The costs of trans visibility
Yesterday, Dylan Mulvaney broke her silence: https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney/vi....
For context, this is a trans influencer who built a 10 million strong following on TikTok. She took a brand deal with budweiser to post an ad on an instagram, and the anti-trans right went absolutely ballistic, calling for a boycott, condemning the company, and to some perhaps unknowable degree it influenced that Budweiser sales dropped by a 1/4 and
. Dylan speaks more personally about the effect of the hatred on her.
What strikes me about this story is that it is just about visibility. This isn't inclusion in sports or gender-affirming care for minors, it was just that a trans person was visible. This wasn't even visibility in a TV commerical that a poor right-winger is forced to see, it was an ad on her own instagram page. We're all in our own social media algorithm influenced bubbles, but from my vantage point it really has seemed that in the last year or so things have just gotten worse for trans people and the backlash to even minor visibility is growing.
We need to do better.
We used to treat people with psychological disorders with non-reversible experimental medical procedures. These were highly successful in treating the disorder. Moniz even won the Nobel prize for his ground breaking research.
However, we now realise lobotomies are ethically bankrupt.
It will be interesting to see how history passes judgement on gender ideologues who performed experimental procedures on children with mental disorders.
Some older psychological treatments, particularly ECT (aka electroshock treatments) are still used at times, because they are still believed to be more effective than any more modern treatments, especially in cases of severe depression. However, the side effects are very common and viewed by most as very bad (major memory loss is typical), so it is generally only used as a treatment of last resort, after every newer form of treatment has been tried and proven ineffective on an individual patient.
This is important because, as usual regarding medical and psychiatric treatments, the most extreme forms of treatment (those which are the most invasive and most likely to cause irreversible side effects) are only used after every other option has been attempted and failed. I see no reason why treatment for someone who feels negatively about their original gender should jump to the most invasive and irreversible one (with the side effects of infertility, likely loss of orgasm, among others) before at least giving a different treatment option a chance.
Seems a bit doubtful. Your take is that humans as they get older eventually become nihilists?
Well, there is no immediate benefit to self consciousness, only discomfort, which is why most people avoid it. Whether or not there is a long term payoff is a faith question. You can observe yourself and find out if you have faith or not.
Older people don’t become nihilists about the world. They become more and more deluded. Only people with faith are nihilists about the world.
We used to treat people with psychological disorders with non-reversible experimental medical procedures. These were highly successful in treating the disorder. Moniz even won the Nobel prize for his ground breaking research.
However, we now realise lobotomies are ethically bankrupt.
It will be interesting to see how history passes judgement on gender ideologues who performed experimental procedures on children with mental disorders.
There will be a reckoning. The gender specialists will fall first. Psychiatry will fall later.
OK. Now that I'm back to modding, I dont have the time to go through several months of posts in the various threads to het caught up. But a quick scan of this one tells me we need to tighten up a bit by dropping the personal insults and instead focus on making points or counterpoints, some preferably even backed up by facts with sources. But opinions without facts behind them are still allowed, and other posters can decide whether to engage with or ignore such opinions. But in any case, please lose the personal attacks and insults.
Thanks.
We used to treat people with psychological disorders with non-reversible experimental medical procedures. These were highly successful in treating the disorder. Moniz even won the Nobel prize for his ground breaking research.
However, we now realise lobotomies are ethically bankrupt.
It will be interesting to see how history passes judgement on gender ideologues who performed experimental procedures on children with mental disorders.
i've mentioned the lobotomy thing ad nauseum and it's always met with "but we know more now" wholly failing to understand that yes, that may be true, but that's exactly what the lobotomy people said as well, "we know more now and we're not making the old misakes of treating this with leeches but handling it was with well researched science"
well stated and echoing what you said, 100% of the trans i know are people i met in the usa were at live music venues as well
but the main thing is we get people manipulating stuff like that fabled 1.7% of people are intersex nonsense in order to elevate the movement into seeming to be a bigger thing than it really is
I have no idea what percentage of people are "intersex" overall, but it's definitely over 1.7% in Portland! So maybe it is that high overall, but that's not really relevant to how they should be treated. Adults who are intersex / trans should be treated with the same respect as everyone else, and should be accorded the rights to live however they want and to do whatever they want with their bodies, as long as it's not harming anyone else. But minors who are / believe themselves to be trans should be subject to the same rules / offered the same legal protections as minors of any other group. They should not be allowed to make major, likely irreversible decisions to alter their bodies, even if they are supported by their parents and whichever (possibly self-interested doctor they found to agree with them.
