What Think You?

Keynote Address: Unscripted — Introducing Intergender Dynamics and Reframing Gender-Type Prejudice by Richard Hogan, MD, PhD(2), DBA

Read on Substack


🇨🇦 Richard Hogan PhD (Mathematics) · MD (Neuroscience) · PhD (Ethics) · DBA (HRD) Architect of IGD & IBT | Rewriting the language of gender justice Essays, theory, and verse from the post-binary frontier


Keynote Address: Unscripted—Introducing Intergender Dynamics and and Reframing Gender-Type Prejudice


Good morning.

It is an honor to stand before you today—not to echo what has already been said, but to challenge what we’ve long accepted. To offer not just a critique, but a new vocabulary. A new lens. A new way forward. I hope you are ‘not toned deaf’.

For decades, we have used the term misogyny to name and confront systemic prejudice against women. It has served us well in many ways. But today, I ask you—academics, legal scholars, educators, and clinicians—to consider this: What if the language we use to fight injustice is now limiting our ability to understand it?

We are living in a post-binary world. Gender is no longer a fixed category—it is a spectrum, a performance, a negotiation. And yet, our frameworks remain tethered to binary logic. Misogyny is one such tether. It is gender-specific. Directionally fixed. It presumes a hierarchy that no longer reflects the lived realities of our students, our patients, our communities.

So today, I introduce a new term: Intergender Dynamics , or IGD .

IGD refers to the patterned, reciprocal, and often asymmetrical interactions between individuals and groups across the gender spectrum. It is not just about identity—it is about relationship . It is about how we perform, police, and punish gender roles in our daily lives. It is about the emotional labor we assign, the authority we grant, the empathy we withhold.

And this is not just a sociological insight—it is a medical one.

Recent research in gender-affirming care has shown that transgender and gender-diverse individuals face significant barriers in accessing health services, often due to systemic bias and relational discomfort within clinical settings. Studies have also revealed that patients with dynamic or evolving gender identities experience distress not only from institutional exclusion, but from interpersonal dynamics—how they are spoken to, validated, or dismissed by providers.

In pediatric and adolescent medicine, clinicians are now trained to recognize how gender-role expectations affect mental health, emotional development, and access to care. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health and The Endocrine Society have emphasized the importance of relational sensitivity—not just diagnostic accuracy—in improving outcomes.

What does this tell us?

It tells us that IGD is not just a theoretical tool—it is a clinical imperative . If we want to reduce disparities, improve mental health, and foster trust in care, we must understand how gender prejudice operates not only in policy, but in conversation. In tone. In silence.

To complement IGD, I also propose Intergender Bias Theory (IBT) —a framework for analyzing the structural architecture of gender-type prejudice. IBT examines how laws, curricula, and institutional norms enforce rigid roles and marginalize deviation. Together, IGD and IBT offer a dual lens: one that captures both the macro-level scaffolding of bias and the micro-level choreography of interaction.

Let me be clear: retiring the term misogyny is not an act of denial. It is an act of evolution. It is a recognition that our language must grow with our understanding. That our frameworks must reflect the complexity of the world we now inhabit.

So I call on you:

  • Academics , to revise your syllabi, your research, your theories.
  • Legal scholars , to expand your statutes, your protections, your definitions.
  • Educators , to teach emotional literacy, role deconstruction, and relational justice.
  • Clinicians , to recognize IGD in patient care and to train for relational sensitivity.

Let us move from naming contempt to understanding connection. Let us shift from binary blame to systemic insight. Let us unscript ourselves—and write a new language of liberation.

This is not the end of a conversation. It is the beginning of a movement.

Thank you.

(snip-To read in Latin, French, Spanish, or Arab, click through to the Substack)

Jimmy Kimmel Cancelled??? Stop Being Pusillanimous!!! | BREAKING NEWS Armageddon Update

Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs

The far-right commentator didn’t pull his punches when discussing his bigoted views on current events

Charlie Kirk, the far-right commentator and ally of Donald Trump, was killed on Wednesday doing what he was known for throughout his career – making incendiary and often racist and sexist comments to large audiences.

