Please, For The Love Of God, Can We Have A Serious Conversation About "Gender-Affirming Care" For Kids?

I should start by saying that I love Jon Stewart. Regardless of recent rumblings that he ruined political discourse.

Stewart taught me that the news could be funny as well as informative. He demonstrated the integrity to question taboos and the government and Tucker Carlson's bowtie. He affirmed my deeply-held belief that deep-dish pizza is not pizza. 

In a world of hot takes and partisan hackery, Jon wasn't afraid to criticise both sides. In a world of insipid, dumbed-down punditry, Jon was sharp and engaging. In a world of performative outrage, Jon genuinely cared about the issues he spoke about. 

And, of course, his key selling point; he took the time to understand what he was talking about. 

---

I don't know if time is short nowadays, but the 2023 version of Jon Stewart seems less clear on what he’s talking about. Especially when it comes to identity politics. 

2023 Jon approaches racial discourse in the same "pro-wrestling" style he famously criticised Tucker Carlson for. He displays only a fraction of the intellectual integrity and nuance he brings to other topics. And he exemplified these problems in this interview with Leslie Rutledge, Arkansas Attorney General. Who sadly doesn’t know what she’s talking about either.

He begins by asking her about the state’s decision to ban gender-affirming care for children: 

Why would the state of Arkansas step in to override parents, physicians, psychiatrists, endocrinologists, who have developed guidelines? Why would you override those guidelines?

Leslie justifies the decision by claiming that 98% of young people with gender dysphoria will outgrow gender dysphoria. A statistic that Jon correctly points out is “incredibly made-up.” After all, according to the available literature, a mere 80% of children outgrow gender dysphoria if allowed to go through puberty unmedicated.

But percentages aside, aren't all medical guidelines, especially new guidelines based on "worryingly weak" evidence, worth careful evaluation? Have we forgotten that there was a time when the medical guidelines for anxiety included lobotomy and the guidelines for morning sickness included thalidomide? 

Are the medical bodies in England, Finland, Norway and Sweden, who have all reevaluated their approach to gender-affirming care for children using incredibly made up statistics too?

Rutledge doesn't ask these questions. And Jon didn't think to ask them of himself.