The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) decided at the last minute not to air Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? – a documentary made by the BBC. The program was scheduled to air 11 December, but the CBC was pressured to withdraw it on the day it was supposed to run after it was the subject of an all-too-familiar online campaign by activists.
LGBT activists claimed that the documentary featuring psychologist Dr. Kenneth Zucker, who has extensive experience in the area of child gender dysphoria, was “harmful” and would fuel transphobia.
Like other medical professionals brave enough to speak up about their concerns over gender therapy being used on children, Zucker’s research was snubbed because he dares to suggest that the majority of children with gender dysphoria outgrow it by puberty. Zucker proposes delaying social and/or physical transition, since there is a high probability that the child will become comfortable in their body. It was his refusal to kowtow to the LGBT agenda that resulted in his being fired from his position at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. As Debra W. Soh of CBS News states:
Nowadays, clinicians face extreme pressure to endorse the early transitioning model for their young patients, even when it may not be the best way forward for them. That's certainly the message that Zucker's firing sent, and it speaks all the more to why the film needed to be aired.
Zucker has not even spoken out against gender transitioning. In fact, he published studies supporting use of hormonal blockers for gender dysphoric children.
It is apparent, from the widespread advocacy of the early transition model, that LGBT activists are busy pushing an agenda. If they truly cared about children, they would let voices of all concerned professionals be heard, rather than blocking the dissemination of research that could benefit parents and their children who struggle with gender dysphoria. Instead, they are working to shut down anyone who disagrees with them. Soh states:
Supporting transgender people, including their right to dignity, support and medical intervention, isn't at odds with taking a scientifically guided approach to determining the best outcomes for children. But as is commonly the case with political movements, these nuances only complicate the narrative and cede opportunities for activists to gain further ground.
Those complicit in the silencing of legitimate science have lost sight of the forest for the trees. The issue is no longer about what's in the best interest of these children, but about winning, at any cost, the ideological war.