> I'm afraid that's not true, or not true anymore. Last year, via SB 5889, Washington Democrats forced insurers to cover gender dysmorphia treatment and gender-affirming care for minors between 13 and 17, without parental consent. It mandates that insurers deal directly with the patient without requiring the policyholder’s authorization.

I had seen references to SB 5889, though not many places other than the article you linked really discussing it.

Importantly, I don't think this is worrying. You jumped to addressing my statement that all states require parental consent (which, based on SB 5889, was wrong), but didn't address that Drs aren't giving children Gender-Affirming Care based on the 'slightest suspicion'. Even if there are isolated instances, I DO NOT see that happening broadly or epidemically. In fact, the medical community (to the detriment of all parties involved) is still very much BEHIND on dealing with trans patients. (Though getting better with WPATH etc).

> The same is true in all states except for 4 red states.

I searched the article you linked and that didn't seem to be included. I can't find evidence of 46 states allowing GAC without parental consent. Further, 15+ states are looking at passing laws BANNING GAC WITH parental consent and that's just not acceptable and seems counter to this fact.

> talk about his gender in his 3rd-grade class

What do you mean talk about his gender? When I was in 3rd grade we talked about boys and girls a lot.

Or do you mean talk about trans / non-binary people? Because you want to shield your child from the existence of people?

> So why is it the case that "People who are aged 18 to 24 are more likely to identify as transgender"?

Acceptance? LGBTQ identification has also risen over time with acceptance. It turns out that if people discourage you and tell you that what you are is disgusting, people tend not to publicly identify with it?

These aren't trans people being created, they're trans people finally identifying themselves. And it is more noticeable in younger generations because they haven't built an entire life around themselves.

> For many of the girls in Shapiro's book, the gender craze is an unhealthy mental preoccupation, who encounter support sites on Tumblr which encourage young girls to question their gender identities and celebrates "transitioning". The concern is that the number of people transitioning due to social pressure _massively_ exceeds those who legitimately need to transition.

I assume you mean the book you linked previously? I'm not going to comment or speculate on anecdata. For those girls it might have been tough to navigate and I feel for them, that doesn't mean it is an epidemic, it just means the book alleges its an epidemic.

The assertion that the number of people now identifying as trans/non-binary "_massively_ exceeds those who legitimately need transition", isn't born out by current evidence, seems potentially explained by acceptance, and seems very akin to the shock people had at how many people were LGB when that started gaining acceptance (and the idea of being gay because you thought it was cool).

> What's odd is that it's unacceptable to encourage kids _not_ to transition.

I don't know what to say if you earnestly think that's the minority view. It isn't. Which is why being trans sucks...

As I said before (then flippantly, now more seriously), yes this is a complicated topic made more so by the discussion of children and transition. But
sensationalizing, fear-mongering, and irrationally banning things because technically my kid COULD (with a shitty dr and a slight suggestion) get GAC is just going to make things worse.