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

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

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 704 posts

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

#341

Post by VictorPath »

ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

> we can _learn_ to want to be another gender

If that is true, then cookie cutter expected gender behavior can be "learned" as well. In fact much of it was illegal in the US a few decades ago.

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

#342

Post by spoils19 »

claudiawerner wrote: post #337
ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

>This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want to be another gender. Did you really think this was going to be downvoted on Hacker News of all places?

The famously 'progressive' HackerNews? Years of reading the comments has led me to believe that the GPs assumption is mostly correct.

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

#343

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #66
ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

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.

It's less "learning to be another gender" but more being in a society that allows an individual to express their gender as something other than their sex.

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

#344

Post by kridsdale1 »

theGnuMe wrote: post #339

There's a new Netflix series called Hot Skull around this theme. I haven't watched it yet but it looks like the premise is that a word virus infects people and they start talking gibberish.

Hey Hiro. You want to try some Snow Crash?

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

#345

Post by SavageBeast »

RC_ITR wrote: post #330
ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

>then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. Don't fall into the trap of assuming that 1950's Western norms are a 'baseline.' History shows us that almost all expressions of gender are fluid. The idea of "men and women need to be segregated in certain places (particularly when nude) and must dress differently' is likely the…

> ... and must dress differently

Operating based on a sampling of women I know - Im going to perform an experiment - I have some clothes of mine that I (Male with a capital M) no longer wear and Im going to give them to some Female friends for their own use.

We'll see what happens but I bet Im going to be met with confusing expressions and laughed at - at best.

Men and women do not dress differently on the count of societal pressures but rather express themselves differently on the count of different imperatives. You can slice it 6 different ways but outside of a small minority of people with non-standard gender ideals, the vast majority of women want to "be pretty" in whatever way that means to them and the vast majority of men want to "look like a man" for their various reasons and in whatever way that means to them.

I realize this is a terribly "incorrect" thing to say these days but at the same time its among the most pervasive ideals I can think of - right up there with the understanding that water is wet. Out side of groups where the word "Patriarchy" is thrown around, men are men and women are women and neither would have it any other way. This isn't due to societal pressure to conform either. This is prevailing behavior of both genders at work.

I personally do not understand why a minority of people choosing alternative, non-birth gender roles needs to be cast into some movement where everyones gender is in question. Im not sure I know anyone who has ever so much as questioned the "baggage" their bio-gender is supposedly saddled with. According to modern psychiatry (which for the purposes of this conversation we'll assume is valid since we all agree Sociopathy and Eating Disorders are real things too), the DSM-5 includes Gender Dysphoria. Psychiatry considers that a real thing right next to some other things I think we can all agree are real.

> History shows us that almost all expressions of gender are fluid.

politely said: CITATION PLEASE

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

#346

Post by claudiawerner »

spoils19 wrote: post #342
claudiawerner wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want to be another gender. Did you really think this was going to be downvoted on Hacker News of all places?

The famously 'progressive' HackerNews? Years of reading the comments has led me to believe that the GPs assumption is mostly correct.

It could be my own bias, but I don't see HN as a particularly progressive place, at least as compared to, say, Reddit. Granted, it can be a good or a bad thing, but HN has a far wider spectrum of opinions that get upvoted; IME trans issues in particular dominate comment threads when it comes to LGBT issues.

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

#347

Post by RobertRoberts »

RC_ITR wrote: post #330
ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

>then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. Don't fall into the trap of assuming that 1950's Western norms are a 'baseline.' History shows us that almost all expressions of gender are fluid. The idea of "men and women need to be segregated in certain places (particularly when nude) and must dress differently' is likely the…

> ...if it didn't come with so much societal baggage.

Isn't societal baggage also a perception issue? Take 10 people with all the same physical traits and the same social situation and you will get 10 different perspectives.

Why should I accept there is _any_ baggage as a fact? It may just appear so for a massive amount of people, and _that_ could be fluid.

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

#348

Post by totemandtoken »

ccity88 wrote: post #33

What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _…

>> This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want to be another gender.

Except this was disproven. Dr. Money and David Rimer is the infamous case study I believe

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

#349

Post by zozbot234 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #327
maxbond wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating heterosexuality and heteronormativity. You could have a society where heterosexuality is prevalent, without having heteronormativity. Heteronormativity encompasses both heterosexuality and a specific set of gender roles for men and women; so it is not enough for heterosexuality to be prevalent. You need to conflate these genders with heterosexuality, prescribe them, and marginalize sexual and gender…

> Heteronormativity encompasses both heterosexuality and a specific set of gender roles for men and women Heteronormativity is just heterosexuality as a normative element of social structures (not merely prevalent in society, but where deviation from it is viewed as transgressive.) In modern societies, it is typically tied to patriarchy (a particular normatige structure of gender roles, in which social power is attac…

> where deviation from it is viewed as transgressive

Note that by this standard, much of LGBTQ+ culture might well be described as heteronormative, since glorifying social transgression as such (not merely inasmuch as it might inevitably follow from having a non-majority gender or sexual orientation) has long been a staple of that particular identity.

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

#350

Post by maxbond »

zozbot234 wrote: post #334
maxbond wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating heterosexuality and heteronormativity. You could have a society where heterosexuality is prevalent, without having heteronormativity. Heteronormativity encompasses both heterosexuality and a specific set of gender roles for men and women; so it is not enough for heterosexuality to be prevalent. You need to conflate these genders with heterosexuality, prescribe them, and marginalize sexual and gender…

> you need look no further than the comment I criticized. It doesn't say, heterosexuality is prevalent; it says, heterosexuality is total That comment actually said "heterosexuality is normal", which is of course ambiguous - it could mean either of "prevalent" or "not merely prevalent but standard, with deviations from it being seen as undesirable". Heteronormativity might be a description of the latter claim, but to…

It isn't ambiguous if you consider the entire comment, where they go on to clarify what they mean by invoking a naturalism fallacy and contrasting it with other identities (which they clearly describe in pejorative terms as "abnormal" and "misleading" with an overall tone of derision). Of course I acknowledge that most people are heterosexual, that's such misrepresentation of what I'm saying (including that I've directly acknowledged this point already) I can't suspend my disbelief it isn't willful. I've provided definitions for all of this, you're choosing not to engage with them.

I make no claims about heteronormativity in Greece or Rome (I do say that the patriarchy is several millennia old, so this could be read as an implicit claim that patriarchy existed in Greece and Rome [and I wouldn't take issue with that claim], but I don't think you'd find this disagreeable, given the "rape culture as purposeful male domination" you reference, and that the definition of patiarchy I provided specifically calls out the domination of men), and gender and sexual identities certainly are linked in the sense that certain combinations are more common than others - they just aren't synonyms. As I noted, there is no burden for this concept to translate to other cultures and time periods in order for us to accept it as a useful model for the purposes of our discussion; I've not seen a counterargument from you on this, so I don't see why I would accept these observations of Greece and Rome as being deleterious to my point, anyway.

Post reply on HN