By the way, did any of you know that in the US a woman of 18 years of age is not allowed (by law) to undergo voluntary sterilization? {This is definitely true for procedures covered by Medicaid; I'm not certain if the law applies to procedures paid by other means). She must be at least 21 years of age, because there is believed to be such a large chance of her later regret of this decision. And even a woman of 21 (or really under 30) who has not had children will find it nearly impossible to find a doctor who is willing to surgically sterilize her, even though the modern treatments are even safer than the old "tube tie" methods. Nearly all gynecologists (the majority of whom are now women) simply find it unethical to permanently take away the ability of a young woman to give birth to a child, even if she swears that she does not want to have children.
I think this is very bad, and that any woman over the age of consent should be allowed to do whatever she wants with her body. Most liberals definitely agree she should be allowed to have an abortion, and most seem to agree that she should be able to have her breasts and uterus removed as part of gender reassignment surgery (which of course causes even more irreversible sterilization than the methods generally used as birth control). Yet somehow there is no outcry about 18 year old child-free women not being allowed make their own choices about their bodies, and I would venture to guess that most liberal women (along with most conservative and liberal gynecologists) would not even want that rule to be changed. Why the double-standard here? We can trust women to choose an abortion, and we can even trust them to become a man, but we can't trust them with a permanent means of birth control?
Well, there is no immediate benefit to self consciousness, only discomfort, which is why most people avoid it. Whether or not there is a long term payoff is a faith question. You can observe yourself and find out if you have faith or not.
Older people don’t become nihilists about the world. They become more and more deluded. Only people with faith are nihilists about the world.
Typo? If not, please explain, as I would expect you to believe the opposite.
i've mentioned the lobotomy thing ad nauseum and it's always met with "but we know more now" wholly failing to understand that yes, that may be true, but that's exactly what the lobotomy people said as well, "we know more now and we're not making the old misakes of treating this with leeches but handling it was with well researched science"
Hey, it was more advanced than trepanation (which, stunningly, actually did sometimes work as well). But even it is still done occasionally.
OK. Now that I'm back to modding, I dont have the time to go through several months of posts in the various threads to het caught up. But a quick scan of this one tells me we need to tighten up a bit by dropping the personal insults and instead focus on making points or counterpoints, some preferably even backed up by facts with sources. But opinions without facts behind them are still allowed, and other posters can decide whether to engage
I sure hope this is true.
i've mentioned the lobotomy thing ad nauseum and it's always met with "but we know more now" wholly failing to understand that yes, that may be true, but that's exactly what the lobotomy people said as well, "we know more now and we're not making the old misakes of treating this with leeches but handling it was with well researched science"
The lobotomy thing is always an excellent point, but the pro transformer group will always say “but we know more now and will never know anymore, we are at the point where any scientific/medical stance we have now will never be wrong!” Anything that doesn’t fit their narrative will be poo pood even if it is facts/logic/rational. Any of us that don’t agree with their viewpoints are just “Bigots!” And “Racists!”
The lobotomy thing is always an excellent point, but the pro transformer group will always say “but we know more now and will never know anymore, we are at the point where any scientific/medical stance we have now will never be wrong!” Anything that doesn’t fit their narrative will be poo pood even if it is facts/logic/rational. Any of us that don’t agree with their viewpoints are just “Bigots!” And “Racists!”
I couldn’t agree more. The purple hair woke leftists are all about diversity of ideas and inclusion….as long as you agree with them. If you don’t, they’ll cancel you.
Meanwhile, there are no studies to suggest drugging kids reduces suicide (remember, that’s the mechanism by which these drugs save lives, what a joke), there are no studies of using these drugs to suppress puberty for long periods of time at the normal phase of life when puberty should occur. There is no psychological evaluation of these kids, just a rush to start them on a course of puberty blockers leading ultimately to hormones.
The lobotomy thing is always an excellent point, but the pro transformer group will always say “but we know more now and will never know anymore, we are at the point where any scientific/medical stance we have now will never be wrong!”
Things like this almost make me think of Asimov's The Relativity of Wrong: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rela...
That is, the claim isn't that we're at peak knowledge, but that we are getting less and less wrong about things.
It will be interesting to see how history passes judgement on gender ideologues who performed experimental procedures on children with mental disorders.
History’s judgement? Bro, the bigots have already been swept into the dustbin of history. Anti-trans bullshit legislation can’t even pass in Ohio, those guys lost, man.
History’s judgement? Bro, the bigots have already been swept into the dustbin of history. Anti-trans bullshit legislation can’t even pass in Ohio, those guys lost, man.
The good guys believe they have enough votes to override the veto. The hard working people of Ohio may be able to protect children after all.
The same people think they have a method of bypassing the constitutional amendment to legalize abortion and gutting the recreational marijuana consumer initiative. I'm sure there are good guys on each side...
what do have Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Katherine Gun have in common?
ALL have been accused of treason. Only one got pardoned by obama after 6 years, and that was Manning, the only trans in this line up.
