5 ms·

What's sad is how effective this is. Religious groups figured out a few years ago that anti-porn groups accomplish nothing, but if you start an anti-trafficking

What's sad is how effective this is. Religious groups figured out a few years ago that anti-porn groups accomplish nothing, but if you start an anti-trafficking group you can restrict porn access.

mc32 7mo ago
Traffickers now use refugee programs as conduits for human trafficking.
chaostheory 7mo ago
It’s meta this time.
phyzix5761 7mo ago
Which religious groups specifically are pushing for this and where? I want to know so I can call them out when I see it.
tangotaylor 7mo ago
Their real goals are even worse than that. Some of these groups have admitted they're also about suppressing LGBT+ content. As the Heritage Foundation admitted: > Keeping trans content away from children is protecting kids. No child should be conditioned to think that permanently damaging their healthy bodies to try to become something they can never be is even remotely a good idea. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/kids-online-safety-act-passes-senate-despite-concerns-it-will-harm-kids/?comments=1&comments-page=1#comments https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/kids-online-safe...
- gib444 7mo ago
  Heritage's tweet in the screenshot in your link makes no reference to "L", "G", "B" nor "+". Just "T"
- abcde666777 7mo ago
  I mean, I don't disagree with the sentiment of keeping trans ideology away from kids, in exactly the way I'd want to protect them from any kind of religious indoctrination.
  - WarmWash 7mo ago
    Firey take there, but I know a few people who are trans and neck deep in the kool aid. They will tell you that 25-30% of population is trans, and just haven't been liberated/are in denial. Look, it's cool to be trans, no problem. These women I know are good people and net contributors to society. But they are off the ideological deep-end, and would happily spend 3 hours at the family BBQ lecturing an impressionable 13 year old about how those weird body feelings are very likely gender dismorphia. They're just as drunk on their flavor of delusional social media as any other religious nut is crazy about God.
  - simonask 7mo ago
    The idea that even a single person in the world is trans because of "trans ideology" is what's absolutely insane here. If you think you could be convinced by anyone that you're not living out your true gender identity, I have news for you... Most people, children too, are not having those thoughts unless there's actually a journey waiting for them.
    - signalfour 7mo ago
      Is it really insane? In the detrans community, it's not uncommon for people to see their transition as ideologically led, see e.g. https://lacroicsz.substack.com/p/by-any-other-name https://lacroicsz.substack.com/p/by-any-other-name.
      - simonask 7mo ago
        OK, sure, there’s going to be confused and vulnerable people making mistakes. As I understand it, the detrans community is a tiny fraction of an already tiny fraction who ever in their life identified as trans. This isn’t an actual risk to anybody, and I can’t believe I have to say that.
- gruez 7mo ago
  >they're also about suppressing LGBT+ content >> Keeping trans content away [...] Isn't it a stretch to round off "trans content" to "LGBT+ content"? I mean, from a pure logical point of view the statement is correct, because "trans content" is a subset of "LGBT+ content", and therefore "suppressing LGBT+ content" is technically correct, but it's at least misleading. The left's version of this would be something like "twitter is suppressing anti-immigration content!", and the actual example is some alt-right commenter saying that immigrants should be lynched. Immigrants being lynched is certainly an subset of "anti-immigration", but it's still misleading.
  - gzread 7mo ago
    [flagged]
  - _moof 7mo ago
    Hi, I've been openly queer for over 20 years. Using trans people as a wedge to pry apart the entire LGBTQ community is a tale as old as time. This isn't theoretical or a slippery slope argument; it's recent history. It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy. Just one of the many, many, many reasons that trans rights are human rights.
    - Spivak 7mo ago
      [dead]
    - gruez 7mo ago
      >This isn't theoretical or a slippery slope argument; it's recent history. It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy. It quite literally is the slippery slope argument. You just don't want to call it that because the term is almost always used in the context of a fallacy, and you think you're right. It's like "freedom fighters" vs "terrorists". Nobody calls themselves terrorists, even terrorists. Moreover the "It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy" argument works equally well for any side, eg. it's not hard to imagine someone on the right saying "today it's Jan 6th protesters and that might seem reasonable, but tomorrow it's anyone at unite the right protests, and when president AOC's in power it's anyone who's protesting against trans surgery for minors".
ip26 7mo ago
If that reduced trafficking, would it not be a worthwhile exchange?

