December 3, 2023 - 8:00am
A recent New York Times op-ed entitled “There is no way to live a life without regret” meditates on youth gender transition, regret and how we know who we are (I’ll save you a few thousand words: we don’t).
As far as op-eds go, it’s poorly argued and far too long. But as an example of its genre —a genre we could call ‘Desperately Throwing Spaghetti at the Wall’ — it’s unbeatable.
“[L]iberals and progressives who fret about the rapidly changing gender landscape,” according to author Lydia Polgreen, are too worked up about the possibility that children and adolescents may later regret the decision to transition. Rather than address their actual concerns, however, Polgreen gives readers a rambling tour of misdirections: gender is like race, somehow, and also like an arranged marriage. Further, life is full of “transitions” that are like “little deaths,” all leading up to the biggest “transition” of all: the big sleep.
Some teenagers get nose jobs and boob jobs, so why should gender transition surgery be viewed as any different? “Cosmetic procedures can produce regret, sometimes famously so,” the author writes. Never mind that few of youth gender transitions’ critics champion cosmetic surgery for teens. The point is, “gender-affirming” care has not been billed to regulators, consumers, and the public as cosmetic, but held up as life-saving procedures, covered under many public and private health insurance plans, and carried out in the name of medicine as a treatment for distress. The stakes matter.
But what is a life without regret? This is a talking point that started circulating relatively recently, in response to mounting evidence of regret and detransition, and concerns that social influence may be driving the explosion in gender-distressed youth — the way just about everybody acknowledges that social influence drives the recent surge in TikTok tics or multiple personalities. So what if it’s a social contagion? “What is gender if not contagious?” Polgreen asks.
Because few young people who embarked on transition as children have spoken up, the author first dismisses their experiences as rare and overhyped (“a handful of such people have appeared over and over again in news stories across the world”) before writing them off altogether a few paragraphs later (“when the media fixates on the hypothetical regret of children who do transition…”).
Besides, maybe deciding to transition as a child is like quitting the swim team: “so what are we saying, really, when we worry that a child will regret this particular decision, the decision to transition? And how is it different, really, from the decision I made to quit competitive swimming?”
Of course, a child who quits competitive swimming merely forecloses a competitive swimming career. One needn’t give up the ocean or the pool whereas children who undergo puberty suppression, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries foreclose more than one possible future. Fertility, sexual pleasure, the possibility of growing up and becoming comfortable in one’s own intact body, to name a few.
We have no idea what childish decisions like these will mean 50 years down the road. And again: Polgreen has pulled the conversation off-course to avoid the inconvenient topic of medical responsibility. The decision to quit swimming is not a medical decision, cosigned by medical authorities. Youth gender transition is.
The author goes on to make a number of bizarre analogies in this 4,500-word slog. But she never touches the real arguments that she pretends to counter: that children are not just small adults, that the medical system needs to be accountable for the power it exercises, and that children who struggle with gender distress need real support, not empty meditations on identity, autonomy, and the ubiquity of regret.
Polgreen misdirects and obfuscates in a half-dozen creative ways, then reifies her misdirections. She misses the point — on purpose — and then wonders why so many people care so much about this issue.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThere are a myriad of decisions that adults take and the law mandates to prevent children (including up to the age of 21 in the US and in the UK in the past) taking decisions that will likely have far less future drastic effects than “transition” such as drinking alcohol, having sex with adults, marrying, smoking, driving, leaving education and taking full time employment, etc. The point is to protect children against unwise and potentially risky decisions. Adults are there to protect children against regret.
I would put it that adults are there to protect children against evil
Then how shall we protect LGBTQ children from the likes of you? You are the a threat to them.
‘Mum, can I have a cigarette?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I have a glass of wine?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I drive the car?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I leave school?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I get a tattoo?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I enter the lottery?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I be a blood donor?’ ‘No, of course not!’
