67
Comments (42)
sorted by:
41
deleted 41 points ago +41 / -0
20
CarmenOfSandiego 20 points ago +20 / -0

No transition: snapping out of the conditioning sooner or later

"Bu-bu-but, muh grooming victims! Won't someone think of the poor abusers who won't have anyone to 'educate'?"

"Sure, I'm thinking of them right now." /reloads

4
ThatsAlright 4 points ago +8 / -4

Not all memes are real, and those are largely overblown to serve precisely this type of propaganda, as can be seen in the article:

“The risks of withholding gender-affirming care vary from patient to patient but often involve things like worsening anxiety, depression, and suicidality.”

“Recent legislation to take gender-affirming medical care as an option away across the board is extremely dangerous and will lead to bad outcomes.” A 2022 study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that trans teens were 7.6 times more likely to attempt suicide than their cis peers.

25
ghostfox1_ 25 points ago +25 / -0

A 2022 study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that trans teens were 7.6 times more likely to attempt suicide than their cis peers.

Because they're mentally ill degenerates, and don't get help with the mental illness part, only enabled

Real hard to crack the case there

7
elleand202 7 points ago +7 / -0

worsening anxiety, depression, and suicidality.”

Oh no! Anyways...

5
GhostBond 5 points ago +5 / -0

A 2022 study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that trans teens were 7.6 times more likely to attempt suicide than their cis peers.

Funny how it doesn't mention that post-amputations, this number doesn't change.

3
TheImpossible1 3 points ago +12 / -9

The suicides in "trans women" are a feature, not a bug. They're intentional.

14
almond_activator 14 points ago +14 / -0

I think it might have more to do with the absolute horror show that is 'bottom surgery'.

2
TheImpossible1 2 points ago +7 / -5

Yes.

Feminist women break those boys, push them into what is effectively self harm, which leads them to an untimely death.

It's the most amazing of sadistic treats for them. Not only did they get their male suicides, but they got those boys to mutilate themselves. They have that added joy of knowing the victim blames themselves for what happened.

33
Assassin47 33 points ago +33 / -0

The clickbait title perfectly encapsulates the philosophical problem at the heart of progressivism. Their entire worldview of past=bad/future=good is logically unsound. The past is recorded. It's history. We can see and judge past failures and successes. Somehow we've reached where we are today by building on the foundations of our ancestors, so the sum of whatever they did worked to some extent. We absolutely do know what happens if we don't try something that was never needed before - nothing. The Earth spins, life goes on. Progressives would say not fixing "mistakes of the past" is bad, but why is it something to care about if I'm here today and doing fine? Can you prove empirically they were mistakes?

In this case you can trigger faux empathy by coming up with all kinds of one-off examples of mentally ill weirdos and people "left behind" by society, but we didn't hear about it because it was a non-issue. It doesn't even matter whether you're a normie raising a family or some intellectual deeply concerned about the future of civilization: nobody is worried about "fixing" a novel social condition that was never something deemed worthy of fixing in the past. What we should worry about is progressive ideologues trying to fix society to cater to every individual's personal issues, because at best nobody really knows what the results will be, and at worst we can follow the trend of recent history and tell you very well how bad it will end up if we keep moving in that direction.

TL;DR these people are evil degenerates who say down is up and bad is good.

13
Ricky_CIA 13 points ago +13 / -0

Foucault, Marcuse and Gramsci mixed together in neo-progressive's minds has created an incredibly destructive intellectual toxic waste.

It's like a societal version of Drexler's grey goo.

12
TentElephant 12 points ago +12 / -0

Progressivism is anti-civilization.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
4
TentElephant 4 points ago +4 / -0

Are you trying to reclaim the word progressive for its original WASP meaning a la Teddy Roosevelt and Wilson? Otherwise, progressivism is the correct term for the dominant ideology of elites in the west. Liberalism is effectively dead alongside the other 20th century ideologies of fascism and communism.

