The Architecture of Animus: An Analysis of the Sources and Strategies of Conservative Opposition to Transgender Americans

20 June 2025

Cassandra Williamson

https://g.co/gemini/share/f70b0cec1dfe Something to play with.

Introduction

The contemporary American political landscape is marked by a series of intense and polarizing "culture wars," but few issues have been thrust into the national spotlight with the velocity and ferocity of the debate over transgender rights. The open existence of transgender Americans has become a central and volatile flashpoint in public life, subject to a level of political and social animus that is both pervasive and severe. This hostility, however, is not a spontaneous grassroots phenomenon arising from widespread public concern. Rather, it is the result of a highly coordinated, well-funded, and multi-faceted political project orchestrated by a network of conservative actors. The objective of this project extends beyond mere disagreement with the concept of gender identity; it seeks to challenge the very legitimacy of transgender existence and, ultimately, to curtail and erase the rights and public presence of transgender people.

This report provides a comprehensive, multi-layered analysis of the interconnected forces driving this conservative hostility. It moves beyond a simple catalog of legislative attacks or inflammatory rhetoric to investigate the foundational sources of the animus. The analysis will deconstruct the ideological frameworks that have been manufactured to justify opposition, examine the political and strategic motivations behind the weaponization of transgender identity, explore the religious and pseudoscientific doctrines used for moral legitimation, assess the critical role of the conservative media in amplifying these narratives, and document the tangible legislative and judicial consequences of this campaign. The central thesis of this report is that the animus toward transgender Americans is the product of a deliberate architecture of opposition, constructed to serve a broader political agenda. By dissecting this architecture—from its ideological blueprints and political strategies to its policy outcomes—this report aims to provide a definitive understanding of the forces that threaten what the user query aptly describes as the "open existence" of transgender Americans [User Query].

Section 1: The Ideological Framework of Opposition

The foundation of the conservative movement against transgender rights is not built on organic public sentiment but on a meticulously constructed ideological framework. This framework, developed and disseminated by a powerful network of think tanks and advocacy groups, serves to unify disparate factions, legitimize political action, and provide a coherent, albeit manufactured, intellectual basis for opposition. At its core is the strategic deployment of the term "gender ideology," a rhetorical device designed to reframe the conversation from one of civil rights and medical science to one of a dangerous political movement threatening the fabric of American society.

1.1 Deconstructing "Gender Ideology": The Central Organizing Principle

The primary rhetorical weapon wielded by the anti-transgender movement is the concept of "gender ideology." This term is not a neutral descriptor but a strategic innovation designed to unify opposition and cast the movement for transgender equality as a sinister, aggressive force. Its power lies in its ability to function as an "empty signifier," a capacious and ill-defined concept onto which various anxieties about social change can be projected 1.

The origins of this term can be traced not to recent political debates in the United States, but to discourse within the Vatican in the 1990s. It emerged as a theological and political response to United Nations conferences in Cairo (1994) and Beijing (1995), which began to formally recognize sexual and reproductive rights and use the term "gender" to refer to socially constructed roles 1. Conservative Catholic groups feared that any understanding of gender as distinct from biological sex would undermine a divinely ordained natural order, threaten the "natural family," and lead to the normalization of homosexuality and the classification of abortion as a human right 4. The term "gender ideology" was thus coined to vilify these developments, framing them as a cohesive and dangerous philosophical system that was antithetical to religious doctrine 1.

The strategic genius of this term lies in its ambiguity. As an "empty signifier," it allows a broad coalition of conservative actors—including religious traditionalists, pro-capitalist movements, and right-wing populists—to unite against a common, albeit fabricated, enemy 1. It serves as a catch-all for a host of "abhorred ethical and social reforms," such as same-sex marriage, reproductive rights, sex education, and gender mainstreaming 1. By attaching the word "ideology" to "gender," opponents strategically place what is a commonsense movement for equality on "shaky ground," implying it is not a teleological step toward progress but a contested set of ideas on par with other political philosophies like communism or fascism 1. This maneuver preemptively delegitimizes the entire conversation about transgender rights. Instead of engaging with the evidence from medical science or the principles of civil rights law, opponents can simply attack the "ideology" itself as a corrupting influence. It recasts a vulnerable minority group as a powerful, aggressive ideological force imposing its will on society.

In the contemporary American context, organizations like The Heritage Foundation have adopted and refined this framework. Heritage explicitly defines "gender identity ideology" as a radical and recent departure from the "objective and scientific understanding" of sex as a fixed, biological binary, which it claims has been the basis of law and culture since the nation's founding 9. In their narrative, this "ideology" is not a benign concept but an invasive force that has "infiltrated our schools, culture, and government policies," posing a direct threat to constitutional freedoms, including freedom of speech, religion, and parental rights 9. This framing is not merely rhetorical; it is the central organizing principle that underpins their extensive policy recommendations and legislative initiatives 10.

1.2 The Institutional Network: Architects of the Anti-Trans Movement

The anti-transgender movement is not a decentralized, grassroots effort. It is spearheaded by a well-funded and highly influential network of conservative institutions that create the ideological content, draft the policy blueprints, and coordinate the political strategy. This institutional architecture provides the movement with its intellectual weight and political efficacy.

At the forefront of this network is The Heritage Foundation, one of the most influential conservative think tanks in the United States 11. Heritage has made combating "gender ideology" a cornerstone of its mission, publishing a voluminous amount of material on the topic 9. Its influence goes far beyond commentary; it acts as a shadow government, or a "government in waiting" 12. Heritage is the primary architect of Project 2025, a nearly 1,000-page presidential transition plan developed in coalition with over 100 partner organizations 12. This document serves as a detailed blueprint for a potential conservative administration to systematically dismantle LGBTQ+ rights and protections. Project 2025 explicitly frames LGBTQ+ equality as being in opposition to the "traditional American family," which it defines narrowly as a married mother and father with their children 12. The plan calls for purging the federal government of any policies that promote LGBTQ+ equality, reinstating a ban on transgender military service, and urging Congress to define gender as male and female, fixed at birth 12. Furthermore, Heritage has been directly involved in writing and coordinating the dissemination of "copycat state legislation" that targets healthcare for transgender youth, demonstrating its direct role in authoring the laws that are now being passed across the country 12.

