The Inconvenient Truth About Kat Highsmith's 'Will & Harper' Screed

Introduction

Well howdy there internet people it’s PITT again, and today we are going to talk about Kat Highsmith’s “Will and Harper” article1. If you've been on Substack for a little while and have been paying attention to the ongoing debate surrounding transgender rights, you likely have come across the writings of Kat Highsmith.

She's made quite a name for herself in certain circles for her trolling behavior and pretty nasty anti-trans rhetoric. Kat is a vocal critic of what she calls the "trans lie" and “trans agenda” among other common transphobic dog-whistles. A quick glance at her Substack archive reveals a consistent pattern of anti-trans rhetoric, often couched in the language of concern or fear mongering for women and children.

Her latest piece, titled "Will & 'Harper': Will Ferrell and Harper2 Steele Are Confused Old Men," is a prime example of their usual tactics. In it, they take aim at Harper Steele, a transgender woman and former comedy writer who worked with Will Ferrell. Highsmith's thesis is simple: Harper isn't really trans, and the very concept of being transgender is a lie perpetuated by the media to manipulate reality.

Throughout the article, Highsmith argues that Harper is merely an "elderly autogynephile" playing dress-up, that her transition is based on sexist stereotypes, and that by affirming her identity, we're opening the door for men to invade women's spaces and harm them. They paint a picture of a grand conspiracy, a "trans fraud" that will inevitably collapse like the scandals of lobotomies and opioids.

But here's the thing: Highsmith's arguments are built on a foundation of logical fallacies, inaccuracies, and outright falsehoods. Their piece is a textbook example of the kind of harmful propaganda that seeks to undermine the very existence of transgender people and roll back the progress we've made as a society. Let’s not forget that autogynephilia is a discredited theory that does not stand up to scrutiny3 4 5 6.

And that's exactly why it's so important that we take the time to thoroughly debunk their claims. Because when misinformation and junk science are allowed to spread unchecked, they can have devastating consequences for some of our most vulnerable communities.

So in this article we're going to do just that. We'll break down Highsmith's piece point by point, shining a light on the flawed reasoning and factual errors that underpin their arguments. We'll counter their claims with actual evidence, citing scientific consensus, statistopics, and expert opinions as best as we can. And most importantly, we'll reaffirm the validity of trans identities and the importance of supporting the transgender community.

This isn't just about setting the record straight on one article. It's about fighting back against a larger narrative that seeks to marginalize and erase an entire group of people. It's about standing up for truth, justice, and the fundamental human dignity of all individuals, regardless of their gender identity. This is going to be a long one, so let’s get started!

Debunking Main Points

With the stage set, let's now turn our attention to the meat of Highsmith's article and start dismantling their main arguments one by one.

The "Trans Lie" and Media Manipulation

1. Highsmith's first and most overarching claim is that the media is pushing a "trans lie" in order to "manipulate and subvert reality."7 She paints a picture of a powerful media conspiracy aimed at normalizing something she believes to be false.

But the notion that transgender identities are a "lie" or that they don't really exist is directly contradicted by a wealth of scientific evidence. Research has consistently shown that gender identity has biological underpinnings and is not simply a choice or a delusion.

For example, a 2016 review in the Harvard Science in the News publication explored the science of transgender identity, discussing studies that have found links between gender identity and brain structure, genetics, and hormone exposure during fetal development. 8 The authors concluded that "…we know now that several of those causes are biological" and that it is "These individuals are not suffering a mental illness, or capriciously “choosing” a different identity."

Furthermore, the lived experiences of transgender individuals themselves provide compelling evidence that their identities are real and valid. A 2020 systematic review synthesized qualitative research on the phenomenology of gender dysphoria in adults, highlighting the distress and discomfort trans people feel when their gender identity does not align with their assigned sex9. These inner experiences cannot simply be dismissed as lies or deception.

By claiming that transgender identities are a "lie" perpetuated by the media, Highsmith is not only denying the scientific consensus, but also invalidating the deeply felt experiences of trans individuals. This kind of rhetoric contributes to the stigma, discrimination, and marginalization that transgender people already face in society.

Denying Harper Steele's Identity

2. Building on their "trans lie" argument, Highsmith then takes direct aim at Harper Steele, asserting that she is not really a transgender woman, but merely an "elderly autogynephile" engaged in an elaborate form of dress-up. They repeatedly misgender Steele, referring to her with male pronouns and consistently deadname her.10

This line of argumentation is not only deeply offensive, but also betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be transgender. Highsmith seems to believe that being trans is nothing more than a superficial affectation or fetish, rather than a core aspect of one's identity.

