this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2023
187 points (97.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43816 readers
1070 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Personally I think not having karma limits is nice currently! I understand why they were used but grinding karma as a lurker on reddit was frustrating.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JasSmith@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (82 children)

Censorship. All the major subreddits became political echo-chambers. Reddit was founded on free speech and open discourse, especially when it was really uncomfortable. I'd love to see the same for Lemmy. Over the years I've seen authoritarianism creep into the moderation policies of most major subreddits. Today, even posting on the wrong subreddit is grounds for being banned from dozens of major subreddits. Even having a polite disagreement about, for example, anything to do with "trans," is grounds for being banned.

[–] Synnikel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago (51 children)
[–] JasSmith@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sorry I'm not sure how else to describe it. Trans people are those who believe their sex doesn't match how they feel inside.

[–] Synnikel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am aware of the concept of being transgender I am just wondering what your "polite disagreements" are with it

[–] sleepyTonia@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'd say that a fairly debated topic related to transgender people, which isn't just transphobes attacking people trying to live their own life, is the presence of transgender athletes in competitions. Some will take it as a personal attack whether you take a side or sit on the fence. I'm not looking to start that conversation here, but yeah. It's definitely possible to hold a polite conversation about this while disagreeing on parts of the question. In a healthy space.

[–] PlasmaK@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think that after HRT the difference is not that big. Trans athletes may even be at the disadvantage since there are some cis woman that have higher than average amount of testosterone.

In the long shot I think it would be for the best to abolish gender based separation altogether and replace it with something more like weight categories.

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Consider two 5'6" 65kg athletes, one man and one woman, are you saying that the man doesn't have an advantage?

I used to believe the same until I saw the recent Women's Premier League in Cricket. They had to reduce the size of field and the weight of ball. Even with that, the fastest bowl in the tournament was 130kmph while that speed is considered a "slower ball" in men's cricket.

Now some of these female cricketers earm more than any Pakistani male cricketers. Which is fair, bigger market, bigger payout. But female cricketers don't stand a chance against the male cricketers

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, that's literally completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. You just flat out stated in this comment that you think that all trans women are actually just men. You're flat out wrong about that.

We have more than enough science that demostrates conclusively that a person on hormone therapy is athletically more similar to the sex they are transitioning to than the sex they were born in. You're just ignoring all of that and pretending that it doesn't exist. YOU might not like that it exists because it makes it clear that you're just being a bigot, but it does exist, and it demonstrates exactly that.

[–] raresbears@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

What does an athlete that's a man have to do with trans people

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Consider two 5'6" 65kg athletes, one man and one woman, are you saying that the man doesn't have an advantage?

No, my MMA teacher was female and she'd kick my arse regularly

They had to reduce the size of field and the weight of ball. Even with that, the fastest bowl in the tournament was 130kmph

Now you're undermining your first point, you're not comparing same heights and weight. Physics is real.

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay.

Ellyse Perry, the fastest bowler in women's cricket is 176cm at 60kg (amazing athlete, represented Australia at both Cricket and Football world cups!). Her fastest ball was 130.1kph

Shoaib Akthar, the fastst bowler in men's cricket is 180cm at 80kg. His fastest was 161kph

Laws of cricket dictate that women should use a ball that is between 415⁄16 and 55⁄16 ounces (139.98 and 150.61 grams); which could be up to 13⁄16 ounces (23.03 grams) lighter than the ball used by the men.

Also made me think, the whole height-weight distinction will only work in purely physical sports like boxing (maybe even some american sports like baseball and nfl). It is not going to work in global sports like Cricket and Football. Think about the greatest footballers of our generation. Cristiano was 183cm (6ft) and Messi 169cm (5ft 6in).

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So his mass is 33% more and the ball goes 23% faster? Momentum is mass x velocity iirc.

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • his mass is 33% more and the ball goes 23% faster? Momentum is mass x velocity iirc.

Do you understand why this statement is wrong?

You’re mixing the mass of the person throwing the ball with the mass of the ball.

  • his mass is 33% more

This would matter if he was flying himself at the batsman.

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the bowler is giving momentum to the ball?

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Correct. The bowler is contributing to the velocity part of the equation

I'm not trying to be difficult, I just probably don't understand. It's been at least 30 years since I did physics.

There's only 3 things in the equation?

