9 ms·

Yes, but there is some middle ground between antisemitism and following what mainstream loves the a given point of time. And right now if someone dares to stick

Yes, but there is some middle ground between antisemitism and following what mainstream loves the a given point of time. And right now if someone dares to stick outside mainstream views this is considered hate speech, anti-XXX, etc. Can we discuss if overweight people should pay more for sits in a plane? Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? I am afraid we no longer can discuss such "uncomfortable" topics because starting such discussion of Facebook or Twitter leads to being "flagged", shadow-banned, because this is hate speech or something-foby or hurts someone's feeling. I see this as a problem as censorship is precisely what pushes people into bubbles that cannot communicate outside and that get more and more radical. You can't have liberal democracy in a bubble society, as there is no respect for opposite opinion, there is only pushing one's agenda as soon as a given bubble wins the election. Democracy becomes just a tirrany of those who managed to win election (which means those who has more money and who has better access to media).

ngcazz 6y ago
It’s tiring to have to repeat that you’re proposing debating the legitimacy of the humanity of certain people as though it merited debate.
- marvin 6y ago
  GP's is not claiming that overweight or transgender people are inhuman. That statement is exactly the type of extremist stance that is causing this debate in the first place. Hell, they aren't even claiming that they are in favor of the points mentioned. Just that it's a bad idea for democratic society to shut down such discussion.
  - CaptArmchair 6y ago
    The problem with those discussions is that they tend to devolve in shouting matches. Why is that? It's because this really is about people's feelings and sentiments on those topics. And those emotions range wildly from totally supportive to indifferent to deeply threatened. While that's all completely valid, voicing your emotions unfiltered on the public Internet in front of an audience of anonymous millions comes with plenty of caveats. It's pretty much like standing up in a crowded, public town square and ranting unfiltered about how you feel personally in no uncertain terms. Or, more insidiously, taking on an appearance of reason and rationality, trying to hide an intention of eliciting an emotional response from others that validates your own feelings. Many people don't take issue with the topic, they take issue with your behaviour. And they will show you their disapproval. Free speech allows you to voice whatever is on your mind, but that doesn't force others to listen to you or give you a platform. Democracy doesn't imply that any and all behaviour is to be tolerated. In real life, such behaviour is relegated to backroom clubs, shady bars and questionable small organizations. The Internet unavoidably hosts their digital equivalent. Moreover, as you can hide behind an anonymous handle on the Internet, move between different platforms fluidly, easily find a platform between thousands that will cater to you,... all of that from the comfort of your couch, really lowers the bar further. The danger in all of this is when all of those digitally pent up negative emotions spill over in public life and starts affecting the very underpinnings that provide security and stability to each and every member society, regardless of who they are.
    - TheRealDunkirk 6y ago
      > It's because this really is about people's feelings and sentiments on those topics. And those emotions range wildly from totally supportive to indifferent to deeply threatened. There's another dimension on top of even this. Nuance and shortcuts to commonly-held understanding, provided by body language and intonation, readily used in spoken discussion, are completely unavailable online. Typing out full, unspoken context for argument points takes far too long. So online discussions distill these deeply, deeply held feelings into a few sentences, which leads to oversimplification of one's own argument, and reductio ad absurdum of the other person's. So while "the internet" gives us this "wonderful" opportunity to discuss things that matter in an open and socialized way, it subtly channels such discussions into the most-hyperbolic form of "discussion" by nature of it being typed. Look no further than Twitter for the "best" example of this phenomenon. #SocialMediaIsDestroyingSociety
- Erwin 6y ago
  Reddit has plenty of discussion about violently overthrowing, imprisoning or murdering anyone anyone who is currently "too rich" like Jeff Bezos. Strangely the American redditor seem unaware that the rest of the world might also claim their wealth.
- concordDance 6y ago
  I find these types of strawman confusing. It's obvious to anyone who reads them that it doesn't even slightly relate to what anyone here has said (not letting someone participate in sporting events where they have a biological advantage is not exactly calling them pigs) but people post them anyway. Is there some sort of costly signalling of membership of some social group (woke group?) going on?
  - eska 6y ago
    If you want to read current psychological research on this I'd suggest this paper. It explores the personality attributes of people who virtue signal and what they have to gain from it in current society, and why that wasn't the case before. The personality types are Machiavellianism, Narcissism, Psychopathy - also referred to as the dark triad. https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ok-et-al.-2020.pdf https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ok-...
  - ngcazz 6y ago
    Simple, I like to be solidaristic and find the _need_ per se to discuss those topics antagonistic to solidarity. I'm not signalling my virtue, but then again, you're free to call my attitude whatever you want, it just demonstrates our values are entirely distinct.
