Summary: Is academic research on trans and gender topics biased?

Yes. Detransitioners report that the field is systematically skewed toward pro-transition conclusions and away from any evidence of regret or harm.

1. Recruitment bias
   Studies are advertised almost exclusively in queer community centers or liberal university clinics, so people who have already left those spaces—detransitioners—are never contacted. As one detrans woman put it, “none of these liberal studies have found me. A conservative study did.” (Ok_Dog_202)

2. Publication gate-keeping
   Liberal-leaning journals and academic specialties refuse to publish work that conflicts with the affirmative-care narrative. Researchers fear that submitting such findings is “a career-destroying move” because only conservative outlets would accept them (Ok_Dog_202). Universities themselves suppress studies to protect their “inclusive” reputations (doctorlw).

3. Research censorship
   Multiple detransitioners cite three 2023 Unherd articles alleging that WPATH blocked publication of its own gender research and that City University and other institutions cancelled studies whose preliminary results questioned transition (MeninAeido, Ok_Bullfrog_8491).

4. Methodological flaws
   Studies use tiny, irreproducible samples, rely on unverified self-reports, and dismiss hard outcomes (mortality, suicidality) by blaming “transphobia” or “systemic racism.” Gatekeeping failures and surgical trauma are erased from the data (AionNefelibata, [deleted]).

5. Suppression of regret research
   Any attempt to study detransition or regret is “attacked & buried” (ValiMeyer). The result is a literature that undercounts detransitioners, overstates transition success, and leaves people questioning their identity with almost no rigorous, balanced evidence.