That’s fair and I would agree, and further guess that I’m reading too far.

That if smells of capitulation without agreement, but thank you in any case. I hope you have a nice day.

Context clues and elementary understanding of language. They stated, prior to mod removal, that they had seen doctors force transitioning. Present tense. This would imply that the person was alive in the 60s/70s (reasonable, though Lemmy’s demographics make that unusual). The more likely, and unprovable on the internet, truth is that the person is regurgitating misinformation.

A quote from someone that quoted the person (incompletely it seems): “seen doctors force sex change to children that lead to the child killing themselves in adulthood”.

This also does not address the inherent misleading portion of it, which is the thing that merits the outrage: cases from half a century ago are not a basis on which to inform people of wrongdoing in modern healthcare. Granted, I didn’t explicitly state that as a goal from the outset, but we’re cuddling up next to bad faith to assert that as unreasonable.

Was. It was common practice. It is not relevant because the person above asserted that it is currently common practice. My goalposts are stationary and your evidence only provides historical context.

Disinformation merits hostility. I’ll yield when I’m wrong.

Because this case ended it, it is no longer true that doctors force transitioning, thus proving my assertion that the person above is full of shit. Show me a relevant case and I’ll be happy to change my mind. Some case in which a doctor forced transitioning and was not prosecuted or sued over it within the last decade. I’m flexible on the date.

They are not referring to detransitioning (which is real though a minority to my understanding). They are referring to the blatant lie that doctors force patients to transition.

Edit: He -> They. Feels really inappropriate to assume gender given the context.

One case in the 60s/70s? That’s bad evidence. I assume you are clarifying and not supporting the person above.

Big claims need big evidence. Source.

Bullshit. Source or it didn’t happen.

I’ve yet to see a wiki article without a shit ton of sources listed clearly at the bottom.

It does seem oddly specific enough to be true, but I hate that I put it out there like it was fact.

This. You can dislike someone and still recognize that a thing is sad, and that the people who loved them are suffering.

Not touching the extremist “everyone aligned with the state should die” argument. I have enough things to make me angry in my life, I don’t need to pull out a broad generalization that’ll anger me whenever I speak to my mailman.

Found what my husband was reading. It was a Reddit comment, so nothing substantial. Sorry about that.

My husband told me when he was reading about it yesterday…

Now I can’t find anything about it…

Why does my mouth taste of shoe?

Edit: Found what he was reading. It was a Reddit comment…. Dubious source to say the least. Apologies.

Ugh, these were funny till a sovcit murdered a process server here in KC yesterday. He was just serving an eviction notice, had nothing to do with that guy’s problems, literally shooting the messenger. These leave a bad taste now.

Edit: Disregard all of that. I was misinformed until someone can find the source my husband was reading. Sorry everyone.

Edit 2: Found what he was referencing. It was someone on Reddit… Link for the curious, but there’s nothing substantial Sorry again.

Many thanks. Obviously, getting brain scans of infants is… difficult, so I wonder if one could proxy that. Maybe feed it brain scans from cultures with significant gender role differences and see if any performance differences are significant?

I’d also be very curious how it sorted transgender individuals. I remember reading something years ago about transgender brains being structured like the sex with which they identify, but that was a long time ago and my critical reading skills have come a long way since then.

Clarify why that would be necessary, I’m not following your argument well.

Your non sequitur is real dumb. Reading a single article online is not the same as Redditor Internet usage habits.

I’m pretty sure the amount you’d have to increase it to break even with the new insurance you’d need and all the cleaning would rather defeat the purpose.

Liability and drivers don’t want to clean up blood to start.