    - concordDance 6y ago
      Problem is you end up forming a link in people's minds between views like yours and strawmen, causing distrust of people like you which will damage your cause.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Icyphox 6y ago
  This is a standard strawman. OP was _not_ suggesting that obese/trans people don't deserve to live.
romwell 6y ago
>Can we discuss if overweight people should pay more for sits in a plane? Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? Those discussions routinely take place on reddit. Google is your friend, buddy.
esperent 6y ago
> Can we discuss if overweight people should pay more for sits in a plane? Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? I am afraid we no longer can discuss such "uncomfortable" topics You can debate those things on reddit without being censored on a lots of subreddits. However, the reason these are such contentious topics is that 99% of the time they are aired it's either people using them to complain about SJW culture, or people trying to stir up shit. The last 1% is people who legitimately care about these people and want to discuss their wellbeing and rights. But I'm putting that in to be generous, I don't think I'm ever seen these topics discussed in good faith. You did not bring them up in good faith, for example, you just used obese and trans people to make a point. I have no reason to think you actually care about them or would ever engage in a conversation about their rights within our society.
- Clampower 6y ago
  The fact that gender critical subreddits were banned, (like LGBdroptheT) where respectful discussion on gay erasure were taking place, speaks volumes. In The current political climate, gay people need to hear from members of their own community that homosexuality is transphobic, because it excludes transpeople. Mainstream gay and lesbian subreddits are teaching lesbians to like "girl dick". A simple joke that gay men need not to worry about getting pregnant is transphobic because WHAT ABOUT TRANS MEN. LGBT communities on reddit are incredibly homophobic, and no community that tries to speak survives. I am So incredibly sad for young gay men and women who are being victimized by their own communit, being told that being attracted to only the same sex is wrong.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - 0dayz 6y ago
    I highly doubt respectful conversations were taking place where phrases like "i don't want to sleep with a Frankenstein monster" was born. So at least be honest about "LGBdroptheT" being transphobic, if you're going to cry homophobia.
pjc50 6y ago
> Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? Trans woman; trans men would be competing in the male competitions, and seem to be invisible in the whole trans debate anyway. The problem with this is that it's almost entirely based on prejudice and people saying things that turn out not to be true, along with vague biological determinism. Hence the Caster Semenya debacle (not trans, intersex AFAB, but high natural testosterone).
- nicoburns 6y ago
  > trans men would be competing in the male competitions, and seem to be invisible in the whole trans debate anyway. Something that was pointed out to me recently that I thought was quite insightful. The greater societal acceptance of trans men compared to trans women seems to parallel the greater societal acceptance of cis women presenting in a masculine way compared to cis men presenting in a feminine way. Which leads to the interesting idea that the key to societal acceptance of trans women may be widening what is considered socially acceptable for cis men.
  - eska 6y ago
    What? How about nobody cares about trans men in male competitions because they are at the bottom, so have no visibility because they don't make it to the big competitions where real money and fame is achieved?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - nicoburns 6y ago
      I think (without endorsing this position), that it's because most people assume trans men would just compete in "female" competitions. To me the truth of the matter is that this is a very complex issue with no simple answers. People altering their physiology through hormones obviously can give them advantages or disadvantages that others don't have. As can having different hormone mixes when growing or through puberty. As indeed can a myriad of other genetic factors. I honestly can't think of a way to make this fair. Do you have any suggestions?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
tokamak-teapot 6y ago
There certainly is a middle ground and I agree it should be protected. In this case, though, the posters on Voat seem to be nowhere near the middle ground and instead wading around in the cesspool of racial hatred.
- eska 6y ago
  He's not saying they're part of the middle ground. He said extreme communities like Voat are the result of not allowing a middle ground and pushing people to one of the extremes.
what2build 6y ago
You’re part of the tyranny who won relative to billions of others. So-called civilized society is using its wealth to expropriate resources from other nations rather than destroy its own land. And poisoning it’s community. But it would be tyranny to stop it, according to the average opinion. Infinitely big little numbers and the cognitive ability to spin in semantic circles often seem like similar concepts to me. But there are consumer clouds to build in and gadgets to dispose of! Don’t tread on me treading on the species at scale! Free speech is great but management of reality for the success of the species should not be left in the rear view mirror. Change in personal agency must be part of the solution, but my free speech!
djs070 6y ago
If you search /r/unpopularopinion or /r/changemyview you’ll find plenty of examples of such topics being discussed.
- eska 6y ago
