Research/Study
Anti-LGBTQ media and groups have been crying âcensorshipâ as flawed research on trans teens is re-evaluated
A Brown researcher published a flawed study about so-called ârapid-onset gender dysphoriaâ that relied on surveys from anti-trans websites. The report claimed that teens were coming out as trans due to âsocial contagion.â
Written by Brianna January
Published
-
Update (3/20/19):Â On March 19, PLOS ONE issued a correction and formal comment on Littmanâs study. The journalâs editor-in-chief also issued an apology on PLOS ONEâs blog, noting, âWe should have provided a better context of this research, its framing, and its limitations related to the study design.â The note continued, âIn our view, the corrected article now provides a better context of the work, as a report of parental observations, but not a clinically validated phenomenon or a diagnostic guideline.â
In August, a researcher at Brown University published flawed research about so-called ârapid-onset gender dysphoria,â a concept that suggests that young people may be coming out as trans due to âsocial and peer contagionâ and that has not been recognized by any mainstream medical organization. Among other flaws, the study was widely criticized for surveying only parents found on anti-trans parent communities rather than transgender people themselves, and Brown and the academic journal that published the study have since pledged to re-evaluate the work. Right-wing media and anti-LGBTQ groups responded by calling the reassessment âacademic censorshipâ and saying Brown and the journal had caved to âtransgender activism.â
Brown University researcher Lisa Littman published a flawed study that claims teens may be identifying as trans due to social influences
A Brown University researcher published a study on so-called ârapid-onset gender dysphoriaâ that suggested teenagers were identifying as trans due to âsocial and peer contagion.â In August, Brown University researcher Dr. Lisa Littman published a study on so-called ârapid-onset gender dysphoriaâ (ROGD) in the online journal PLOS ONE. The study suggested that transgender youth are experiencing a new type of ârapidâ gender dysphoria due to social influences, asserting that both multiple peers in pre-existing friend groups coming out as transgender and âincreased exposure to social media/internet preceding a childâs announcement of a transgender identityâ raise âthe possibility of social and peer contagion.â From PLOS ONE (citations removed):
The description of cluster outbreaks of gender dysphoria occurring in pre-existing groups of friends and increased exposure to social media/internet preceding a childâs announcement of a transgender identity raises the possibility of social and peer contagion. Social contagion is the spread of affect or behaviors through a population. Peer contagion, in particular, is the process where an individual and peer mutually influence each other in a way that promotes emotions and behaviors that can potentially undermine their own development or harm others.
Littmanâs study surveyed the parents of transgender people ages 11-27, circulating the survey on three websites: 4thwavenow.com, transgendertrend.com, and youthtranscriticalprofessionals.org. Those websites are online communities primarily for parents of transgender people who deny their childrenâs identities, and the study acknowledged that the survey was specifically targeted to âwebsites where parents and professionals had been observed to describe rapid onset of gender dysphoria.â In fact, according to trans researcher Julia Serano, the phrase ârapid-onset gender dysphoriaâ and accompanying acronym originated on those very websites in July 2016, before Littmanâs study or abstract were released. The term and acronym are frequently used by parents who do not accept their childrenâs trans identities; there is even a website called parentsofrogdkids.com. Prior to releasing her full study, Littman published an abstract in the Journal of Adolescent Health in February 2017 describing supposed parental experiences with ROGD.
Gender dysphoria is an established diagnosis involving âa difference between oneâs experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, and significant distress or problems functioning.â The American Psychiatric Association recommends affirming the gender expression of people with gender dysphoria, including through âcounseling, cross-sex hormones, puberty suppression and gender reassignment surgeryâ as well as social transitions not involving medical treatments.
After fielding concerns about Littmanâs methodology, Brown and PLOS ONE announced they would re-assess her research
PLOS ONE is seeking âfurther expert assessment on the studyâs methodology and analysesâ after receiving complaints. On August 27, PLOS ONE announced that it would re-evaluate Littmanâs study due to âconcerns raised on the studyâs content and methodology.â Slateâs Alex Barasch noted that âre-evaluating a studyâs content and methodology doesnât stymie the scientific process; itâs a natural and necessary extension of it.â From PLOS ONEâs announcement:
PLOS ONE is aware of the reader concerns raised on the studyâs content and methodology. We take all concerns raised about publications in the journal very seriously, and are following up on these per our policy and [Committee on Publication Ethics] guidelines. As part of our follow up we will seek further expert assessment on the studyâs methodology and analyses. We will provide a further update once we have completed our assessment and discussions.
