2024: The year the tide turned on radical gender ideology
What is a woman? This is the question that was posed by U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn to then-nominee for the Supreme Court, Ketanji Brown Jackson, during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings. By not providing a simple answer based on basic biology and instead deflecting to the role of an impartial judge, Jackson revealed something that contributed to the turning point regarding transgender ideology that we have witnessed in 2024.
As a woman herself, no one reasonably thinks Justice Jackson is unable to offer a definition of what constitutes a woman. But feeling the need to avoid responding in a direct fashion was a signal that Jackson, personally in that moment, had prioritized bowing to the bizarre and ever-changing cultural definitions of gender instead of a straightforward acknowledgement of what we all know to be true about the two sexes.
For many Americans, that a judge who is supposed to make decisions based on reality and facts would shy away from that in an answer, was the latest example of just how far down the path of insanity our culture had strayed—and they wanted no more of it. This is especially the case as it relates to children.
Get Our Latest News for FREE
The 2024 election was seen by many as a chance to make a national statement about changing direction. And for a large portion of voters, President Trump represented the change they were seeking. An astounding 70% of Concerned Women of America exit poll participants said “Trump’s opposition to transgender boys and men playing girls and women’s sports and of trans boys and men using girls and women’s bathrooms,” was an important issue for them when voting.
But to simply read this dynamic shift in the last two years through a political lens is to miss the ways the tide has turned for parents, within families, and in communities—both here in the U.S. and abroad.
A quick glance at the state of today’s youth reveals a troubling picture: a mental health crisis exacerbated by social media overuse; rising rates of depression, particularly among teenage girls; and a deepening sense of alienation among young men, sometimes culminating in violent outbursts. These challenges are compounded by cultural shifts catalyzed by the sexual revolution—shifts that push the fictional narrative that a boy can become a girl and vice versa.
For decades, this progressive ideological push seemed unstoppable, especially for children. Yet, this year has brought a surprising and significant pushback, suggesting a return to biological reality is in order.
In April, the Cass Review, a study commissioned by the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, delivered a damning critique of puberty blockers and gender transition surgeries for children. The report highlighted the lack of scientific evidence supporting these practices, and its findings were affirmed across the political spectrum in the U.K. The fallout was swift, with U.K. policymakers reassessing the medical and ethical implications of such interventions.
Later this year, the controversy surrounding trans-identifying biological males competing in women’s sports came to the forefront in the United States. San Jose State’s volleyball team was credited with multiple forfeit victories after teams in the Mountain West Conference boycotted games against them for including a biological male who identifies as female. This incident underscored the tensions and practical challenges of enforcing fairness in sports under the banner of gender inclusivity.
In December, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Skrmetti, a case centered on a Tennessee law banning gender transition “treatments” for minors. Tennessee is one of 26 states to enact such legislation, citing insufficient scientific support for these interventions and evidence of significant harm. While predicting a result based on oral arguments is often a fool’s errand, a majority of justices appeared reluctant to overturn Tennessee’s ban and instead may recognize the importance of the state’s role in protecting children from harm.
Finally, just a week ago, the U.K. extended its prohibition on the sale of puberty blockers for minors, with a legislative review set for 2027. This marks yet another step in the growing global resistance to radical gender ideology.
Without a doubt, our society remains largely libertine, adhering to the belief that “as long as it doesn’t harm anyone, anything goes.” However, the question of harm —particularly when it comes to children —is now being scrutinized more closely. Though I would articulate my objections about transgender ideology for any age or for any context, it’s one thing for adults to subject themselves to radical “treatments;” it’s another thing entirely when that is forced upon innocent children —and asking society at large to just acquiesce to this.
When children undergo these radical “treatments,” the harmful effects spread to how we interact and live with one another. When a teenage girl loses her spot on the podium because she’s competing against a biological male in a swimming meet; or when a child comes home and describes his interaction with a child of a different gender in the locker room; or when a mom feels unsafe in a restroom facility at the mall, what might feel abstract or distant becomes deeply personal when it impacts one’s own family.
The key, however, is not merely to critique what is wrong but to present a positive and hopeful vision. Christians can point to the beauty of the family and a perspective that respects the God-created natural distinctions between male and female, that values the body as an integral part of personhood, and that sees human sexuality as a reflection of divine intent rather than personal whim. And we can do this even while acknowledging some individuals may feel a disconnect about how they perceive themselves. They are in need of support and care, not extreme experimentations that so often lead to destructive results—for them personally and people around them.
If 2024 has taught us anything, it is that cultural change is possible. The backlash against radical gender ideology suggests that people are hungry for a better story—one that affirms their worth, their bodies, and their God-given identity.
Brent Leatherwood was elected as president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission in 2022, after a year of leading the organization as acting president. Previously, he served as chief of staff at the ERLC, as well as the entity’s director of strategic partnerships. He brings an expertise in public policy to his work, having been the executive director of the Tennessee Republican Party, the director of communications and policy strategy in the Tennessee General Assembly, and working for several years on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Brent is a dedicated member of his church, where he has served as a deacon since 2014. Brent is married to Meredith, and together they have three children.
