24 Comments
User's avatar
LarryC's avatar

The irony is the leaders of the NYT think of themselves as courageous, if not heroic, for publishing a few sex realist articles and editorials and for allowing some “gender critical” comments to get through their censors.

Lisa Simeone's avatar

The NYT is and has been irresponsible in reporting on the "trans" cult. Several of us have written about and to the NYT, of course to no avail. Just two examples:

Cowardice On Parade: NPR, NYT, WaPo, and the “Free” Press

https://lisasimeone.substack.com/p/cowardice-on-parade-npr-nyt-wapo

Sick of the NYT's Censorship of Gender-Critical Comments

https://lisasimeone.substack.com/p/sick-of-the-nyts-censorship-on-gender

nina's avatar

Journalism going off a reality standard is disturbing. It is beyond yellow journalism to straight up gaslight. Doctors do not assign biology. they can only observe and measure.

Journalism and police misinforming the public is institutional terrorism to benefit a small subset of depraved males...

Simone Hogan's avatar

What gets my goat is that the NYT feels the need to sprinkle gender ideology even into their crossword puzzle clues.

Chris Fox's avatar

The justification for the "sex assigned at birth" phrasing is obvious. An infant's actual biological sex isn't the "true" one, it's just a provisional placeholder until the activists on TikTok have had time to weigh in. The (utterly fictional) "gender identity" is the true sex.

Gender ideology will die out, leaving us with tens of thousands of damaged, short-lived people with a new kind of Auschwitz tattoo, piss-dripping eunuchs and breastless women. I can't wait until it goes away.

Tim Gregory's avatar

Here is an excellent article from Quillette describing the false neutrality of media organizations.

https://quillette.com/2026/03/10/the-soft-disinformation-contagion-psychology-social-media-politics/?utm_source=newsletter_daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=qd_2026-03-10&utm_content=new_this_week. The author calls it "soft disinformation."

A key paragraph:

"The operational structure of soft disinformation is remarkably consistent. It begins with an implicit conclusion established in advance. Data compatible with that conclusion are selected, while variables that complicate the narrative are omitted or deprioritised. The result is presented as neutral, evidence-based analysis, often draped in the visual language of authority—charts, citations, and professional jargon. Statistics may be accurate and quotations may be authentic, but the manipulation occurs entirely in the assembly. Crucially, the method does not generate hypotheses that can fail. The conclusion is insulated from refutation by design."

Andrew Crean's avatar

Yup these people are nuts and they are damaging our children. Only lawsuits with huge financial penalties will end this madness.

KMac's avatar
2hEdited

In The New York Times NEED to be a crusader of justice and protector of civil rights, they had to create a new minority group and fell for the trans ideology hook, line, and sinker! They will never admit wrongdoing because they feel they are above that. If we were all as naked as chimps, there would be no gender ideology.

Truth Matters's avatar

They are not journalists. And we must hold them accountable. Thank you for calling them out.

Chris Fox's avatar

After decades as a subscriber and then years away from 𝑆𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝐴𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑛 magazine I resubscribed for a year. The first issue I received had an article exactly like what the NYT is doing, describing sex as a "spectrum" and using the same gender gibberish the author describes here.

I hope the staff at NYT is poring over this but I doubt that 𝑚𝑒𝑎 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑝𝑎 is forthcoming.

Very good article.

Michael Mohr's avatar

Many good points. Mostly agree. Still respect the NYT but they failed on culture war issues for sure.

Anonymous Dad's avatar

The Times won't do any of this. They think they're above reproach, and believe their critics are rubes. I know a business editor there. That's truly their attitude. Does anyone else wonder what other stories they're getting horribly wrong?

Chris Fox's avatar

Maybe the Israeli "right to exist," a phrase even less sensible than "sex assigned at birth."

Cassandra anonymous's avatar

An excellent summary of the nuttery that has infested and taken over the Times. Everyone involved should be blackballed from journalism forever more.

And remember, if you lie about something so obvious, how can we trust you to speak the truth about anything else?

Mb's avatar

Leftists are not aiming at transing kids. Thats bollocks. But as the article states the herd mentality of dems support peoples rights; rights that are completely misapplied here, kinda like the second amendment right on the Gop side. We are all victims of garbage in garbage out.. our news sources inform our worldview.

Chris Fox's avatar

I read many posts in many substacks from Democratic parents who were planning to vote for Trump, explicitly to protect their children from the surgeons.

EyesOpen's avatar

Thanks for this summary. Another writer adds her disgust for the New York Times: https://anitabartholomew.substack.com/p/only-the-new-york-times-could-fck

I'm glad to see pushback on their reporting.

Theo's avatar

Largely agree. However, the new ASPS position statement actually wasn’t due to the detrans lawsuit win just a few days before. It kinda seemed plausible that they could’ve been related at first, but we’ve since learned that the ASPS had already been working on that position statement for well over a year. So it appears the timing was actually probably a bizarre coincidence.