4 ms·
Am I the only one who thinks it's incredibly toxic and anti-science when campaigners for transgender rights attempt this kind of censorship and deplatforming?
by 0xy 6y ago
Am I the only one who thinks it's incredibly toxic and anti-science when campaigners for transgender rights attempt this kind of censorship and deplatforming?
If people can't even question the science, treatments or effects on children then it feels like a political ideology is at the wheel.
I've noticed this online in traditionally liberal-leaning forums. There's no room for nuance in discussion without being the recipient of vicious attacks, deplatforming or bans. If the case for transgender rights is so strong, you should not need these tactics to make your case. Make your case, don't attack those who respectfully question the policies and science.
- jskdvsksnb 6y agoWhat exactly is there to question about the "science and treatments"? I'm curious what these totally rational questions are.
- eloff 6y agoI agree, I've got nothing against transgender people. I've got a problem with transgender activists going after people like J.K. Rowling, and trying to deplatform her, for her completely reasonable opinions. Fortunately in her case, she's too successful to deplatform, no publishing company is that stupid to turn her away. I'm also deeply horrified what's happening to young girls especially where they are deciding they're trans and transitioning when much of the time they're simply confused teenagers. You merely have to look at how it clusters in friend circles like a contagion of the mind for proof it's a social phenomenon and not a biological one. Adults who should know better are encouraging them to do irrevocable harm to their bodies. I don't care where you fall on trans rights, that's going to be looked upon as a terrible tragedy down the road that we allowed this to happen.
- gilrain 6y agoWow dude, being trans is not a "contagion of the mind". This is wildly and dangerously hateful.
- hirundo 6y agoIt isn't hateful if it's true. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6095578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6095578/ And if it's true it's dangerous to deny.
- gilrain 6y agoOops, you "forgot" this part of the study: >Notice of republication >After publication of this article [1], questions were raised that prompted the journal to conduct a post-publication reassessment of the article, involving senior members of the journal’s editorial team, two Academic Editors, a statistics reviewer, and an external expert reviewer.
- 0xy 6y agoThe reassessment doesn't invalidate the original study at all.
- throwaway33339 6y agoThis is probably the time to plug this wonderful extension [0] that directly warns you, whenever a link to a scholarly article is posted, that said article has had comments on its PubPeer entry. For those who don't know, PubPeer was designed as a kind of forum where people can discuss articles after they're published (with or without a pseudonym). Of course, it almost instantly turned into a place for anonymous whistleblowing and call-outs for fraud, replication failure, etc. So while it's not an absolute rule, an article having one comment or two on PubPeer is usually a middling red flag for that article being generally dubious. The reason I'm talking about all this is that the parent's link has twenty-five (25) comments on PubPeer. See for yourself, read the discussion and make of that what you will. [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/pubpeer/ https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/pubpeer/
- neonate 6y agoThat's not what the GP said. Let's try to be fair.
- 6y ago
- jdashg 6y agoThis whole second paragraph is FUD, as should be obvious from the phasing "irrevocable harm to their bodies". Dismissal as a "social phenomenon" is naive in the extreme, as is the author's revealed ignorance of mainstream medicine's approach to transgender minors.
- 0xy 6y agoActually, there's evidence some of the hormone blocking drugs given to children are not reversible and have serious side effects in some cases, including the loss of bone density. [1] It's my understanding that multiple studies have affirmed this. So your claim of FUD is unfounded in this case. [1] https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l5647/rr-0 https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l5647/rr-0
- newen 6y agoIf they want to transition back, they can’t do it fully since they won’t be able to have children anymore. So technically it is irrevocable harm to their bodies.
- eloff 6y agoYou think taking male hormones as a teenage girl is harmless - you know it can make them sterile right? How about a radical double mastectomy? This has real, irreversible effects. Shame on the adults for pushing parents or forcing parents to accept this, and shame on you for dismissing my very valid concerns as FUD.
- jdashg 6y agoThe mainstream approach is blockers not HRT.
- nick_gur 6y agoHes reasonable with his stance . It's not extreme or radical in any way, and backs it up with personal experience + studies hes read. Oh well
- UncleMeat 6y ago> If people can't even question the science, treatments or effects on children People absolutely can do this. Research is done and presented in journals regularly without controversy. It is just that not all criticism is valid. "I'm criticizing the research" is not an invincible shield that one can hide behind. The research must be methodologically sound and dispassionate. The specific transphobic guests that Rogan has brought on have not done this kind of research.