It’s one thing to have differing views, but I’ve seen enough attempted reddit migrations to be relieved that the popular communities in the fediverse so far haven’t been about crazy racist stuff or other extreme right bullshit.

I am also glad that I’m getting away from reddit’s general political shitposting, which was more left leaning. You couldn’t have any proper discourse on there, and even I with my generally more left leaning views recognized that.

  • sethw@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    What a boring and unnecessary opinion to have. You’re not their doctor, they arent your patients, what business is it of yours? and to go on about sharing that uneducated, untrained, unsolicited opinion online and then complaining about censorship when your medical advice is not well received… I just can’t wrap my head around the entitlement.

    • Noumena@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      You have some points, but “not well recieved” would be downvotes. I think banning is censorship and can be a fair complaint.

      With that said, maybe the sub had posted rules that were violated. It isn’t like OP couldn’t create their own sub if that was the situation.

      Banning people from communication spaces though should be a concerning behavior. It goes both ways.

      • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If your goal is to have a safe space for an oppressed minority group to express themselves, allowing transphobes to go about “just asking questions” and harassing people shuts down conversation of a group that actually has their freedom of expression threatened. Allowing harassment is more censorship than banning it. And no one should have the expectation of being able to just go into anyone’s house and shit on their floor without consequence. And that might mean being banned from going to all of their friend’s houses as well.

        • Noumena@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          But you don’t know what they said or what the community was. You are missing my general point. Please don’t support general fascism behavior, whether it is from the right or left.

          On top of that, this isn’t somebody’s house. That isn’t a good analogy.

          • chaogomu@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            They already said quite clearly that they’re transphobic. The “I don’t think children should undergo gender or sex transition” is almost verbatim an anti-trans talking point.

            Here’s some actual research on the subject of trans people, including trans youth, and suicide risk. With citations;

            Bauer, et al., 2015: Transition vastly reduces risks of suicide attempts, and the farther along in transition someone is the lower that risk gets.

            de Vries, et al, 2014: A clinical protocol of a multidisciplinary team with mental health professionals, physicians, and surgeons, including puberty suppression, followed by cross-sex hormones and gender reassignment surgery, provides trans youth the opportunity to develop into well-functioning young adults. All showed significant improvement in their psychological health, and they had notably lower rates of internalizing psychopathology than previously reported among trans children living as their natal sex. Well-being was similar to or better than same-age young adults from the general population.

            Gorton, 2011 (Prepared for the San Francisco Department of Public Health): “In a cross-sectional study of 141 transgender patients, Kuiper and Cohen-Kittenis found that after medical intervention and treatments, suicide fell from 19 percent to zero percent in transgender men and from 24 percent to 6 percent in transgender women.)”

            Murad, et al., 2010: “Significant decrease in suicidality post-treatment. The average reduction was from 30% pretreatment to 8% post treatment.”

            De Cuypere, et al., 2006: Rate of suicide attempts dropped dramatically from 29.3% to 5.1% after receiving medical and surgical treatment among Dutch patients treated from 1986-2001.

            UK study: "Suicidal ideation and actual attempts reduced after transition, with 63% thinking about or attempting suicide more before they transitioned and only 3% thinking about or attempting suicide more post-transition.

            Heylens, 2014: Found that the psychological state of transgender people “resembled those of a general population after hormone therapy was initiated.”

            Perez-Brumer, 2017: “These findings suggest that interventions that address depression and school-based victimization could decrease gender identity-based disparities in suicidal ideation.”

            Here’s a study showing that children know what gender they prefer and don’t change their minds on it.

            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35951394/

            Here’s another meta study on trans youth who received gender-affirming care, and who saw a decrease in suicide risk.

            https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33320999/

            • Noumena@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Transitioning is One solution, and it is valid to be able to discuss other options. Your citations bring good discussion points, but shouldn’t be used to ban people.

              My point is about censorship and the race to the bottom thst it can and often brings.

              • chaogomu@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                I don’t know, I’m always in favor of banning transphobes. Their arguments are always based in hatred, not any verifiable science. I gave you the science.

              • Anomander@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                Except that’s a sidestep. The viewpoint you were defending was saying that this one specific option, that has substantial academic backing for positive outcomes for kids, should not happen or should be prohibited.

                That’s not “discuss other options” - that’s discussing this option and arguing that society should take it away.

                That you’re now trying to argue that it’s just discussion and it’s reasonable debate and - forgive my bluntness - being openly dishonest about what the original speech was that you’re defending with “free-speech” and anti-censorship talking points is like … the example case for how this thread started. The nazis and the transphobes and the hateful bigots can always, easily, spin their own takes as righteous and reasonable debate - if you let them lead the dialogue and frame their discourse through the most-appealing lenses possible. And they can make valid-sounding and appealing arguments for why you, too, should defend them and their right to speak.