Another key actor is the Family Research Council (FRC), an organization designated as an anti-LGBTQ hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for its long history of propagating harmful falsehoods 15. The FRC's primary specialty is the defamation of LGBTQ people through the use of "discredited research and junk science" 17. A central and recurring tactic of the FRC is to revive long-debunked myths that falsely link LGBTQ people, and transgender individuals specifically, with pedophilia and the "grooming" of children 17. This strategy is designed to provoke moral panic and frame their opposition as a necessary measure to "protect children" 17. The FRC actively campaigns against gender-affirming care, which it demonizes, and promotes the harmful and discredited practice of conversion therapy 17. The FRC's influence is felt through its intense lobbying efforts and its close working relationship with conservative politicians. For instance, the organization fought a subpoena related to its communications with the Trump administration regarding the ban on transgender military service, illustrating its direct involvement in federal policymaking 16.

This network extends beyond these two giants to include a broader coalition of what one analysis calls the "anti-trans movement," which is composed of several wings, including a "Far-Right and Conspiracy Wing" and a "Disinformation and Conversion Wing" 19. These groups, which include organizations like the Alliance Defending Freedom and Focus on the Family, are united by a shared belief in a fixed and binary understanding of sex and gender and a general opposition to racial and gender equality 18. This interconnected ecosystem of organizations works in concert, creating a powerful echo chamber that develops, refines, and disseminates anti-transgender ideology and policy across the conservative landscape.

The relationship between these think tanks and the political sphere is not one of distant influence but of direct, symbiotic partnership. There is a clear and demonstrable pipeline running from the policy shops of organizations like Heritage and the FRC directly to state legislatures and the executive branch. These groups do not merely comment on policy from the sidelines; they are the authors and architects of it. The Heritage Foundation's role in drafting and coordinating "copycat state legislation" is a prime example of this direct authorial function 12. Project 2025 is not a set of recommendations; it is a meticulously detailed "blueprint" for a new government, complete with specific executive orders to be signed and personnel to be appointed 11. The FRC's lobbying and direct communications with the White House on policy matters like the military ban further cement this relationship 16. This creates a closed-loop system: the think tanks produce the ideology and the specific policy language; allied politicians adopt this platform wholesale; and once in power, they implement the agenda crafted by the think tanks, who then provide the political and "legal" justification for the actions taken 10. This is not a system of influence; it is a system of co-creation and joint enterprise, where the lines between outside advocate and government actor are deliberately blurred.

Organization	Flagship Initiative / Key Focus	Core Policy Objectives	Publicly Stated Justifications
The Heritage Foundation	Project 2025	- Ban gender-affirming care for minors via federal funding cuts 14 - Legally define sex as biological, binary, and immutable at the federal level 14 - Rescind non-discrimination protections based on gender identity 12 - Reinstate transgender military ban 14	- "Traditional American values" 12 - Protecting "individual freedom" and "limited government" 12 - Restoring "biological truth" 21 - Protecting parental rights and religious liberty 9
Family Research Council (FRC)	Anti-LGBTQ "Hate Group" (SPLC)	- Oppose all legal validation of transgender identity 17 - Promote conversion therapy 17 - Criminalize gender-affirming care, framing it as "child abuse" 17 - Oppose transgender military service 16	- "Protecting children" from "grooming" and "predators" 17 - Upholding a "Judeo-Christian worldview" 17 - Defending against the "cult of transgenderism" 17 - Preserving moral and cultural boundaries 17
American Enterprise Institute (AEI)	Research and Commentary	- Questioning the rise in LGBTQ identity, particularly among youth 23 - Critiquing "transgender ideology" and media "boosterism" 24 - Providing intellectual framing for opposition to gender-affirming care 24 - Supporting legal challenges to transgender rights 21	- Concerns about "rapid rise" in LGBTQ identity 23 - Need for "nuanced" debate on medical treatments 24 - Defending free speech against "woke staffers" and "censorship" 24 - Upholding fairness in women's sports 24

Section 2: The Political Weaponization of Transgender Identity

While the ideological framework provides the intellectual justification for animus, the political sphere is where this animus is activated and weaponized. Transgender identity has been strategically transformed from a matter of individual existence into a potent political tool. It serves as the new focal point in the American culture war, a powerful instrument for populist mobilization, and a convenient distraction from other, less politically advantageous issues for the conservative movement.

2.1 The New Front in the Culture War

The intense focus on transgender rights is not an isolated event but the latest chapter in a long-running culture war. Following the landmark 2015 Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, the Christian Right and its political allies were left without their primary galvanizing social issue 25. A strategic pivot was necessary, and transgender rights were selected as the new front line. This shift represented an evolution of opposition, where the arguments, tactics, and fears that were once deployed against gay and lesbian people were repurposed and aimed at a new, less visible, and less understood minority group 27.

As a political tool, anti-transgender rhetoric has proven remarkably effective for mobilizing the conservative base. It is used as a wedge issue to portray the Democratic Party and its candidates as extreme, radical, and disconnected from the concerns of the "broader American public" 30. Political advertising campaigns have honed in on this theme with significant effect. One analysis found that a single 30-second ad focusing on transgender issues was able to shift viewers' opinions in favor of Donald Trump 31. Post-election polling has suggested that a focus on "cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class" was a key predictor for voters switching their support from Biden to Trump 32. This political efficacy is not lost on conservative strategists, some of whom have openly stated that a "mix of culture wars and trans debate" will be a central component of future election campaigns 33.

The political utility of this issue is amplified by its asymmetric importance. While polling shows that anti-transgender positions are popular within the conservative base, culture war issues in general often rank low on the list of priorities for the broader electorate, which tends to be more concerned with economic matters 27. However, for a highly engaged and politically active segment of conservative voters—particularly those who consume political media via podcasts and online channels—the issue is a powerful motivator 32. This dynamic creates a low-risk, high-reward scenario for Republican politicians. They can use the issue to energize their most ardent supporters and drive turnout, while facing relatively little backlash from the median voter, for whom the issue is less salient. This makes it a more politically convenient weapon than other divisive social issues, such as abortion, which became a significant liability for Republicans in many races after the overturning of Roe v. Wade 30. The intense focus on transgender people, therefore, serves as a strategic distraction. It provides a reliable, emotionally charged issue that can dominate media cycles, mobilize the base, and divert public attention away from policy areas where the conservative platform is less popular or has demonstrably failed. A former LGBT+ business chief for the UK's Conservative Party resigned precisely for this reason, stating that the party's plan was explicitly to "run a culture war to distract from fundamental economic failings" 33. The animus is not just an end in itself; it is a means of political misdirection.

2.2 Populism, Nationalism, and the "Other"

The attack on transgender rights aligns seamlessly with the playbook of modern right-wing populism. Populist rhetoric thrives on creating a binary division between a virtuous, hardworking "people" and a corrupt, condescending "elite" 35. In the context of the anti-transgender movement, this narrative casts traditional, nuclear families as the authentic "people" who are under threat from a cabal of "elites"—including academics, journalists, and globalist organizations—who are accused of imposing a foreign "gender ideology" upon them 5. Transgender individuals and the concept of gender fluidity become the ultimate scapegoat, a tangible symbol of the cultural and social changes that fuel populist anxiety 1. The fluidity of gender identity is deliberately contrasted with the perceived stability of tradition and the nation, making transgender people an easy target for antidemocratic forces seeking to create suspicion and fear 38.