4
ItsOkayToBeWight 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's in the name: Progressive. "Progress is good. Only bad people stand in the way of progress!" Attempting to win via programming people. And it works. That's why we call them NPCs.

2
LawNmowermaN 2 points ago +2 / -0

This touches on something that really gets to the heart of the differences between the right and the left, leading to so many of our differences of opinion. It's a thought experiment called Chesterson's Fence.

The idea is that you inherit a large tract of good ranch land from a rich uncle, and you hope to use it to raise cattle and make a ton of money. Upon inspecting it for the first time, you find a fence running right down the middle of the property. The fence is placed in such a way that it significantly reduces the value of the ranch land. You have no explanation for who built it, or for what purpose. Without knowing whether it is better to leave it up or tear it down, a rightwinger's first thought will be, "Someone built this for a reason. I should find out what it is, and leave the fence standing for now." A leftwinger's first thought is, "I can't think of a reason this fence needs to be here. I should tear it down immediately." And to both rightwingers and leftwingers, their own first thought is perfectly natural, and the other first thought is insanity. Note that there may be a good reason for the fence to be there, or not; this is just about the first instinct in the face of the unknown.

To a rightwinger, life is complicated and uncooperative, so it's worth defending the way things are even if one cannot articulate why it's a good idea. This happened a lot when gay marriage was the big debate in the early 2000s. Rightwingers knew hetero-only monogamous marriage was good, but often struggled to articulate why. Many just appealed to tradition. Leftwingers interpreted this as bigotry because they could not imagine wanting to keep a system without an articulable reason. The leftists won that framing argument, and have used it ever since - "If you can't give me a reason I like, then I am correct by default."

Leftwingers see no value in tradition, or even in consistency over time. That's why they will completely overturn centuries-old tradition; it's why they can even overturn the much more recent phenomenon of feminism to make way for the transsexual agenda. It's why they say, "Don't worry about looters and rioters, insurance will take care of it," because they do not understand that a working insurance system requires a stable society in the first place; to them, the institutions they like will remain in place as long as needed regardless of any circumstances. In effect, leftists think society and humanity are both infinitely re-engineerable, and that anything not being deliberately changed will continue to work as expected when everything around it has changed. Arguing with this is frustrating; going back to the gay marriage thing, even if you can give a solid, articulate reason for trad marriage ("Marriage exists as an institution to reward men for investing in the future and to provide a stable environment for children; both men and women are happiest with this arrangement, and it consistently leads to better long-term outcomes for everyone"), the leftist believes one can just isolate all the variables and completely change everything ("Well, then educate men and women to be different, and spend more money on schools and social programs, bigot").

I like this theory because it applies even to the leftist elites. You can easily argue that for most issues, the leftist elite doesn't really believe what they are saying (e.g. environmentalists who fly private jets and buy 24-acre beach property). But even the elite appear to genuinely believe they can just change and reengineer anything at will, and get genuinely surprised or frustrated when it doesn't work or when it has undesired side effects. It also shows in the right-wing elite, who refuse to adapt to their rivals' perfidy, and continue to act like everything's chummy and collegial right up until it affects them personally.

28
Smith1980 28 points ago +28 / -0

They grow up to be normal?

28
Indipendepede 28 points ago +28 / -0

Worse, they might go on to reproduce and live happy lives.

19
CarmenOfSandiego 19 points ago +19 / -0

First half of your sentence is enough.

16
cartoonericroberts 16 points ago +16 / -0

9 out of 10 desist. So yeah, from the left's perspective having kids grow out of it is apparently a disaster.

8
ThatsAlright 8 points ago +8 / -0

Lmfao, love the subtle Russia flag in the header pic.

Ok.

4
AbleistSL 4 points ago +4 / -0

that Jarred Fogle rape face.