‘Mum, can I begin social, medical and surgical gender transition?’ ‘Of course dear, you know what’s best for you.’
“‘Mum, can I begin social, medical and surgical gender transition?’ ‘Of course dear, you know what’s best for you.’” <– No, but when they meet the WPATH standards for age categorized care for gender dysphoria, they benefit immensely from that, 99 times out of 100.
Mum, can I have a fifty-two year old boyfriend? I know that I REALLY love him and it’s my body, my choice.
“. The point is to protect children against unwise and potentially risky decisions.” <– That can not be the point, because there is no evidence there is any untoward regret rate. It is below 1%. You will be unable to justify any claim of a greater percentage being more reliable.
The actual point is Social Conservatives like any other sort of progressive, being seen to succeed in enacting their agenda and having power, by in this case abusing those children they think are only fit for abuse. That is what restricting gender affirming care is, child abuse.
Thank you so much for taking this article to task in your usual, thorough way. Even though we are all aware by now what an execrable job the New York Times has been doing in reporting and opining on gender identity issues, this Op Ed reached a landmark new low.
Hopefully the beauty of free-speech is manifesting: give people enough rope and they will hang themselves. In other words, the gen pop needs to realise that the SJWs are nuts – at the moment I think many people think modern Stonewall is just continuing the good work of the 80s, 90s, whereas the movement has morphed from a cause to a business to a racket.
The NYT has been lying for nearly 100 years, starting in the early 1930 s by covering up Stalin’s crimes. Later lies are covered by Ashley Rindsberg in The Gray Lady Winked. Timely is an episode in which their writers claimed Israeli soldiers beat up a Palestinian boy only to have the father of the Jewish boy being beaten up by Palestinians call up to correct them. There’s lots more.
“Thank you so much for taking this article to task in your usual, thorough way.” <– You mean vapid, atmospheric argumenst based on nothing but bigotry and deliberate ignorance? Because that is all she has displayed here.
Lydia Polgreen is a vile creature
And no doubt paid to be.
No more than any Social Conservative.
As is Talia Perkins.
The word “transition” is SO misleading.
Quite. It’s essentially part of the same spectrum on which cosmetic surgery (also a bad idea) exists.
False breasts are a daft idea but they do not cause harm to the same extent
Which is why I described it as a spectrum.
They are regretted far more often when done for cosmetic reasons, and when done for gender dysphoria almost never. That’s why you are daft — you don’t care what is real.
Where does cosmetic surgery end and reconstructive surgery begin?
Fair question. I would say that it’s the other way round and cosmetic surgery (elective, non essential in terms of functionality and for the purposes of changing the body’s appearance to match the individual’s preferences) begins where reconstructive (often advisory rather than purely elective and which either restores or confers functionality, which may include creating a conventional appearance in parts of the body) ends.
No, it is not. Literally someone is transitioning from signalling one gender to signalling another — their real one more then 99 times out of 100.
An odious woman published by an odious media outlet. Well done Eliza.
I’m just glad the NYT have finally allowed comments on an article about trans teens. Finally.
The penny is dropping, I’d wager. Did you notice the direction of the commments – over-whelmingly critical of the article. This may be the best way for the zealots to shut up, and reality-check their saviour/warrior-for-freedom complex; and insulate the adults at the paper from gaslighting claims of transphobia.
I admire your optimism. However, in my my experience, it only makes them double down and dismiss as bigots all those who dare disagree with them. That’s pretty much the way all cult ideologies maintain traction.
True – though maybe that is to realise the process is longer, more vexatious and less complete than we’d hope!
Dropping out of the swimming team may have been more to do with having to get changed whilst a man looks on then destroys their dreams in the pool.
We need to stop framing detranitioners realisation that they have not been given the correct treatment for their distress as ‘regret’. These young people were ‘diagnosed’ by members of the medical profession who offered them an completely inappropriate, harmful and irreversible ‘treatments’ for their distress. ‘Regret’ places all of the responsibility on the patient and none on the doctors and surgeons who harmed them.
