The Cornerstone of the Transgender Movement
When there are questionable actions taking place, it is often said that one should “follow the money” to find the real motivations behind the questionable activity. Money is an incredibly powerful influencer, which has historically been able to sway governments, bribe officials, or bias researchers. While money is a necessary part of modern society for the exchange of goods, there is one type that we should be aware of that has powerfully shaped much of our current culture’s obsession with gender and sex. This one, however, is not a type of currency; it is actually a man. Many revere his work as foundational to culture, but few realize the horror and exploitative nature of this man. To understand what the modern transgenderism movement is founded on, one must “follow the Money,” which in this case is Dr. John Money.
Dr. Money was a New Zealand psychologist who specialized in researching sex (or “sexology” as it was sometimes called). He is credited with coining or popularizing terms such as “gender role,” “sexual orientation,” and “gender identity.” He constructed a theory of sexual development, “…emphasizing the interaction and interdependence of social psychology and biological factors.” Money’s clinical work started with people who were considered intersex (born with reproductive anatomy that does not fit the typical definitions of male or female) at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. He eventually moved to Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore in 1951. His works are foundational to the modern gender theories, including the belief that a person can tangibly become the other sex: transgenderism.
The bulk of Money’s research allegedly led him to believe that the sex that was assigned by doctors and parents to a child at birth or during earliest childhood will dominate his gender identity. Basically, Money had assumed that gender was heavily influenced by nurture, not just nature. He wanted to prove this, so it was not surprising when he took on the case of a pair of twin brothers to test this hypothesis.
Bruce Reimer and his identical twin Brian were born in 1965. Both were born with slight genital defects, and the doctors attempted to correct it with circumcision. Dreadfully, the operation was botched and Bruce’s genitals were damaged beyond repair. Understandably, his parents did not allow the procedure done on his twin brother Brian (whose defect naturally resolved itself). The parents were referred to a psychologist with experience with physically intersex individuals: Dr. John Money. At the doctor’s advice, his parents agreed to have him “sex reassigned” and made into a girl via surgical, hormonal, and psychological treatments. Over time and through numerous office visits where he studied their interactions, Dr. Money apparently thought the transition was a great success.
Although this girl is not yet a woman, her record to date offers convincing evidence that the gender identity gate is open at birth for a normal child no less than for one born with unfinished sex organs or one who was prenataly over-or underexposed to androgen, and that it stays open at least for something over a year after birth
Money continued to monitor and experiment with the twins for more than a decade, analyzing the gender and sexual development of both boys with Bruce being reassigned the identity of a girl named Brenda. When the twins turned nine, Money published his self-reported success with the twins study in a book called Sexual Signatures:
The girl already preferred dresses to pants enjoyed wearing her hair ribbons, bracelets, and frilly blouses, and loved being her daddy’s little sweetheart. Throughout childhood, her stubbornness and the abundant physical energy she shares with her twin brother and expends freely have made her a tomboyish girl, but nonetheless a girl.
The influence of Dr. Money’s reports was widespread in theory and practice. Sociology, psychology and women’s study texts were rewritten to argue that, as Time magazine reported: “This dramatic case . . . provides strong support … that conventional patterns of masculine and feminine behavior can be altered. It also casts doubt on the theory that major sex differences, psychological as well as anatomical, are immutably set by the genes at conception.” Lay and social science writings still echo this case and so do medical texts., , ,, What many of these writings fail to include in their analysis of Dr. Money’s work was the abusive and sexually degenerate nature of it. These twin boys were not subjects of a study; they were victims of a predator.
As Bruce (aka Brenda) tried to heal from the gender reassignment surgeries and adapt to the artificial influx of female hormones, he regularly went to see Dr. Money along with his brother. As identical twins, they were considered ideal test subjects for a psychological study on gender and what influences it. Brian acted as the control group for comparison to Bruce. The scientific legitimacy of the study effectively ended there.
