Hacker News Reader

Comment by nindalf | Hacker News Reader

Most comments are about the library, which makes sense. I think it’s curious how the strategy of homophobes have shifted over the years. Earlier they would simply say “gayness is a sin that needs to be wiped out”. But no, it’s a social faux pas to be outright homophobic. So they’ve rebranded with “but think of the children”.

I have no doubt that they believe a teenager could read a book and decide to be gay. Studies on genetics say otherwise, but these are not the kind of folks who might not be inclined towards understanding genetics.

View on HN

> Studies on genetics say otherwise

It's actually not that clear. Like most traits, both genetics and environment play a role.

Also, you are straw-manning the "homophobic" position. Humans have self-control, and having a desire doesn't mean one should act on it.

pls read this research, kids absolutely can (falsely) decide that they are trans just because it is considered trendy and because some of their friends came out as trans (peer pressure).

Then after some time they realize they are NOT trans and were falsely led to gender-change surgery, and have to reverse gender reversal surgery

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10508-021-021...

these are unfortunate consequences to all the media grooming and brainwash happening in mainstream discourse re lgbtq

I think you are right to highlight this point.

It seems we are in early days in the science of trans-prepubescents and trans-adolescents. Different from LGBQ, trans decisions are sometimes medical and hard to reverse. I am not surprised that parents in a less liberal community would be allergic to any risk of their children becoming trans.

Censorship is abhorrent, probably even to that community, but they are in the fog of culture war and go to battle with the pathetic weapons they have.

That's exactly why the LGBT community pushed for the term 'non binary'. People mock a lot this term, but it's raison d'être is teens or young adults not feeling like the gender they are for multiple reason, one of which being attracted by the same sex, and one which 12 years ago was considered by my LGBTQ friends as the principal: feeling like gender stereotypes from your parents/environment crushed you. Your dad calling you 'not man enough' or your mom saying 'man up's when you were sad. Your mom calling you a tomboy and unattractive, forcing you to wear dresses and heels.

With the ease of gender change surgery, this term is even more needed than before imho.

And i feel like for an anglo country who worship Hamilton, this is weird to be against more information tbh.

Gender expression, gender identity, and sexual orientation are different. Most people same sex attracted people feel like their assigned gender. Even if they don't fit stereotypes

Fair. i wasn't sure about that tbh, i only had the example of the "tomboy" who think she was a he for 5 years because her familly, and LGBTQ activist around Nantes who told me that a third gender should exist for case like this, to allow people like her to be able to think something else than "i do not feel like a female, i should then be a male" which can be detrimental.

do you believe in Darwin's theory? do non-binary genders exist among primates?

non-binary (like the rest of 72 genders) is just a social construct, created fairly recently, it has no connection to biology of homo sapiens as biological species or any foundation in science. Only people's emotions/human feelings are the main basis for 72 genders that are now being told to kids left and right, together with ridiculous dose of hormone blockers

You ignored everything i said. Re-read please.

Non-binary is (or at least was) a tool to avoid have teenagers and young (or older) adults feeling at odds with their assigned gender at a point in their life to avoid identifying as trans. IT IS TO AVOID those "ridiculous" dose of hormone blockers.

Please just read the comment you are responding to. please. I know i'm not a native speaker and i moght have troubles to explain myself on non-teck subject, but it is quite clear that i am NOT TALKING AT ALL about what you're responding to.

Cultures through history all over the planet had more than 2 genders. Women born in male bodies, men born in female bodies, and 2 spirits in 1 body are old ideas.

Well, last I heard, the going theory is that other animals, other primates, don't have gender whatsoever. They have biological sex, of course, but no concept of gender: no concept that women should be in the kitchen can men should be bringing home to bacon, etc, etc, tired stereotypes that convey the point, etc. Clownfish will literally transition from male to female, but there's yet no research as of yet to suggest that Clownfish start wearing heals.

You are correct, gender is a social construct, so is motherhood and fatherhood and so on, but that doesn't mean those things aren't real, don't mean anything, or impact our lives or aren't deeply and sincerely held identities.

> Well, last I heard, the going theory is that other animals, other primates, don't have gender whatsoever. They have biological sex, of course, but no concept of gender: no concept that women should be in the kitchen can men should be bringing home to bacon, etc, etc, tired stereotypes that convey the point, etc.

