Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The New Homophobia

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 61 posts

Re: The New Homophobia

#41

Post by laserdancepony »

kgwxd wrote: post #6
jc_811 wrote: post #4

Does anyone else feel like the recent focus on gender identity/pronouns/trans is being totally driven by the extreme 5% on both sides (left and right)? Meanwhile the remaining 90% of us are under the attitude of "equal rights for all, do and/or call yourself whatever you want as long as it brings no personal harm to others". Personally, for every gender non-binary person I've encountered (there have been multiple), w…

We could all mostly ignore it if there wasn't a bunch of idiots in government passing laws every chance they get to ensure it continues being a very real human rights issue. The right initiates all this non-sense, they do some oppressing and the left has no choice but to react, because you can't just let that stuff slide, so both sides end up completely consumed by an issues most people aren't effected by.

Yes, the screeching radical left is completely innocent in derailing the political debate to an extent incomprehensible to anyone with a braincell left. Not that the right wing gonzos are not to blame for it too, but to offload all of the guilt onto a single side of the horseshoe is very much just as undifferentiated as you are calling your political enemy.

Re: The New Homophobia

#42

Post by replygirl »

Avshalom wrote: post #39
replygirl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as i understand it, those states have seen pushes to leave it up to parents to educate and nurture their kids in early development, carving out a space where the state cannot take over for parents, which was not a controversial thing to want for families until recently

Abbott in Texas has stated any affirming care by parents is grounds to have the children taken away by the state.

didn't the texas supreme court block that?

Re: The New Homophobia

#43

Post by beej71 »

yusefnapora wrote: post #40
Bostonian wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I was a bit surprised to see how most people I interact with over the age of 40 or so (my parents incl.) are pretty stubborn about referring to people based on what they consider right" Well, I'm 51. I don't think a man who takes hormones and gets operated on is actually a woman, and I'd rather not be forced to be complicit in a lie by referring to him as "she". By normalizing transgenderism society is encouraging a…

What do you do when you meet an androgynous person whose gender isn't immediately obvious? If they introduce themselves as female, do you take their word for it, or do you first need to inspect their genitals to make sure you're not being complicit in a lie?

It's not enough. You also need to look at their chromosomes.

Re: The New Homophobia

#44

Post by replygirl »

a_shovel wrote: post #38
replygirl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as i understand it, those states have seen pushes to leave it up to parents to educate and nurture their kids in early development, carving out a space where the state cannot take over for parents, which was not a controversial thing to want for families until recently

The Florida Department of Health recently released new guidelines stating "Social gender transition should not be a treatment option for children or adolescents." [0] For those unaware, "social gender transition", in addition to changing their pronouns and name, would be things like a trans girl switching to wearing dresses or growing out her hair, or a trans boy cutting his hair or wearing boy's clothes, or engaging…

i think it's fair for the department of health to not allow adolescent therapists and psychiatrists to prescribe social transition—there are implications for a parent blocking access to something legally considered a medical treatment. from what i read it seems like parents still have some leeway to respond to their childrens' needs independently, at least on the social side.

to be fair i don't think i've seen any policy regime, in effect or proposed, that feels quite right to me. in florida's case i would change the language to allow that sort of prescription subject to parental consent whether it's social or hormonal.

on the blockers though, it's not the end of the world that i grow hair on my face and have a little more muscle mass than most women. dysphoria peaks when you first acknowledge it, then slowly subsides over a few years once you're Living Your Truth. i am more than my annoying body

> and an exception to that for intersex people

this has been an intersex rights issue for much longer than what's in the spotlight right now, and should be considered separately imo. one thing i learned from the intersex people in my life is they don't like intersex concerns being lumped in with trans concerns, even if many do grow up to be, or present as, trans.

if we have to consider both at the same time, i would say "leave bodies as they were born until the person inhabiting them is old enough to know what's best for themself"

> enforcing gender conformity.

elsewhere in this thread i voiced my opinion that contemporary queer ideology has eroded the usefulness of identity markers. to build on that, i also think most liberals (i.e. people who believe "progress" is both real and virtuous) have a pretty narrow idea of how gender nonconformity can present itself

Re: The New Homophobia

#45

Post by Avshalom »

replygirl wrote: post #42
Avshalom wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abbott in Texas has stated any affirming care by parents is grounds to have the children taken away by the state.

didn't the texas supreme court block that?

a district court judge issued a temporary injunction

but even aside from that distinction, we've seen this same shit with abortion for the last 50 years, do some obvious bullshit, 10 wait for a court opinion, do some new bullshit carefully written to avoid the precise court opinion, GOTO 10.

