What do you think?
Rate this book
The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity in Our Society
International sex researcher, neuroscientist, and columnist Debra Soh debunks popular gender myths in this scientific examination of the many facets of gender identity that “is not only eminently reasonable and beautifully-written, it is brave and vital ” (Ben Shapiro, #1 New York Times bestselling author).
Is our gender something we’re born with, or are we conditioned by society? In The End of Gender , neuroscientist and sexologist Dr. Debra Soh uses a research-based approach to address this hot-button topic, unmasking popular misconceptions about the nature vs. nurture debate and exploring what it means to be a woman or a man in today’s society.
Both scientific and objective, and drawing on original research and carefully conducted interviews, Soh tackles a wide range of issues, such as gender-neutral parenting, gender dysphoric children, and the neuroscience of being transgender. She debates today’s accepted notion that gender is a social construct and a spectrum, and challenges the idea that there is no difference between how male and female brains operate.
The End of Gender is conversation-starting “required reading” (Eric R. Weinstein, PhD, host of The Portal ) that will arm you with the facts you need to come to your own conclusions about gender identity and its place in the world today.
Is our gender something we’re born with, or are we conditioned by society? In The End of Gender , neuroscientist and sexologist Dr. Debra Soh uses a research-based approach to address this hot-button topic, unmasking popular misconceptions about the nature vs. nurture debate and exploring what it means to be a woman or a man in today’s society.
Both scientific and objective, and drawing on original research and carefully conducted interviews, Soh tackles a wide range of issues, such as gender-neutral parenting, gender dysphoric children, and the neuroscience of being transgender. She debates today’s accepted notion that gender is a social construct and a spectrum, and challenges the idea that there is no difference between how male and female brains operate.
The End of Gender is conversation-starting “required reading” (Eric R. Weinstein, PhD, host of The Portal ) that will arm you with the facts you need to come to your own conclusions about gender identity and its place in the world today.
336 pages, Paperback
First published August 4, 2020
587 people are currently reading
7619 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 567 reviews
October 24, 2020
This book is a complete mess. It reads like a blog post, not science reporting, and relies as heavily on anecdotes as references. I'm not sure what book other people were reading, but it wasn't the book I read.
Now, I am not entirely unsympathetic. I even agree with some of Soh's points, but Soh seems more concerned with terrorizing people with the weird anti-trans activist straw man "gender ideology" than she is with making clear, coherent arguments based on logic and evidence. Arguments which might in some way persuade people who are on the fence. Come on, Debra: convince me! This is science; we both know common sense arguments like "there are only two genders" aren't going to cut it in a book about the science of gender. If common sense was all anyone needed, we'd still think the world was flat.
You'd think in a book about science and freedom of intellectual inquiry the scientific debate would be the preeminent part of the book, the meat and potatoes, the dog AND the pony, and I would have LOVED to see that here, but Soh consistently represents only one side of the debate. And she doesn't even do a good job of that. There's only a sprinkling of references to scientific papers in a porridge of autobiographical rhetoric, as if the mere existence of these papers is somehow conclusive. (I'm sure they seem that way to Soh.) The problem is, very good arguments have been made against the conclusions drawn by the authors of many of those papers. Things like Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (lol) and autogynephilia have been heavily criticized because they're NOT adequate explanations for the observed phenomena. (That is how the scientific process works, Debra.) But you won't find those arguments here, because this book isn't a debate; and because it's not a debate, it doesn't actually debunk anything; it's a political pamphlet with a bombastic title and a victim narrative. Freedom of intellectual inquiry is indeed very important (no argument here; I agree 100% with Soh on that issue and I don't agree with deplatforming or harassment or other anti-social behaviors); but then, I am very far from being afraid of anything that science has to say. And neither are the vast majority of trans people. Like most trans people, I know a lot more about reproductive biology than I ever wanted to know, and certainly much more than the average person on the street. (The apparent target audience for this book.) XY chromosomes mean a person is male? Please, tell me more. I've never heard of such things...
The book is filled with "horror stories" about academics (her friends, it seems) who were "vilified" by "gender ideology activists" but she doesn't bother to explain the actual argument between the academics and the activists on scientific grounds. Many activists are scientists, after all, with PhDs in subjects like biology and neuroscience, just like Soh. But according to Soh, you can't be both a scientist and an activist (how convenient for her argument). Of course, as Soh herself has clearly written a work of activism and not science, I could argue that it behooves us all to maintain the same skepticism toward her own work as we are told to maintain toward the people she's caricaturing. A one-sided book can never be an objective book, after all, almost by definition. But unlike Soh, I happen to believe a person's arguments should be evaluated in their own right and that whether or not they're an activist is entirely irrelevant so far as that goes. I wouldn't want anyone to discount her book just because she's an activist. By all means, be ruthless when evaluating people's arguments. But be impartially ruthless. All of the vilified scientists in the field of sexology were operating under dogmas, too, unexamined or not. There is no such thing as a purely objective, ideologically free person. (Now there's a myth that should have been debunked.)
As Soh makes no attempt to explain (or, apparently, even to understand) the thinking of the people she's criticizing, fails to understand identity entirely, and merely tars and feathers everyone she disagrees with as "anti-science" and "biology deniers", it's hard to see how she's refuted anything at all in this book. What she's refuted are claims that the vast majority of trans people, gender therapists, doctors, and scientists dealing with gender identity don't even hold. I'm sure there are some fringe activists out there with weird ideas about some of this stuff (there always are), and there are always people who oversimplify or push things too far, but they're pretty hard to find in the trans community in general. Newsflash! Most trans people also believe in science. How can trans people be "biology deniers" when their dysphoria is mostly about that biology? (Seriously, what trans person doesn't know about chromosomes and hormones and reproductive biology and secondary sex characteristics? That's all they seem to talk about sometimes, lol.)
What I see in this book is the same set of misconceptions that I see in many books criticizing "progressive" notions of gender. Someone (a cis person) has failed to understand what someone else (a trans person, feminist, whatever) is trying to say and they've written a book about it under the misconception that they have understood it. And other people, who also don't understand what those people are trying to say, feel vindicated and "common sense" prevails. Unfortunately for those who are partial to common sense, nature and science are under no obligation to accommodate them.
Now, I am not entirely unsympathetic. I even agree with some of Soh's points, but Soh seems more concerned with terrorizing people with the weird anti-trans activist straw man "gender ideology" than she is with making clear, coherent arguments based on logic and evidence. Arguments which might in some way persuade people who are on the fence. Come on, Debra: convince me! This is science; we both know common sense arguments like "there are only two genders" aren't going to cut it in a book about the science of gender. If common sense was all anyone needed, we'd still think the world was flat.
You'd think in a book about science and freedom of intellectual inquiry the scientific debate would be the preeminent part of the book, the meat and potatoes, the dog AND the pony, and I would have LOVED to see that here, but Soh consistently represents only one side of the debate. And she doesn't even do a good job of that. There's only a sprinkling of references to scientific papers in a porridge of autobiographical rhetoric, as if the mere existence of these papers is somehow conclusive. (I'm sure they seem that way to Soh.) The problem is, very good arguments have been made against the conclusions drawn by the authors of many of those papers. Things like Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (lol) and autogynephilia have been heavily criticized because they're NOT adequate explanations for the observed phenomena. (That is how the scientific process works, Debra.) But you won't find those arguments here, because this book isn't a debate; and because it's not a debate, it doesn't actually debunk anything; it's a political pamphlet with a bombastic title and a victim narrative. Freedom of intellectual inquiry is indeed very important (no argument here; I agree 100% with Soh on that issue and I don't agree with deplatforming or harassment or other anti-social behaviors); but then, I am very far from being afraid of anything that science has to say. And neither are the vast majority of trans people. Like most trans people, I know a lot more about reproductive biology than I ever wanted to know, and certainly much more than the average person on the street. (The apparent target audience for this book.) XY chromosomes mean a person is male? Please, tell me more. I've never heard of such things...
The book is filled with "horror stories" about academics (her friends, it seems) who were "vilified" by "gender ideology activists" but she doesn't bother to explain the actual argument between the academics and the activists on scientific grounds. Many activists are scientists, after all, with PhDs in subjects like biology and neuroscience, just like Soh. But according to Soh, you can't be both a scientist and an activist (how convenient for her argument). Of course, as Soh herself has clearly written a work of activism and not science, I could argue that it behooves us all to maintain the same skepticism toward her own work as we are told to maintain toward the people she's caricaturing. A one-sided book can never be an objective book, after all, almost by definition. But unlike Soh, I happen to believe a person's arguments should be evaluated in their own right and that whether or not they're an activist is entirely irrelevant so far as that goes. I wouldn't want anyone to discount her book just because she's an activist. By all means, be ruthless when evaluating people's arguments. But be impartially ruthless. All of the vilified scientists in the field of sexology were operating under dogmas, too, unexamined or not. There is no such thing as a purely objective, ideologically free person. (Now there's a myth that should have been debunked.)
As Soh makes no attempt to explain (or, apparently, even to understand) the thinking of the people she's criticizing, fails to understand identity entirely, and merely tars and feathers everyone she disagrees with as "anti-science" and "biology deniers", it's hard to see how she's refuted anything at all in this book. What she's refuted are claims that the vast majority of trans people, gender therapists, doctors, and scientists dealing with gender identity don't even hold. I'm sure there are some fringe activists out there with weird ideas about some of this stuff (there always are), and there are always people who oversimplify or push things too far, but they're pretty hard to find in the trans community in general. Newsflash! Most trans people also believe in science. How can trans people be "biology deniers" when their dysphoria is mostly about that biology? (Seriously, what trans person doesn't know about chromosomes and hormones and reproductive biology and secondary sex characteristics? That's all they seem to talk about sometimes, lol.)
What I see in this book is the same set of misconceptions that I see in many books criticizing "progressive" notions of gender. Someone (a cis person) has failed to understand what someone else (a trans person, feminist, whatever) is trying to say and they've written a book about it under the misconception that they have understood it. And other people, who also don't understand what those people are trying to say, feel vindicated and "common sense" prevails. Unfortunately for those who are partial to common sense, nature and science are under no obligation to accommodate them.
August 8, 2020
Summary
An important and complete work that refutes the increasingly more popular claims regarding gender, sex, biology and transgenderism. For those familiar with the subject, this is a great résumé and disproof of the current culture craze. For others, this will be a quite a ride on the crazy train.