This populist framework is deeply intertwined with the rise of Christian Nationalism, a political ideology asserting that the United States is, and should be, a Christian nation, and that its laws should be based on a specific interpretation of Christian values. There is a powerful, documented correlation between adherence to Christian Nationalism and hostility toward transgender people 39. Christian Nationalists view LGBTQ+ rights and the existence of LGBTQ+ candidates as a fundamental challenge to their preferred social order, which is rooted in a singular, state-enforced definition of morality and citizenship 41. Research shows that as support for Christian Nationalism increases, support for transgender political candidates decreases, an effect that holds true across partisan, racial, and even other religious affiliations 41. The ultimate goal of this movement is to use the power of the state to legislate its "narrow, religious view of gender" into law for all Americans 39.

This framing elevates the issue beyond simple social disagreement to a matter of national defense. The rhetoric employed by opponents often casts the acceptance of transgender identity as a threat to the nation itself. By challenging the "natural" family structure—which is positioned as the primary and essential unit of the polity—transgender rights are portrayed as undermining national strength, identity, and even demographic continuity 1. This nationalist framing transforms a civil rights issue into an existential threat, justifying extreme political and legislative measures in the name of preserving the nation.

2.3 The "Protecting Children" Narrative

The most emotionally potent and politically pervasive narrative used to justify anti-transgender animus is the claim that these policies are necessary to "protect children." This argument is deployed across every front of the legislative war, used as the rationale for banning books with LGBTQ+ themes, censoring school curricula, restricting access to gender-affirming healthcare, and barring transgender youth from participating in sports 29. The rhetoric paints a picture of children being "indoctrinated" into a harmful ideology, "groomed" by predators, or subjected to a dangerous "social contagion" 13.

This strategy is not new. It is a direct and conscious echo of the anti-gay campaigns of the 1970s, most famously Anita Bryant's "Save Our Children" movement, which successfully demonized gay and lesbian people by falsely accusing them of "recruiting children" into a sinful lifestyle 29. Today, organizations like the Family Research Council employ the exact same "groomer" rhetoric to stoke fear about transgender people and their allies 17. The historical parallel is stark, revealing that this is not a new, genuine concern for child welfare but a proven, reusable political tactic designed to dehumanize a minority group and mobilize a fearful public.

This narrative has moved beyond mere rhetoric and has been operationalized to weaponize the power of the state against families. In a chilling development, Texas Governor Greg Abbott ordered state child welfare agencies to investigate the supportive parents of transgender children for "child abuse," threatening to tear families apart simply for following medical advice 20. The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 goes even further, proposing a federal policy that would require educators and public librarians who discuss the concept of being transgender to be registered as sex offenders 13. This transforms a political talking point into a direct and terrifying threat to the safety and integrity of families, teachers, and librarians.

This weaponization of the "protecting children" narrative reveals a profound and strategic contradiction in the conservative movement's use of the concept of "parental rights." The movement has co-opted this language and inverted its meaning. Traditionally, "parental rights" refers to the fundamental right of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and medical care of their children, free from undue government interference. Conservative activists frequently invoke this principle when demanding control over school curricula or library books 9. However, this principle is completely abandoned when it comes to the issue of gender-affirming care. In this domain, the state is called upon to intervene directly and forcefully into the family, with laws that explicitly prohibit parents from seeking medically necessary, life-saving care for their transgender children, even when the parents, the child, and their team of medical professionals are all in agreement 20. The state is simultaneously positioned as the protector of parental rights against teachers and as the enforcer of ideology against parents themselves. This demonstrates that "parental rights" is not the core principle at stake. The core principle is the enforcement of a rigid social and moral ideology. The language of "parental rights" is merely a rhetorical vehicle, deployed when it aligns with the movement's goals and discarded when it stands in the way of the primary objective: the suppression of transgender identity.

Section 3: Doctrinal and Moral Justifications

To provide a veneer of legitimacy to the political campaign against transgender rights, conservative actors rely heavily on a set of doctrinal and moral justifications. These arguments are drawn from specific theological interpretations, amplified by a coordinated disinformation campaign that promotes pseudoscience, and are rooted in deep-seated psychological anxieties about gender and social change. This combination of religious conviction, manufactured scientific doubt, and psychological fear creates a powerful rationale for animus.

3.1 Theological Foundations of Opposition

A significant portion of the opposition to transgender rights is rooted in the theological doctrines of specific conservative Christian denominations. While these views are often presented as representative of "the" Christian position, they reflect a particular interpretive choice that is not shared across the diversity of Christian thought.

The central theological pillar of this opposition is the belief that God created humanity in two distinct, complementary, and immutable sexes: male and female 53. This view is heavily based on interpretations of biblical passages, most notably Genesis 1:27 ("So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them") 55. For these denominations, gender is not a social construct or a matter of internal identity but a fixed biological reality ordained by the Creator. The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), in its formal 2014 resolution on the topic, explicitly states that "gender identity is determined by biological sex and not by one's self-perception." It attributes any deviation from this, such as gender identity confusion, to the "fallen human nature" resulting from original sin 55. While the resolution calls for love and compassion toward transgender individuals and condemns bullying, it simultaneously and steadfastly opposes any medical transition, any social recognition, and any cultural or legal validation of transgender identity, which it views as contrary to God's design 55.

Similarly, the Catholic Church has been a primary intellectual source for the anti-transgender movement, particularly in developing the "gender ideology" framework 1. The Catechism teaches that gender is exclusively binary and that every person must "acknowledge and accept his sexual identity" as it corresponds to their birth anatomy 54. Both Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have spoken out strongly against what they see as the modern notion of gender fluidity. Pope Benedict warned that such ideas could lead to the "self-destruction" of the human species by blurring the God-given distinction between male and female, while Pope Francis has described it as an expression of humanity's desire to "create himself" in defiance of the Creator 54.

