Summary of “Trans-Identifying Minors: How ‘Progressive’ Media Manipulate Public Opinion in 10 Steps” by Magali Pignard
- La Petite Sirène
- Apr 25
- 5 min read
Trad. ChatGPT/DeepL
How Most Media Construct a Narrative Around Minors with Gender Dysphoria/Who Identify as Trans
This text outlines the strategies used to enforce a singular viewpoint: biased presentation of hormonal treatments, omission of high-level scientific studies, minimization of side effects, and discrediting of any criticism. It explores how these narratives influence distressed youth and restrict debate on an issue that is both complex and sensitive.
Shaping the Narrative Around the “Wrong Body”
Encouraging affected youth* to believe they were “born in the wrong body” (as if their “gendered soul” had not been incarnated in the correct body), thereby prompting them to reject their own bodies and to attribute all their past and present difficulties to this “wrong body” as well as to transphobia.
*These young people, the majority of whom are girls, are typically non-conforming to sexist stereotypes and sexual orientation norms (which is not problematic—in fact, quite the opposite). Some have experienced childhood abuse (at higher rates than the general population), often present with various co-occurring conditions or disorders, and struggle to cope with bodily changes during puberty. (More info: University of York 2024 systematic review.)
Presenting Puberty Blockers and Cross-Sex Hormones as the Ultimate Remedy for Gender Dysphoria
Presenting gender dysphoria as a fatal and permanent condition (if untreated), potentially leading to death (by suicide).
Framing these hormonal treatments as a way to “finally become oneself” and to prevent suicide—an inaccurate claim. Constructing a narrative where the risks of sterility and side effects are downplayed in comparison to the idea that, without treatment, these young people’s lives are in danger. Framing the denial of access to these treatments as tantamount to endangerment (death by suicide).
Concealing Scientific Evidence
Keeping the following points out of the discussion:
Systematic reviews of the evidence conducted by various countries all conclude that the evidence supporting the idea that these treatments improve mental health and reduce gender dysphoria in minors is weak—meaning that “the actual effect may be very different from the estimated effect.” Systematic reviews are at the top of the scientific evidence hierarchy.
Instead: selecting studies that suggest improved mental health outcomes, without mentioning that these are rated as low quality in systematic reviews (the most often cited studies: Tordoff 2022 and Chen 2023—both debunked; see also here).
Lack of Evidence Linking Puberty Blockers/Cross-Sex Hormones to Reduced Suicide Risk
As noted in the Cass Review (p. 186, 15.36), there is no evidence showing that puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones reduce suicide risk. The most recent study confirming this lack of correlation is Ruuska et al., 2024.
Policy Reversals in Pioneering Countries
Countries that were early adopters are now changing course. England, for example, revised its policy following a comprehensive evaluation of its gender services (Cass Review), which drew upon the most thorough systematic reviews to date and consultations with over 1,000 professionals and affected individuals. It’s not hard to imagine that so-called “progressive” media view the Cass Review as a transphobic, far-right report—even though its recommendations are being implemented by a left-leaning (Labour) government.
Promoting a False Consensus
Only citing/interviewing professionals who adopt a “trans-affirmative” approach.
Asserting that a “scientific consensus” exists in this field—when in fact, the scientific community is deeply divided, as even the New York Times has acknowledged. The science is far from settled. The supposed consensus is artificially created through “circular referencing” between guidelines issued by WPATH and the Endocrine Society.
These two influential organizations collaborated to create their initial guidelines (2009 and 2012). Later, U.S. medical societies adopted these guidelines without conducting independent systematic reviews. Then, when WPATH updated its own 2012 guidelines in 2022, it referenced these same medical societies—which, in turn, had based their previous endorsements on WPATH’s 2012 guidance. (See the University of York 2024 systematic review of international guidelines.) As the Cass Review notes:
“The circularity of this approach may explain the appearance of consensus on key areas of practice, despite the weak evidence base” (Section 9.22).
Minimizing the Side Effects of Puberty Blockers
(= Suppression of Sex Hormone Release During Adolescence)
Presenting puberty blockers as completely reversible—even though their long-term effects remain unknown—and as simply a way to “buy time to think,” despite the fact that most youth who begin puberty blockers go on to cross-sex hormones, which may lead to infertility/sterility and sexual dysfunction in adulthood. This all occurs in the treatment of a condition that may naturally resolve.
As highlighted in the Cass Review:
“Given that the vast majority of young people who begin puberty blockers go on to masculinising/feminising hormones, there is no evidence that puberty blockers provide time to think, and there are concerns that they may influence the trajectory of psychosexual and gender identity development” (Section 83).
Avoiding Mention of the Natural Course of Gender Dysphoria Without Medical Transition
Ignoring the fact that many children who experience gender dysphoria no longer do so in adulthood, if they do not undergo social or medical transition.
Remaining silent on recent studies that challenge the dogma that gender dysphoria must always persist into adolescence and adulthood.
*Research spanning from 1972 to 2013—in which study participants did not undergo social transition in childhood—found low rates of persistence of gender dysphoria into adulthood. These earlier studies were criticized for lacking formal DSM/ICD diagnoses. However, a reanalysis focusing on children who did meet formal diagnostic criteria found that in 67%, dysphoria did not persist. (See the full list of studies and critiques at this link.)
Additionally, the Cass Review states:
“Several studies from this period (Green et al., 1987; Zucker, 1985) suggested that a minority (approximately 15%) of prepubertal children with gender incongruence persisted into adulthood. The majority of these children became cisgender homosexual adults. These early studies have been criticized for not formally diagnosing all participants. However, a review by Ristori & Steensma (2016) notes that more recent studies (Drummond et al., 2008; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015; Wallien et al., 2008) also reported persistence rates ranging from 10 to 33% in cohorts who met full diagnostic criteria at baseline and were followed over longer periods” (Section 2.6).
Spreading Misinformation About Detransition
Minimizing the number of detransitioners by claiming they represent “less than 1%,” despite the fact that the actual rate is unknown.
Attributing detransition solely to external “social pressures”, disregarding more complex personal or medical reasons.
More information: Misinformation About Detransition
Demonizing Any Criticism
Mocking or defaming parents who question the sudden emergence of a trans identity in their child.
Discrediting scientific arguments by ignoring their substance and attacking the individuals who present them, rather than engaging in genuine debate.
Framing any psychological intervention aimed at exploring psychosocial challenges that may underlie gender-related distress as a form of conversion therapy.
Denying the Influence of Social Factors
Rejecting any hypothesis that family, peer groups, or social media could influence how a young person perceives themselves or their gender.
Systematically Comparing Gender Identity to Sexual Orientation
Claiming that gender identity is innate, stable, and immutable, just like sexual orientation—despite the absence of a phenomenon equivalent to detransition in the case of sexual orientation.
Shifting the Necessary Scientific Debate to the Realm of Human Rights
(“Trans rights are human rights”)
Framing any questioning of the scientific or ethical issues surrounding these practices as an attack on the rights of trans people.
Labeling all criticism as transphobia or discrimination, thereby avoiding any rational and fact-based discussion on these topics.
➥ More on the evolution of treatments for minors and the retreat of pioneering countries: Medical Transition in Minors: Some Context
Comments