During the twin’s visits with Money, they were instructed to strip naked and look at their sibling’s genitals, as well as engage in sensual performances. Bruce was shown pictures of naked adult women, supposedly to train him to be more feminine and reinforce his gender identity. Later in life, Bruce said that much of Money’s treatment included the compulsory practicing of deliberately sexual positions and motions with his brother. Money justified it all as the equivalent of normal childhood sexual exploration. In a later interview with Rolling Stone, Bruce informed readers that Dr. Money had at least once photographed their “exercises.” Sometimes he watched them alone. Other times he observed them with multiple colleagues. The twin also recalled how, when they were alone with Dr. Money, the doctor would show anger and become verbally abusive if either of them resisted his orders—a stark contrast to the calm and polished veneer that their parents always saw.15
As a result of this controversial case going mainstream for all to see, Dr. Money’s views on the acceptability of pedophilia came to light. He had argued that pedophilia could be clinically divided into “affectionate pedophilia” and “sadistic pedophilia,” all the while appearing himself to be supportive of some aspects of the pro-pedophilia movement. Money once said “If I were to see the case of a boy aged ten or eleven who’s intensely erotically attracted toward a man in his twenties or thirties, if the relationship is totally mutual, and the bonding is genuinely totally mutual […] then I would not call it pathological in any way.” When this support of pedophilia is put in the context of his actions in the Reimer case, one really begins to question the motivations of this once lauded doctor and why he had these boys act out sexual activities while he watched.
For over a decade, Bruce and Brian unknowingly provided data that, according to biographers and the Intersex Society of North America, was used to reinforce Money’s theories on gender fluidity and provided justification for thousands of sex reassignment surgeries for children with abnormal genitals, as well as those in more recent times that have “transitioned” with no physical deformities as the reason for the surgery.
When one compares Money’s study data to Reimer’s testimony, it appears as if the famed sexologist was either dishonest or ignorant in his note taking. According to the victimized Bruce Reimer, unlike what Money had claimed, the young boy had not taken to the female role at all and had experienced severe gender dysphoria (the distress resulting from a person’s assigned gender), contradicting what Money had said about the experiment’s success. In this scenario, Bruce was forcibly assigned the gender of a girl, while in reality being a biological boy. Bruce reported that he actually did not identify as a girl, hated wearing dresses, disliked typical feminine activities and toys, as well as—quite justifiably—strongly resented all his visits to the doctor. The trauma got so bad that at the age of thirteen, Bruce told his parents he would commit suicide if he was forced to return to Dr. Money.14 All the female hormones, dresses and female norms they tried to use with “Brenda” Reimer simply made matters worse. On top of it all, he was viciously bullied and did quite poorly in school. The charade was falling apart. It makes one wonder if Dr. Money’s conclusions were intentional falsehoods or if he really did miss these blatant signs.
Eventually, at the age of fifteen, Bruce’s father finally told the twins the truth about what he really was. This brought great relief to Bruce. It appears all those years of gender dysphoria were actually reality pushing through. He immediately reassumed his male identity, taking the first name of David. By the age of 21, testosterone injections, surgeries to remove the breasts that the female hormones had caused to form, and the reconstruction of a passable penile replacement all helped him reclaim some of what Dr. Money had stolen from him. In interviews, and a later book about his experience, David described his dealings with Money as torturous and abusive. Accordingly, Reimer claimed he developed a lifelong distrust of hospitals and medical professionals.
The transition back to a male identity did indeed help David, as he began to work out, become more physically masculine and eventually married a single mother with three children. Unfortunately, the trauma never left. As is common with childhood abuse, it lingers—or in this case, builds to a head until something gives or the victims themselves break. The secret destroyed their family. His father sunk into alcoholism and his mother attempted suicide. Reimer’s twin sibling, Brian, later descended into substance abuse and petty crime. The physical stress wore on David too, leading twice to suicide attempts by his early twenties. In 2002, Brian Reiner died from a drug overdose. Two years later, David committed suicide at the age of thirty-eight.
The echoes of this tragedy still remain today, rippling through our culture. Instead of universal condemnation of John Money’s child abuse and discrediting of his work, he has become the foundation of an entire movement. Money’s concepts of gender have led to our “gender fluidity” and how sex and gender are no longer linked. Transgenderism has, thanks to Money and his disciples, convinced thousands that they can in every essence become the opposite gender from their physical birth sex. While many have assumed that transgender reassignment treatments, including hormonal puberty blockers and genital removal and remodeling, have been reserved for those legally at the age of consent, it has recently been discovered that such treatments have also been used on youth. The removal of healthy breasts at the onset of puberty has certainly been occurring in youth as early as 13 if not younger. Vaginoplasty, the irreversible last “stage” in male to female transsexual transitioning has also been occurring in minors in the United States despite guidelines to the contrary.
