QT: questions about transphobia (But gc feel free to add questions)

submitted by loveSloaneDebate King from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (38 children)

GC Murder trans babies but I’m being too ridiculous to debate lmao.

Dangerous drugs used for cosmetic effects in preparation for future cosmetic surgery being compared to cosmetic surgery alone is incomprehensible, and I’m the idiot here.

How does anyone take these arguments so seriously that they pretend sex doesn’t exist? My nieces gave better during their tantrums.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (37 children)

I feel like a whole lot of sub rules are being broken, and I wish we could have some type of post discussing the rules and what constitutes breaking them. Because just in this post we’ve/a I’ve been called or compared to a bigot, told to fuck off, and I can’t imagine that the leap to us now being murderers because we oppose puberty blockers being given to people not old enough to give consent to them is not somehow flaming? Again, we’re gc so I guess whatever is said to or about us is okay, but I do think we need some type of transparent discussion about the rules.

I know I’d personally love to discuss the “no misogyny” rule.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (36 children)

I have zero faith in porcelain quetzal as a mod ever since they told me I’m free to take a break from masks during the ‘morally obliged to help your rapist’ debacle.

I don’t think much moderation really happens. I was told to correct misgendering on my old account but qt are free to call us all cis bigot nazi terf monsters who can fuck off. Either this is a space for debate and feminism or it’s yet another qt safe space where gender rules. A discussion and all the mods, not just peaking, need to decide what rules are enforced and what rules are just for show.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (35 children)

Agreed.

Eta- also, either I or adungitit got called an asshole, that’s gotta be up there with breaking the flaming rule

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (34 children)

There’s stupid amounts of namecalling that qt gets to freely drop. Wonder if the weekly off topic thread is something anyone gets to post or mod only. I’m bringing it up next time we have one.

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (33 children)

Made the mistake of looking at the thread on my break. Made an account on my phone because jesus you both need help.

To both of you. I said murder trans babies as a hypothetical debate topic that you would ignore and not debate, because it holds no ground and has no factual proof. Looking at it i guess that isnt as clear as it should have been. Esl problems, but i digress, thank you for proving my point and thinking I was actually trying debate the point and saying it was too stupid to argue against.

To Sloane. Get over yourself, i called you an asshole, you told me it was my friends fault for being trans that her mother was emotionally abusive. I will take a ban for rulebreaking with pride if they do the same for you for victim blaming (also in the rules). They won't, because the moderation is just as biased as it was before, but thats where it is. As for your one singular study you can give me (but didn't), what. Am I supposed to be proud of you? Here is one single study proving that women are dumber than men. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289606000250. It took me forever to find, and i only found it by reading another person debunking it, but it exists, therefore it must be true.

To houseplant, osteoporosis huh? And you have scientific evidence backing this up, or is this just something you read in that one BBC article? We know bmd doesnt increase on puberty blockers. We also know it DOES increase to normal levels when we switch from them to csht. Ill link you studies if you want when I get home, otherwise I hope you have a wonderful night.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

That’s a lot of effort to go to for people you’re ignoring.

Your murder trans babies comment not being a real accusation wasn’t missed at all. You merely misunderstood the criticism it got.

Stop calling people assholes. If you can’t control yourself even that little bit, why should anyone give you time or effort?

Since you can’t google ‘Lupron and osteoporosis’

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3047394/

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/020011s040lbl.pdf

There are hundreds more for other drugs used in halting children’s puberty. Do you not have google?

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

Didnt call her one again, just owned up to the fact that i did. I stand by it too, people who blame people for their own abuse are aptly described by the word.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Whilst you continue endorsing child abuse via blocking healthy puberty in children in other comments this is rich.

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

You continue endorsing child abuse via blocking clinically proven medical treatment.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

Literally didn’t say it was your friend’s fault for being trans. Get your head out of your ass and learn some reading comprehension skills. What I said was it seems more likely, based on your phrasing, that your friend is manipulative and that your anecdote doesn’t make sense.

Why would I link studies (yes plural, I never mentioned “one single study”) AFTER YOU BLOCKED ME? Who would I be sending them to? I didn’t know you were so pathetic that you’d make an alt to reply to someone that you’d already blocked, so since I assumed you’d blocked me, I assumed our interactions were done. It’s so funny that you’d spend your time looking for the study you just linked, and would take the time to make an alt, read the threads of the people you blocked, make a poor attempt at insult, but I’m the asshole?

