Moderation Questions and General Chat Thread

Here's your post.

Here's some definitions of delusions:

"a false belief or judgment about external reality, held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions."

"psychology : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary"

I'd make the same decision today should you repeat that line of commenting.

That's incredible tbh, i started using the word after reading the book "the God delusion", the idea that we can't use deluded to refer to people convinced they are a woman even if they have a penis is incredible, that's the literal dictionary definition of what a delusion is . A strong belief in something that is objectively not real.

That such a convinction can appear more often in mentally ill people isn't at all a claim that you must be mentally ill if you are deluded about something.

So if someone says that people are deluded about Trump being a good president, that's a claim of group mental illness? basically the word can never be used in this forum?

You ahould probably reread the politics forum policy guidelines irt transgender issues. It outlines why your statement is not allowed. It also states that some may well vehemently disagree with this policy.

Im not going to engage with a debate with you on this. But I will suggest that you consider you may be conflating the definitions of biological male and female with the gender identities of man and woman.

I am not debating the guideline. I am ok not calling trans people all inherently mentally ill.

I am debating the use of "delusional" to be a reference to mental illness.

I am not "conflating", i am denying a thing such as gender separated from biological sex exists. I am denying all gender theory.

So, mod question: is the use of "delusional" or variation of such, considered a claim on the mental health of the person or groups it is used about? and if so why, given the dictionary doesn't say that.

By denying the existence of gender separate from sex, you are, in fact, saying to all transgender people that "it's all in their head" and they suffer from delusions. That is the very thing that is prohibited in this forum. You are welcome to your opinion. But that opinion, contradicted by the major medical associations who deal with this subject matter, is not welcome here.

wait wait even gender identity as posited by gender theory is in the head (=completly subjective), so it's not about not calling them mentally ill, it's not allowed to claim gender theory is wrong? that's the policy? i completly didn't understand that to be the case.

They don't (not necessarily) SUFFER from delusions. I claim they are deluded, ie convinced of something literally false. That doesn't mean it's a mental illness nor that he has to automatically generate suffering. Same for people who believe in god and many other examples.

If that's the policy, if i can't deny the truth value of gender theory, ofc i simply can't wrote about the topic, but it really should be stated differently in the guidelines

The guidelines *DO NOT* ask people to affirm gender theory. They ask people to not deny the existence of trans people (i don't), and to avoid claiming they are all mentally ill (i didn't claim that).

I can't find where the rules claim that i have to say gender theory is true in order to be able to talk about the topic

Seems to me you expanded the rules to include "must accept gender theory", but that part isn't in the rules.

/Luciom- if you continue to refer to transgender as a mostly a made up phenomenon, and tell another poster he actually only had brainwashed kids, you will be banned again. This forum policy is that gender incongruence is a real thing, so therefore transgender people are real people who are neither brainwashed or delusional. If you can't adhere to the policies you should stop posting in this thread/

So mod question, even claiming a significant portion of the young, radical leftist, people who self-define as trans are actually brainwashed into doing so is against forum policy? i have to believe the totality of people who self-define as trans are such?

"Trans people exist" doesn't lead automatically to "anyone including young and weak people who claim to be trans is decisively so".

Again quite a bit of an unwritten jump from the actual stated rules, and your interpretation of them.

Btw given detransition exists, it's literally a fact that some (unknown) portion of the people who today claim to be trans actually aren't.

Browser, if you banned someone for saying "deluded" when the rule is against "mentally ill" that seems like an overreach. Your job shouldn't be to look up words in the thesaurus to see if someone did or didn't break a rule. You even had to create a chain of definitions there: deluded --> psychotic --> mentally ill. You can find grounds to ban pretty much anyone for anything if this is the standard. Then again, I guess that's probably the idea.

As you quoted from the rules:

Transgender people are defined as those who have an incongruence between their perceived gender identity and their biological sex.

Here's your post again:

That is a false statement. No transgender person think they are the other sex. They feel their gender identity doesnt match their biological sex. That is the very definition of transgender. So when you claim it "isnt real for us" (apparently speaking for all nontransgender people) you are in fact denying there is even such a thing as a transgender person outside of a delusional mind.

Another incorrect statement. None of the mainstream medical organizations who are experts in this field refer to having a gender identity differing from biological sex as a delusion. Nor do they consider the concept of someone having a gender at all delusional. It certainly is considered anything but an objectively false delusion. Yet you state that as if it is some sort of medical certainty.

You say society must stop considering someone who is a biological male as having a gender identity of a woman. You state it is impossible, (never was, can never be.) IOW there can be no transgender people with gender incongruence, only biological males and females with delusions.

This isnt about spinning semantics. Your statements couldnt be clearer. You dont have to actually use the words "mentally ill" to equate transgender people a mental disorder. You are trying to dance around the policy.

I didnt need to look up anything in a thesaurus nor come up with a sequence to get to mental illness. See my response above.

Holy ****, can we all just be normal about transgender people?

Simplerick has been permabanned for multiple posts stating that all transgender people are mentally ill. The decision to permabanned was based on the context of his remarks, and his mod action history, including that he had a previous account permabanned.

by rule then, if the word "thoughts" or "thinking" had been used instead "delusions" in the offending post, would a ban have been issued?

What if he had said that a great deal of trans were ill and not all...would that be okay???

Sorry, but with a couple of posters in the last few mins using various wording could you repost with the specific post you are referring too?

D2, I disagree with you on this one. Maybe the forum rules needs to be written more broadly but there are plenty of posters who dance around stating directly that transgender people suffer from a mental illness and it/them/their treatment/their rights shouldn't be coddled or supported as a result. If Luciom's answer to resolve every transgender issues is that we should stop treating gender differences as real, because it's all a delusion, he shouldn't be posting here.

These are the same posters that would be discussing eugenics and the merits of race based crime theories if allowed.

sure.

you quoted the post that earned a one week ban (post 401 above). this is the relevant portion to my question

if the word "thinking" or "thoughts" had been used instead of "delusions", would a ban have been issued?

Your argument is that he was banned for a body of work, which is fair enough, but also not what I was objecting to.

The context plays an important part in it. For example the DSM-5 defines gender dysphoria as a mental health disorder where the gender incongruence between gender identity and biological sex creates such a level of anxiety or discomfort that it manifests itself as having debilitating effects on everyday life. The gender incongruence itself is what defines a person as being transgender, but is not, without the debilitating mental state, a mental illness.

So if someone had a study, for example, that said that x% of transgender people suffer from gender dysphoria (a mental disorder) that is one thing. But to say that simply having gender incongruence (ie just being transgender) is a mental disorder, in any percentage, is what is prohibited.

Seems nitpicky. Who hurt you?

Yes. Those words are often used together anyway (delusional thinking"). But to say the very fact that they think they have a gender identity at all,much less one that doesnt match their biological sex is "objectively false" is the heart of the issue. I think people need to take a higher up look at the forest rather than try and look at individual trees. Look at the purpose of the policy, and then look at the purpose or meaning of the post in question.

Not nit picky. That distinction is at the very heart of the transgender issue. It is a very different thing to say some transgender people may develop a mental health disorder versus transgender people have a mental disorder by definition just because they are transgender. Accusations of mental health disorders have been used for decades to marginalize and discriminate against members of the LGBQT communities.

I dont know why you added that gratuitous personal comment at the end. It wasnt appropriate.

Because I think you jump to the ban hammer too often like a hurt individual who seeks control. This is probably your only outlet.

Decided to make your return a fleeting one, I see. Catch you in a week.