OT 21: DFD Giveth and DFD Taketh Away

[golftdibrad1]

If we're not going to allow any discussion of gender with kids involved, though, then that leads to an interesting number of conclusions:

No more boy's or girl's sports, because we can't talk about kids being boys or girls.

No more boy's or girl's bathrooms.

...and on and on, dress codes at school mean that everyone has to wear a beige sack and have medium-length hair.

No school dances. No cheerleaders. No (American) football.

Everyone must be treated exactly the same as everyone else, otherwise you are introducing ideas of gender.

Sounds great, komrade. Brad the Big Beige Bolshevik!?

thats not what I said, and of course that wont work either. This is:

Now we get somewhere: Yes we do "start education with "idealized bullshit" because reality is usually quite a bit more nuanced and complex." Which is exactly fucking why its not ok to speak to kids about this shit!
..... Be kind. Boys potty here and girls potty here, because I said so. Dress like this to be normal. Dress like this will make you stand out. End of discussion. When kids hit puberty is when FAMILY can start to introduce these ideas with the help of trusted adults.

95% or more of people are at least somewhat attracted to the opposite sex. Society is tailored to this, not the other whatever percent of people that fall outside of normal. They of course have rights to do what they want. And some people wont like it, and those people are the more assholey of the group. You will never stop that, sorry.......

You cant strawman my actual words Valerie.

[Valkyrie]

Boys potty here and girls potty here, because I said so. Dress like this to be normal. Dress like this will make you stand out. End of discussion.

That is literally speaking to kids about this shit.

You're OK with speaking to them as long as your own personal views are the only ones allowed. Not those of the academic or scientific communities, because you are the grand wizard who is the world's leading authority on everything. Actual people who teach and study these things for a living? A bunch of brainwashed libtards! Lock them up! Hunter Biden's Laptop! BUT HER EMAILS!!!

[MrH42]

But if biological sex isn't what defines "gender", what does? What does it mean to be a biological man, but proclaim to be a woman? What even is a woman if not the biological sex?

It's essentially a set of societal norms. Which is antithetical to what I believe. A little girl can be into firetrucks, playing in the mud, and sports. That doesn't make her a male.

We've prioritized societal gender norms as reality over obvious biology. I'm with Brad here. To put in a child's mind that if they don't fit within the pre-defined gender stereotype, they might mentally be the wrong sex and they must change their body physically to match is introducing very dangerous ideology.

The fact the camp puts very clearly that their goal is political and they're dealing with 8 year olds is insane. I would feel the same way even with political ideas I lean towards. If a space summer camp states that they're also going to be educating kids that taxation is theft, I'd be out

[golftdibrad1]

Boys potty here and girls potty here, because I said so. Dress like this to be normal. Dress like this will make you stand out. End of discussion.

That is literally speaking to kids about this shit.

You're OK with speaking to them as long as your own personal views are the only ones allowed. Not those of the academic or scientific communities, because you are the grand wizard who is the world's leading authority on everything. Actual people who teach and study these things for a living? A bunch of brainwashed libtards! Lock them up! Hunter Biden's Laptop! BUT HER EMAILS!!!

Again, we strongly disagree.

And to be clear, I don't want any political ideology beyond general history and civics taught to school age kids. The literal mission statement of your orgs says its political.

To put in a child's mind that if they don't fit within the pre-defined gender stereotype, they might mentally be the wrong sex and they must change their body physically to match is introducing very dangerous ideology.

The fact the camp puts very clearly that their goal is political and they're dealing with 8 year olds is insane. I would feel the same way even with political ideas I lean towards. If a space summer camp states that they're also going to be educating kids that taxation is theft, I'd be out

re: bold, exactly, you've distilled down my concerns to one sentence.

re: rest, also this. Even though I, with my kid, will introduce libertarian ideas about personal freedom, responsibility, liberty, and taxation being theft even I would hesitate to send him to a CAMP that does this as part of its mission. CAMP is a time for kids to be fucking kids and have fun, play, and make friends.

[Valkyrie]

It's essentially a set of societal norms. Which is antithetical to what I believe.

Stop the presses. 2 guys on the internet say that the professional community is wrong, guess we'd better listen to them.