Re: The New Homophobia

#46

Post by replygirl »

Avshalom wrote: post #45
replygirl wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

didn't the texas supreme court block that?

a district court judge issued a temporary injunction but even aside from that distinction, we've seen this same shit with abortion for the last 50 years, do some obvious bullshit, 10 wait for a court opinion, do some new bullshit carefully written to avoid the precise court opinion, GOTO 10.

hopefully this doesn't become the next political football after abortion. it seems pretty clear to me that both sides want to keep that issue on the table indefinitely—abortion tends to come up whenever something more important is about to come to a head.

Re: The New Homophobia

#47

Post by Jcowell »

smeej wrote: post #17
replygirl wrote: post #11

This might be incoherent It's hard to talk about this for myself as a trans woman, and especially for cis gays, as liberal queer ideology has taken over the discourse, but it's worth having more queer people speak up about it so we can develop a language for it that leaves things open to good-faith debate. I'm not against blockers to delay puberty until someone is old enough to develop an informed understanding of th…

That last line is the key, isn't it? Sex used to(?) mean something. People were exposed to each other, vulnerable, sharing themselves. It was even intensely powerful, in the sense that new life might actually spring out of it. But this is basically treating another unique, unrepeatable human person as a toy, and not even an exceptional one. I can't help but think we've lost something important and are that much the p…

Did it? Some cultures surely put meaning into it but did all of them?

Re: The New Homophobia

#48

Post by replygirl »

Jcowell wrote: post #47
smeej wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That last line is the key, isn't it? Sex used to(?) mean something. People were exposed to each other, vulnerable, sharing themselves. It was even intensely powerful, in the sense that new life might actually spring out of it. But this is basically treating another unique, unrepeatable human person as a toy, and not even an exceptional one. I can't help but think we've lost something important and are that much the p…

Did it? Some cultures surely put meaning into it but did all of them?

i think we're just talking about western culture, more specifically american culture, which was founded on and has spent most of its history confronting anglican and protestant values

Re: The New Homophobia

#49

Post by Avshalom »

replygirl wrote: post #44
a_shovel wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Florida Department of Health recently released new guidelines stating "Social gender transition should not be a treatment option for children or adolescents." [0] For those unaware, "social gender transition", in addition to changing their pronouns and name, would be things like a trans girl switching to wearing dresses or growing out her hair, or a trans boy cutting his hair or wearing boy's clothes, or engaging…

i think it's fair for the department of health to not allow adolescent therapists and psychiatrists to prescribe social transition—there are implications for a parent blocking access to something legally considered a medical treatment. from what i read it seems like parents still have some leeway to respond to their childrens' needs independently, at least on the social side. to be fair i don't think i've seen any po…

It doesn't say therapists and psychiatrists can't prescribe social transition, it says it should not be a treatment option, which means that prohibition applies to peers and family.

While simultaneously saying they should provided social support by peers and family and seek counseling from a licensed provider, which kinda means support and counseling have can't take the form of allowing social transition.

More generally you keep saying things like "from what I've read"... what have you been reading? The actual texts have all clearly usurped parental rights. Fucking Idaho made it a crime to leave the state to get your kid affirmative care. Who has been splitting what hairs to make any of these seem like they're securing parents' rights?

Re: The New Homophobia

#50

Post by [deleted] »

replygirl wrote: post #46
Avshalom wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a district court judge issued a temporary injunction but even aside from that distinction, we've seen this same shit with abortion for the last 50 years, do some obvious bullshit, 10 wait for a court opinion, do some new bullshit carefully written to avoid the precise court opinion, GOTO 10.

hopefully this doesn't become the next political football after abortion. it seems pretty clear to me that both sides want to keep that issue on the table indefinitely—abortion tends to come up whenever something more important is about to come to a head.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN