7 ms·

> transgender treatments The grandparent post didn't say "transgender treatments" they said "transgender issues." Do you believe that the mere concept of ques

> transgender treatments The grandparent post didn't say "transgender treatments" they said "transgender issues." Do you believe that the mere concept of questioning your gender identity or expression is something that should be kept from the minds of minors?

xethos 1y ago
This isn't an "I believe..." / "Do you believe..." kind of issue though. This is "Will the American State and Federal government impose an increasingly stringent moral compass on the wider internet, over time" Which... the VISA-Mastercard duopoly, backed by American soft power and with an American moral compass, already rather proves that point for anyone that's ever tried to pay for erotica outside the mainstream
- LexiMax 1y ago
  > This isn't an "I believe..." / "Do you believe..." kind of issue though. I asked because I wanted to get a sense on if he conflating the two by accident, or if it was an attempt to steer the conversation away from free speech concerns.
- frumplestlatz 1y ago
  Let’s be clear about what you mean when you say “outside the mainstream”, because that innocuous turn of phrase is doing a lot of work to cover what you’re really saying. Visa and MasterCard disallow content depicting CSA, rape, incest, bestiality, necrophilia, scatological erotica, torture, extreme sexual violence, and revenge porn.
  - xethos 1y ago
    Equivocating child sexual abuse with the dude drawing consentual fan-fic or furry porn feels disingenuous at best, and more like bad faith though. Because you're not wrong, the mainstream is fairly narrow, but to say the credit card duopoly excludes only the most heinous and vile imagery that can only barely be covered under "artistic expression" isn't exactly an entirely accurate depiction of reality.
    - dcow 1y ago
      I believe that happens for other reasons though. No law is telling Visa/Mastercard to prohibit payments to furry artists. They have some risk model that says it’s not good business and additionally pressure from advertising partners to not have their logo near that stuff.
lelanthran 1y ago
> The grandparent post didn't say "transgender treatments" they said "transgender issues." You don't think that transgender treatments is a transgender issue? If you think it is then my response is perfectly on-topic. > Do you believe that the mere concept of questioning your gender identity or expression is something that should be kept from the minds of minors? Depending on your jurisdiction, there are messages you can't target to kids. Why should there be a special exemption for this? Besides, my belief on this is irrelevant; the only transgender issue that has gotten pushback en-masse from the clear majority of people world wide has been transgender treatments on minors. IOW, this (treatment for persons unable to give informed consent) is a very unpopular position.
- LexiMax 1y ago
  > Depending on your jurisdiction, there are messages you can't target to kids. Why should there be a special exemption for this? Because the idea that the only acceptable gender norms a kid is allowed to be exposed to and express is the one tied to their genes is frankly a ridiculous concept. There's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls. If you don't believe that harmless message should reach the ears of kids, then why? What is in that sort of message that you're afraid of?
  - bluefirebrand 1y ago
    > There's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls. If you don't believe that harmless message should reach the ears of kids, then why? I fully agree there's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls I think the idea that a boy wearing dresses and playing with dolls must automatically be trans is actually very harmful and I do oppose that message reaching anyone
    - LexiMax 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - 1y ago

xethos 1y ago

This isn't an "I believe..." / "Do you believe..." kind of issue though. This is "Will the American State and Federal government impose an increasingly stringent moral compass on the wider internet, over time" Which... the VISA-Mastercard duopoly, backed by American soft power and with an American moral compass, already rather proves that point for anyone that's ever tried to pay for erotica outside the mainstream

LexiMax 1y ago
> This isn't an "I believe..." / "Do you believe..." kind of issue though. I asked because I wanted to get a sense on if he conflating the two by accident, or if it was an attempt to steer the conversation away from free speech concerns.
frumplestlatz 1y ago
Let’s be clear about what you mean when you say “outside the mainstream”, because that innocuous turn of phrase is doing a lot of work to cover what you’re really saying. Visa and MasterCard disallow content depicting CSA, rape, incest, bestiality, necrophilia, scatological erotica, torture, extreme sexual violence, and revenge porn.
- xethos 1y ago
  Equivocating child sexual abuse with the dude drawing consentual fan-fic or furry porn feels disingenuous at best, and more like bad faith though. Because you're not wrong, the mainstream is fairly narrow, but to say the credit card duopoly excludes only the most heinous and vile imagery that can only barely be covered under "artistic expression" isn't exactly an entirely accurate depiction of reality.
  - dcow 1y ago
    I believe that happens for other reasons though. No law is telling Visa/Mastercard to prohibit payments to furry artists. They have some risk model that says it’s not good business and additionally pressure from advertising partners to not have their logo near that stuff.

lelanthran 1y ago

> The grandparent post didn't say "transgender treatments" they said "transgender issues." You don't think that transgender treatments is a transgender issue? If you think it is then my response is perfectly on-topic. > Do you believe that the mere concept of questioning your gender identity or expression is something that should be kept from the minds of minors? Depending on your jurisdiction, there are messages you can't target to kids. Why should there be a special exemption for this? Besides, my belief on this is irrelevant; the only transgender issue that has gotten pushback en-masse from the clear majority of people world wide has been transgender treatments on minors. IOW, this (treatment for persons unable to give informed consent) is a very unpopular position.

LexiMax 1y ago
> Depending on your jurisdiction, there are messages you can't target to kids. Why should there be a special exemption for this? Because the idea that the only acceptable gender norms a kid is allowed to be exposed to and express is the one tied to their genes is frankly a ridiculous concept. There's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls. If you don't believe that harmless message should reach the ears of kids, then why? What is in that sort of message that you're afraid of?
- bluefirebrand 1y ago
  > There's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls. If you don't believe that harmless message should reach the ears of kids, then why? I fully agree there's nothing wrong with boys wearing dresses and playing with dolls I think the idea that a boy wearing dresses and playing with dolls must automatically be trans is actually very harmful and I do oppose that message reaching anyone
  - LexiMax 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - 1y ago