Anti-trans arguments rarely originate with ordinary people asking genuine questions. Rather, they emerge from coordinated networks of organizations, funders, and media outlets working together to manufacture and amplify false claims. Understanding where misinformation comes from—and how it spreads—is essential for evaluating sources and resisting manipulation.

Anti-trans arguments do not arise organically. Research by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), particularly through their Project CAPTAIN (Combating Anti-LGBTQ+ Pseudoscience), has mapped the infrastructure behind coordinated anti-trans disinformation. What emerges is not a grassroots movement but a well-funded, deliberately coordinated campaign. ¹

From the SPLC's analysis: “Disinformation from junk science is dangerous. When anti-LGBTQ+ pseudoscience turns into policy, it has real-life, often life-threatening consequences for trans and nonbinary people.”

The anti-gender movement is substantially funded: ²

• The aggregate revenue of U.S.-based organizations associated with the anti-gender movement during 2008–2017 was $6.2 billion USD.
• In that same period, eleven U.S. organizations funneled at least $1 billion internationally to amplify anti-trans and anti-gender messaging globally.
• Much of this funding comes from conservative Christian organizations and donor-advised funds that redirected resources previously dedicated to opposing marriage equality.

This is not organic skepticism—it is manufactured opposition with institutional backing.

SEGM (Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine) functions as a central hub of the anti-trans disinformation network. ³

SEGM is a 501©(3) nonprofit founded by physicians including Stephen Beck (an executive at Bon Secours Mercy Health, the fifth-largest Catholic healthcare network in the U.S.). While presenting itself as an “evidence-based” organization, SEGM is identified by Wikipedia and multiple watchdog organizations as an anti-trans organization known for healthcare misinformation. ⁴

SEGM has:

• Falsely claimed that the majority of transgender children desist (see Debunking Desistance)
• Advocated for “exploratory psychotherapy” as an alternative to gender-affirming care—a rebranding of conversion therapy
• Positioned members as “expert witnesses” in anti-trans litigation
• Built a network of career commentators and advocates against gender-affirming care

SEGM does not operate in isolation. It maintains direct partnerships with:

Genspect – International gender-critical organization founded by Stella O'Malley, explicitly opposed to conversion therapy bans and transition access for people under 25

Cardinal Support Network – Parent-focused anti-trans group led by Sharon Beck (wife of SEGM cofounder Stephen Beck), campaigns against hospital gender clinics

Partners for Ethical Care – U.S.-based organization working to defund and shut down pediatric gender clinics

Youth Trans Critical Professionals – Hub for credentialed professionals opposing gender-affirming care, founded by Lisa Marchiano, clinical social worker and SEGM advisor

These are not separate organizations—they share leadership, funding, strategies, and messaging.

CAN-SG (Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender) serves as SEGM's UK-based counterpart, operating in a nearly identical strategic role.

CAN-SG presents itself as an independent network of clinicians calling for “evidence-based care,” but it is primarily composed of activists from SEGM and Genspect. ⁵ It operates with a specific political mission:

• Opposing conversion therapy bans that include gender identity
• Influencing NHS policy and university curricula regarding trans medicine
• Positioning itself as a “clinical” voice to legitimize anti-trans positions within healthcare institutions

CAN-SG's public conference lineup reveals its connections:

Stella O'Malley (Genspect founder) – Described as suppressing gender identity in therapy and lacking empathy for trans youth

Michael Biggs – Anti-trans campaigner linked to prolific troll accounts

Richard Byng – Member of SEGM pseudoscience network

Speakers from Sex Matters, Transgender Trend, and other connected anti-trans groups

Connected to SEGM and CAN-SG are:

Sex Matters – UK-based gender-critical organization

Transgender Trend – Anti-trans advocacy group presenting itself as “concerned parents”

Alliance Defending Freedom – Multimillion-dollar Christian legal organization with lawyers worldwide attacking LGBTQ+ rights, including bans on gender-affirming care ⁶

American College of Pediatricians – Fringe organization founded in 2002, unrepresentative of actual pediatric consensus but frequently cited as authority

These organizations cross-reference each other, share speakers, coordinate messaging, and work toward aligned policy goals.

The SPLC has documented the specific mechanics of how anti-trans disinformation is created and weaponized:

Anti-trans organizations explicitly produce white papers and reports designed to provide legal cover for legislation, not to advance scientific understanding. ⁷ As researchers note:

These white papers' explicit purpose is to manufacture justification for banning gender-affirming care (or at minimum, denying Medicaid coverage) that will be plausibly defensible in court.

SEGM members have been directly involved in drafting anti-trans bills and providing testimony, blurring the line between “clinical advice” and political advocacy.