Velocity = Momentum/Mass

momentum is the product of the mass and velocity. It is a vector quantity, possessing a magnitude and a direction

The ball gets its momentum from the mass and velocity, so size and speed of the bowler?

Add in levers from long whippy limbs and you get the fastest ball for the size of bowler?

Do biological males have longer whippier limbs? If not, then I don't understand how a bowler of the same size and weight of either sex would have an advantage, assuming identical levels of access to playing and coaching from a young age.

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I only pointed out the difference between the fastest. There’s plenty of shorter, leaner bowlers in men’s cricket who bowl faster than Perry. Kemar Roach for instance is in the same height and weight category as Perry and regularly bowls 150kph

Tbf it’s expected. You know women going below 16-18% body fat is completely unhealthy while top male athletes are perfectly healthy at 6% or so

Edit: wtf mate? Momentum is not mass of propeller times velocity. By your logic a sumo wrestler would easily be the fastest cricket bowler!

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Momentum is mass x velocity. Google it.

Would you rather get hit by a featherweight or heavyweight? Mass matters

I'd say the difference between men and women's cricket will reduce as women get more training and money, I don't see any reason why not

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes dear friend, momentum is indeed mass x velocity. But we’re not talking about the speed at which the bowler runs. It’s the speed at which the bowl is propelled.

(to be clear, the lower mass of cricket ball in women’s cricket is a factor in reducing momentum. But we’re talking purely speed here)

Some women cricketers (outside Pakistan) earn more than Pakistani male cricketers already. And I must say, I’m a huge supporter. Unlike the WNBA in the US, women’s cricket is way more popular in rest of the world.

It’s a biological factor that women, generally, aren’t as physically strong as men and as a supporter of female athletes, abolishing gender boundaries is practically killing women’s sports. Here’s some more data you could’ve found out by googling: https://boysvswomen.com/#/

[–] bernieecclestoned@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not so sure. Women's football is doing very well now that it's getting more money and attention, as are motor sports.

[–] OldIndianMonk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

It is doing very well indeed! Why kill it?!

[–] PlasmaK@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Here is a surprise for you: HRT actually does things to your body. I don't think this should have been that hard to find on your own, but I can't judge your circumstances.

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Transphobes always make the same tired arguments about "biological differences between men and women" and then scream and run away when you bring up actual science, because they don't care about the science. They care about being bigots, and using science to make their bigotry look legitimate.

[–] Knoll0114@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are things that don't completely change with HRT (particularly when started after puberty.) Height, bone density, lung capacity, hand/foot/limb size etc. do not vary significantly after HRT and depending on the sport can make a huge difference (eg. Hand and foot size or lung capacity in swimming even where the two swimmers are the same height.)

[–] PlasmaK@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then we should allow people to access gender affirming treatment earlier, no?

[–] Knoll0114@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That could be one conclusion since it may lead to more desirable outcomes. On the other hand, we generally don't allow children to undergo other permanent procedures (eg. Nose jobs, tattoos etc.) because children change their minds. It can be argued that medical transition is necessary medical care (eg. like how we give chemo even though it may have permanent long-term effects.)

However, since dysphoria is a psychiatric diagnosis (there's nothing physical to test like a tumour) we cannot be sure in the same way that treatment is medically necessary. Therefore, I believe that the care providers should have to be extremely sure that the child is not going to detransition before making any medical moves like puberty blockers or HRT. I'm not convinced they can be sure enough or at least that they are being that rigorous (they clearly weren't here: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62335665.)

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

the presence of transgender athletes in competitions

I disagree, that isn't a "polite disagreement" and is, absolutely, "just transphobes attacking people trying to live their own life" as you put it. Every time that "Argument" happens it's openly done in biologically unfounded ways by people who simply don't understand how our bodies actually work- yet those arguments get mass upvoted by people who also don't understand how biology actually works and who believe that trans athletes get some insane, unfair advantage.

If you want to pass laws to restrict trans people from sports, then you want to pass laws to discriminate against trans people. That's not really up for debate IMO, it's a straight up fact; it's what you're doing when you advocate for laws that are not founded in science, that are specifically targeting a tiny minority for the chance that one of that tiny minority might beat cis athletes in an "unfair" way, you're advocating for bigoted laws.

Such arguments are also inevietably filled with people misgendering trans people, deliberately calling trans women "men" and hiding behind the "I'm talking about biology" argument to do so.