It is crucial, however, to recognize that this is not a monolithic Christian perspective. A wide array of mainline Protestant denominations have embraced fully affirming and inclusive theological stances. The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), for example, "celebrates the gifts of all gender identities and sexual orientations" and affirms its commitment to the "full welcome, acceptance, and inclusion of transgender people" 56. In a 2025 statement, the PC(USA)'s Advocacy Committee for LGBTQIA+ Equity went so far as to interpret scripture as containing visible affirmation for gender-nonconforming people, citing eunuchs in the Bible as examples of those who did not operate within conventional gender norms and were still called by God to be prophets and missionaries 57. Other denominations, including the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, and, as of 2024, the United Methodist Church, have also adopted policies supporting LGBTQ+ inclusion, including the ordination of transgender clergy and the celebration of same-sex marriages 56. This theological diversity demonstrates that the conservative opposition to transgender rights is the result of a specific doctrinal interpretation, not an inherent or unavoidable conclusion of Christian faith.

3.2 The Disinformation and Pseudoscience Wing

A parallel and equally important strategy of the anti-transgender movement is the deliberate creation and promotion of disinformation and pseudoscience. The goal of this "Disinformation and Conversion Wing" is to undermine the broad and deep medical consensus that supports gender-affirming care and to sow public doubt and confusion about the nature of transgender identity 19.

This strategy closely mimics the tactics employed by the climate change denial movement. Just as fossil fuel-funded organizations sought to create the public impression of a scientific debate on climate change where none truly existed, anti-transgender groups work to manufacture a similar "false scientific debate" regarding gender-affirming care 11. They do not need to disprove the established science; they only need to create the appearance of a controversy to provide political cover for legislative action. They achieve this by elevating a handful of dissenting voices and promoting poor-quality or discredited research to create what one article described as a "nuanced portrait of the debate within the medical community" 24. This manufactured debate is then amplified by conservative media, which frames the issue as having two legitimate "sides," thereby misleading the public about the overwhelming consensus held by every major medical and mental health association in the United States, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Psychological Association 12.

A key part of this disinformation campaign is the promotion of "junk science" and pathologizing theories 17. Activists and organizations like the FRC frequently cite debunked or pseudoscientific concepts such as "rapid-onset gender dysphoria" (ROGD) and "autogynephilia" 16. ROGD is a contested theory suggesting that transgender identity in adolescents is a social contagion, while autogynephilia is a term used to characterize transgender women's identity as a sexual fetish. These theories are not accepted by mainstream medical bodies but are used to portray transgender identity as a mental illness or a dangerous trend.

Furthermore, conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation engage in sophisticated rhetorical tactics to portray transgender identity as inherently illogical and "riddled with contradictions" 60. They construct strawman arguments, for instance, by claiming that activists assert gender is both a social construct and innately fixed, or that there are no differences between men and women while simultaneously relying on rigid sex stereotypes 60. This is a deliberate strategy to confuse the public and make the lived experiences of transgender people seem incoherent. This approach reveals a strategic incoherence within the conservative movement's own arguments. On one hand, the foundational theological and "biological truth" argument posits that sex is an immutable, unchangeable biological reality 9. On the other hand, the primary political argument used to justify legislation claims that children are highly susceptible to being influenced into a transgender identity through "social contagion" or "indoctrination" 14. These two claims are logically mutually exclusive. If gender is an unchangeable biological fact, one cannot be "talked into" being transgender. Conversely, if one can be influenced to change their gender identity, then it cannot be a fixed biological essence. The fact that the movement deploys both arguments without acknowledging the contradiction reveals that they are not derived from a coherent philosophy but are used instrumentally. The "immutability" argument serves to invalidate the existence of transgender people, while the "social contagion" argument serves to justify attacks on schools, libraries, and healthcare providers.

3.3 The Psychology of Animus

Beyond theology and pseudoscience, the animus toward transgender Americans is fueled by a set of powerful psychological drivers. These include deep-seated cognitive biases, existential fears, and perceptions of threat that make transgender identity a particularly potent target for hostility.

Social and cognitive psychology research suggests that a key factor is gender essentialism, the folk belief that gender is a deep, natural, and immutable category determined at birth 61. This binary worldview is a fundamental organizing principle for many people's understanding of the social world. Transgender identity directly challenges this belief system, creating cognitive dissonance and provoking a hostile reaction. Individuals who do not fit neatly into established categories can be perceived as threatening the "natural" order of things, imposing a "cognitive tax" on perceivers and becoming targets of antipathy 61.

This cognitive threat is amplified into a broader moral panic by the rhetoric of the anti-gender movement. The movement effectively condenses diffuse societal anxieties—about economic precarity, the loss of patriarchal authority, the decline of national or racial purity, and the erosion of traditional values—and displaces them onto a single, tangible scapegoat: "gender" 6. The concept of "gender ideology" becomes a phantasm that represents all that is feared about the modern world, transforming transgender people into the embodiment of this threat 5. This fuels a visceral, fear-based opposition that is disproportionate to any actual impact transgender people have on society.

Finally, a specific and pernicious psychological element is the perception of deception. Studies have shown that transgender people are often perceived as being more deceptive than other minority groups 62. The very act of living as one's authentic gender, or "passing," is framed not as an expression of identity but as a predatory act of trickery designed to fool others 62. This narrative is the foundation for the heinous "trans panic defense," a legal strategy in which a defendant claims they were provoked to violence by the "deception" of discovering their victim was transgender 62. This perception of inherent deceptiveness fosters deep distrust and provides a psychological justification for animosity and violence.

Section 4: The Media Amplification Chamber

The ideological frameworks and political strategies of the anti-transgender movement would have limited reach without a powerful mechanism for dissemination. The conservative media ecosystem, with Fox News at its center, serves as this critical amplification chamber. It does not merely report on the political conflict over transgender rights; it actively shapes, drives, and intensifies it through disproportionate coverage, dehumanizing rhetoric, and the systematic exclusion of transgender voices.

4.1 Narrative Dominance and Disproportionate Coverage

Analysis of cable news coverage reveals a stark imbalance in the attention paid to anti-transgender issues, with conservative media outlets dominating the conversation. A comprehensive study by Media Matters for America, conducted during the first month of a new Trump administration, found that Fox News devoted nearly as much airtime to a series of anti-transgender executive orders as CNN and MSNBC combined 63. In a 31-day period, Fox News aired 85 distinct segments on the topic, more than double the number aired by CNN (39) and MSNBC (32) 63. This saturation coverage ensures that the issue remains at the forefront of the minds of the conservative base.

This disparity is primarily driven by the network's influential hard-right opinion programs. These shows accounted for a staggering 60% of Fox News's total coverage on the topic and 28% of all coverage across the three major cable news networks 63. This indicates that the issue is being propelled not as a matter of objective news reporting but as a central plank of a political and ideological narrative. The network's personalities also inject the topic into segments on other issues, using teasers and mentions to continually remind viewers of the administration's anti-transgender agenda 63.

