The Curious Case of The Non-Binary Parent and His 8-Year-Old Transgender Daughter
"I yam what I yam." ~Popeye
INTRODUCTION
As the parent of two teenagers who I love more than life itself, this is a very difficult piece to write and explore. My long-term and possibly even recently acquired readers will know by now that my usual style is polemical, antagonistic, deliberately offensive and unapologetic in nature. I employ these writing strategies to push back against the ever-encroaching infringements to the two cornerstone human rights of freedom of thought and expression. However, I am used to writing about religious and ideological extremists who seek to arrogantly and narcissistically erase the aforementioned human rights for those who do not share their rigid, narrow and harmful worldviews.
This case, however, involves an obviously loving parent and an absolutely adorable and extremely likable and highly intelligent child. So if you have opened this piece and are expecting my usually brutal and offensive style, I am sorry to tell you, but this will not be such a piece. I have written mercilessly on what I see as the toxic infusion of Wokeism into the pre-existing trans-rights movement, but those cases I wrote about involved mob violence, bullying and unjustified intimidation by adult trans and trans-allied activists, who have used the real suffering of real people with real gender dysphoria as weapon to promote a form of ideological fascism that is harmful to the human rights of everyone in society, including the marginalized people they are fighting for in this culture war.
JOHNATHAN JOLY: IN THE BEGINNING
This story doesn’t begin with young 8-year-old Eduardo, who now identifies as ‘Edie.’ It begins with her parent, a popular YouTube content creator, who, with the assistance of his lovely wife, Anna, has made a living out of making YouTube videos that chronicle their personal life. Johnathan and Anna met in University, and according to Anna, it was Johnathan’s idea to kickoff their successful YouTube career. They have received awards for their videos and amassed a fan base of millions.
According to Johnathan, he had a very troubled and traumatic childhood, suffering abuse in the home and vicious bullying at school. Here is another point of unity between myself and Johnathan, as I know full well the pain of severe childhood trauma and violent abuse, and the pain that results. Such intense and unabating pain can either destroy you or it can be turned into fuel for the fire of creativity. Johnathan bravely chose the latter, and for this he should be admired and applauded. It is no small thing to overcome the demons that chase you throughout your life as a result of serious childhood trauma and abuse. These demons never leave you. They are there, waiting constantly for you to experience moments of self-doubt and crippling anxiety, so that they can pounce on you and drive you into hell, where they intend on keeping you held prisoner to the pain of your past. Left unexamined and untreated, such trauma is capable of driving you literally insane. It is the touch of insanity I have which drives me to be the deliberately offensive and unflinching fighter for human rights, and it is Johnathan’s pain that drives him to create and share his unique gifts with the world.
In 2021, having already established a large fanbase, Johnathan, who is in his 40s, came out to his fans as non-binary. According to Johnathan, it was his 7-year-old child’s revelation that he was in fact a she that caused Johnathan to discover he too was gender non-conforming. According to their own account, Eduardo had a somewhat short history of preferring to dress like his big sister and was horrified by the prospect of eventually growing facial hair after being taught about puberty at age 7. The isolation caused by the pandemic was said to have been the catalyst, but the Joly family took these previous signs as being clues that their 7-year-old son had always in fact been a transgender girl.
Again, I stress that this is not a hit piece intended to dump further hate onto this lovely family, rather, it is an expression of my curiosity into the case of an extremely young and prepubescent child believing they are transgender and then subsequently being labelled as such by her parents. It is a fascinating case study. Now, Johnathan, if you ever stumble across and read this piece, I want you to know that from the bottom of my heart, as a fellow parent who loves his children and like you and Anna would accept and love them regardless of how they choose to identify, my questions and gentle investigative criticisms do not come from a place of malicious intent. Here is the video of Edie’s second gender reveal event.
TRANSGENDER IDENTITY AND THE POSSIBLE IMPACT OF ‘SOCIAL CONTAGION’
One thing that struck me watching this video is the bubbling pride Johnathan expressed about being part of such a “progressively diverse family.” Johnathan says:
“We should just not be afraid to show our truth. We are a very progressive and diverse family. Even with Anna, you, you have a gay sister, a trans cousin, a gay cousin, a non-binary husband, a transgender child. You know, you are a melting pot and that’s the world we live in today.”
These identity markers are expressed with such enthusiastic adulation, almost as if these ultimately superficial characteristics make the Jolys somehow very special, whilst at the same time being up-to-speed with today’s norms and values, with Johnathan normalizing such identity markers by saying, “that is the world we live in today.” Please do not misunderstand me here. It is a fantastic thing that people are afforded far more ability today to live their authentic truth openly, but given the performative nature of his expression and his long-standing history of shining a public light on his personal life for attention, recognition and reward, one must explore the possibility that there may be an aspect of social reward driving the Joly family to label their now 8-year-old child as transgender.
In a recent interview, the source for which escapes me at the moment, Jordan Peterson argued against the likelihood of a non-binary parent having a transgender child given that the statistical rates of gender dysphoria are so staggeringly low, therefore, he argued along the lines of “What are the chances?” I believe he put forth this argument to argue in favour of indoctrination in such cases, and indoctrination could well be a factor in some such cases. However, what Peterson failed to factor into his assessment is the observed genetic component which is heritable according to some studies. One such study entitled, The Biological Contributions to Gender Identity and Gender Diversity: Bringing Data to the Table, the team of researchers involved observed:
‘Based on the data reviewed, we hypothesize that gender identity is a multifactorial complex trait with a heritable polygenic component.’