If it was current and controversial in US politics, chances are that Kirk was talking about it. On his podcasts, and on the podcasts of friends and adversaries, and especially on college campuses, where he would go to debate students, Kirk spent much of his adult life defending and articulating a worldview aligned with Trump and the Maga movement. Accountable to no one but his audience, he did not shy away in his rhetoric from bigotry, intolerance, exclusion and stereotyping.

Here’s Kirk, in his own words. Many of his comments were documented by Media Matters for America, a progressive non-profit that tracks conservative media.

On race

If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024

If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022

Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023

If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024

If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023

On debate

We record all of it so that we put [it] on the internet so people can see these ideas collide. When people stop talking, that’s when you get violence. That’s when civil war happens, because you start to think the other side is so evil, and they lose their humanity.

– Kirk discussing his work in an undated clip that circulated on X after his killing.

Prove me wrong.

– Kirk’s challenge to students to publicly debate him during the tour of colleges he was on when he was assassinated.

On gender, feminism and reproductive rights

Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.

– Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025

The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered.

– Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded, published on 8 September 2024

We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 April 2024

On gun violence

I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.

– Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023

On immigration

America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 22 August 2025

The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 20 March 2024

The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 March 2024

On Islam

America has freedom of religion, of course, but we should be frank: large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 30 April 2025

We’ve been warning about the rise of Islam on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with western civilization.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 24 June 2025

Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America.

– Charlie Kirk social media post, 8 September 2025

On religion

There is no separation of church and state. It’s a fabrication, it’s a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists.

– The Charlie Kirk Show, 6 July 2022

Dani Anguiano contributed reporting.

Charlie Kirk was a hate monger who vilified and called for the violent erasure of anyone not a white cis straight Christian males.

He Still Did It, & He Still Owes

This is a succinct summary and discussion of the decision and its import.

Affirmed: E. Jean Carroll Case by Joyce Vance
Read on Substack

I asked Robbie Kaplan, the lawyer who tried the case, how she felt after learning that the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the $83.3 million verdict a jury awarded E. Jean Carroll in her defamation case against Donald Trump. This is what Kaplan told me: “Both the amazing and brave E. Jean Carroll and I could hardly be happier about today’s decision from the Second Circuit. It has been a long road to get here, and we are not at the end of the road yet, but as the opinion makes clear: ‘The starting point is the now-indisputable fact that a jury found in Carroll II that Trump sexually abused Carroll in 1996, and … that, based on the jury’s findings, Carroll did not lie and that Trump uttered falsehoods in his statements accusing her of lying and acting with improper motivations.’”

The Second Circuit affirmed the verdict against Trump on the same day that Trump’s birthday missive to Jeffrey Epstein became public. Trump says he didn’t send it, but the signature is extremely similar to verified Trump signatures on notes he wrote to both George Conway and Hillary Clinton. The birthday message is in the distinctive Sharpie marker scrawl Trump is known for. But Trump is insisting it isn’t his, a strange hill to die on since his friendship with Epstein is well documented. A jury believed E. Jean when she said Trump sexually assaulted her. The jury of public opinion may well believe Trump sent this incriminating note to Epstein.

This image shared by Democrats on the House Oversight Committee shows the birthday note to Jeffrey Epstein bearing Donald Trump's name. Trump has repeatedly denied writing the letter.

Trump will undoubtedly try to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. It will be up to the Court to decide whether to hear the case or let the Second Circuit’s opinion stand.

The 70-page opinion starts like this: “A jury found that then-President Trump acted with common law malice when he made defamatory statements about Carroll in June 2019 and awarded compensatory and punitive damages. Trump appeals, arguing that he is entitled to presidential immunity or, in the alternative, a new trial. Trump also contends that the jury’s damages award is excessive and must be remitted.” The court then writes one word, “AFFIRMED,” which means that the jury’s verdict stands. You can read the full opinion here.

Last December, the Second Circuit affirmed the verdict in the case referred to as “Carroll II”—the second defamation case Carroll filed against Trump, which confusingly went to trial first (because Trump bogged down “Carroll I” in appeals). The jury in Carroll II returned a $5 million verdict against Trump.

In this case, Carroll I, Carroll’s lawyer, Robbie Kaplan, argued to the jury that if a $5 million verdict was insufficient to stop Trump’s defamation of Carroll, then they needed to return a larger verdict that they believed would stop his misconduct. That’s what they did. The verdict was for $83.3 million.

