Category: Gender Science

Posted on

‘You Cannot Change Sex’: Veteran NHS Doctor Challenges Gender Medicine

Step into the Light

In a strongly worded open letter, Dr. Joseph Chrysostom warns young people against what he calls “deceptive” gender medical practices, including irreversible surgeries and hormone treatments. He claims these interventions do not create functioning sexual organs, but rather permanent wounds and dependencies on the medical system. He also accuses institutions of failing to protect youth and predicts growing accountability in the years ahead.

Open Letter to British Youth Considering Gender Surgery

Dear Young People, I am Dr. Joseph Chrysostom, a medical doctor who has served in the NHS for over 25 years. I am writing to you out of deep concern and genuine care — to warn you about what I believe to be some of the most harmful and deceptive medical practices currently happening in our country. These include the use of cross-sex hormones and surgeries such as vaginoplasty, orchidectomy, and phalloplasty, offered both within and outside the NHS. What I write here reflects my professional opinion and sincerely held belief based on my knowledge of human biology and surgical practice.

You have been told that you can “change sex.” But biologically, that is impossible. Every one of your body’s trillions of cells carries either XX or XY chromosomes — a genetic signature that cannot be altered by hormones or surgery. To claim otherwise is, in my view, deeply misleading. Any doctor or institution promising to “feminise” or “masculinise” the human body without changing its DNA is, in effect, deceiving you.

I believe this deception began early — in schools, through Relationship and Sex Education materials that claimed gender is fluid and that sex is “assigned at birth.”

That is false. Sex is determined at conception, and by the seventh week of foetal development, it is already biologically clear whether a person is male or female. By teaching that doctors might have “assigned” you the wrong sex, these materials planted a dangerous idea — one that could easily take hold during adolescence, a time when self-doubt and confusion are common.

In my view, this was not education but indoctrination. Schools were instructed to hide these matters from parents — the very people best placed to support you through emotional confusion. This isolation mirrors the pattern seen in cult-like ideologies: separating young people from those who love them most. Once detached from parental guidance, vulnerable youth become easy targets for ideologues and, later, for those in medicine who profit from these falsehoods. Sadly, some doctors, surgeons, endocrinologists and psychologists — knowingly or not — have become part of this system.

Cross-sex hormones are being prescribed despite well-documented long-term complications. Surgeons have begun to perform irreversible operations on healthy bodies. When challenged, the professional institutions — Royal Colleges, GMC, NHS England, and the Department of Health — all pass responsibility between themselves. No one will say these surgeries are not deceptive. Yet none will take accountability either.

Let me be clear about what these procedures truly involve:

Vaginoplasty does not create a vagina. It creates a deep surgical slit-like narrow space lined with skin. It is a wound tending to heal and contract, not an organ. It lacks the glands, microbiome, glycogen-rich inner lining, acidic pH (to protect against infections) and natural functions of a female reproductive tract.

Phalloplasty does not create a penis. It forms a mound of skin and fat from another part of the body. It cannot perform erection, emission, or ejaculation — the defining functions of male sexual anatomy.

Mastectomy cannot make a female chest into a male one. It leaves irreversible scars and removes healthy breasts permanently leaving you incapable of lactation. These are not restorative surgeries — they are destructive ones. In my opinion, they have the potential to turn healthy young people into lifelong patients, dependent on the medical system for repairs, revisions, and mental health support.

What you truly need is not surgery, but psychotherapy — compassionate, skilled counselling to help you understand and accept your biological reality.

You deserve truth, not ideology. You deserve to be treated with honesty, not with the promise of impossible transformations. I believe that within a few years, many of those who underwent these surgeries will express deep regret — but by then, it will be too late. Lost organs cannot be replaced. The physical and psychological scars are permanent.

I urge you: step away from the conveyor belt that starts in classrooms and ends in operating theatres. Parents and professionals across the world are now awakening to the dangers of gender ideology. Within the next few years this conveyor belt will be empty due to the alertness of current generation of parents.

Accountability is coming. I believe, those who performed, assisted, promoted, or profited from these procedures will one day have to answer for them. Thank you for reading this letter with an open mind. I write not to condemn you, but to protect you — before irreversible harm is done.

With sincerity and concern,
Dr. Joseph Chrysostom,
MBBS, MS (Gen Surg), FRCSEd GMC 5199143

+++

Step into the Light

Posted on

Two Gametes, Two Sexes, and the Truth About Creation

Walk across almost any college campus today and you’ll hear that “sex is a spectrum” or that “male and female are just social constructs.” Yet when you strip away the slogans and look at the science, the truth is simple: there are two gametes, two sexes, and therefore two genders. This isn’t a matter of prejudice—it’s the foundation of biology itself. And it’s a truth that aligns deeply with the Christian understanding of creation.

What the Biologists Are Saying

Carole Hooven, an evolutionary biologist from Harvard, recently wrote in Tablet:

“Sexual reproduction in animals can only occur when two distinct types of gametes (specialized sex cells containing DNA) fuse: the small mobile ones (sperm) and the large immobile ones (eggs). We call animals that produce sperm ‘male’ and those that produce eggs ‘female.’ That’s about it. The bottom line is that there are two gamete types and thus two sexes.” 

Hooven points out that this is not a controversial view in her field. Among mainstream evolutionary biologists, the “gametic view” is the consensus. The controversy, she argues, is political, not scientific.

