Show Script:
Is the trans agenda contagion amongst our young people finally over?
Is the whole LGBT++ virus dying?
Eric Kaufmann, professor at the U.K.’s University of Buckingham and director of the new Centre for Heterodox Social Science, says yes.
He has analyzed data from several large-size, high-quality youth surveys and notes a decided shift in American teens and young adults moving away from identifying as either trans or queer.
His full report, entitled “The Decline of Trans and Queer Identity among Young Americans,” documents how the number of young people once identifying as trans or non-binary nearly halved across most data sets over the last two years.
To explain more and help us understand this fascinating trend and data is our correspondent and great ally in the cultural issues affecting families Glenn Stanton from Focus on the Family in the US.
Glenn, welcome.
Glenn: Bob, it’s great to be with you. I, I look forward to every day I get to talk with Bob.
Bob: I know you’re mocking now. Hey. Okay. Let’s get into it. Yeah. So, so this report has this called
Glenn: American Sincerity.
Bob: Yeah. Uh, so this report has been released. Um, look, perhaps people will say, well, who’s Eric Kaufman? What’s the center? Um, you know, is it run by Hitler? Is everything from the writer is run by Hitler. Can you give us a little background to this organization?
Glenn: Yeah. No, Eric, I’ve known his work for a good while. Um, and he is a political scientist. He’s a social scientist. He studies a lot of interesting things, faith, sexual orientation, all kinds of things. And, um, he, I like his work. I like his work very, very much. I mean, I have a, an, an essay from 2022 right here. Called born this way, the rise of LGBT as a social and political identity. I thought that was a very, very good report. And this new report that you’re highlighting, um, I read this and um, I’ve got a few questions about it, but it gives us some very good and very important indicators of what might be happening here. So, um, Eric is a stalwart, he’s a bold scholar. Um. Says what the data says and good for him for doing so.
Bob: Okay. Um, actually, uh, when I looked back on some of the stuff that he had written, I realized that I’d been quoting him previously because he was the one identified that. A lot of young people identify themselves as Rainbow LGBT, but in fact their behavior doesn’t match it. So it’s, it’s just the identify, but they don’t act like it. Yeah. Yeah. Which is very interesting.
Glenn: Absolutely. He said that LGBT identification is running twice as high as actual LGBT behaviour. Yeah. So he has long seen this sort of social contagion thing of, you know. Kids sign up for the rainbow flag who don’t really identify with the rainbow flag, because the rainbow flag is pretty cool and it, it gains them points with their friends and things like that.
Bob: Oh, well, it’s critical theory. You wanna be part of the intersectionality group so that you can claim the victimhood. Yeah. Um, okay, so just in relation to this report then, who, who have they surveyed?
Glenn: Well, he, he’s drawing from a couple different data sets. Some of the research is from, um, fire, an organization, um, that, you know, follows college students and things like that.
Fire is the foundation. Um, for individual rights and expression. He also draws some data from another organization, the Higher Education Research Institute here, but then he is also looking at some surveys from Andover Phillips Academy, which is a very elite school here in the United States, up in the Northeast and from Brown University.
So it’s a hodgepodge of data that he’s looking at, and every one of them are measuring different things. So. Isn’t comparing to like, which is a. Coming of this research, but it doesn’t not tell us anything. It does show us some different things. And so he’s looking at various data sets to see how identity has increased in terms of identifying as non-binary, that’s the word that’s being used, and not necessarily identifying as male and female, um, but also either.
Yes or no? Not identifying as queer, questioning, things like that, and he’s marking a significant increase, but then a decrease since about 2023. The increase from 2020 to 2023 going sharply high in people identifying as non-binary and queer in questioning. And the important thing Bob, to understand with both of those phrases, non-binary and queer Yeah.
Is like, there is no definition of those. No, not at all. They’re just whatever people think they are. And there’s so many students who are like, oh yeah, that’s me. I’m non-binary, I’m queer. Um, but then from about 2003 to present, we see a decline in identity of those. He says that. Okay, let me just show you this graph while you’re talking.
Yeah. About, that’s square, isn’t it? Um, yes, that’s exactly it at about half. Um, and this one was, um, you know, it, it looks at the Andover data, the fire data, the Brown University data. Um, and he noted a significant decline in, um, those not identifying clearly as objectively male and female, but in other categories there. Um, and here we see this is the new, the other chart that you have, the proportion non-binary by cohort according to the fire, um, data. Um, yeah, through different years from 2020 up to 2025. And we see more recently that declining. Yeah.