But they do: consider lions as an example. Male lions will guard the pride's territory while lionesses hunt for food.

If it is not scientific, but social construct, it means it can be accepted or rejected. So should we as a society universally accept all social constructs? Or should it be accepted on opt-in basis?

I can only recognize universal nature laws, because I cant fight physics, and recognize legal laws, because they are enforced.

But social constructs - it is not 100% clear to whom they are applicable and whether one can selectively reject certain social constructs.

If a woman can reject social construct that she must be housewife and take care of kids, then by the same logic anyone can selectively reject any trendy social constructs like having gender #69

Nothing in this messy, complicated life is 100% clear; everything has exceptions, outliers, and grey areas... including biological sex. If you want to spend your free speech and precious time on this Earth invalidating other people's gender, then that's your prerogative, but you shouldn't be surprised if they use their free speech against you in return. Them calling you a bigot (or whatever) is a direct retaliation to you saying something objectionable about them or who they are. If you think they shouldn't be so offended then you should ask why you're so offended at being called a bigot. It works both ways.

You talk a lot about Darwin's theory. You've strongly implied or outright said in many comments that gayness is a choice.

Could you please go ahead and explain gay relationships in wild animals? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals). What's the matter, they're watching too much TV?

> There is no single narrative to explain the experiences of all individuals who detransition and we should take care to avoid painting this population with a broad brush.

> Findings about detransition should be used to improve our understanding of gender dysphoria and to better inform the processes of evaluation, counseling, and informed consent for individuals who are contemplating transition.

Did your not read your own study?

> Did your not read your own study?

This discourse is not helpful, please read the guidelines for commenting :>

> Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."

My apologies, from now on I'll only say that someone unintentionally mislead Parlia.. I mean, that their study actually said X, Y, and Z.

author provides breakdown further, I encourage you to continue reading this paper [with an open mind]

I'll read it through [with an open mind] once you have. Since the conclusions you've drawn are thoroughly incongruous with the abstract and conclusion, I gather that you haven't, in fact, read it.

from the same abstract you skipped over:

>>Reasons for detransitioning were varied and included: .. 2) becoming more comfortable identifying as their natal sex (60.0%);

so 60 out of 100 patients who gender transitioned were NOT in fact transgenders and were falsely led towards gender transition surgery

>>The majority (55.0%) felt that they did not receive an adequate evaluation from a doctor or mental health professional before starting transition

This matches the parents' pushback argument that gender transition is being prescribed and promoted left and right, which leads to medical mistakes

It's worth remembering that this is a study of de-transitioners, not of the trans community as a whole. Having read the study [with an open mind], you ought to remember the table on page ten which lists how the participants detransitioned. You'd remember that they detransitioned overwhelmingly by... wait for it... no longer taking their cross-sex hormones (95%) and returning to their previous pronouns (63%). This is a far cry from your moral panic about children being led to the surgeon's knife. Only 14% of the participants began hormonal detransition and only 9% began surgical detransition.

Given that detransitioners are already a small minority of trans people, who are themselves already a small minority of society, this feels less like splitting hairs and more like splitting atoms. I simply cannot fathom how this study is enough for you to be spamming it to everyone. This study isn't spicy anti-trans statistical data. It's data that suggests that evaluation for medical transition needs to be improved. Indeed, as already mentioned, that's the explicit goal of the study... and yet you're here pretending like it's some gotcha moment.

So you do agree that there is a chance of medical mistake in diagnosing/prescribing Gender Dysphoria, just like medical mistakes happen with any other condition?

And a lot of these mistakes happen due to social pressure (including pressure from medical professionals who should know better, but didnt't because opposing research is being canceled).

>>Clinicians, partners, friends, and society were named as sources that applied pressure to transition, as seen in the following quotes: >> - My gender therapist acted like it [transition] was a panacea for everything; >> - [My] [d]octor pushed drugs and surgery at every visit >> - I was dating a trans woman and she framed our relationship in a way that was contingent on my being trans >> - A couple of later trans friends kept insisting that I needed to stop delaying things >> - [My] best friend told me repeatedly that it [transition] was best for me

I dont deny that there is selection bias in Mrs. Littmann's research. But if I am parent and have only one child, I really dont care about percentage chances, and I simply dont want to play in this dumb lottery of wrongly identifying GD only to reverse it later. If current medical understanding is wrong, something needs to be done to improve medical approach. and current mainstream consensus doesn't help at all

Do I agree that healthcare can and does go wrong? Duh, yes. Do I think that it should therefore become a regular national news hot-topic for reactionaries to obsess about and start imposing bans/heavy regulation on that healthcare? No. If there are instances of malpractice from doctors, those instances should go to court. We needn't expect trans healthcare to be faultless before we allow it to exist.