Trump asked the Court of Appeals to reverse for two reasons:

  • He argued that the Supreme Court’s decision about presidential immunity in criminal cases in Trump v. United States means the Second Circuit erred when it refused to afford him immunity in this civil case, even though it involves an assault that occurred decades before he became the president. Beyond that, while he defamed Carroll while he was in office the first time, his comments were about an entirely personal matter that had nothing to do with the office he held. The court declined to reverse on this ground. They held Trump had waived the immunity argument by not making it at the proper time before the lower court.
  • Trump also challenged the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Carroll and other procedural rulings. The trial court held that a jury had already found that Trump sexually assaulted Carroll in the first trial and that finding was binding in the second case. That decision reflects the well-known principle of collateral estoppel, and the Court ruled there was no reason to disturb it because the identical issue was decided in the prior action and Trump had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue during those proceedings.

Trump has frequently been able to twist courts and delays to his advantage. He did that here for a time. But that clock seems to have run out on him. The Supreme Court would have to up end its existing jurisprudence on basic procedural issues to rule for Trump here.

A jury believed E. Jean Carroll. That’s the bottom line. In our system, we leave decisions about disputed facts and what happened to juries. The jury here deliberated and found against Donald Trump. That decision should remain in place. In an era where so much damage is being done to women’s legal standing, it’s essential that we be believed when we have the courage to speak out about sexual assault. Carroll did that. She told friends about the attack at the time in occurred but had been too intimidated by threats she would lose her job and her livelihood if she spoke up to move forward then.

If we can do nothing else for women in an era where abortion rights, more properly understood as the right to receive lifesaving medical care, and other rights have been taken away, we can do this: we can believe them when they summon the courage to come forward and reveal a rape or a sexual assault. Maybe if our nation had done that sooner, we wouldn’t have had a Trump presidency at all.

We’re in this together,

Joyce

Why Anti-Trans Hate Makes a Toxic Environment for Women Athletes

These bans have been successful in part because of a toxic and ruthless ecosystem of far-right influencers, like Riley Gaines, who have formed entire careers around attacking trans athletes by prioritizing hate and misinformation.

“So much of what we see … just seems like it’s wrapped up in really hateful and negative messages that aren’t good for anyone,” says Mary Fry, a professor of sport and exercise psychology at the University of Kansas. “We’re creating issues where maybe we don’t need to.”

The anti-trans attacks in sports are also affecting cis women. Ayala, a competitive cyclist, remembers one race where she and her trans friend both made the podium. When photos of the event were posted on Facebook, people accused her of being trans, and she was added to a “list of males who have competed in female sports” maintained by Save Women’s Sports.

https://www.unclosetedmedia.com/p/why-anti-trans-hate-makes-a-toxic

Jul 22, 2025

Photo by Nik via Unsplash.

Earlier this year, 16-year-old AB Hernandez became the target of nationwide hate and harassment when the president of a local school board publicly doxxed the track and field athlete and outed her as transgender. Right-wing activists misgendered her and called her mom “evil;” swarms of adults showed up to heckle her at games; Charlie Kirk pushed state governor Gavin Newsom to condemn her; and President Donald Trump threatened to withhold federal funding from California over her participation.

While transgender athletes are very rare, this type of harassment towards them is playing out across the country and internationally. A trans girl was harassed at a soccer game in Bow, New Hampshire, by adult protestors wearing XX/XY armbands, representing an anti-trans sports clothing brand. And in British Columbia, a 9-year-old cis girl was accosted by a grown man who accused her of being trans and demanded that she prove her sex to him.

While research into the relative athletic capabilities of trans and cis women is ongoing, far-right groups, including the Alliance Defending Freedom and the Leadership Institute, have been putting hate before science to turn the public against trans athletes since at least 2014. And it’s working.

Laws, rules or regulations currently ban trans athletes from competing in sports consistent with their gender identity in 29 states, with 21 beginning the ban in kindergarten. The majority-conservative Supreme Court announced this month that it’ll be taking on the question of the constitutionality of the bans. Meanwhile, the federal government is pressuring states without bans to change their policies in compliance with a Trump executive order that attempts to institute a nationwide ban.

