Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 23:21:13 UTC No. 16174700

>>16174687
>FTM ended up looking like incels
>MTF end up looking like a prostitutes.

This happens all the fucking time.

Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 23:33:35 UTC No. 16174718

>>16174687
I think their real power is close to zero but scientists, like many other people are just too goddamn nice and pussies, so they don't want to look like insensitive intolerant jerks.

Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 23:40:01 UTC No. 16174733

>>16174718
>so they don't want to look like insensitive intolerant jerks.

Then what happens is you allow pseudoscience to be real science. When that is obviously not true. Imagine if people were pushing perpetual motion devices to be taken seriously. If you question the validity of the perpetual motion device, you would be called all sorts of names to make you seem like you are in the wrong but in reality you are in the right because you know that perpetual motion devices don't work due the first law of thermodynamics.

So why pretend to go along with people's scam? Just to make them feel better? That's not very scientific at all.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 00:18:19 UTC No. 16174759

>>16174687
It's a humiliation ritual.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 01:22:06 UTC No. 16174819

>>16174687
>Why are people scared of this tiny boogey man?
They got all the money somehow.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 01:34:26 UTC No. 16174829

>Rep is important

They're too pussy disprove the trans lie cause they gonna get eaten up by the press.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 01:48:34 UTC No. 16174842

John Money is not relevant for trans healthcare
If you look at what world class researchers like Ray Blanchard think, you'll quickly realise that trans ideology is just not relevant, or at least hasn't been relevant until perhaps recently
The way that Ray Blanchard envisages trans healthcare is that you have a bunch of mentally ill people suffering from gender dysphoria
In many ways these people can be treated and are able to live their lives as normal men and women, trans researchers like Ray Blanchard and Kenneth Zucker believe that this is the optimal outcome, the latter has used this approach at his clinic for decades with a lot of success particularly with children who he has managed to cure
The interesting thing though is that these researchers have come to the conclusion that for some, transitioning is necessary and for others it's a last resort
They know that in these cases, transitioning is the only treatment that they have available to them
Because of this Ray Blanchard believes that society should make a reasonable accommodation and accept these people for who they feel they are
Ray Blanchard is against trans people in sports and bathrooms but he still thinks that normal people should treat them well and not deliberately misgender them
It's not that he thinks transwomen are actually women or transmen are actually men, he just knows the cost of their mental illnesses and think society is obliged to do a bare minimum to support them

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 01:53:00 UTC No. 16174846

>>16174842
Sorry I'm re-reading my post and the 'accept these people for who they feel they are' bit is wrong
I just mean trying to treat trans people decently and using their preferred pronouns within reason

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 04:38:58 UTC No. 16174985

>>16174733
I don't know but I think they pretend and when there is some actual work to be done they throw it all into the garbage bin, which is good. Being honest about it would be even better, sure.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 05:48:44 UTC No. 16175059

>>16174842
>Ray Blanchard

Criticism of Ray Blanchard

>Autogynephilia Theory:
>Oversimplification: Critics argue that Blanchard’s theory of autogynephilia, which posits that some male-to-female transgender individuals are motivated by a sexual attraction to the idea of themselves as women, oversimplifies the complex motivations behind gender dysphoria.

>Empirical Support: Some researchers claim that the empirical evidence supporting autogynephilia is limited and that the theory does not account for the experiences of many transgender individuals who do not fit into this framework.

>Pathologization: Many transgender advocates and mental health professionals believe that Blanchard’s theory pathologizes transgender identities and reinforces harmful stereotypes, potentially leading to stigma and discrimination.

>Research Methods: Some critics have pointed out potential methodological flaws in Blanchard’s research, including small sample sizes and lack of longitudinal studies. They argue that these limitations weaken the generalizability of his findings.

>Ethical Concerns: Some critics are concerned about the ethical implications of diagnosing and treating individuals based on criteria that they believe are too subjective or culturally biased.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 05:50:37 UTC No. 16175062

>>16175059
>cont

>Broad Definitions: Blanchard’s work on paraphilias has been criticized for having overly broad and potentially stigmatizing definitions of sexual interests. Critics argue that this can lead to the unnecessary pathologization of behaviors that do not cause harm or distress.

>Controversial Diagnoses: Blanchard’s influence on the DSM-5, particularly in the sections related to gender dysphoria and paraphilic disorders, has been controversial. Some mental health professionals argue that the inclusion of certain diagnoses may not be supported by sufficient evidence and can have negative impacts on those diagnosed.

>Resistance from Transgender Community: There has been significant resistance from the transgender community regarding Blanchard’s contributions to the DSM-5, with concerns that his work does not adequately respect the identities and experiences of transgender individuals.

Seems like Ray Blanchard doesn't have much when in comes to empirical evidence just like john Money.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 06:46:37 UTC No. 16175128

>>16174687
>ideology
Do you think your usage of that word is deeply scientific?

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 06:54:05 UTC No. 16175139

>>16175128
troon detected

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 08:34:54 UTC No. 16175206

>>16175128
>Do you think your usage of that word is deeply scientific?

Could you specify which part of my usage you find unscientific? Clarifying this would help ensure we are on the same page and can discuss the issue more effectively.

>>16175139
Based.

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 09:56:05 UTC No. 16175266

>>16175206
>how is this absolutely-nowhere-defined x scientific?
<how is unscientific
I'm asking you to define your meaningless buzzword and you're asking me to do it for you? You're obviously arguing in bad faith.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 10:00:03 UTC No. 16175274

>>16175206
>how is this absolutely-nowhere-defined x scientific?
<how is it unscientific
I'm asking you to define your meaningless buzzword and you're asking me to do it for you? You're obviously arguing in bad faith.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 17:51:22 UTC No. 16175774

>>16175274
Ideology is not a, "Buzzword" dude. Your mad that your grift is getting exploited.

Anonymous at Tue, 14 May 2024 18:14:59 UTC No. 16175807

>>16174687
>The trans ideology is pseudoscience.
Are you a researcher in the field? Otherwise... ya know, that's like, your opinion man.