281–290 of 340 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1.7% of the population are intersex. 2% of the population are blond. Are blonds genetic abnormalities? Can I say “No people have blonde hair” and dismiss all the blonds?
In Northern Europe, blonde hair is very common.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This invalidates the argument as much as people with Down Syndrome invalidate the statement "people have 42 chromosomes". Hermaphrodism is a genetic abnormality, not a normal state of being.
1.7% of the population are intersex. 2% of the population are blond. Are blonds genetic abnormalities? Can I say “No people have blonde hair” and dismiss all the blonds?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This invalidates the argument as much as people with Down Syndrome invalidate the statement "people have 42 chromosomes". Hermaphrodism is a genetic abnormality, not a normal state of being.
You can thank genetic "abnormalities" in part for evolution. Many genetic variations, even those that cause disease, have been later found to give evolutionary advantages. Sickle cell comes to mind. There is no "normal state of being" and it's dehumanizing to talk that way about people who are simply different from you. Nature is bizarre if you open your eyes and humans as social animals spend a huge amount of effort…
Your view makes it impossible to distinguish anything from anything else. It's just intellectually a dead end if you take it seriously with any consistency.
Don't be so open minded your brain falls out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1.7% of the population are intersex. 2% of the population are blond. Are blonds genetic abnormalities? Can I say “No people have blonde hair” and dismiss all the blonds?
Prevalence of intersex conditions are nowhere near 1.7%. More like one in a thousand or one in ten thousand.
> “Estrogen is not a treatment for ODD. I can’t be more emphatic about that,” McGough said. “You won’t find a reference anywhere that supports the use of estrogen for ODD.” Well certainly the doctor got this theory from someplace. They believed this young man would be better behaved if he had less testosterone and more estrogen, and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence (and ethics quite frankly). S…
> and went ahead with a treatment against scientific evidence Despite a lack of scientific evidence not against. Don't think this has been tested and disproved in a scientific manner. And for ethical reasons probably won't be. A relationship between male hormones and aggressive behavior while sometimes questioned is generally well supported. Yes that's not ODD but one can easily see the train of thought here. What th…
That a relationship exist is well supported. The cause and effect, as per more modern research, however is one that more recent (ie > last 30 years) has found to be quite different than previous assumptions.
Throw in a random number of test subjects in a room, observe aggressiveness, and then measure testosterone and you get a clear pattern. Now change the test by first measuring the testosterone and then observe aggressiveness, and the data is all over the place.
The part that more modern research is questioning is not that the relationship does not exist, but rather in what direction the arrow points. Can behavior effect hormone secretion? More and more data seem to support that very theory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The higher-order reason that it's relevant is that there's something of a moral panic going on about medical therapy for transgender youth. While this particular case (assuming that the news story is accurate, of course) seems like an entirely unjustified prescription that's also entirely irrelevant to any medical gender transition, there is absolutely a push to try to get doctors to be unable to prescribe estrogen o…
Do you have a source for encouraging the prescription of children to have hormone replacement therapy? All I’ve seen are puberty blockers myself.
To be clear, by "children" I mean minors past the age of puberty, not, like, 5-year-olds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1.7% of the population are intersex. 2% of the population are blond. Are blonds genetic abnormalities? Can I say “No people have blonde hair” and dismiss all the blonds?
Prevalence of intersex conditions are nowhere near 1.7%. More like one in a thousand or one in ten thousand.
https://isna.org/faq/frequency/
> Total number of people whose bodies differ from standard male or female one in 100 births
> Total number of people receiving surgery to “normalize” genital appearance one or two in 1,000 births
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody said anything about "superior". Men changing their bodies to match their gender are generally not prescribed estrogen, so it doesn't make sense to reference them in the context of people being prescribed estrogen, that's all.
you're really quite sure that trans women are not offered estrogen?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can thank genetic "abnormalities" in part for evolution. Many genetic variations, even those that cause disease, have been later found to give evolutionary advantages. Sickle cell comes to mind. There is no "normal state of being" and it's dehumanizing to talk that way about people who are simply different from you. Nature is bizarre if you open your eyes and humans as social animals spend a huge amount of effort…
How many fingers do humans have? I guess you couldn't say, right? Your view makes it impossible to distinguish anything from anything else. It's just intellectually a dead end if you take it seriously with any consistency. Don't be so open minded your brain falls out.
Of course I can say. Many people have five fingers and some have fewer and some have more. The second sentence of the Wikipedia article on fingers agrees with me. [1] What was so difficult about that that you thought it would be some kind of gotcha?
> Your view makes it impossible to distinguish anything from anything else. It's just intellectually a dead end if you take it seriously with any consistency.
I think I've already demonstrated that you're wrong, but feel free to provide concrete examples of where my view does what you claim.
> Don't be so open minded your brain falls out.
Please avoid this type of language. It's not welcome on HN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have seen a cop order a medic to give sedative to a human that was being choked by said cops for more than 10 minutes (he was basically already dead when they injected him). Search for Tony Timpa on Youtube if you want to see the video. And they were joking while killing him. And last but not least, they all kept their jobs. All humans can be bastards.
> And last but not least, they all kept their jobs Police unions are some of the most powerful organizations. Not being able to fire bad actors is one of the worst parts of unions. I've never understood why there hasn't been a movement to reform them. Their coworkers get stuck with them too and bringing the whole unit down. Instead we're always sold some nostalgic narrative of past golden eras of unions. Glossing ove…
The gains unions won for their members were worse than zero-sum, because they merely redistributed from profit (shareholder income) to worker income, while resulting in collective bargaining agreements that reduced the flexibility of the labor market.
The violence they were involved in was almost universally started by them, as illegal action that violated the employer's right to their property, and replacement worker's right to work at their site, was their main source of leverage.