Bob: Okay, so the, the pushback on this, and I, I thought it when I first saw this and then I saw some commentary on it, is that if, if you think you are trans, uh, you will identify as male and female. It’s just not your biological male or female. It’s the one you think so like, yeah, a lot of those kids will say they’re non-binary, but some of them will say, well, no, I’ve transitioned and I’m now the opposite sex. So does that cloud the material?
Glenn: You know what, Bob, it’s such a great question because there was a criticism of Kaufman’s data from that point.
Um, but I don’t think it’s really that clean necessarily. I don’t think that a. Trans individual who is identifying as trans is gonna recognize themselves as male. They’re gonna recognize themselves as either non-binary or trans male or trans female because Bob, you know that special indicator. I’m a special individual.
I’m unique. I am a, um, marginalized class. They’re not gonna give up. Oh, I’m just male. No, I’m trans male. Yeah. Um, yeah. And so I don’t wanna fit within the binary,
Bob: the colonial, bi colonial binary world. Do they?
Glenn: That is exactly right. That is exactly right. So. You know, part of the criticism there between, um, various scholars has a little bit of validity to it, but I think Kaufman is not incorrect in his conclusions, what he’s concluding. Um, okay.
Bob: Well it’s also backed up by other charts. Let’s have a look at this one. Uh, this is people who say they’re non heterosexual. So this is more in sexuality, isn’t it? Um, just, just talk us through what this is showing. I’ll just enlarge it for the audience.
Glenn: Yeah. And so we see all those, those colour numbers he’s drawing from a bunch of data sets here. And you know, that’s the Andover data, the fire data, the Huy data, brown University, but some CDC data, some general science survey data. And he, the data that he’s looking at, um, he notes a significant decline in those who report being non heterosexual, and he said that the return seems to be towards a heterosexual identification. But Bob, you know this very well. There has been a lot of slipperiness, if you will, in these identities over the past. You know, five years Yeah. Of, you know, his, uh, Kaufman’s early report the Born This Way report question mark.
He says that, yeah, the increase in people saying I’m L-G-B-T-Q or I’m queer, but then you ask ’em what their actual sexual behaviour is or desire and they’ll say, you know, they report basically heterosexuality or bisexuality. Um, and so there’s this great disconnect between what the young people say they identify and then what they, um, actually do.
Bob, I remember talking just a number of years ago to a young woman. And, um, she said, she said, oh, I’m lesbian. I’m lesbian, but oh, don’t get me wrong. I love guys. I’m interested in guys. And I’m like, well, I don’t think you know what these categories are. So these are extremely fluid categories. Yeah. That really have more to say about how the person is feeling at the moment and who the people that they’re with are, rather than this innate objective, either sexual identity or gender identity.
Bob: And look, just to back up what you just said, I, I noticed, and I’ve quoted this, you know, the CDC, this is your report in the US 26 identifies L-G-B-T-Q. But when you break down, what do they identify as? Uh, actually it’s 12% are bisexual, which to me just means they’re, well, Randy teenagers, um, yeah. Yeah. 5% are questioning, they don’t know 4% or other.
Right. Um, actually only 3% are gay or lesbian and 2% don’t understand the question. Yeah, I actually looked at the New Zealand data just before you comment on that. Uh, so this is from Youth 19. Uh, youth 2000. So this is a survey that is done through of 7,000 secondary school students throughout New Zealand.
It’s done on a regular basis. I think they’re just about to release the, some latest data. This says that, um, 16% say that they were either same or multiple sex attracted. Not sure or not attracted to any sex. Um, so that’s 16%. And then later in the report it got down to 10% who identified as pui, which is the indigenous word for rainbow in effect.
So, ah, uh, it’s, it’s, it’s moving. Goalposts is a statement, and like you say, it’s just the identification that matters, not actually the behavior.
Glenn: You know what Bob, and that is exactly right. And so I mean that data that you’re presenting from New Zealand is fascinating because it jives with what we’re seeing in so many other places.
We are constantly told that gay, lesbian, whatever, like these are things rooted in nature. It’s who people are and therefore we have to respect it. But what we find when we look into the data is these are shifting identities that oftentimes have no real definition to them at all. I mean, yeah. Bisexual.
Nobody’s actually bisexual. It’s like you said, um, they’re just opportunists, you know, in that sense. And they’re open to everything because they’re experimental and they’re exploring driven by the home. 2%, the questioning. Yeah. And so these are kids that are, and young people, young adults. That are identifying with something that they see and know to be fashionable and that can get them street cred in class and with their friends.
