The Myth of “Both Sides”: AJC’s Ongoing Failure to Address Women’s Realities

Radical feminist voices remain absent as the AJC frames gender ideology as a partisan issue

I’ve always respected the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and the talented political reporters whose work sheds light on critical issues with integrity. That’s why it’s disappointing to see them approach the topic of gender ideology in a way that feels reductive and one-sided. Their recent episode of Politically Georgia claims to explore “both sides” of the transgender debate in Georgia politics but ultimately falls into the trap of false neutrality—presenting a carefully curated narrative that excludes critical perspectives and obscures the real stakes.

A Narrow Frame

The podcast framed gender ideology as a simple partisan battle between Republicans and Democrats, reducing a complex issue to political theater. By positioning the discussion this way, the hosts ignored the voices of radical feminists, gender-critical thinkers, and others who affirm the reality of biological sex and often challenge gender ideology from a leftist perspective. These voices, which emphasize the harms to women, girls, and vulnerable children, are inconvenient for mainstream media narratives but essential for a full understanding of the issue.

Instead, the podcast invited a male conservative lobbyist, Cole Muzio, to argue against medicalized interventions for children and the inclusion of males in women’s sports. While Muzio’s use of biologically accurate language and acknowledgment of social contagion were refreshing, his role as the sole voice challenging gender ideology reinforced a harmful narrative: that only conservatives—and only men—are advocating for the protection of women’s sex-based rights and children’s well-being. This framing is not just misleading; it actively erases decades of feminist work that has warned about the dangers of gender ideology.

Euphemisms and Lack of Scrutiny

The podcast leaned heavily on euphemistic language like “gender-affirming care,” obscuring the harsh realities of what this term entails: pharmaceutical and surgical interventions that alter children’s sex traits. Dr. Jason Schneider, the physician featured, repeated the oft-debunked claim that puberty blockers merely “pause puberty.” There was no acknowledgment of the serious, irreversible consequences these drugs can have, nor any inclusion of perspectives from detransitioners or other critics of these practices.

When detransitioners were briefly mentioned, Schneider dismissed their experiences with the overused “knee surgery regret” comparison, trivializing the lifelong harm these individuals endure. This wasn’t journalistic inquiry—it was a platform for Schneider to defend a practice he profits from, without meaningful pushback or alternative viewpoints.

Even more troubling was the false equivalency drawn between taxpayer-funded sex-trait modification procedures for inmates and providing medication for conditions like diabetes or high blood pressure. This comparison reveals a lack of critical scrutiny that is hard to reconcile with the AJC’s purported journalistic standards.

Ignoring the Reality of Women’s Sports

The podcast’s treatment of trans-identified male athletes in women’s sports exemplifies its pattern of reducing real harms to abstract political debates. Mitchell claimed that such athletes don’t have a natural advantage over females—an assertion that defies reality and credible research.

Nigut added that there’s no evidence of trans participation in Georgia’s women’s sports, but this ignores clear precedents from other states. For example, South Carolina made similar claims before enacting the Save Women’s Sports Act in 2022, only for it to later emerge that Blaire Fleming, a male athlete on Coastal Carolina University’s women’s volleyball team, had been competing all along. The podcast’s failure to engage with these material realities highlights its reluctance to confront inconvenient truths.

The Harrell Family and Legislative Bias

Georgia Democratic Senator Sally Harrell shared her story as the parent of two trans-identified children, framing her personal experiences as central to her legislative approach. While her perspective as a mother is valid, her reliance on her transgender-identified children’s insights raises concerns about the balance between personal experience and broader policymaking responsibilities. Harrell dismissed sex-based protections as “primitive,” an insult to the generations of women who fought for fairness in sports, safety in shelters, and dignity in prisons.

Harrell also noted that both of her children came out as transgender post-puberty, a pattern consistent with social contagion among adolescents. Yet this significant point went unexplored and the podcast allowed her narrative to stand unchallenged. This omission reinforced a reductive portrayal of gender ideology as a natural evolution of societal progress rather than the contested and harmful belief system it is.

False Neutrality Harms Women and Girls

The AJC positioned this episode as a balanced exploration of transgender issues, but balance requires more than presenting two opposing sides. It demands a willingness to engage with the full spectrum of perspectives, including those that challenge the mainstream narrative. By excluding radical feminist voices and failing to scrutinize the claims of its guests, the podcast perpetuated false neutrality—a pretense of fairness that ultimately obscures the harms caused by gender ideology.

This isn’t just a disservice to journalism; it’s a disservice to the women, girls, and children whose lives are directly impacted by these policies. If the AJC wants to claim the mantle of balanced reporting, it must do better. It’s time to move beyond curated debates and engage with the material realities of those most affected. Georgia’s women and girls deserve nothing less.