"Transing Away the Gay": A Debunking

“Transing away the gay” is a widespread anti-trans claim asserting that healthcare systems, affirming adults, and society are systematically converting gay and lesbian youth into transgender identities to “erase” homosexuality. ¹ This article examines the claim's origins, logical structure, empirical basis, and rhetorical function in contemporary anti-trans discourse.

The phrase encompasses several related assertions:

1. That youth who would naturally grow up to be gay are instead being socially or medically transitioned
2. That gender-affirming care deliberately targets LGB youth as an alternative to allowing them to accept their sexuality
3. That affirming trans identities represents a form of conversion therapy targeting sexual orientation
4. That removing a potential gay person from the LGB community through transition constitutes harm

The phrase is explicitly modeled on the earlier slogan “pray the gay away,” creating a linguistic parallel between religious conversion practices and gender-affirming medical care. ²

The fundamental error underpinning this claim is treating gender identity and sexual orientation as a single, interchangeable trait. They are not.

Sexual identity and sexual orientation are independent biological and psychological components of a person's overall identity. ^{3 4} Some research suggests that a subset of gender-dysphoric children would grow up to be gay if untreated, yet this finding is neither universal nor without controversy. ⁵

Many people conflate these dimensions because of social stereotypes that enforce the assumption they should align. In reality:

1. A trans man may be gay, straight, bisexual, or asexual—independent of his male gender identity
2. A trans woman's sexual orientation is distinct from her womanhood
3. A cisgender gay person's sexual orientation does not make them transgender
4. A cisgender trans-allied heterosexual may support trans rights without changing their orientation

The assumption that “most kids who experience gender incongruence, if left alone, would simply grow up to be gay” ⁶ misunderstands the relationship between these traits. Even if some gender-dysphoric children would have become gay adults without medical intervention, this does not establish that gender-affirming care constitutes “transing away the gay.” ⁷

If “transing away the gay” were occurring at scale, we would expect to see the LGB population declining as people were redirected into trans identities. The opposite is true: reported LGB identification has increased substantially in recent years, even as gender-affirming care has become more available. ⁸

This demographic trend is incompatible with a systematic campaign to eliminate homosexuality.

Anti-trans rhetoric sometimes cites longitudinal studies showing that some gender-dysphoric children do not transition in adulthood, arguing these children were prevented from becoming gay instead. ⁹

This argument commits several errors:

1. It assumes all gender-dysphoric youth would become gay if given no intervention (unfounded)
2. It treats “not transitioning” as evidence of hidden sexual orientation rather than genuine lack of gender dysphoria
3. It ignores that some desisters are heterosexual or asexual
4. Every trans person's experience of sexuality is their own—some trans people discover their sexual orientation changes as they transition authentically, while others' orientations remain consistent

While individual experiences vary, this claim overgeneralizes problematically:

1. Some gay people do transition, but their transition reflects genuine gender identity, not sexual orientation displacement
2. Individual lived experience is valid but cannot be generalized into systematic policy claims
3. The claim also relies on the false assumption that transitioning somehow “makes someone straight”—trans men who previously lived as lesbian women do not automatically become heterosexual, though their gender and/or partner preferences may shift

The phrase “transing away the gay” persists despite lacking empirical support because it functions as rhetorical repetition and linguistic resonance. When a claim is stated frequently enough in media and discourse, audiences begin to accept it as true regardless of evidence. The explicit modeling on “pray the gay away” leverages existing cultural familiarity with anti-gay conversion narratives. ¹⁰

This represents a known cognitive bias: the “illusory truth effect.”

The “transing away the gay” claim echoes earlier homophobic panic rhetoric:

1. 1980s claims that gay rights advocates were “recruiting” children
2. Modern claims that LGBTQ visibility constitutes “grooming”
3. The underlying structure: minority identity is a contagion that corrupts youth

This rhetorical continuity reveals that the claim functions as generalized anti-LGBTQ animus, not a specific empirical concern. ¹¹

Framing gender-affirming care as “transing away the gay” strips away the humanity of:

1. Young people experiencing genuine gender dysphoria
2. Medical providers offering evidence-based care
3. Trans people themselves, rendered as erasers of others rather than people with valid identities

Major medical organizations affirm that:

1. Gender identity and sexual orientation are distinct, independent traits with separate biological bases ¹²
2. Gender-affirming care improves mental health and quality of life for trans and gender-diverse individuals who seek it ¹³
3. Gender-affirming care is standard, evidence-based medical practice, not experimental or harmful ¹⁴

The “transing away the gay” narrative is not supported by epidemiological data, biological science, or clinical evidence. Instead, it functions as:

1. A rhetorical device leveraging cognitive biases (illusory truth effect)
2. An echo of historical anti-LGBTQ moral panic
3. A form of dehumanizing language that obscures the reality of transgender people and gender-affirming medicine
4. Part of a coordinated anti-trans effort that deliberately conflates distinct identities and harms to manufacture opposition to affirming care

Those genuinely concerned with protecting both gay and trans youth should:

1. Oppose all conversion therapy, including efforts targeting gender identity
2. Recognize that affirming care for trans youth and supporting gay youth are complementary, not contradictory goals
3. Demand evidence-based policy rather than rhetorical catchphrases
4. Recognize that both gay and trans people face real persecution—and that pitting them against each other benefits neither group

—

See Also:

1. There Is No Such Thing as "Trans Ideology"
2. Key Distinctions
3. Conversion Therapy and Its Harms
4. Medical Consensus
5. Anti-Trans Disinformation Networks