Trump signs an executive order calling for bans on trans women and girls from women’s sports. Photo by: The White House.

These bans have been successful in part because of a toxic and ruthless ecosystem of far-right influencers, like Riley Gaines, who have formed entire careers around attacking trans athletes by prioritizing hate and misinformation.

“So much of what we see … just seems like it’s wrapped up in really hateful and negative messages that aren’t good for anyone,” says Mary Fry, a professor of sport and exercise psychology at the University of Kansas. “We’re creating issues where maybe we don’t need to.”

Harassment and Mental Health

Grace McKenzie has been deeply affected by these hate campaigns. A lifelong athlete, McKenzie has stayed healthy by playing multiple sports where she’s met “amazing people.” Shortly after she transitioned in 2018, she was thrilled when she was invited to join a women’s rugby team at the afterparty of a Lesbians Who Tech conference.

Grace McKenzie. Photo courtesy of McKenzie.

“Rugby became my home, it was my first queer community, it was the space where I really discovered my own womanhood,” McKenzie told Uncloseted Media. “I could be the sometimes-masculine, soft-feminine person who play[s] rugby and loves sports.”

But that started to change in 2019, when McKenzie and others on her team started to hear rumors that World Rugby was considering a ban on trans athletes. Fearing the loss of her community, she started a petition that racked up 25,000 signatures—but it wasn’t enough, and the ban took effect in 2020.

As anti-trans rhetoric in sports has ramped up, McKenzie says she’s had soul-crushing breakdowns that have left her “sobbing uncontrollably and unconsolably.”

“It would be these waves of such intense despair and rage—it was like going through grief for five years,” she says. “I have to wake up every single day and read about another state or another group of people who say that they don’t want me to exist.”

While McKenzie says she’s found the strength to keep playing where she can, sports psychologist Erin Ayala has seen clients leave sports altogether due to the hate toward trans athletes.

“It can be really difficult when they feel like they’re doing everything right … and they still don’t belong,” says Ayala, the founder of the Minnesota-based Skadi Sport Psychology, a therapy clinic for competitive athletes. “Depression can be really high. They don’t have the strength to keep fighting to show up. And then that can further damage their mental health because they’re not getting the exercise and that sense of social support and community.”

That was the story of Andraya Yearwood, who made national headlines in high school when she and another trans girl placed first and second in Connecticut’s high school track competitions. The vitriol directed at her was intense: Parents circulated petitions to have her banned; crowds cheered for her disqualification; the anti-LGBTQ hate group Alliance Defending Freedom launched a lawsuit against the state for letting her play; and she faced a torrent of transphobic and racist harassment.

“It’s a very shitty experience,” Yearwood, now 23, told Uncloseted Media.

Fearing more harassment, she quit running in college.

“I understood that collegiate athletics is on a much larger and much more visible scale. … I just didn’t want to go through all that again for the next four years,” she says. “Track obviously meant a lot to me, and to have to let that go was difficult.”

It’s understandable that Yearwood and other trans athletes struggle when they have to ditch their favorite sport. A litany of research demonstrates that playing sports fosters camaraderie and teamwork and improves mental and physical health. Since trans people disproportionately struggle from poor mental healthsocial isolation and suicidality, these benefits can be especially crucial.

“In some of these cases, kids have been participating with a peer group for years, and then rules were made and all of a sudden they’re pulled away,” says Fry. “It’s a hard world to be a trans individual in, so it’d be easy to feel lonely and separated.”

Caught in the Crossfire

The anti-trans attacks in sports are also affecting cis women. Ayala, a competitive cyclist, remembers one race where she and her trans friend both made the podium. When photos of the event were posted on Facebook, people accused her of being trans, and she was added to a “list of males who have competed in female sports” maintained by Save Women’s Sports.

Ayala isn’t alone. Numerous cis female athletes have been “transvestigated,” or accused of being trans, including Serena Williams and Brittney Griner. During the 2024 Paris Olympics, Donald Trump and Elon Musk publicly accused Algerian boxer Imane Khelif of being trans after her gold medal win, as part of a wave of online hate against her. She would later file a cyberbullying complaint against Musk’s X.

