I've received several letters from Gary Stradling and Terry Goldman, and I thought it would be helpful to delve into the scientific basis of being transgender.
First, let's summarize the key points: Science has consistently demonstrated that being transgender is not a choice. Biology is a complex field, and it's not as straightforward as XX and XY. The transgender community represents only about 1.3% of the population, making them vulnerable targets for anti-trans groups. These groups often exploit this vulnerability to scapegoat the transgender community, ignoring the real issues that plague our society.
Now, let's talk about the science. Numerous studies have shown that transgender individuals are real and not a choice. It's just as natural as the color of your skin, your handedness, or your height. The XX and XY chromosomes determining sex and gender are an oversimplification that works for most of the population, but it doesn't encompass the full complexity of biological diversity. Just as Newtonian physics works for most practical applications but breaks down at extreme conditions, we shouldn't abandon scientific theories simply because they only cover the 1% or less of cases.
Here's a comprehensive resource on sex and gender that goes beyond the basics. It's a long biology lesson from Forrest Valkai (https://youtu.be/nVQplt7Chos?si=7cVtAHI_izkXUlnR). He's got nearly 400 scientific references and explains how sex, sexuality, and gender are spectrums in humans and across the animal kingdom. For single references, one interesting paper is from the NIH (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8955456/#:~:text=The%20observed%20shift%20away%20from,for%20a%20female%20gender%20identity). It's a study that shows how using a machine learning algorithm to classify brains reliably showed male and female brains. They found that MTF trans brains were more female than cis males, but completely female (note that this didn't look at after hormone replacement therapy, so that might change things). But here's the conclusion: "The observed shift away from a male-typical brain anatomy towards a female-typical one in people who identify as transgender women suggests a possible underlying neuroanatomical correlate for a female gender identity." So it's an anatomical difference that might or might not be genetic. If you're looking for something closer to Los Alamos, a researcher at LANL researching epigenetics and transgenderism and can be seen in this TED Talk (https://youtu.be/HLEgiR1Fsds?si=OotRzK_ShZRgBhgt).
There have been numerous attempts, both locally and nationally, to ban LGBTQ+ materials. Some of these attempts come from schools, and now they're spreading to everything. They often claim to be protecting children, but in reality, they're doing more harm than good. It's okay to protect children from sexually explicit materials, but that doesn't mean we should erase all references to LGBTQ+ life. In the United States, about 10% of the population is LGBTQ+. If books and stories accurately represented American life, one in ten characters should be LGBTQ+, and one in a hundred should be trans. Take, for example, "And Tango Makes Three," a book about two male penguins who raise a baby. This book is often banned from LGBTQ+ hate groups like Mom's for Liberty. It has nothing to do with sex and simply shows two loving fathers taking care of their child.
Under Trump, the Stonewall monument, a significant milestone in the LGBTQ+ movement, was stripped of its transgender representation (https://www.npr.org/2025/02/14/g-s1-48923/stonewall-monument-transgender-park service#:~:text=New%20Music%20Friday-,Park%20Service%20erases%20'transgender'%20and%20'queer'%20from%20Stonewall,lesbian%2C%20gay%20and%20bisexual%20people.). This move, which erased 'transgender' and 'queer' from the monument, is a blatant attempt to rewrite history to serve an agenda. It's even worse when you consider the government's decision to remove photos of the Enola Gay, a crucial part of Los Alamos, from government websites under DEI initiatives because it includes the word 'Gay' (https://www.newsweek.com/military-remove-enola-gay-photos-dei-rules-2041029). While it's likely that these changes will be reversed, the fact that they've gone this far should be a cause for concern.
Furthermore, the argument that LGBTQ+ parents are less suitable for children than straight parents has been largely debunked (https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2154&context=jiws). While there are some reports that suggest otherwise, they are often flawed. This study, which analyzed 72 different studies, shows an overwhelmingly support that CIS and LGBTQ+ parents are roughly equivalent in raising children, and why the few that differ have certain problematic points. I will also note that many anti-trans advocates point to the CASS report when criticizing trans people and/or trans care. This report had major flaws such as dismissing the trans peoples responses in favor or the parents, bad assumptions, and demanding double blind studies for anything that would remotely support trans, but not for anti-trans care (double blind studies in these cases would be near impossible due to the nature of the medicine and medical ethics). Here is a full scientific rebuttal from Yale (https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/integrity-project_cass-response.pdf)
For those curious about the significance of this topic, I can share my personal experience as part of the LGBTQ+ community. For years, I suppressed my true feelings, believing that being LGBTQ+ was wrong. I had never met anyone like me, and it was portrayed as abnormal and a choice on TV and media. The only option was to deny it even to myself and feel like something was fundamentally wrong with me. This internal struggle took a toll on my mental health, but I managed to overcome it. Unfortunately, not all LGBTQ+ individuals are as fortunate, leading to a significantly higher suicide rate.
