|
shadowvine118 posted:A lot of right wing groups and sites seem to be citing a paper published in The New Atlantic, a scientific ethics journal associated with several right wing groups. It was co-authored by Paul McHugh of John Hopkins university, who argued that Transgenderism is a mental illness. Paul McHugh is infamous. Johns Hopkins was at one time a leading edge institution in transgender health care. The earliest form of the male-to-female sex reassignment surgery was first documented there. He actively sought to be hired by Johns Hopkins to run their transgender care programs in order to destroy it from the inside. He's had the opinions he does since long before he had anything to do with transgender healthcare. It would be a bit like Tony Perkins taking a job as an auditor for Title IX compliance or something. He's an rear end in a top hat and anyone who cites him is an rear end in a top hat.
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Hollismason posted:Is there a article on him about this that can be read ? That's insane. https://thinkprogress.org/meet-the-doctor-social-conservatives-depend-on-to-justify-anti-transgender-hate-fe764009b93 https://www.glaad.org/cap/paul-mchugh http://transadvocate.com/clinging-to-a-dangerous-past-dr-paul-mchughs-selective-reading-of-transgender-medical-literature_n_13842.htm http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/johns-hopkins-professor-e_b_9510808.html http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2015/12/15/scary-science-johns-hopkins-university His continued employment is especially distressing to me because Johns Hopkins is one of my company's longstanding customers and we have met a gross amount of resistance from them and some others in trying to improve trans healthcare. It's really distressing, as a queer trans woman, to be on a conference call and hear actual medical practitioners giggle at the word "queer".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
TinTower posted:I wouldn't be surprised if there was the American TERF contingent self-described as "very liberal" for the purposes of polling; in the UK, most of them are in Labour, with about eight or so in the Green Party. It's this. Extremely liberal women (straight and gay) who reject trans women's identities as being inauthentic. TERFs are honestly even more hateful than garden variety bigots; normal bigotry comes from ignorance and TERFs are generally well educated and extremely active in civil rights activism and absolutely have the resources to know better but choose not to out of some sort of "but they're not exactly like meeeeeeee" reaction.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Mister Olympus posted:Hahahahahahaha well, at least then maybe we could have legitimate asylum applications in like canada or germany or something.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
Pussy Cartel posted:Christ. My American partner and I were gonna get married in a few years once I was done with my PhD. Now I don't know what the gently caress's going to happen. my wife and I were going to try for a baby this year. now my wife is in a panic to spend all our money on srs for me so I can change my birth certificate and go stealth.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:Right now, you can get an updated passport with just a doctors note. Make that your priority, since it's likely to get harder to do in a trump administration, but if you do it, it's good for the next 10 years. And an updated passport will let you fix your social security gender marker. Also, depending on how ballsy you/your doctor are, you can straight up lie to get your BC changed. I haven't because I'm hoping to do SRS soon, but I've known several people who had their doctor sign a sworn statement that they had undergone "gender correcting procedures" and the judge found this acceptable evidence to order the birth certificate updated. It's not like the judge is going to ask you to lift your skirt up to confirm, unless Kansas's laws are even more evil than I thought.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Closeish: Yet again, trans men do not exist and the real reason for the bill is the male conservative fear of penises.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Fossilized Rappy posted:Here in Louisiana, Governor Edwards's executive order for the protection of LGBT government workers was shot down as unconstitutional: quote:For example, LGBT workplace protections will be removed from a state employee health insurance contract that the Legislature had rejected because lawmakers weren't comfortable with that language. That means the contract has a much better chance of being approved this week, and thousands of state employees' health insurance will no longer be caught up in a dispute over LGBT rights. I think this is the most uncritical sentence I've read today. Like why the gently caress would you even write that?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I'm not reading that poo poo but how much is Someone posted a screencap in the yospos pics thread that was literally a steam article entitled "MY WAIFU IS DEAD".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 17:33
|
|
BUT MY WAIFU
|
