🐺 Wolves in Sheep's Clothing🐑
What Happens When Ideology Disguises Itself as Science
I originally had wrote this post about a week before the new administrations executive order which directs agencies to end their reliance on guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which it accused of peddling “junk science”. Enjoy.
Wolves in sheep's clothing is an old adage that warns us to be cautious of those who present themselves as harmless while hiding dangerous motives. Yet, time and time again, society fails to recognize them until it’s too late. This cautionary tale feels painfully relevant when examining the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH)—an organization widely regarded as the leading authority on transgender healthcare.
In my opinion, WPATH is far from the unbiased authority on gender medicine it claims to be. Instead, it appears to be driven by ideologues who leverage their professional credentials to advance an activist agenda. To me, it’s clear that WPATH operates as an activist group disguised as a medical authority, with actions that have alarming consequences for both the field of medicine and society at large.
I was sickened by how WPATH’s Standards of Care Version 8 (SOC8) exemplifies the dangers of conflating activism with science. At first I didn’t believe it until I downloaded a copy for myself but the latest edition includes a chapter on eunuchs, framing the desire to remove one’s genitals as a VALID gender identity deserving of medical intervention.
“As with other gender diverse individuals, eunuchs may also seek castration to better align their bodies with their gender identity. As such, eunuch individuals are gender nonconforming individuals who have needs requiring medically necessary gender-affirming care.”1
In doing so, WPATH essentially endorses castration as a form of gender-affirming care. According to their guidelines, medical practitioners are encouraged to respect and facilitate these desires, including performing irreversible surgeries, even in cases that defy traditional medical or psychological understanding.”
Essentially WPATH endorses castration as a form of “gender-affirming care.” According to these guidelines that anyone can download and review for themselves medical practitioners are encouraged to respect and facilitate these desires, including performing irreversible surgeries.
Even tho these surgeries will remove the individuals natural hormonal function and eventually require supplemental hormone replacement therapy or otherwise suffer compromised health risks. Thus rendering the said “eunuch” the need for life long medical care $.
None the less here are some of the “gender affirming” interventions recommended by the WPATH guidelines:1
“Hormone suppression to explore the effects of androgen deficiency for eunuch individuals wishing to become asexual, nonsexual, or androgynous;”
“Orchiectomy to stop testicular production of testosterone;”
“What’s even more disturbing is that the original draft of WPATH’s SOC8 contained links to the Eunuch Archives, a fetish website hosting graphic and disturbing content, including short stories glorifying the castration and mutilation of children for sexual pleasure. This draft was not only published but was also uploaded to NHS Scotland’s official website, making it an official reference point for medical practitioners in the UK. This level of negligence raises serious questions about the standards of care clinicians are being encouraged to follow and the credibility of the organization providing them.”
“Orchiectomy with or without penectomy to alter their body to match their self-image; Orchiectomy followed by hormone replacement with testosterone or estrogen.”
“By allowing activist-driven ideologies to infiltrate medicine, we risk prioritizing fringe agendas over patient well-being. These guidelines, masquerading as evidence-based recommendations, reflect an idea rather than sound medical principles. WPATH’s actions demonstrate the dangers of conflating activism with expertise—when ideology takes precedence over ethics and reason, the results are both dangerous and deeply unethical.”
“Medicine must remain grounded in rigorous science, ethics, and patient-centered care—not the influence of activist organizations claiming authority they have not earned.”
It doesn’t end there. Even more troubling is that the original draft of WPATH’s SOC8 included links to the Eunuch Archives, an organization established in 1998 that is, in reality, nothing more than a fetish website. This site hosts graphic and highly disturbing content, including short stories glorifying the castration and mutilation of children for sexual pleasure.
The online feminist news and opinion journal Reduxx, which has extensively documented this case as it has unfolded, also conducted a private investigation into the website, shedding further light on its appalling nature.
“The existence of a private, password-protected area of the site was revealed in an exclusive investigation published by Reduxx in May. The area is accessible after an application process has been completed, and hosts over 3,700 stories that have been tagged as depicting the explicit written sexual abuse and genital mutilation of children. Within the password-protected area, ‘minor’ is the third-most popular tag, and among the other tags are ‘minors having sex’, and extreme, violent tags such as ‘snuff’ and ‘rape.’”2
Astonishingly, this draft—including links to the disturbing website in question—was not only published but also uploaded to NHS Scotland’s official website, effectively making it an official reference point for medical practitioners in the UK. This alarming level of negligence raises serious concerns about the standards of care being promoted to clinicians and calls into question the credibility of the organization responsible for these guidelines.
And just when you thought there was nothing more, Reduxx has further uncovered that a now-retired cultural anthropology professor from California State University, along with two other individuals directly connected to WPATH (World Professional Association for Transgender Health) and contributors to its Standards of Care (SOC), were also tied to this website hosting erotic story featuring graphic themes of child mutilation and slavery.
Beyond the overwhelming disgust this stirs in me, the most disturbing part is that even after all of this, the SOC8 draft was released in 2022 and remains available as a professional guideline. This issue hits especially close to home for me as a survivor of sexual abuse. After spending time reading and writing about the majority of this, I had to bring it up in therapy to get it off my chest. When I shared this toxic, vile information with my therapist, he looked at me in disbelief, questioning whether I might be in a dissociated state.
I asked if he had ever heard of such things, and of course, he hadn’t. Yet, as a licensed professional who could write a letter of recommendation for someone seeking “transition,” this guide is still accessible to him. When he realized I wasn’t imagining or exaggerating but was instead sharing factual data, his mind was blown. This only underscores the risks of continuing to turn a blind eye to these issues.
By allowing activist-driven ideologies to infiltrate medicine, we risk prioritizing fringe agendas over patient well-being. These guidelines, masquerading as evidence-based recommendations, reflect an idea rather than sound long term studied medical principles. Lobotomies were once rushed to as a cure for many years. Why do we not still us this as a viable medical option? And when will we finally be able to see the parallel between these two types of medical care.
WPATH’s actions demonstrate the dangers of conflating activism with expertise—when ideology takes precedence over ethics and reason, the results are both dangerous and deeply unethical. Medicine must remain grounded in rigorous science, ethics, and patient-centered care—not the influence of activist organizations claiming authority they have not earned.
Coleman, E., Radix, A. E., Bouman, W. P., Brown, G. R., De Vries, A. L. C., Deutsch, M. B., Ettner, R., Fraser, L., Goodman, M., Green, J., Hancock, A. B., Johnson, T. W., Karasic, D. H., Knudson, G. A., Leibowitz, S. F., Meyer-Bahlburg, H. F. L., Monstrey, S. J., Motmans, J., Nahata, L., . . . Arcelus, J. (2022b). Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8. International Journal of Transgender Health, 23(sup1), s88-S94. https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2022.2100644
Gluck, G. (2022, June 20). NHS Scotland apologizes for “Eunuch gender identity” document - Reduxx. Reduxx. https://reduxx.info/nhs-scotland-apologizes-for-eunuch-gender-identity-document-leak/
4 likes? Should be 4 THOUSAND!