But once again, the science tells a different story. Studies have found clear distinctions between biological sex and gender identity, with the latter being shaped by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors.11 For transgender individuals, their inner sense of gender does not match the sex they were assigned at birth based on external anatomy.

Moreover, recent neuroimaging research has provided further evidence that transgender individuals' brain structures and functions more closely resemble their identified gender than their assigned sex. A 2022 study found that "the underlying brain anatomy in transgender people is shifted away from their biological sex towards their gender identity."12

By stubbornly misgendering Steele and reducing her identity to a crude caricature, Highsmith is not only displaying a callous disregard for her dignity, but also willfully ignoring the scientific evidence that validates the experiences of transgender people. Their rhetoric echoes the kind of demeaning stereotypes and misconceptions that have long been used to justify discrimination against the trans community.

Sexist Stereotypes and Mocking Womanhood

3. Highsmith also argues that Steele's transition is based entirely on sexist stereotypes and that she is essentially mocking womanhood by embracing femininity. They suggests that Steele's identity as a woman is nothing more than donning dresses and playing into outdated gender roles.13

This argument not only insults Steele, but also relies on an overly simplistic and regressive understanding of what it means to be a woman. Highsmith seems to believe that there is only one correct way to express femininity, and that any deviation from that narrow norm is somehow a mockery.

But the reality is that gender expression is diverse and multifaceted, encompassing a wide range of behaviors, appearances, and roles. Just as cisgender women can express their femininity in countless different ways, so too can transgender women. Wearing dresses or makeup does not make someone less of a woman, regardless of their assigned sex at birth.

Furthermore, the notion that transgender women are simply "mocking" or "imitating" cisgender women is a pernicious stereotype that has long been used to undermine their identities. It suggests that trans women's experiences of gender are somehow less authentic or valid than those of cis women.

However, research has shown that transgender individuals' sense of gender identity is just as deeply felt and integral to their sense of self as it is for cisgender people. The aforementioned systematic review on the phenomenology of gender dysphoria found that for many trans people, living in accordance with their true gender identity is a matter of psychological necessity, not mere preference or play-acting.14

By reducing Steele's identity to a collection of sexist stereotypes and dismissing her womanhood as a mockery, Highsmith is perpetuating harmful myths that have real-world consequences for the trans community. This kind of rhetoric contributes to the invalidation and marginalization of transgender identities, making it harder for trans individuals to live authentically and be accepted by society. It is misogynistic in its own right, and to use a term Serano coined - transmisogynistic.

Playing the Victim and Forcing Acceptance

4. Another of Highsmith's main arguments is that transgender individuals like Steele are simply "playing the victim card" in order to force others to accept their "mental illness and perversions."15 They suggest that trans people are manipulating others into affirming their identities by exaggerating the discrimination and victimization they face.

This argument is not only deeply insulting, but also flies in the face of the very real hardships and challenges that transgender individuals experience on a daily basis. Far from being a ploy for sympathy or acceptance, the victimization of trans people is a well-documented reality.

Numerous studies have found that transgender individuals face disproportionately high rates of discrimination, harassment, violence, and negative health outcomes compared to the general population. For example, a 2022 systematic review of the health status of transgender people globally found that they experience "high rates of stigma, discrimination, and violence" which contribute to "mental health problems, substance use, and suicide attempts."16

Moreover, the idea that being transgender is a "mental illness" or "perversion" is a harmful and outdated misconception that has been rejected by the mainstream medical community. Major health organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association, have affirmed that being transgender is not a mental disorder and that gender-affirming care is medically necessary for many trans individuals.

By accusing trans people of playing the victim and labeling their identities as mental illnesses or perversions, Highsmith is not only denying the very real struggles they face, but also perpetuating the kind of stigma and misinformation that contributes to their victimization in the first place. This rhetoric serves to delegitimize trans identities and experiences, making it easier for others to justify discrimination and violence against them.

The Slippery Slope of Trans Inclusion

5. Perhaps one of Highsmith's most inflammatory arguments is their claim that affirming transgender identities will inevitably lead to men invading women's spaces and harming them. She suggests that trans inclusion is a slippery slope that will result in the erosion of women's safety and privacy. 17

This argument is a classic example of the slippery slope fallacy, which assumes that one event or decision will inevitably lead to a chain of negative consequences, often without any evidence to support such a claim. In this case, Highsmith is suggesting that simply acknowledging the existence and validity of transgender identities will open the floodgates for male predators to access women's spaces with impunity.