And for the record, as a lesbian, I find the hypersexualized appearance of the character super offensive and making her gay doesn't fix the problem that female characters are designed mostly to satisfy the malegaze of players.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Filthy Haiku posted:Really? Tracer? I'm not saying that you're wrong, I just personally found her to be better than I've come to expect from video games, which is an abysmally low bar to clear. She still wears a skintight suit, has perfect proportions, etc. Yardbomb posted:Yeah pretty much, she had a dumb victory screen pose of her looking back over her shoulder, but pretty much everyone in this game including dudes has good butts, so people got mad about that view of her butt and then they changed the pose to something better but then bigger idiots got mad about MUH CENSORSHIP!!!1! Don't be an idiot. The guys have good butts because male players want to see themselves as those guys. The women have good butts because the male players want to look at them. In 90% of game scenarios (this is a scifi arena shooter right?) there's no actual reason for the characters to be wearing outfits that are skintight and sexually suggestive (yes, that picture you posted is sexually suggestive. It's basically painted on and emphasizes her unrealistically curvy body) and yet in nearly every game they do. Why don't the characters in the shooty game wear armor? It's because the male player wants to look at the butts. edit: Before someone deliberately and obtusely misrepresents my point, this is not to say that there can be 0 depictions of sexy characters in video games. Only that while the vast majority of depictions of female characters are sexy it remains clear that there is a misogynist malegaze attitude in video games. I can't believe I have to explain this poo poo in a loving queer issues thread. The MUMPSorceress fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Dec 21, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Those are all bi issues, yes, but they're not political issues which is all Mr. Nice is trying to say. All they were trying to point out is that the outstanding legal rights that bi people have not attained are the same legal rights other queer people have not obtained, and so for political purposes it makes sense that the bi community is part of the greater lgbtq community. Like, their whole point was that people spent the last two pages discussing how really there's barely anything tying the LGBTQ community together and he's pointing out that, no, actually the political stuff we all need is basically the same (with some extra stuff specific to trans people) and so the real splintering is in social issues and not political ones.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Vulpes Vvardenfell posted:Anybody know when we're likely to get a ruling on whether or not these bathroom bills are constitutional? Any guesses as to the ruling? I really hope we don't get a federal version. if a bathroom bill passed nationally it basically means we get to do the naughtiest possible passive resistance ever. ill be a urine rebel!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:You're still not getting it. If dysphoria did not rise to the level of distress or impairment, then a patient would have no reason to seek GRS. This is a bad example because if you are trans it is not cross dressing. People ignorant of trans people might see it that way, but it's not. A better example is cochlear implants. Being deaf is something that just happens sometimes and a deaf person who experiences distress from not hearing can get surgery to alleviate this. It's totally voluntary, though, because bit all deaf people have distress from bit hearing. Some prefer it that way. Much as not all trans people have distress from genital dysphoria and don't want grs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:"Avoiding a label" is a quite significant thing when dealing with gender. Seriously. "It's a mental illness" is the excuse my grandmother used when she told me she will never accept me or acknowledge my identity. Taking away that language takes away a tool for bigots to hide their prejudice behind. As somebody said earlier, gender dysphoria has a lot of the same symptoms as poverty (or any other extreme stressor in one's life). Would you call poverty a mental illness? gently caress no. Stress isn't even a mental illness. Stress can have mental symptoms, but it has an external cause. It's not an inherent property of the person. For trans people that external cause is partially the incongruity between body and mind, but also the treatment they receive from others due to their identity.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:A few years ago (when I was still closeted to myself and still posing as a cishet male) I lived for over half a year in an in-patient treatment program for people suffering from mental illness. (I have a formal diagnosis of Schizoaffective disoreder that is not related to my gender identity) Part of this program was an endless parade of lifeskills classes that we all had to attend. One of those classes focused specifically on legal ways that we residents could obscure both our mental illness diagnosis as well as our time living at that facility from future employers/landlords/anyone else. The point was to help us avoid having the stigma of mental illness attached to us so that we would be less likely to wind up unemployed/homeless in the future. The general gist of the class was "don't tell anyone who doesn't have a good reason to know", and the facility in question lived by that motto and took pains to hide our residency there from inquiring eyes. This is not that far from the trans community concept of going stealth (aka, doing what is necessary to pass and then pretending to be cis to everyone except your most deeply trusted circle). I'm borderline ready to change jobs because I transitioned while working here and even though it's an accepting environment it's still clear that it colors people's interactions with me. For example, HR being more impatient with me when I challenge internal policies than they were pre-transition.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