Brown University removed a news article about the study after receiving complaints about Littmanâs research and its methodology. After experts and advocates pointed out several flaws in the studyâs methodology and PLOS ONE announced its own re-evaluation, âBrown determined that removing the article from news distribution is the most responsible course of action.â The next day, the dean of Brown Universityâs School of Public Health issued a letter confirming that the article had been removed âbecause of concerns about research methodology,â acknowledging concerns that the flawed studyâs conclusions could harm the transgender community, and reiterating the universityâs commitment to academic freedom and âthe value of rigorous debate informed by research.â On September 5, the university released an expanded statement, proclaiming, âBrown does not shy away from controversial research.â The statement claimed that the articleâs removal from the universityâs news site was ânot about academic freedom,â but rather âabout academic standards,â noting that âacademic freedom and inclusion are not mutually exclusive.â
Researchers, experts, and journalists have found several flaws with Littmanâs research
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health urged restraint of the term âROGDâ and noted that it has not been ârecognized by any major medical professional association.â The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which publishes the internationally accepted Standards of Care and Ethical Guidelines for managing gender dysphoria, released a position statement about ROGD on September 4, noting that it âis not a medical entity recognized by any major professional associationâ and has not gone through âthe deliberative processes by which diagnostic entities and clinical phenomena are classified and established.â WPATHâs statement said ROGD âconstitutes nothing more than an acronym created to describe a proposed clinical phenomenon that may or may not warrant further peer-reviewed scientific investigation.â From the September 4 statement (emphasis original):
At present, WPATH asserts that knowledge of the factors contributing to gender identity development in adolescence is still evolving and not yet fully understood by scientists, clinicians, community members, and other stakeholders in equal measure. Therefore, it is both premature and inappropriate to employ official-sounding labels that lead clinicians, community members, and scientists to form absolute conclusions about adolescent gender identity development and the factors that may potentially influence the timing of an adolescentâs declaration as a different gender from birth-assigned sex.
...
WPATH also urges restraint from the use of any termâwhether or not formally recognized as a medical entityâto instill fear about the possibility that an adolescent may or may not be transgender with the a priori goal of limiting consideration of all appropriate treatment options in accordance with the aforementioned standards of care and clinical guidelines.
Researchers writing in PinkNews: Littmanâs study âwas heavily biased towards specific groupsâ and âtells us less about trans teenagers than it does about the parents being surveyed.â Writing for PinkNews, researchers Florence Ashley of McGill University and Alexandre Baril of the University of Ottawa said Littmanâs research âwas heavily biased towards specific groups and in no way can be said to be representative of the general populationâ because it surveyed parents from specific anti-trans websites. Their report contended that âthe study tells us less about trans teenagers than it does about the parents being surveyed.â They also pointed out that research suggesting that trans identities are the result of a âcontagionâ attempts to frame the narrative in a way that âdistinguishes âgood,â true transgender people from âbad,â fake trans people, allowing proponents to claim that they have nothing against trans people â well, at least the real ones.â