The pathway from disinformation to law follows this pattern:

1. Generate pseudoscience – SEGM, CAN-SG, and partner organizations produce reports using poor methodology, misquoted research, and fringe experts
2. Amplify through media – Right-wing and mainstream media outlets uncritically report on these claims
3. Influence politicians – Legislators cite these manufactured “studies” as justification for bills
4. Pass discriminatory legislation – Anti-trans bills proliferate, often using language directly copied from pseudoscience networks

In 2024, over 500 anti-trans bills were proposed or adopted in the United States, with many directly citing SEGM-produced materials. In 2025, 1,020 bills are under consideration. ⁸

A critical component of the anti-trans disinformation network consists of media outlets and platforms that function as “Narrative Manipulation” (NM) groups—translating pseudoscience into digestible political messaging for mass audiences. ⁹

These outlets amplify claims from SEGM, CAN-SG, and related organizations to right-wing and conservative audiences, often without critical fact-checking or disclosure of the outlets' connections to the pseudoscience network.

The City Journal, the flagship publication of the Manhattan Institute, serves as a critical amplification channel for anti-trans pseudoscience into mainstream conservative thought. ¹⁰

The Manhattan Institute, founded in 1978 with over $14 million annual budget, employs Chris Rufo and Leor Sapir, both directly connected to SEGM and FAIR. Rufo, in particular, has been instrumental in:

• Injecting anti-LGBTQ+ pseudoscience into the intellectual mainstream of American conservatism
• Using The City Journal to disseminate anti-trans narratives “often by obfuscating key details that muddy his points”
• Building what a 2022 New York Times profile called an “intellectual cover” for “flawed and inflammatory work”

In June 2023, Colin Wright (SEGM board member and Manhattan Institute fellow) and Leor Sapir published a Wall Street Journal editorial attacking federal court decisions protecting transgender healthcare access. The editorial failed to disclose Wright's SEGM membership, that SEGM members provided expert testimony in the cases being discussed, or the authors' collaboration on anti-trans messaging. ¹¹

The City Journal regularly publishes columns by SEGM-affiliated authors and FAIR members, positioning fringe anti-trans claims as serious conservative intellectual work.

Quillette, a self-described “free speech” online magazine, has become a platform for amplifying anti-trans pseudoscience through its podcast and article features. ¹²

The connection runs through Jonathan Kay, Quillette's podcast host, who simultaneously serves on FAIR's (Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism) board of advisors. This creates a direct pipeline: SEGM research → FAIR's narrative framing → Quillette's amplification to its audience.

In August 2023, Quillette's podcast featured Colin Wright (SEGM/Genspect) and journalist Christina Buttons (Gender Dysphoria Alliance/Archives of Sexual Behavior board member), hosted by Kay. The episode did not disclose the interconnected relationships between all three participants or their positions in the anti-trans pseudoscience network. ¹³

Quillette presents itself as defending “open debate” while functioning as a megaphone for fringe anti-trans claims, often without critical examination of the claims' methodological flaws or the speakers' financial/professional stakes in perpetual controversy.

UnHerd, founded in 2017 by hedge fund manager Paul Marshall and conservative activist Tim Montgomerie, has become a prominent platform for anti-trans content and anti-trans advocates. ¹⁴

UnHerd's function within the disinformation ecosystem:

• Publishes prominent anti-trans narratives and opinion columns targeting conservative audiences
• Platforms SEGM-affiliated experts and gender-critical advocates without disclosure of network connections
• In April 2024, was placed on the Global Disinformation Index's Dynamic Exclusion List after publishing “anti-trans narratives,” prompting advertisers to withdraw ¹⁵
• Presents anti-trans arguments as serious editorial content rather than political advocacy

Notably, UnHerd actively criticized the SPLC's December 2023 Project CAPTAIN report, framing the documentation of the coordinated network as “condemning feminists as white supremacists” rather than acknowledging the report's detailed mapping of pseudoscience networks and their funding. ¹⁶

This defensive response reveals how outlets in the NM category operate: by portraying fact-checking and network-mapping as attacks on “free speech” and feminist discourse.

As the SPLC notes, the report explicitly documents that “the network we identify supports and is supported by white Christian nationalist ideology that seeks to privilege straight, white, cisgender Christians in public policy and replace science and American law with Christian theology.” UnHerd's framing of this as anti-feminist censorship obscures the actual substance of the report.