[MrH42]

It's essentially a set of societal norms. Which is antithetical to what I believe.

Stop the presses. 2 guys on the internet say that the professional community is wrong, guess we'd better listen to them.

You're trying to shame us for having our own opinions and thoughts on something?

[Valkyrie]

Stop the presses. 2 guys on the internet say that the professional community is wrong, guess we'd better listen to them.

You're trying to shame us for having our own opinions and thoughts on something?

I'm shaming you for trying to force those opinions onto everyone else.

You claim, without evidence, that following the advice of people who actually work in these fields will cause harm.

They claim, with evidence, that following their advice will do the opposite.

Your opinion is not equally valid when it comes to setting public policy.

If you want to teach your kids at home that the teacher lady is and the Earth is actually a donut on the back of a space turtle, that's up to you. If you want to require all kids be taught that in school, that's another story entirely.

[golftdibrad1]

It's essentially a set of societal norms. Which is antithetical to what I believe.

Stop the presses. 2 guys on the internet say that the professional community is wrong, guess we'd better listen to them.

OH HAI Mr. Credentialism / appeal to authority. I've missed you. Since the 'experts' have been soooooo spot on the last three years i guess we should removed that logical fallacy from existence.

[Valkyrie]

The authority is evidence, not credentials.

[golftdibrad1]

The authority is evidence, not credentials.

Where is it? who compiled it and wrote the studies? What statistical methods were used? How long was the study period? What was the number of participants? What journal published? Who were the peer reviewers?

[MrH42]

You're trying to shame us for having our own opinions and thoughts on something?

I'm shaming you for trying to force those opinions onto everyone else.

You claim, without evidence, that following the advice of people who actually work in these fields will cause harm.

They claim, with evidence, that following their advice will do the opposite.

Your opinion is not equally valid when it comes to setting public policy.

If you want to teach your kids at home that the teacher lady is and the Earth is actually a donut on the back of a space turtle, that's up to you. If you want to require all kids be taught that in school, that's another story entirely.

I'm not claiming any of that. I just think it's a terrible idea. You're the one making these claims, not me. If you want to back it up with empirical evidence, by all means, let it rip, I'd be more than happy to engage.

But yeah, sorry. A young teacher with a bachelor degree in education pushing their political philosophies is not objectively more correct than myself or anyone else in terms of how best to raise children. That's a bizarre stance to take.

[coogles]

Gender is not an adult idea. We force kids into boxes (which they quickly start enforcing on each other, often quite cruelly) before they're even born with all this pink and blue nonsense. Barbie vs GI Joe, long hair vs short, you know the drill.

It's not all forced. Having 3 kids now, one boy and two girls, that's become pretty obvious to see. There are things inherent in their personalities, their curiosities, the things they notice about themselves and others that shape their perception of themselves and others.

I won't go on and on with examples, but we're starting to potty train the twins (both girls). We sometimes bathe all three together and when they were two they couldn't have cared less that our son has a penis and they don't. But now they're three. They see that he stands up when he pees. Daddy can stand up and pee. Mommy has to sit down. Daddy has different parts than they do, and when I got to the bathroom it's "meh, whatever", but when my wife goes to the bathroom they sprint across the house and scream "MOMMY I COME WIFF YOU!!!"

The idea that biological sex and what we consider sociological gender have no link is just crazy to me. I see it in my own children every day. And if my nearly 5 year old little dude decided he wanted to be a girl I would love him no less, but if some third party decides to plant bugs in his ear about how he can be a girl if he wants to be and there's no difference between boys and girls and any other such nonsense, I'm going to have a problem. Kids have enough to figure out about the world, to learn and understand already.

[MrH42]

I thought this guy put it pretty eloquently. He tweeted this thread in response to this he received on twitter:

A large part of education is giving students language to define and explain things. That is precisely what you’ve described. Eg, I knew I was cis gendered and heterosexual at 11. I didn’t have the language to express it. If I’d have been given it, I’d have used it. This isn’t odd

You did not 'know' that you were 'cis' at age 11 lol- you learned the term 'cis' as an adult and then retroactively applied it to yourself- it's not the same thing

This 'knowledge' (which is akin to the knowledge that your arm possesses 'armness') was *socially produced* through your introduction to the discourse of 'gender identity', through your introduction to a conceptual distinction founded upon 'identifying with one's assigned sex'

Ironically, the fact that you've never felt a dissonance between yourself and your 'assigned sex' becomes evidence for the legitimacy of the distinction in the first place i.e. you assume that because *you* experience a unity of 'gender' and 'sex', this implies that others don't

By teaching young children that they *can* experience a dissonance between their 'inner selves' and their 'assigned sex', you actually invite them to 'consider what this would be like'- and this objectless rumination then becomes the 'evidence' for the necessity of transition

Since there are no actual tangible standards by which a person can verify that their gender 'matches' their assigned sex (literally none whatsoever), in the absence of such standards, the mind's process of enquiring into itself *becomes* the standard

A given vocabulary *extends* and *produce* new modes of self-understanding, new modes of conceptualisation- they don't 'unlock' knowledge already present
When the mind is given as a task an unsolvable enquiry (unsolvable because the resolution it seeks is a pure phantom of categorisation), it actually *creates* a feeling of disatisfaction, a sense that 'something is wrong'- because 'if there's no problem, why am I searching one?'

The assumption is then that this 'feeling of something being wrong' is a deeply felt part of the self that has been 'unearthed' by the act of enquiry- when it is actually something produced as a *positive effect* of that enquiry! (not 'positive' in the sense of 'good', obviously)

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1544 ... 15554.html

[Valkyrie]

I'm shaming you for trying to force those opinions onto everyone else.

You claim, without evidence, that following the advice of people who actually work in these fields will cause harm.

They claim, with evidence, that following their advice will do the opposite.

Your opinion is not equally valid when it comes to setting public policy.

If you want to teach your kids at home that the teacher lady is and the Earth is actually a donut on the back of a space turtle, that's up to you. If you want to require all kids be taught that in school, that's another story entirely.

I'm not claiming any of that. I just think it's a terrible idea. You're the one making these claims, not me. If you want to back it up with empirical evidence, by all means, let it rip, I'd be more than happy to engage.

But yeah, sorry. A young teacher with a bachelor degree in education pushing their political philosophies is not objectively more correct than myself or anyone else in terms of how best to raise children. That's a bizarre stance to take.

That LGBT folks exist is not a political philosophy, it is a biological fact and ignoring it causes harm.

Individuals do not (or should not) set public policy. You can find wackadoodle individuals publishing all sorts of nonsense, some of them even with degrees and/or a lot of money behind them. See: "American College of Pediatricians" vs "American Academy of Pediatrics" - a handful of Christofascists (~700 members, being an actual pediatrician is not a requirement for membership so less than 700 doctors) vs an actual professional group of ~70000 pediatricians. Guess which one the state of Florida chose to consult with to set and defend public policy?

[Valkyrie]

The authority is evidence, not credentials.

Where is it? who compiled it and wrote the studies? What statistical methods were used? How long was the study period? What was the number of participants? What journal published? Who were the peer reviewers?

Much of the existing research is cited in this document:

https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc

Where is yours?

[MrH42]

I'm not claiming any of that. I just think it's a terrible idea. You're the one making these claims, not me. If you want to back it up with empirical evidence, by all means, let it rip, I'd be more than happy to engage.

But yeah, sorry. A young teacher with a bachelor degree in education pushing their political philosophies is not objectively more correct than myself or anyone else in terms of how best to raise children. That's a bizarre stance to take.

That LGBT folks exist is not a political philosophy, it is a biological fact and ignoring it causes harm.

Individuals do not (or should not) set public policy. You can find wackadoodle individuals publishing all sorts of nonsense, some of them even with degrees and/or a lot of money behind them. See: "American College of Pediatricians" vs "American Academy of Pediatrics" - a handful of Christofascists (~700 members, being an actual pediatrician is not a requirement for membership so less than 700 doctors) vs an actual professional group of ~70000 pediatricians. Guess which one the state of Florida chose to consult with to set and defend public policy?

I'm not following what you're saying here at all. What are you disputing that I've said so far?

