4 ms·

I 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 deplatfo

by eloff 6y ago

I 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 ago
Wow dude, being trans is not a "contagion of the mind". This is wildly and dangerously hateful.
- hirundo 6y ago
  It 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 ago
    Oops, 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 ago
      The reassessment doesn't invalidate the original study at all.
  - throwaway33339 6y ago
    This 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 ago
  That's not what the GP said. Let's try to be fair.
- eloff 6y ago
  I actually explained why this is often, but not always, a contagion of the mind. I'll spell it out for you "dude": If there's some property "being trans" which functions like we think "being gay" does, either set biologically or early on in life or some combination of those, then you expect this property to be relatively randomly distributed in the population. What you see instead is one teenage girl transitions and then her friends are far more likely to also transition. The effect clusters around social relationships. Hence it's a social contagion of the mind. Again not in all cases, I'm not denying there are real trans people out there who benefit from transitioning. Dr. Debrah Soh lays the argument out in much greater detail and with supporting citations in her book: https://www.amazon.ca/End-Gender-Debunking-Identity-Society/dp/1982132515 https://www.amazon.ca/End-Gender-Debunking-Identity-Society/...
jdashg 6y ago
This 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 ago
  Actually, 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 ago
  If 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 ago
  You 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 ago
    The mainstream approach is blockers not HRT.

by eloff 6y ago

gilrain 6y ago

Wow dude, being trans is not a "contagion of the mind". This is wildly and dangerously hateful.

hirundo 6y ago
It 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 ago
  Oops, 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 ago
    The reassessment doesn't invalidate the original study at all.
- throwaway33339 6y ago
  This 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 ago
That's not what the GP said. Let's try to be fair.
eloff 6y ago
I actually explained why this is often, but not always, a contagion of the mind. I'll spell it out for you "dude": If there's some property "being trans" which functions like we think "being gay" does, either set biologically or early on in life or some combination of those, then you expect this property to be relatively randomly distributed in the population. What you see instead is one teenage girl transitions and then her friends are far more likely to also transition. The effect clusters around social relationships. Hence it's a social contagion of the mind. Again not in all cases, I'm not denying there are real trans people out there who benefit from transitioning. Dr. Debrah Soh lays the argument out in much greater detail and with supporting citations in her book: https://www.amazon.ca/End-Gender-Debunking-Identity-Society/dp/1982132515 https://www.amazon.ca/End-Gender-Debunking-Identity-Society/...

jdashg 6y ago

This 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 ago
Actually, 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 ago
If 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 ago
You 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 ago
  The mainstream approach is blockers not HRT.