Reduxx, founded in 2022, presents itself as a “pro-woman, pro-child safeguarding” news outlet but functions as anti-trans propaganda strategically positioned to appeal to feminist and child safety concerns. ¹⁷

Reduxx's website claims to be “100% independent and does not receive any funding from special interest groups, governments, or big media corporations.” ¹⁸ However, its operational strategy and messaging align precisely with coordinated anti-trans networks:

• Claims to be “independent” while publishing coordinated anti-trans narratives that align with SEGM, Genspect, and gender-critical networks
• Focuses on amplifying sensationalized, anecdotal, and often decontextualized stories framed as evidence of trans people's danger
• Uses inflammatory headlines and selective framing to suggest widespread patterns from isolated incidents
• Recruits contributors with “unique backgrounds” and “shared passion” for “facts” that consistently align anti-trans messaging

In November 2024, Reduxx lost its primary funding source when Patreon shut down its donation page. The platform discovered that Reduxx was offering merchandise that could be used as weapons. ¹⁹

An archived example of Reduxx's Patreon revealed a monthly donation tier titled “Clown World Trapeze Artist” that offered a “keychain” designed to function as a weapon. When PinkNews reported this violation of Patreon's terms of service, the platform immediately suspended the account. Reduxx blamed “rabid trans activists” for the account closure rather than acknowledging the weapons merchandise. ²⁰

This incident is significant because it demonstrates that outlets positioned as legitimate “journalism” or “safeguarding” organizations are simultaneously operating infrastructure designed to intimidate and potentially harm. It reveals the extremist positioning underlying Reduxx's ostensibly moderate “pro-woman” framing.

Reduxx operates in the NM functional role by translating anti-trans pseudoscience into emotional narratives (“protecting women and children”) that activate conservative and gender-critical audiences without requiring detailed engagement with actual evidence. For example, Reduxx frames discussion of gender identity in healthcare as:

• “Gender ideology” threatening women's spaces
• “Biological integrity” being violated by medical transition
• Trans people as inherent threats to children and women's safety

These framings allow Reduxx to appeal to genuine feminist and child safety concerns while directing them toward anti-trans policy goals rather than evidence-based solutions.

The SPLC's network analysis reveals that media outlets like The City Journal, Quillette, UnHerd, and Reduxx operate as a coordinated ecosystem: ²¹

1. Research & Practice groups (SEGM, CAN-SG, ICGDR) produce pseudoscientific reports

2. Think tanks (Manhattan Institute, Heritage Foundation, AEI) provide institutional legitimacy

3. Narrative Manipulation outlets (The City Journal, Quillette, UnHerd, Reduxx) repackage claims for mass consumption

4. Legal Advocacy groups (Alliance Defending Freedom, Heritage Foundation) translate narratives into litigation and legislation

These outlets do not operate independently—they amplify each other's content, cross-promote speakers, and coordinate messaging timelines. A single claim originating in a SEGM white paper can appear across The City Journal, Quillette, UnHerd, and Reduxx within days, creating the false impression of widespread, independent concern rather than coordinated messaging.

One of the most pervasive tactics is selective citation and deliberate misinterpretation of existing research.

The 2011 Swedish longitudinal study on transition outcomes is frequently cited by anti-trans advocates to claim that “transition makes trans people more suicidal” and that “trans women retain male-pattern criminality.” ²² SEGM and CAN-SG members prominently cite this study in their materials, and these misquotations are then repeated across UnHerd, Quillette, and Reduxx articles.

However, the study's actual findings show:

• Transition improves mental health outcomes
• The study did not measure the effects of transition itself
• Crime rate comparisons were taken out of methodological context

This single misquoted paper spreads through the coordinated network (SEGM→The City Journal/Quillette→UnHerd/Reduxx→audience), appears in policy briefs, and becomes cited as “evidence.”

Anti-trans organizations recruit credentialed professionals who operate outside the consensus of their own fields. This allows them to claim scientific authority while contradicting actual professional standards.

SEGM explicitly markets its members as “expert witnesses” and career commentators, who are then featured in The City Journal, quoted on Quillette, or interviewed by UnHerd. Members appear in:

• Legislative testimony
• Media interviews positioned as “independent experts”
• Legal cases
• “International conferences” convening like-minded activists

A pediatrician in SEGM speaking against gender-affirming care is newsworthy and cited as “a doctor” by these outlets; the fact that 97%+ of pediatric organizations support such care goes unreported.

Stories of individual regret are amplified and generalized to entire populations, despite representing statistical outliers. Reduxx, in particular, specializes in this tactic: publishing one detransitioner's experience with a headline suggesting a widespread pattern, without statistical context or counterbalance.

Detransitioner narratives are promoted by SEGM-connected organizations and amplified through these media outlets as “evidence” that transition itself is harmful, even though desistance and detransition occur at documented low rates with identifiable reasons unrelated to transition itself.

