OneMeaningManyNames @ whydudothatdrcrane @lemmy.ml

Full time smug prick

---

Read more

Posts

53

Comments

386

Joined

1 yr. ago

Like gender identity interacts with the chemistry of the drug somehow? Is it safe if the kid is cis and it is not when the kid is trans? Is there some (well) materialism in gender identity or is this philosophical dualism of some sort?

The prescribed use is to suppress the development of sex features by blocking sex hormones, so how is it different?

This is just fear mongering.

And they also say nothing about

circumcision

intersex infant normalization surgeries

ongoing breast enhancement surgeries for cis girls

Republicans did not ban those, nor they did minor marriages, but I will keep to the surgery related arguments.

At the same time, puberty blockers for cis kids with precocious puberty goes on as before. They only designate the transgender use as "off-license" with unknown long term side-effects.

How the fuck gender identity is supposed to interact with the exact same drug? This is pure hokum.

But you know the problem is that only you and me will read that. Vast majority of people are spoonfed transphobic propaganda from TERFs and Xitter. It is sickening how hard it is to get those simple talk points across nowadays.

Here, from 16:15 onward Vaush (I don't vouch for the guy BTW) disects an way earlier article poisoned with the flawed logic about puberty blockers https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=HhYruaFZEOI Just for people curious for how long this disinformation has been going on.

Republicans just want this fact suppressed. Everywhere you look, puberty blockers are presented as bad as genital surgery. They want to make it sound scary and overly artificial, like "toxic levels of hormones to go against the grain of the natural process". This part they don't actually say out loud but it is implied. Every outlet that fails to make clear that puberty blockers is a well established intervention for cis and trans kids alike, they are part of the TERF propaganda apparatus right enough.

Interesting, I will check those out. For the record, I phrased my way so to not be conviction specific or even religion specific. I would like to see questions exploring different religions, so perhaps queer theology is the closest. Sad that this should sent someone back to reddit though.

You might be overgeneralizing. I have never posted anything religion related exactly because I see how religious people are treated online, and you know it just felt like shutting up for LGBTQ+ issues in school because speaking up would get you in trouble too. Sounds like bullying to me. Also, atheists shit on all religious people unprovoked in their own niches, like all the time.

So yes, exactly the fact that many religions are anti-LGBT is a point of identity conflict for many people. Some LGBTQ+ people might have been religious before realizing or coming out. So this is a point of discussion in itself. And most leftish people wouldn't really care to have it. Ergo, a need for a "space."

"All property is theft" is a well-known anarchist adage. I first heard of it when I was like... in my earliest introduction to anarchist ideas. I am genuinely surprised you have never heard of it.

In general I agree with other responders, in that it is best to let them explain their bigotry. Having said that, and for the record:

• a stealth trans woman will face misogynist discrimination at work
• a non-stealth trans woman will face transmisogynist discrimination at work
• a stealth trans man might be able to take advantage of passing privilege and male privilege combined [^1]
• a non-stealth trans man will face transphobic and misogynist discrimination at work

If any of the above people are non heteronormative they will face homophobic discrimination either way.

Let alone that these legal transition procedures are wildly imperfect, and it would be unreasonable to assume that a person can as easily transition in law as they imply. In fact it might take years and $$ just to get just the most important paperwork done[^2]. And then what? Do they think that legal name change is like a Permanent Polyjuice Filter that allows you perfectly pass and live as the other gender?? P r e p o s t e r o u s

Besides, why would anyone transition in paper if they are not transgender? This is the most basic comeback. Ask them "Why don't you switch genders then? Grass might be greener on the other side.[^3]" They will probably respond "But I am not trans". "Neither am I", continue, "I just want equality at work, trans rights included".

(Source: Old social studies coursework on transgender issues, but some info might be outdated.)

[^{1]: This is not to mean that he might face other types of discrimination in different settings, like reproductive health. [}2]: And don't even ask about non-binary provisions, more often than not they are not any. [^3]:You might also be better looking as a lady than what you look now, lmao, no just kidding don't say that.

