Home › Society › Gender and media

Gender and media

Media — from entertainment and social platforms to public broadcasters and newspapers — play a dual role in the gender debate. They report, and they socialise. The way transgender themes are framed, which stories are and are not covered, and which criticism is and is not admitted, helps shape how an entire generation of young people learns to think about identity and the body. That influence is not a detail but a central part of the story.

One-sided framing in mainstream media

Much of Dutch and international mainstream coverage of transgender themes has in the past decade largely followed the agenda of advocacy organisations. Concepts such as "sex assigned at birth", "gender-affirming care" and "trans children always knew" were often adopted unchecked. The voices of detransitioners, critical clinicians, parents and feminist authors received much less coverage. The result was not neutral reporting but a one-sided narrative.

In the United Kingdom this changed when independent journalists (among them Hannah Barnes with Time to Think) and researchers scrutinised the practice of the Tavistock gender clinic. In the Netherlands this critical perspective is still under-represented in the mainstream press.

Social media and the role in socialisation

Social media are a factor of their own, not a passive mirror. On TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and Tumblr, from around 2014 onwards large communities emerged in which teenagers — especially girls — read each other into gender dysphoria, transition stories and identity labels. Algorithms amplify content that users react to, so that anyone who clicks on the topic ends up in a strongly affirmative bubble within a short time. This is not a conspiracy but a direct consequence of how these platforms are built.

Research by, among others, Lisa Littman (2018) pointed to a pattern of suddenly appearing gender dysphoria in adolescents, especially girls, often in friend groups simultaneously, often after intensive social media use. The concept of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria is contested, but the empirical observation of the rise in numbers and the clustering pattern stands.

The role of entertainment

Films, series and streaming platforms increasingly show transgender characters as positive lead roles. That is not bad in itself, but when entertainment systematically conveys the idea that transition is an unambiguously positive solution, while detransition, regret and complications are consistently kept out of view, an educational effect arises without there being any education. For young people of identity-forming age this is a significant form of implicit promotion.

What is missing: critical voices, detransitioners, parents

In many mainstream productions critical clinicians (Cass, Levine, Hruz), feminist authors (Stock, Joyce), detransitioners (Cole, Beck, Bell) and worried parents are rarely given a voice. When they do appear, they are often dismissed as "opponents" or "anti-trans". In this way a legitimate scientific and social discussion is effectively excluded from public information.

Journalistic guidelines and self-censorship

Journalistic handbooks on transgender reporting — often drawn up in cooperation with advocacy organisations — contain rules on language that go further than politeness: they prescribe which terms may and may not be used, which studies "cause harm" and which questions are inappropriate. The result is a creeping form of self-censorship, in which journalists no longer ask crucial questions about care, evidence and the well-being of young people.

What should good reporting contain?

Good journalism presents contested subjects as contested. In gender care this means: attention to the Cass Review, to the changes of direction in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Denmark, to the existence of detransition and regret, to the weak evidence base under youth transition, and to the difference between adults with long-standing dysphoria and adolescents with suddenly arising identity questions. Without that overview, reporting is not information but advocacy.