While women of all races have been targeted, Black women have faced harsher scrutiny due to stereotypes that portray them as more masculine.

Yearwood remembers posts that would fixate on her muscle definition and compare her to LeBron James.

“I think that is attributed to the overall hyper-masculinization and de-feminization of Black women, and I know that’s a lot more prevalent for Black trans women,” she says. “It made it easier to come for us in the way that they did.”

A Big Distraction

Joanna Harper, a post-doctoral scholar at Oregon Health & Science University and one of the world’s leading researchers on the subject, says that the jury is still out on whether the differences in athletic performance between trans and cis women are significant enough to warrant policy changes.

“People want simple solutions, they want things to be black and white, they want good guys and bad guys,” Harper says, adding that the loudest voices against trans women’s participation do not actually care about what the science says.

“This idea that trans women are bigger than cis women, therefore it can’t be fair, is a very simple idea, and so it is definitely one that people who want to create trans people as villains have pushed.”

Even Harper herself has been the victim of the far-right’s anti-trans attacks. Earlier this year, she was featured in a New York Times article where she discussed a study she was working on with funding from Nike into the effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on adolescents’ athletic performance.

After the article came out, Riley GainesTurning Point USA and Fox News-affiliated sports outlet OutKick attacked Nike for funding the study.

Riley Gaines and OutKick founder Clay Travis attack Harper’s study on X.

“That Nike chose to fund a study on trans athletes doesn’t actually say that they’re supporting trans athletes. They’re merely supporting research looking into the capabilities of trans athletes,” Harper says. “You don’t know what the research will show until you get the data … but the haters don’t want any data coming out that doesn’t support what they want to say.”

Harper says this anti-trans fervor and HRT bans are making it more difficult to conduct studies in the first place.

And while the far-right argues that they are “protecting women’s sports” in their war on trans athletes, multiple athletes and experts told Uncloseted Media that this distracts from bigger issues in women’s sports, including sexual harassment by coaches and a lack of funding.

“If the real goal was to help women’s sports, they would try to increase funding [and] support for athletes,” says Harper, noting that women’s sports receive half as much money as men’s sports at the Division I collegiate level. “But that’s not what they’re doing, and it becomes pretty evident the real motivation behind these people.”

Share

Moving Forward

Since Trump’s reelection, Grace McKenzie has somewhat resigned herself to the likelihood of attacks on trans people getting worse. Despite this, she finds hope in building community with other trans athletes, such as the New York City-based trans basketball league Basketdolls.

“If that’s the legacy that [the anti-trans movement] wants to leave behind, good for them,” McKenzie says. “Our legacy is going to be one about hope, and collective solidarity, and mutual aid, and I would much rather be on that side of the fence.”

Meanwhile, Fry remains hopeful that conflicts can be resolved and that trans people may be able to find a place in sports over time.

“If we could all have more positive conversations and not create such a hateful environment around this issue, it would just benefit everyone.”


If objective, nonpartisan, rigorous, LGBTQ-focused journalism is important to you, please consider making a tax-deductible donation through our fiscal sponsor, Resource Impact, by clicking this button:

Donate to Uncloseted Media


Hegseth’s Pastor: “Gay Marriage Doesn’t Exist” [VIDEO]

100% Christian hate.  No one loves more than bigot Christians can hate.  This would be a non-story except Kegseth is the head of the military with the authority to remove any group from the military he doesn’t like.   Think about the idea that woman shouldn’t vote according to his preacher yet females in the military at every level have authority over men … so if they can’t be trusted to vote …?  But Kegseth thinks the US military needs to be an all white male thuggish killing machines like the Russian military who are getting their asses kicked by the inclusive Ukrainian military.  The Christian bigotry prevents people like him from seeing the truth.  The idea of heavily muscled men facing each other on a field of battle is far in the past.  Military tech is way more far advanced.  It needs twink kids in the basement playing on gaming machines, it needs females who can out think every man around. Kegseth’s idea of manliness and the military makes me suspect him of having a man fetish, an Arnold Schwarzenegger fetish.  It idealizes something that is not true and doesn’t exist.   This man grew up on far too many he man cartoons and movies.   Hugs.  