Platforms have created uneven conditions for misinformation spread:

1. Moderation policies allow ideological critique of gender identity while restricting direct attacks on trans people, creating a legal loophole for harassment
2. Algorithms amplify divisive content, benefiting engagement-driving anti-trans content
3. Recent policy changes by major platforms have reduced protections for LGBTQ+ users while allowing increased anti-LGBTQ+ speech ²³

SEGM, CAN-SG, and media outlets like UnHerd and Reduxx content spreads readily through these gaps, appearing as “expert commentary” and “news reporting” rather than political advocacy.

Certain false claims recur across anti-trans networks with suspicious consistency, indicating coordinated messaging:

The same talking points appear across SEGM white papers, CAN-SG webinars, The City Journal articles, Quillette interviews, UnHerd columns, and Reduxx posts within days—evidence of deliberately coordinated communications strategy.

False assertions that suspects in mass shootings are transgender are common in the immediate aftermath of tragedies. These claims are coordinated enough to appear across multiple platforms simultaneously, despite lacking evidence. There is no evidence of rising LGBTQ+ violent extremism or “trans terrorism.”

The claim that gender identity is “contagious” or socially transmitted reflects an explicitly ideological position, not evidence. This trope functions to dismiss the legitimacy of trans youth identity by claiming it is peer-influenced rather than genuine. SEGM and CAN-SG materials prominently feature this framing, and it is routinely repeated in The City Journal, Quillette, and Reduxx without critical examination.

Gender-affirming care is systematically misrepresented in anti-trans discourse. Language is deliberately deployed to obscure what care actually involves and its evidence base. SEGM materials consistently mischaracterize puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and psychological support, and these mischaracterizations are then spread through media outlets without fact-checking.

When encountering claims about trans issues, ask:

1. Who produced this? Is it from:
   • A medical organization (AMA, AAP, APA, WHO)? Likely credible.
   • A political advocacy group (SEGM, CAN-SG, Heritage Foundation)? Most likely has bias.
   • A media outlet (The City Journal, Quillette, UnHerd, Reduxx)? Most likely has bias. Consider whether they've disclosed connections to advocacy networks.
   • An individual fringe professional? Likely lacks consensus support.

1. Is the author credentialed in the relevant field? A therapist speaking on endocrinology may have credentials but lacks relevant expertise. SEGM members are often in non-medical fields making medical claims.
2. Are conflicts of interest disclosed? If a Quillette podcast features SEGM and FAIR members without mentioning their organizational connections, disclosure is being deliberately withheld.
3. Does it contradict major professional organizations? If the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, and American Academy of Pediatrics all disagree with the claim, it is likely misrepresenting evidence.
4. Are studies quoted accurately? Look at the study itself. Check if the abstract and methods support the claim being made. Compare to how the study is cited by multiple SEGM materials and media outlets.
5. Is there financial motivation? Organizations receiving substantial funding to oppose certain policies have incentive to manufacture supporting “evidence.” Media outlets may benefit from engagement-driving controversy.
6. Is this coordinated? If a talking point appears across SEGM, CAN-SG, The City Journal, Quillette, UnHerd, and Reduxx simultaneously, it reflects coordinated messaging, not independent analysis.
7. Are voices missing? If coverage of trans issues excludes trans people themselves, information is likely incomplete or skewed.
8. Does this person/outlet have a career stake? Members of SEGM and CAN-SG have built careers as “expert witnesses” and anti-trans commentators. Media outlets like Reduxx depend on engagement from their anti-trans audience. Their livelihoods depend on continued conflict.

Several organizations maintain fact-checking and resource databases:

1. SPLC's Project CAPTAIN: Detailed analysis of anti-LGBTQ+ pseudoscience networks and claims, including SEGM, CAN-SG, and media amplification strategies
2. GLAAD Fact Checks: Systematic debunking of common false claims and tropes
3. The Commons Library: Comprehensive anti-trans disinformation handbook with network mappings
4. Trans Safety Network: Tracks interconnections between anti-trans organizations and their funding
5. Gender Analysis: Investigative journalism on anti-trans pseudoscience networks and media amplification
6. Ruth Pearce's analysis: Academic researcher documenting CAN-SG, SEGM, and conversion therapy connections
7. Scientific American: How Anti-Trans Efforts Misuse and Distort Science
8. NIH and peer-reviewed sources: PubMed and other databases allow you to read actual studies rather than summaries

1. Debunking Desistance
2. Debunking Puberty Blockers
3. Debunking Swedish Study
4. List of Bad Arguments
5. Playbook of Oppression
6. There Is No Such Thing as "Trans Ideology"