Was this fair? why didnt they pardon Snowden or Assange??
I believe Snowden became a citizen of Russia not too long ago. He will probably never come home. Lord knows what secrets he gave to Vlad Putin, Esq.
But again, this is 'Merica where the woke snowflakes will cancel you if you don't agree people can "feel" like one gender one moment, then "feel" a completely different gender the next. This is why 'Merica is destined to fail at this point. We no longer live in reality. We live in some bizarre
Yes hes russian now. they made him do that.
it seems bizzare I agree.
there you have it black on white:
"Male sex offenders ‘faking trans identities’ to move to women’s prisons
Evidence unearthed by the prisoners’ newspaper Inside Time found inmates were pretending to change gender to access the female estate
Charles Hymas, Home Affairs Editor 10 July 2023 • 4:37pm
Jailed male sex offenders are faking transgender identities in an effort to move to women-only prisons, research backed by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) suggests..."
Manning was convicted to 35 years for treason. then the transition in prison if Im not mistaking and then pardoned after 6 by Obama. .
that is correct, she was convicted to 35 years end of july, 2013 and not even a month later she says "guess what? Im now a woman!"
I dont want do make any accusations here but the timing seems odd.
it turned out to be a very smart move bc obama pardoned her in 2017.
what do have Edward Snowden, Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Katherine Gun have in common?
ALL have been accused of treason. Only one got pardoned by obama after 6 years, and that was Manning, the only trans in this line up.
Was this fair? why didnt they pardon Snowden or Assange??
Unfortunately thats what it seems like, doesnt it?
Manning was convicted to 35 years for treason. then the transition in prison if Im not mistaking and then pardoned after 6 by Obama. Assange same thing, treason, out: never
Snowden same thing...
that is correct, she was convicted to 35 years end of july, 2013 and not even a month later she says "guess what? Im now a woman!"
I dont want do make any accusations here but the timing seems odd.
it turned out to be a very smart move bc obama pardoned her in 2017.
Most of what you state is just completely wrong. None of these people were accused, indicted or found guilty of treason. Manning either pled guilty or was found quilty of around 20 charges atCourt Martial. However, with the most serious charge of aiding the enemy, the Court Martial found him not guilty.
Neither Assange nor Snowden have been tried at all yet. They both remain outside the US though Assange is facing extradition. So nothing to pardon there. Katherine Gun had her charges dropped by the British government.
Manning was not pardoned by Obama. His sentence was commuted to bring it in line with the sentences of others convicted of leaking classified documents.
manning notified his supervisor in his Army unit by email in2010 that he suffered from gender identity disorder and included a picture dressed as a woman. So the whole point of his release being somehow tied to his transgender status being discovered only after he was in prison is also wrong.
So basically every assumption you made and fact you claim in your post is just wrong. None of the people you named were accused of treason; only Manning was ever convicted of anything, and was not pardoned. The two other Americans have never gone to trial and the Brit had the charges dropped.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Mannings status as a transgender person had anything to do with the sentence being commuted. You just made that up out of thin air, and it is completely inappropriate for this forum.
Mod note. it is clear this thread has strayed from the topic of the cost of trans visibility back into another catch all transgender thread, filled with the same old transgender bashing and insults that plagued other trans catch all threads that were closed. I deleted some posts that were nothing but insults rather than addressing the topic at hand.
I am reexamining our policy in regards to how the transgender topic will be moderated, and will issue additional guidance soon. But in the meantime stop with the gratuitous transgender bashing. Whatever your beliefs are on this topic, insulting or ridiculing others will not be allowed.
Most of what you state is just completely wrong. None of these people were accused, indicted or found guilty of treason. Manning either pled guilty or was found quilty of around 20 charges atCourt Martial. However, with the most serious charge of aiding the enemy, the Court Martial found him not guilty.
Neither Assange nor Snowden have been tried at all yet. They both remain outside the US though Assange is facing extradition. So nothing t
True Bradley Manning was not tried in federal criminal court but as a court martial, but he was convicted of espionage. The dude faced a max of 90 years, so the 35 he got and should've served were a gift. Robert Hanssen and Aldrich Ames were given life sentences for......, you guessed it, espionage. John Walker got life for espionage. His son got 25 years. Clayton Lonetree got 30 years for banging a spy. Let's not act like Bradley Manning was somehow treated harshly for betraying his country. He's damn lucky they didn't seek the death penalty, which they could have.
Bradley may have dressed up in women's clothing, but never came out publicly as trans until the day after being sentenced. The previous poster was not incorrect about that.
Proclamation 4311 sets a precedent that a pardon can be issued prior to even being indicted, which both Assange and Snowden have been. So, you are wrong when you say, "So nothing to pardon there."