A new study of nationwide hospital databases discovered at least 1,130 minors between 2016 and 2019 went through reconstructive chest surgeries to match their perceived genders. This is a 389% increase in three years. As astonishing as this sudden spike is, it may not be the whole story. Leor Sapir of the Manhattan Institute suggests that the number of minors who receive gender-related chest surgeries is underrepresented in that study.
JAMA included only procedures performed in hospitals, not by plastic surgeons in private settings. Because these procedures yield around $10,000 per patient, many mastectomies take place outside of hospitals in surgery centers owned by plastic surgeons themselves.
This exponentially climbing number of minors getting these permanent and harmful physical changes is not slowing down. In fact, it is being encouraged from the top. In August of 2022, President Biden’s administration published a proposed rule that would require hospitals to provide “gender transition or gender-affirming care.” This includes what can more accurately described as chemical castration and body mutilation for no medical reason. Under the rule, insurers must pay for it, and there is no minimum age listed in the regulation.
Proponents of gender-confirming medical interventions will argue that suicidality is high in those that do not receive the surgeries. As the narrative goes, the individual’s gender dysphoria leads to sever anxiety, depression, and other issues and allowing them to conform to their perceived image of themselves will ease those burdens. The problem is, this is not backed up by research. Back in 2016, the Obama administration was unable to conclude that Medicare should pay for medical transitions due to the increase in suicidality after such surgeries.
Dr. Jack Turban is a leading voice in the pro-gender affirming surgeries for minors. He cites 16 studies that allegedly showed that such surgeries result in favorable mental health outcomes. Leon Sapir broke down those studies in an article, showing that many of those studies were short term follow ups which failed to properly analyze long term results. Two studies that Sapir pointed to showed that regret did not typically manifest fully until after ten years.  When these pro-gender surgery studies only publish mental health of individuals in the short term, they either ignorantly or manipulatively hide the actual rates of regret. In fact, one long term study with Swedish adults showed that, after 10-15 years post-surgery, the suicide rate was nineteen times that of comparable peers. No long-term study of this sort has yet to be done with those transitioned as minors. It may predictably be even worse than those that transitioned as adults.
What all these disciples of Dr. John Money fail to notice is the natural resolution of gender dysphoria in children. According to Dr. James Cantor, “roughly 60-90% of trans-kids turn out no longer trans by adulthood.” Even the regularly progressive New York Times published an article that said
Several studies have tracked the persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they grow. For example, Dr. Richard Green’s study of young boys with gender dysphoria in the 1980s found that only one of the 44 boys was gender dysphoric by adolescence or adulthood. And a 2008 study by Madeleine S. C. Wallein, at the VU University Medical Center in the Netherlands, reported that in a group of 77 young people, ages 5 to 12, who all had gender dysphoria at the start of the study, 70 percent of the boys and 36 percent of the girls were no longer gender dysphoric after an average of 10 years’ follow-up.
Clearly this is an absolute disaster of our own making. Science has been replaced by ideology, and biology has been replaced by imagination. Children who would naturally recover from their early mental disorder are being regularly pushed into permanent, life altering treatments that will severely disrupt how their bodies develop, sterilize them, and remove healthy body parts from them. The number of regretful transitioned persons will soon spike as the “honeymoon” phase ends and they finally see themselves in the mirror for what they are: a shadow and mockery of the gender that they could never actually become. Those that avoid suicide are already speaking out, but have an uphill battle to be heard, since mainstream media turns a blind eye to such counter-narrative stories. That said, if one takes the time to look, the regret is clear and it is absolutely heartbreaking.
Back in the 90’s, self-esteem was a huge message pushed through the educational system. Now, instead of helping people find value within themselves, our medical institutions agree with their twisted sense of brokenness and encourage their confusion. Rather than help them return to a correct understanding of reality, we have moved into a culture that does not acknowledge that any such reality exists. The truth is whatever each person wants it to be, so of course whatever a person says they feel like they can be. One social media influencer claims to be “tri-gendered,” with male, female and nonbinary as the three genders she identifies with. The severe lack of training in logic here is palpable, since it is absolutely impossible to be both genders and no gender at the same time. Other young people go as far as claiming to a different species., One of the worst, however, are those healthy people identify as handicapped, going as far as causing self-harm to their otherwise healthy bodies.,  At what point will doctors willingly assist in the destruction of healthy tissues simply because a person wants to be handicapped? Since they already remove healthy sex organs, we cannot be that far off from such a scenario.