However, this fear-mongering scenario is not supported by the facts. Numerous studies have found that allowing transgender individuals to use facilities that align with their gender identity does not increase safety risks for cisgender women. In fact, research suggests that it is transgender individuals themselves who face the greatest risks of harassment and violence in public restrooms and other sex-segregated spaces.

Moreover, the idea that transgender women are really just men seeking to prey on women is a pernicious myth rooted in transphobic stereotypes. It paints trans women as deceitful and dangerous, when in reality they are simply trying to live authentically and go about their daily lives like anyone else.

It's important to recognize that transgender individuals have been using facilities that match their gender identity for decades without incident. The notion that trans inclusion suddenly poses a new and unprecedented threat to women's safety is a baseless scare tactic designed to stoke fear and justify discrimination.

By promoting this slippery slope narrative, Highsmith is not only perpetuating harmful stereotypes about transgender people, but also undermining efforts to create a more inclusive and equitable society for everyone. Their rhetoric contributes to a climate of fear and hostility that makes it harder for trans individuals to access public spaces and services without facing discrimination or violence.

Ignoring the Impact on Women and Children

6. In addition to her slippery slope argument, Highsmith also claims that the documentary featuring Steele and Ferrell ignores the negative impact that transgender rights have on women and children. They suggest that affirming trans identities somehow comes at the expense of these groups' well-being and safety.18

However, this argument sets up a false dichotomy between the rights of transgender individuals and the protection of women and children. It suggests that these goals are somehow mutually exclusive, when in reality they are closely intertwined.

Research has consistently shown that creating a more inclusive and accepting environment for transgender people benefits everyone, including women and children. For example, studies have found that policies and practices that affirm transgender students' identities in schools lead to better mental health outcomes and lower rates of bullying and harassment for all students, not just those who are trans.

Moreover, the notion that transgender rights pose a threat to women and children is often based on the same kind of fearmongering and misinformation that underlies Highsmith's slippery slope argument. It relies on the false stereotype of trans people, particularly trans women, as predatory and dangerous - or enable men who are to make a “legal claim or basis” to be predatory and dangerous.

In reality, transgender individuals are far more likely to be the victims of violence and abuse than the perpetrators. Studies have found that trans people, especially trans women of color, face disproportionately high rates of physical and sexual assault, often at the hands of cisgender men.

By suggesting that affirming transgender rights somehow harms women and children, Highsmith is not only perpetuating dangerous myths, but also pitting marginalized groups against one another. This kind of divisive rhetoric only serves to undermine efforts to create a more just and equitable society for all.

The Inevitable Collapse of "Trans Fraud"

7. Finally, Highsmith concludes their article by confidently predicting the eventual collapse of what they call the "trans fraud," comparing it to past medical scandals like lobotomies and the opioid crisis. They suggest that the affirmation of transgender identities is a dangerous trend that will ultimately be exposed as a harmful sham.19

However, this argument is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of both the history and the current state of transgender healthcare and advocacy. Unlike the discredited practices of lobotomy or the profit-driven overprescription of opioids, the affirmation of transgender identities is based on a solid foundation of scientific evidence and medical consensus.

As discussed throughout this piece, numerous studies have consistently shown that being transgender is a real and valid experience, not a mental illness, delusion, or fraud. Major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, have recognized the importance of gender-affirming care as a legitimate and necessary form of healthcare for trans individuals.

Moreover, the comparison to past medical scandals ignores the long history of transgender people fighting for recognition and equality. The modern transgender rights movement has its roots in the mid-20th century, with key figures like Christine Jorgensen and Marsha P. Johnson20 paving the way for greater visibility and acceptance.

In the decades since, transgender advocates have worked tirelessly to challenge discrimination, educate the public, and push for policies that protect and affirm trans identities. This work has been based on a growing body of research and the lived experiences of trans individuals themselves, not on a fraudulent or fleeting trend.

By dismissing this history and suggesting that transgender rights are nothing more than a temporary delusion destined to collapse, Highsmith is not only denying the very real progress that has been made, but also undermining the ongoing efforts to create a more just and equitable world for transgender people.

Their rhetoric contributes to a climate of skepticism and hostility that makes it harder for trans individuals to access the healthcare, legal protections, and social support they need to thrive. It also emboldens those who seek to roll back the hard-won gains of the transgender rights movement and return to a time when trans people were forced to live in secrecy and shame. This has knock-on effects against women’s rights as well.

Ultimately, Highsmith's prediction of the inevitable collapse of "trans fraud" says more about their own biases and misconceptions than it does about the reality of transgender experiences and advocacy. By perpetuating this myth, they are not only on the wrong side of history, but also actively contributing to the harm and marginalization of an already vulnerable community.

