This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Another aspect common to pedophiles and pro-trans activists is the exaggeratiom of childs capability to form an independent will, which both groups elevate above those of the childs parents.
The former by claiming that merely convincing a child to say words "I consent" is sufficient, the latter by its claims that a child mouthing the words "I am a girl" is a statement which isn't merely an expression of a momentary feeling like "I am a robot" or "I am a dinosaur" but of a stable and permanent one.
Citation needed. The usual requirement for child diagnosis of gender dysphoria is that the claim to be the other gender is "insistent, consistent and persistent." Your claim that merely saying the words "I am a girl" is taken to imply a stable and permanent identity is contrary to the facts. You are straw-manning your outgroup here.
So I will admit that I am not someone who collects folders full of bookmarked links for ready deployment, nor am I a Graham Linehan or LibsOfTikTok, making a career out of outrage-harvesting nutpicking. But I have read a fair amount of this discourse from the both the pro and con sides over the last few years, and the impression I get is that there is definitely a motte and bailey going on in practice.
On paper, yes, diagnosis of gender dysphoria and recommendations for transition have a lot of guidelines and safeguards meant to ensure we're actually dealing with a dysphoric individual who genuinely identifies as another sex and whose best outcome is supporting them in transitioning. You're not supposed to just tell a boy who says "I'm a girl" that they are in fact a girl and put them on puberty blockers.
In practice, though, how many times have we heard from doctors (including here on TheMotte) that actually telling a kid (let alone an adult) who says "I'm a boy/girl" that maybe they're not, and that gender nonconforming thoughts do not make you trans, can result in accusations of transphobia, even formal complaints, and that it's becoming increasingly hard to push back against a kid who might just be going through a phase? That in fact, even suggesting things like "going through a phase" or "social contagion" is itself transphobic and failing to affirm someone's gender identity?
I'm willing to accept that maybe in the real world this is actually not happening as often as the anti-trans side says it is, and that maybe gender clinics do turn away a significant number of self-identified trans people, or at least tell them and their parents they need to spend more time thinking about this and considering other options before putting a child on puberty blockers or hormones. But I am also quite skeptical that none of these stories of kids being transed on demand are real. I think the direction of public discourse (failure to affirm is literally murdering trans children!) cannot help but put pressure on well-meaning doctors and clinicians and parents and teachers to basically take a child's words at face value, at least on this very particular subject.
More options
Context Copy link
That was how it worked for my adult friend. First time she saw any kind of medical personnel in years she got put on estrogen. Weeks later, she got her first round of bloodwork back showing serious endocrine issues, namely a critically low testosterone level, which apparently did nothing to give anyone any pause.
Now, this is an adult and not a child, but aren't there something like 1000 similar complaints being alleged at Tavistock?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If we are making facile derogatory comparisons, this is also a commonality between free-market capitalists and cannibals, who both exaggerate the individual's capacity to enter contracts in their own interest.
You could even go a bit further and talk about the aspect common to pedophiles (of the subset that does not particularly care for consent) and anti-trans activists, who both believe in the parents' absolute authority to make decisions about the child's sexual development. Statistics are circulating that something like a third of child sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by parents or close relatives, and I'd imagine that the vast majority of the Eastern European suggestive underage model pictures that flooded the *chans back in the days were created with the support of the parents. Surely only someone who is anti-family would presume to interfere with the parents' judgement there!
What is the ratio of Cannibals to trans activists in our society? and that is without the disproportionate impact that trans activists have when they introduce or modify laws. I'm unaware of cannibals trying to pass laws related to their proclivities.
Give it time. I hadn't heard of would-be eunuchs trying to pass policy related to their proclivities either until last month.
The MAJOR roadblock to anything cannibal related is that it requires eating someone or parts of someone.
Well, eunuchs have some spare parts...
yeah, but wouldn't cannis just get tired of eating dick all day?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
In the simile, the cannibals map to the pedophiles, not the trans activists.
More options
Context Copy link
The ratio of interest would be cannibals-to-capitalists. Like pedophiles, the former are thankfully rare.
Though a complete lack of cannibalism-enshrining laws, coupled with the existence of any cannibals, does imply they are underrepresented.
I think pedophilia is quite a bit more common than cannibalism, unless you start counting things like communion or chewing ones nails as cannibalism. For instance, the BBC quotes an estimated prevalence at 1% of the adult male population.
More options
Context Copy link
(to /u/4bpp too) Problem being that unlike the lack of relationship between cannibals and capitalists, the trans activists are actively promoting rules, regulations and concepts that would benefit pedophiles in their pursuits (minors capable of consent, keeping secrets from your parents, etc.), which is why I'm interested in the ratio of the problematic populations as Capitalist don't advance the canni agenda but transactivists indirectly (and intentional or unintentionally) do so.
As a note, I don't think it was appropriate that Meiwes was convicted. With the caveat that Bernd Jürgen Armando Brandes was of sound mind during the episode (which I very much doubt) but isn't mentioned in the Wiki article one way or another.
I consider the capacity to enter contracts with another party as a fundamental part of liberty and individualism (social contract as one example), not something exclusive to capitalism.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link