The commodification of puberty

In exposing known harms and the paucity of evidence around puberty blockers, the Cass Review and other studies are making it harder for trans activists to claim that blockers are safe and reversible. It’s difficult now to uphold the argument that kids can consent to something when even adults around them don’t know what exactly the kids are “consenting” to. I mean activists still try. They discredit any evidence that counters their narrative as flawed, transphobic and against consensus. But they’re also leaning heavily into another of their thought-stopping one-liner gotchas. Natal puberty, say the activists, is irreversible and damaging and how can kids consent to that?”.

But that’s ridiculous, I hear you say. Puberty is a natural part of human development, you don’t consent to growing up. That’s like saying babies can’t consent to toddlerhood. How right you are. However.

I feel like I am making this article very long by providing examples, but I am wary of being accused of vilifying trans activists in the same way that many of their loudest happily vilify gender critics. I am determined to show that I am not ascribing unhinged fringe trans activist views to the main players in an attempt to make the whole movement look bad. I don’t need to. From submissions and writing published over summer 2024/25, when the New Zealand public could make submissions on restrictions around the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria, we can see that the ‘natural puberty is dangerous’ argument is a core component of contemporary trans rights/pro-puberty blocker rhetoric.

New Zealand lobby group InsideOUT wrote a puberty blocker submission guide that said “Puberty blockers have been shown to be reversible; however the alternative of going through unwanted physical changes in puberty is irreversible.” It used a variation of the phrase “irreversible, unwanted physical changes” in discussing natural puberty no less than five times in its guidelines.1

In the Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa’s (PATHA) submission, the group said “Denying puberty blockers has the potential for significant negative impacts on young transgender people’s mental health and level of gender dysphoria. The irreversible physical changes that occur through puberty…”2.

The Public Service Association (PSA) chimed in with a submission that said “Irreversible and unwanted physical changes associated with puberty can affect transgender and gender diverse people's lives into adulthood”3.

Raul Seatown wrote a story in The Spinoff called “She knew before she could read” and says of his child’s access to puberty blockers: “This came as a profound relief as the idea of going though male puberty and developing a beard and a deeper voice (among other things) has always been deeply distressing for Marie, as it would be for any girl”4.

Project Village’s pamphlet, vigorously promoted by gender lobbyist organisations, is typical. “While the effects of puberty blockers are reversible, some of the effects of going through puberty are not.”5

Across the ditch, one of the banners at a protest against Queensland’s puberty blocker ban read “Unwanted puberty is an irreversible decision”.

Gender activists are desperate to equate the blocking of puberty with the progression of normal puberty. Both are posited as interchangeable decisions. Let’s unpack that. A powerful medical intervention with largely unknown impacts on psychosexual development, cognition and anatomy is equated with a kid going through the natural human maturation processes that turns a child’s brain and body into an adult’s brain and body. This stage of human development— crucial in physical development, identity formation, executive function, the development of nuanced thinking and sexual awakening—is equated with depriving a kid of that stage of development.

These two things are clearly different. But, in a society softened by decades of neoliberal thinking, it makes perfect sense6. Devotees of the right-wing market economics that transformed New Zealand in the 80s and 90s were willing to allow the free, unfettered market—where supply and demand determine an optimal price—to solve almost every social, economic or political decision. Government functions were privatised, core state activities were contracted out, councils were made to act like corporations, state assets were sold off, tariffs that protected local industries were removed and user-pays for once free social services was normalised. There has been no meaningful roll back of these policies.

Under the reign of the free market, individuals are primarily seen as consumers whose freedom is realised in having the ability to choose from a dazzling array of interchangeable goods and services made possible through appropriate market conditions. While the market enjoyed massive expansion into previously non-commodified aspects of our life, gender ideology goes further and might be the logical end point of neoliberal ideology.

Under the trans movement’s influence, biological sex, identity, gender and womanhood are now fair market game. These are all products that can be plucked off the shelf. So too with puberty. Trans activists reimagine children as rational consumers, who, provided with appropriate information, must be free to select from a range of options for how or if they develop. Natural puberty, puberty blockers, the physical changes achieved through cross-sex hormones, delayed puberty or no puberty, are all equally valid consumer choices. If the kid wants it, the market should supply it. Trans activists, like all neoliberal zealots, argue that this market must be protected at all costs.

In their veneration of market forces, neoliberals identify protections—of local industry, of workers’ rights, of nature, or protections designed to prevent hardship—as barriers to the free market. The language of freedom and barriers creates a seemingly moral imperative for their policy objectives. Gender activists have adopted the same language and tactics. Normal medical protocols, safeguards, evidence, common sense, legitimate concern about women’s safety, hard wired sexual preference and even the reality of our mammalian selves are seen as barriers to trans rights and freedom.

Trans activists laissez-faire belief extends of course to ‘gender-affirming healthcare”. They argue vehemently that all obstacles that prevent parents and kids getting their hands on untested medication must be removed.

“Gatekeeping, the process by which gender affirming care has been withheld or controlled by the medical field, has been widely practiced in psychiatry, neglecting a patient-led, informed consent approach” says PATHA.

PSA said “We strongly object to regulation that would restrict the availability of treatment. Transgender and gender diverse rangatahi already report that they have difficulty accessing puberty blockers, and have difficulty accessing healthcare in general.”

InsideOUT’s submission guidelines state “There should be no restrictions on access to puberty blockers for the trans young people who need them.”

Neoliberals advocate for a shrinking of the state so that the market can take a more central role. In this schema, the government’s role becomes facilitative, simply maintaining the market conditions in which suppliers and consumers can do their thing. Trans activists’ vision of medical professionals is similarly transactional. Pre-pubescent children must be fully empowered to choose natural puberty or a drug that stops them growing up. A doctor’s role is diminished and their professional expertise by-the-by. A child or family can, in the trans activists’ view, diagnose and prescribe treatment. The doctor’s job is only to facilitate access to puberty blockers.

This mentality is beautifully illustrated in the March 2025 Queer Endurance in Defiance march through Wellington. Hundreds, including current and ex-Green Party MPs (perhaps other parties too?) joined the call for “Puberty Blockers on Demand”. The march, which encourages kids to make concrete their shame about their natal sex, was promoted as part of the Wellington Pride Festival.

The trans activist marketing campaign is genius: a neoliberal wet dream where the most intimate parts of us become commodified is sold as life-saving healthcare and autonomy. In this dystopia even bodily integrity and the human lifecycle are not immune from the ravages of the market.

Note: Substack doesn’t (yet?) allow one-off tips so I am introducing a Buy me a coffee thing via Ko-Fi. It defaults to three bucks but you can choose any amount from a dollar up. Anyway, if you liked this article, have a few dollars spare, and want to show your thanks, that would be great. I also so appreciate it when you recommend, share, like or make comments as well. I’d love my writing to get a wider audience. But also, if you want…

Buy me some coffee beans

Share