8
APDSmith 8 points ago +8 / -0

Well, judging by recent information, it appears that if parents don't let their kids transition, people Vox no doubt describes as "brave" will transition them anyway

6
realerfunction 6 points ago +6 / -0

is that a threat?

5
Ricky_CIA 5 points ago +5 / -0

Vox: Just shut the fuck up and let us sterilize and mutilate your kids. If you don't they may be SAD!

5
TheImpossible1 5 points ago +11 / -6

All the sources are women.

“This is not experimental care. This is care that’s been around, in a very formal fashion, for over 50 years,” says Michelle Forcier, a professor at Brown University’s medical school and co-editor of Pediatric Gender Identity. “We know that there are studies that demonstrate efficacy and safety.”

Forcier. The simulation is mocking us.

What studies? Name one, not by a fucking woman, because we all know you would say the sky is green if it meant you could harm men.

The recent hyperfocus on trans youth is largely a media invention, says Jules Gill-Peterson, a history professor at Johns Hopkins University. “Trans people and trans youth were never really objects of the media [until recently]. I really don’t think most people ever encountered the idea that they shared the world with trans youth until the last 10 years.”

Probably because ten years ago, there was still some facade of women considering men their equals.

Everyone can see from 40 miles away what's going on.

In 2001, Anne Vitale, a California psychotherapist who has specialized in gender-nonconforming patients since 1984, published a groundbreaking paper in the journal Gender and Psychoanalysis surveying trans women at all stages of life who did not transition as young people.

confusion and rebellion in childhood, false hopes and disappointment in adolescence, hesitant compliance in early adulthood, feelings of self-induced entrapment in middle age, and if still untreated, depression and resignation in old age,” she writes.

That just sounds like being a man in women's world to me. False hope that you will be considered equal, feeling that if you were a woman you'd be in a better position in society, depression that you never got to live the life you deserved because of sick people with zero remorse.

#MoreFeminineWay

4
GhostBond 4 points ago +4 / -0

I've said this before, "trans" is women's version of rape. Men force their parts into a women, women psychologically dominate others into cutting their off for fear of offending them.

Both the "trans" people I knew where very clearly slowly tricked into it ("I think I'd be more attracted to you if you were more like a girl") or pressured into it to avoid his mothers man-hating wrath after facebook became he a thing. He was in high school, had to live with her - nowhere else to go. She had previously driven her nice guy ex-husband to suicide.

5
censorthisss 5 points ago +5 / -0

Written by a tranny BTW

3
Guy_Incognito76 3 points ago +3 / -0

Urge to fedpost, rising

3
dzonatan 3 points ago +3 / -0

I always wonder what is their excuse is for seemingly lack of teenage suicide up until late 2010s.

2
GhostBond 2 points ago +2 / -0

At this point any new "trans studies" are sort of like studies on stalins popularity - in russia, while stalin was in power.

The only people left are fanatics, and yes-men-or-women who simply publish whatever they're told.

Any reasonable people moved their career to something else, or stay very quite.

2
barwhack 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sounds threatening.

2
evilplushie 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fucking groomers

2
BrainJuice 2 points ago +2 / -0

How vaguely threatening of them.

2
SoctaticMethod1 2 points ago +2 / -0

Reality of if they don't transition: " come on mom/dad, let's go play in the park!"

In their heads if they don't transition: Wir werden die Uber-Rasse züchten, um die schwachen feminösen Männer und die festgefahrenen Frauen zu vernichten.

2
BlueDrache 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sounds like a threat to me.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
You_Are_Based 1 point ago +1 / -0

BAD ENDING: you kept gay people away from your kid... and now it's the gender it was born as!!!

1
voidposter 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not "let", "brainwash" or "groom".

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Desistance rates after puberty show that the vast majority will be fine. So yeah, I'm fine with saving the majority of children from predatory pharma seeking to make them permanent cash cows. And that's not even touching the suicide of non-trans people being pushed to suicide by urging them to transition under the lie that it will help them.