Slateâs Alex Barasch: âThe sites that participants were culled from are full of damning evidence of biasâ against transgender people. Barasch noted that Littmanâs study was âpurportedly about 256 trans-identified âadolescents and young adults,ââ but it is âperhaps fairer to say that itâs about their parents, who participated in a 90-question survey about their relationships with and perceptions of their childrenâwith no input from the kids themselves, and no controls to speak of.â Barasch identified several problems with the studyâs sample, including that it sourced parental reporting from websites with anti-trans biases such as 4thwavenow.com, which âhosts long missives from parents who have strenuously denied their childrenâs identities for years.â He continued, âIn exclusively surveying parents from these âgender criticalâ spaces, Littman sharply limited both the relevance and the validity of her results.â
Barasch added that âone of the studyâs most glaring flawsâ is that Littman made no effort to substantiate the claims of the parents who participated in her study by speaking to their transgender children. He noted that the studyâs findings about âthe worsening of parent-child relationshipsâ after the child came out and the children's preference to befriend other LGBTQ kids actually weakened its conclusions about trans identities being a âsocial contagionâ because young LGBTQ people would be more likely to âflock together online or in-personâ if they face âskepticism and hostility at home.â
Finally, Barasch noted that the concept of ROGD âtreats the emergence of dysphoria around or after puberty as something new and unusual that should be treated with suspicionâ when in fact the medical community recognizes late-onset gender dysphoria, which describes the emergence of dysphoria âaround puberty or much later in life.â Barasch highlighted examples of PLOS ONE retracting several other studies that featured âquestionable researchâ and pointed out that âpeer review isnât an automatic assurance of ironclad scienceâ and that the review of the study âis both standard and vital.â
Researcher Julia Serano: The concept of ROGD originated in 2016 on three blogs âthat have a history of promoting anti-transgender propaganda.â In an essay on Medium, biologist and transgender activist Julia Serano explained that the concept of ROGD was not new, but originated in 2016 on three anti-trans blogs -- the same blogs from where Littman drew her sample. Thus, Serano wrote, Littmanâs study was âentirely based on the opinions of parents who frequent the very same three blogs that invented and vociferously promote the concept of ROGD.â She contended, âThis is the most blatant example of begging the question that I have ever seen in a research paper.â Serano also refuted the studyâs assertion that gender dysphoria in the surveyed parentsâ children was ârapid,â writing that âthe word ârapidâ in ROGD doesnât necessarily refer to the speed of gender dysphoria onset. ⊠Rather, whatâs ârapidâ about ROGD is parentsâ sudden awareness and assessment of their childâs gender dysphoria (which, from the childâs standpoint, may be long standing and thoughtfully considered).â
Brynn Tannehill in The Advocate: Transgender youth featured in the study may have avoided coming out to âhostile parents,â which could have led to parents perceiving their gender identity development as ârapid.â Responding to an abstract of Littmanâs study released in 2017, transgender advocate and author Brynn Tannehill -- who recently published an explanatory book about transgender issues -- pointed out flaws in the hypothesis that young people may be identifying as transgender because of other LGBTQ friends and online LGBTQ media. She noted that âtransgender youth in unsupportive homes are much more likely to share their thoughts and feelings with LGBT friends at school and peers online than family.â Tannehill added that those youth often âstick to âsafeâ LGBT social groupsâ and âdelay telling hostile parents until they cannot bear not to,â which could explain why the parents Littman surveyed from unsupportive online communities thought that their childâs identity came on rapidly.
Tannehill in INTO: âLittman failed to mention the viewpoints of the groups from which she drew her sampleâ and did not interview supportive parents or trans youth. Writing for the digital magazine INTO, Tannehill reiterated that the study âfailed to address the much more realistic explanation that transgender teens with anti-trans parents look for support from other LGBTQ youth online because they fear the reaction of their families.â She also noted that Littman did not acknowledge the anti-trans viewpoints of the websites from which she drew or sampled, ânor did she make any attempt to reach out to groups for supportive parentsâ or interview transgender youth.