Full Review
Coward Culture
Imagine having been in a coma for over ten years, and waking up in 2020. You would think that a worldwide pandemic and Donald Trump in the White House should be the craziest of recent events, and you could go on with your life. You go on the - surprisingly fast - internet to catch up with what you missed, and come across phrases like 'women with a penis', 'people who menstruate' and 'wormkin'. For a minute, you would be either confused, shocked or amused, before realizing this is probably some fringe group on the internet that does not exist in real life. But then you hear presidential candidate Joe Biden say that male convicts who identify as female should go to women prisons. You learn that teenage girls can get testosterone treatment and puberty blockers without any medical or psychological evaluation. You see Bill Nye singing about 'sex junk' after professing that gender is a spectrum. What the hell is going on? Either that coma turned into a weird dream, or the world has surely gone mad.
One needs not to have been in a decade-long coma to be baffled by some of the wide-spread claims about gender and sex. If you are smart enough to stay off social media, chances are you are mostly oblivious to the misinformation pushed by radical Left activists and spread by (often) well-intended progressives. Unfortunately, I used to be on Twitter, and have been well aware of the lunacy for a while now. What still surprises me, however, is not the ridiculous declarations themselves - people say all sorts of crazy things - but the lack of push-back on obviously false statements. Professionals in all sorts of fields agree publicly on what they strongly disagree with in private, hoping that the angry mob will not come for them next. Cancel culture is, indeed, coward culture. Someone who cannot be accused of being a coward is Dr. Debra Soh, the author of 'The End of Gender'.
Demythifying
Dr. Debrah Soh, a doctor in sexology, decided to leave the academic world following backlash regarding her 2015 editorial on childhood gender transitions. Ever since, she has been an outspoken opponent of the anti-scientific worldview held by many on the political Left concerning biology, appearing on popular podcasts such as 'The Joe Rogan Experience' to elaborate on her standpoints. 'The End of Gender' is a collection of those standpoints; a refutation of the most popular myths on sex, gender and biology.
Most of the myths are linked to the current transgender craze, such as 'There are more than two genders' and 'Biological sex is on a spectrum'. The author uses a wide array of sources to disproof these assertions, ranging from the scientific literature, interviews with professionals and transgender people to plain logic and reasoning. Those without a academic background should be able to follow along even the more sophisticated arguments, since Soh manages to explain biological terms and translate scientific research to layman's terms without oversimplifying a complex reality. I found the later chapters a bit disconnected from the first two-thirds, even though the core subject was still gender en gender identity. For example, the chapter about 'women behaving like men in sex and dating' felt more like dating advice, yet it was interesting enough for me to fully read.
Tone-wise, the book is critical and direct, without resorting to snarkiness or cynical comments. The author is almost overly eager to state she does not dislike transgender people or people with certain gender identities, but her problem is with the unscientific approach and mob mentality of some activists. Soh is actually surprisingly sympathetic towards them, at one points proclaiming she could see herself as friends with an interviewee in another time and space. Compared to the similar book 'Irreversible Damage' by Abigail Shrier, some readers could perceive the writing-style of 'The End of Gender' a bit dry perhaps. Personally, I enjoyed the straightforwardness and lack of comments by the author. Combined with the relatively objective narrative and well-structured chapters, it makes for an easy read, despite the heavy subject matter.
What Is The Point?
So we have an solidly argued, well-written book on a controversial topic. Perhaps the topic of biology and sex itself is not so controversial, as there is a huge difference in what people claim to believe and what they actually believe on this subject. When asked privately, the overwhelming majority of people will admit that a biological male, complete with male gametes and a prostate, is not a woman, that sex is not a spectrum and there is not an infinite number of genders. On the other hand, there is a group of people who will deny any proof that does not fit their ideological narrative, labeling it 'transphobic' or 'sexist', the adult equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and screaming. So what is the point of publishing a book like this?
Hopefully, it will provide people with a better understanding of biology and sex, and a bit of courage to stand up for the truth. Being called a 'racist' or 'bigot' or 'transphobe' is surely uncomfortable, and with little knowledge on the subject it can be tempting to give in to the mob in the hope that they will leave you alone. But as Gulag survivor Alexander Solzhenitsyn warned us, we should not live by lies. By writing 'The End of Gender', Debra Soh knew the mob would come for her, something that undoubtedly will be reflected in the comments and reviews on this website. Yet she was brave enough to still write this terrific book. I hope that many who read it will follow her example. I hope that they will be able to say to HR: "No, there is not a whole spectrum of genders, and I will not sign this". I hope they will be able to say to organizers of a sports event: "Biological men are not the same as biological women". And I hope they will be able to say to school counselors "There are more options than choosing between putting my child on hormone therapy or them committing suicide". Hopefully, we can look back in ten years, and laugh at how crazy things were back then.
Disclaimer
As with my review for 'Irreversible Damage', I would like to extend an invitation to people who disagree with the author's views or with my review specifically. I am more than happy to read your ad hominem attacks or non sequiturs, but they will not change my views. However, if you can recommend me a book that proves this book wrong, I will add it to my 'to-read' list and read it as soon as possible. Who knows, you might even make me change my mind.
An important and complete work that refutes the increasingly more popular claims regarding gender, sex, biology and transgenderism. For those familiar with the subject, this is a great résumé and disproof of the current culture craze. For others, this will be a quite a ride on the crazy train.
Full Review
Coward Culture
Imagine having been in a coma for over ten years, and waking up in 2020. You would think that a worldwide pandemic and Donald Trump in the White House should be the craziest of recent events, and you could go on with your life. You go on the - surprisingly fast - internet to catch up with what you missed, and come across phrases like 'women with a penis', 'people who menstruate' and 'wormkin'. For a minute, you would be either confused, shocked or amused, before realizing this is probably some fringe group on the internet that does not exist in real life. But then you hear presidential candidate Joe Biden say that male convicts who identify as female should go to women prisons. You learn that teenage girls can get testosterone treatment and puberty blockers without any medical or psychological evaluation. You see Bill Nye singing about 'sex junk' after professing that gender is a spectrum. What the hell is going on? Either that coma turned into a weird dream, or the world has surely gone mad.
One needs not to have been in a decade-long coma to be baffled by some of the wide-spread claims about gender and sex. If you are smart enough to stay off social media, chances are you are mostly oblivious to the misinformation pushed by radical Left activists and spread by (often) well-intended progressives. Unfortunately, I used to be on Twitter, and have been well aware of the lunacy for a while now. What still surprises me, however, is not the ridiculous declarations themselves - people say all sorts of crazy things - but the lack of push-back on obviously false statements. Professionals in all sorts of fields agree publicly on what they strongly disagree with in private, hoping that the angry mob will not come for them next. Cancel culture is, indeed, coward culture. Someone who cannot be accused of being a coward is Dr. Debra Soh, the author of 'The End of Gender'.
Demythifying
Dr. Debrah Soh, a doctor in sexology, decided to leave the academic world following backlash regarding her 2015 editorial on childhood gender transitions. Ever since, she has been an outspoken opponent of the anti-scientific worldview held by many on the political Left concerning biology, appearing on popular podcasts such as 'The Joe Rogan Experience' to elaborate on her standpoints. 'The End of Gender' is a collection of those standpoints; a refutation of the most popular myths on sex, gender and biology.
Most of the myths are linked to the current transgender craze, such as 'There are more than two genders' and 'Biological sex is on a spectrum'. The author uses a wide array of sources to disproof these assertions, ranging from the scientific literature, interviews with professionals and transgender people to plain logic and reasoning. Those without a academic background should be able to follow along even the more sophisticated arguments, since Soh manages to explain biological terms and translate scientific research to layman's terms without oversimplifying a complex reality. I found the later chapters a bit disconnected from the first two-thirds, even though the core subject was still gender en gender identity. For example, the chapter about 'women behaving like men in sex and dating' felt more like dating advice, yet it was interesting enough for me to fully read.
Tone-wise, the book is critical and direct, without resorting to snarkiness or cynical comments. The author is almost overly eager to state she does not dislike transgender people or people with certain gender identities, but her problem is with the unscientific approach and mob mentality of some activists. Soh is actually surprisingly sympathetic towards them, at one points proclaiming she could see herself as friends with an interviewee in another time and space. Compared to the similar book 'Irreversible Damage' by Abigail Shrier, some readers could perceive the writing-style of 'The End of Gender' a bit dry perhaps. Personally, I enjoyed the straightforwardness and lack of comments by the author. Combined with the relatively objective narrative and well-structured chapters, it makes for an easy read, despite the heavy subject matter.
What Is The Point?
So we have an solidly argued, well-written book on a controversial topic. Perhaps the topic of biology and sex itself is not so controversial, as there is a huge difference in what people claim to believe and what they actually believe on this subject. When asked privately, the overwhelming majority of people will admit that a biological male, complete with male gametes and a prostate, is not a woman, that sex is not a spectrum and there is not an infinite number of genders. On the other hand, there is a group of people who will deny any proof that does not fit their ideological narrative, labeling it 'transphobic' or 'sexist', the adult equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and screaming. So what is the point of publishing a book like this?
Hopefully, it will provide people with a better understanding of biology and sex, and a bit of courage to stand up for the truth. Being called a 'racist' or 'bigot' or 'transphobe' is surely uncomfortable, and with little knowledge on the subject it can be tempting to give in to the mob in the hope that they will leave you alone. But as Gulag survivor Alexander Solzhenitsyn warned us, we should not live by lies. By writing 'The End of Gender', Debra Soh knew the mob would come for her, something that undoubtedly will be reflected in the comments and reviews on this website. Yet she was brave enough to still write this terrific book. I hope that many who read it will follow her example. I hope that they will be able to say to HR: "No, there is not a whole spectrum of genders, and I will not sign this". I hope they will be able to say to organizers of a sports event: "Biological men are not the same as biological women". And I hope they will be able to say to school counselors "There are more options than choosing between putting my child on hormone therapy or them committing suicide". Hopefully, we can look back in ten years, and laugh at how crazy things were back then.
Disclaimer
As with my review for 'Irreversible Damage', I would like to extend an invitation to people who disagree with the author's views or with my review specifically. I am more than happy to read your ad hominem attacks or non sequiturs, but they will not change my views. However, if you can recommend me a book that proves this book wrong, I will add it to my 'to-read' list and read it as soon as possible. Who knows, you might even make me change my mind.
June 4, 2021
Dr Debra Soh does an excellent job of taking a non-bais and open-minded approach while writing this book. I found this book through the Joe Rogan podcast as I did with “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters”. While Irreversible damage focuses on Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria on young women, this book takes a more broad approach to the transgender movement. The book is sectioned into three parts. The first is the “foundations” of the transgender movement like sex is a spectrum. The second part is the “frontier” which explores topics like “children with gender dysphoria should transition”. The last part is called the “future” which explores topics like gender-neutral parenting.
I do not believe that this book is any way transphobic. We can be for transgender right while critiquing certain aspects of the movement. I urge people to have an open mind when reading this book. In the end, I want everyone to be who they are without feeling like an outcast. However, in the pursuit of truth and equality, we should not sacrifice reality or oppress narratives that do not conform.
