The Problem with Strange Bedfellows

Balancing Protection and Freedom in the Debate Over Transgender Medicalization

I never thought I’d find myself in an alliance with conservatives. Yet here I am, united with those whose broader agendas often clash with my values, fighting against the medicalization of minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Normally, I would oppose legislative bans on principle. I value individual freedom, and I understand that identity—especially when it comes to something as deeply personal as gender—defies easy categorization.

But this issue is different. The medical establishment has embraced gender-affirming care for children with what feels like unbridled enthusiasm and far too little caution. Puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries are being offered to children and adolescents with alarming speed, all while long-term research on the outcomes remains either incomplete or deeply flawed. The risks are enormous—ranging from irreversible sterility to loss of sexual function to lifelong dependency on medical interventions. This rush to affirm has left me with little choice but to support restrictions, even bans, on these practices for minors.

Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash

“Lie Down With Dogs, You Get Up With Fleas”

However, this stance has created an uncomfortable alliance. My friend, a lesbian and the mother of a child who identifies as nonbinary, summed it up bluntly: “Lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.” Her words sting because they carry truth. By aligning myself with conservatives to oppose the medicalization of gender-nonconforming kids, I’m forced to reckon with the future intentions of these unlikely allies.

Will conservatives, after successfully implementing these bans, truly advocate for the well-being of gender-nonconforming kids—many of whom might simply grow up to be gay? Or is this just the first step in a broader rollback of LGBTQ rights, starting with transgender interventions and moving toward curtailing freedoms for everyone under the queer umbrella?

Clip from the most recent Episode of Informed Dissent titled, “Strange Bedfellows” with Lisa Selin-Davis, Cori Cohen, Eliza Mondegreen, Ben Appel, and Jamie Reed.

Find the full Episode here.

A Complex Moral Terrain

I oppose the medicalization of minors because I believe the science is not there to support such irreversible decisions. But that opposition comes with a weighty moral and ethical dilemma: Could my stance inadvertently empower those who would harm the very children I aim to protect?

Gender-nonconforming kids deserve the freedom to explore who they are without being coerced into lifelong medical dependency. They also deserve protection from the ideological agendas of adults—whether those agendas involve affirming every declaration of identity with medical intervention or attempting to erase the existence of nontraditional identities altogether.

The conservative push to restrict sex reassignment procedures often frames itself as a fight for child safety. But let’s be honest: these same voices have, historically, not been allies of gay and lesbian youth. The question looms large: When this battle over gender ideology is “won,” what happens next?

Different Roads, Same Destination

This fight brings together a strange patchwork of people, each arriving from a different road but converging on the same destination. For some, the call to action began with the heartbreaking stories of detransitioners who regret their medical journeys. Others were pulled into this battle after watching schools socially transition children without informing their parents, realizing that something was deeply wrong. For me, it was the statistical impossibility of so many friends’ children coming out as trans at the same time, combined with the spectacle of Lia Thomas—a transwoman athlete—dominating women’s sports.

These varied paths have brought us all to the same place: the Courage Coalition, where we work together to safeguard children, protect their right to grow into themselves, and challenge a medical system that too often prioritizes ideology over evidence.

Navigating the Path Forward

For me, this fight isn’t just about stopping what I view as dangerous medical practices for minors. It’s also about creating a world where children can be themselves—whether that means being a tomboy, a feminine boy, or somewhere outside those labels entirely—without fear of judgment, coercion, or permanent medicalization.

To achieve this, I must be vigilant. My temporary allies may share my immediate goal, but their broader agenda might conflict with the vision I have for the future. A future where children grow into healthy, whole adults without being pushed down paths that serve ideological or political ends. A future where gay kids aren’t erased by medical interventions that transform them into something they’re not.

The Balancing Act

This is the uncomfortable reality of my position: navigating a path that balances protection from premature medical decisions with the freedom to explore identity in a supportive, understanding environment. It means asking hard questions—not just of the policies I support but of the motivations and potential consequences of the alliances I’ve formed.

Strange bedfellows make for uneasy sleep. But in the end, I hope this alignment is temporary, and that the real work begins when we no longer need to fight this particular battle. It’s not enough to stop harmful practices. We need to build something better—a world where all children can grow into themselves, unencumbered by the agendas of adults.

Join the Courage Coalition

If this resonates with you, consider supporting the Courage Coalition. Together, we can stand against the harmful medicalization of minors and create a world where children are free to grow into whoever they’re meant to be. Every voice matters in this fight to protect the next generation.