Liars can Figure, But Figures don’t Lie

Do you remember that saying?

Well the right-wing anti-LGBT haters came up with this weird new theory…

'Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria' Is Biased Junk Science
A frighteningly biased piece on trans youth was published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, says Brynn Tannehill, who breaks down why it's so wrong.
The Advocate
By Brynn Tannehill
February 20, 2018

Recently, a new anti-transgender narrative has emerged among the right wing. The narrative states that teens, particularly those assigned female at birth, are going on the internet and convincing themselves that they are transgender because being transgender is “trendy.” It treats transgender identities as a form of social contagion. This theory has been picked up on by numerous hate groups and conservative news outlets, including LifeSite, Barbara Kay, the Catholic Institute for Marital Healing, the Minnesota Family Council, MercatorNet, the Illinois Family Institute, the Family Research Council, the Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal, and an advocacy group of anti-gay therapists.

The entire theory is based on a single poster abstract in 2017 by Dr. Lisa Littman. Poster abstracts are often published when not only is the material too weak to be a journal article, but of insufficient quality to even be accepted for oral presentation at a conference. As such, the academic bar for a poster abstract getting accepted is very low. It was, however, published in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

Littman’s abstract suffers from so many methodological flaws, logical errors, and unacknowledged biases that it fits firmly in the category of junk science. Given how glaring these issues were, it is surprising that the Journal of Adolescent Health published it regardless of how low the bar was set.

Here’s why this abstract by Littman is poor science.

1. The sample group has a heavy and unacknowledged bias which affects the results
Littman posted a survey on three websites asking parents about their transgender teens. What she failed to mention in her abstract is that all three websites — 4thwavenow.com, transgendertrend.com, and YouthTransCriticalProfessionals.org — are all dedicated to parents who do not recognize the gender identities of their children, and do not support their transitions. Littman did not post her survey to sites where parents of transgender adolescents support their children or even neutral sites.

Wow, so much for a random sample, she went out looking for people to fit her hypothesis!

2. One of her survey questions appears to be a deliberate attempt to hide her bias
One of the survey questions asked respondents whether they believe “transgender people deserve the rights and protections as other people.” The abstract notes that 87.7 percent answered yes, and is presented in such a way as to suggest that the respondents did not harbor anti-transgender animus. However, this question, and statistic, appear to be deliberately misleading.

3. The unacknowledged bias in Littman’s sample leads her to ignore plausible explanations for her data supported by extant literature
Littman asks “before and after” coming out questions in her survey. This includes things such as whether the parent-child relationship improved or got worse after they came out, and whether the mental well-being of the child improved or declined after the child came out. Based on parents’ perceptions, both declined according to her survey.  She notes that this observation contradicts the existing body of research, which shows improvement when trans youth come out.

Tell me, if the parents do not accept their trans child what do you think they will say?

And the last flaw that the Advocate article pointed out was,

4. The conclusions reached by this abstract rely on poor logic and what appears to be a deliberately biased sample
The abstract concludes that “rapid onset gender dysphoria” is dangerous, real, and is caused by interactions with friends and people on the internet. This conclusion is based on some rather heroic leaps of logic.

The most grievous logical error is the conclusion that this is a new phenomenon, when current literature in the context of youth living in unsupportive homes would explain the observations. The abstract conclusion also seems to imply that sources of information which encourage parents to reject the identities of transgender youth are mainstream voices.

But do you want to bet that the anti-trans group will hold this up as an example against us?

Yeah, I had 'Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria' after fifty years of living with gender dysphoria. When I came out to him it was like 'Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria' for him but for me I have been fighting gender dysphoria all my life.

As one commenter said on the WPATH Facebook page…

“Rapid Onset???” I guess that’s what some people think when we finally come out to them after living with gender dysphoria for a lifetime.

The haters are going to make the most of this farce of junk science.