                But inevitably they are also going to use any and all space you clear for them to be hateful and bigoted and call for harm to other people - that is their goal. Everything else is just a setup play.

              • GataZapata@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                If the scientific community overwhelmingly and independently comes to the same conclusion over and over again, insisting on being able to discuss other solutions, especially not in the context of academic exploration (because it IS important for the scientific process to check opposing hypothesis and to peer review) but in the Context of telling a baseless opinion easily disputed, then no.

                That’s like the people who insist on ‘discussing other explanazions’ for climate change.

                And it is more than understandable that this insistence then is seen as the Opposite of good faith arguing and met with resistance. There is no point in giving a forum to harmful lies. That is not productive discourse

            • Otome-chan@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              I’m literally transsexual, have transsexual friends, and don’t think children should undergo gender/sex transition. that isn’t an “anti-trans talking point” it’s common sense backed by medical literature and scientific studies.

          • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            They repeated what they said, which is good enough reason to ban them from dozens of communities. People generally portray themselves in the least controversial light possible in these circumstances, so that’s the best case scenario.

            Many subreddits are the personal spaces of groups of people. Doesn’t matter whether it’s literally a physical house someone lives in or a metaphorical home for marginalized people. It’s still their personal space. They’re justified in excluding people even for trivial reasons such as liking the number 7. Blatant transphobia is an obvious reason to ban people from such spaces.

            Blocking people from harassing marginalized people is not fascism. Excusing the persecution of marginalized people otoh…

    • awsamation@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I have opinions on when and how children should be allowed to access cigarettes, alcohol, and motorcycles. Are those opinions also boring, unnecessary, and entitled?

      • BarbecueCowboy@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If that medical opinion wasn’t backed up by doctors and the majority of the medical community, I’d imagine that opinion probably would be.

        • awsamation@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          The medical opinion backed up by doctors and the majority of the medical community used to be that alcohol for minors was fine and that cigarettes were good for you.

          The medical community is perfectly capable of being wrong and prescribing societal dogma over anything else.

          • anlumo@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            You’re dismissing all of modern medicine there, which IMO is even worse. Knowledge might change, but until it does, we have to follow the current state of science. Otherwise we’re back to guesswork.

            • awsamation@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              No, I’m dismissing the idea that the “medical consensus” is unquestionable truth.

              If questioning the medical consensus was always wrong then we’d still believe that handwashing was a waste of time, and cigarettes would probably be lauded as a way to resist the miasma.

              When the consensus changed to say that cigarettes and underage drinking are bad, that didn’t overthrow the idea that handwashing is still good. And when the consensus changes to say that the modern approach to transitioning has caused more harm than help, that won’t overthrow the idea that underage drinking and cigarettes are still bad.

              • anlumo@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                Questioning the medical consensus is ok, as long as you’re a medical researcher with a study to show that there’s a problem. I don’t get the feeling that you are.

                • awsamation@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Laypeople are perfectly happy to give baseless opinions on my actual field of expertise, only fair I return the favor on other fields. Also how do you propose we get a study which shows the problem if you aren’t allowed to ask the question which prompts the study until after the study is done?

                  Besides, when societal dogma is driving more than anything else then the only expertise you need is to be a member of that society. And nobody can deny me that qualification.

                  • anlumo@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I’m in software development. If people give uneducated opinions, we all have a laugh and move on. In medicine, people die when this happens. This is not comparable.

    • tikitaki@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      You’re not their doctor, they arent your patients, what business is it of yours?

      ok, so if you’re not a doctor you can have no opinion on healthcare now? ridiculous statement. i think healthcare should be free. i don’t work in healthcare or health insurance. so am i just supposed to shut the fuck up and know my place?

      no, I have my opinion and I’m going to share it and @JasSmith has his opinion and he’s going to share it. that’s the whole point of having discussion boards. the last thing i want is this place to become an echo chamber

      i think kids should be able to transition. but it’s also not so simple a conversation when you’re making permanent changes to teenage kids - https://nypost.com/2022/06/18/detransitioned-teens-explain-why-they-regret-changing-genders/

      kids are fickle creatures and fads catch on - all of a sudden we see a dramatic rise in kids wanting to transition - like 4400% increase in girls wanting to transition to boys. is it because we are now more accepting as a society or is it social contagion? probably both and it’s a serious topic we need to address if we actually do want the best for the kids. we need to keep ideology out of healthcare and make sure each individual kid is taken care of with whatever is best for them - transitioning is not always the best option. but sometimes it is.