—————————————————————————————————————

 

“We have to overturn Obergefell. Many people will say, ‘That ship’s sailed, man. Gay people are married. We can’t go back.’ Gay marriage does not exist in the world. It can’t, any more than a square triangle can exist. God created marriage. I had premarital counseling today, I opened up the bible to Genesis I and showed them where God created marriage. He made them male and female. He set it.

“You want us to persist in having lies at the fundamental level of our nation? What’s that going to do to our country, other than have it crumble and have judgment be upon it? You have to remember that there’s a God in heaven who has thoughts on these matters.

“Of course, it has to go because it’s non-reality. We have to become sane again as a nation. And because we’ve gotten ourself so deep into this sin, there’s no clean way to do it.” – Pete Hegseth’s pastor Brooks Potteiger, who last appeared here when he called for God to burn down a “demonic” network’s headquarters for featuring a gay couple on a reality show.

Pottigier’s church is part of Pastor Doug Wilson’s Christian nationalist network, which advocates for a full-Gilead theocracy in which women cannot vote and homosexuality is criminalized. Last week Hegseth retweeted a video in which Wilson called for all of those things.

What gets me is the arrogance they show saying shit like this. “Everybody must live according to MY beliefs! “

That is pretty much religion all over the world. And they mostly all believe they are the only true religion. Buddhism seems the most benign of all of them.

Gay marriage doesn’t exist?

I can produce a married gay couple faster than he can produce his god.

No one needs any religion’s approval of a…

CIVIL MARRIAGE!

Got it?

 

If Obergefell is overturned, same sex marriage will not go away but we will go back to the bad old days where there will be a patchwork of states where SSM will be valid.

I do wonder for example if someone was married in Oklahoma will their marriage be voided and would need to remarry in SSM state or will they be grandfathered in.

Getting real sick of being ruled by people who believe in the myths of 2,000 year old clan of goat herders.

Ruined Afternoon Swim

sigh.

A Trans Woman and Her Friends Were Violently Assaulted at an Austin Swimming Hole

The incident is being investigated by police as a possible hate crime.

By Samantha Riedel

A transgender woman and several friends were harassed and assaulted in Austin, Texas last weekend, and one bystander who stepped in to defend them was hospitalized, in an incident police are investigating as a possible hate crime.

On July 26, the trans woman — who has requested anonymity during the ongoing investigation — and several friends visited Barton Springs, a public swimming hole in Austin’s Zilker Park, as Chron reported Wednesday. During their visit, three men they didn’t know flirted heavily with members of the group, the woman told Chron, but soon began harassing and pointing at her, making remarks about not “support[ing] that lifestyle.”

The three men then reportedly began shoving members of the group and poking the women “near their breasts,” according to a Reddit user who posted about the incident on Monday, claiming to be a friend of one of the victims. At that point, a bystander — identified as Jarod — intervened, and was attacked himself.

“The three men then proceeded to get violent and aggressive, yelling at us and getting in our faces until one of them decided to start swinging and punched Jarod in the jaw, knocking him unconscious,” the anonymous trans woman told Chron. “I quickly ran over to him in an attempt to help Jarod out but was then punched in the face by the assailant in the orange shorts.” The men then shoved another of the women to the ground and left the scene soon after, according to video footage of the incident posted to social media.

The Austin Police Department (APD) released a statement on Tuesday stating that the alleged assault was under investigation and could be declared a hate crime by the city’s Hate Crime Review Committee. “APD remains unwavering in its commitment to fostering a secure and inclusive Austin community,” the department stated. (Community leaders called for APD to be investigated for excessive force in March this year, after videos circulated online that appeared to show officers throwing a trans woman onto the ground during an arrest.)

Austin-area drag performer Brigitte Bandit posted about the assault on Instagram Monday, asking locals for help identifying the attackers. In a follow-up post the next day, Bandit stated that the men had been identified and the information had been shared privately with the victims. “I will not be posting their information without consent of the people involved in the attack,” Bandit wrote, adding, “[l]et’s let them decide which routes they decide [are] best.” (snip-MORE. Also embedded tweet. Then, if you click through, you’ll see they’ve gotten the suspects ID’d.)

