When psychologist John Money first proposed his theory that gender identity is a product of social conditioning, he didn’t just write about it—he experimented on children. His infamous and tragic case study of David Reimer, a biologically male child raised as a girl after a botched circumcision, became the centerpiece of his so-called “success story.” Money claimed it proved that nurture triumphs over nature. In reality, it proved the exact opposite.

David, forced to live as “Brenda,” rejected his imposed identity, endured years of psychological torment, and ultimately died by suicide. His story is not just a chilling case study of unethical science, but a resounding warning: biological reality cannot be overwritten by social theory.

Yet despite this very public failure, modern gender ideology continues to charge forward on the same foundational error: that identity can be constructed independently of biology. Why? And at what cost?

The case that exposed the truth

David Reimer’s story, once hailed by Money as proof of his theory, now stands as its most damning indictment. After a botched circumcision in infancy, David’s parents were persuaded by Money to raise him as a girl. The psychologist insisted that if the child was never told the truth and was “properly socialized,” he would live a happy, healthy life as a female.

Trusting the expert, David’s parents complied—for his sake. This rationale still echoes today, as parents consent to gender-transition treatments for their children, despite the catastrophic outcome of the Reimer case.

From the beginning, David resisted the imposed identity. He rejected dresses, gravitated toward “boy” toys, and was repulsed by being treated as a girl. His internal sense of self—his biological identity—persisted. It wasn’t learned; it was innate.

On The Oprah Winfrey Show, David’s mother expressed her regret, recalling how she used to tell him he was just a “tomboy” to ease his confusion. But that comfort never came.

The pain of being lied to

When David was finally told the truth as a teenager—that he had been born male and unknowingly subjected to a social experiment—he transitioned back to living as a boy. But the damage had already been done.

On Oprah, David shared how deeply betrayed he felt:

“You feel like you’ve been lied to. You feel like you’re not a person. You’re just a kind of lab rat. You just feel worthless.”

His words cut through the ideological haze: denying biological reality in the name of theory can cause devastating harm.

No amount of social conditioning could suppress who he truly was. His life proves what ideology tries to ignore—nature does, in fact, have a say.

Why are we still repeating this?

Given the weight of David’s story, one might expect today’s society to handle gender identity with caution—especially when children are involved. But instead, we are watching a revival of Money’s flawed theory in real time.

Today’s gender ideology repeats the same claims: that gender is a social construct, that children are blank slates, and that biology doesn’t matter. Kids as young as three are being encouraged to question their gender, schools are socially transitioning minors without parental consent, and medical professionals are prescribing puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to preteens.

The premise? “Gender is how you feel.” And the body? Just a canvas to be reshaped.

But if David’s story teaches us anything, it’s this: identity cannot be manufactured. And no amount of “affirming” language can change reality.

The blinding power of ideology

Why does this continue? Because when ideology becomes dogma, it blinds us.

The modern gender movement is not just about inclusion—it’s about reshaping how we understand reality itself. If biology is inconvenient, it must be reinterpreted. If outcomes are negative, they must be ignored.

American scientific journals are now hesitant to publish research on the risks of gender transition. Scandinavian countries, by contrast, have begun sounding the alarm—acknowledging the harm in transitioning minors.

John Money didn’t abandon his theory when David suffered. He doubled down. He published false success reports, ignoring the signs of psychological distress. Some defend him, saying David seemed fine at the time. But David later confirmed Money knew otherwise—and reported it as a success anyway.

Institutionalizing a lie

Today, that same blind commitment has been institutionalized—woven into school curricula, HR manuals, medical protocols, and pediatric clinics.

It promises liberation and authenticity, but often delivers confusion, regret, and a lifetime of medical dependency.

The growing wave of detransitioners—people who regret medical transition—should be a red flag. Instead, it’s brushed off as irrelevant.

Who pays the price?

There’s an eerie silence around the harm being done. David’s emotional suffering during Money’s experiment went ignored. Today, young people facing regret after transition are dismissed in the same way.

Transition is sold as a solution to distress. But for many, it only compounds it. Meanwhile, minors are rushed through irreversible treatments with minimal psychological evaluation.

When detransitioners speak out, they’re told they were never “really” trans to begin with. In other words, the movement absolves itself of responsibility—even as it drives vulnerable individuals toward unnecessary interventions.

Where is the accountability?

Reclaiming reality

We must stop pretending that identity is infinitely malleable. While gender expression can vary, biological sex is not a feeling—it is a fact. Our chromosomes, anatomy, and hormones are not suggestions. They are truth.

David Reimer’s story is more than a cautionary tale about unethical science. It is a call to humility: biology matters. And ignoring it doesn’t affirm someone’s identity—it erases it.

We owe it to David—and to today’s children—to end this cycle. To tell the truth. To protect the vulnerable.

Because biology isn’t bigotry.

 It’s clarity.

And clarity is what those considering life-altering treatments deserve most.