  I challenge you to do it. You'll instantly be shadowbanned by bots from multiple subreddits, people will actively seek out your posts and point out you're an extremist on unrelated topics (again, triggered by bots pointing you out), and people will use your post history against you in arguments unrelated to whatever you said in those posts.
  - UncleMeat 6y ago
    What challenge? The question of transgender people in sports comes up like three times per week at the top of change my view.
    - secabeen 6y ago
      In case you want to see these discussions, this search shows multiple discussions of exactly this type over the last month: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=sports&restrict_sr=on https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=sports&restri...
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    What are you talking about? Here's a search on r/ChangeMyView for topic of trans people and sports[1]. There's more threads than I can count, and people who say that they think trans people should be segregated have their posts gilded multiple times[2]. That last example was from 3 months ago. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=transgender+sports&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=transgender+s... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/itsq7t/cmv_transwomen_transitioned_postpuberty_shouldnt/ https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/itsq7t/cmv_tr...
cycomanic 6y ago
These comments always reek of hipocrasy. Try having a debate on the existence of God, the legitimacy of the church or even the right of gay people to exist somewhere in rural US, you often get threatened with violence (and I mean the actual physical kind) very quickly. But somehow it's the poor antisemists, or homophobes who complain about being "censored" in these discussions. Two examples of the hipocrasy: John Safran knocking on doors to tell people about atheism in utah: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A1G8nJ2IFjA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A1G8nJ2IFjA And here how Tucker Carlsson reacts to his interviewees challenging him and guess what he never aired it (/s censorship!) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE
- amadeuspagel 6y ago
  The idea that getting told to fuck off by random people is remotely comparable to getting banned from twitter or reddit is a great example of the desperation to point to some hypocrisy to distract from one's own lack of principles.
lordCarbonFiber 6y ago
I love how, in a screed about "censorship killing good faith arguments", you make 2 incendiary claims with no sources to back them up. You're doing the thing, you're the bad faith actor. Here, have an actual source regarding women competing in women's sports. Minus transphobic dog whistling. [0][1][2] Repetition legitimizes and it's way less effort to "have discussions" then actually do the work in debunking them. What is this mainstream you're so worried about defying? Is it the currently accepted academic consensus? Then publish your counter claims, why are all your ideas being wasted on internet debates. If it's just laypeople, then where are your sources to back up your ideas that people can engage with in good faith? [0]“there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.” https://sci- https://sci- hub.tw/10.1007/s40279-016-0621-y [1]“[t]he available, albeit incomplete, evidence makes it highly likely that the sex difference in circulating testosterone of adults explains most, if not all, the sex differences in sporting performance.” https://sci-hub.tw/10.1210/er.2018-00020 https://sci-hub.tw/10.1210/er.2018-00020 [2]“[a]ny athletic advantages a transgender girl or woman arguably may have as a result of her prior testosterone levels dissipate after about one year of estrogen therapy.” https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCLR_TransStudentAthlete%2B(2).pdf https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCLR_TransStudentAt...
- amanaplanacanal 6y ago
  Excellent sources, thank you.
- likeclockwork 6y ago
  You do know that people are not required to take hormones to be considered transgender right? It's not a medical state, it is a social one.
  - lordCarbonFiber 6y ago
    Trans people are required to be on hormones (and even maintain certain levels) to compete in elite sports. See WA and the Olympic committee's rules[0][1] So yeah, not a transmedicalist, just we have existing frameworks for how to balance inclusion and fairness; there's no open question that needs debate around how trans people can compete in sports (unless you get all your cues from South Park i suppose). The only real debate is around what the levels should be and how to avoid retroactively excluding cis women with hyperandrogenism or related conditions. Also just as an aside, like a lot of hypotheticals that get forced onto trans people, there isn't any evidence of this being an issue. Trans people just want to live their lives, medicinally transition if necessary, and exist as regular people. The number of people who both chose not to hormonally transition, and are competing in some kind of sporting event where that matters is small enough to be humanly addressed case by case (if there are any at all). [0]https://www.worldathletics.org/news/press-release/questions-answers-iaaf-female-eligibility-reg https://www.worldathletics.org/news/press-release/questions-... [1] https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Commissions_PDFfiles/Medical_commission/2015-11_ioc_consensus_meeting_on_sex_reassignment_and_hyperandrogenism-en.pdf https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Commissions_PDFfiles/...
andrei_says_ 6y ago
All these are discussed over and over again - if you’re really after discussion go to r/changemyview do a search on your favorite topic an read until you find the argument you’d reward a delta to. Unless you just want to vent.