Francis (Sid) Dougan makes the same case in his paper published in Archives of Sexual Behavior. He explains the evolutionary process called anisogamy, where reproduction depends on the existence of two—and only two—types of gametes. Dougan writes:

“The two-sex system originates in anisogamy: the condition where reproduction involves two distinct gamete morphs, large and small. This evolutionary split is the foundation of ‘female’ and ‘male.’ Claims about ‘third sexes’ misunderstand or misapply this biology.” 

In other words, while there may be rare medical conditions or variations, there is no such thing as a “third sex.” Dougan continues:

“The existence of only two sexes is not a cultural construct, but a biologically constrained inevitability of anisogamous reproduction. As such, there are only two sexes, and there can never be more.” 

Why This Matters

Hooven warns that confusing identity with biology leads to real-world harm:

  • In medicine, ignoring sex differences can obscure crucial data on disease risk and treatment.
  • In sports, blurring the categories of male and female undermines fairness and safety.
  • In law and policy, redefining sex creates ambiguity that destabilizes rights and protections.

As she puts it:

“Facts do matter. The gametic definition matters in science. It’s the only one that applies across all sexually reproducing species. It is indispensable in evolutionary biology, medicine, and public health.” 

A Christian Response

For Christians, none of this should come as a surprise. Scripture is clear from the beginning: “Male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). Creation is not chaotic but ordered, and the existence of two sexes is part of God’s design for life, family, and fruitfulness.

This does not mean we dismiss or mock people who are confused about their identity. Compassion is essential. But compassion must be anchored in truth. To affirm what is false—whether scientifically or biblically—is not love, but harm.

St. Paul reminds us that creation itself reveals God’s order (Romans 1:20). Biology is bearing witness to what Scripture has declared all along. Hooven and Dougan, though not writing from a Christian framework, are echoing the reality that God has woven into creation: there are two gametes, two sexes, two genders.

Conclusion

In a culture that insists everything is fluid, it takes courage to affirm what is fixed. But truth and love belong together. Christians can and must speak with both clarity and compassion: honoring the biological reality of male and female while pointing to the deeper truth that our identity is most fully found in Christ 1For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

Or as Jesus Himself said, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female?” (Matthew 19:4).

There are only two gametes. There are only two sexes. And that is not a problem to overcome but a gift to receive.

SOURCES:

Carole Hooven
Tablet Magazine Article

F. S. Dougan
X-account

Achives of Sexual Behavior

Companion Post

More Than Two Sexes?

+++

Posted on

Speaking for the Body: Medicine, Identity, and the Voice of the Flesh

What is medicine for?

This deceptively simple question sits at the heart of a fierce debate currently playing out in courts, clinics, and the conscience of a culture. A recent case—U.S. v. Skrmetti—confronts this head-on. The lawsuit challenges Tennessee’s law banning medical gender transition procedures for minors. But beneath the legal arguments lies a deeper philosophical fault line:

Is medicine the art of healing a disordered body, or the tool of sculpting a desired identity?

Two Models of Medicine

During oral arguments, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson asked provocative questions: If a teenage girl says, “I don’t want breasts,” is that enough to justify medical suppression of puberty?

That question exposes two competing visions of medicine:

  • The Service Provider Model: The physician delivers treatments to match the patient’s internal sense of self.
  • The Restorative Model: The physician diagnoses and treats real pathologies based on the body’s design and function.

If patient discomfort becomes the metric for medical intervention, anything can be labeled disease—including normal puberty.

Desire Is Not Diagnosis

In her article on Fairer Disputations, Leah Libresco Sargeant argues clearly: wanting something gone does not make it a disease.

A young girl may dislike her breasts due to dysphoria—or due to social pressure, trauma, or confusion. The physician’s job is to discern the difference. A culture that teaches self-avoidance should not be allowed to weaponize medicine against the body itself.

“A good doctor must attend to the body, not simply the feelings about it.” – Leah Libresco Sargeant

Feelings matter, but they are not the final diagnostic authority. Medicine must balance compassion with truth.

Listening to the Body’s Voice

Sargeant reflects personally on her own medical journey. As a teenager, signs of PCOS1PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) is a common hormonal disorder affecting women of reproductive age. It involves a combination of symptoms related to hormonal imbalance, metabolism, and ovarian function. were dismissed as normal. It wasn’t until later—after multiple miscarriages—that the condition was diagnosed.

Her body was speaking clearly. No one listened.

This isn’t just a case of delayed treatment. It’s a paradigm failure. Medicine did not fail to affirm her identity—it failed to honor her body’s reality. True healing requires both discernment and humility.

Medicine Must Be Rooted in Reality

When medicine drifts from diagnosis and healing into affirming personal desires, it risks becoming a mirror of cultural confusion rather than a defender of bodily truth.

We see this elsewhere:

  • Athletes pushed toward surgeries or eating disorders.
  • Cosmetic procedures driven by media-filtered ideals.
  • Adolescents offered radical interventions in response to passing anguish.

The question isn’t just what someone wants—but why they want it. And whether medicine should say yes.

Final Word: Healing, Not Hacking

The body is not a blank canvas. It is not raw material for existential expression. It is a living testimony, created with meaning and wisdom. Our job—especially in medicine—is to listen, learn, and heal.

When medicine speaks for the body, it fulfills its sacred calling.

When it speaks against the body, it becomes something else entirely.

SOURCE: “Speaking for the Body” by Leah Libresco Sargeant on Fairer Disputations.

+++

Stay Human, Speak the Truth