If reality is no longer applicable, then any limitations are subject to the dumpster. If a child is mature enough to decide permanent bodily reconstruction, are they mentally capable of voting? Are minors mature enough to buy firearms? Are minors able to get tattoos? The hypocrisy is palpable in places like New York or California, where minors cannot get a tattoo even with parental permission, yet they can get an abortion or double mastectomy without their parents ever being notified. What really is the age of consent? If a child can consent to permanent body manipulation and sterilizing surgeries, can they consent to sexual relationships too? This brings us full circle back to Dr. Money and his apparent support of particular types of pedophilia. In a world where children are considered mature enough to allow doctors to butcher their genitals, it is not far off to see any push for legal pedophilic relationships. We even see scholars presenting TedTalks claiming that pedophilia is just another of the long and ever evolving list of gender identities. When will this insanity and child abuse stop? It stops when people make it stop.
Conservative talk show host Matt Walsh, host of the Matt Walsh Show and the man behind the controversial “What is a Woman” documentary has laid the groundwork for what must be done. After much research, Walsh had released his documentary exploring the world of gender theory, showing viewers the not only confusing, but self-contradictory nature of the view. He then revealed that permanent bodily harm was being done to minors around the country in the form of “gender affirming care.” This shocked many who thought only adults could participate in such procedures. Following the momentum of the film, Walsh has started to call out specific hospitals that perpetrate this child abuse, such as Vanderbilt University. Vanderbilt paused its surgeries on minors after Walsh’s efforts lead to media pressure and bad press.
Taking the message up the ladder to those in political office, Mr. Walsh has been highly influential in the formation and presentation of a statewide ban on gender conforming treatments and surgeries in his state of Tennessee. Governor Ron DeSantis also took action to ban such treatments on minors in Florida. Multiple other states are hinting at following suit. Sadly, this topic is becoming a battle ground of progressives and conservatives instead of being something we can all unite on in defense of our youth. The United States has often been the leader in scientific innovation, but on this topic, it lags behind many other nations to our discredit. It is up to the American people to take a stand against such cruel mutilation of children by taking it to the ballot box.
Minors are simply not capable of properly making such life altering choices. It is up to the adults in their lives to steer them closer to an understanding of reality, not push them further into their self-destructive rejection of reality. The bill in Tennessee does not just ban the gender transitions in minors: it would allow those that regret their transitions as minors to sue their parents for failing to protect them in their innocent youth. If other states can follow suit on this, we will soon see parents held accountable for encouraging such harm on impressionable children. It is a necessity for this to finally stop. It has almost become a fad for parents to jump on any hint that their child is within the LGBTQ camp.
Gender theory as introduced and influenced by Dr. John Money has sent disruptive ripples out across our culture. Posthumously, his ideas continue to reverberate throughout society, their destructive force knocking down one taboo after the other. Are these medical practitioners really trying to destroy the foundations of society and our future generations? Maybe a few, but probably not the majority. Are some convinced they are helping? Most definitely. Are some motivated by other more tangible things? Well, as we already said, when questionable actions take place, one should follow the Money, right?
 Bullough, Vern (2003). “The Contributions of John Money: A Personal View”. The Journal of Sex Research. Taylor and Francis, Ltd. 40 (3): 230–236. doi:10.1080/00224490309552186. JSTOR 3813317. PMID 14533016. S2CID 22122271.
 Money J, Tucker P. Sexual Signatures: On Being a Man or Woman. Boston: Little, Brown, 1975. Page 98
 Money, John. Sexual Signatures. Brown Little, 1975.
 Behrman RE, Kliegman RM. Nelson’s Essentials of Pediatrics. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co., 1994.
 Blethen SL, Weldon VV. “Disorders of External Genital Differentiation”. In: Kelly VC, ed. Practice of Pediatrics. Vol. 7. Philadelphia: Harper & Row, 1985:1-23.
 Catlin EA, Crawford JD. “Neonatal Endocrinology”. In: Oski FA, ed. Principles and Practice of Pediatrics. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1990:420-429.
 Ratzan SK. “Endocrine & Metabolic Disorders”. In: Dworkin PH, ed. Pediatrics. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1996:523-565.
 Diamond M. “Sexual Identity, Monozygotic Twins Reared in Discordant Sex Roles and a BBC Follow-Up”. Archives of Sexual Behavior 1982; 11:181-185.
 Interview: John Money; PAIDIKA: The Journal of Paedophilia; vol. 2, no. 3; Spring 1991