      • sethboy66@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The problem is that there’s a very big difference between wanting a blanket ban on transition preparation and wanting the actual people involved (the trans kid, the parents, and the doctors) to do a better job of evaluating the situation and working out the best path for each case.

        While your opinion may be more reasonable you should be careful to not assume they share your opinion. A lot of people don’t realize that the common choice for “transition” treatments for teens does not transition them, but rather delays/suppresses puberty in such a way that they can choose which way to go at a later time. Banning this treatment forces a choice and disallows a trans person’s ability to fully transition once of age.

      • fritz@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Ah yes the great source of the New York post. I don’t think you are being harmful on purpose but I do believe that by spreading shit like this you are harming trans people. There is no trans epidemic or social fad. That opinion is absolutely ridiculous. I have a close family member who is trans and the difficulty of even getting hormones is extreme. Multiple meetings with psychologists and endocrinologist, many exams and paperwork, not even mentioning the bureaucracy you have to deal with afterwards. And this is as an adult, transitioning as a minor is way way harder. No one just gets transitioned in an accident, and 99% don’t regret it. Now on the flip side 30-50% of trans kids want to commit suicide due to societal pressure and bullying. The only „cure“ for gender dysphoria is, shocking I know, transitioning. So when people say to protect trans kids, it’s literally protecting them from self harm or from getting attacked. Also, do you really think that more people identify as trans because it’s a „fad“ or maybe it’s because your can finally openly talk about it! It’s like saying that the rise of left handed people after them not being retrained in school anymore is a social fad. It’s a stupid opinion. Whenever you have more societal acceptance of something more people will feel safe coming out. I understand that some people are scared of their kids being transed by the woke liberal teachers but the same people also think that Obama turned the frogs gay.

        • JasSmith@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Ah yes the great source of the New York post.

          Are you questioning that Chloe exists? She’s been speaking at length about her de-transition because the whole experience has destroyed her body permanently. You can read about her on her Wikipedia page. It’s cool to question sources, but you didn’t even take a sec on Google to check if your ad hominem attack was valid.

          Here is another example. Sweden went all-in on “temporary” puberty blockers for gender affirming care until children started experiencing life-long injuries. They are now effectively banned for gender affirming care for children.

          In one particularly shocking case, a girl who wanted to become a boy began taking hormone-blocking drugs at just 11-years-old. Almost five years after the treatment began, the puberty-pausing drugs induced osteoporosis and permanently damaged the teen’s vertebrae, severely limiting the teen’s mobility.

          “When we asked him regularly how his back felt, he said: ‘I’m in pain all the time’,” she added.

          • spencerforhire81@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Chloe’s case is a tragedy, for sure. The issue I have is that people are calling for bans rather than enhanced oversight.

            Healthcare, at its core, is a numbers game. No effective treatment we’ve ever discovered is completely without risk. Every surgery or treatment, no matter how innocuous, could lead to complications or death. To use a recent example, the Covid vaccinations. They’re considered extremely safe, and over 13 billion vaccination doses have been given to date with over 5 billion people having been vaccinated. Given that Covid kills or permanently disables 2 in every 100 unvaccinated people, and vaccines lower that rate by at least 90%, that’s nearly 100 million lives that have been safeguarded by the vaccine. However, the vaccine has certainly harmed some people with extremely rare side effects. We accept that tradeoff, because saving 100 million lives is worth the risk of harming a few thousand people.

            Gender affirming care for children is the same thing. We know that trans children are at extremely elevated risks of self harm and suicide, and gender affirming care is proven to be effective in preventing those outcomes. We know that some will regret their decision to transition because those cases are inevitable in any population that transitions. The focus should be on reducing the cases of regret with better screening and more oversight.

            So, to debate this seriously, you need to answer the following question:

            How many regretful de-transitioners are you willing to risk in order to save the lives of successful transitioners?

            If the answer is zero, then you’re not willing to seriously debate the use of a medical treatment and your opinion is dogmatic and carries no semantic value.

            If the answer is very few, then congratulations, you’re on the same side as many allies who want more funding for care and screening for trans issues.

            Chloe would have likely been helped by more psychiatric care and screening, as from her story it’s clear that her sexual assault as a minor precipitated a complex regarding her sexuality that was misdiagnosed as a desire to transition.