Hope you’re not too upset that the article saying you’re smarter than u/houseplant and I was debunked, unlike the many recent studies that you don’t have to desperately scroll to find that prove that blockers are harmful to children.

You’re boring to debate and not good at talking shit so you’re kind of useless as a sparring partner. Won’t be blocking you as you don’t matter enough to me for me to need to, but also won’t waste my time on you.

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

You know full well I have yet to block you on my phone, because I clearly read your response, and I've yet to do so specifically because I wanted to see if you would. You still haven't. Houseplant linked me a study about old men taking lupron, and if I have to explain why that's completely irrelevant then i have no fucking idea what I'm doing here.

Why would I be upset it was debunked? Literally why. I was very clear I posted it to prove a point about how fucking worthless its existence is. Just like your single study you totally have.

You responded to the response I was looking at. I didn't search you out, it was just right there. Making an account took seconds, finding the article took minutes, and I did it to pass time at work. Get over yourself. The world doesn't revolve around you I just happened to overhear you talking behind my back.

sparring partner

Are you 12? What sort of highschooler shit is this.

Since you clearly don't understand the subject matter, I'll leave you with this. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7433770/#!po=35.3659

I'd prefer a larger sample size but we take what we can get, right? This is one of the first things on Google when I search "puberty blockers bone density". It's recent, I didn't have to scroll desperately, and it proves blockers are harmful to children. Wait, no, it says a small percentage have bmd issues and they were all calcium deficient. And the conclusion was pretty clearly make sure these kids get more calcium and vit D in their diet. Wowee. What else is on Google? Oh it's that British medical journal paper that the BBC linked to fearmonger trans kids to old people. What's their takeaway? If you guessed monitor bmd and shove calcium down their throat, congrats, you're right! Next in Google is this one. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27845262/ . I already linked it, it just says that bmd reaches normal levels with the switch from blockers to csht. Here's an article from the daily mail, I'm expecting fire and brimstone from thi... Oh, besides the fear mongering title it just says levels return to normal off puberty blockers.

How far do I have to keep scrolling. I found that debunked paper you took so seriously on page 2, so maybe I'll quit after the second page. I've got an article here from a pro-life Christian site just quoting the tavistock paper again. An article on an osteoporosis website. Seems good? Nope just saying if you have surgery and aren't getting artificial hormones your risk goes up. A different publication site of one I found earlier, nope that ain't it.

I was led to believe this would be easy, but the only shit thats even remotely said it's dangerous is the politicized BBC article, and in the same Google search I found three (3!) responses criticizing the Cohen analysis it's based off of.

Look, I honestly don't even care about blockers. Hormone therapy from the outset is just a better option overall, blockers are just putting off a problem and DO require medical oversight to a degree that can be hard on children. I'm just completely over all this medical denialism from the group that seems to be so keen on believing science. I get sent weird fucking irrelevant links or links to studies they clearly didn't even read, and I don't get it. But sorry, whatever. I did go back and look at your original comment, and I guess it could technically have been written without victim blaming in mind. Honestly, Idk, if you didn't, good, if you did, I guess you're comfortable living with that. My friends got an abusive mom who was radicalized by a watered down version of your rhetoric floating around in British media. I think we all want to be loved by our own family. Some people get it rough I guess. Shifts about over and im bored searching through Google so I'm gonna end it here.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not reading any of this past the first sentence so sorry you wasted your effort

You said you blocked me, but somehow I’m supposed to interpret that as you not blocking me? It’s exactly this faulty logic of yours that has made me decide to ignore the rest of your response and not waste my time engaging with you. I had no reason to assume you were so obsessive that you’d make an alt in order to reply to people you’d blocked. Flattered that we matter so much to you tho. Deuces.

For clarity- I’m saying I’m done responding to you specifically on this post, should you comment on another post and say something worth responding to I will, but you just seem to have some need to go back and forth with me and u/houseplant for some reason, and I just don’t care enough about you or your opinion to bother. Have a great day or don’t idc

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Aww, you said you wouldn't waste any time on me but I got two whole paragraphs. GCers have a heart after all! Tbh I got really heartfelt in the end, overcame my demons and whatnot, you're missing out!

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Um why ask if someone is twelve as if twelve year olds are somehow less intelligent, mature, or educated than an adult when they are capable of consenting to medical experimentation and disrupting healthy puberty?

Are 12 year olds immature or not?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I never read their last comment but I just started reading through the post and this is such an amazing response lmao. Brava

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

Good question.

Why do you believe it's acceptable for children to suffer when we know how to treat it?