ngcazz 6y ago

It’s tiring to have to repeat that you’re proposing debating the legitimacy of the humanity of certain people as though it merited debate.

marvin 6y ago
GP's is not claiming that overweight or transgender people are inhuman. That statement is exactly the type of extremist stance that is causing this debate in the first place. Hell, they aren't even claiming that they are in favor of the points mentioned. Just that it's a bad idea for democratic society to shut down such discussion.
- CaptArmchair 6y ago
  The problem with those discussions is that they tend to devolve in shouting matches. Why is that? It's because this really is about people's feelings and sentiments on those topics. And those emotions range wildly from totally supportive to indifferent to deeply threatened. While that's all completely valid, voicing your emotions unfiltered on the public Internet in front of an audience of anonymous millions comes with plenty of caveats. It's pretty much like standing up in a crowded, public town square and ranting unfiltered about how you feel personally in no uncertain terms. Or, more insidiously, taking on an appearance of reason and rationality, trying to hide an intention of eliciting an emotional response from others that validates your own feelings. Many people don't take issue with the topic, they take issue with your behaviour. And they will show you their disapproval. Free speech allows you to voice whatever is on your mind, but that doesn't force others to listen to you or give you a platform. Democracy doesn't imply that any and all behaviour is to be tolerated. In real life, such behaviour is relegated to backroom clubs, shady bars and questionable small organizations. The Internet unavoidably hosts their digital equivalent. Moreover, as you can hide behind an anonymous handle on the Internet, move between different platforms fluidly, easily find a platform between thousands that will cater to you,... all of that from the comfort of your couch, really lowers the bar further. The danger in all of this is when all of those digitally pent up negative emotions spill over in public life and starts affecting the very underpinnings that provide security and stability to each and every member society, regardless of who they are.
  - TheRealDunkirk 6y ago
    > It's because this really is about people's feelings and sentiments on those topics. And those emotions range wildly from totally supportive to indifferent to deeply threatened. There's another dimension on top of even this. Nuance and shortcuts to commonly-held understanding, provided by body language and intonation, readily used in spoken discussion, are completely unavailable online. Typing out full, unspoken context for argument points takes far too long. So online discussions distill these deeply, deeply held feelings into a few sentences, which leads to oversimplification of one's own argument, and reductio ad absurdum of the other person's. So while "the internet" gives us this "wonderful" opportunity to discuss things that matter in an open and socialized way, it subtly channels such discussions into the most-hyperbolic form of "discussion" by nature of it being typed. Look no further than Twitter for the "best" example of this phenomenon. #SocialMediaIsDestroyingSociety
Erwin 6y ago
Reddit has plenty of discussion about violently overthrowing, imprisoning or murdering anyone anyone who is currently "too rich" like Jeff Bezos. Strangely the American redditor seem unaware that the rest of the world might also claim their wealth.
concordDance 6y ago
I find these types of strawman confusing. It's obvious to anyone who reads them that it doesn't even slightly relate to what anyone here has said (not letting someone participate in sporting events where they have a biological advantage is not exactly calling them pigs) but people post them anyway. Is there some sort of costly signalling of membership of some social group (woke group?) going on?
- eska 6y ago
  If you want to read current psychological research on this I'd suggest this paper. It explores the personality attributes of people who virtue signal and what they have to gain from it in current society, and why that wasn't the case before. The personality types are Machiavellianism, Narcissism, Psychopathy - also referred to as the dark triad. https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ok-et-al.-2020.pdf https://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ok-...
- ngcazz 6y ago
  Simple, I like to be solidaristic and find the _need_ per se to discuss those topics antagonistic to solidarity. I'm not signalling my virtue, but then again, you're free to call my attitude whatever you want, it just demonstrates our values are entirely distinct.
  - concordDance 6y ago
    Problem is you end up forming a link in people's minds between views like yours and strawmen, causing distrust of people like you which will damage your cause.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Icyphox 6y ago
This is a standard strawman. OP was _not_ suggesting that obese/trans people don't deserve to live.

romwell 6y ago

esperent 6y ago

> Can we discuss if overweight people should pay more for sits in a plane? Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? I am afraid we no longer can discuss such "uncomfortable" topics You can debate those things on reddit without being censored on a lots of subreddits. However, the reason these are such contentious topics is that 99% of the time they are aired it's either people using them to complain about SJW culture, or people trying to stir up shit. The last 1% is people who legitimately care about these people and want to discuss their wellbeing and rights. But I'm putting that in to be generous, I don't think I'm ever seen these topics discussed in good faith. You did not bring them up in good faith, for example, you just used obese and trans people to make a point. I have no reason to think you actually care about them or would ever engage in a conversation about their rights within our society.