        • tikitaki@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Also, do you really think that more people identify as trans because it’s a „fad“ or maybe it’s because your can finally openly talk about it

          i think it’s both. i don’t know at what ratio, but kids really do follow fads. one kid kills themselves at a school and it raises the chances for all of them to do so. ideas are contagious. a kid that may just be going through the regular teenage angst period searching for an identity might latch onto the trans label to explain their feelings when really it’s just a normal teenage thing to go through identity issues

          again, i’m not trying to say kids shouldn’t transition. i view transitioning as healthcare so to block kids off from it is absurd. but i think we also need to be careful and talk about the elephant in the room - that the rate of trans kids increasing so dramatically points to some issues with the ways we are doing it. when something jumps up so dramatically we should be asking questions

          • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            It’s like the prevalence of left-handedness shot up dramatically once it was socially acceptable. You can’t look at changes alone and say that things changing is a concern because it’s changing.

            • C4RP3_N0CT3M@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is false equivalence if I’ve ever seen it. The treatment for left-handedness was to sit on your hand, not do a fucking life-altering permanent surgery.

      • DaniAlexander@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s so funny to me this person don’t ever seem to have the same concerns about the nose jobs, boob jobs, lip enhancements, etc that are also being done on teens AND CHILDREN. I hear nothing from you about the performance enhancing drugs for teenage boys, or the altering of the bodies of gymnasts who also start in their early childhood. In the case of the latter, they get stunted growth because the intensive amount of training affects hormones and delays puberty. Gee what other thing that you argue about sounds similar to that?

        Maybe you didn’t know about those things before. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. But now I fully expect that you go to all of gymnastics forums where they’re talking about young female gymnasts and male athletes,l and tell them that you don’t think they should do those sports anymore. You’re totally going to do that right? Right?

        • JasSmith@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s so funny to me this person don’t ever seem to have the same concerns about the nose jobs, boob jobs, lip enhancements, etc that are also being done on teens AND CHILDREN. I hear nothing from you about the performance enhancing drugs for teenage boys, or the altering of the bodies of gymnasts who also start in their early childhood.

          I mean, you don’t know me, or you’d know that I also think those things are wrong. I also tell people that I think those things are wrong. Don’t you?

        • gigachad@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I mean the top comment is a guy who was banned because of his opinion on gender/sex transition… And the person you answered to expressed their opinion on that topic. Why would they talk about nose jobs or whatever? If you want to discuss these topics why not ask them about it instead of assuming their political agenda? Not saying I agree with them, but that’s not how debates work.

        • awsamation@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Sure, I can go harass people on gymnastics forums if that’s what you want. But in that case it’s only fair that I start harassing people on trans forums as well. I wasn’t doing either of those things before, but you said I have to so I guess it’s time to go bully some trans people.

          I have no problem with condemning the people who push children into intensive training for competition gymnastics. And no, I don’t believe them either when they argue that “the child wanted this.” The parents wanted a child who fits a certain mold and the child is just trying to make their parents happy, or atleast not angry depending on how externally abusive that parent is being.

          Also I absolutely support the idea of banning under 18s from getting nose jobs, boob jobs, lip fillers, taking PEDs, etc. Heck throw in piercings and tattoos as well for all I care. No procedure and no parental permission exceptions.

        • tikitaki@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          we aren’t seeing a 4000% increase in kids becoming gymnasts

          it’s a poignant social topic. instead of attacking my credibility, aiming to represent me as biased, you should try to attack my argument

          having said that, i support kids transitioning. i’m more upset about the “wrongthink” mentality where someone can’t even share their opinion without getting pounced on. he isn’t sharing hate speech he’s just talking

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Indeed, I’ve been finding myself hesitant to chime in on this because I know I’m inevitably going get lumped in with transphobe Nazi facists because at some point I’m going to say “hey hang on, there’s some nuance here that you’re missing.”

            • tikitaki@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              was in the article i linked

              between 2009 and 2019, children being referred for transitioning treatment in the United Kingdom increased 1,000% among biological males and 4,400% among biological females.

              i guess it’s too much to expect people to read things

              • Anomander@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                So “transition treatments” have gone up 4000% … in the time period following the treatment becoming available. If being a gymnast was illegal until 2009, or nobody had invented a trampoline until then, you can certainly bet making it legal or possible to do floor routines would result in a 4000%+ increase in people who were openly and publically gymnasts.

                Trans people, trans kids, have always existed - we just didn’t have the technology to provide the treatment in that article.

                That article is choosing to cite the numbers on the treatment rather than the condition because the treatment’s very recent launch means it allows the presentation of a scarier number.

      • awsamation@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        See the problem here is that you forgot that opinions are only allowed to include concerns or nuances that are on the approved list.

        Anything you might be concerned about that isn’t on the approved list puts you straight into wrongthink, double plus ungood.