It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness • Hacker News Board

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#291

Post by maxbond » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:04 PM UTC

rendall wrote: post #289

maxbond wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinks are impossible to pin down or fence in, people can get turned on by literally anything. https://xkcd.com/468/ This doesn't really muddy the waters; the concepts remain distinct, and people making it a kink to conflate them is kinda like how a joke isn't true but is only funny if you know the truth it refers to. Heteronormativity conflates gender and sexuality; I'd guess (while acknowledging I don't know the con…

> Kinks are impossible to pin down or fence in, people can get turned on by literally anything. While a true statement it's also a non-sequitur. Anglosphere society is roiled with social turmoil about trans-gender identity. One faction would like society to recognize that some people's gender does not fit their sex, and to normalize accommodating these people's gender expression without intrusive and oppressive quest…

This narrative of predatory trans people does not bare out, trans people are not assaulting people in bathrooms, and what you're describing is really using the way our society is built to be hostile to people who do not fit into gender norms as a way to justify further hostility. It's saying, oh look, we built bathrooms and prisons in a way that reinforces these norms, well, I guess we're stuck with them.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#292

Post by joenot443 » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:07 PM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #42

gadders wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuck it, I'll take the karma hit. I am of course referring to young girls identifying as male/non-binary. I'm sure some of the cases are genuine, but not all. And I'm not saying these girls aren't troubled or have other things going on that they need help with.

I appreciate your being willing to speak your mind without hiding behind vaguery. We can risk a karma hit together. You are referring to a myth called "Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria," which has been debunked. Gender identity is not a socially transmitted pathology. I don't believe you meant this in a hateful way, but let me explain what the problem is with this idea. This is sophistry about how LGBTQ people should rem…

Has ROGD been absolutely debunked? Last I checked it was still pretty debated, I see discussions about it all the time still. When I search for papers I see the original [1], criticisms [2], and a correction issued by the original authors [3] which holds to most of their starting claims.

Obviously being cis and childless I don't have a horse in this race, but it seems to me that there's still a fair amount of disagreement in the field, and the ROGD's existence or non-existence isn't really settled. The result found by the original paper may be unpopular, but it's bad science to hide it away solely for that reason.

[1] https://rogd.fi/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/pone.0214157.s001... [2] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/003802612093469... [3] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#293

Post by kome » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:10 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #146

kome wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

very very good point. and anecdotally, i think it's indeed the case for gender dysphoria... btw, not long ago there was a sociologist from columbia, working on the autism epidemics, pointing out how autism is "contagious" among parents https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122411399389 - so it's not for the first time that we point out at the sociogenesis of mental illness

Hell no it's not. Gender non-conforming people have been a staple throughout human history, with examples dating back to at least the 2nd century AD [1], and not just in Europe but in South Asia as well [2]. The thing is, many societies didn't care for a long time, and only in the 20th century repression really took off with the rise of ultra-fundamentalist religions. Now we're seeing the backlash against that and pe…

i know it has been a staple throughout human history, and i'm not contesting that. i just posit that the proportion of it, nowadays, might be inflated by social media and mimetic behaviors. edit, a very enlightening comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33879136

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#294

Post by nicoburns » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:35 PM UTC

brookst wrote: post #228

nicoburns wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Over represented compared to what? In the case of gender dysphoria, the obvious comparison would be, compared to a society where one can subvert gender norms and be accepted without changing one's identity. The emergence of trans movement has created a space where gender-nonconforming people can find more acceptance, but it comes with own set of norms and requirements. One of which is that one must change their ide…

I kept waiting for you to support the “over represented” claim. Much disappointment. Over represented compared to what real thing? What should the representation be, in terms of percent, compared to what we see today?

The "real" thing would be the gender dysphoria present if people weren't subject to a society telling them that if they don't conform to the norms of then they can't be , they must be . A society that conflates wanting to live and present in a certain way with wanting a certain body type (these are both valid things to want, but they ought to be treated as independent phenomena rather than as being linked by an abstract concept of gender).

Having such an escape is better than not having it, but it's far from an ideal gender free society (where we effectively treat everyone as having a non-binary gender), in which I suspect we would see a lot less gender dysphoria. Allowing people to choose which set of gender norms they want to follow is still enforcing gender norms if you expect people to choose a single identity and don't allow people to freely mix and match.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#295

Post by blueflow » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:42 PM UTC

ryanbrunner wrote: post #267

blueflow wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My parents didn't like me playing with Barbie dolls; they explicitly told me that it wasn't something boys did. Same with me, but let me ask you a question. Were you the sort of kid that actually listens to their parents? Because i didn't, and most of my peers didn't, either.

If it's your parents and your peers and virtually all popular media, it's massively naive to think that isn't going to have a normalizing effect on people.