RabbitMage posted:Hello thread. Up your t doses to get real buff and hairy and get a good packer. All the trans hate is really directed at the girls and further still at the ones who don't pass. Trans men don't exist.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:Today in mixed messages, Trump is going to continue Obama's EO to protect federal contractors from discriminating against LGBT people. Probably just to make it seem more justifiable when they pass FADA. They want the fig leaf of saying "see the government doesn't discriminate, just private entities exercising their rights." Dipshits will see this as a "common sense compromise".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I don't know, maybe I'm overly optimistic but it seems like the Democrats are doing this to back Republicans into a corner. Meanwhile when someone decides I'm definitely peeping because I'm 6'4" and they saw the top of my head over the stall harsher laws mean that I'm going to get hosed over harder until I can get a lawyer to sort it out in court.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Sessions already pulled title IX protection for trans students. Hey, a person in the trans discussion thread was wondering if the title IX case before the Supreme Court currently is affected by this, or if they could independently still decide to rule that trans people are protected by title IX?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I'm not familiar with the case so I can't speak to any specifics on it. I can say the court can absolutely still extend protections. It's kindof their job in civil rights cases. Sessions' actions could help or hurt the case depending on where it is at in the timeline. If they still haven't heard argument, then it could provide concrete examples of why these protections should be extended. Looks like it's 16-273 GLOUCESTER COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD V. G.G. according to the poster who asked.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Coffee And Pie posted:There go protections for trans kids let's start a new charity, guns for trans kids.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:this is terrible, even as joke when you are well-armed, everywhere is your bathroom.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:with this addendum, I agree, but man did it look like you were going in a different direction at first wait, did you think i was implying we should kill trans kids or something? i was making the standard "<x> wouldn't be a problem for <y> if they were armed". im trans my dude, i want to protect all the adorable trans kids.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:other way around i am not actually advocating that transgender children be armed and shoot their way into the bathroom. instead, i am playing upon the common theme of weapons being the solution to any problem someone might have. an absurd statement, if you will.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:i was more coming at it from the angle of population known to be prone to suicide + guns being an unfunny combination then some kind of trans child toilet liberation army yeah, i didnt think of that angle but you're right that was kinda lovely. im sorry guys. this is why memes are bad i guess.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Why does the "woke" left have such a hateboner for white gay men? I don't see this level of vitriol from these people aimed at any other subset of any minority group, white or not. Like all things online it gets echoed out of proportion, but white gay men still have white and male privilege. While they have some of the disadvantages that come with being queer in America, they are by far the most protected out of any of us both financially and socially, and this can frequently lead to them having blind spots about the struggles the rest of the community deal with. It can often feel like white gay men are strong allies right up until their issues are addressed and then they drop the rest of the community to sort their own poo poo out.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Yeah that's the part I find confusing, I recognize that racism is a serious issue that needs to be worked on and I've certainly meet white gays with terrible views but they're certainly not singularly bad in that regard. I don't see these same people attacking "white male Jews" or anything like that with such vitriol. I literally don't think I have ever seen one of these "woke" people go after white lesbians. You're being disingenuous. People call out white gay men specifically because they are part of the queer community and are happy to milk that when it benefits them, but aren't happy to carry the load when other portions of the community need help. Jews have nothing to do with the queer community.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Why would a white gay man be more racist than a white lesbian, or more transphobic than a black gay man? Do you literally not understand words? White gay men have a unique position of privilege that causes them not to comprehend the issues other queer people struggle with. Consequently, they're seen as ignorant of or in opposition to queer issues. It is not any kind of affirmative statement of lesbians or black people or anything else. It is instead a specific statement about the shortcomings of white gay men. Please keep the goalposts exactly where they belong.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Octatonic posted:MaxxBot, you are succumbing hardcore to some hardcore masculine/white fragility right now, and I think you should take a step back and really examine why you feel singled out. Have a coffee, go for a walk in the snow. I was writing another reply to him but honestly this is what it is. If you can't understand how being part of the queer community but then being willfully blind to its struggles is a problem for gay white men but not some random black person, you're just being dense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:The argument that being part of a minority group automatically makes you more likely to support rights for other minority groups literally isn't true though. This is what you're not getting. Gay white men allow themselves to be grouped into the same minority group as trans people, lesbians, etc when it suits their needs, but are able to distance themselves from that group when it advantages them. They get to have it both ways and that's hosed up. What you're advocating, essentially, is just to say that gay white men no longer get to place themselves under the larger LGBTQ umbrella. What we're saying is that gay white men have a habit of picking their queer advocacy issues a la carte, which other subsections of the queer umbrella can't do as easily.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:
