patrick.net

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/lunch-money-saturday-november-8-2025

This year, President Trump issued an executive order reversing the State Department rules, and requiring all newly issued passports to show a person’s biological sex. Period. Lawsuits and injunctions ensued.

The lower court, and then the Court of Appeals, sided with transgender people. They enjoined the revised rule as illegally discriminatory, abusive, and worst of all, transphobic.

But on Thursday, the Supreme Court temporarily approved the Trump rule (6-3), lifting the stay, while lower courts continue to consider the case. In its unsigned emergency order, SCOTUS made three findings:

The Trump policy requiring passports to list “biological sex at birth” does not violate equal protection principles, any more than listing country of origin; the government is just “attesting to a historical fact.”

The challengers had “failed to establish” that the policy “lacks any purpose other than a bare ... desire to harm a politically unpopular group.”

Most significantly, the order explicitly said the administration is likely to succeed on the merits. This is the legal standard for letting the rule take effect pending further litigation, and it sends a strong signal to the lower courts.

In The Times’ story (neatly tucked away in the Travel section), the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex. (“The State Department has not said how it will verify if a person’s birth sex matches the sex listed on their passport,” it sneered, suggesting they’ll have to come out and take a look beneath the skirts for themselves.) They did not mention that the penalty for knowingly lying on a U.S. passport application (18 U.S.C. § 1542) is up to 10 years in federal prison plus a fine of up to $250,000.

Patrick says

"the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex."

How about...
1. An idiot at the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex.
Or
2. An imbecile at the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex.
Or
3. A degenerate at the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex.
Or
4. A traitor at the Times naively wondered how the government could possibly verify a person’s biological sex.

Very high male to female ratio in Alaska, so the men would probably fuck anything short of a Polar Bear.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/following-science-tuesday-november

We might not be out of the transgender woods of insanity yet, but we can hear the highway. The London Times ran a highly ironic story yesterday, headlined, “Transgender women to be banned from all female Olympic events.” Best of all: they did it using science.

“The International Olympic Committee is set to announce a ban on transgender women in female competition early next year,” the Times non-ironically began, “after a science-based review of evidence about permanent physical advantages of being born male.”

This will shock you, so prepare yourselves. The IOC appointed a team of brilliant scientists to study one of the most confounding scientific puzzles in history: are average men stronger than average women?

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/making-lemonade-friday-november-21

“HHS’ 410-page report alleged that gender-affirming care —including puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and gender-affirming surgeries —caused significant, long-term damage.” ...

On January 28th, eight days after taking office, President Trump signed Executive Order 14187, which ordered HHS within 90 days to report on “the existing literature on best practices for promoting the health of children who assert gender dysphoria, rapid-onset gender dysphoria, or other identity-based confusion.” ...

HHS’s report threatens to snuff out big medicine’s lucrative industry around elective procedures _for children_.

The report demolishes the “Gender Dysphoria” (GD) industry. It is careful and comprehensive. It exposes the whole sordid game as unscientific. “The diagnostic criteria for GD are based solely on subjective reports and behavioral observations in patients with no objective physical pathology,” it clinically and correctly stated. “There are no verifiable physiological or biochemical markers —such as abnormal imaging, lab, or clinical findings— to confirm the GD diagnosis.”

And yet these doctors, without any clinical confirmation, want to perform permanent surgeries with potential complications on children— procedures that are even more risky and horrifying than the one that produced Jeffrey Epstein’s disfigured dongle.

For a single example, one ‘transfemale’ died after ‘her’ vaginoplasty from postsurgical necrotizing fasciitis. Ugh. Kids taking hormones show higher levels of cardiovascular complications, including heart attacks and strokes. Many studies show very high levels of surgical regret, and even post-surgical suicide.

Stop messing around with people’s genitals. ...

Ironically, the AAP and other medical groups complained that they must operate “free from political interference”— apparently having amnesia about how, for the last five years, they’ve relentlessly scolded everyone for “not following the science” when “the science” was just CDC suggestions.

In a press release on Wednesday, NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya called the report “a turning point for American medicine,” adding that “we are committed to ensuring that science, not ideology, guides America’s medical research.” Always follow the science!

“This is a new day for HHS. It’s a new day for the country,” Admiral Brian Christine, assistant secretary for HHS, told Blaze News. “It is because of President Trump and Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that this information has come out.”

💉 In the end, the real story isn’t just that HHS produced a 410-page blast of white-hot forensic light, aimed straight at one of the most ideologically protected medical rackets in modern memory. The story is who produced it. For the first time in decades, the government’s science agencies are acting like… science agencies. Not marketing departments for pharma. Not cheerleaders for activist guilds. Not nervous hall monitors terrified of upsetting the donors who financed the new stadium.

This report broke formation. It’s an unmistakable signal flare: the old capture model is cracking. The mandarins who once demanded ritual compliance are suddenly facing a bureaucracy that, at least in part, remembers it has an investigative function. And the moment that happens — the moment evidence stops bowing to guild catechisms — the con starts to shatter apart.

Call it a restoration, a reckoning, or simply a slow return of adult supervision. But something is shifting. And the people who’ve profited the most from confusion, silence, and fear know it. For the first time in a long time, the alphabet-soup agencies aren’t manufacturing balloons of consent — they’re popping them, along with the moneyed interests invested in the pseudo-science.




Don’t miss the part that really stings the institutional interests: this wasn’t a Substack post, a rogue researcher, or a disgruntled clinician yelling into the wind. This is an official, peer-reviewed, HHS publication — stamped, numbered, and signed by the very agency that once carried water for the gender-medicine guild.

Now, every lawyer representing an injured patient, every parent blindsided by a catastrophic complication, can walk into discovery with a federally sanctioned, peer-reviewed document saying what the medical cartels insisted could never be said: that the entire diagnostic framework rests on subjective impressions, that no objective pathology exists, that the evidence base is weak, and that the risks are grave.

In malpractice litigation, that’s solid gold. It’s an engraved invitation to ask juries the critical question: “Why was the hospital doing irreversible surgeries on minors when federal regulators warned them the science was junk?”

Hospitals know exactly how dangerous that is. So do insurers. So do the academics who built their careers on affirm-only dogma. They’re suddenly staring down the barrel of a government report that not only undercuts their talking points but becomes a plaintiff’s Exhibit A.

The liability clock just started ticking loudly.

It almost gives me hope that the government health agencies do have a purpose. Here, their purpose was to collapse pseudo-scientific “consensus” and let some sunlight into the debate. Kudos to Trump and his team.

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/majority-of-nih-transgender-programs

Majority of NIH Transgender Programs Cut

Harvard laments loss of funds while parents and sane doctors breathe sigh of relief

Among many favorable moves by the Trump administration has been the new stance towards transgender medicine which has been shown to be harmful to children resulting in sterilization, disfigurement, increased psychiatric problems, and worsened mortality.

A new paper from Harvard by Miller et al, however, laments the loss of research funding to institutions doing transgender research. ...

The authors show no insight into why research funding was cut. Nor do they understand most of the projects were dealing with harms of their work. Instead they articulate aims of securing independent funding and continuing this diabolical course of human research.

From my perspective is the best way to stop the harms from transgender medicine is to stop funding altogether. This will be the the most expedient course to discourage this heinous line of new clinical medicine and surgery and bring organizations like Harvard back to some semblance of reality.