The current craze for surgically mutilating troubled high school girls (Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria) can be looked at another way: as a really slick exercise in negative eugenics. Being nuts is fairly heritable: I have no doubt that many of these girls’ mothers were cutting themselves ( while listening to grunge) back in the 90s. If you remove their ovaries, these girls aren’t going to have descendants: end of story.
Genetic tendencies to insanity in the next generation will be weaker than they otherwise would have been. This approach is far more effective than castrating autogynephilic Decathlon winners and economists, because it’s happening early in the reproductive schedule.
You might think it would be difficult to induce parents to have their daughters spayed, but apparently you can convince bien-pensant liberals of absolutely anything, as long as it’s false. Gotta keep up with the Jim Joneses. They even pay for it!
Generally, negative eugenics has a bad reputation. Deservedly so: usually it was coercive, and people have a right to be left alone. But if you can con them into damaging or destroying themselves, that’s all right. That wouldn’t be possible if people were stuffed full of sense and agency, but of course they’re not. They don’t automatically think for themselves or come to correct conclusions, even on old, long-settled questions. Many of them are saps, really. Sad.
Apparently the real goal of the powers that be is to purge some kinds of insanity from society, rather like Oliver Wendell Holmes: Three generations of lunatics are enough.
Don’t pay attention to what the New York Times says: look at the long-term consequences.