This

These are chemicals found in every single human, how can you think they cause insanity? Also environmental stressors play a big role on mental health issues, but what you call "insanity" might be better defined as neurotransmitter imbalance, and it has not a lot to do with sex hormones, but a totally different set of chemicals.

Fallacy means sth in the effect of "cognitive illusion" as in "logical fallacy", not a rhetorical strategy. The difference is the intent of the speaker. A rhetorical strategy can be deceptive, or tactically motivated, a logical fallacy is more like a form of apparent naivete and common paradoxes. When there is intent to deceive and/or win at all costs, there is "prevarication" or "sophistry" instead of "fallacy".

a “put your money where your mouth is” fallacy

Is this a "fallacy" or is it an "angle"? Probably it is little more than straw-man attack, because you know even homeless people need actual homes not just places to crash, and it is also a form of ad hominem attack that typically targets progressive/social change demands (do you really hear that often the opposite, like "if you hate homeless people that much, why don't you support gassing them?"). I don't know if people call those fallacies these days, I tend to see them as tactical conversational attacks. A fallacy is sth you can easily fool yourself with.

we risk being excluded entirely

I misread "being executed entirely".

Oh. Wait.

They do not matter at all.

I beg to disagree. If "useless internet points" don't matter, why is there a billion dollar marketing industry surrounding them? I mean all kinds of data mining conducted on all forms of internet reactions. People are paid good money to crunch these types of numbers, including who is casting the votes (man, woman, white, black, American, not-American, liberal, conservative, etc, etc). Then there is the troll/astroturfing angle. There are different types of campaigns that pay drones to upvote or downvote stuff, for marketing purpose or state-actor agendas.

Sure basing your self-esteem on internet points is harmful and useless, but seeing internet reactions as a narcissist fuel only is also naive and misleading. Given the OP wants to get genuine feedback to his opinions to use as a political or moral compass, the question of the feedback quality is not moot at all.

It should have no bearing on your life what so ever.

The feedback quality is also indeterminate. We can't know the proportion of astroturf, spooks/trolls, and genuine users in any upvote/downvote score and/or reaction. This can lead to a situation where the feedback to your opinions is always muddy, and vague. Do my opinions suck or is this their problem? In real life you won't get honest feedback to your opinions anyway, for reasons of politeness. I read once this is why conspiracy theories thrive in Facebook more than Twitter (old study), because a network of acquaintances will not challenge your BS, but a crowd of strangers will.

For all these reasons I think the OP's question is a valid problem we don't yet have good answers to. And it is relevant to any platform, Lemmy included.

There is basically one thing that people should prevent fascists from doing, and that is getting hold of the state apparatus. Once the army, police, health, education and social services are under far right control there is no horror we can put past them.

Um... the trend is to criminalize research on climate change if conservatives win in November.

Everyone knows what a witch hunt means. And almost everyone knows how to not feed the troll. It is insane that you succumbed to any idiot suggesting that "witch hunt" would demonize trans students. By the same coin, when Trump talked of his impeachment as "witch hunt", he did not come out as a witch, did he? This is preposterous.

So this is what Vulcanization is? Are you weirdly worked up about this topic?

Like all these people were happily Yugoslavs and somebody fueled the** different nationalisms** in them to break them up? How does this** compare even remotely** to the American situation?

In America you have several states that oppress their own people because they stand fundamentally against constitutional democracy, freedom of religion, abolition of slavery, gender equality, climate science, endocrinology, ...add here whatever the average christofascist hates in order to feel righteous and murderous.

In that they explicitly want to undo modernity and bring society back to the Dark Ages, they are basically the equivalent of the Islamic State in every aspect, except for the flavor of Abrahamic OS they run on their state apparatus.

So instead of telling normal people (leftists, scientists, muslims, gay, trans, intersex) to tolerate those weird freaks, why don't you go preach to oppressed Arab populations to find some common ground with ISIS, and GTFO ?

Some call it Vulcanization, others call it Deprogramming the Trump Cult victims and rehabilitate them into the decent society, if possible.