Replace the word "trans" with "black" and you'll find that people are making literally identical arguments to those against desegregating professional sports leagues 80 years ago. Literally word for word.

[–] maynarkh@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

The thing I don't understand around it is that the people who are making the argument "trans people shouldn't be able to participate in sports" are usually also people who are not interested in the sport at all. As in are they upset because someone on the telly told them to, but they really don't care about the sport except in this very niche aspect which impacts a very slight minority of participants. I mean would half the US public be very interested in the deep technicalities of competitive high-school running?

Same with HRT. Why do I even have to know about it? It's a niche medical treatment for a comparatively small amount of people suffering from some very specific conditions. I can barely understand what the difference is between ibuprofen and paracetamol, and I'm sure most people are even less informed. Why is it not the sole interest of people affected by gender dysphoria (IDK if I'm even spelling or saying it right, sorry for my ignorance), and their doctors?

The thing that actually grinds my gears is that this culture war stuff takes over places and trans people have to get defensive over their existence, and a forum on fricking Bionicle gets full of trans memes. Don't get me wrong, if you're a trans person, or a Zulu, or IDK what niche minority, and you've made a Bionicle that uniquely represents you, I'm going to upvote that shit so hard since it's frickin awesome. But having the whole place be full of low effort "trans people are people" memes is about as funny or interesting as having the whole place full of "the sky is blue" memes.

People are getting outraged about what some socially disadvantaged minority is doing with their lives instead of actually contributing to society, because some idiotic grifter TV host told them to. Fucking lemmings.

[–] usernotfound@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Every time that “Argument” happens it’s openly done in biologically unfounded ways by people who simply don’t understand how our bodies actually work.

I'll be the first to admit I don't know how our bodies work, but I think explaining it will be more helpful in the long run than just making the subject taboo and banning everyone who asks it.

At the beginning of the pandemic a common argument against masks was "the virus is too small to be caught in a mask" - which made sense from a layman's point of view. When people started explaining that masks did stop the water droplets the virus needs to be airborne - that argument become a lot less common.

Not everybody who has questions is "just asking questions", if you catch my drift.

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not everybody who has questions is “just asking questions”, if you catch my drift.

I agree with that statement, context is everything.

I think that in the context of someone starting out going "it's unfair for men to compete in women's sports," the person is "just asking questions." That context poisons the well for questions.

But if someone comes in and makes a thread like "I don't understand how hormone therapy works, can someone please explain it?" that, to me, is a good faith question and 100% should not be bannable.

[–] usernotfound@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All good :)

Now that I have your attention though, what would be a good counter argument on why trans women should be allowed to compete in the same league as non-trans women (please excuse my lacking vocabulary)?

Like I mentioned, at first sight as a layman, the argument that trans women would have an competitive advantage makes sense to me. So I'd be grateful if you could take away my ignorance.

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

First for the vocabulary:

non-trans = cisgender. cis meaning "same," as in "same gender as assigned at birth."

Second, I'm not the best at doing that, but I know of a really good report which has good citations of studies and really thoroughly discusses the issue. PDF WARNING: It can be found here.

[–] usernotfound@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the former, guess I should have known that, but I'll be sure to remember now. As for the second... I'm interested in the answer, but not 86 pages scientific report interested. Guess I'll just have to wait around for the "water droplet"-size answer, but thanks for your patience nonetheless :)

[–] Landrin201@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The hardest part with this conversation is that there isn't really a satisfying short answer, but I can try to give one.

The biological differences between men and women that most people think of as giving men an advantage over women in sports are counteracted by hormone replacement therapy, and do not give trans women athletes an advantage over cis women athletes. Some of the arguments, such as bone density being higher in men, are literally taken word-for-word out of segregationist rhetoric- and ignores the fact that black women have higher bone density than most men. There is not a clear scientific reason to exclude trans women who are undergoing HRT from sports.

That's it, that's the answer. But I feel like that's just asking you to take my word for it- all of that and more is backed up by science in the report I linked.

[–] usernotfound@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For what it's worth, I never checked the size of the corona virus particle either, so I'm fine with having to take your word for it :)

It also sounds like this could be confirmed by the drug testing, which is already in place anyway, and would ensure that participants have the proper hormone level that wouldn't give them an advantage. (I also just now remember that this was literally the plot point of a Futurama episode.)

