The Epstein Files, Robert Trivers, and transing kids for sexual purposes

Not a single TERF was surprised by the email from Trivers to Epstein

The latest batch release of the Epstein Files by the U.S. Department of Justice has revealed a link between pedophilia, sex abuse, and the gender transitioning of children. This came as no surprise to the persons who’ve been paying attention to pernicious gender ideology over the past decade or more.

A graphic Dec. 2018 email from evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers, addressed to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, describes Trivers’ opinion on the sexual attractiveness of “transexual women” (biological males) and goes on to suggest that toddler boys as young as three might benefit from hormonal intervention, should they not fit gender stereotypes associated with their sex.

The 2018 email was sent after Epstein had been publicly accused of running a sex-trafficking ring and abusing underage girls. (Nearly a decade earlier, Epstein pled guilty to charges of solicitation of prostitution and of solicitation of prostitution with a minor under the age of 18, and was sentenced to 18 months in prison.)

“(By the way) we are now pushing the intervention earlier—so you notice your three-year-old son has trans tendencies, so now you intervene with hormones—I would be frightened to do that—but who knows?” Trivers wrote to Epstein.

It is unclear just who Trivers means when he uses the royal “we”—but it is certainly true that those who promote the transition of minors have for years been lobbying for it to happen at younger and younger ages. For instance, the (widely condemned) World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) removed all minimum age requirements for hormones and surgeries from their 2022 standards of care recommendations.

Earlier in his email, Trivers discussed what mainstream medicine colloquially refers to as “gender affirming care” in terms of its ability (or lack thereof) to create sexually captivating prostitutes or sexual partners.

“With greater molecular control over development we are increasingly capable of producing novel phenotypes—more feminine men, by blocking testosterone receptors (or castration) and, at the same time, increasing estrogen production—the one b(l)ocks male features, the second encourages female features,” Trivers wrote, before discussing graphic sexual acts with transgender-identified males and then denigrating the attractiveness of “female to male” transgender persons. (And the vulva—which he says is an “acquired taste.”)

For the layperson, a phenotype is the outward, physical expression of given genes. Height and eye colour are examples. Trivers’ grotesque musings on new phenotypes are all about using “gender affirming care,” on children, to create customizable human beings whose only apparent value is in whether or not men will want to use them for sex.

Ultimately, what Trivers says is this: the earlier that one intervenes and provides hormones to children, the better control they have over that child’s “novel phenotypes.” Forget the human rights or social justice narratives about one’s inherent “gender identity” or of discovering one’s true self via gender exploration—for men like Trivers, gender ideology is, evidently, all about sexual gratification and fetishes. It is not about saving anyone from gender dysphoria or suicide, should they not have access to “gender affirming care.” It’s merely about satisfying carnal desire.

Again, Trivers’ unabashed and grotesque ponderings, shared with a convicted sex offender, come as no surprise to all of us who’ve been criticizing gender ideology for years.

Gender critical persons have also long argued that female transitioners—i.e. “transmen”—have been the pawns of fetish-motivated activists, used to legitimize their cause, because the (typically young) females who transition almost exclusively do not have sexual or fetishistic motivations. They provide cover for those who seek to transition minors for dubious, sexual purposes. This assessment undoubtedly jives with Trivers’ insulting comments on transmen as being “unhappy and lonely” and “the worst of both worlds.”

This is not the first time that a close link between child abuse, pedophilia and transgender ideology has revealed itself.

In 2022, Reduxx journalist Genevieve Gluck revealed that WPATH—which to this day is used by numerous Canadian healthcare authorities to guide their “gender affirming” medicine policies—had used an online community called the “Eunuch Archive” to inform the organization’s “standards of care” document, called SOC8, which added “eunuch” as a gender identity for the first time.

The problem with Eunuch Archive: it was co-founded by a convicted pedophile, and contains thousands of pages of written child sexual abuse content, much of it specifically about the castration of young boys. Gluck also revealed that another convicted pedophile was a prominent member of the online group.

Within SOC8, WPATH lauds the Eunuch Archive as an online community whose moderators “attempt to maintain both medical and historical accuracy.” WPATH speaks of the group’s international gatherings and notes that “(m)any former Eunuch Archive members have achieved their (castration) goals and no longer participate.” They fail to mention the rampant pedophilic child sexual abuse material.

Why is that?

The obvious caveat to all of this is that not everyone providing, receiving, or advocating for “gender affirming care” is doing so for explicitly nefarious reasons. And most are likely (one can hope) unaware of the heinous persons operating from behind the curtains of gender activism.

Regardless, we mustn’t ignore this problem.

It’s difficult enough to convince others that pediatric gender transition is the largest medical scandal of our era—now imagine trying to convince others that behind the scandal are evil persons with dark and ulterior motives. I get it: it sounds like lunacy.

However, if everyone could stop and contemplate the revolting email between Trivers and Epstein, it will begin to make sense.

The evidence is right before us.