The content of this coverage is highly selective, focusing on the most divisive and emotionally charged aspects of the issue to maximize its potential as a political wedge. The participation of transgender athletes in women's sports, for example, has been a particular obsession. This single topic accounted for 51% of all cable news segments on the anti-trans executive orders, with Fox News's relentless focus on its "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports" framing making up a full third of all coverage across the networks 63. This disproportionate emphasis on a single, inflammatory issue demonstrates a clear strategy to frame the entire transgender community through the lens of a manufactured conflict.

4.2 Rhetorical Strategies of Dehumanization and Exclusion

The narrative constructed by conservative media is characterized by the systematic exclusion of transgender voices and the use of intentionally dehumanizing language. This ensures that the public conversation about transgender people happens without them, allowing their opponents to define them and their experiences.

Across all cable news networks, transgender or non-binary guests were featured in only 14% of the segments discussing the policies that would profoundly affect their lives 63. The exclusion was most pronounced on Fox News, which included a transgender guest in just one segment during the study period. That guest was Caitlyn Jenner, a conservative contributor who vocally supports bans on transgender athletes, thereby reinforcing the network's own narrative 63. This near-total absence of authentic transgender perspectives allows cisgender, and often deeply hostile, commentators to control the narrative completely. It prevents the public from hearing directly from the people being targeted, making it easier to portray them as an abstract threat rather than as human beings. As one advocate noted, this removes their "humanity from the equation" 64.

The language used in this coverage is not accidental; it is a deliberate political choice designed to dehumanize and delegitimize. Conservative politicians and media figures routinely use inflammatory and medically inaccurate terms like "transgender insanity" 14, "chemical and surgical mutilation" 20, and speak of the need to "eradicate transgenderism from public life entirely" 67. This is not the language of policy debate but of moral condemnation. It is a rhetorical strategy designed to frame transgender people as mentally ill, physically dangerous, and ideologically corrupt, thereby justifying discrimination against them 31. The overarching narrative consistently positions this small and vulnerable minority 52 as a powerful and aggressive threat—a threat to women's sports, a threat to children, a threat to the family, and a threat to "biological truth" itself 12.

This media environment creates a powerful feedback loop with the political sphere. The system does not simply reflect a political debate; it actively co-creates it in a self-reinforcing cycle. The process begins when think tanks like Heritage and the FRC formulate anti-trans talking points and policy objectives 12. Conservative media then seizes upon these points, giving them sensationalized and disproportionate coverage, which in turn manufactures a sense of crisis and moral panic within the conservative base 34. Politicians then respond to this manufactured public outrage, adopting the exact language and framing from the media and implementing the policies developed by the think tanks 14. The resulting political action—a new law or executive order—becomes a major "news" event, which the conservative media then covers extensively, justifying its initial focus and starting the cycle anew 63. This is not a reflection of reality; it is the construction of a political reality.

This dynamic also creates a "neutrality trap" for mainstream journalism. The professional norm of providing "balance" by presenting "both sides" of an issue is expertly exploited by anti-transgender activists 59. They present their disinformation and hateful rhetoric as a legitimate "opposing view" to the established medical and scientific consensus 24. When mainstream news outlets, even those with good intentions, present these two positions as equivalent, they create a "false balance" that gives undue credibility to pseudoscience and harmful narratives 59. The New York Times, for instance, drew significant criticism for publishing articles that framed the medical consensus on gender-affirming care as an open "debate," a framing that critics argued legitimized the very disinformation that is causing harm 24. This journalistic practice, when misapplied to an issue of established science and fundamental civil rights, inadvertently becomes a vehicle for the dissemination of the very animus it may be seeking to neutrally report on.

Section 5: The Legislative and Judicial Assault

The culmination of the ideological frameworks, political strategies, and media amplification is a concrete and devastating assault on the rights and well-being of transgender Americans. This assault is being waged on multiple fronts, through an unprecedented wave of state-level legislation and a concerted effort to reshape federal policy and judicial precedent. The ultimate goal, as evidenced by the language of the policies themselves, is the legal and social erasure of transgender people from public life.

5.1 The State-Level Onslaught: A Multi-Front War

Since 2021, the United States has witnessed what Human Rights Watch describes as a "wave of legislation targeting transgender health care" that has swept across the country 20. This legislative onslaught is not random or isolated; it is a coordinated, multi-front campaign targeting nearly every aspect of a transgender person's ability to live openly and safely. In the first few months of 2023 alone, politicians in various states introduced over 120 bills restricting the rights of LGBTQ+ people, with a particular focus on transgender youth 69.

The most severe of these laws are the healthcare bans. As of March 2025, 25 states have enacted blanket bans prohibiting access to gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth 20. These laws have directly disrupted or ended essential medical care for an estimated 100,000 young people 20. The scope of these bans is often sweeping, and they carry draconian penalties, with at least six states classifying the provision of this medically necessary care as a felony offense for doctors 20. The human toll of these laws is catastrophic. Families have been forced to travel across state lines at great expense or flee their home states entirely to continue care, while others have lost access completely. This disruption has created a severe mental health crisis, with studies showing a dramatic increase in suicide attempt rates among transgender youth in states that have passed anti-transgender laws 20.

Beyond healthcare, the legislative war is being fought in schools and public spaces. As of May 2025, a comprehensive attack on the public life of transgender youth includes:

• Sports Bans: 28 states have passed laws prohibiting transgender youth from participating in school sports consistent with their gender identity 20.

• Bathroom Restrictions: 19 states have enacted laws restricting transgender youth from using school bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity 20.

• Curriculum Censorship: 19 states have passed laws that censor or prohibit any discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in school curricula, often referred to as "Don't Say Gay" laws 20.

• Forced Outing Policies: 8 states now have laws that mandate school officials disclose a student's transgender identity to their parents, even against the student's will, stripping them of their privacy and potentially putting them in danger at home 20.

This legislative pattern reveals a clear and comprehensive strategy. The goal is not to address a single perceived problem but to systematically remove transgender people from all aspects of public life—from the doctor's office to the classroom to the athletic field.

Typology of State-Level Anti-Transgender Legislation (as of May 2025)	Description	Number of States with Law
Healthcare Bans (Minors)	Prohibit or criminalize the provision of gender-affirming medical care (e.g., puberty blockers, hormone therapy) for transgender youth.	25 20
Sports Participation Bans	Bar transgender students, particularly trans girls, from participating in school sports teams that align with their gender identity.	28 20
Bathroom Access Restrictions	Prohibit transgender students from using school restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to their gender identity.	19 20
Curriculum Censorship	Restrict or forbid discussion of LGBTQ+ topics, including sexual orientation and gender identity, in public school classrooms.	19 20
Restrictions on Legal Recognition	Limit the ability of transgender people to update gender markers on official identification documents like birth certificates and driver's licenses.	4+ 69

5.2 Federal Policy and the Goal of Legal Erasure

While the most immediate legislative damage has occurred at the state level, the ultimate ambition of the anti-transgender movement is to wield federal power to achieve its goals nationwide. The blueprint for this federal assault is laid out in explicit detail in The Heritage Foundation's Project 2025, which outlines a plan to attack transgender rights from "day one" of a new conservative presidency 14. This agenda includes reinstating the ban on transgender military service, cutting off all federal funding to any school or hospital that provides gender-affirming care or promotes "gender ideology," and rescinding healthcare protections for transgender people 12.

