you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

OP is trying to negate/deactivate a rhetorical point that is often used by TRAs. I don't see them buying into trans ideology. Rather, it's more like, "if what you say is true, then there should be evidence of it ..." If there is no evidence, then the assertion is much less likely to be true.

[–]schomee 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The poster is saying he's looking for cases of trans people being attacked by conversion therapy. I understand exactly what he's doing. He's engaging to flip around a piece of rhetoric to throw back at them but he's playing around with rhetoric that's loaded with massive suppositions which he inherently accepts by accident.

This is a trick in rhetorical games where you have to accept a certain premise to respond to their rhetoric.

And i've heard this trans talking point as well: "you're trying to convert people with gender dysphoria"..which is what these people are doing, transexualizing them to "fix" their dysphoria. There are no examples of this because "transing" people IS the conversion therapy.

And he's not aware of the lingo but the word he's looking for is "de transitioners". The key to responding to their rhetoric is the de-transitioners who were manipulated into transitioning as a solution to their dysphoria and it was a disaster for them.

[–]Rage-Xion[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. I indeed don't buy into "gender identity" though I do think gender disphoria and autogynephilia are real.