Thanks for taking the time to answer me. I don't need the complete fine details, but it is a satisfying answer.

[–] Synnikel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] sleepyTonia@programming.dev -1 points 1 year ago

All good! Sorry for the paragraph. I'm just bad a writing short messages… 😅

[–] JasSmith@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you genuinely interested or just looking to start a fight? I know recreational outrage is a thing on Reddit and I had hoped to leave it there.

[–] Synnikel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No I'm genuinely interested to hear your perspective and why it was a point of contention

[–] JasSmith@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

No worries. Sorry for being defensive. I’ve received death threats before so you can imagine my reticence to speak freely.

Forgive the brevity. The topic is quite personal to me. I had a trans person in my family until recently. They committed suicide. I took it upon myself to research the topic to the best of my abilities. My current stance is that, while I support the right for adults to do with their body as they wish, I do not support the practise of transitioning children; be it medically or socially. In all my research I couldn’t find a single study, anywhere, demonstrating an objective quality of life improvement. These would be measurable metrics like:

  • Life expectancy.
  • Suicide rate.
  • Rates of addiction.
  • Health outcomes such as reduced rates of obesity and heart attacks.
  • Rates of crime.
  • Rates of homelessness.
  • Rates of victimisation (rape, assault, etc.).
  • Income.
  • Wealth.

It’s not for lack of trying, either. I’ve never seen so much funding go to any single topic in academia. Given this lack of evidence, researchers turned to subjective measures of improvement. The primary being “suicidality.” They ask subjects how they feel about suicide. This is an effective proxy for, “are you happy with the major medical procedure you just asked for?” Unsurprisingly, this is subject to enormous bias.

Instead, I found evidence that not transitioning is a much better, much more effective treatment for children. This study found that only 37% of children still identified as dysphoric five years later. This study found that 88% had desisted (they were no longer dysphoric). This mirrors other historical research into various areas of child psychology. Children frequently change identity and beliefs around identity.

The primary arguments appear to be, a) if we don’t transition children, they will commit suicide. As above, I believe this is false. The second premise is, b) puberty blockers are completely reversible. This isn’t true either. These are the expected side effects of puberty blockers:

Common side effects of the GnRH agonists and antagonists include symptoms of hypogonadism such as hot flashes, gynecomastia, fatigue, weight gain, fluid retention, erectile dysfunction and decreased libido. Long term therapy can result in metabolic abnormalities, weight gain, worsening of diabetes and osteoporosis. Rare, but potentially serious adverse events include transient worsening of prostate cancer due to surge in testosterone with initial injection of GnRH agonists and pituitary apoplexy in patients with pituitary adenoma. Single instances of clinically apparent liver injury have been reported with some GnRH agonists (histrelin, goserelin), but the reports were not very convincing. There is no evidence to indicate that there is cross sensitivity to liver injury among the various GnRH analogues despite their similarity in structure. There is also a report that GnRH agonists used in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer may increase the risk of heart problems by 30%.

Osteoporosis and diabetes are absolutely life altering. 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.

Further, there is a growing body of evidence to show high risk of infertility after prolonged use of these drugs.

And these are just the dangerous irreversible side effects. The cosmetic side effects are devastating, and include men with child-sized penises and testicles, and women without breasts. This is one such case. The teenager had taken puberty blockers, resulting in a small penis. With insufficient penile tissue, doctors attempted to remove and use part of his colon to create a fake vagina. He died less than a day later from complications.

Ultimately, I believe I am very open to evidence. I have reached my position precisely by pouring over research. I am open to honest discussion and debate. I don't belittle or minimise anyone's experiences or beliefs. I simply want the best outcomes for children. For this opinion, I have been banned on many subreddits. I have been sent death threats. I have been called every disgusting name in the dictionary, and then more. I hope that Lemmy is a place which allows respectful discussion.

[–] Awoo@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

@dessalines@lemmy.ml this is exactly why tone policing is bullshit moderation policy.

Your modteam is allowing this transphobic screed to exist, and has in fact unbanned the user that posted it despite the very very obvious fact that they are a transphobe doing concern-trolling and "just asking questions" style veiled bigotry, while simultaneously banning everyone that has reacted to their behaviour by rightfully calling them the names they deserve to be called.