A little maybe, but the reality is that a white gay man can, if push comes to shove, hide the fact that he's gay. A black person can never stop being black. Intersectionality is complicated and I'm probably not expressing it well, but being a white man does a lot to overcome the difficulties of being queer. But like I said, the way some people online are like "every white gay is a *phobe and a jerk and abloobloo" is insanely out of proportion and people need to take a chill pill. The real message is that white gay guys need to stop sometimes and think about how their experiences are different from other queer people and how they fit into that community, because they are part of that community.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:To complete strangers, sure, but not to anyone you interact with on a regular basis. There are many, many examples from history of governments and private agencies being able to expose and fire/jail gays en masse even though their sexuality was probably their most closely kept secret. Unless you're really good at lying and deceiving people anyone who wants to know can find out. You are basically a walking illustration of the inability to recognize your own privilege. You're not going to get it so I am giving up on this chat.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Is it intentional or just ironic that you've just used the primary argument biphobic people everywhere use to try and push bi folks out of queer spaces? Bi people not standing up for the queer community doesn't seem to be much of a problem so I'm not sure why you're trying to undercut me by pointing out a superficial similarity to biphobic nonsense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
I think I'm feeling piled on and I am explaining myself really badly here. All I am trying to say is gay guys who are white often haven an easier time than other queer people (not an easy time, just easier, I am absolutely not trying to invalidate the struggles of white gay men) and it can blind them to the struggles of others. I know way too many people that got marriage equality and then just stopped caring about any of the issues their friends still face.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
Aleph Null posted:I still cannot fathom a possible reason for Facebook to block someone from blocking someone. That makes no sense. So, somebody can no longer view a bunch of other people's profiles. So, what? Someone please provide a legitimate reason for this algorithm to exist that isn't grasping at straws. Seriously, a bunch of people got doxxed just from being friends of friends of one person whose facebook was compromised. FB does not do nearly enough to help you build a wall around your poo poo. For example, did you know that your current profile photo is required to be public-visible? And when you change photos your old profile photo is not changed to friends-only automatically? I've fixed all my historical photos permissions and now only use not-pictures-of-me as profile photos. People doxxing on FB is bad enough that I don't even friend other trans people on it anymore because crazies will just find a trans person and then start crawling friend links searching for more victims.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:It's exactly as planned. They gotta sell your poo poo to advertiser somehow. im not sure how useful my info is to an advertiser when an insane stalker murders me for being a trans person
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Aleph Null posted:This. But unironically. I know people who already get "remember this day" when the old posts are them talking about someone who died that they'd rather not be reminded about. facebook doesn't let me delete other peoples' uploaded photos of me so every birthday i get a montage of pre-transition pictures i don't want to see with a "aren't these happy memories" message. i bet most of my friends get them on random occasions too (they send out friend-aversary videos and poo poo). thanks facebook.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:why don't you untag yourself i try to when i notice them, but there's like thousands of pictures of me from college parties and whatnot and as far as i can find there is no bulk-untag feature in facebook so you have to do it 1-by-1. and then some dickheads go and retag me anyway. im thinking i might just close my account and open a new one but apparently facebook has ip banned people for doing that in the past.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Keeshhound posted:It's also kind of lovely that Facebook (god, so many sentences must start that way.) requires you to put in the effort of untagging yourself instead of making people ask for your permission to tag you in the first place. Easier to ask forgiveness than permission, especially when they already scraped all the useful data first. It's genuinely insane to me that some people are into the idea of Zuckerberg for president because the guy is a grade-a sociopath and everything Facebook does is vampiric on their users. edit: But you can't just delete your facebook because then you will literally get cut out of social groups that only communicate via facebook and cannot plan a gathering via text or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 21:16
|
|