This commentary responds to Moti Gorin's article “What Is the Aim of Pediatric ‘Gender‐Affirming’ Care?” We argue that Gorin's case against pediatric gender‐affirming care rests upon numerous false conceptual binaries: female/male, public/private, objective/subjective, and medically necessary/elective. Drawing on feminist bioethics, we show how such dichotomous thinking is both inaccurate and marginalizing of gender minorities.

Doernberg and Truog (2023) claim that physicians increasingly serve in multiple roles outside the traditional clinical encounter, roles with various and divergent aims that nonetheless “invoke the...

Drawing on comparisons to genetic exceptionalism, Cheung et al. (2025) reject psychedelic exceptionalism—that psychedelics raise unique concerns regarding increased vulnerability and diminished aut...