No Evidence Being Transgender Is A "Social Contagion"
People opposed to transgender rights have often pointed at the rising number of transgender clinic referrals as proof of "social contagion." There is no evidence for this claim.
In recent years, those opposed to transgender rights have argued that being transgender is a form of “social contagion,” and that the rise in transgender identification globally is not legitimate. While it is true that the number of people identifying as transgender in many countries is on the rise, the idea that transgender people are identifying as transgender because they are caught up in some form of mass “social contagion” is a theory that lacks substantiation. This theory is further contradicted by recent trends in non-trans LGBTQ+ identification, new research that refutes the proposed mechanisms for “social contagion of trans identity,” and even historical examples. It is time to put this theory to rest: being transgender is not contagious.
The idea of transgender “social contagion” was first proposed in a 2018 paper by Dr. Lisa Littman, a researcher who has pushed the theory heavily. The article, entitled “Rapid-onset gender dysphoria in adolescents and young adults: A study of parental reports,” proposed that social contagion was leading to an increase in trans identification. To support her claim, Littman solicited interviews from anti-trans websites such as Transgender Trend and 4thWaveNow. She used data from those interviews to claim that transgender youth “suddenly” develop gender dysphoria through a process known as “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria.”
Her paper was immediately withdrawn with an apology by the journal for correction after the data collection methods were revealed, with the republication stating that the research “does not validate the phenomenon” of transgender social contagion.
"Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria" is derived from interviews with parents who report their children "abruptly came out as trans" without any forewarning. For numerous parents on these websites opposed to transgender rights, they claimed their children’s coming out was too sudden to be genuine. Coupled with conservative media exposure asserting that being transgender results from factors ranging from TikTok to alleged "grooming" in schools, parents frequently sought alternative explanations for their children's trans identification, instead of acknowledging the possibility that their children were authentically transgender.
A pivotal study published in The Journal of Pediatrics in 2021 entirely debunked this concept. Professionals who work closely with transgender populations frequently observe that individuals harbor dysphoria for an extended period before revealing their feelings to loved ones. Upon coming out, these individuals often swiftly embrace their transgender identity, motivated by the liberation that comes with acknowledging one's true self. To determine whether transgender identification is genuinely "rapid," researchers sought to pose a direct question to transgender teenagers: How long have you known you were transgender?
The results were stunning. Transgender teens knew they were trans for an average of 4 years before coming out as trans and getting their first clinical visit:
The study did not stop there, however. It also analyzed the few transgender teens who indicated their gender dysphoria realization was more recent. It found no linkages among those groups with depression, online support, having transgender friends, or any other proposed mechanisms for “rapid-onset gender dysphoria.” To put it simply: transgender people often know they are trans for a long time before coming out, and having transgender friends does not influence you to “become transgender.”
Although there is no proposed explanation, those opposed to transgender rights continue to maintain that transgender people are increasing in population, and therefore, there is a “social contagion” factor that is explaining that increase. Proponents of this theory often claim, for instance, that “lesbians are going extinct” because of transgender men transitioning due to social forces - the idea often promoted is that being trans is somehow preferable, socially, to being gay. Problems with the theory aside (gay acceptance tends to be much higher than transgender acceptance in recent polls), the data does not support this claim.
LGBTQ+ identification is up across the board, not just transgender identification:
So what could be at play here, if not social contagion?
The most likely answer can be found in history. One hundred years ago, only 3% of people identified as left handed. By 1950, that number skyrocketed to 12%. If people treated left-handedness then like they treat being transgender today, we might see stories published stating that being left handed “is a choice” and that left handed people were getting it through “social contagion” factors. This is actually not far from what occurred in the time period - people viewed left-handedness as a choice, a bad habit, linked to mental illness, and something that could be trained out of. See the following excerpt from a study on left-handed kids in 1880:
"Amongst 54 children, whose ages ranged from 4 to 7 years, 8 children had come to school left-handed. They were not allowed to use their left hands in writing or ciphering. Great trouble had, in fact, been taken to make them desist from using their left hands. Some of them had to be kept near the teacher at their writing, but in the playground they threw stones and played at bowls with their left hands. It was thought that left-handedness seemed more prevalent with children likely to be neglected in infancy, but this could not hold good of two of the eight."
Things changed in the early to mid 1900s. Left-handed acceptance started to increase, with campaigns by parents that children should be free to use the hand they feel most comfortable with. The increased acceptance of left handedness led to a stunning result: a swing in left handedness to its current rate of 12% and a gradual elimination of forced right-handedness.
It is clear that “social contagion” does not explain increase in transgender identification. Instead, increased acceptance has allowed more LGBTQ+ people to feel safe being public with their identities. Similar to left handedness, LGBTQ+ rates in society at large are likely much higher than they were in the past when these identities faced heavier discrimination than they do today.
The misuse of “social contagion” and “rapid onset gender dysphoria” has led to widespread condemnation by over 60 psychological organizations, including the American Psychological Organization. Despite an overwhelming body of evidence refuting the concept of transgender social contagion, it continues to be propagated by some conservative politicians and anti-trans activists.
Earlier this year in Nebraska, Senator Kathleen Kauth referenced this discredited theory when promoting a bill she sponsored to prohibit all gender-affirming care for transgender youth. She stated, "there is a social contagion going around." Similarly, Representative Braxton Mitchell, the sponsor of a bill in Montana that bans gender-affirming care for transgender youth, said the same in his own hearing. More recently, in a national congressional hearing, Dr. Jennifer Bauwens, a leading Republican witness opposing gender-affirming care, asserted that transgender identities are the result of social contagion. This discredited theory continues to be invoked to legitimize efforts to ban gender-affirming care, despite its lack of credible backing.
Moving forward, more research will likely be done on the increase in LGBTQ+ identification worldwide. For those who are LGBTQ+, though, the culprit seems clear: the only phenomenon spreading in recent years is social acceptance, and for that, the community can be thankful.
Anti-transgenderism is clearly a social contagion.
You can tell a lot about what someone really thinks by their choice of words. The word "contagion" is typically only used when discussing disease; some viral or bacterial malady that requires a cure. I think their choice of words is telling. They think we are a disease, a blight, a plague if you will.