Extreme anti-LGBTQ groups have claimed Brown âis in denial about transgender identityâ and âcaved to cross-dressersâ
Family Research Councilâs Cathy Ruse: Littmanâs study âreveals trouble in transgender paradise.â Cathy Ruse of the extreme anti-LGBTQ group Family Research Council wrote a post in The Stream attacking Brown University for removing news about Littmanâs study from its website. Ruse called the move âcensorshipâ and asserted that âthereâs an alarming trend of adolescents suddenly announcing theyâre in the wrong body.â She also defended the studyâs survey of parents rather than the actual transgender young people the study was about, writing that this âacknowledged limitation of the studyâ is a response to clinicians accepting what transgender patients tell them âat face value, never seeking the parentsâ perspective.â Ruse has a history of disparaging trans identities, and she has previously suggested that affirming transgender children âcan be child abuse.â
American College of Pediatriciansâ Michelle Cretella: Littmanâs study âwas quickly silencedâ because âtransgender activists called for censorship.â Writing for The Heritage Foundationâs right-wing outlet The Daily Signal, American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) President Michelle Cretella said that Littmanâs study âwas quickly silenced by activists and by Brown University,â which âdisconnected its link to the study and issued an apologyâ for it because âtransgender activists called for censorship.â
ACPeds is a small and extreme anti-LGBTQ group of physicians that broke off from the legitimate American Association of Pediatrics (AAP). Cretella and ACPeds have worked for years to discredit trans-affirming science and policy under the veneer of credibility offered by the groupâs misleading name, which âis easily confused with the AAP.â Cretella has claimed that affirming transgender youth is child abuse.
ACPedsâ Dr. Andre Van Mol posted several times about ROGD on Twitter. ACPedsâ Dr. Andre Van Mol retweeted several posts about Littmanâs study, including from two of the anti-transgender parent forums where Littman sourced her data. Van Mol promoted a tweet linking to a petition calling for Brown to âdefend academic freedom and scientific inquiryâ by supporting Littman and her study. He also tweeted a link to an article about Littmanâs study and asserted, âIdealogues (sic) are trying to suppress a study that shows the effect of peer pressure on transgenderism.â Van Mol has a long anti-LGBTQ record, including advocacy in favor of forcibly changing sexuality or gender identity through the discredited and harmful practice of conversion therapy. He has actively worked to oppose measures to protect LGBTQ people from the practice.
Illinois Family Instituteâs Laurie Higgins: Brown âcave[d] to cross-dressers and their collaborators.â Laurie Higgins of the extreme anti-LGBTQ state organization Illinois Family Institute wrote that Brown âcave[d] to cross-dressers and their collaboratorsâ after feeling âthe wrath of men in dresses with flowing tresses and bearded women in dungarees.â Higgins called Brownâs removal of its article about the study âcensorshipâ and claimed, âNo matter how well a study is designed and executed, if trannies donât like the findings, âprogressiveâ universities will not draw attention to it even if the study is conducted by their own faculty.â Higgins previously called transgender identity a âsuperstitionâ and compared trans people and their allies to a cult. She has also praised the Trump-Pence administrationâs plan to redefine âgenderâ to exclude the transgender community.
Right-wing media and proponents of the study have called the re-evaluation âacademic censorshipâ and said Brown and PLOS ONE caved to LGBTQ activists
Proponents of ROGD launched a petition to âdefend academic freedom and scientific inquiryâ by supporting Littmanâs research. Supporters of the ROGD concept launched a petition urging Brown and PLOS ONE to âdefend academic freedom and scientific inquiryâ in response to the studyâs re-evaluation. The petition implies that the study was being censored, claiming that Brown and PLOS ONE should âresist ideologically-based attempts to squelch controversial research evidence.â The petition, which currently has 4,900 signatures, was shared by some of the same anti-trans websites where Littman collected data for her study, including 4thwavenow and Transgender Trend.
Fox Newsâ Tucker Carlson on Brownâs decision: âAcknowledging reality itself becomes a criminal act; superstition reigns. The dark ages have arrived.â Fox prime-time host Tucker Carlson claimed that Brown was âcensoringâ Littmanâs study and stopped promoting it because âactivists descendedâ and âwere offended by the conclusions of the study.â Carlson claimed that activists found Littmanâs conclusions âideologically inconvenient and therefore unacceptable.â He also asserted that they âdemanded that the data be suppressed, and remarkably, Brown caved to their demands.â Carlson has previously denied the existence of the trans community, claimed that trans-affirming policies would hurt women, and hosted anti-transgender guests like ACPedsâ Cretella on his show. From the September 11 edition of Fox Newsâ Tucker Carlson Tonight:
TUCKER CARLSON (HOST): Brown University is censoring a scientific study by one of its own researchers because political activists don't like it. In a paper published earlier this month, a tenured Brown professor called Lisa Littman found that teenagers who say they want to switch genders are often influenced, not surprisingly, by friends and social media like all young people are. Well, the study was solid enough to be picked up by a reputable scientific journal. In fact, Brownâs PR department sounded a press release promoting the study. But then activists descended. They were offended by the conclusions of the study, not because the conclusions were wrong -- no one even argued they were wrong -- but because the conclusions were ideologically inconvenient and therefore unacceptable. They demanded that the data be suppressed, and remarkably, Brown caved to their demands. The university yanked the press release and apologized for sending it in the first place.
