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

After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

tpr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 379 posts

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#81

Post by chownie »

transcoderx wrote: post #50
klyrs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People believing that masses of children are literally getting surgery, circumcision notwithstanding, is a result of a persistent campaign to cause panic. And it's the same hucksters selling fear to the same religious reactionaries. New day, new apocalyptic scapegoat.

[flagged]

Tavistock also were not performing surgeries on children.

Trans people often don't even receive hormones until they're 16, I don't know how this idea that they're receiving surgery on a whim makes any sense to anyone.

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#82

Post by notahacker »

transcoderx wrote: post #71
ropable wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And btw hormone blockers are not harmless. Untrue. We’ve been using them for more than 30 years for kids who start puberty at a super young age (it’s called precocious puberty). And as best as science can tell, those kids are healthy when they grow up

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#83

Post by Freak_NL »

beebeepka wrote: post #70
Freak_NL wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, but you may want to avoid the word 'tranny' when you mean transvestite (or preferably, cross-dresser or drag queen) or transsexual or transgender person. 'Tranny' has been embraced as a hateful slur and is generally considered offensive and derogatory. (Cf.: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tranny )

Maybe this is why I am being downvoted. What should I use instead? I don't exactly follow the waves of nuspeak

Your example hints at a man who dresses like a woman (but usually not transitioning or being uncomfortable with their (day-to-day) manhood), so cross-dresser (or drag queen if it is really over the top, well, drag queenish, which the ballgown sort of implies).

'Tranny' being derogatory isn't really new-speak. The only recent shift I know of is that men who dress up like (feminine) women tend to prefer 'cross-dresser' over 'transvestite' nowadays. The problem with 'tranny' in this context is also that it now mostly refers to transgender people (in a derogatory way) rather than cross-dressers.

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#84

Post by chownie »

hoseja wrote: post #68
klyrs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People believing that masses of children are literally getting surgery, circumcision notwithstanding, is a result of a persistent campaign to cause panic. And it's the same hucksters selling fear to the same religious reactionaries. New day, new apocalyptic scapegoat.

[flagged]

Provide the evidence, you'll quickly find that it doesn't support the claim.

No children (prepubescent) are given surgeries, a tiny minority of 16 year olds are able to receive top surgeries but the vast majority can't even get hormones until late teens.

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#85

Post by chowells »

beebeepka wrote: post #70
Freak_NL wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, but you may want to avoid the word 'tranny' when you mean transvestite (or preferably, cross-dresser or drag queen) or transsexual or transgender person. 'Tranny' has been embraced as a hateful slur and is generally considered offensive and derogatory. (Cf.: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tranny )

Maybe this is why I am being downvoted. What should I use instead? I don't exactly follow the waves of nuspeak

Are you seriously equating treating people with respect with nuspeak? The post you replied to already answered your question. I'm just going to suggest that you should focus more on respecting others and less on thinking you're debating.

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#86

Post by phire »

I assume these satanic panic cases happened everywhere.

In New Zealand, we had a kindergarten teacher who was convinced of preforming satanic rituals in a medieval style torture chamber in the basement of the kindergarten, There was even a network of secret tunnels. The building didn't even have a basement. That fact alone should have been a large enough clue that four-year-old kids can be unreliable witnesses if mishandled.

His conviction wasn't overturned until last year, which was 3 years after he died. First time a conviction was posthumously quashed in NZ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ellis_(childcare_worker)

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#87

Post by meindnoch »

friend_and_foe wrote: post #16

> “Instead of getting help with the real mental problems she was experiencing, she was persuaded and kept mentally ill with pseudoscience and superstition,” said Parker. I wonder what modern day mass hysteria/social contagion we will remember in this way. Whatever it is you can bet lots of people will pretend they never engaged in it.

Hmmmmmm. No, not gonna take this bait :-)

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#88

Post by birracerveza »

8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #3

A similar travesty of justice happened in Italy in the late 90s with a bunch of parents going to jail, their kids being taken away by the local child protection services, parents committing suicide from the trauma etc. Two decades later, as part of an investigation, the kids (now adults) came out as saying that they were brainwashed, they were pressured into confessions of satanic rituals in the local cemetery, of bl…

>unfortunately no En version of the page

For the best. My blood is fucking boiling.

I can't even imagine what these families were put through, this is beyond horrible. This is the work of demons indeed!

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#89

Post by vincnetas »

transcoderx wrote: post #69
zrail wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children don't receive elective surgery. It's just not a thing, in any medical guidelines or ethics rules, anywhere in the country. Older teens, _extremely rarely_, are allowed to have top surgery, but it's case by case. Children _can_ receive puberty blockers, which _by definition_ are 100% completely reversible. The process to start treatment is universally difficult and involves multiple years of therapy and concu…

No, puberty blockers are not 100% reversible and they are not harmless, either. Surgeries are not rare, either - at least it is debatable what should be considered "rare".

Do you have numbers on surgeries. Im curious how "not rate" are they.

Re: After 30 years, a father is exonerated in 'Satanic panic' case

#90

Post by altacc »

transcoderx wrote: post #69
zrail wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children don't receive elective surgery. It's just not a thing, in any medical guidelines or ethics rules, anywhere in the country. Older teens, _extremely rarely_, are allowed to have top surgery, but it's case by case. Children _can_ receive puberty blockers, which _by definition_ are 100% completely reversible. The process to start treatment is universally difficult and involves multiple years of therapy and concu…

No, puberty blockers are not 100% reversible and they are not harmless, either. Surgeries are not rare, either - at least it is debatable what should be considered "rare".

Risks are comparative, moral panic is not and ignores this. Banning something because it is not 100% harmless is just not something that is done without extra considerations, such as a moralizing. E.g. Pain killers cause significantly more societal harm than puberty blockers but are still widely available.

As to the real risks, time and again it has been shown that the comparative risks of a) receiving puberty blockers vs b) growing up a gender you do not feel you are, strongly points to puberty blockers being a significant net benefit. Those taking puberty blockers rarely regret it; whereas those growing up a gender they do not identify with mostly regret it are are significantly more prone to abuse, mental health issues and suicide.

Post reply on HN