I do not believe that this book is any way transphobic. We can be for transgender right while critiquing certain aspects of the movement. I urge people to have an open mind when reading this book. In the end, I want everyone to be who they are without feeling like an outcast. However, in the pursuit of truth and equality, we should not sacrifice reality or oppress narratives that do not conform.
October 5, 2020
Very valuable points, most of which I agree with, so I'm not critiquing from a place of ideological conflict.
My issue is that the points were very poorly argued and the book seemed poorly written.
Instead of stating her position and then providing numerous examples from the scientific literature to elaborate and prove her points, the author states a point, often not making it sufficiently clear to begin with, and then goes on these semi-ranty tangents about how the issue plays out in her personal experience or on social media. Even if you have the most solid position on Earth, that's not a good way of arguing it.
Often it felt like she was more in the business of describing the current internet debates around gender than the scientific knowledge and findings. Seeing how quickly the internet landscape changes, this would probably render the book obsolete in a few years. Although her unique perspective as an ex-researcher leaving due to disenchantment with the field is enlightening, a stronger scientific backbone to the text would have given it more longevity and, in my opinion, more value for the reader.
The writing is also very repetitive and jumpy. Although the general structure, the sections and the chapters, have a clear logic to them, the actual content of each chapter feels like a bit of a brain dump that hasn't been edited yet. I'm also not a big fan of 'we'll talk more about this in chapter X' when used as excessively as it was in this book. If you feel the need to jump back and forth so much meaningwise, then the text probably wasn't laid out in the most logical and flowy way.
The many times that Soh chose to insert references to her clubbing days, friendships with members of the LGBT community, her punk phase and her alleged masculinity also didn't seem to be furthering the goal of the text. They were overly repetitive and to me personally read as a grab for cool girl points, rather than a meaningful piece of self-disclosure.
Really disheartening, because there aren't many books out there right now stating the unpopular truths Soh has the courage to present here, but I think it just wasn't written well enough to have the needed impact.
My issue is that the points were very poorly argued and the book seemed poorly written.
Instead of stating her position and then providing numerous examples from the scientific literature to elaborate and prove her points, the author states a point, often not making it sufficiently clear to begin with, and then goes on these semi-ranty tangents about how the issue plays out in her personal experience or on social media. Even if you have the most solid position on Earth, that's not a good way of arguing it.
Often it felt like she was more in the business of describing the current internet debates around gender than the scientific knowledge and findings. Seeing how quickly the internet landscape changes, this would probably render the book obsolete in a few years. Although her unique perspective as an ex-researcher leaving due to disenchantment with the field is enlightening, a stronger scientific backbone to the text would have given it more longevity and, in my opinion, more value for the reader.
The writing is also very repetitive and jumpy. Although the general structure, the sections and the chapters, have a clear logic to them, the actual content of each chapter feels like a bit of a brain dump that hasn't been edited yet. I'm also not a big fan of 'we'll talk more about this in chapter X' when used as excessively as it was in this book. If you feel the need to jump back and forth so much meaningwise, then the text probably wasn't laid out in the most logical and flowy way.
The many times that Soh chose to insert references to her clubbing days, friendships with members of the LGBT community, her punk phase and her alleged masculinity also didn't seem to be furthering the goal of the text. They were overly repetitive and to me personally read as a grab for cool girl points, rather than a meaningful piece of self-disclosure.
Really disheartening, because there aren't many books out there right now stating the unpopular truths Soh has the courage to present here, but I think it just wasn't written well enough to have the needed impact.
September 13, 2021
My God, you commenters are going to be so embarrassed by yourselves some day.
I am so fucking sick of this transphobic trash - and others like it - appearing in my TL. This is not what it claims to be. It's not some neutral exploration but straight up transphobia. You only have to look at the blurb and reviews to see that.
STOP WITH THIS TOXIC HARMFUL NONSENSE.
Okay, listen, since apparently this review is so brilliant it makes people read the book: I DO NOT CARE. I highly doubt that you weren't going to read the book anyway, but if you're digging for a one star review to tell the reviewer that they made you read the book, maybe just don't? It's so unoriginal and boring! Maybe go actually read the book! I could not give less of a shit! But if you REALLY feel the need to thank me, fucking buy me an Amazon gift card. That way you're doubly making the world a worse place and can feel extra accomplished, and I can take the credit for turning five more people into transphobes! Win-win!
I am so fucking sick of this transphobic trash - and others like it - appearing in my TL. This is not what it claims to be. It's not some neutral exploration but straight up transphobia. You only have to look at the blurb and reviews to see that.
STOP WITH THIS TOXIC HARMFUL NONSENSE.
Okay, listen, since apparently this review is so brilliant it makes people read the book: I DO NOT CARE. I highly doubt that you weren't going to read the book anyway, but if you're digging for a one star review to tell the reviewer that they made you read the book, maybe just don't? It's so unoriginal and boring! Maybe go actually read the book! I could not give less of a shit! But if you REALLY feel the need to thank me, fucking buy me an Amazon gift card. That way you're doubly making the world a worse place and can feel extra accomplished, and I can take the credit for turning five more people into transphobes! Win-win!
March 30, 2021
Necessary reading for our insane times. Dr. Soh offers a sane, rational, compassionate and above all, non-partisan explanation on the state of the gender movement today and its implications for our youth, our learning establishments, employer & government policies, and supposedly new scientific findings, which are arrived at not through impartiality and a rigorous adherence to scientific methods, but partisanship and activism pushing a woke agenda.
There are already loads of great reviews for this book, which surprises me, as Dr. Soh has been much maligned by trans and gender activists, despite being pro-gay & trans rights. If you care about the state of the world and our society, read this. If you’re the parent of young children or young adults, you must read this to offer you a more balanced take on what is at stake for children and youth being pushed to socially and medically transition because of the “affirmation” model, which is the only one current policies in the US, Canada, the UK and Australia are allow any professional medical consultant or instructor to adopt, without any consideration given to the need to explore what lies at the root of a person’s wish to live as the “opposite sex” or even as a non-binary entity. This influences the entire medical establishment including the fields of psychology & psychiatry and of course, information made available to the public and at clinics dedicated to treating gender dysphoric patients.
I have so much more to say, but after yet another searingly disappointing loss of an entire lengthy and considered piece, I badly need a nap. I got the Quebec National library to stock both the ebook and audio recording of this important work on Overdrive, to offer a healthy counterpoint to the spate of literature on “gender diversity & fluidity” flooding physical & electronic bookshelves today. Read this book.
Bonus!
What a surprise! The father of Queer Theory is a paedo! https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/...
There are already loads of great reviews for this book, which surprises me, as Dr. Soh has been much maligned by trans and gender activists, despite being pro-gay & trans rights. If you care about the state of the world and our society, read this. If you’re the parent of young children or young adults, you must read this to offer you a more balanced take on what is at stake for children and youth being pushed to socially and medically transition because of the “affirmation” model, which is the only one current policies in the US, Canada, the UK and Australia are allow any professional medical consultant or instructor to adopt, without any consideration given to the need to explore what lies at the root of a person’s wish to live as the “opposite sex” or even as a non-binary entity. This influences the entire medical establishment including the fields of psychology & psychiatry and of course, information made available to the public and at clinics dedicated to treating gender dysphoric patients.
I have so much more to say, but after yet another searingly disappointing loss of an entire lengthy and considered piece, I badly need a nap. I got the Quebec National library to stock both the ebook and audio recording of this important work on Overdrive, to offer a healthy counterpoint to the spate of literature on “gender diversity & fluidity” flooding physical & electronic bookshelves today. Read this book.
Bonus!
What a surprise! The father of Queer Theory is a paedo! https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/...
August 30, 2020
DNF
I thought this book sounded interesting, but Soh lost me when she started talking about neuroscience. She's not a neuroscientist, which is probably why she's so comfortable citing the naturalness of pink and blue brains. Even the most conservative neuroscientists admit that brains are plastic and shaped (literally) by social as well as biological factors. For all her claims to objectivity, Soh has a clear agenda. I recommend Inferior by Angela Saini for a more balanced overview of much of the same literature.
I thought this book sounded interesting, but Soh lost me when she started talking about neuroscience. She's not a neuroscientist, which is probably why she's so comfortable citing the naturalness of pink and blue brains. Even the most conservative neuroscientists admit that brains are plastic and shaped (literally) by social as well as biological factors. For all her claims to objectivity, Soh has a clear agenda. I recommend Inferior by Angela Saini for a more balanced overview of much of the same literature.
February 27, 2023
There’s a new wave of joyless, party-crashing puritans on the scene, and, this time, they are not coming from the religious right but the secular left. Many liberals who cannot abide science denial when it comes from conservative religious groups are happy to turn a blind eye when left-wing activists not only deny obvious truths about sex and gender that are well-supported by science but also persecute those who dare question their orthodoxy. This toxic and oppressive climate compelled free-thinking sexologist Debra Soh to leave academia and write The End of Gender, a fascinating book that outlines with wit, compassion, and precision the ways in which the science of sex is being hijacked by illiberal activists pushing a political agenda.
It’s a strange world indeed when conservative Christians, radical feminists, and an atheist sexologist whose research specializes in “kinky sex” find enough common ground to link arms when it comes to beliefs about sex and gender. I never thought I would see the day, but here we are. Though Soh and I would disagree on many foundational levels, I found most of her conclusions persuasive and refreshing. It’s one thing when you’re asked to quietly tolerate lies that fly in the face of science and common sense; it’s another thing when you’re compelled to recite them, embrace them, celebrate them, and act pleased when your unsuspecting kids are indoctrinated with them at school. Thoughtful people can only take this for so long without feeling utterly demoralized, and I’m glad there are people like Soh who are brave enough to push back and tell the truth.
The big takeaway points from this book: biological sex is real; there are only two sexes, male and female; no matter how you alter your body, your biological sex does not fundamentally change; gender is not a mere social construct (I can’t tell you how many times my erudite undergraduate and graduate professors at two different well-respected, progressive US universities insisted that it was); and, there is no such thing as “lunagender,” a gender that fluctuates according to the moon’s cycle.
People are free to believe that sex and gender are fluid and that there is an infinite number of genders open to each one of us. I don’t want to live in a world where everyone is forced to think the same way. But, we should acknowledge these beliefs for what they are— religious beliefs accepted on faith and in conflict with science—and stop foisting them on those who beg to differ. Science is not God to me; it’s flawed, and I don’t expect people to accept as gospel truth every scientific study that comes down the pike. But, the West needs the courage to stop pretending that activist dogma is real science when it’s not, and we need to stop harassing scientists whose work challenges the dominant narrative on sex and gender. No one wins in a society where serious sex research can’t take place. Women, especially, suffer.
