California governor Gavin Newsom has been making news for himself by posturing anti-Trump resistance while embarking on a media run targeting the fragile egos of the “manosphere.” He’s used his air time to join the chorus of voices calling for rolling back trans rights, telling conservative activist Charlie Kirk that his view “completely aligns” with Kirk’s.
Last month, Newsom continued his tour on the Shawn Ryan Show, agreeing with Ryan’s concerns about medical gender transition before the age of 26 because (as Ryan puts it) “their brain isn’t even fully developed.” In his response, you can almost hear Newsom lurch rightward from concerns about adolescent transition, with an anxious chuckle followed by “Plus, yeah, that’s even further with the brain.”
Newsom’s banal betrayal is striking as the supposedly liberal governor of the state with the largest population of trans Americans (myself included). It is also a continuation of the pseudoscientific bases of anti-trans politics and a gross misunderstanding of basic neuroscience.
Lest you need reminded, Gavin Newsom is not a neuroscientist. Before getting into politics, Newsom started a winery backed by an heir of the Getty family. Fortunately, developmental neurobiology is my field of research. This commonly reported neuroscientific axiom is largely misunderstood.
During puberty, the brain does “rewire” itself by reorganizing the brain’s circuitry, making this an attractive area of study. In conducting these studies, researchers have to make somewhat arbitrary decisions on when in a subject’s life the study will occur. For example, a study using MRI technologies to measure human brain activity across adolescence is expensive. It can’t go on infinitely, so researchers must decide at what age to stop taking these measurements.
Some studies have tracked continued changes in brain outputs up to age 25 - but they also didn’t examine brain activity beyond that age. Therefore, they are unable to conclude when the brain stops altering its connectivity. In this way, 25 (a pop neuro myth and the age which Newsom and Ryan were referencing) is just an arbitrary age.
In reality, the specialized ability of the brain (and the entire nervous system) is to consistently change its activity throughout life based on one’s experiences. This includes learning, memory, and forgetting. This neural fluidity is influenced by age but not dependent on it — you can teach an old dog new tricks (if the dog is willing to learn).
I think of development and aging as a continuum. A body is built, then maintained over time. Often, it adapts. Sometimes, it gets damaged. At no point is development ever complete because in life, the only constancy is change.
Similarly, there is no magic age where “concerns” about access to transition will suddenly dissipate. The basic premise of anti-trans politicians limiting transition for adolescents was to start with a politically vulnerable group (minors) and then to manufacture consent to expand restrictions from there. To watch Newsom’s interview with Ryan is to watch the consent be manufactured in real time.
Today, “liberal” parties are not guaranteed to support trans rights. Look no further than the United Kingdom’s ruling Labour Party whose Prime Minister announced (through his spokesperson) that trans women are not women. The UK’s Equality and Human Rights Commission is issuing guidance that trans people should use the restroom of their birth assigned sex/gender.
Despite Labour’s flagging polls behind the far right Reform Party, Newsom appears eager to follow their lead. His tour is not just empty rhetoric. In October 2024, he vetoed a bill which would have expedited medical licensure for trans health care in California. In 2023, he vetoed a bill which would allow judges to protect trans youth from a transphobic parent in custody disputes. This pattern shows a disregard for trans people which predates the 2024 election.
Frankly, it’s hard to believe that Newsom ever ran for California governor touting his record on queer rights. His shift is emblematic of his opportunism in positioning himself as a future presidential candidate, gambling that open transphobia will make him more “electable.”
If Newsom is simply going to laugh and agree with every anti-trans talking point, then he will perpetuate the politics of state paternalism. It doesn’t matter who (Trump, Newsom, or anyone else) limits access to transition because the outcome is the same — the criminalization of trans identity as justified by asinine pseudoscience.
from the archive