All I've said is I think it's a really, really bad idea to push political and gender philosophies on kids. I think that camp is filled with red flags and I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. What does policy or Florida have to do with any of this?

[Valkyrie]

Gender is not an adult idea. We force kids into boxes (which they quickly start enforcing on each other, often quite cruelly) before they're even born with all this pink and blue nonsense. Barbie vs GI Joe, long hair vs short, you know the drill.

It's not all forced. Having 3 kids now, one boy and two girls, that's become pretty obvious to see. There are things inherent in their personalities, their curiosities, the things they notice about themselves and others that shape their perception of themselves and others.

I won't go on and on with examples, but we're starting to potty train the twins (both girls). We sometimes bathe all three together and when they were two they couldn't have cared less that our son has a penis and they don't. But now they're three. They see that he stands up when he pees. Daddy can stand up and pee. Mommy has to sit down. Daddy has different parts than they do, and when I got to the bathroom it's "meh, whatever", but when my wife goes to the bathroom they sprint across the house and scream "MOMMY I COME WIFF YOU!!!"

The idea that biological sex and what we consider sociological gender have no link is just crazy to me. I see it in my own children every day. And if my nearly 5 year old little dude decided he wanted to be a girl I would love him no less, but if some third party decides to plant bugs in his ear about how he can be a girl if he wants to be and there's no difference between boys and girls and any other such nonsense, I'm going to have a problem. Kids have enough to figure out about the world, to learn and understand already.

Kids learn from what they see/hear/read. If you only allow them to see one side of things, that's what they start with as the only side.

That's not directly forcing them into a box I guess, but refusing to acknowledge the existence of the rest of the world isn't helping anyone find their place within it.

[Valkyrie]

That LGBT folks exist is not a political philosophy, it is a biological fact and ignoring it causes harm.

Individuals do not (or should not) set public policy. You can find wackadoodle individuals publishing all sorts of nonsense, some of them even with degrees and/or a lot of money behind them. See: "American College of Pediatricians" vs "American Academy of Pediatrics" - a handful of Christofascists (~700 members, being an actual pediatrician is not a requirement for membership so less than 700 doctors) vs an actual professional group of ~70000 pediatricians. Guess which one the state of Florida chose to consult with to set and defend public policy?

I'm not following what you're saying here at all. What are you disputing that I've said so far?

All I've said is I think it's a really, really bad idea to push political and gender philosophies on kids. I think that camp is filled with red flags and I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. What does policy or Florida have to do with any of this?

Ohhh so you think it's a really, really bad idea to do but you don't think that it should be against public policy? You're "just saying" with no actual argument?

How exactly do you think that we can avoid ever saying anything "political" or about gender to any kids?

I see where this is going, but y'all are going to have to say the quiet part out loud at some point.

[golftdibrad1]

Where is it? who compiled it and wrote the studies? What statistical methods were used? How long was the study period? What was the number of participants? What journal published? Who were the peer reviewers?

Much of the existing research is cited in this document:

https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc

Where is yours?

This is akin to the fox advocating for the chicken fence to be removed, and being surprised all the chickens got eaten the next morning.

I also am not going to go down a research rabbithole for something I know to be immoral, and no I don't feel the need to cite my sources. Just look at the breakdown of the general population; we should cater general society to the vast majority of people not the 5%.

[MrH42]

I'm not following what you're saying here at all. What are you disputing that I've said so far?

All I've said is I think it's a really, really bad idea to push political and gender philosophies on kids. I think that camp is filled with red flags and I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. What does policy or Florida have to do with any of this?

Ohhh so you think it's a really, really bad idea to do but you don't think that it should be against public policy? You're "just saying" with no actual argument?

How exactly do you think that we can avoid ever saying anything "political" or about gender to any kids?

I see where this is going, but y'all are going to have to say the quiet part out loud at some point.

I'm more than happy to have this discussion in good faith.

If you want to talk about specific policies, I can give you my thoughts on it, but it's pointless if you're just going to assume the worst about people that disagree with you. I know this is a very personal and heated topic for you, but I just ask that you assume that we're all acting with good intentions. It's a complicated and nuanced topic for sure, but government intervention isn't the solution most of the time either.

