I can be like, “I’m definitely pro-access to hormone treatments in most circumstances for adults, but I still think having transitioning a person’s sex is a big decision, should be made cautiously, and can have lasting psychological effects.” And I’ll get 100+ down votes.
I mean, just because you pretend you were subtle here doesn’t mean you’re not still admitting to being transphobic and mad you cannot get away with it scot free.
The reason you get downvoted is because its, in your case likely unwitting, concern trolling.
It is nobody’s decision but the person receiving treatment.
While it’s important that people are fully informed of the risks and potential downsides associated, the specific wording of the talking point you are repeating is designed to infantalize and remove the option under the guise of “caution”.
Ironically this is a perfect example of how liberals end up supporting conservative and/or fascist policies.
That’s the thing: that sounds reasonable until you take 5 minutes to research and find that there are already a fuck ton of roadblocks and checks in place to make sure it’s what they want and the best option. That statement is either made in bad faith or in ignorance. A trans person trying to get access to surgery and a woman trying to have her uterus removed have similar, but unique, levels of difficulty.
Pretending anyone can make that choice on a Tuesday and undergo serious surgery on a Wednesday is either super ignorant or a bad actor. You can’t even do that shit for normal healthcare procedures.
But the viral right found its token examples, and those examples became the face of an entire problem that didn’t exist.
Maybe because it’s a disingenuous and ignorant defense that plays into the right’s framing that “their transing the kids”, ignores the reality of ‘de-transitioners’, sows doubt on puberty blockers, and is just the casual whitewashed version that is used to make the more controlling legislation palatable.
Like why should you get “close enough” points for this take on Lemmy of all places.
You see this readily on Lemmy.
I can be like, “I’m definitely pro-access to hormone treatments in most circumstances for adults, but I still think having transitioning a person’s sex is a big decision, should be made cautiously, and can have lasting psychological effects.” And I’ll get 100+ down votes.
Because your position is forcing children to endure the wrong puberty.
And your purity position is that a Nazi in power that threatens everyone is better than “not perfect”.
Your policy results in trans kids committing suicide. And it’s why you want it so bad.
I mean, just because you pretend you were subtle here doesn’t mean you’re not still admitting to being transphobic and mad you cannot get away with it scot free.
The reason you get downvoted is because its, in your case likely unwitting, concern trolling.
It is nobody’s decision but the person receiving treatment.
While it’s important that people are fully informed of the risks and potential downsides associated, the specific wording of the talking point you are repeating is designed to infantalize and remove the option under the guise of “caution”.
Ironically this is a perfect example of how liberals end up supporting conservative and/or fascist policies.
You just can’t help yourself.
Correct, societal problem require group effort and you’re pulling the wrong way.
You just can help instead.
That’s the thing: that sounds reasonable until you take 5 minutes to research and find that there are already a fuck ton of roadblocks and checks in place to make sure it’s what they want and the best option. That statement is either made in bad faith or in ignorance. A trans person trying to get access to surgery and a woman trying to have her uterus removed have similar, but unique, levels of difficulty.
Pretending anyone can make that choice on a Tuesday and undergo serious surgery on a Wednesday is either super ignorant or a bad actor. You can’t even do that shit for normal healthcare procedures.
But the viral right found its token examples, and those examples became the face of an entire problem that didn’t exist.
Maybe because it’s a disingenuous and ignorant defense that plays into the right’s framing that “their transing the kids”, ignores the reality of ‘de-transitioners’, sows doubt on puberty blockers, and is just the casual whitewashed version that is used to make the more controlling legislation palatable.
Like why should you get “close enough” points for this take on Lemmy of all places.
Thank you for demonstrating the point in the most predictable way possible.
Thank you for not engaging with a single part of the actual argument.
So you want to take away access to care for some adults?