This is not really about Brown. This is what it looks like when reason itself dies: Politics trump science;Â empirical conclusions are banned;Â acknowledging reality itself becomes a criminal act; superstition reigns. The dark ages have arrived. This is what they told you the Christian right wanted to do. They were lying. As soon as they took power, they did it themselves. Of course.
The Daily Wireâs Ben Shapiro: âThe left went insaneâ over Littmanâs study, âso Brown cavedâ in an act of âacademic tyranny.â The Daily Wireâs Ben Shapiro claimed that âBrown immediately cavedâ by removing its article because âany effort to actually research the environmental component of transgenderism is met with raucous calls for censorship.â Shapiro alleged that PLOS ONE and Brown âturned against the study because it offended politically correct sensibilities about transgenderismâ and called the situation âacademic tyranny.â
Shapiro: âScience is taking a back seat to the realities of political correctness.â On his show, Shapiro repeated talking points from his Daily Wire post and claimed that Brown had âburied the studyâ and âcavedâ because âit offended politically correct sensibilities about transgenderism.â He called the move âinsane,â claimed that âscience is taking a back seat to the realities of political correctness,â and called leaders at Brown âcowards.â Shapiro then predicted that Brown would fire Littman, saying that the left âwill go after anyone who does not follow the basic leftist consensus on politics, they will destroy science in order to do so, and they will censor people.â Shapiro has a history of anti-transgender bigotry, including calling transgender troops âmentally ill soldiersâ and mocking transgender men and women who date them. He has also called being trans a âmental disorderâ and âtyranny of the individual.â
One America Newsâ Liz Wheeler: âThis is even creepier, I think, than just stifling free speech. This is akin to book banning and book burning.â On the September 7 edition of One America Newsâ The Tipping Point, host Liz Wheeler railed that Brownâs decision to remove its article on the study was âeven creepier, I think, than just stifling free speech,â comparing it to âbook banning and book burning.â She continued, âThis is taking a scientific study because it doesn't substantiate your political view and erasing it. That's so creepy.â Wheelerâs guest Amber Athey, a Daily Caller contributor, asserted that Brown âdecided to get rid of the study not because they think that it didnât meet scientific standards but just because they donât like the results of it.â
Wheeler: Brown is participating in âthought control. ⊠Thatâs incredible scary. That is 1984.â In another segment, Wheeler repeatedly claimed that Brownâs removal of its post about the study was an example of âthought control.â Wheeler and her guest, The Daily Callerâs Anders Hagstrom, compared the situation to the dystopian novel 1984 and the Soviet era. Wheeler had previously criticized the Boy Scouts for accepting transgender youth and has suggested that affirming trans identities will lead to accepting âtransracial, âtransable,â and âtransbabyâ identities in which people believe themselves to be of a different race, ability or disability, or age. From the September 17 edition of One America Newsâ The Tipping Point:
ANDERS HAGSTROM (REPORTER, THE DAILY CALLER): I know thereâs a study at Brown college where a similar thing happened where this -- I can't remember if it was a he or a she who did this study, but they basically found that something regarding transgenders and a gender dysphoria and the way that children may grow out of it. And people objected to what that study found, and they just said, âOK, you're not allowed to publish that anymore. You canât do any more research.â
LIZ WHEELER (HOST): Right, because it might offend activists who are advocating for the transgender ideology.
HAGSTROM: Yeah, exactly, because it might offend people.
WHEELER: This is why I say this is thought control, because when you pick and choose what information is to be made public, and you pick and choose what you're going to hide from the American people because it might influence their thought in a way that you don't want. That's incredibly scary. That is 1984. That is thought control. It goes beyond the speech control.
