Trans people and trans-friendly people subscribe to his research though, which is the issue. John Money was responsible himself and only himself for what he did. Its obvious that his experimentation was cruel and a complete failure, so with that in mind why use his completely bogus, stupid term "gender" to describe (validate) themselves and human sexuality?
>I've seen some accusations like this. Every time, the drag show has turned out to be completely G-rated, and they're offended at the lie that they would expose children to sexual acts. In many cases, it was the act of drag itself that was the supposed "sexual element".
>turned out to be completely G-rated
Like this one with "It's not gonna lick itself" and men in fishnets running around? https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/dallas-family-friend...
>Genital surgery for transgender people has one of the highest satisfaction rates of any surgery of any type.
This so laughably bad and false that you should feel ashamed for having said it. Please go read https://www.reddit.com/r/detrans/top/?t=all
An Appendectomy is what I'd expect to fall under "surgery with one of the highest satisfaction rates", not a festering "neo-vagina" that requires lifelong dilation and will never function similarly to a real vagina while the rest of the (now malfunctioning) male sexual system is still present.
>We do not "validate" people with schizophrenia like that because it does not improve their happiness or well-being.
And its the exact same case with trans people. The suicide statistics, r/detrans testimonies, and general trans lifestyle problems are not testaments to "We do affirm transgender people in their identity because it does improve their happiness and well-being". Its obvious that "validating" them is only a minimal, temporary solution, if even that.