The most radical and revealing aspect of this federal agenda is the explicit goal of legally erasing transgender identity itself. This is not hyperbole; it is the documented policy objective of a mainstream political movement. A proposed executive order from Donald Trump was ludicrously titled "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government," and its text makes the intention clear: to "legally erase the existence of transgender Americans" 21. The mechanism for this erasure is a directive that all federal agencies must define "sex" as being strictly male or female, assigned at birth, and immutable 14. This definition would be enforced across all federal policies and documents, including passports, visas, and other forms of identification, making it legally impossible for a transgender person to be recognized by their government 21. This would also effectively nullify the Supreme Court's 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, which found that discrimination on the basis of gender identity is a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 12. The goal is to render a minority population legally invisible.

This legislative and executive assault has been emboldened by the judiciary. The Supreme Court's 2025 decision in United States v. Skrmetti delivered a major victory to the anti-transgender movement. In upholding Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors, the Court ruled that such laws do not violate the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause 51. This decision effectively gave a constitutional green light to the wave of state-level bans and signaled a significant retreat by the Court from its role in protecting the rights of marginalized groups. Justice Amy Coney Barrett's concurring opinion was particularly telling, as she argued that courts must grant legislatures broad "flexibility to make policy in this area," a position that severely weakens the potential for judicial review and leaves transgender youth vulnerable to the whims of partisan politics 51.

This judicial and legislative strategy demonstrates a cynical and opportunistic weaponization of federalism. The anti-transgender movement employs a "heads I win, tails you lose" approach to the balance of state and federal power. When arguing against a uniform federal standard of rights for transgender people, they champion the principle of "states' rights," as seen in the Skrmetti case, which sent the issue back to the states 30. However, when it serves their agenda, they demand sweeping federal action. Project 2025 and other proposals call for the federal government to impose a single, nationwide definition of sex, use federal funding as a weapon to enforce their ideology, and override any state or local policies that are protective of transgender people 12. This reveals that the principle of federalism is not the goal; it is merely a tool. The movement will defend state power when states are hostile to transgender rights and demand federal power to crush state protections when they are not. This tactical flexibility underscores the true objective: the uniform suppression of transgender identity by any means necessary.

Section 6: Synthesis and Recommendations

6.1 An Interconnected Ecosystem of Hostility

The animus directed at transgender Americans is not a series of isolated incidents or the product of a single cause. As this report has documented, it is the result of a powerful, self-reinforcing, and interconnected ecosystem of hostility. This ecosystem operates through a clear and deliberate pathway, transforming abstract ideology into tangible harm.

The process begins with the ideological production within well-funded conservative think tanks like The Heritage Foundation and the Family Research Council. These organizations manufacture the intellectual architecture of opposition, creating and popularizing rhetorical weapons like "gender ideology" and generating pseudoscientific "research" to create the false impression of a scientific debate. This ideological framework is then given moral and religious justification by conservative religious institutions, such as the Southern Baptist Convention and the Catholic Church, which frame the opposition as a defense of divine order and biblical truth.

This combination of manufactured ideology and religious doctrine is then handed off to the political sphere, where it is weaponized by populist leaders and political strategists. Transgender identity is transformed into a potent culture war issue, used to mobilize a political base, distract from unpopular economic policies, and paint political opponents as dangerous radicals. This political campaign is relentlessly amplified by a conservative media chamber, led by outlets like Fox News, which saturates its audience with disproportionate and dehumanizing coverage, systematically excludes transgender voices, and creates a feedback loop that manufactures public outrage and political urgency.

Finally, this entire process culminates in a legislative and judicial assault designed to achieve the legal and social erasure of transgender people. The talking points from think tanks and the rhetoric from cable news are translated directly into the text of state and federal legislation that bans healthcare, restricts public life, and seeks to define transgender people out of legal existence. The judiciary, once a backstop for minority rights, has shown an increasing willingness to defer to this political project. Understanding this complete, interconnected pathway—from ideological conception to legislative execution—is essential to grasping the comprehensive and existential nature of the threat facing transgender Americans.

6.2 Pathways for Counter-Narratives and Policy Defense

Addressing this multifaceted assault requires an equally sophisticated and multi-front response. Based on the analysis presented in this report, the following recommendations are offered for key stakeholders committed to defending the rights and dignity of transgender people.

For Civil Rights Organizations and Advocates:

• Deconstruct the "Ideology" Frame: Directly challenge and expose the manufactured nature of the "gender ideology" narrative. Educational campaigns should focus on its origins in Vatican discourse and its function as a political tool, rather than engaging with it as a legitimate intellectual concept 1.

• Highlight Strategic Contradictions: Publicly and repeatedly point out the internal contradictions within the conservative movement's arguments, particularly the paradox of claiming that gender is both a fixed, immutable biological reality and a contagious ideology that can be spread to children. This exposes the instrumental, rather than principled, nature of their claims.

• Center the Medical Consensus: Counter the "false scientific debate" by relentlessly promoting the unified and overwhelming consensus of every major medical and mental health association in the United States that supports gender-affirming care. Frame the opposition not as a "debate" but as a political attack on established medical science 12.

• Draw Historical Parallels: Explicitly connect the current anti-transgender rhetoric and tactics to the anti-gay rights campaigns of the past. Showcasing how the "protect children" and "groomer" narratives are recycled from previous eras can help neutralize their power and expose them as a cynical political playbook 29.

For Journalists and Media Outlets:

• Abandon the "False Balance" Trap: Recognize that presenting the overwhelming medical consensus as one "side" of a debate and politically motivated disinformation as the other is a journalistic failure, not a success of neutrality. Report on the consensus as a baseline fact and scrutinize anti-trans claims with the same rigor applied to other forms of disinformation 24.

• Identify and Label Politicized Language: Journalists should treat terms like "mutilation," "groomer," "transgender insanity," and even the seemingly neutral "biological boy" as the loaded, partisan shorthand they are. These terms should be quoted as political rhetoric, not adopted as neutral descriptors 31.

