Evil Origins of SRS

It wasn’t about compassion

OK, is it possible to use the word “evil” too much in the discussion of Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS) and Gender Affirming Care for children?

Last week I ended with a snippet about Dr. John Money, the pioneer of SRS. I promised to follow up with this article—a promise I almost broke. I really want to get out of this culture war theme.

But having reviewed my notes rom Miriam Grossman’s Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist’s Guide Out of the Madness, I couldn’t help being appalled all over again about the evil he perpetrated. Yes, there’s that word again: EVIL.

Born in New Zealand, Money studied psychology at Harvard and wrote his dissertation on hermaphroditism—a rare condition we now call “intersex.” About .02% of infants are born with ambiguous genitalia, and years ago, when their biological sex was uncertain, doctors were indeed assigning a gender at birth.

Out of Money’s doctoral research, he began to push for sex reassignment surgeries on the intersex. He also began to run with his theory that biological sex and gender were two different things, with the latter being largely the result of cultural influence.

As mentioned last week, he was soon introduced to the Canadian twins Bruce and Brian Reimer. There I wrote that Money . . .

. . . launched his theory by experimenting on identical twin boys from Canada whose parents were young and simple folk. One boy’s penis was severely damaged when circumcised. In their distress, they presented their case to the then famous researcher at Johns Hopkins. The year was 1962. He saw his golden opportunity to prove his theories.

Bruce was castrated and became “Brenda”. His parents were advised that “Brenda” would later need an operation to construct a vagina and warned them never to doubt his approach and never to tell anyone about what had been done, especially not Brenda.

Grossman continues:

When Brenda and Brian were six, in 1972, Money revealed his “twins case” to the public at an annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, DC.

Nearly everyone welcomed his research. His distortions were soon taught as fact for decades in many disciplines. As a result, babies with abnormal genitalia all over the world were castrated and raised as girls. Parents let it happen because, after all, you need to trust the doctors.

The only person of significance to object was Milton Diamond of the University of Hawaii.

Diamond’s position was that male and female identities are hardwired in the brain during the initial months of pregnancy. In the sixties he published challenges to Money’s theory of psychosexual neutrality and voiced concerns over sex reassignment surgery in babies.

Money had a reputation for being a tyrant at Johns Hopkins and for fighting hard against opponents. Diamond was no exception. Money intimidated editors, keeping them from publishing Diamond’s work.

As for “Brenda”, (s)he insisted for years that (s)he was not a girl.

He had refused to play with dolls, ripped his dresses off, and preferred wrestling to cooking. He even urinated standing up when possible. . . . Kids called her “cavewoman”.

After much pleading, and with the encouragement of a psychiatrist, his parents finally told him the truth. He was greatly relieved and soon changed his name to David because he saw himself as facing many giants in life. He later married and adopted three children.

In 1997, at age 32, David went public. He had heard how Money’s theories had impacted medical practices around the world, and he would not have it.

By me not saying anything, the medical community was under the impression that my case was a success story. I was shocked when I heard that people thought my case was a success story.

The BBC was the first to break the news. They broadcasted an interview between David and Dr. Diamond. The latter went on to co-author a work to prove Money’s research was all a sham, but Money’s theories were so widespread and accepted by academia, Diamond was unable to find a journal willing to publish it until two years had passed. (Click here to see a later BBC documentary with David Reimer.)

In going public, David and Brian revealed that on their annual visits to Johns Hopkins, John Money began to take pictures of them as they were naked and posed in “sexual positions” with each other. The link to the above documentary portrays this as Money’s last ditch effort to persuade Brenda that he was a girl.

This experiment with the Reimer twins was more than simply the curiosity of a scientist seeking truth. Money had long espoused sexual deviancy. He had argued that “all forms of consensual sexuality are good, or at least neutral; problems arise not from sexuality but from guilt, fear, and repression.”¹

Grossman expands upon Money’s views:

Money’s immorality extended to children. He claimed that from an early age, children must be exposed to explicit images, in order to understand the difference between male and female sex organs. He publicly endorsed pedophilia and incest, calling the former “a love affair between an age-discrepant couple.” About incest he wrote, “a childhood sexual experience, such as being the partner of a relative . . . need not necessarily affect the child adversely.”²

The Reimer twins met a tragic end, unfortunately. When brother Brian was told that his sister Brenda had actually been born a boy, he disowned Brenda/David for years, rebelled against family in general, and had bouts of schizophrenia. After appearing in the initial BBC documentary, he died of an overdose.

David had persuaded Brian to do the interview with the BBC, and so felt personally responsible for his death. A few years later, he himself committed suicide.

Yet through all of this, Money never denied the validity of his research. He simply went silent. The medical community had bought into the lie so deeply in the 25 years before David Reimer went public, they refused to reverse course. At his death in 2007, John Money was still hailed as a pioneer.

Honestly, there are so many more sickening details in Grossman’s chapter on John Money—all of it extensively footnoted. I simply encourage you to read it for yourself. While I am reluctant to say that anyone is an evil person, it is clear John Money was a tool for the Evil One who continues to use transgender ideology to ruin the lives of children. Simply tragic.

Today, compassion and guilt are the tools of manipulation used by those who push affirmative care on our culture. Government officials and the public in general are urged to allow puberty blockers and hormone treatments to prevent suicide. Parents are plowed under with the words, “Would you rather have a dead daughter or a living son?”

While some may genuinely view gender ideology as truly a compassionate alternative for confused children, such an approach for kids haw been evil from the beginning. Evil. OK, one last time . . . evil.

Next week, on to lighter topics. I promise!

1. Grossman, p. 6.

2. Grossman, p. 7.