So here is where we explore the apparently burgeoning rates of transgender identity and the possibility that there may be an aspect of social contagion involved.
According to Ronald E. Riggio and Clara R. Riggio, in Reference Module in Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Psychology, 2022:
‘Social contagion is an ubiquitous process by which information, such as attitudes, emotions, or behaviors, are rapidly spread throughout a group from one member to others without rational thought and reason. While much of the social contagion process, such as people following fads, trends, or rituals, are not necessarily dangerous, when social contagion leads to harming individuals, as in clusters of violence or self-harm, it is a concern for public and mental health.’
Given the increased interconnectedness of the human experience now with large parts of the world having access to the internet, and the increasing rise in social media usage, particularly amongst teenagers, it is no stretch of the imagination to posit that ideas, attitudes and behaviours popularized on these global platforms are far more capable of spreading via social contagion. Add to this reality the spotlight recently directed toward non-conforming gender identity in both the mainstream media and on social media, again, it is no stretch of the imagination to posit that social contagion via perceived social rewards may be having an impact on the apparently increasing number of people now choosing to identify as transgender and otherwise gender non-conforming.
To balance this argument, the apparent increase in numbers could be accounted for by a more tolerant social environment, that allows people to openly express their true selves, rather than having to hide, which was certainly the case in the past. Just how much of the increase in visible gender non-conformity is the result of social contagion versus increased acceptance is a matter requiring further study and analysis. In Sweden, for example, between 2008 and 2018, there has been a ‘1,500% increase in gender dysphoria diagnoses among 13 to 17-year-olds born as girls.’ In a Washington Post article by Anne Branigin, she reports:
The Pew data suggests that at least 5.3 million trans and nonbinary people live in the United States, based on current census data. That is about two times higher than the number implied by two studies from the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute: A 2016 survey estimated that 0.6 percent of U.S. adults — about 1.4 million — identified as trans, and another in 2021 estimated that 1.2 million adults identify as nonbinary. (Pew researchers noted that the intent of its latest survey was not to calculate a specific total.)
The survey did not get into the reasons rates might be higher among younger groups, Brown said, “but one thing to note is that young adults tend to be more familiar with the idea of being nonbinary.” They are also the only age group in which a majority of respondents — 52 percent — said they know a trans person.
The next thing we need to examine is whether the potential social contagion associated with the marked increase in gender non-conformity is harmful or potentially harmful. There are studies that demonstrate that gender affirming care actually reduces harm by reducing the mental distress which causes depression, self-harm and suicide among gender non-conforming people. To balance this perspective, Lisa Littman, a physician and professor of behavioral science at Brown University argues against rushing to encourage young people to transition in all cases. Writing for Psychology Today, Samuel Paul Veissière Ph.D., says:
‘Littman raises cautions about encouraging young people’s desire to transition in all instances. From the cases reviewed in her study, she concluded that what she terms “rapid-onset gender dysphoria” (ROGD) appears to be a novel condition that emerges from cohort and contagion effects and novel social pressures. From this perspective, ROSD likely exhibits an aetiology and epidemiology that is distinct from the "classical" cases of gender dysphoria documented in the DSM…It is clear from Littman’s study that the rise of rapid-onset gender dysphoria, which seems to predominantly involve natal females, points to a complex web of social pressures, changing cultural norms, and new modes of distress and coping that warrant further investigation. For parents, educators, and clinicians alike, caution is warranted in dealing with this growing phenomenon.’
There is potential harm in hasty diagnoses of gender dysphoria. This is particularly the case where there may not be legitimate cases of gender dysphoria involved, but other factors mentioned in Littman’s study. This potential harm is created when the social transition process has begun, as there is a risk that psychological phenomena such as the ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’ and ‘cognitive dissonance,’ which can work in tandem to automatically keep pre-existing belief structures in place due to our inherent drive for psychological and behavioural consistency, results in unnecessary and irreversible medical treatment being incorrectly administered to children and young adults, which can do more harm than good in the long run. In this way, such hasty diagnoses represent the flip-side of the coin to denying treatment for legitimate cases of gender dysphoria.
Here is where the stifling influence of ideological Wokeism becomes an impediment to both sides of the problem, as its doctrines of ‘Speech is Violence’ and ‘Censorship’ via cancel culture makes this investigation combustible, toxic, and even dangerous for those brave enough to engage in it.
CONCLUSION
The truth is, we do not know whether Edie has been inadvertently or deliberately subjected to the psychological pressures of parents who value being progressive as a badge of honour for social reward, or whether the badge of honour is the result of a brave acceptance of who they are as a progressive family who have overcome the challenges of facing bigotry and hostility.
Despite the obvious performative character of their expressions of identity, which do lend an air of social reward as a motivating factor, there is little-to-no doubt that by all appearances, this family is happy, well-adjusted, warm and functional. It is obvious from Edie’s body language and mirco-expressions that she is the recipient of genuine love and care. It should also be noted that both Johnathan and Anna have an exit strategy in place should Edie ever wish to revert to her biologically-aligned gender identity, which does seem to indicate that they have their daughter’s best interests at heart above all other factors and pressures.
It will be interesting to see Edie’s development in the long-term, because for now, at this age, it is far too early to tell how she will end up identifying, and if I am being perfectly honest, it isn’t really any of our concern. Nonetheless, this family certainly makes for an extremely interesting case study, and I am sure that anthropologists to come will find great value in the Jolys’ social media experiment.