Exposing Logical Fallacies

Having thoroughly debunked the main points of Highsmith's article, let's now turn our attention to the numerous logical fallacies that underpin her arguments. By examining these flaws in reasoning, we can further expose the weaknesses in her position and demonstrate how her conclusions are not supported by sound logic. I feel this is important in addition to already debunking the content because here we can reveal the bad-faith basis and manipulative aspects of her arguments, and the flawed nature of them. This exposes that not only is Kat factually wrong per the above points made, but is actively employing a strategy to relay that information in a deceptive and irrational or illogical way.

Ad Hominem Attacks

An ad hominem fallacy occurs when someone attacks the character, motive, or attributes of a person making an argument, rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. Instead of engaging with the ideas being presented, the ad hominem fallacy seeks to discredit the person behind them.

Throughout her article, Highsmith repeatedly relies on ad hominem attacks to undermine Harper Steele's identity and experiences. Kat refers to her as an "elderly autogynephile," "unattractive," and suggests that he has an "empty male mind." These personal insults and characterizations do nothing to refute the validity of Steele's identity as a transgender woman. Instead, they serve only to mock and demean her as an individual.

By resorting to ad hominem attacks, Highsmith reveals the weakness of their own position. If Kat had a strong, evidence-based argument against the validity of transgender identities, they would not need to stoop to personal insults and name-calling. Their reliance on this fallacy suggests that they are unable to counter Steele's experiences and the broader reality of trans identities with facts and reason.

Hasty Generalization

A hasty generalization fallacy occurs when someone draws a broad conclusion based on insufficient evidence or a limited sample size. It involves making sweeping claims about a group or phenomenon based on a few anecdotal examples or personal observations, rather than a comprehensive analysis of the available data.

Highsmith commits this fallacy throughout their article, using the specific example of Harper Steele to make broad, unsubstantiated claims about transgender people as a whole. Based on their subjective perception of Steele's appearance and behavior, they conclude that "trans does not exist" and that being transgender is a "lie." Yes, I am aware that Kat says this as a broad generalization regardless of the person targeted, or as a repetitive mantra to anything trans related. In their article, Kat seems to elevate Harper as an example that serves to prove their point, so I feel this is an adequate example for this fallacy.

However, this hasty generalization ignores the vast body of scientific evidence and personal testimonies that support the reality of transgender identities. As discussed in the previous section, numerous studies have found biological and neurological bases for gender identity, and the experiences of countless trans individuals confirm the deep-seated nature of their identities.

By basing their sweeping conclusions about the nature of transgender identity on a single, cherry-picked example, Highsmith is engaging in fallacious reasoning that undermines the credibility of their argument. Their hasty generalization ignores the complexity and diversity of transgender experiences and relies on a narrow, biased perspective to draw unwarranted conclusions.

False Equivalence

A false equivalence fallacy occurs when someone compares two things as if they were equivalent, when in fact they are not. This fallacy often involves drawing a comparison between two things that may share some superficial similarities, but are ultimately distinct in important ways. Think “Apples to Oranges.”

Highsmith commits this fallacy when she compares being transgender to mental illnesses like schizophrenia and physical conditions like anorexia, apotemnophilia21, and opioid addiction. By lumping these diverse experiences together, Highsmith suggests that they are all equivalent examples of delusion or self-harm.

However, this comparison is deeply flawed and misleading. Being transgender is not a mental illness or a delusion, but a natural variation in human identity and expression. Unlike the conditions Highsmith cites, which involve distorted perceptions of reality or harmful behaviors, being transgender is a deeply felt and persistent sense of one's own gender identity. It cannot be a state of delusion because trans people are exceedingly aware of the body they have. That is sort of the very basis of incongruence they feel.

Moreover, the medical community has long recognized the distinction between transgender identity and the conditions Highsmith mentions. While gender dysphoria (the distress that can arise from a mismatch between one's gender identity and assigned sex) is a diagnosable condition, it is not a mental illness in itself, and transition is a widely accepted and effective treatment.22

By falsely equating transgender identity with mental illness and self-harm, Highsmith is not only perpetuating harmful stereotypes, but also engaging in a fallacious form of reasoning that obscures the real nature of trans experiences. Their false equivalence serves to delegitimize and pathologize transgender identities, rather than engaging with the complex realities of gender diversity.

Slippery Slope

A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone argues that a relatively small first step will inevitably lead to a chain of related events culminating in a significant and often negative effect. This fallacy assumes that one thing must lead to another, without providing evidence for the likelihood or necessity of that progression.