And even, um, you know, when you apply to college, if you apply as a Q, you’re more likely to get favourable reception. Yeah. At the, yeah. Administration desk and things like that. So there is a lot of messy stuff that is going on here, and I think that is what Eric Kaufman’s research shows us that these things are not fixed like we have been told they are.
Bob: Now, there’s one graph I’d just like you to explain because I think it’s quite significant, but it’s the probability. So let me enlarge it. Just for the audience of being trans and the probability of being bisexual or queer, can you just explain what the graph is showing?
Glenn: Yeah, so this is data from the, the fire research as you can see across there at the top, looking from trend lines from 2020 to 2025. And we saw from 2020 up to 2022 a lot of people increasing, um, as. Reporting to be non-binary that is neither male nor female and now is non-binary. Um, trans, I think it’s exactly the same thing. It’s like, no, I don’t fit into your binary boxes of male or female. And so non-binary can just be a general sort of thing, or it can be trans.
But on the other chart there, the probability of identifying as bisexual or queer, um. He, uh, Kaufman is showing generally the same sort of lines, um, although they’re a little different between the two. They’re the same trajectory, if you will. Yeah. Um, rising high, high in 2022 to a peak. Yeah. And then crashing back down, um, which is matching this, isn’t it, 20?
Bob: I was just gonna say the million dollar question is what happened in 2023 that suddenly gave people common sense. Trump didn’t get elected until 2024 to remind us that there’s only two sexes. So what was the tipping point?
Glenn: Here’s what I think.
I mean, first of all, the proper answer is we don’t know. Um, and. Kaufman. In his paper he talks about issues of mental illness and, um, COVID era mental illness and isolation and aloneness, and how that affected behaviors and that maybe that. You know, the, the ending of that COVID era tip things back down.
Um, there’s some indicating data that some of that might be true, and I think a bit of that is valid. Um, I think, Bob, what happened there possibly, and this is the analogy that I use, is. Trans is not a thing. It’s not natural. It’s not a naturally occurring thing. It is a socially created artificial sort of identity.
Now there is quickly – Gender dysphoria is a psychic thing, but that is extremely rare. Most of the identity that we’re seeing is social contagion identity. And when you take something unnatural and you try to pretend as if it is natural, that’s like taking a beach ball and pushing it underwater.
You can pretend for a good long while. Oh look, the beach ball’s underwater, but it will not stay underwater. And I think a lot of these people just realize like, okay, you know what I’m, I don’t even know what queer is. I don’t know what trans is. It was cool for a while, but now I’m something different. And you see these people window shopping for different identities and unfortunately.
Um, that has created a lot of damage. There’s a lot of hormone blockers that have been taken. There’s a lot of body modification surgeries that have been done, and we have a good people regretting those things. And I think people have generally just seen that. We’re talking about something that doesn’t actually exist in nature, and it existed in my feelings last year.
But it doesn’t exist in my feelings anymore. Yeah. And so, um, I think it just demonstrates the artificiality, if you will, of the queer identity of the non-binary identity and those sorts of things. And so we’ll see how the data shakes out in coming years, but I absolutely will not be surprised if this downward decline sustains itself, and we see this showing up in other data sets.
Bob: Glenn, just before we, um, wrap this up, I, I just was fascinated by this graph just where you were when you were talking about the, uh, improving of mental health of young people since COVID. Yeah. But this graph really fascinated me, and let me just enlarge it, because what it’s showing is that, uh, those with who are most anxious or depressed.
Those lines up the top and they are the non-binary, the bisexual, um, very liberal and no religion are the top four lines. And then you get to heterosexual and conservative. Uh, but they’re coming down consistently. So that suggests that. Um, it’s not this so-called phobia or, um, discrimination or anything because they’re actually acting in tandem.
It’s actually just showing that if you are confused sexually or gender wise, you’re gonna be more stressed and anxious and depressed.
Glenn: Yeah, and that’s exactly true. I kind of question Bob, the cleanness of all those lines going in the same direction because what we have, yeah. This one as well, consistently seen with good data over the last 20 years is that more liberally oriented individuals tend to have lower mental health and happiness and security than conservative individuals. Yeah. And so to see those lines now kind of paralleling each other, but in terms of what’s high and what’s low, um, I think he is right. And I think that that does demonstrate itself is you see there like very liberal people tending to have higher levels of anxiety and depression than conservatives and heterosexual folks, um, having lower than, um, some of the more sexually adventurous and, um, experimental kind of sexualities there. Yeah.
Bob: Uh, look, I’m sure this report went down like a cup of cold sick with the media. I, I bet the lamestream has completely avoided it.