Clampower 6y ago
The fact that gender critical subreddits were banned, (like LGBdroptheT) where respectful discussion on gay erasure were taking place, speaks volumes. In The current political climate, gay people need to hear from members of their own community that homosexuality is transphobic, because it excludes transpeople. Mainstream gay and lesbian subreddits are teaching lesbians to like "girl dick". A simple joke that gay men need not to worry about getting pregnant is transphobic because WHAT ABOUT TRANS MEN. LGBT communities on reddit are incredibly homophobic, and no community that tries to speak survives. I am So incredibly sad for young gay men and women who are being victimized by their own communit, being told that being attracted to only the same sex is wrong.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- 0dayz 6y ago
  I highly doubt respectful conversations were taking place where phrases like "i don't want to sleep with a Frankenstein monster" was born. So at least be honest about "LGBdroptheT" being transphobic, if you're going to cry homophobia.

pjc50 6y ago

> Can we discuss if a trans male who identifies herself to be a woman should be allowed to take part in female sport competition (box, running)? Trans woman; trans men would be competing in the male competitions, and seem to be invisible in the whole trans debate anyway. The problem with this is that it's almost entirely based on prejudice and people saying things that turn out not to be true, along with vague biological determinism. Hence the Caster Semenya debacle (not trans, intersex AFAB, but high natural testosterone).

nicoburns 6y ago
> trans men would be competing in the male competitions, and seem to be invisible in the whole trans debate anyway. Something that was pointed out to me recently that I thought was quite insightful. The greater societal acceptance of trans men compared to trans women seems to parallel the greater societal acceptance of cis women presenting in a masculine way compared to cis men presenting in a feminine way. Which leads to the interesting idea that the key to societal acceptance of trans women may be widening what is considered socially acceptable for cis men.
- eska 6y ago
  What? How about nobody cares about trans men in male competitions because they are at the bottom, so have no visibility because they don't make it to the big competitions where real money and fame is achieved?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - nicoburns 6y ago
    I think (without endorsing this position), that it's because most people assume trans men would just compete in "female" competitions. To me the truth of the matter is that this is a very complex issue with no simple answers. People altering their physiology through hormones obviously can give them advantages or disadvantages that others don't have. As can having different hormone mixes when growing or through puberty. As indeed can a myriad of other genetic factors. I honestly can't think of a way to make this fair. Do you have any suggestions?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

tokamak-teapot 6y ago

There certainly is a middle ground and I agree it should be protected. In this case, though, the posters on Voat seem to be nowhere near the middle ground and instead wading around in the cesspool of racial hatred.

eska 6y ago
He's not saying they're part of the middle ground. He said extreme communities like Voat are the result of not allowing a middle ground and pushing people to one of the extremes.

what2build 6y ago

You’re part of the tyranny who won relative to billions of others. So-called civilized society is using its wealth to expropriate resources from other nations rather than destroy its own land. And poisoning it’s community. But it would be tyranny to stop it, according to the average opinion. Infinitely big little numbers and the cognitive ability to spin in semantic circles often seem like similar concepts to me. But there are consumer clouds to build in and gadgets to dispose of! Don’t tread on me treading on the species at scale! Free speech is great but management of reality for the success of the species should not be left in the rear view mirror. Change in personal agency must be part of the solution, but my free speech!

djs070 6y ago

If you search /r/unpopularopinion or /r/changemyview you’ll find plenty of examples of such topics being discussed.