• Center Lived Experience: The most powerful antidote to dehumanization is humanization. News coverage must prioritize and center the voices and lived experiences of transgender people and their families. This means moving beyond reporting on the political conflict and telling the human stories of those impacted by these laws 59.

For Policymakers and Political Allies:

• Reclaim Core Principles: Frame the defense of transgender rights around core American principles that resonate across the political spectrum: the freedom to be oneself without government interference, the fundamental right of parents to make medical decisions for their children, and the protection of individuals from government overreach and discrimination.

• Build Broad Coalitions: Actively build and showcase coalitions that cut across traditional political lines. This includes amplifying the voices of affirming faith communities to counter the narrative that all religion is anti-transgender, and engaging with moderate conservatives and libertarians who are uncomfortable with the expansion of state power into private medical decisions 56.

• Prepare Proactive Defenses: Do not wait for attacks to materialize. Use the detailed plans laid out in documents like Project 2025 as a roadmap to prepare legal, legislative, and public-relations defenses against the specific policies the anti-transgender movement has announced it will pursue. This includes preparing for fights over federal funding, non-discrimination regulations, and the legal definition of sex.

Works cited

1. Gender Ideology, the Far Right, and LGBTQ Politics | PS - Cambridge University Press, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/gender-ideology-the-far-right-and-lgbtq-politics/D5DA2BE50D775FEA35D45B81F45589AB

2. (PDF) The Right-Wing Myth of “Gender Ideology” - ResearchGate, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364266120_The_Right-Wing_Myth_of_Gender_Ideology

3. Gender Ideology: tracking its origins and meanings in current gender politics - Engenderings, accessed June 20, 2025, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/gender/2017/12/11/gender-ideology-tracking-its-origins-and-meanings-in-current-gender-politics/

4. Trump's “Gender Ideology” Attacks Are Following a Global Movement, accessed June 20, 2025, https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/02/trump-gender-ideology-global-trend-women-lgbtq-rights?lang=en

5. Anti-gender movement - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-gender_movement

6. View of Judith Butler, Who's Afraid of Gender? (New York: Penguin Books, 2024) | feminists@law - Journals at Kent, accessed June 20, 2025, https://journals.kent.ac.uk/index.php/feministsatlaw/article/view/1279/2352

7. 'Gender Ideology': Weak Concepts, Powerful Politics - Brill, accessed June 20, 2025, https://brill.com/view/journals/rag/6/2/article-p268_11.pdf

8. Recognizing, Documenting, and Addressing Anti-Gender Opposition - Global Action for Trans Equality, accessed June 20, 2025, https://gate.ngo/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2024-GATE-Recognizing_Documenting_and_Addressing_Anti-Gender_Opposition.pdf

9. Introduction: How to Speak Up About Gender Identity | The Heritage Foundation, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.heritage.org/gender-identity/introduction-how-speak-about-gender-identity

10. Gender | The Heritage Foundation, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.heritage.org/gender

11. The Heritage Foundation - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heritage_Foundation

12. Project 2025 Exposed - GLAAD, accessed June 20, 2025, https://glaad.org/project-2025/

13. How anti-trans policies in Project 2025 could impact all families - The 19th News, accessed June 20, 2025, https://19thnews.org/2024/08/project-2025-anti-trans-policies-impact-families/

14. How a second Trump presidency could impact the LGBTQ+ community | PBS News, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-a-second-trump-presidency-could-impact-the-lgbtq-community

15. Family Research Council - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Research_Council

16. 10 things you need to know about Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.splcenter.org/resources/hate-watch/10-things-you-need-know-about-tony-perkins-and-family-research-council/

17. Family Research Council - Southern Poverty Law Center, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.splcenter.org/resources/extremist-files/family-research-council/

18. Attacking Trans People in Defense of “Austerity" | Political Research Associates, accessed June 20, 2025, https://politicalresearch.org/2017/07/27/attacking-trans-people-in-defense-of-austerity

19. The Anti-Trans Movement Framework - The Commons Social Change Library, accessed June 20, 2025, https://commonslibrary.org/the-anti-trans-movement/

20. “They're Ruining People's Lives”: Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for ..., accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.hrw.org/report/2025/06/03/theyre-ruining-peoples-lives/bans-gender-affirming-care-transgender-youth-us

21. We All Lose in Trump's War Against Trans Americans | American Enterprise Institute - AEI, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aei.org/op-eds/we-all-lose-in-trumps-war-against-trans-americans/

22. The GOP Pretends to Protect Children — While Literally Promoting Child Labor - Jacobin, accessed June 20, 2025, https://jacobin.com/2023/03/gop-anti-trans-wokeness-child-labor-shootings

23. What's Behind the Rapid Rise in LGBTQ Identity? | American Enterprise Institute - AEI, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aei.org/articles/whats-behind-the-rapid-rise-in-lgbtq-identity/

24. The New York Trans | American Enterprise Institute - AEI, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aei.org/op-eds/the-new-york-trans/

25. An Inflection Point for the Transgender Movement | American Enterprise Institute - AEI, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aei.org/op-eds/an-inflection-point-for-the-transgender-movement/

26. Anti-LGBT and Religious Right Movements in the United States | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, accessed June 20, 2025, https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-1170?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190228637.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190228637-e-1170&p=emailAUrUQeo6EU2Qg

27. Who cares about the culture war? Evidence from a vote choice conjoint experiment - -ORCA, accessed June 20, 2025, https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/177686/1/1-s2.0-S0261379425000010-main.pdf

28. Attack on LGBTQ+ rights: The politics and psychology of a backlash - Berkeley News, accessed June 20, 2025, https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/05/02/attack-on-lgbtq-rights-the-politics-and-psychology-of-a-backlash/

29. Anti-transgender agendas part of a long effort by conservatives - University of Oregon, accessed June 20, 2025, https://news.uoregon.edu/content/anti-transgender-agendas-part-long-effort-conservatives

30. SCOTUS issues blockbuster ruling on gender care for trans minors - YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCj-V5SZ9wo

31. Covering the Actual Story of Trans Lives - Columbia Journalism Review, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.cjr.org/criticism/covering-the-actual-story-of-trans-lives.php

32. Leveraging the Culture War - City Journal, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.city-journal.org/article/leveraging-the-culture-war

33. Lee Anderson's Culture Wars: How the Conservative Party is Flirting with Far-Right Hate to Appeal to its Base - Byline Times, accessed June 20, 2025, https://bylinetimes.com/2023/02/15/lee-andersons-culture-wars-how-the-conservative-party-is-flirting-with-far-right-hate-to-appeal-to-its-base/

34. GOP candidates elevate anti-transgender messaging as a rallying call to Christian conservatives - AP News, accessed June 20, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/lgbtq-transgender-republicans-trump-christian-conservatives-election-83becc009d8123d96a75c2e4940ab339

