical, consequences may create an intolerable burden.

The other study referenced, by the authors, is this one from 2019. The methodology was to access a random sample of patient notes to examine whether the patients expressed any regret. The authors are keen to point out detransition can be seen as part of an exploration of their identity. This is a frequent rationale and sometimes described as part of a ”Gender Journey”. This sits oddly with the push to irreversible medicalisation and injunctions to listen to the patient when they demand access to treatment. Note the conclusion, if so few detransition there should be no reason to slow down the treatment pathway. 👇. Richards, the co-author, works at a Gender Clinic.

Another source (not quoted) also found only 1% detransitioned. The methodology appears similar. A years worth of clinical notes were scanned for words indicating regret or detransition. This study has similar limitations to the one I am looking at here. It’s only a snapshot, the authors define what they regard as ”detransition” and there is also a lack of recognition that dissatisfied patients would, potentially, be unlikely to notify the Gender Clinic.

Their findings are listed below:


Back to the Cambridge Study.

Here is a table giving an overview of the kind of co-morbidities the patient group are also wrestling with 👇. As you can see there are high rates of mental health issues; over 80% in the under 25, male group. Looking at the pattern for accessing mental health services many of these co-morbidities appear to be going untreated. Rates of self-harm are notable in the female, under 25’s. Nearly 90% of the younger females also had at least one adverse childhood experience.


In the table above it is the females over 25 who have the highest percentage of suicide attempts. Buried in the report is a reference to three, completed, suicides. There is no further information about the sex of the people who committed suicide and no intelligence as to whether this was attributed to the medical treatment they accessed. If these were linked to post-transition regret that would be another three to consider.


Below, more information is supplied about those who met the threshold to be defined as detransitioners. One, a male, had completed Genital Reassignement Surgery, which, I presume means removal of the testicles/penis. Again, I would imagine re-identifying as your natal sex would be especially challenging in this circumstance. All the females had accessed double mastectomies.


The authors of the study do recognise the limitations of their research, as well as the dearth of studies in the field. They do recognise that there is much loss to follow up and no consistent way of tracking those who detransition. They also recognise that GICs are dealing with a 40% increase in referrals and they are treating a new, adolescent female, demographic specifically designed to meet the needs of older, males. However, like the earlier studies they are reluctant to let go of a more streamlined service, for which read lower levels of gatekeeping and faster progress through the system.


The authors also question the use of notions of regret in this community; using the kind of language associated with those who talk of ”Gender Journeys”. Such language masks the fact that there is no way to reverse surgeries like double mastectomy or GRS, or even Testosterone usage. This sophistry seems designed to obscure rather than illuminate.


Note also 👆that they recommend including “trans” people in research and service development but not detransitioners.
So, in summary, more research is needed, loss to follow-up remains a problem, GICs need to be compelled to evaluate all those who have accessed medical interventions. The definition of detransition remains contested. For those who choose not to return to the GICs there has to be a mechanism to track their outcomes. Sadly, there is also now a need for a service for detransitioners; some of whom may need to rely on synthetic hormones, for life, having no means to produce these naturally.

Another important acknowledgement of the studies limitations points out that research shows regret can take years following treatment. Even the authors acknowledge they may have underestimated rates of regret/detransition.


You can read part one of this series here:

Littman and Detransition

I do this work full-time and am unwaged. If you can support my work it helps me keep going.

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.


Littman and Detransition


In this piece I will cover Lisa Littman’s research into detransitioners. A person who detransitions is someone who embarked on medical intervention to deal with a discomfort with their natal sex. This is a bodily disassociative disorder labelled ”Gender Dysphoria”. A person who re-identifies with their natal sex, without any medical intervention is labelled as a “desister”. Both these groups are important to understand what is going on. Lisa’s paper is below: Well worth reading it in full and sharing!


Here is the abstract from the study:


Details of the sample are contained above. As you can see natal females are a significant majority at 69%. This is what we are seeing in the United Kingdom where, over the last decade, the sex of referrals to the main Gender Identity Clinic has inverted the sex ratios to be 70% female. The majority, in Littman’s sample, (55%) did not feel they were given an adequate evaluation by the doctor /medical professional who assessed them. Significantly 23% located their discomfort with difficulty accepting a non-hetereosexual orientation.

Its worth referring to this article that evaluated what happens to children labelled as ”transgender” when they grow up. 👇

Do trans kids stay trans

Here are the conclusions from that study:


This data somewhat predates the explosion in ”trans-kids” sweeping, mostly, the western world. The conclusions were remarkably similar. Most did not wish to transition when they reached adulthood and generally turn out to be, simply, gay. This was in the days of ”watchful waiting” before the days of early medical intervention. In the U.K we now put children as young as 10 on puberty blockers and, increasingly, socially transition them at even younger ages. Are we foreclosing the path to an unmedicalised future and homo/bi-sexuality for a generation of kids?

As Littman points out the visibility of detransitioners is growing with more YouTube accounts, blogs, DeTrans advocacy groups and a growing community on Reddit. Recently these stories have started to break into the national media, especially in the UK but also, more recently in the U.S media.



There are now 23,000 contributors on the de-trans sub-reddit which you can access here: 👇


When I first started to track the numbers on this forum there were around 15,000. This was about four months ago. Here one poster is trying to gain accurate data on de-transitioners. This is a major stumbling block in garnering the attention of politicians. Typically those who regret their medical interventions do not wish to go back to the people they feel hurt them, feel embarassed or are traumatised. These clinics should be forced to follow up every patient. Loss to follow up has distorted the data for decades. Here is a post in the detrans forum on reddit.


Another poster explains how hard it is to escape media saturation on Gender Identity. We have been pushing the trans-narrative to kids, even in primary school, for at least a decade. Even Children’s BBC showed ”Becoming Leo” , about a female in flifht from her sex. Complete with the promotion of a medical pathway. This to impressionable kids without parental knowledge. I certainly didn’t know what my son was exposed to; though ChildLine (run by the National Society For the Protection of Children), was the most egregious pusher in my experience.


Another two comment get to the heart of the issue: Social contagion and late stage capitalism 👏👏.

Its an industry. Mining profit from healthy bodies. FYI CAGR is Compound Annual Growth Rate and anything above 15% is considered good 👇


Back to Littman’s paper

More clinicians are starting to raise the alarm and ask for more research. There are extensive linked papers in the study and a wealth of references.


Here are some of the reasons given, for medical transition, by those who re-identified with their birth sex:


A mal-adaptive response to trauma, difficulty reconciling to sexuality, internalised misogyny and peer pressure. An incredible 20% also cited pressure from a person/peope to transition:


What might have helped was the presence of good role models. The absence of Butch Lesbians in the media is notable:


In conclusion the author asks for much better research on the phenomenon of detransition. Gender clinics have no incentive to do long term follow-up and their ex patients may have no wish to return to the people who colluded with their mistake. Crucially they will likely disappear from LGBT+ networks enabling a denial of the scale of the issue:


Next time you see papers on low rates of regret remember to look for loss to follow-up. Bear in mind the length of time patients are followed up is also significant. Medical complications can take time to appear. The current cohort is also a vastly different demographic than the older, males, which typically formed the main clientele for Gender clinics. Also look out for conflicts of interest. Much (most?) of the research is emerging from people who are making their living from the Gender Industrial complex.


I do this research full-time and unpaid. If you can afford to donate here is how.

Researching the impact of Gender Identity Ideology on women & girls as well as the consequences for Lesbians, Gay males and autistic kids. I do this full time and have no income. All my content is open access and donations help keep me going. Only give IF you can afford. Thank you to my generous donors.