What's sad is how effective this is. Religious groups figured out a few years ago that anti-porn groups accomplish nothing, but if you start an anti-trafficking group you can restrict porn access.

mc32 7mo ago

Traffickers now use refugee programs as conduits for human trafficking.

chaostheory 7mo ago

It’s meta this time.

phyzix5761 7mo ago

Which religious groups specifically are pushing for this and where? I want to know so I can call them out when I see it.

tangotaylor 7mo ago

Their real goals are even worse than that. Some of these groups have admitted they're also about suppressing LGBT+ content. As the Heritage Foundation admitted: > Keeping trans content away from children is protecting kids. No child should be conditioned to think that permanently damaging their healthy bodies to try to become something they can never be is even remotely a good idea. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/kids-online-safety-act-passes-senate-despite-concerns-it-will-harm-kids/?comments=1&comments-page=1#comments https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/kids-online-safe...

gib444 7mo ago
Heritage's tweet in the screenshot in your link makes no reference to "L", "G", "B" nor "+". Just "T"
abcde666777 7mo ago
I mean, I don't disagree with the sentiment of keeping trans ideology away from kids, in exactly the way I'd want to protect them from any kind of religious indoctrination.
- WarmWash 7mo ago
  Firey take there, but I know a few people who are trans and neck deep in the kool aid. They will tell you that 25-30% of population is trans, and just haven't been liberated/are in denial. Look, it's cool to be trans, no problem. These women I know are good people and net contributors to society. But they are off the ideological deep-end, and would happily spend 3 hours at the family BBQ lecturing an impressionable 13 year old about how those weird body feelings are very likely gender dismorphia. They're just as drunk on their flavor of delusional social media as any other religious nut is crazy about God.
- simonask 7mo ago
  The idea that even a single person in the world is trans because of "trans ideology" is what's absolutely insane here. If you think you could be convinced by anyone that you're not living out your true gender identity, I have news for you... Most people, children too, are not having those thoughts unless there's actually a journey waiting for them.
  - signalfour 7mo ago
    Is it really insane? In the detrans community, it's not uncommon for people to see their transition as ideologically led, see e.g. https://lacroicsz.substack.com/p/by-any-other-name https://lacroicsz.substack.com/p/by-any-other-name.
    - simonask 7mo ago
      OK, sure, there’s going to be confused and vulnerable people making mistakes. As I understand it, the detrans community is a tiny fraction of an already tiny fraction who ever in their life identified as trans. This isn’t an actual risk to anybody, and I can’t believe I have to say that.
gruez 7mo ago
>they're also about suppressing LGBT+ content >> Keeping trans content away [...] Isn't it a stretch to round off "trans content" to "LGBT+ content"? I mean, from a pure logical point of view the statement is correct, because "trans content" is a subset of "LGBT+ content", and therefore "suppressing LGBT+ content" is technically correct, but it's at least misleading. The left's version of this would be something like "twitter is suppressing anti-immigration content!", and the actual example is some alt-right commenter saying that immigrants should be lynched. Immigrants being lynched is certainly an subset of "anti-immigration", but it's still misleading.
- gzread 7mo ago
  [flagged]
- _moof 7mo ago
  Hi, I've been openly queer for over 20 years. Using trans people as a wedge to pry apart the entire LGBTQ community is a tale as old as time. This isn't theoretical or a slippery slope argument; it's recent history. It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy. Just one of the many, many, many reasons that trans rights are human rights.
  - Spivak 7mo ago
    [dead]
  - gruez 7mo ago
    >This isn't theoretical or a slippery slope argument; it's recent history. It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy. It quite literally is the slippery slope argument. You just don't want to call it that because the term is almost always used in the context of a fallacy, and you think you're right. It's like "freedom fighters" vs "terrorists". Nobody calls themselves terrorists, even terrorists. Moreover the "It's effective because it sounds "reasonable" on its face, but it's a ploy" argument works equally well for any side, eg. it's not hard to imagine someone on the right saying "today it's Jan 6th protesters and that might seem reasonable, but tomorrow it's anyone at unite the right protests, and when president AOC's in power it's anyone who's protesting against trans surgery for minors".

ip26 7mo ago

If that reduced trafficking, would it not be a worthwhile exchange?