“We need to stop framing detranitioners realisation that they have not been given the correct treatment for their distress as ‘regret’.” <– Except of course all double handfuls or so of the “loud” ones Social Conservatives prop up as their Lord Haw Haws do claim to regret their transition, and like Keira Bell, are misdiagnosed on the basis of their lies. Only they can be responsible for their lies.
You did know the court decision only initially in favor of Bell was reversed on appeal as her deceits became known to the higher court, didn’t you?
It’s just so weird. The whole point about this stuff is that it is meant to deliver a life without the regret of never living one’s “truth”. To then claim “regret is a part of life, whatever” is a recognition of sorts that transing-away-the-gay/pain is never going to work.
The person writing the original article is an idiot, so is the Social Conservative parrot attempting a rely. The regret rate at gender affirming care in terms of surgery is below 1%.
No one has the right to impose on someone regret at being forced to undergo the puberty of their sex, when they meet the criteria for gender affirming care per WPATH standards of care.
Your projections reflect back on nobody but you.
Female to male transition is a fad. Girls are highly suspectible to fads and fashion. When fads change young tomboy ànd lesbians are left without genitals
The whole emo thing was far less self-destructive
Hippies, Trogs, Goths, Emus etc, etc. subculture phases that many young people have gone through in the past. Unlike “transitions” the only negative is looking back on the daft photos of the fashion as they get on with their normal life. Probably laugh at how they looked as they settle into their job at the corporation they vowed to despise for life.
And has nothing to do with it.
They probably hate themselves that much they think it more exciting to transition than live life as a boring old ten a penny lesbian
You certainly make up whatever you prefer to believe.
“Female to male transition is a fad. Girls are highly suspectible to fads and fashion.” <– There is no more any evidence of that than there is that the fact 1 in 20 to 30 now say they are gay or bi is a “fad”.
I like the new genre – “throwing spaghetti at the wall”. Very apt. Let’s encourage young people to mutilate themselves – after all regret is a part of life. Insane! And this person – from what google tells me a “queer” lesbian – doesn’t even hear herself!
Queer lesbian? Is that straight?
No, it means definitely not the “lipstick” sort. More the lumberjack look with five unnatural hair colors.
It is not apt at all. It has nothing to do with it. Neither does Mondegreen’s reply to the NYT.
Trans Rights Activists have been saying “so what?” to questions about regret for a while now. They have even implied that young people can simply have further surgery to fix things. “A girl regrets her double mastectomy? So what? She can get breast implants”. The fact that she can never breastfeed is swept aside. And genital surgery is absolutely irreversible. They want us to think people are made of Lego; we can just click new parts on at will. But we can’t.
This is what a collapsing narrative looks like.
It’s ugly; but, like all things, this too shall pass.
These procedures are crimes against the most vulnerable of our society, intellectual wannabe comments are just ridiculous! They are cutting and sterilising our children. These people are anti-human. I hate anyone who thinks differently, as you are the problem.
Hating anyone who thinks differently sounds a bit Woke – Are you sure you are at the right publication as i think you might prefer Slate.com or some such…
My reading of it is that the ‘intellectual wannabes’ refers to the NYT columnists and the last sentence is paraphrasing the attitude that such people adopt. I didn’t read this as the poster’s actual viewpoint. It is a bit unclear though.
Agreed. But…
I don’t really care about your anger issues. As a first step “toward healing” (as they say) maybe you should just keep it to yourself.
The NYT article is risible.
The comments however are very interesting. The cracks in gender ideology are definitely widening and more people are openly challenging it with pretty solid facts about the harms.
Fortunately the activists and zealots are starting to do our work for us, in this case dismantling the ‘life saving’ claims of the trans lobbyists by reducing their mystical ‘transition’ to the status of having a nose job.
What makes it interesting is that most of them were written by liberals.