Highsmith employs this fallacy when she argues that affirming transgender identities will inevitably lead to men invading women's spaces and harming them. She suggests that accepting the validity of trans identities is the first step on a slippery slope towards the complete erosion of women's safety and privacy.

However, this argument is based on fear-mongering and unsupported assumptions, rather than evidence. As discussed in the previous section, studies have shown that allowing transgender individuals to use facilities that align with their gender identity does not increase safety risks for cisgender women. The idea that trans inclusion will lead to an epidemic of male violence against women is a baseless and transphobic myth.

Moreover, the slippery slope argument ignores the fact that transgender people have been using gender-appropriate facilities for decades without incident. The notion that affirming trans rights will suddenly open the floodgates to predatory behavior is not supported by the long history of trans inclusion in public spaces.

It is important to recognize a fundamental truth about trans people existing:

By relying on the slippery slope fallacy, Highsmith is able to paint a frightening picture of the consequences of trans acceptance without providing any real evidence for their claims. This fallacious reasoning allows Highsmith to stoke fears and anxieties about transgender people, rather than engaging in a factual discussion of the actual impacts of trans inclusion.

Cherry-Picking

Cherry-picking, also known as the fallacy of incomplete evidence, occurs when someone selects only the evidence that supports their argument, while ignoring or dismissing evidence that contradicts it. This fallacy involves presenting a biased or misleading picture of a situation by focusing only on the facts that confirm one's preexisting beliefs.

Highsmith engages in cherry-picking throughout their article, selectively citing examples and anecdotes that support their anti-trans narrative while disregarding the wealth of evidence that challenges it. For instance, Highsmith highlights individual cases like Caitlyn Jenner's car accident and a single instance of a trans woman attacking someone, while ignoring the countless examples of trans people living peaceful, productive lives. These events and examples are not representative of all trans people.

By focusing only on these cherry-picked examples, Highsmith creates a distorted picture of transgender people as dangerous and delusional. They ignore the vast majority of trans individuals who go about their daily lives without incident, or are successful and well regarded in society, as well as the research showing that trans people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

Moreover, Highsmith's cherry-picking extends to their treatment of scientific evidence. While they dismiss the numerous studies that support the biological basis of transgender identity and the effectiveness of gender-affirming care, they elevates anecdotal examples and discredited theories that align with their preexisting beliefs.

This selective use of evidence allows Highsmith to paint a misleading picture of the state of transgender research and medicine. By ignoring the broad scientific consensus and cherry-picking outlier examples, they are able to construct a narrative that confirms their biases, rather than engaging with the full range of available evidence.

So as we have shown, throughout their article Kat Highsmith relies on a series of logical fallacies to advance their anti-transgender agenda. From ad hominem attacks on individual trans people to hasty generalizations about the nature of trans identity, their arguments are riddled with flawed reasoning and unsupported assertions.

Moreover, Highsmith's reliance on false equivalencies, slippery slope arguments, and cherry-picked evidence reveals a pattern of fallacious thinking that undermines the credibility of their conclusions. By examining these fallacies in detail, we can see how their article is not a good-faith attempt to engage with the realities of transgender experience, but rather a biased and misleading polemic.

Ultimately, the logical fallacies employed by Highsmith serve to obscure the truth about transgender identities and experiences. By relying on flawed reasoning and selective evidence, they are able to construct a narrative that confirms their preexisting biases and stokes fears and anxieties about trans people.

However, as we have seen throughout this analysis, the facts simply do not support Highsmith's claims. The reality of transgender identity is far more complex and nuanced than her fallacious arguments suggest, and the evidence overwhelmingly supports the validity and legitimacy of trans experiences.

It sure sounds good to someone who wouldn’t know these facts off-hand, do not know any trans people in their lives, or how to identify the flaws in the logic though. It makes for great sensationalized reading, but that is all it is - “gender critical” propaganda.

Inaccuracies and Falsehoods

As we've seen, Kat Highsmith's article is riddled not only with logical fallacies, but also with numerous inaccuracies and falsehoods about transgender identities and experiences. In this section, we'll take a closer look at five of her most egregious and harmful claims, refuting them with empirical evidence and explaining the dangers of allowing such misinformation to spread unchecked.

"Trans does not exist"

One of Highsmith's central claims is that "trans does not exist" and that transgender identities are a "lie" perpetuated by the media24. However, this assertion is directly contradicted by a wealth of scientific evidence and the lived experiences of transgender people themselves cited previously.