This policymaking is what results in people in the left calling someone a terf or a fascist getting banned while the fascists and terfs roam free. The site will be taken over by this and the left will slowly be banned and pushed out by it. The fact that the team can't seem to get into their heads that trans people might get a little fucking heated when bigots are allowed to exist and clearly defended by some of the incompetent members the modteam is another part of the problem.

You should get some trans people on your team to keep the rest of the idiots on it making these shit decisions in check. This nerd should absolutely be rebanned and every other person that copped a ban over this shit should be unbanned.

Demanding that lgbt people, racial groups and the lower classes engage with their oppressors in a suitable “tone” without ever getting heated is unrealistic. The outcome of tone policing is that the oppressed get banned from spaces when they don’t behave with the right tone when discussing their oppression while those doing the oppressing (this fucker) come to dominate it more and more. The oppressed come to be alienated by it (leaving the space as a result) while the oppressors come to be empowered by it. Tone policing should NEVER come before principle and protection of the marginalized.

[–] GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

ty for articulating this so well o7

[–] Awoo@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

It's pleasant to see that the Lemmy team saw reason on this. I intentionally used a few names in it for effect and that was a risk to me getting banned but seemed to work out demonstrating that a person can be completely correct and should be listened to despite their tone. Wasn't even really intentional either I was just fucking heated over the way this was being handled. Lemmy does need some on-point trans mods that are willing to argue with the rest of the team internally over poor decision making and do some internal education.

[–] hannadryad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What the hell is this? Trans person here. This is not the thread to start concern trolling about trans issues. If you really want a space to talk freely about your concerns you can start a community or even your own instance.

[–] dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, this is just run of the mill transphobic sealioning. They even complain about reddit having been run by tankies and repeated the "current thing" conservative reactionary trope. I'm totally fine if this kind of person doesn't feel welcome here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@dessalines@lemmy.ml please reconsider reprioritizing civility fetishism, particularly in defense against transphobia. The course of events here was extremely uncool and is tantamount to making this space systemically transphobic.

All it will take to drive trans people off is for you to ban them when they defend themselves against transphobic hate. And all it will take for transphobes to make that happen is for transphobes to harass people here until they react. This pattern has happened many times on many platforms and I'm surprised if you're not aware of it.

[–] ShadowAether@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

In all my research I couldn’t find a single study, anywhere, demonstrating an objective quality of life improvement.

You're saying you haven't found any evidence and that proves there isn't improvement but it's impossible for any properly done study to prove any changes to those categories. The simple reason is there is no environment that has existed for long enough to do a comparison. It's impossible to conduct a proper study on the life expectancy of trans people if they transition at 12 years old or 20 years old because the treatments have not been around long enough and people can live a long time. Even a study that tracks suicide rates over 5 years based on treatment type takes much more than 5 years.

The only studies that can be done need to use historic data and we can't change the past plus retroactive comparisons are super dicey and very prone to bias. Remember how dead patients were added post-moterm to that COVID trial published from Egypt which totally skewed the results? That study lead to large numbers of people taking ivermectin and fueled the antivax movement worldwide https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93658

The absence of research studies can not be used to prove or disprove something and should not form your opinions based on this. As least people aren't trying and doing it poorly then people write catchy articles about it and it creates whole industries (I'm looking at you, nutritional science).

[–] Sphere@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I am completely appalled at this instance right now for allowing this absolutely vile comment to persist on here, but since some reactionary admin decided your disgusting falsehoods should remain up, allow me to provide an extremely easily-found data point you "couldn't find" in your search:

New Study Confirms Extremely Low Regret Rates for Gender-Affirming Surgery

Regret rates for sex reassignment surgery are among the LOWEST for ANY type of surgery OF ANY KIND. They're even lower than the complication rate! (Yes, really!) How's that for hard data?

Given the fact that this was incredibly easy for me to find (a single Google search pulled it up easily), I can only conclude that you "couldn't find" evidence that transitioning is beneficial because you weren't actually looking for it; you were looking for evidence of exactly the opposite point.

If this comment is indicative of things you said to your relative who took their life, then you should absolutely feel partially responsible; this kind of patronizing pseudo-concern BS is exactly the kind of toxicity that makes trans people feel that they will never be accepted by the people in their lives.

[–] Cloak@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've removed it. Please understand I'm a human and overloaded

[–] cryball@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

This is pure comedy ✌

Others please note I did not see the above message, but instead it was already removed by a moderator.

load more comments (49 replies)
load more comments (79 replies)