HAGSTROM: Itâs Soviet, yeah.
WHEELER: The way that you control speech is you control what people are allowed to put in their heads so that they can form those ideas. It's terrifying, and itâs sanctioned now by liberals on these campuses.
Breitbartâs Tom Ciccotta: âBrown University has decided that not displeasing the LGBT community is more important than having its professors research this phenomenon.â On August 30, Breitbart Newsâ Tom Ciccotta wrote that Brown had âcensored a research paper on gender dysphoriaâ because the university âdecided that not displeasing the LGBT community is more important than having its professors research this phenomenon.â Breitbart often pushes anti-transgender narratives and cites ACPedsâ anti-transgender positions as credible.
The Federalistâs Robert Tracinski: âIs transgender the new anorexia?â The Federalistâs Robert Tracinski called Littmanâs study a âblockbusterâ for arguing that transgender identities âmight be a âsocial contagionâ -- a maladaptive coping technique for troubled teens, spread by peer groups and the Internet.â Tracinski claimed that Brown retracted its press release âin response to a furious outcry from transgender activistsâ who saw the research as a âthreat.â He also posited that the study began because researchers saw âeerie parallelsâ of âsocial contagionâ between eating disorders such as anorexia and transgender identities, and then highlighted the studyâs assertion that so-called ROGD, âwith the subsequent drive to transition, may represent a form of intentional self-harm.â He further claimed that medical professionals who offer gender-affirming care are âideologically motivated gender dysphoria specialistsâ who âhave engaged in massive malpractice in their zeal to âaffirmâ their young patientsâ self-diagnosis.â
The Federalistâs Joy Pullman: Brown ârepressedâ the study because it reinforces the idea that âtransgenderism looks a lot like a dangerous fad.â Federalist Executive Editor Joy Pullmann wrote that Brown had ârepressedâ Littmanâs study âafter a transgender activist feeding frenzy.â She continued, âThe reason trans activists went nuts is that the study reinforces what plenty of parents, public health experts, and doctors have been saying: Transgenderism looks a lot like a dangerous fad.â She also said that transgender advocates âdemand[ed] suppressing the resultsâ and that Brown âchose to prioritize the unreasonable demands of a tiny minority above the potential well-being of children and the process of scientific inquiry.â Pullman admitted that âthe study design has many flaws â self selection and self reporting among them.â However, she claimed that it was âcomparable in quality to studies that LGBT activists amplify when it serves their narratives.â Despite its flaws, Pullman still praised the study because âLittman found a number of things that make transgender narratives look terrible.â The Federalist is a go-to outlet for conservatives to push anti-LGBTQ stories, compare transgender inclusion to âtransgender authoritarianism,â and call gender-affirming procedures âmutilation.â From the August 31 post:
This makes it obvious why transgender activists do not want this information public. It suggests many gender dysphoric young people hit a rough patch in life (or several), have poor or immature coping skills, and got the message from peers, online, or both that transgenderism was a handy, simple explanation for their feelings that also offered instant social acceptance and attention.
National Reviewâs Madeleine Kearns: Brown âsuccumbed to political pressureâ and âsacrificed its core principles of scientific inquiry and truth-seeking.â In a post titled âWhy Did Brown University Bow to Trans Activists?â National Reviewâs Madeline Kearns claimed that Brown and PLOS ONE âsuccumbed to political pressureâ by re-evaluating the study and that the university âappears more concerned with its marketability than with finding truth,â which she said âundermines academic freedom.â Though she acknowledged that there were concerns about the sample of parents coming from 4thwavenow and other biased websites, Kearns suggested that Brownâs removal of its article about Littmanâs study was âcowardiceâ and âpart of a bigger trendâ -- an example of how âa radical ideological lobby has, once again, been highly effective in bullying dissenters into silence.â She concluded that Brown âsacrificed its core principles of scientific inquiry and truth-seeking to the feelings of âsome membersâ of their community.â National Review has a history of providing a platform to anti-LGBTQ figures such as anti-transgender conservative commentator David French, who in a May 9 article repeatedly misgendered Chelsea Manning and declared, âHeâs a man.â
Â