Numerous studies have found biological and neurological bases for transgender identities. For example, a 2016 review in the Harvard Science in the News publication explored the existing research on the science of transgender identity, concluding that "there is a biological basis for transgender identity" and that it is "not a mental disorder, but rather a normal variation of human identity and expression."25

Moreover, the experiences of gender dysphoria reported by transgender individuals provide compelling evidence for the reality of their identities. A 2020 systematic review synthesized qualitative research on the phenomenology of gender dysphoria in adults, highlighting the distress and discomfort trans people feel when their gender identity does not align with their assigned sex.26 These deeply felt experiences cannot simply be dismissed as a "lie" or a media invention.

By denying the very existence of transgender identities, Highsmith is not only rejecting the scientific consensus, but also invalidating the lived realities of trans people. This kind of erasure contributes to the marginalization and stigmatization of an already vulnerable population, making it harder for trans individuals to access the support and resources they need to thrive.

"Affirming trans people is a dangerous new trend."

Another of Highsmith's inaccurate claims is that the growing acceptance of transgender identities is a "dangerous new trend" or "fad" invented by Hollywood and the media. She portrays it as a novel and harmful phenomenon that is being pushed on society as part of some nefarious "agenda."

However, this characterization is completely at odds with the long history of gender diversity across human cultures. Transgender people have existed throughout recorded history, from the Hijra of South Asia27 to the Two-Spirit people of Indigenous North American28 cultures to the Kathoey of Thailand29. The idea that trans identities are a modern invention of Western media is a blatant falsehood.

What Highsmith derisively calls the "trans agenda" is in fact the result of decades of grassroots activism and hard-fought struggles by trans communities to achieve visibility, acceptance and equal rights. The increasing social and legal recognition of transgender people in recent years is a product of this long history of resilience and resistance, not some top-down media conspiracy.

By framing the growing affirmation of trans lives as a dangerous fad, Highsmith is not only erasing the rich tapestry of global gender diversity, but also diminishing the courageous efforts of generations of trans activists. Her ahistorical and culturally myopic claim is a prime example of the kind of ignorance and prejudice that the trans rights movement has always had to contend with. This echoes the similar struggles the gay community had in the past, and harkens back to many of the same arguments being recycled and pressed into service against transgender people.

Affirming trans identities is equivalent to affirming "male perversion and delusion"

Highsmith also claims that affirming transgender identities is akin to affirming "male perversion and delusion."30 She suggests that being transgender is a mental illness or disorder that should not be validated or supported. However, this claim is based on outdated and discredited misconceptions about the nature of transgender experience.

Major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), have long recognized that being transgender is not a mental illness, perversion, or delusion.31 Gender-affirming care, which may include social, medical, and legal transition, is considered a legitimate and necessary form of healthcare for many trans individuals.

The notion that affirming trans identities is equivalent to endorsing perversion or delusion is not only scientifically baseless, but also deeply harmful to trans people. It perpetuates the stigma and discrimination that transgender individuals already face in society, and can discourage them from seeking the care and support they need to live authentically.

By spreading this false equivalence, Highsmith is contributing to a climate of ignorance and prejudice that undermines the mental health and well-being of transgender people. Her claim contradicts the consensus of the medical community and the lived experiences of trans individuals who have found affirmation and support to be crucial to their thriving.

Trans rights harm women in prisons, sports, and bathrooms

Another of Highsmith's inaccurate claims is that affirming transgender rights inevitably leads to the harm of cisgender women in prisons, sports, and public restrooms. She suggests that trans inclusion in these spaces puts women at risk of violence and violation by "men in dresses."32

However, this fearmongering claim is not supported by evidence. As noted in the previous section, numerous studies have found that allowing transgender people to access facilities and participate in activities that align with their gender identity does not pose any increased safety risk to cisgender women.

The myth of trans women as predatory men invading women's spaces is a pernicious stereotype that has been repeatedly debunked. It is based on the false assumption that transgender women are not "real" women, but rather men seeking to exploit the system. This view ignores the reality that trans women are far more likely to be the victims of violence and discrimination than the perpetrators.

Moreover, the idea that trans rights and women's rights are somehow in opposition is a false dichotomy. Transgender women are women, and their rights and safety are inextricably linked to those of all women. Pitting these two groups against each other only serves to undermine the collective struggle for gender justice and equality. As I summarized in the graphic previously, equal rights is not pie.

By perpetuating the baseless myth of trans predation, Highsmith is not only promoting a falsehood, but also contributing to a climate of fear and hostility that puts transgender women at increased risk of violence and discrimination. Her claim contradicts the evidence and the lived experiences of trans people who simply want to exist and participate in society as their authentic selves.

