Where does transgender psychology end?

OPINION:

Suppose a 16-year-old boy has just gone through the early stages of puberty. He loves baseball and was one of the top players in the 11-12 little league. Now, however, the other boys have surpassed him physically, and he has become a mediocre player — couldn’t even make the high school team.

He has an epiphany. He no longer identifies with his 16-year-old body, which has made him feel weak, inept and awkward. His self-esteem has been shattered, and he yearns for a time when he was content and comfortable within his own body, so he decides on reshaping himself to resemble an 11-year-old boy. With new-found body hair completely shaved, he starts wearing clothes typical of boys that age and learns the new video games they now enjoy. A name change is undertaken, switching from Joseph to the “Joey” he called as a youngster. Joey even seeks surgical attention for his vocal cords so he can revive the tender tone of a boy five years younger. Upon his return, all he did was bash home runs and toss no-hitters.  

Preposterous? Please do not dismiss this as a transphobic thought experiment. On the contrary, it alerts us to confused attitudes towards science and how we — liberals and conservatives — can be erratic when agreeing or disagreeing with its findings. This thought experiment asks us: If you accept that a man can identify himself as a woman and thus compete in female sports, on what basis do you reject the 16-year-old identifying himself as an 11-year-old playing little league?  

To respond that this analogy fails because gender identity is more pervasive than what we might call “transchronos” (those who want to switch the chronological state of their bodies) is misleading. Transgender individuals comprise less than 1% of the general population. On the other hand, once human beings reach 40, most rue the youthful days when they couldn’t wait to look older. Past 40, many of us will devote considerable effort and money to looking younger, feeling younger, identifying as younger (as in the “you’re only as old as you feel” mantra.) Most of us are “transchronos.”  

Dare we respond that being 16 years old is an objective or natural fact? That will not work if we also ignore the objective or natural facts that zoologists, botanists and human geneticists assume about the biological differences among male and female plants, animals and humans. Chromosomes, anatomy, lung capacity, and muscular and skeletal development are measurable and identifiable. A similar difference can be found in a 16-year-old who wants to play in the 11-12 little league.

To recommend counseling for the hypothetical 16-year-old is also risky, if not antiquated. When it comes to deciding on one’s true identity, acceptance and encouragement are the currently correct reactions rather than requesting psychiatric help.   

Liberals and conservatives tend to cherry-pick when science is right, or the data tells us what we want to hear. Conservatives are deemed anti-science if they doubt climate warming or the mandates ushered in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. That could be, yet many liberals adopt an anti-science posture when it comes to identity politics, with transgender cases drawing the latest attention.  

A recent highlight to this thought experiment: Over the last several months, Amy Schneider became one of the most successful competitors in the history of “Jeopardy,” often guaranteeing victory before the Final Jeopardy challenge. Fans and previous champions celebrated Ms. Schneider’s domination. It was well known early on that Ms. Schneider was transgender. Yet there was not one hint of controversy about her success. “Jeopardy” is primarily a game of smarts, where the brain difference between men and women is negligible.  

Indeed, in her 2020 book, “Seven and a Half Lessons About the Brain,” neuroscientist Lisa Barrett underscores this fact when she distinguishes the human brain from other species, particularly its unique role in making social interaction possible. Any difference between human male and female brains is a nonissue in her book.  

This is not the case when a 21-year-old man decides to lower his testosterone levels, eliminate body hair, develop breasts and compete among biological females in such physically demanding sports as swimming. If we remain unconvinced, how or why would we object to our hypothetical 16-year-old who plans to alter his identity/ body and return to play baseball against 11-year-olds?  

• Alex Hooke is a professor of philosophy at Stevenson University. His most recent book is Philosophy Sketches — 700 words at a time. Second edition (Apprentice House, 2021)