Hello, World. I'm the Dad of a Trans Kid
Hello, world. I'm the dad of a trans kid.
I first voiced those words about a decade ago. They would have seemed completely foreign to my younger self, but life has a way of reminding us that this beautiful, maddening, largely unpredictable world still has plenty of surprises in store for us.
To this very point, I could never have anticipated the journey my family would be on when our young son made it painfully clear there was something very wrong with his assigned gender. I would spend the last decade and a half dismantling my old worldview and constructing a new one that actually matched with reality. I also watched as enormous political energy and resources were poured into a campaign to dehumanize that child and falsely portray him and the trans community as a threat to God and country.
This podcast series is based on a soon-to-be-published book of the same title. But it is not just about my trans son, although his existence is the reason I'm speaking. It is about a country that has become increasingly addicted to certainty. Certainty about who counts as a real American. About what a real family looks like. About whose children have the right to exist and whose don't. About what God wants and what God forbids and which laws should be written to enforce the answers.
What we could use now, more than ever, is a superpower. Luckily, we already have one. Every one of us. It has just gone largely unrecognized and under-utilized.
Consider for a moment the uniquely human capacities for curiosity and critical thinking—traits that are powerful, transformative, and too often under-appreciated. Traits that in combination, produce the closest thing we have to a superpower. The ability to make informed decisions based on facts and evidence. The ability to see the world as it truly is, while also imagining the possibilities of creating a better world.
This is the superpower we must urgently embrace today if we are to prevent the rise of authoritarian regimes. Regimes that sow fear and rage in an effort to divide us, and that thrive on disinformation and an uninformed public.
Scientific Rebellion is a movement dedicated to restoring critical thinking as a foundational principle of American democracy. To reviving the spirit of curiosity and critical inquiry, that when embraced, has resulted in extraordinary achievements — and that when suppressed, has led to some of the darkest periods in our history. It is a movement unafraid to confront the manufactured certainty currently being weaponized against transgender kids, teachers of honest history, climate experts, and doctors who follow the evidence.
Are you ready?
This is Peter Tchoryk. Welcome, to the rebellion.
Hello, World. I'm the Dad of a Trans Kid
Episode 3: Beginnings
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
In this episode I want to start at the very beginning. Not the beginning of my story. The beginning of the human nervous system, which is where the trouble starts.
In the 1940s, the psychologist Abraham Maslow proposed what is now one of the most widely recognized frameworks in social science — a hierarchy of human needs. At the base of the pyramid sit the most elemental needs: food, water, warmth, rest. Above them sits safety. Only once those foundational needs are met can a human being move upward toward belonging, esteem, and what Maslow called self-actualization — the full realization of one's potential.
The hierarchy has been critiqued and refined over the decades, but its core insight endures. Before we can be wise, generous, curious, or creative, we need to feel safe. Safety is not a luxury. Safety is the precondition for everything else that makes us human.
This is not a metaphorical claim, it is a claim about the architecture of the human nervous system. The amygdala — the small, almond-shaped structure deep in the temporal lobe — is the brain's primary threat-detection system. It responds to perceived danger faster than the conscious mind can process information. It generates the fear response, the fight-or-flight activation, before the prefrontal cortex has had time to evaluate whether the perceived threat is real.
This is adaptive. In the environment in which human beings evolved, the cost of a false alarm was trivial compared to the cost of missing a real threat. Better to run from a shadow that turns out to be a branch than to ignore a shadow that turns out to be a predator. We are the descendants of the ones who ran. The ones who hesitated too long are not our ancestors.
The problem with this architecture is that it was designed for an environment of physical threats, and we live in an environment of social and cognitive threats for which it is poorly suited. The amygdala cannot reliably distinguish between a physical threat to bodily integrity and a social threat to group identity. And the political economy of manufactured certainty exploits this fact systematically.
When political messaging frames LGBTQ people as threats to children, or immigrants as threats to the nation, or secular education as a threat to faith, it is activating a threat-detection system that evolved for lions, not for policy disagreements. The physiological response is similar. Elevated heart rate. Narrowed attention. Reduced capacity for complex reasoning. Increased in-group loyalty. Heightened out-group hostility.
Joseph LeDoux, who has spent his career studying the neuroscience of fear, describes a useful distinction here. There is fear as a first-person subjective experience, and there are the threat-response systems that produce it. The threat-response systems are not infallible. They are, in fact, reliably manipulable. Every political strategist who has ever run a fear-based campaign has understood this.
The question is whether we can, through conscious effort, interrupt the automatic threat response long enough to evaluate whether the perceived threat actually corresponds to anything real. This is supposed to be difficult. The architecture of the system is designed to prioritize speed over accuracy. But it is not impossible — and it is not optional, if we are to govern ourselves by evidence rather than fear.
I would venture that most of the people who support policies that harm LGBTQ youth, that restrict teaching about racial history, that impose religious frameworks on secular governance – are not primarily motivated by malice. They are more likely to be motivated by fear. Genuinely experienced, neurologically real fear, that has been deliberately activated by political messaging designed to exploit the architecture of the threat-response system.
Understanding this does