Children are being "mutilated and sterilized" by gender-affirming care

Perhaps one of Highsmith's most inflammatory and inaccurate claims is that children are being "mutilated and sterilized" by gender-affirming medical care. She suggests that supporting transgender youth inevitably leads to irreversible harm and abuse. 33

However, this claim is a gross misrepresentation of the realities of gender-affirming care for minors. The medical interventions available to transgender youth are carefully regulated and designed to support their well-being, not cause harm.

For prepubescent children, gender-affirming care is primarily social, involving changes to hair, clothing, name, and pronouns to align with their identity. Medical interventions such as puberty blockers are only prescribed for adolescents who meet strict diagnostic criteria, and their effects are largely reversible.

Surgical interventions are typically only available to older adolescents and young adults who have been living in their identified gender for a significant period of time and have undergone extensive psychological evaluation. Even then, if they are a legal minor, this can only be done with parental consent34, and is often reserved for individuals who present an “emergent need.”35 The notion that children are being routinely "mutilated" by gender-affirming surgery is a fearmongering myth not supported by evidence.

Major medical organizations, including WPATH, have developed comprehensive standards of care for the treatment of transgender youth that prioritize their health and well-being.36 These guidelines are based on the best available scientific evidence and the collective clinical experience of providers who work with this population.

By spreading the false claim that gender-affirming care is equivalent to child abuse and mutilation, Highsmith is not only rejecting the medical consensus, but also contributing to a climate of misinformation that can discourage trans youth and their families from seeking the support they need. This rhetoric fuels efforts to restrict access to gender-affirming care, which can have devastating consequences for the mental health and well-being of transgender young people. Recent studies show that when states enact laws to restrict this care, that doing so can increase the risk of suicide by 38% or more.37

The "trans fraud" will inevitably collapse like lobotomies and opioids

Finally, Highsmith confidently asserts that the "transgender fraud" will inevitably collapse, comparing it to discredited practices like lobotomies and the opioid epidemic. She suggests that mainstream acceptance of transgender identities is a dangerous trend that will ultimately be exposed as a harmful lie.38

However, this claim ignores the crucial differences between transgender healthcare and the medical scandals Highsmith cites. Unlike lobotomies, which were based on flawed science and quickly abandoned by the medical community39, gender-affirming care is supported by a robust body of evidence and has been endorsed by major health organizations for decades.40

Moreover, the comparison to the opioid epidemic is particularly inapt, as gender-affirming care is not driven by profit motives or pharmaceutical interests, but rather by the needs and experiences of transgender individuals themselves. The consensus among medical professionals is that gender-affirming care is necessary and beneficial for many trans people, not a reckless or fraudulent practice.

Highsmith's prediction of the imminent collapse of "trans fraud" is not only baseless, but also reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the history and current state of transgender rights and healthcare. The movement for transgender equality and access to affirming care is not a passing trend or a conspiracy, but a long-standing struggle rooted in the lived experiences of trans people and supported by scientific evidence.

By comparing transgender acceptance to medical scandals and suggesting that it is a harmful fraud, Highsmith is not only spreading misinformation (again), but also undermining the progress that has been made in recent years to support and affirm transgender individuals. Their claim contributes to a climate of skepticism and hostility that can discourage trans people from living authentically and accessing the care they need to thrive.

"Most trans people regret transitioning."

In addition to her prediction of the impending collapse of the "trans fraud," Highsmith also confidently asserts that the majority of transgender individuals who transition ultimately regret their decision and seek to detransition. She portrays transition as a misguided choice that most come to see as a mistake.

However, this claim is starkly at odds with the available data on transition outcomes. Numerous studies have found that the vast majority of trans people who undergo transition report significant improvements in their quality of life and mental well-being. Rates of regret and detransition are consistently found to be very low.

For example, a 2015 survey of nearly 28,000 people conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality found that 13.1% of respondents reported detransitioning at some point, but that only 0.7% did so because they realized transition was not right for them. Important to highlight is the fact that of those 12.4% who detransitioned due to external pressures, more than 60% went on to later transition. So more than half of those who detransition will later transition anyway. The most common reason for detransition was pressure from family, while other reasons included facing too much harassment or discrimination after transition, and having trouble getting a job.41

A great meta-analysis of the relevant studies and methodologies was performed by Lexi Henny. Though not a formal peer-reviewed paper in and of itself, the analysis is more robust and recent on the topic of detransition rates, and has made their sources and methodologies entirely transparent and open. According to her figures, we find an overall detransition rate of about 3.3% when analyzed across the board, and a surgical regret rate of 1.7% to 2.1% over the course of several years.42

So while detransition does occur, it is far from the widespread phenomenon of regret and reversal that Highsmith describes. Her misrepresentation of the data appears designed to paint transition as far more risky and uncertain than it actually is for the vast majority of trans people who undertake it.