For people with your attitude, yes.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#296

Post by maxbond » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:46 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #254

alisonatwork wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Adventurous or curious people might give something a try just for the hell of it. For some it will stick. For many it won't. This is what I find so exhausting about those who try to drum up some kind of controversy around gender identity. Assuming it is all just a fad, who cares? Where's the issue when people decide to switch their gender on a whim? It's their lives. People do all kinds of things on a whim. Adu…

> Where's the issue when people decide to switch their gender on a whim? The issue, at least for me, starts when we give children drugs and surgeries to enable them to switch genders. There's nothing wrong with little Timmy wanting to play with Barbies. He doesn't need hormone injections because of it.

These same points are made & rebutted in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33880094

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#297

Post by red_admiral » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:46 PM UTC

ryanbrunner wrote: post #282

red_admiral wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is "cool" inside a very small, but very powerful, stratum of society. You are right that there are still a lot of places where being queer (whether of the LGB or T variety) is a huge disadvantage.

Even within that stratum, I'd argue that it's more "acceptable" than specifically "cool". Or if it is "cool", it's in a superficial sort of way that doesn't relay any real benefits or privilege.

I guess one could argue whether getting upvotes, likes, views and such on social media counts as "real benefits", but that seems to be exactly what's going on with some of the Tourettes-on-TikTok people. You get lots of validation coming your way, you get to be part of a community, and you get +1 armor against trolls who claim it's ok to punch as long as you're only punching up.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#298

Post by rendall » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:47 PM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #291

rendall wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kinks are impossible to pin down or fence in, people can get turned on by literally anything. While a true statement it's also a non-sequitur. Anglosphere society is roiled with social turmoil about trans-gender identity. One faction would like society to recognize that some people's gender does not fit their sex, and to normalize accommodating these people's gender expression without intrusive and oppressive quest…

This narrative of predatory trans people does not bare out, trans people are not assaulting people in bathrooms, and what you're describing is really using the way our society is built to be hostile to people who do not fit into gender norms as a way to justify further hostility. It's saying, oh look, we built bathrooms and prisons in a way that reinforces these norms, well, I guess we're stuck with them.

> This narrative of predatory trans people does not bare out...

I didn't say predatory trans people. I said predatory men. Have you met men? Some men will put on a dress, call themselves trans, and fondle themselves in a women's locker room.

Again, pretending this is about trans people is disingenuous. This is about (some) men.

And, again, whether you genuinely dismiss the concern because you genuinely disbelieve that any man ever would take advantage of the situation, the faction that bring it up do genuinely believe that some men will take advantage of it. This faction will not go away. So, probably best to at least acknowledge their concerns so that trans people can get on with the business of doing their business.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#299

Post by nicoburns » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:49 PM UTC

simiones wrote: post #147

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What boggles my mind is that people who adamantly claim that all gender behavior is socially constructed are the ones who are the first to denounce the idea that you can learn to want to be another gender.

I don't think that happens too often. The problem is that there are at least two different and often opposing currents in pro-trans movements. One is from the "gender is a social construct" post-modernist side, which views the very idea that people are either men or women with some suspicion, and leads to concepts such as gender fluidity, non-binary identities, and the idea that maybe young kids should not be gendere…

> My impression is that the second group is much much more prevalent, but also seen as problematic by the first group. The first group is much more extreme, and has much more "interesting" talking points, so it is significantly over-represented in online discussions and media.

My impression is that extreme opinions are mostly from two subgroups of the second group:

- Those who believe that gender is essentially defined by physical characteristics

- Those who believe that gender is essentially defined by social characteristics.

Their inability (or unwillingness) to more deeply consider the concepts of "men"/"women" place them in conflict with each other because each of them want to use a different concept, and neither of them are open to exploring different ones.

The only way I can see this being resolved is by taking an attitude more similar to first group.

Re: It’s not Tourette’s but a new type of mass sociogenic illness

#300

Post by nicoburns » Tue, Dec 06, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #260

simiones wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that happens too often. The problem is that there are at least two different and often opposing currents in pro-trans movements. One is from the "gender is a social construct" post-modernist side, which views the very idea that people are either men or women with some suspicion, and leads to concepts such as gender fluidity, non-binary identities, and the idea that maybe young kids should not be gendere…

The question of how many people happen to genuinely be in the liminal space between male and female gender expression is very much an empirical matter, not about philosophy. In the real world, seemingly clear-cut binary distinctions and fuzzy, mysterious liminal phenomena are not opposed to one another; they can very much coexist.

I would suggest that empirically it's pretty much everybody. Almost nobody is entirely masculine or feminine. And it seems to me that the world would be a better place if we recognised that for everybody not just those who especially struggle with a world that places us into binary categories.