eska 6y ago
I challenge you to do it. You'll instantly be shadowbanned by bots from multiple subreddits, people will actively seek out your posts and point out you're an extremist on unrelated topics (again, triggered by bots pointing you out), and people will use your post history against you in arguments unrelated to whatever you said in those posts.
- UncleMeat 6y ago
  What challenge? The question of transgender people in sports comes up like three times per week at the top of change my view.
  - secabeen 6y ago
    In case you want to see these discussions, this search shows multiple discussions of exactly this type over the last month: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=sports&restrict_sr=on https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=sports&restri...
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  What are you talking about? Here's a search on r/ChangeMyView for topic of trans people and sports[1]. There's more threads than I can count, and people who say that they think trans people should be segregated have their posts gilded multiple times[2]. That last example was from 3 months ago. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=transgender+sports&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/search?q=transgender+s... [2] https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/itsq7t/cmv_transwomen_transitioned_postpuberty_shouldnt/ https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/itsq7t/cmv_tr...

cycomanic 6y ago

These comments always reek of hipocrasy. Try having a debate on the existence of God, the legitimacy of the church or even the right of gay people to exist somewhere in rural US, you often get threatened with violence (and I mean the actual physical kind) very quickly. But somehow it's the poor antisemists, or homophobes who complain about being "censored" in these discussions. Two examples of the hipocrasy: John Safran knocking on doors to tell people about atheism in utah: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A1G8nJ2IFjA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A1G8nJ2IFjA And here how Tucker Carlsson reacts to his interviewees challenging him and guess what he never aired it (/s censorship!) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6_nFI2Zb7qE

amadeuspagel 6y ago
The idea that getting told to fuck off by random people is remotely comparable to getting banned from twitter or reddit is a great example of the desperation to point to some hypocrisy to distract from one's own lack of principles.

lordCarbonFiber 6y ago

I love how, in a screed about "censorship killing good faith arguments", you make 2 incendiary claims with no sources to back them up. You're doing the thing, you're the bad faith actor. Here, have an actual source regarding women competing in women's sports. Minus transphobic dog whistling. [0][1][2] Repetition legitimizes and it's way less effort to "have discussions" then actually do the work in debunking them. What is this mainstream you're so worried about defying? Is it the currently accepted academic consensus? Then publish your counter claims, why are all your ideas being wasted on internet debates. If it's just laypeople, then where are your sources to back up your ideas that people can engage with in good faith? [0]“there is no direct or consistent research suggesting transgender female individuals (or male individuals) have an athletic advantage at any stage of their transition (e.g. cross-sex hormones, gender-confirming surgery) and, therefore competitive sport policies that place restrictions on transgender people need to be considered and potentially revised.” https://sci- https://sci- hub.tw/10.1007/s40279-016-0621-y [1]“[t]he available, albeit incomplete, evidence makes it highly likely that the sex difference in circulating testosterone of adults explains most, if not all, the sex differences in sporting performance.” https://sci-hub.tw/10.1210/er.2018-00020 https://sci-hub.tw/10.1210/er.2018-00020 [2]“[a]ny athletic advantages a transgender girl or woman arguably may have as a result of her prior testosterone levels dissipate after about one year of estrogen therapy.” https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCLR_TransStudentAthlete%2B(2).pdf https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCLR_TransStudentAt...

amanaplanacanal 6y ago
Excellent sources, thank you.
likeclockwork 6y ago
You do know that people are not required to take hormones to be considered transgender right? It's not a medical state, it is a social one.
- lordCarbonFiber 6y ago
  Trans people are required to be on hormones (and even maintain certain levels) to compete in elite sports. See WA and the Olympic committee's rules[0][1] So yeah, not a transmedicalist, just we have existing frameworks for how to balance inclusion and fairness; there's no open question that needs debate around how trans people can compete in sports (unless you get all your cues from South Park i suppose). The only real debate is around what the levels should be and how to avoid retroactively excluding cis women with hyperandrogenism or related conditions. Also just as an aside, like a lot of hypotheticals that get forced onto trans people, there isn't any evidence of this being an issue. Trans people just want to live their lives, medicinally transition if necessary, and exist as regular people. The number of people who both chose not to hormonally transition, and are competing in some kind of sporting event where that matters is small enough to be humanly addressed case by case (if there are any at all). [0]https://www.worldathletics.org/news/press-release/questions-answers-iaaf-female-eligibility-reg https://www.worldathletics.org/news/press-release/questions-... [1] https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Commissions_PDFfiles/Medical_commission/2015-11_ioc_consensus_meeting_on_sex_reassignment_and_hyperandrogenism-en.pdf https://stillmed.olympic.org/Documents/Commissions_PDFfiles/...

andrei_says_ 6y ago

All these are discussed over and over again - if you’re really after discussion go to r/changemyview do a search on your favorite topic an read until you find the argument you’d reward a delta to. Unless you just want to vent.