By fearmongering about the specter of regret and detransition, Highsmith is not only spreading misinformation, but also contributing to a climate of skepticism and mistrust that can discourage trans people from accessing the care they need. Her claim flies in the face of the overwhelming evidence that transition is a safe and effective way for many trans individuals to alleviate gender dysphoria and live more authentically.

With all that being said, we have demonstrated that Kat Highsmith's article is riddled with inaccuracies and falsehoods about transgender identities and experiences. From denying the very existence of trans people to comparing gender-affirming care to child mutilation, her claims are not only factually wrong, but also deeply harmful to an already marginalized population.

Wrapping It All Up…

Throughout this in-depth analysis, we have systematically deconstructed Kat Highsmith's article, "Will & 'Harper': Will Ferrell and Harper43 Steele Are Confused Old Men," on multiple fronts. By examining their main arguments, exposing the logical fallacies that underpin them, and refuting the numerous inaccuracies and falsehoods they spread, we have demonstrated that their piece is not a good-faith attempt to engage with the realities of transgender identity, but rather a biased and harmful work of anti-trans propaganda.

Highsmith's article is a prime example of the kind of misinformation and junk science that threatens to undermine the progress that has been made in recent years to support and affirm transgender individuals. From their denial of the very existence of trans identities to her fearmongering about the supposed dangers of trans inclusion, their claims are not only factually wrong, but also deeply damaging to an already marginalized community.

The importance of fighting this kind of misinformation cannot be overstated. As we have seen, the falsehoods and myths spread by those like Highsmith contribute to a climate of ignorance, fear, and hostility that puts transgender people at risk of discrimination, violence, and poor health outcomes. When these false narratives are allowed to spread unchecked, they can discourage trans individuals from living authentically and accessing the care and support they need to thrive. It can spur legislation with disastrous effects.

That is why it is so crucial that we continue to counter these harmful narratives with real facts and evidence. Throughout this analysis, we have drawn on a wealth of scientific research, medical consensus, and the lived experiences of transgender people themselves to refute Highsmith's claims and present a more accurate and nuanced understanding of trans realities. And we only scratched the surface of the depth and breadth of the research on this topic.

The evidence is clear: transgender identities are real, valid, and worthy of respect and affirmation. The notion that being transgender is a mental illness, a delusion, or a threat to society is not supported by the facts or data. Rather, it is a reflection of the prejudice and stigma that trans people continue to face in a world that often refuses to acknowledge their humanity.

Supporting and affirming the transgender community is not only a matter of basic human rights and dignity, but also a public health imperative. When trans individuals are able to access gender-affirming care, live authentically, and participate fully in society, they experience better mental health outcomes, lower rates of suicide and substance abuse, and improved overall well-being.

Conversely, when they are denied these basic rights and subjected to discrimination and violence, the consequences can be devastating. The high rates of poverty, homelessness, and physical and mental health problems among transgender populations are a direct result of the systemic oppression and marginalization they face.

In light of these realities, it is incumbent upon all of us to challenge and reject the kind of anti-trans narratives peddled by Highsmith and others like her. We must commit to thinking critically about the information we consume, to seeking out accurate and reliable sources, and to amplifying the voices and experiences of transgender people themselves.

This means calling out misinformation and junk science when we see it, whether it appears in a fringe blog post or a mainstream media outlet. As we have seen in recent political debates, fake stories spread by fringe posters have made their way to national news in political debates44. This means educating ourselves and others about the realities of transgender identity, and the importance of gender-affirming care. And it means standing in solidarity with the trans community in their ongoing struggle for equality, justice, and human rights.

The fight against anti-trans propaganda is not an easy one, but it is a necessary one. The stakes could not be higher – particularly with the political climate in the US and UK, and other countries as that influence and rhetoric spreads. The lives and well-being of transgender individuals hang in the balance. But by working together to spread the truth, to challenge prejudice and ignorance wherever we find it, and to create a world in which all people can live freely and authentically, we can make a real difference.

So let this be a call to action: to all those who value truth, justice, and human dignity, we urge you to join us in rejecting the harmful lies and distortions of those like Kat Highsmith45. Stand with the transgender community, and stand on the right side of history. I believe that together, we can build a world in which every person, regardless of their gender identity, is able to thrive and reach their full potential.