[Valkyrie]

Much of the existing research is cited in this document:

https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc

Where is yours?

This is akin to the fox advocating for the chicken fence to be removed, and being surprised all the chickens got eaten the next morning.

I also am not going to go down a research rabbithole for something I know to be immoral, and no I don't feel the need to cite my sources. Just look at the breakdown of the general population; we should cater general society to the vast majority of people not the 5%.

Right, you're only here to put people down and have no need to actually support your own claims.

Less than 5% of people in this country are a lot of things. Jews for example. Blind. Wheelchair-bound. Autistic. Native Americans. Millionaires.

Fuck it, let's pretend that none of them exist.

[Valkyrie]

Ohhh so you think it's a really, really bad idea to do but you don't think that it should be against public policy? You're "just saying" with no actual argument?

How exactly do you think that we can avoid ever saying anything "political" or about gender to any kids?

I see where this is going, but y'all are going to have to say the quiet part out loud at some point.

I'm more than happy to have this discussion in good faith.

If you want to talk about specific policies, I can give you my thoughts on it, but it's pointless if you're just going to assume the worst about people that disagree with you. I know this is a very personal and heated topic for you, but I just ask that you assume that we're all acting with good intentions. It's a complicated and nuanced topic for sure, but government intervention isn't the solution most of the time either.

The argument seems to be that no one should be allowed to mention gender to any child other than their own, because he says so. But with exceptions for whatever he deems morally correct because he knows best.

Interesting that you seem to be against this kind of restriction being implemented, yet also think that he's right?

[MrH42]

I'm more than happy to have this discussion in good faith.

If you want to talk about specific policies, I can give you my thoughts on it, but it's pointless if you're just going to assume the worst about people that disagree with you. I know this is a very personal and heated topic for you, but I just ask that you assume that we're all acting with good intentions. It's a complicated and nuanced topic for sure, but government intervention isn't the solution most of the time either.

The argument seems to be that no one should be allowed to mention gender to any child other than their own, because he says so. But with exceptions for whatever he deems morally correct because he knows best.

Interesting that you seem to be against this kind of restriction being implemented, yet also think that he's right?

I'm not saying that camp shouldn't be "allowed", I think it's just really awful to push overtly political things on kids and to make that your mission statement. Let the free market decide if it's a bad idea. I will say, if you want to run a successful summer camp, that's not how you attract parents to sign their kids up.

Now, schools are a bit of a different topic. Tax dollars are funding this, and being overtly political in nature is not fair game IMO. I don't think gender ideology should be taught in schools. If or how that's legislated, I would need to see the details. It's very much a slippery slope and can be used by either side, so I'm hesitant to say we should just write laws for everything, but a huge majority of public schools fail to meet basic educational metrics. They have much more important things to worry about than trying to teach gender theory.

I think you're coming at this from a completely different perspective though. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears you think the concept of gender is a completely fluid, abstract thing that is independent of biological sex? And that this is objective fact and settled? Is that right? Just want to make sure I'm understanding you.

I think that's where a large portion of the population disagrees. I don't think the basics of gender ideology hold up to basic deductive reasoning. That's not to say that gender dysphoria doesn't exist, and transgender people aren't a real thing. It very much is, and I think the vast majority of people don't care what adults do in their personal lives. The issue is trying to push these ideas on kids, that's what is causing the massive cultural backlash now.

[Desertbreh]

[Valkyrie]

I think you're coming at this from a completely different perspective though. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears you think the concept of gender is a completely fluid, abstract thing that is independent of biological sex? And that this is objective fact and settled? Is that right? Just want to make sure I'm understanding you.

I think that's where a large portion of the population disagrees. I don't think the basics of gender ideology hold up to basic deductive reasoning. That's not to say that gender dysphoria doesn't exist, and transgender people aren't a real thing. It very much is, and I think the vast majority of people don't care what adults do in their personal lives. The issue is trying to push these ideas on kids, that's what is causing the massive cultural backlash now.

It's far from settled/explained, but that's the consensus of every reputable professional community studying the topic.

Your opinion is currently the one being pushed on kids. Where is your research? What makes it OK for your view to be pushed instead?