Some of the same people who would mock and revile so-called “creation science” are now putting pressure on others to accept “lunagender” as a scientific reality...
It’s a strange world indeed when conservative Christians, radical feminists, and an atheist sexologist whose research specializes in “kinky sex” find enough common ground to link arms when it comes to beliefs about sex and gender. I never thought I would see the day, but here we are. Though Soh and I would disagree on many foundational levels, I found most of her conclusions persuasive and refreshing. It’s one thing when you’re asked to quietly tolerate lies that fly in the face of science and common sense; it’s another thing when you’re compelled to recite them, embrace them, celebrate them, and act pleased when your unsuspecting kids are indoctrinated with them at school. Thoughtful people can only take this for so long without feeling utterly demoralized, and I’m glad there are people like Soh who are brave enough to push back and tell the truth.
The big takeaway points from this book: biological sex is real; there are only two sexes, male and female; no matter how you alter your body, your biological sex does not fundamentally change; gender is not a mere social construct (I can’t tell you how many times my erudite undergraduate and graduate professors at two different well-respected, progressive US universities insisted that it was); and, there is no such thing as “lunagender,” a gender that fluctuates according to the moon’s cycle.
People are free to believe that sex and gender are fluid and that there is an infinite number of genders open to each one of us. I don’t want to live in a world where everyone is forced to think the same way. But, we should acknowledge these beliefs for what they are— religious beliefs accepted on faith and in conflict with science—and stop foisting them on those who beg to differ. Science is not God to me; it’s flawed, and I don’t expect people to accept as gospel truth every scientific study that comes down the pike. But, the West needs the courage to stop pretending that activist dogma is real science when it’s not, and we need to stop harassing scientists whose work challenges the dominant narrative on sex and gender. No one wins in a society where serious sex research can’t take place. Women, especially, suffer.
Some of the same people who would mock and revile so-called “creation science” are now putting pressure on others to accept “lunagender” as a scientific reality...
August 29, 2023
America is in the midst of a cultural war, and The End of Gender focuses on the battlefront of gender politics. The author is Deborah Soh, who has a PhD in sexology, which is the scientific, quantitative study of human sexuality and gender. Soh describes herself as a gender-atypical, liberal feminist.
Dedicated to "those who blocked her on Twitter," this book is her nuclear bomb in the war against "science denial, mob mentality, shaming, and allegations of hate speech." As someone on the left, what surprised Soh is that the liberal left - both academics and the media - are denying any science contrary to their positions. Part of this is attributable to feminists fearing that biology would again be weaponized against women.
The End of Gender debunks 9 myths:
• Myth #1 Biological Sex is a Spectrum
• Myth #2 Gender Is a Social Construct
• Myth #3 There Are More Than Two Genders
• Myth #4 Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Are Unrelated
• Myth #5 Children with Gender Dysphoria Should Transition
• Myth #6 No Differences Exist Between Trans Women and Women Who Were Born Women
• Myth #7 Women Should Behave Like Men in Sex and Dating
• Myth #8 Gender Neutral Parenting Works
• Myth #9 Sexology and Social Justice Make Good Bedfellows
The End of Gender is an articulate, punchy science-based explanation and cultural argument, and doing so while advocating for fair and compassionate treatment of all marginalized groups. Soh's scientific explanations definitely provided food for thought as I had recently read Angela Saini's Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong, which had adopted an opposing position in regards to the existence of sex differences in the brain. I had read both books because I wanted to see what quantitative-based science, especially neuroscientists, had to say about the differences between men and women.
The End of Gender also delved deeply into the trenches of social trends, in particular on matters affecting those who self-identify as neither female nor male. So if like me, you've been a bit mystified by the influx of this terminology - gender nonbinary, enby, genderqueer, bigender, androgyne, trigender, quadgender, pangender, agender, neutrois, aliagender, almagender, anongender ... - Soh adressed them.
This book contains controversial material during these days of clamoring for social justice along gender lines. It is therefore a very timely read. Although I avoid the most popular social platforms, even I have noticed the vast changes in personal pronoun usage and the extensive medical treatments for children's gender issues. For those particularly interested in transgenders (ie. persons with gender dysphoria and who are transitioning into the opposite sex), it would probably be helpful to read this during one's research process. Because after all, good, solid research entails an examination of all sides of an issue.
When I began reading sexological papers, the realization that female and male sexual systems were at all different completely upended my worldview.
Dedicated to "those who blocked her on Twitter," this book is her nuclear bomb in the war against "science denial, mob mentality, shaming, and allegations of hate speech." As someone on the left, what surprised Soh is that the liberal left - both academics and the media - are denying any science contrary to their positions. Part of this is attributable to feminists fearing that biology would again be weaponized against women.
The success of the feminist movement does not require the claim that men and women are identical.
It isn’t sexist to acknowledge sex differences. What’s sexist is assuming that women must be the same as men in order to be treated as equals.
The End of Gender debunks 9 myths:
• Myth #1 Biological Sex is a Spectrum
• Myth #2 Gender Is a Social Construct
• Myth #3 There Are More Than Two Genders
• Myth #4 Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Are Unrelated
• Myth #5 Children with Gender Dysphoria Should Transition
• Myth #6 No Differences Exist Between Trans Women and Women Who Were Born Women
• Myth #7 Women Should Behave Like Men in Sex and Dating
• Myth #8 Gender Neutral Parenting Works
• Myth #9 Sexology and Social Justice Make Good Bedfellows
The End of Gender is an articulate, punchy science-based explanation and cultural argument, and doing so while advocating for fair and compassionate treatment of all marginalized groups. Soh's scientific explanations definitely provided food for thought as I had recently read Angela Saini's Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong, which had adopted an opposing position in regards to the existence of sex differences in the brain. I had read both books because I wanted to see what quantitative-based science, especially neuroscientists, had to say about the differences between men and women.
The End of Gender also delved deeply into the trenches of social trends, in particular on matters affecting those who self-identify as neither female nor male. So if like me, you've been a bit mystified by the influx of this terminology - gender nonbinary, enby, genderqueer, bigender, androgyne, trigender, quadgender, pangender, agender, neutrois, aliagender, almagender, anongender ... - Soh adressed them.
This book contains controversial material during these days of clamoring for social justice along gender lines. It is therefore a very timely read. Although I avoid the most popular social platforms, even I have noticed the vast changes in personal pronoun usage and the extensive medical treatments for children's gender issues. For those particularly interested in transgenders (ie. persons with gender dysphoria and who are transitioning into the opposite sex), it would probably be helpful to read this during one's research process. Because after all, good, solid research entails an examination of all sides of an issue.
August 8, 2020
At a time when basic tenets of biology are being threatened by overzealous activists in the name of political correctness, it has become increasingly hard to find rational voices. Dr. Soh is one of them. She reaffirms biological facts and addresses new and emerging science to arm readers against nonsense.
August 10, 2021
Book framed through the author's classic liberal feminist views, some of which overlap with terf views, tackling nine "myths":
Myth 1. Biological sex is a spectrum left me confused as I struggled among the author's contradictions, one saving grace was the clear demarcation between sex and gender
Myth 2. "Feminist = woman, man terrified to question said woman" Terf-like views in stating if gender is thought to be learned, masculinity will remain the gold standard and women will be pressured to rid themselves of femininity
Doesn't disprove that gender is a social construct, the author references neuroscience research that observe differences "between sexes" that lead to differences in interests and behaviour that manifests in gender, and concludes that "gender is indeed biological and not due to socialisation"
However despite this seeming like sound logic, the author fails to demonstrate any causal evidence and ignores how society impacts an individual as well as neuroscience research
Myth 3. The author's claim that gender is binary failed to put across a convincing case, especially when taking into account cultures with more than two genders
Unfortunately I found the book was full of strawman arguments, selective choice of evidence, once I delved deeper into the relevant literature, and the author's belief that science is true, objective and unaffected by any ideological bias misled rather than informed
Myth 1. Biological sex is a spectrum left me confused as I struggled among the author's contradictions, one saving grace was the clear demarcation between sex and gender
Myth 2. "Feminist = woman, man terrified to question said woman" Terf-like views in stating if gender is thought to be learned, masculinity will remain the gold standard and women will be pressured to rid themselves of femininity
Doesn't disprove that gender is a social construct, the author references neuroscience research that observe differences "between sexes" that lead to differences in interests and behaviour that manifests in gender, and concludes that "gender is indeed biological and not due to socialisation"
However despite this seeming like sound logic, the author fails to demonstrate any causal evidence and ignores how society impacts an individual as well as neuroscience research
Myth 3. The author's claim that gender is binary failed to put across a convincing case, especially when taking into account cultures with more than two genders
Unfortunately I found the book was full of strawman arguments, selective choice of evidence, once I delved deeper into the relevant literature, and the author's belief that science is true, objective and unaffected by any ideological bias misled rather than informed
March 23, 2022
Popular myths about gender and identity have, unfortunately, made their way into the mainstream. Dr. Soh, a sexologist from Canada, beautifully undercuts those myths using what is considered mainstream social science research in the field of psychology. If you want an academic response to purveying myths about gender and identity this is a great resource.
November 6, 2020
Asserts foolish, harmful, and generally untrue notions on gender and sexuality. Claims NB/queer individuals are motivated by an elevated social status and the pursuit of manipulation of others. Trash.
August 18, 2020
There are a number of problems with this book, despite it being an undeniably interesting and provocative read. The first is that because this is intended to be a popular work aimed at a lay audience there has been a certain dumbing down of what is an inescapably complex subject matter, with highly contested studies and research briskly skipped over, with only the most superficial objections to the notion of a 'gendered brain' being acknowledged. Soh also has the habit of making assertions which leave you scratching your head wanting much more in the way of explanation.
Despite pointing out that there is a material, objective foundation to biological sex, it could be argued that Soh's central assertion - that gender as well as sex is wholly biologically determined - actually gives credence to much of the ground the trans lobby positions itself on. The idea that there are distinct 'masculine' and 'feminine' brains, influenced, Soh appears to suggest, by varying levels of exposure to pre-natal testosterone, could support the argument that some people are simply 'born into the wrong body,' a fact she acknowledges but somewhat brushes over too lightly.
What this book should do is make you want to go away and do more digging, examining in more detail the studies and researchers she mentions. Gina Rippon's 2019 book 'The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters The Myth of the Female Brain' might be a good place to start for counter-balance, as it discusses many of these theories in a far more rigorous and, I would suggest, convincing way than Soh manages to. Critically examining a wide range of studies, including many that Soh cites, she concludes, in complete contradiction to this book, that there is no consistent and reliable evidence proving a fundamental difference between male and female brains, and little consistency of findings across studies. Rather than see Soh plug her book by being interviewed by the likes of Joe Rogan or, even worse, Ben Shapiro, it would be fascinating to see her debate these issues with someone like Rippon. Although she mentions and rejects the accusation, Soh's arguments do seem to rest upon a biological reductionism, underplaying the extent to which social influences affect brain development and the ways in which our brains respond to experience.