Health Dis/Misinfo That’s Dangerous For Young People

Opinion: Contraception Gives Young Women Control of Their Bodies—So Why Are So Many Girls Afraid to Use it?

Jul 28, 2025, 9:00am Shoshana Kaplan

One-third of young women who don’t take birth control say they fear its side effects. Misinformation plays a role, a health expert says.

This story is part of our monthly series, Campus Dispatch. Read the rest of the stories in the series here.

As long as contraception has been widely available, misconceptions about its safety—from weight gain fears to claims you need a birth control “cleanse” every few years—have scared some young women away from using it. Today, this kind of misinformation is no longer solely circulated in locker rooms or sleepovers. In the modern digital world, active misinformation and disinformation campaigns that deter people from using contraception circulate on social media—reaching millions.

The origin of this issue varies. Sometimes, rumors about birth control are intentionally created and promoted for political purposes; this is disinformation. Sometimes, false claims are unintentionally spread by people who believe their statements are true. Other times, one person misrepresents their real, lived experience as a universal truth.

The results are astonishing: A 2022 KFF study found that roughly one-third of reproductive-age women who are not on birth control cite fears of side effects as a reason for avoiding contraception.

Since the fall of Roe v. Wade in 2022, contraception and comprehensive sex education have become more than just public health priorities: They are now the front lines of defense in protecting reproductive rights and empowering people—young women especially—to make choices about their bodies.

I am a public health master’s candidate focused on reproductive health and communications. This summer, I am interning at the sexual health and equity non-profit Advocates for Youth, which champions bodily autonomy for young people. In my work here to develop sex education materials and resources for young people and educators, as well as in my academic research, I’ve come to believe that combatting digital misinformation about birth control will require a collective response.

Taking health advice from TikTok

It’s easy to see how young people can fall victim to digital misinformation: Imagine you’re a 15-year-old girl dealing with severe period pain, or perhaps your acne has gotten out of control. Or maybe, you’re just excited to start having sex for the first time and want to do so safely. After talking with your mom and doctor, you decide to try hormonal birth control. You feel relieved. After months of keeping this big life choice to yourself, you finally shared your needs—and you were heard. You have a plan.

That night, some two hours into your usual TikTok scroll, you’re shown a video featuring a beautiful young woman you recognize from your “For You” page. She says birth control not only wrecked her hormonal balance, but will also cause cancer. You’ve seen this creator’s lifestyle content before and always trusted her. In the most-liked comments, hundreds of people echo her experience, sharing stories of hair loss or feeling “crazy” on the pill. Some comment they’re grateful to have never started birth control at all. Nowhere in the comments do you see a doctor or other medical expert pushing back, insisting that birth control is safe and effective.

What do you do?

Perhaps you search TikTok for other perspectives. You find a couple videos from OB-GYNs disputing the claims. But the other creator’s post had more than 200,000 views and hundreds of comments, while that one OB-GYN’s explainer only has 5,000 views and 20 comments. On social media, attention often passes for credibility.

You text your best friend, who asks her older sister. The sister agrees with the original creator’s claims.

Now you’re really nervous (your sister’s friend has had two boyfriends, after all!). You go back to your mom to say you’re not sure about the plan anymore. You’re scared of what birth control will do to your body. She tries to reassure you that it’s safe, but you can’t stop thinking about the women on TikTok who said it wasn’t.

‘A fertile breeding ground for misinformation’

Even though birth control rumors have circulated for decades, today’s rising mistrust of medical providers and the over-politicization of health, combined with poor digital literacy, have come together to create a fertile breeding ground for misinformation. False claims about infertility and severe mood disorder flourish.

“Data clearly show the deluge of misinformation about reproductive health care, including birth control, on social media,” reads a June 2024 statement from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the nation’s top association of OB-GYNs. “This misinformation can cause real harm for patients by encouraging unsafe methods of contraception; by sharing ineffective methods that expose people to unintended pregnancy; or by scaring people away from safe, effective, evidence-based methods of contraception.”

The American Medical Association is likewise sounding the alarm that the rapid spread of misinformation puts lives at risk.