Glenn: Yeah, well it has taken off online. It’s been very, very viral. That’s zore as people sharing it. But yeah, you’re right in terms of the mainstream press, um, it’s like it doesn’t even exist. And I think that’s, that’s the thing that we need to take away from this, Bob, is that there are factors happening that you are not going to see in the mainstream elite media.
But that scholars, brave scholars like Eric Kaufman are presenting here and it’s worth looking at. This stuff is online. You can find it, go look at it, study it yourself, and you make the determination about what you think. Um, yeah, and I think that’s very important.
Bob: Is Eric Kaufman going to be the next Mark Regnerus, our good buddy. I’ve met Mark a number of times, loved the guy, and of course, he came out with that study, uh, which challenged the, you know, suggested that same sex parenting wasn’t as beneficial as, uh, traditional mum and dad. And of course he got. You know, you know, one of the first cancellations that I can think of that happened is Eric Kaufman gonna go down the same track, or you think we’ve got to a point where because of social media, he can back up what he said?
We can see the viral tweets. Um, we can get to the facts before the media distort the narrative.
Glenn: Yeah, I think Mark Regnerus thing was at about 2012, and I think you’re exactly right. Um, if he had been able to get his information out there and to let people see it, um, it would’ve been different. Mark is a dear friend. I was texting with him this morning actually, and like, yeah, it had a real impact on his career, but additional research has come out showing that he was absolutely right in his data, but you had so many people piling onto him saying that it was incorrect. It wasn’t incorrect. Yeah. And I think in the long run.
Experience will show Eric Kaufman’s data to be correct as well. His data is very preliminary, it’s very early. Um, it’s an early indicator, but I think long-term, um, trends will show him to be exactly right.
Bob: Okay. Just before we go, Glenn, I know you’re right prolifically and, um, I read it all, of course. Um, as you know, being loyal, uh, and in the Federalist you’ve just published this one.
Just, just to show that maybe this is partly driving the madness that we are seeing. And you say that the American Sociological Association have published an article entitled Childhood Sexualities on Pleasure and Meaning from the Margins, and it’s about preadolescent kids children’s erotic capacities.
Glenn: Yeah. Here’s the study right here. Folks, this is a real study that a real academic wrote in, um, a real academic.
Bob: Be careful what you say there, Glenn.
Glenn: Yeah, I mean, you know, she, she’s a woman from South Africa. Um, I looked her up. She looked like the completely nice and kind individual. Um, but this is in the journal, sex and Sexualities.
And Bob, let me just read these first two lines to you in her abstract, and this is this, I’m reading it right here. She says, sexuality scholarship marginalizes childhood sexual pleasure positioning children as vulnerable suspects. She says that as if it’s like a bad thing. This article repositions Childhood Sexualities within a pleasure centered, globally oriented and power aware frame informed by feminist, queer and decolonial perspectives parents.
How many of you want your kids anywhere near that? And this is, you are right. It’s, it’s just remarkable. Later on in the, um. Later on in the study, this is on page five, she says, what is clear is the notion of childhood.
Sexual innocence is not a natural construct. It is a colonial fiction that has a long erase. The very thought of PUD sexuality. Childhood together, she is intent on breaking down this thing that civil society holds. That sexuality is a good thing between adults, sexuality between adults and children. Very bad thing.
She wants to break that Taboo negativity that we hold and see that as a good thing, that taboo, if you will. Yeah. Um, and that’s why things like this are very, very dangerous. No place in the piece does she say adults should have sex with children? She knows she can’t go there. But as I say in the Federalist piece, that’s how this game is played.
You don’t say it outright, you hint at it. You break away at the margins. And in fact, the subtitle of this childhood Sexualities on Pleasure and Meaning from the Margins, it’s taking the marginal things and bringing it to the center as. If it’s normal, as if, as if it’s acceptable. So they are trying to soften this idea of childhood sexuality and childhood experimentation.
And she also says in the abstract of breaking down age barriers there as well. So that’s how this game is played, Bob. And we see, okay, just another example of this being presented.
Bob: Well, there’s some, uh, amongst all of this, there’s some positives that our younger people aren’t buying the rhetoric and the narrative, uh, and the ideology, so that’s a positive.
The negative is that our academics are still pushing it, and we should be very aware of any of these so-called associations because they’ve been captured by radical activists at the top, and it’s happened in New Zealand as well. Glenn, always great to catch up with you. I really appreciate your work and, uh, getting across all these cultural issues and interpreting things further us, and, um, I’m sure we’ll be back.
So thank you Glenn,
Glenn: Bob. I look forward to it. Bless you, man.