Soh ends her book with a call to defend academic freedom. There's nothing wrong with that, but there is, however, insufficient understanding or regard in the preceding pages paid to the social roots of identity politics, the manner in which a foregrounding of identity and notions of the self have arisen in tandem with the relentless rise of the free market, with gender politics taking on the language of progressiveness whilst simultaneously promoting an extremely traditional and conservative, if disturbingly narcissistic, agenda.
Despite pointing out that there is a material, objective foundation to biological sex, it could be argued that Soh's central assertion - that gender as well as sex is wholly biologically determined - actually gives credence to much of the ground the trans lobby positions itself on. The idea that there are distinct 'masculine' and 'feminine' brains, influenced, Soh appears to suggest, by varying levels of exposure to pre-natal testosterone, could support the argument that some people are simply 'born into the wrong body,' a fact she acknowledges but somewhat brushes over too lightly.
What this book should do is make you want to go away and do more digging, examining in more detail the studies and researchers she mentions. Gina Rippon's 2019 book 'The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters The Myth of the Female Brain' might be a good place to start for counter-balance, as it discusses many of these theories in a far more rigorous and, I would suggest, convincing way than Soh manages to. Critically examining a wide range of studies, including many that Soh cites, she concludes, in complete contradiction to this book, that there is no consistent and reliable evidence proving a fundamental difference between male and female brains, and little consistency of findings across studies. Rather than see Soh plug her book by being interviewed by the likes of Joe Rogan or, even worse, Ben Shapiro, it would be fascinating to see her debate these issues with someone like Rippon. Although she mentions and rejects the accusation, Soh's arguments do seem to rest upon a biological reductionism, underplaying the extent to which social influences affect brain development and the ways in which our brains respond to experience.
Soh ends her book with a call to defend academic freedom. There's nothing wrong with that, but there is, however, insufficient understanding or regard in the preceding pages paid to the social roots of identity politics, the manner in which a foregrounding of identity and notions of the self have arisen in tandem with the relentless rise of the free market, with gender politics taking on the language of progressiveness whilst simultaneously promoting an extremely traditional and conservative, if disturbingly narcissistic, agenda.
December 29, 2020
When you write a “scientific” book, which presumably you wish to be taken seriously, and proceed to use sources such as YouTube videos to “back up your claims”... it’s no wonder that half of each chapter was spent lamenting “cancel culture” and mentioning at length how many people dislike her; it was the only way to fill the pages and keep people who enjoy reading opinion pieces and then using them (horribly inaccurately, as the author did) as basis for their “scientific debate”, hooked.
It was an absolutely disgusting piece of work :) I enjoyed the irony of claiming that transgender people “claiming” to be the opposite gender enforces the gender binary - but people claiming not to fit the binary does not reinforce non-binary existence.
What a piece of work. It’s really sad that so many people cling to it as if it has a single shred of scientific evidence in it. Past the opinions of a former scientist who can’t even use real studies to back herself up 🙄
It was an absolutely disgusting piece of work :) I enjoyed the irony of claiming that transgender people “claiming” to be the opposite gender enforces the gender binary - but people claiming not to fit the binary does not reinforce non-binary existence.
What a piece of work. It’s really sad that so many people cling to it as if it has a single shred of scientific evidence in it. Past the opinions of a former scientist who can’t even use real studies to back herself up 🙄
September 21, 2020
A solid book that would be "ah, interesting"/5 in a normal world. I learned next to nothing new, mostly because I frequent Twitter way more than is good for my mental health. Anyways, it's about the science of sex and gender, and is systematic, honest (about what science does or doesn't tell us), kind and rationally inclusive - good enough for me.
The last chapter, The End of Academic Freedom, should terrify us all equally.
That some will find anything in here transphobic is too exhausting to consider. Until we all get reasonable and make books like this meh again, 5/5 from me.
The last chapter, The End of Academic Freedom, should terrify us all equally.
That some will find anything in here transphobic is too exhausting to consider. Until we all get reasonable and make books like this meh again, 5/5 from me.
August 10, 2020
I seriously don't understand why people are adding this book into the "politics" category. This book is not related to politics, and the author does a great job at writing from an unbiased, scientific point of view.
The only reason why anyone should give this book a 1-star is because they don't agree with the scientific evidence of this book, not because it disagrees with your views or hurts your feelings.
The only reason why anyone should give this book a 1-star is because they don't agree with the scientific evidence of this book, not because it disagrees with your views or hurts your feelings.
August 12, 2020
This is an incredibly important and timely book. I'm not going to give a thorough review right now, because I want to spend some time looking up the science Dr. Soh references in order to fully draw my own conclusions on several things she brings up.
If what she says on children transitioning is accurate, though, there are very profound and concerning implications. I find this especially troubling as a masc lesbian, seeing it is young masc lesbians who are most at risk under the current false narratives and myths around gender and identity.
This renders the book very important for young people, and for parents of young people.
That being said, there are two issues in this book where I remain unconvinced by Dr. Soh's arguments (even though at the whole, the book comes across to me as very solid). These issues are related to non-binary identities and autogynephilia.
What I wish she would have touched on with non-binary identities is the fact that some people experience gender dysphoria enough to partially transition, taking hormones etc., but not enough to identify as the opposite sex. This to me seems like a solid reason to be open-minded to at least the possibility of non-binary identities (though I share her concerns over the explosion of non-binary identities and how a fair amount of that may be driven by misogyny and homophobia).
Perhaps she didn't bring this up because there haven't been scientific studies on this? I don't know if there have been or not. But I still think this is something she should have mentioned. At the very least, it's a fascinating phenomenon that needs to be legitimately studied.
As for autogynephilia, it seems reasonable to assume that some MTF trans people experience this, but there are also lots who deny it reflects their experiences. To explain away this denial with other theoretical factors comes across as special pleading to me, which I found really disappointing, as Dr. Soh seems very rational and objective in other areas. ContraPoints did a very thorough video on the topic I found insightful, and it's worth watching for an alternative perspective.
If what she says on children transitioning is accurate, though, there are very profound and concerning implications. I find this especially troubling as a masc lesbian, seeing it is young masc lesbians who are most at risk under the current false narratives and myths around gender and identity.
This renders the book very important for young people, and for parents of young people.
That being said, there are two issues in this book where I remain unconvinced by Dr. Soh's arguments (even though at the whole, the book comes across to me as very solid). These issues are related to non-binary identities and autogynephilia.
What I wish she would have touched on with non-binary identities is the fact that some people experience gender dysphoria enough to partially transition, taking hormones etc., but not enough to identify as the opposite sex. This to me seems like a solid reason to be open-minded to at least the possibility of non-binary identities (though I share her concerns over the explosion of non-binary identities and how a fair amount of that may be driven by misogyny and homophobia).
Perhaps she didn't bring this up because there haven't been scientific studies on this? I don't know if there have been or not. But I still think this is something she should have mentioned. At the very least, it's a fascinating phenomenon that needs to be legitimately studied.
As for autogynephilia, it seems reasonable to assume that some MTF trans people experience this, but there are also lots who deny it reflects their experiences. To explain away this denial with other theoretical factors comes across as special pleading to me, which I found really disappointing, as Dr. Soh seems very rational and objective in other areas. ContraPoints did a very thorough video on the topic I found insightful, and it's worth watching for an alternative perspective.
September 14, 2020
There is definitely some validity to Soh's arguments–namely, I don't think that it is necessary for us to discredit gender differences in the brain to attain gender equality.
That being said, I think that she is unnecessarily condescending and critical of LGBT people and gender-nonconforming people. She uses tactics like throwing out terms that sound crazy (moongender, puzzlegender, arborgender) to discredit any nonbinary person. There is a difference between the few people who identify as a tree and the many people who don't feel satisfied living as a man or a woman.
She is also big on using the numbers argument: that there are NOT 72 genders!!!1!! I've never seen anyone list 72 specific, different genders. The purpose of the statement "more than two genders" is to acknowledge that some people don't identify with being a man or a woman. She doesn't take this statement seriously, and I think it damages her argument.
Furthermore, most of her statements beyond neurological function are simply her opinion. These parts of the book are not backed up by psychological studies and are much less compelling. In Myth 3, she cites data showing that straight Millenials are unlikely to know an LGB+ person who identifies as something other than gay or lesbian. This, to Soh, means that "more people are identifying as part of the community not out of a true sexual identity, but because it is trendy to do so, or because they believe sexuality is 'fluid.'" Her argument that bisexuality and other sexualities are not real shows a lack of understanding of the queer community and sexual orientation as a whole.
I've decided not to finish this book due to the lack of scientific backing after the first myth, but I was interested to see what she had to say.
That being said, I think that she is unnecessarily condescending and critical of LGBT people and gender-nonconforming people. She uses tactics like throwing out terms that sound crazy (moongender, puzzlegender, arborgender) to discredit any nonbinary person. There is a difference between the few people who identify as a tree and the many people who don't feel satisfied living as a man or a woman.
She is also big on using the numbers argument: that there are NOT 72 genders!!!1!! I've never seen anyone list 72 specific, different genders. The purpose of the statement "more than two genders" is to acknowledge that some people don't identify with being a man or a woman. She doesn't take this statement seriously, and I think it damages her argument.
Furthermore, most of her statements beyond neurological function are simply her opinion. These parts of the book are not backed up by psychological studies and are much less compelling. In Myth 3, she cites data showing that straight Millenials are unlikely to know an LGB+ person who identifies as something other than gay or lesbian. This, to Soh, means that "more people are identifying as part of the community not out of a true sexual identity, but because it is trendy to do so, or because they believe sexuality is 'fluid.'" Her argument that bisexuality and other sexualities are not real shows a lack of understanding of the queer community and sexual orientation as a whole.
I've decided not to finish this book due to the lack of scientific backing after the first myth, but I was interested to see what she had to say.
May 21, 2022
Apparently, this is a controversial book, and I should be careful I do not get “cancelled” by reading it! I consider myself a “centrist” and “progressive”, but I have also been concerned about the increasingly zealousness of activists against science in recent times if it does not fit a particular political or social justice position. I found the author to compassionate and objective and even though she is pro-gay and trans rights, she has been targeted by gender and trans activists for her scientific views on gender and sex.
Whilst she covers 10 myths in this book about sex and gender from a biological perspective, I found the most interesting (and disturbing) to be the final chapter about academic freedom – how science has become increasingly politicised and biased and academics who put forward alternative views or try to research what are considered “controversial” areas can have their careers destroyed and are now afraid to publish for fear “of offending people”. Social activism and political pressure mean instead of rigorous and respectful debate, studies are suppressed, not published or manipulated to obtain a certain outcome.