To a certain extent, historic distrust in doctors drives this phenomenon. Physicians have long faced accusations of minimizing women’s medical concerns—by not using anesthesia when inserting intrauterine devices (IUDs), for example, or dismissing reports of pain during pregnancy. This past, which fuels genuine mistrust, is especially prominent in Black and brown communities, where the medical establishment in the 19th and 20th centuries routinely ignored, lied to and exploited patients under the guise of scientific discovery and public health. Any serious efforts to address reproductive health care must acknowledge this legacy, not deny it.

Instead, politicians capitalize on this weakening trust in medicine by amplifying misleading claims. Right-wing commentators like Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens routinely use their platforms to denounce birth control and spread lies about its effectiveness and adverse effects, while claiming they are concerned for women’s health. Some academic researchers and political analysts suggest these are deliberate efforts to dampen opposition should Republicans begin repealing access to birth control using the Comstock Act, an anti-obscenity law from the late 1800s that could stop doctors from mailing contraception or abortion pills. The fewer people believing in the efficacy of birth control, the more compelling their case.

Combatting disinformation together

Too often, efforts to combat misinformation are limited to one-on-one doctor’s office conversations, high school health class (if a school district even offers evidence-based sex education; many don’t), or sporadic debunking posts from reproductive health organizations.

Those of us who believe, as I do, that birth control should be a right for every person who needs it must challenge misinformation and disinformation with the same vigor and coordination as the people and groups spreading it. To meaningfully push back, organizations committed to advancing reproductive health-care access must invest in sweeping digital campaigns—paid, organic, and partnerships—to combat misconceptions and reclaim the narrative around contraception.
I’m not the only one who believes these trends call for swift action to match the scale of the problem.

Power to Decide, an organization working to expand access to reproductive health services, is evolving its long-running hashtag campaign #thxbirthcontrol to meet the moment. What began in 2012 as a campaign on X to influence public perception of birth control has now expanded to other platforms including TikTok, where the group posts short videos that highlight the positive, everyday impacts of contraception.
Combatting stigma with content that’s compelling, relatable, and accurate is essential to combatting misinformation. So is getting that content directly to the people most swayed by misinformation.

At the launch of their new Health Misinformation and Trust initiative, KFF President and CEO Drew Altman explained, “Most Americans have encountered health misinformation, but a large group simply isn’t sure if it’s true or false. Most people fall into this muddled middle place—underscoring the real opportunities we have to counter misinformation but also the risks of inaction.”

While both of these efforts are promising, they cannot be effective in isolation; a coordinated, aligned response is necessary to effectively combat misinformation.

One encouraging approach is Advocates for Youth’s “The Busybodies Club.” This national campaign, which launched before I joined the organization, combines digital education with relational organizing to teach young people how to “spot fake facts, identify misinformation, and challenge misconceptions.” The Busybodies Club is structured to recognize that challenging misinformation requires more than facts—it requires trust, community, and creativity at the interpersonal and systemic levels. The organization’s guide to spot red flags on birth control posts is a great starting point for folks interested in being part of the solution.

And as more organizations join the fight to combat misinformation about birth control, it’s important to acknowledge that hormonal birth control may not be right for everyone. Depending on the method and hormone type, contraceptives may cause headaches, nausea, and mood changes. For people who experience adverse side effects, there are alternatives like the copper IUD, or different hormonal formulations. This kind of honesty is essential to rebuild trust in contraception and for people to truly exercise reproductive autonomy.

Autonomy means choice. Trouble arises, though, when young women use falsehoods to inform their decisions. Misinformation can convince young people, incorrectly, that everyone will have terrible side effects from hormonal birth control or that or that all non-hormonal methods are equally effective. The copper IUD is more than 99 percent effective. Tracking your cycle is not—it fails to prevent pregnancy up to 25 percent of the time.

The current landscape can make it scary for young people to start birth control, and it shouldn’t be. When a girl wants to take charge of her sexual and reproductive health, I believe she should feel empowered, informed, and supported—not frightened. In an era where reproductive autonomy faces relentless attacks online and in legislatures, arming young people with facts isn’t a luxury. It’s a matter of survival.

Disclosure: Shoshana Kaplan is a 2025 graduate fellow at Rewire News Group, focused on sexual health. She is a summer intern at Advocates for Youth, where she receives some funding for her work.

tRump sends a fixer to silence Maxwell before she testifies