35. Homophobic Populism | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, accessed June 20, 2025, https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-2080?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190228637.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190228637-e-2080&p=emailAkXWmMx.3VLGE

36. An analytic framework for theorizing the anti-gender agenda in education, accessed June 20, 2025, https://epaa.asu.edu/index.php/epaa/article/view/8829/3493

37. Judith Butler's Who's Afraid of Gender | Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, accessed June 20, 2025, https://signsjournal.org/judith-butlers-whos-afraid-of-gender/

38. The Global Resistance to LGBTIQ Rights | Journal of Democracy, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-global-resistance-to-lgbtiq-rights/

39. AU denounces Christian Nationalist SCOTUS decision on transgender health care bans, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/au-denounces-christian-nationalist-scotus-decision-on-transgender-health-care-bans

40. AU denounces Christian Nationalist SCOTUS decision on transgender health care bans, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.au.org/the-latest/press/transgender-health-care-ban-scotus/

41. Christian Nationalism: A 'Stained-Glass Ceiling' for LGBT Candidates? - PRRI, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.prri.org/spotlight/christian-nationalism-a-stained-glass-ceiling-for-lgbt-candidates/

42. Queer Panic: An Interpretation of Christian Nationalist Opposition to the Trans and Gender Nonconforming Community | Bulletin for the Study of Religion - Equinox Publishing, accessed June 20, 2025, https://journal.equinoxpub.com/BSOR/article/view/21029

43. The Conservative Crusade Against "Gender Ideology" - Politics and Rights Review, accessed June 20, 2025, https://politicsrights.com/conservative-crusade-against-gender-ideology/

44. The culture-war trap – Democracy and society | IPS Journal, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/democracy-and-society/the-culture-war-trap-6585/

45. Investigating Federal and State Actions Against Trans Youth, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ewa.org/how-to-cover-the-story/how-the-conservative-reframing-of-civil-rights-affects-trans-youth

46. How Gender Became Central to Far-Right Politics - Green European Journal, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/how-gender-became-central-to-far-right-politics/

47. GENDER IDEOLOGY - Mobilization of conservative groups against gender equality and sexual citizenship, accessed June 20, 2025, https://eige.europa.eu/resources/Report%20I%20Gender%20ideology%20-%20strategies.pdf

48. State Reforms to Protect Children from Harmful and Irreversible Transgender Medical Procedures | Issues - America First Policy Institute, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.americafirstpolicy.com/issues/state-reforms-to-protect-children-from-harmful-and-irreversible-transgender-medical-procedures

49. Guide to Anti-LGBTQ Online Hate and Disinformation - GLAAD, accessed June 20, 2025, https://glaad.org/smsi/anti-lgbtq-online-hate-speech-disinformation-guide/

50. Instead of Addressing Child Abuse Prevention, Trump Attacks Trans Youth, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/04/10/instead-addressing-child-abuse-prevention-trump-attacks-trans-youth

51. Supreme Court OKs Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for kids, a setback for transgender rights, accessed June 20, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-transgender-health-care-trump-79fc6f3bbdab2e92d6f0184201a468a9

52. Supreme Court Upholds Curbs on Care for Transgender Minors - YouTube, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG-8TbUa5yo

53. en.wikipedia.org, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_transgender_people#:~:text=Denominations%20including%20the%20Catholic%20Church,of%20England%2C%20Church%20of%20Sweden%2C

54. Christianity and transgender people - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_transgender_people

55. On Transgender Identity - SBC.net, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.sbc.net/resource-library/resolutions/on-transgender-identity/

56. LGBTQIA+ Ministry | Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), accessed June 20, 2025, https://pcusa.org/how-we-serve/inclusion-equity/lgbtqia-ministry

57. March 31 marks Trans Day of Visibility | Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), accessed June 20, 2025, https://pcusa.org/news-storytelling/news/2025/3/31/march-31-marks-trans-day-visibility

58. List of Christian denominations affirming LGBTQ people - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_affirming_LGBTQ_people

59. Politicized coverage is failing the trans community - Center for Journalism Ethics - University of Wisconsin–Madison, accessed June 20, 2025, https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/2024/01/30/politicized-coverage-is-failing-the-trans-community/

60. Transgender Ideology Is Riddled With Contradictions. Here Are the Big Ones., accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/transgender-ideology-riddled-contradictions-here-are-the-big-ones

61. Folk theories of gender and anti-transgender attitudes: Gender differences and policy preferences - PMC, accessed June 20, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6936834/

62. Anti-LGBTQ rhetoric - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-LGBTQ_rhetoric

63. New analysis reveals the extent of Fox News' obsession with Trump's anti-trans orders, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.yahoo.com/news/analysis-reveals-extent-fox-news-160053422.html

64. Trump's Anti-Trans Orders Get Most Airtime on Fox News, Report Finds | Truthout, accessed June 20, 2025, https://truthout.org/articles/trumps-anti-trans-orders-get-most-airtime-on-fox-news-report-finds/

65. New analysis reveals the extent of Fox News' obsession with Trump's anti-trans orders, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-transgender-executive-orders-fox-news-cnn-b2712988.html

66. What to know about the impacts of the Supreme Court's ruling on transgender care for youth, accessed June 20, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/transgender-care-minors-ban-supreme-court-tennessee-2222e833fdbb51d5afb93a09fd47fc43

67. Talks by three conservative speakers creating conflict on campus | University Times, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.utimes.pitt.edu/news/talks-three-conservative

68. 6 ways Trump's executive orders are targeting transgender people | PBS News, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/6-ways-trumps-executive-orders-are-targeting-transgender-people

69. Over 120 Bills Restricting LGBTQ Rights Introduced Nationwide in 2023 So Far - ACLU, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/over-120-bills-restricting-lgbtq-rights-introduced-nationwide-2023-so-far

70. THE IMPACTS OF ANTI-TRANSGENDER LAWS AND POLICIES - ACLU, accessed June 20, 2025, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/08/Impact-AntiTrans-Law-Research-Brief-FINAL.pdf

71. Protecting the Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex (LGBTQI+) People | HHS.gov, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/lgbtqi/index.html

72. Transgender rights in the United States - Wikipedia, accessed June 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_the_United_States

73. The Human Toll of Trump's Anti-Trans Crusade | American Civil Liberties Union, accessed June 20, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/the-human-toll-of-trumps-anti-trans-crusade

74. David Boaz and Trans Rights | Online Library of Liberty, accessed June 20, 2025, https://oll.libertyfund.org/publications/liberty-matters/2025-06-05-david-boaz-and-trans-rights