Before taking all this on, I want to start with an admission.
I once made two critical decisions back to back that had far reaching ramifications, both concerning language and how the Daily Caller would use it.
First the good: I was the one who first suggested referring to “gender affirming care” as “sex changes” and “sex changes for minors” when children were involved. I felt that not only would it resonate in all the best ways, regardless of audience, but also that it was comprehensively accurate. School administrators quietly referring to Jane as Johnny and not telling Jane’s parents was as accurately a sex change as Jane getting stuffed with testosterone and suffering a mastectomy to boot.
An added benefit would be that the stigma around sex changes still registered among both sides of the debate. Adults getting sex changes was still shocking. Now imagine children?
It wasn’t long before the phraseology was widely adopted among conservatives. I considered it a win for reality. It was also edifying to the ol’ ego.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member