Receipts: The Boston Globe

The sort of letters they refuse to publish...

BROADview has a receipts project going on and I’m inspired to make a contribution here. My hometown beacon of what was once journalistic excellence, The Boston Globe, has had numerous opportunities to highlight the voices of dissenting liberals on the topic of gender ideology. They even sent a staff reporter to interview me on July 2nd when I stood outside of Boston Children’s Hospital with a “Stop Transing Gay Kids” sign (designed by LGB Courage Coalition) in my hands. I made it very clear to the reporter that yes indeed I’m a lesbian (in case you couldn’t tell) AND a registered Massachusetts Democrat who has never once voted for bad orange man! Their photographer snapped some nice photos of me and my group of fellow supporters. I can’t say whether they asked the PR folks at Boston Children’s Hospital for comment on our demonstration. But I can tell you that no story showed up in The Boston Globe after that day. Maybe it was just too boring?

Photo courtesy of yours truly. I once rode in a helicopter over Boston. I highly recommend it!

Below are letters I’ve written to The Boston Globe that never got published. Here they are on Substack, so read ‘em and weep!

Letter to The Boston Globe, 12/9/24

Thank you for publishing Lisa Selin Davis’s piece, “Legal challenges to red-state bans on youth gender care have illuminated a coverup” on December 3rd, 2024.

In a media landscape where the narrative regarding the medicalization of gender-distressed minors leans heavily toward affirmation and drug and surgical interventions, it is crucial to provide other perspectives grounded in science, ethics, and concern for long-term well-being.

As Selin Davis’s piece highlights, the “affirmation-only” approach is neither evidence-based nor without significant risks. This is why progressive European nations are changing their practices and rejecting WPATH. It is not “transphobic” or “anti-trans” to critically examine these issues; rather, it is a necessary part of ensuring responsible, compassionate, and informed care.

As a member of the LGBT community, I value dignity, equality, and rights for transgender individuals. However, I also believe it is vital to consider the possibility that gender nonconformity in children does not require medicalization. Encouraging exploration and acceptance without rushing to invasive treatments may ultimately serve the best interests of these kids.

Thank you for publishing this important piece and fostering a conversation that includes diverse perspectives. Only through open dialogue can we ensure the best outcomes for all.

Letter to The Boston Globe, 6/21/25 (on behalf of DIAGdemocrats)

Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender applauds the Supreme Court decision in U.S. v. Skrmetti to allow states to protect minors from serious medical harm. Pharmaceutical and surgical body modifications for minors (euphemistically called “gender-affirming care”) is medical abuse. It is unsafe and unproven.
Protecting the health of children is an ethical issue. A large contingent of Democrats do not support medical interventions for youth distressed about their sex. The media—including the Globe—continues to frame so-called “gender” medicine in political terms, claiming opposition to this medical scandal as only coming from the Right, eroding people’s trust in journalism.
In the U.S., where health care is managed at the state level, states should be able to exercise their power to protect minors, especially when major medical institutions fail to follow the evidence. Young people who seek “gender affirming care” often have serious mental health issues that go completely unaddressed once “gender identity” is raised. The Skrmetti decision will protect vulnerable children from irreversible medical harm (at least in “red” states) and provide them with a better chance of receiving appropriate mental health support.
The U.S. v. Skrmetti decision was correct and will help to preserve children’s health.

Letter to The Boston Globe, 8/4/25

Amanda Gokee’s August 1st article entitled “New Hampshire becomes first state in New England to ban gender-affirming care for minors” failed to cover many important voices from the Left involved in advancing this legislation. HB 712 and HB 377 gained bipartisan support, and several Democrats, including myself, testified in favor of these bills. Notably, a NYT/Ipsos poll from January 2025 revealed that 54% of Democrats support bans on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors. Gokee’s article ignored the fact that progressive European countries such as Sweden, Finland, Norway and the UK are discouraging and prohibiting “gender affirming care” for minors due to known risks. There is an opportunity to present both sides of the story and not just the usual activist narrative from pro-trans-medicalization groups. American medical organizations like the AAP and APA only follow the guidance of only one entity: WPATH, which is not a medical organization. It is an activist organization that has been discredited for its reliance on citation laundering. As for suicide risk, there is no credible evidence that cross-sex hormones and surgeries prevent suicide, and the ACLU’s own Chase Strangio admitted this in front of the Supreme Court during the Skrmetti hearing.

Letter to The Boston Globe, 8/26/25

I’m writing in response to your August 25 article, “Mass. is emerging as a haven for trans youth seeking care.” Your readers deserve a more balanced discussion of what this “care” actually entails.

“Gender-affirming care” is not neutral; it involves puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries on healthy bodies. Numerous physicians, researchers, and psychotherapists argue these interventions are medically harmful and lack a solid evidence base. Long-term studies, including Sweden’s 2011 Dhejne study, found higher—not lower—rates of suicide after surgery. Yet the “suicide prevention” narrative persists despite even ACLU attorney Chase Strangio admitting it is false.

Most children with gender distress reconcile with their sex after puberty. Many of these children, like myself as a gay adult, might otherwise grow into healthy homosexual or bisexual adults. But when put on blockers and hormones, they face permanent sterility and sexual dysfunction before they can possibly consent. This is not compassionate care—it is a grave social justice issue.

Your article also referenced Turner’s syndrome. Disorders of sexual development do not prove sex is a spectrum. Turner’s patients are always biologically female and require estrogen therapy for bone and cardiovascular health—not a “choice” of puberty.

I urge you to interview dissenting experts and present the full picture.