I'm not convinced Mason Deaver talked to a single trans man before writing this book. 

A 16 year old got top surgery at least a year or two prior to the book starting, despite most doctors even refusing to do this type of surgery on people younger than 16. No to mention it sounds like he got on T around the same time as he got top surgery, which for the amount of chest growth he probably had doesn't make sense. T doesn't remove chest growth, but it can deflate it a bit with fat redistribution, so it could have been unnecessary for him to get top surgery at all. The fact Neil wore binders briefly is mentioned, but it's talked about like it's a horrible decision. I do think there's wording used is just bad, but it's a serious oversight of how it could be read ("It's like the short period when I wore a binders briefly, before I did the proper research, when I put myself in danger by binding too tightly for too long").

The author also switches between saying Neil is on patches or shots. These are two very different forms of administering testosterone, and while both are effective and he could have changed what he uses, they're both talked about in the present sense. Plus, where is a 16 year old trans kid getting testosterone in North Carolina? It's not exactly the most friendly state, and testosterone is a regulated substance.

Deaver also is absolutely horrible about the relationship this trans boy has with his mom. The mom is said to "just throw" him into medical transitioning and it's made to sound like he wasn't even entirely sure he wanted it in the first place, he just knew he was a boy. Transphobes love to say that trans boys don't know who we are, that we're forced by our parents, so to have this in here is a deep oversight. Plus Neil says he finally got the attention he craved from his mom when he came out, and given trans people in general are called attention seekers this is a horrible thing to include.

Even the premise of this book, outside of trans issues, doesn't make sense. A 16 year old is in a friends-with-benefits situation. The same child when he was 14 somehow was sneaking into clubs and stole a car. To me this would make more sense for a college student, not a literal child.

Furthermore on the friends-with-benefits, Neil is somehow made to feel like he owes him an apology for not loving him. (He's also made to apologize to his mom for calling her out on never defending him against transphobia or how she raised him). I absolutely hated Neil throughout the whole book and thought he was a brat, but those two things he did made sense to me and somehow those are the only two things other characters think he did wrong.

This book was a strong hate read after the first few pages. I don't recommend bothering with it.