Thanks for writing this review of new arrival to the West Lydia Polgreen’s confusion-inducing meditation on swimming, adolescent angst and mutilating the genitals of minors.
I quit the Times’ article just past the midway point and did the crossword to clear my head. It’s nice to know that I made the right
decision.
There’s just nothing to be done about these major media outlets. They’ve completely given in to the most ridiculous of emotional melodramas and are unlikely to make a recovery. While the New York Times was issuing the above piece of agitprop, the Washington Post had a 7,000 word op-ed (they’re usually about 900 words) claiming in its headline that Donald Trump is literally quite likely to impose a dictatorship on America. At the same time, The Atlantic has devoted its entire latest issue to hysterical fantasies of a Trumpian collapse of America. These people are lost; forget them.
Thanks for this article. The comments to the New York Times’ article are encouraging.
Masha Gessen made the same case in the New Yorker. A regret-free life is impossible so why worry? The real meaning of regret in this story is the way it is intensely avoided by parents who can’t face the possibility they’ve been handmaidens to serious mistakes.
I’m old enough to remember when genital mutilation was frowned upon in civilized countries.
Can the kid sing? Opera has many classical rolls for castrated males and no one to fill them. Italians castrated boys of music talent. Pre puberty castration results is the male soprano was a staplr of italian opera. Without eunuchs these operas by famous composers are un performed. A well paid job openi5.
The Hypatia Transracialism Controversy provides an entertaining sightseeing tour on alleged differences and similarities between gender and race.
‘When Luvvies Fall Out’ might be a good four line summary.
The collateral damage to the body is profound and deadly.
Thank you much for this pithy and sane rebuttal to that meandering drivel from Polgreen. I was so frustrated after reading that the other day and hoping it would be a topic of conversation among the thinking minority that I come here to hear from. I woke up this morning pondering how someone could trivialize medical malfeasance to being akin to dropping out of youth sports. Ridiculous.
Let us be incandescently clear: the New York Times lost the plot more than three decades ago. Since then, it has become merely a mouthpiece of the Left, by the Left, and for the Left. Facts matter not in the least to this moribund publication. They might as well rename it Pravda. Sort of a caricature of the news with no real truth to it.
The only writer here misrepresenting anything is you, Mondegreen.
“Some teenagers get nose jobs and b**b jobs, so why should gender transition surgery be viewed as any different?” <– Nothing the article ever says or implies.
And that is correct. The point is that gender affirming procedures are regretted almost never, the rate is below 1% being regretted.
“but held up as life-saving procedures”
Because it is. It is how the infamously high rate at which transgender people experience suicidality is reduced by them by a factor of approximately 4.
“We have no idea what childish decisions like these will mean 50 years down the road.”
Yes we do, because gender affirming care was originated in the United States in the 1970’s, and has been in use somewhere ever since.
That 1% regret rate includes youthful transitions in it’s dataset.
Those links and others can be found here.
https://taliaperkinssspace.quora.com/People-are-born-transgender-they-are-not-mentally-ill-it-is-no-paraphilia-it-is-a-physical-variance-from-the-usual-at
“that children are not just small adults” <– Who do you pretend says they are? To what effect do you pretend they do?
“that the medical system needs to be accountable for the power it exercises” <– It already is.
“and that children who struggle with gender distress need real support” <– That real support is what gender affirming care per the WPATH standards of care is. What you apparently want instead if conversion therapy which will torture them.
“not empty meditations on identity” <– No such things are involved in gender affirmation care.
“autonomy” <– They have it, you r=want to take, and you have no excuse to pretend they misuse it with any frequency more than about 1 time in 100.
“and the ubiquity of regret” <– Which has nothing to do with anything, as it happens. But I understand your deceitful reasons for dwelling on it.
You will be unable to respond with any facts which prove any point to which you allude.
Goebbels would be proud of you.
And you finish your hate-speech with some Godwin lunacy. Definitely male aggression going on there eh mate?