This isn't about religion, but since we are touching on the topic I will include a bit of information. Regarding my religious beliefs, I'm not particularly religious. I believe it's arrogant of me to claim that I know which religion is right, if any, but support anyone who knows the right one for them. Instead, I strive to be a good person and acknowledge my ignorance. However, I've come across some intriguing arguments suggesting that Transgender individuals and modern Christianity can coexist (in some cases, even find support in certain religious texts). I'll include some references for those interested.
Here are a few resources you might find helpful:
Let's talk about using trans people as a distraction. When groups searched for trans athletes in middle and high school, there were only 5 (https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/01/15/how-many-transgender-athletes-are-there-in-the-us/). And in the NCAA, there were less than 10 (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgezz0k3mno). Now, if they have an advantage or not, I don't know, and likely more research is needed. When you look at the spectrum of biology, the question becomes even harder. Take the woman boxer Imane Khelif who was assigned female at birth. There's been speculation that she might have a genetic abnormality like XY missing the SRY, but that has no definitive evidence (I do not think you can count Russia's word as definitive evidence). We do know that she was born with female anotomy and grew up that way. Albania bans transgenderism and she has female on her birth cirtificate. And there were also cases of the South African runner with natural high testosterone (https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/06/sport/caster-semenya-totestosterone-limits-world-athletics-spt-intl/index.html#:~:text=Follow%20CNN-,Caster%20Semenya%20says%20she%20went%20through%20'hell'%20due%20to%20testosterone,limits%20imposed%20on%20female%20athletes&text=South%20Africa's%20two%2Dtime%20Olympic,negative%20impact%20on%20her%20health.). So, I'm not going to argue this either way, just point out that it is a distraction from real issues with statistically no trans athletes (In the same way you chances of winning the lottery don't statistically change rather you buy a ticket or not, it happens, but mathematically not really).
The debate about "men" in women's spaces often centers around concerns about assault. However, this also isn't a real issue. Trans women simply want to use the restroom that aligns with their gender, and they're often put in danger when using the restroom that doesn't match their gender. It's not the other way around. (https://juliaserano.medium.com/transgender-people-bathrooms-and-sexual-predators-what-the-data-say-2f31ae2a7c06). One argument is that someone might disguise themselves as a woman to gain access to those spaces. In such cases, it would be an issue with a cisgender man violating voyeurism laws, not trans people. This applies to anyone who lies about being trans to do something they shouldn't. If you ban trans people from using the restroom that aligns with their gender, it won't solve this problem; it will only harm trans people.
By the way, any trans surgery for minors is extremely rare (basically non existent even among those with gender dysphoria). (https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/gender-affirming-surgeries-rarely-performed-on-transgender-youth/) This is another tactic used by the anti-trans movement to scare people. In fact, there are far more cisgender people undergoing these procedures, such as breast enhancements, than trans, but for some reason, those are considered acceptable. (https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/gradeschool/puberty/Pages/Cosmetic-Surgery-in-Teens-Information-for-Parents.aspx#:~:text=Breast%20augmentation%20(breast%20implants)%20%2D,18%2D19%20year%20old%20girls.)
There are real sexual predators out there, and we should be strengthening and enforcing those laws. Trump is convicted of sexual assault (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html). He also was caught on tape talking about using his position as the owner of Miss America to gain access to the dressing rooms of young ladies, and possibly commit assault (https://www.vox.com/2016/10/7/13205842/trump-secret-recording-women) and he didn't need to pretend to be trans to do it. Then we have Matt Gaetz trying to stop his evidence of statutory rape being released (https://6abc.com/post/matt-gaetz-sues-house-ethics-committee-stop-release-report-sexual-misconduct-probe/15696271/). Biden had uncomfortable touching, but not of a sexual nature (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/04/joe-biden-allegations-physical-behavior-women), though this wouldn't violate the law (it made them uncomfortable but wasn't to the level of assault). And to be clear, I think no matter what side, if they were guilty of it, they should be prosecuted.
Let's approach this topic with an open mind and consider the evidence. We can't rely solely on anecdotal evidence or personal opinions. Instead, we should look at the statistics and the facts. I'm open to discussing these allegations further if you're interested. But if you're just here to troll or spread misinformation, I will follow Pedro Pascal on say I am not interested (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pedro-pascal-instagram-trolls_n_67c1e2e6e4b0abc2b3eecb85).