Readers may not agree with everything Dr Soh writes, but I think its so important we read alternative viewpoints otherwise we continue to live in our echo chambers. It seems that once religion suppressed science and progress, and now the suppression is coming from the supposed “progressive left” – very sad.
Whilst she covers 10 myths in this book about sex and gender from a biological perspective, I found the most interesting (and disturbing) to be the final chapter about academic freedom – how science has become increasingly politicised and biased and academics who put forward alternative views or try to research what are considered “controversial” areas can have their careers destroyed and are now afraid to publish for fear “of offending people”. Social activism and political pressure mean instead of rigorous and respectful debate, studies are suppressed, not published or manipulated to obtain a certain outcome.
Readers may not agree with everything Dr Soh writes, but I think its so important we read alternative viewpoints otherwise we continue to live in our echo chambers. It seems that once religion suppressed science and progress, and now the suppression is coming from the supposed “progressive left” – very sad.
August 30, 2020
I was hoping this book would be good. I've seen some of Soh's previous work (articles & videos) and had some issues with it, but I thought I'd give this a try. However, it ended up being very similar to other work - quippy, whiny, sorta condescending, and contrarian (but not in a good way). She starts off with a premise I agree with - sex is biological, and then goes onto say that "gender" is too (!?). But she doesn't ever really give a good definition for "gender", although she talks briefly about "gender identity" and "gender expression", and often it sounds that she conflates the terms sex and gender throughout her work. She also has a wishy-washy analysis of feminism that leaves her coming off like a "cool girl".
Some of her analysis of identity culture is interesting, and I while I agree with some of her analysis on gender identity culture, I find some of it hyperbolic. I'm glad she addressed some of what's happening with desistance, especially with natal women. I also appreciated some of the things she said about the quandary between women's rights and trans-women's rights.
I see many folks lauding her as a truth-teller and someone who's willing to talk about controversial topics, but I find her quite off-putting and annoying. While she's covering a topic that's very interesting to me, and extremely controversial at the moment due to woke culture, this book seems like some narrative non-fiction written by someone with a chip on her shoulder who's very interested in telling a story about the lengths people have gone to criticize her views and de-platform her. Enh? I haven't seen her losing any of her cool-girl status, so I'd say she's doing alright. If nothing else, I do hope this book helps bring the gender conversation out of the shadows and in to the light.
Some of her analysis of identity culture is interesting, and I while I agree with some of her analysis on gender identity culture, I find some of it hyperbolic. I'm glad she addressed some of what's happening with desistance, especially with natal women. I also appreciated some of the things she said about the quandary between women's rights and trans-women's rights.
I see many folks lauding her as a truth-teller and someone who's willing to talk about controversial topics, but I find her quite off-putting and annoying. While she's covering a topic that's very interesting to me, and extremely controversial at the moment due to woke culture, this book seems like some narrative non-fiction written by someone with a chip on her shoulder who's very interested in telling a story about the lengths people have gone to criticize her views and de-platform her. Enh? I haven't seen her losing any of her cool-girl status, so I'd say she's doing alright. If nothing else, I do hope this book helps bring the gender conversation out of the shadows and in to the light.
August 24, 2020
Thank you for standing up for science
August 23, 2020
I was hesitant in picking this book up. I half (ok, 3/4) expected a politically charged and socially conservative propaganda piece dripping with misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia. I was wrong, very wrong.
Instead of the craziness I expected, I found myself agreeing with a good bit of Soh's arguments - not that I am, in any way, suggesting that I'm an authority on the subject matter. I also recognized a lot of my own frustrations in Soh's comments. I find it immensely frustrating that we/people can't see when we commit the same sins that we lambaste others for committing. Furthermore, by suppressing conversation and opinion, we lay a foundation of fear, distrust, and hatred that, when allowed, festers and grows until any little spark may light a raging wildfire.
Considering this, Soh's book is both timely and important. In a world where we're all too often too quick on the proverbial trigger-finger, Soh raises some very interesting points, concerns, and facts regarding the world of gender that goes against the grain of what is socially and politically acceptable. Regardless of your ideas on the matter today, I urge you to read this book for another perspective than that which we hear of on a near-daily basis. Maybe you disagree entirely, maybe you swallow the book whole, or maybe, as I did, you find it compelling and insightful - albeit with a few holes at times - with many threads to explore further (and, to be frank, I cannot speak to the truth regarding some claims simply because I have not read enough on the subjects yet - but, partly thanks to this book, I will).
Regardless of where you land though, I hope you agree that one should never suppress science simply because one does not agree with it. Similarly, regarding opinions that deviate from the "norm," I find it difficult to see how alienating them to the point of exclusion from the realm of conversation and debate can do anything but foster a system of ever-expanding cracks that will, eventually, tear said system asunder.
Instead of the craziness I expected, I found myself agreeing with a good bit of Soh's arguments - not that I am, in any way, suggesting that I'm an authority on the subject matter. I also recognized a lot of my own frustrations in Soh's comments. I find it immensely frustrating that we/people can't see when we commit the same sins that we lambaste others for committing. Furthermore, by suppressing conversation and opinion, we lay a foundation of fear, distrust, and hatred that, when allowed, festers and grows until any little spark may light a raging wildfire.
Considering this, Soh's book is both timely and important. In a world where we're all too often too quick on the proverbial trigger-finger, Soh raises some very interesting points, concerns, and facts regarding the world of gender that goes against the grain of what is socially and politically acceptable. Regardless of your ideas on the matter today, I urge you to read this book for another perspective than that which we hear of on a near-daily basis. Maybe you disagree entirely, maybe you swallow the book whole, or maybe, as I did, you find it compelling and insightful - albeit with a few holes at times - with many threads to explore further (and, to be frank, I cannot speak to the truth regarding some claims simply because I have not read enough on the subjects yet - but, partly thanks to this book, I will).
Regardless of where you land though, I hope you agree that one should never suppress science simply because one does not agree with it. Similarly, regarding opinions that deviate from the "norm," I find it difficult to see how alienating them to the point of exclusion from the realm of conversation and debate can do anything but foster a system of ever-expanding cracks that will, eventually, tear said system asunder.
August 21, 2020
Let's not abandon science.
This book allowed me to remember what I knew, to have faith in what I knew to be true, and to have the scientific evidence to back this up, before the dogmatic narrative of the so-called progressives began in earnest, somewhere in the years of the last decade.
Debra Soh, as a sexologist, utilises a scientific standpoint throughout, as befits her profession. There are some facets of what she speaks of that echoes what progressives would advocate, like "being born in the wrong body" having a kernel of truth to it, in as much as one's brain's "wiring" and physicality being more similar to that of the opposite sex than one's birth sex. But she also goes on to debunk a number of commonly-cited myths regarding gender such as: "Gender is a social construct", "There are more than two genders", and "There are no differences between men and women". What a lot of progressives have forgotten or have been ignorant of is that there IS a biological component to gender; it dictates our behaviour, our preferences, and our personality in the real world, and for 99.9% of people it ties in very closely with their birth sex.
It's important to note that she remains compassionate throughout to those who would be gender non-conforming or "atypical" males or females. It should go without saying that compassion and listening to others' grievances is important, but not to the point where we start denying facts to satiate an angry mob.
Debra also talks about the danger of stifling important research in the name of being politically correct or "being on the side of social justice". All this does is appease those who would denounce you as a transphobic bigot otherwise, if you dare stray from the "facts" the progressives would have you believe.
Again, let's not forget or abandon science. It's vital to be objective in research, free of political leanings, particularly in the modern world where the dogma of the progressives would, ironically, stifle meaningful scientific progress for the sake of pushing a dogmatic narrative.
This book allowed me to remember what I knew, to have faith in what I knew to be true, and to have the scientific evidence to back this up, before the dogmatic narrative of the so-called progressives began in earnest, somewhere in the years of the last decade.
Debra Soh, as a sexologist, utilises a scientific standpoint throughout, as befits her profession. There are some facets of what she speaks of that echoes what progressives would advocate, like "being born in the wrong body" having a kernel of truth to it, in as much as one's brain's "wiring" and physicality being more similar to that of the opposite sex than one's birth sex. But she also goes on to debunk a number of commonly-cited myths regarding gender such as: "Gender is a social construct", "There are more than two genders", and "There are no differences between men and women". What a lot of progressives have forgotten or have been ignorant of is that there IS a biological component to gender; it dictates our behaviour, our preferences, and our personality in the real world, and for 99.9% of people it ties in very closely with their birth sex.
It's important to note that she remains compassionate throughout to those who would be gender non-conforming or "atypical" males or females. It should go without saying that compassion and listening to others' grievances is important, but not to the point where we start denying facts to satiate an angry mob.
Debra also talks about the danger of stifling important research in the name of being politically correct or "being on the side of social justice". All this does is appease those who would denounce you as a transphobic bigot otherwise, if you dare stray from the "facts" the progressives would have you believe.
Again, let's not forget or abandon science. It's vital to be objective in research, free of political leanings, particularly in the modern world where the dogma of the progressives would, ironically, stifle meaningful scientific progress for the sake of pushing a dogmatic narrative.
August 10, 2020
Great and honest book
Some people claim that Dr. Soh is a transphobic bigot, but reading this book suggests otherwise. I second her idea that science shouldn’t be hijacked by any activists. Let scientists do their work.
Some people claim that Dr. Soh is a transphobic bigot, but reading this book suggests otherwise. I second her idea that science shouldn’t be hijacked by any activists. Let scientists do their work.
January 19, 2021
WARNING: DON'T JUDGE THIS BOOK BY IT'S TITLE It is not about moving towards a more gender neutral and gender accepting society, but it's just another trans/nb-phobe who thinks using debunked arguments will magically cure trans/nb people of their dysphoria or make them decide that "oh wait I'm totally my assigned gender at birth, woops silly me".
I am so glad I decided to flip through before purchasing this book that would have been a huge. Just from the the first few title chapters I knew it was a mistake. Trying to claim that gender is NOT a socially created construct when it so obviously is! Or that age old crap that there are only two gender! FIrst, try and tell people who identify as something other than fully male or fully female that and it's not going to change how they feel or who they are, it's just not. Second is this just another person who STILL thinks gender and sex are the same thing? Lady, there aren't even just two sexes, because intersex people exist.
TL;DR: Misleading title. Trans and NB phobic as crap.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE GOING TO WHINE THAT I ADDED STARS TO THIS REVIEW WITHOUT HAVING READ THE ACTUAL BOOK I LITERALLY CAN'T LEAVE A REVIEW WITHOUT AT LEAST LEAVING AT LEAST ONE STAR. I AM THIS MESSAGE TO WARN TRANS, NB FOLKS AND THEIR ALLYS FROM WASTING THEIR TIME AND MONEY ON THIS OUTDATED HEARTBREAKING CRAP!