If it were only healthcare matter, it would not be such a big deal.

Unfortunately this slides into ideological/political subject and current polarization of society doesn't help at all. Left wingers want to show off as a big LGBTQ allies and supporters, and any even slightly opposing opinion gets canceled fiercely.

School teacher can counsel my kid regarding gender confusion and not tell me about it. This is wrong and violation of my parents rights.

It is kinda becomes emotional and hard subject to reason logically. I support when adult gets the treatment they needed, but at the same time when it comes to my kids (who can be easily manipulated by public opinion) I want to keep my child away from mainstream propaganda that may sway my kid towards wrong route. Until they become adults and are free to choose themselves.

Honestly, this whole problem sounds to me like parents being utterly unwilling to discuss gender with their children. Teachers wouldn't have such a supposed monopoly on this if kids felt comfortable talking to their parents. If your child came to you because they're questioning themselves, I sincerely hope you'd be there for them instead of freaking out about liberal propaganda. Kids and especially teenagers will question themselves... it's kind of the whole point of puberty. Are the people obsessing about this so old that they forgot what puberty was like?

And people said the exact same stuff, verbatim, about gay people. Section 28 for example was a law passed in the UK in 1988 that reads eerily similar to Florida’s dubbed Don’t Say Gay Bill. Section 28 was literally passed in reaction to a Danish book called "Jenny Lives with Eric and Martin" where a young girl and her two dads do sordid things like having a birthday party and visiting the launderette. And British youngsters were immeasurably damaged by Section 28 and the effects remain even though it was repealed in 2004.

Similarly, there were protests a few years ago of conservative parents who were """"concerned"""" that their children were being taught graphic gay sex when, in reality, children were merely being taught that some families have two mums or two dads. A lot of the puritanical moralism comes from conservatives unconsciously (or not) spreading ideologically framed, ambiguous statements. It’s like how you took the concept of teenagers seeking out that book in the adult section with that book “be[ing] on display to kids.” You made it sound worse than it was, so people interpret it as worse than it was, so it becomes a moral panic.

I remember my time in puberty. I was dumb and was heavily influenced by peers. Drug use was normalized back then [in my environment], and I tried all the heavy drugs because it was deemed acceptable among peers, and I regret that. If my peer environment did not influence me in such a bad way, I would have never tried drugs.

This is why I think it is important to protect children from bad influence, especially when it comes from mainstream sources like library, books, media.

I dont want my kids to experiment with same sex sexuality, trans gender stuff, just because it is considered trendy, diverse, equal, inclusive, etc. especially if they will regret it will have poor mental health because of that

With all due respect, it sounds like you're gunning on being a helicopter parent, which is your choice but it probably wont go over well. Your kid will try what they want to try and the most important question for you should be whether they're safe and happy.

My son's coming up on 16 now and he had a short period of gender-confusion where he questioned his identity, but he came and talked to us about it and spent a couple of weeks experimenting with his gender expression. And I honestly couldn't care less where his gender-confusion came from, the fact that he knew he could share that with us, could confide in us, was one of the most beautiful moments I've experienced and something that reminds me how blessed I am to have him as a son. If he came home from school one day and said he's got a boyfriend but literally only because it's trendy, am I supposed to start thrashing him or something? No, we'd have a conversation which would mostly involve me asking him whether he's safe and happy. If yes, then it's his business not mine. Our duty as his parents is to safeguard his best interests, not dictate and micromanage his entire life and thoughts.

They always said think of the children.

The use of the word grooming is new, although the reference to pedophilia is not. What’s crazy is how that can carry weight in 2022.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10508-021-021...

What does that have anything to do with the hateful message that equates queer people with pedophiles?

Nothing. It was just another opportunity to throw some more misinformation confetti.

Indeed: https://www.mic.com/articles/144948/this-50s-film-shows-depi...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com