And don't bother commenting if you agree with what this book is saying. THIS REVIEW ISN'T FOR YOU!
I am so glad I decided to flip through before purchasing this book that would have been a huge. Just from the the first few title chapters I knew it was a mistake. Trying to claim that gender is NOT a socially created construct when it so obviously is! Or that age old crap that there are only two gender! FIrst, try and tell people who identify as something other than fully male or fully female that and it's not going to change how they feel or who they are, it's just not. Second is this just another person who STILL thinks gender and sex are the same thing? Lady, there aren't even just two sexes, because intersex people exist.
TL;DR: Misleading title. Trans and NB phobic as crap.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE GOING TO WHINE THAT I ADDED STARS TO THIS REVIEW WITHOUT HAVING READ THE ACTUAL BOOK I LITERALLY CAN'T LEAVE A REVIEW WITHOUT AT LEAST LEAVING AT LEAST ONE STAR. I AM THIS MESSAGE TO WARN TRANS, NB FOLKS AND THEIR ALLYS FROM WASTING THEIR TIME AND MONEY ON THIS OUTDATED HEARTBREAKING CRAP!
And don't bother commenting if you agree with what this book is saying. THIS REVIEW ISN'T FOR YOU!
August 13, 2020
Probably the best popular science book I've read since The Selfish Gene (which is my favorite book in that genre). A lot of non-fiction books tend to do three things that derail my enjoyment of them. This book avoids ALL of the following:
1. Underestimate the scientific literacy of the audience. In the place of raw information, authors create imperfect metaphors and end up confusing the overall message
2. Over-writing. This sort of relates to #1, in that the same point is expressed over several paragraphs to account for readers of all levels
3. Injecting their own politics or too much personal history into what otherwise could have been used for more information.
Soh does none of these. I'm genuinely more informed after having read this book, even if I'm not allowed to demonstrate that in most public situations (unfortunately). This is a truly controversial book, and I'm not surprised at the flak she's taking over it.
If I could criticize one aspect of the book, I'd have enjoyed her possibly addressing some of her peers that openly disagree with the reading of the current literature (Lise Eliot and Gina Rippon).
1. Underestimate the scientific literacy of the audience. In the place of raw information, authors create imperfect metaphors and end up confusing the overall message
2. Over-writing. This sort of relates to #1, in that the same point is expressed over several paragraphs to account for readers of all levels
3. Injecting their own politics or too much personal history into what otherwise could have been used for more information.
Soh does none of these. I'm genuinely more informed after having read this book, even if I'm not allowed to demonstrate that in most public situations (unfortunately). This is a truly controversial book, and I'm not surprised at the flak she's taking over it.
If I could criticize one aspect of the book, I'd have enjoyed her possibly addressing some of her peers that openly disagree with the reading of the current literature (Lise Eliot and Gina Rippon).
January 29, 2021
DNF @ 7%
PSA: If you say “yeah only a and b exist so it’s a proven binary, except when c or d happens” ..... that means it’s not just binary, pal.
I was going to try to read this in order to understand other viewpoints... but it was so whiny and constantly contradictory that I couldn’t do it. The author is intelligent, but from what I could tell at the beginning, she’s misinterpreting the science she has studied.
PSA: If you say “yeah only a and b exist so it’s a proven binary, except when c or d happens” ..... that means it’s not just binary, pal.
I was going to try to read this in order to understand other viewpoints... but it was so whiny and constantly contradictory that I couldn’t do it. The author is intelligent, but from what I could tell at the beginning, she’s misinterpreting the science she has studied.
December 30, 2020
Truly horrendous. This book is horribly written and doesn't seem to have any scientific depth. Those who enjoy it are transphobic. The author was basically banished from academia for having horrible beliefs and not being a good scientist. Don't waste your time.
May 15, 2021
The argument of this book is worth considering. If the facts upset you or make you uncomfortable, that's tough, because reality is going nowhere, so it's time to get your beliefs and ideals into line with the material reality of our embodied lives.
While a culture war is raging over issues of sex and gender, it is becoming increasingly hard to conduct and report the kind of good quality scientific research capable of settling many if not all of the issues in dispute. Indeed, there is a strand of science-denial to the Left politically that is as intransigent as the science-denial long associated with the political Right. We have reached a stage where even well established science is not acknowledged because it does not fit the preferred narrative. We almost need to reinvent the wheel.
The suggestion that either scientists or Science itself are biased, inherently untrustworthy, transphobic, white supremacist and imperialist does not impress Debra Soh. Her PhD in Sexology was achieved through a rigorous investigation of kinky sex, the field of human sexuality holds no mysteries or inhibitions for her and she professes a warm respect for the often marginalised souls who occupied her professional and social life over many years. She repeatedly asserts that there is no conflict between her empirical, dispassionate examination of difference and the respect due to each individual as they are, rather than a politically motivated insistence on what they ought to be. Both left and right, in her view, have abandoned that humane concern for real people in pursuit of their political ideals.
It is possible to read this book as either a defence or a rejection of the transgender identity and the decision will hinge on whether the reader is open to evidence or blinkered by ideology. It is not an encyclopedia or a scientific textbook, but the personal statement of one very well informed and competent observer, written in the accessible and amiable style of a journalist. It is, as I said, an argument, and it is absolutely not necessary to agree with all of it in order to learn and benefit from reading it. It is probably not possible for most readers to accept the contents without altering some or many opinions and I can say that some of mine have shifted.
Some quotes
It isn’t sexist to acknowledge sex differences. What’s sexist is assuming that women must be the same as men in order to be treated as equals. p.52
There is no such thing as a transgender child.... “Transgender” is an identity and political label denoting that an individual identifies as the opposite sex. Children, and particularly prepubescent children, do not possess the emotional maturity to identify this way. Gender dysphoria, as defined by DSM-5, is a medical condition manifesting as distress at the incongruent experience between one’s experienced gender identity and one’s birth sex. A child may be diagnosed with gender dysphoria.... Mental health professionals now emphasize this distinction so that a person can identify as transgender without experiencing gender dysphoria. p.149
In 2018 the World Health Organisations removed “gender incongruence” ... from being categorised as a mental disorder... Many compare the decision to the American Psychiatric Association’s removal of being gay from its list of mental disorders in 1973. The comparison is not accurate. Gay people do not require medical intervention to alleviate their distress. p.152 .... the true problem is not that gender dysphoria was considered a mental disorder, but that mental disorders are stigmatized. ... If a gender dysphoric person is not experiencing a mental health disorder, why do they need to transition to feel better? p152
Psychotherapy, or talk therapy, aimed at children with gender dysphoria typically falls into one of three categories. The early transitioning or “gender affirmative” approach ...has been touted by experts as probably the only ethical form of treatment, one that ‘saves lives’. A child takes on a new name, changes their haircut and clothing, and is referred to using opposite-sex pronouns (though the prevalence of nobinary children who are referred to as “they” is growing... Socially transitioning means that everyone who knows the child will refer to them as the opposite sex, endorsing the belief that they are not the sex they were born as. There is no reason, however, why adults can’t support a child’s preferences while maintaining that they are the sex they were born as, and – based on the research literature on desistence – at puberty reconsider this, if the child’s dysphoria persists. A second approach called “watchful waiting” or “wait and see”, allows the child to guide the course they take... The third approach, called the “therapeutic approach” or the “developmental model”, allows a chuld to explore their gender while being open to the possibility that they may grow comfortable in their birth sex. A clinician will seek to understand factors relevant to the child’s developments, including trauma or other psychopathology, and what else is going on in the child’s life that maybe leading them to feel this way. The final approach, which is backed by the scientific literature as the most appropriate course of therapy for these children, has instead been denounced by experts, medical organisations and academic researchers as transphobic, “conversion therapy”, and abusive. pp.153,4
For children, the onset of puberty is distressing because the associated changes make it more difficult for an individual to present as the opposite sex. In boys, unwanted effects include a growth spurt, facial and bodily hair, and the deepening of one’s voice. Girls must contend with menstruation every month and the development of hips and breasts... “Puberty is a critical time for physical and psychological development, as sexual differentiation, brain and musculoskeletal maturation all occur within complex social context. In other words, it’s not just the physical changes of puberty (which are multifaceted) that are important; it’s also the timing of these events... We have no idea if fertility will be preserved, or if other physical functions of the body that depend on properly timed puberty will ‘catch up’.” ... “On its face, interrupting this intricate process that is vital to human development ... in an effort to relieve psychological distress, is a risky proposition for which there should be significant scientific evidence. But evidence that it leads to more benefits than harm does not exist.” pp.156-8
In 2018, all hell broke loose when Lisa Littman, a physician and assistant professor at Brown university, published the first study on rapid-onset gender dysphoria... Her findings suggested that for some of these girls, being transgender is a form of social contagion. p.166
Worryingly, the conversation now revolves around transitioning as opposed to whether someone experiences gender dysphoria. Transitioning is no longer a medical consideration, it has become an identity... ROGD speaks to the fact that it’s become more socially acceptable to be a trans man than a lesbian woman in certain peer groups and progressive circles. p.174
Young lesbians who detransition will often say they do not feel they have lesbian role models to look up to, and that they experience internalised homophobia and shame for not being conventionally feminine. When we consider public figures in the media, most women who are sexually attracted to women now identify as transgender men, nonbinary or genderfluid. Most of the lesbian representation we do see is transgender women who are attracted to women. p178
One reason detransitioning seems rare is that a person isn’t required to go to a doctor in order to do it. This makes it difficult for gender clinics to track these numbers. ... the decision to detransition is usually undertaken quietly and privately. Some will disappear for a period of time before reappearing on social media as their birth sex without formal announcement. p179
In Newcastle, England, a city that has a population of about 300,000 people, hundreds of young women have come forward saying they regret transitioning. Fitting the profile of RGGD, most report being lesbian and on the autism spectrum. p.179
what happens to those for whom transition was not the right choice? They’ve been left to their own devices, to suffer silently. Empathy for one group does not require disparagement of the other. I would argue that detransitioners’ coming forward doesn’t mean all transgender people will change their minds. If medical professionals were able to do their jobs properly and rule out other possible explanations for a person’s gender dysphoria, the vast majority of detransitioners wouldn’t have transitioned in the first place. p.183
Regardless of whether a person believes gender is biological or socially constructed, the discussion revolves around whether a person’s gender is necessarily in alignment with their anatomy. p194
For girls who are competing for college scholarships, who have been training their entire lives for these opportunities, it is particularly demoralizing to be competing against transgender girls, knowing that the cards are stacked against them and the outcome is predictable even before the compeititon has begun... Yet again, science denial is perfectly acceptable if it follows in the fashion of woke politics. At a time when society is actively pushing for the equality of women, this entire debacle is flabbergasting, highlighting exactly who is calling the shots in the identity politics hierarchy. There is nothing wrong with advocating for meaningful and fair opportunities for everyone, They should not come at the cost of prioritizing one group over another. Pp.215,6.
Everything from gingerbread cookies to sewer coverings to Santa Claus has undergone a gender-neutral rebranding but the debate is full of inconsistencies. For example, in gender-typical children, gender is designated as an irrelevant construction that can and should be unlearned, but when it comes to gender dysphoric kids, it should be prioritized over biology. Similarly, those who say gender is a social construct and femininity and masculinity are learned will use gender stereotypes to justify why a little boy who wears dresses, or a little girl in overall, is really the opposite sex.
There is nothing more cringeworthy than watching individuals proudly proclaim their academic or scientific credentials before spewing something completely unscientific and deranged. ...What that says to anyone with a cursory understanding of biology is that scientists and medical professionals are willing to lie if it suits their political values. For most others who don’t know the difference, they will take what these ‘experts’ are saying at face value. ... support for these scholars isn’t based on the merits of what they are saying, but on the message and the virtues they stand for. p.275
There is a sordid history of scientists acting unethically, like in the case of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, in which more than one hundred black men died because lifesaving medication, penicillin, was withheld from them... The response from minority communities, as one might expect, has been an overall distrust of the medical system and scientific research. p.276
Considering that adults are finding it difficult to discern truth from fiction, one can only imagine how confusing the process will be for young children. They are dependent on parents, teachers, caregivers, and medical professionals to make decisions on their behalf based on this faulty information. p.280
For those who say that hateful ideas shouldn’t be entertained and that debating someone you disagree with legitimizes their position, muzzling the debate doesn’t make them go away. Controversial research, in itself, doesn’t pose a threat. Instead of attacking and punishing researchers, we should be combating those who misuse research findings to uphold their prejudiced positions. p295
While a culture war is raging over issues of sex and gender, it is becoming increasingly hard to conduct and report the kind of good quality scientific research capable of settling many if not all of the issues in dispute. Indeed, there is a strand of science-denial to the Left politically that is as intransigent as the science-denial long associated with the political Right. We have reached a stage where even well established science is not acknowledged because it does not fit the preferred narrative. We almost need to reinvent the wheel.
The suggestion that either scientists or Science itself are biased, inherently untrustworthy, transphobic, white supremacist and imperialist does not impress Debra Soh. Her PhD in Sexology was achieved through a rigorous investigation of kinky sex, the field of human sexuality holds no mysteries or inhibitions for her and she professes a warm respect for the often marginalised souls who occupied her professional and social life over many years. She repeatedly asserts that there is no conflict between her empirical, dispassionate examination of difference and the respect due to each individual as they are, rather than a politically motivated insistence on what they ought to be. Both left and right, in her view, have abandoned that humane concern for real people in pursuit of their political ideals.
It is possible to read this book as either a defence or a rejection of the transgender identity and the decision will hinge on whether the reader is open to evidence or blinkered by ideology. It is not an encyclopedia or a scientific textbook, but the personal statement of one very well informed and competent observer, written in the accessible and amiable style of a journalist. It is, as I said, an argument, and it is absolutely not necessary to agree with all of it in order to learn and benefit from reading it. It is probably not possible for most readers to accept the contents without altering some or many opinions and I can say that some of mine have shifted.
Some quotes
It isn’t sexist to acknowledge sex differences. What’s sexist is assuming that women must be the same as men in order to be treated as equals. p.52
There is no such thing as a transgender child.... “Transgender” is an identity and political label denoting that an individual identifies as the opposite sex. Children, and particularly prepubescent children, do not possess the emotional maturity to identify this way. Gender dysphoria, as defined by DSM-5, is a medical condition manifesting as distress at the incongruent experience between one’s experienced gender identity and one’s birth sex. A child may be diagnosed with gender dysphoria.... Mental health professionals now emphasize this distinction so that a person can identify as transgender without experiencing gender dysphoria. p.149
In 2018 the World Health Organisations removed “gender incongruence” ... from being categorised as a mental disorder... Many compare the decision to the American Psychiatric Association’s removal of being gay from its list of mental disorders in 1973. The comparison is not accurate. Gay people do not require medical intervention to alleviate their distress. p.152 .... the true problem is not that gender dysphoria was considered a mental disorder, but that mental disorders are stigmatized. ... If a gender dysphoric person is not experiencing a mental health disorder, why do they need to transition to feel better? p152
Psychotherapy, or talk therapy, aimed at children with gender dysphoria typically falls into one of three categories. The early transitioning or “gender affirmative” approach ...has been touted by experts as probably the only ethical form of treatment, one that ‘saves lives’. A child takes on a new name, changes their haircut and clothing, and is referred to using opposite-sex pronouns (though the prevalence of nobinary children who are referred to as “they” is growing... Socially transitioning means that everyone who knows the child will refer to them as the opposite sex, endorsing the belief that they are not the sex they were born as. There is no reason, however, why adults can’t support a child’s preferences while maintaining that they are the sex they were born as, and – based on the research literature on desistence – at puberty reconsider this, if the child’s dysphoria persists. A second approach called “watchful waiting” or “wait and see”, allows the child to guide the course they take... The third approach, called the “therapeutic approach” or the “developmental model”, allows a chuld to explore their gender while being open to the possibility that they may grow comfortable in their birth sex. A clinician will seek to understand factors relevant to the child’s developments, including trauma or other psychopathology, and what else is going on in the child’s life that maybe leading them to feel this way. The final approach, which is backed by the scientific literature as the most appropriate course of therapy for these children, has instead been denounced by experts, medical organisations and academic researchers as transphobic, “conversion therapy”, and abusive. pp.153,4
For children, the onset of puberty is distressing because the associated changes make it more difficult for an individual to present as the opposite sex. In boys, unwanted effects include a growth spurt, facial and bodily hair, and the deepening of one’s voice. Girls must contend with menstruation every month and the development of hips and breasts... “Puberty is a critical time for physical and psychological development, as sexual differentiation, brain and musculoskeletal maturation all occur within complex social context. In other words, it’s not just the physical changes of puberty (which are multifaceted) that are important; it’s also the timing of these events... We have no idea if fertility will be preserved, or if other physical functions of the body that depend on properly timed puberty will ‘catch up’.” ... “On its face, interrupting this intricate process that is vital to human development ... in an effort to relieve psychological distress, is a risky proposition for which there should be significant scientific evidence. But evidence that it leads to more benefits than harm does not exist.” pp.156-8
In 2018, all hell broke loose when Lisa Littman, a physician and assistant professor at Brown university, published the first study on rapid-onset gender dysphoria... Her findings suggested that for some of these girls, being transgender is a form of social contagion. p.166
Worryingly, the conversation now revolves around transitioning as opposed to whether someone experiences gender dysphoria. Transitioning is no longer a medical consideration, it has become an identity... ROGD speaks to the fact that it’s become more socially acceptable to be a trans man than a lesbian woman in certain peer groups and progressive circles. p.174
Young lesbians who detransition will often say they do not feel they have lesbian role models to look up to, and that they experience internalised homophobia and shame for not being conventionally feminine. When we consider public figures in the media, most women who are sexually attracted to women now identify as transgender men, nonbinary or genderfluid. Most of the lesbian representation we do see is transgender women who are attracted to women. p178
One reason detransitioning seems rare is that a person isn’t required to go to a doctor in order to do it. This makes it difficult for gender clinics to track these numbers. ... the decision to detransition is usually undertaken quietly and privately. Some will disappear for a period of time before reappearing on social media as their birth sex without formal announcement. p179
In Newcastle, England, a city that has a population of about 300,000 people, hundreds of young women have come forward saying they regret transitioning. Fitting the profile of RGGD, most report being lesbian and on the autism spectrum. p.179
what happens to those for whom transition was not the right choice? They’ve been left to their own devices, to suffer silently. Empathy for one group does not require disparagement of the other. I would argue that detransitioners’ coming forward doesn’t mean all transgender people will change their minds. If medical professionals were able to do their jobs properly and rule out other possible explanations for a person’s gender dysphoria, the vast majority of detransitioners wouldn’t have transitioned in the first place. p.183
Regardless of whether a person believes gender is biological or socially constructed, the discussion revolves around whether a person’s gender is necessarily in alignment with their anatomy. p194
For girls who are competing for college scholarships, who have been training their entire lives for these opportunities, it is particularly demoralizing to be competing against transgender girls, knowing that the cards are stacked against them and the outcome is predictable even before the compeititon has begun... Yet again, science denial is perfectly acceptable if it follows in the fashion of woke politics. At a time when society is actively pushing for the equality of women, this entire debacle is flabbergasting, highlighting exactly who is calling the shots in the identity politics hierarchy. There is nothing wrong with advocating for meaningful and fair opportunities for everyone, They should not come at the cost of prioritizing one group over another. Pp.215,6.
Everything from gingerbread cookies to sewer coverings to Santa Claus has undergone a gender-neutral rebranding but the debate is full of inconsistencies. For example, in gender-typical children, gender is designated as an irrelevant construction that can and should be unlearned, but when it comes to gender dysphoric kids, it should be prioritized over biology. Similarly, those who say gender is a social construct and femininity and masculinity are learned will use gender stereotypes to justify why a little boy who wears dresses, or a little girl in overall, is really the opposite sex.
There is nothing more cringeworthy than watching individuals proudly proclaim their academic or scientific credentials before spewing something completely unscientific and deranged. ...What that says to anyone with a cursory understanding of biology is that scientists and medical professionals are willing to lie if it suits their political values. For most others who don’t know the difference, they will take what these ‘experts’ are saying at face value. ... support for these scholars isn’t based on the merits of what they are saying, but on the message and the virtues they stand for. p.275
There is a sordid history of scientists acting unethically, like in the case of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, in which more than one hundred black men died because lifesaving medication, penicillin, was withheld from them... The response from minority communities, as one might expect, has been an overall distrust of the medical system and scientific research. p.276
Considering that adults are finding it difficult to discern truth from fiction, one can only imagine how confusing the process will be for young children. They are dependent on parents, teachers, caregivers, and medical professionals to make decisions on their behalf based on this faulty information. p.280
For those who say that hateful ideas shouldn’t be entertained and that debating someone you disagree with legitimizes their position, muzzling the debate doesn’t make them go away. Controversial research, in itself, doesn’t pose a threat. Instead of attacking and punishing researchers, we should be combating those who misuse research findings to uphold their prejudiced positions. p295
Displaying 1 - 30 of 567 reviews