Hacker News Reader

Comment by paulmd | Hacker News Reader

> "we shouldn't give 11 year olds puberty blockers, wait until they are 18 to choose"

the puberty blocker exists solely to give them the time to choose, it's not the same thing as transitioning itself. Denying puberty blockers is letting nature force the choice.

Along with your suggestion that "3 year olds are being given genital surgery" as another commenter highlighted - like it or not you are repeating bigoted conservative talking points here and I think what you are seeing is not "I have to walk on eggshells to avoid upsetting people" but people's valid and legitimate negative reactions to bigoted opinions that you are espousing.

For the record, just because OAN is even more reactionary than you, doesn't make the things you're saying centrist, they're still reactionary and bigoted.

View on HN

> 3 year olds are being given genital surgery

This is not my suggestion, I am saying that this is what the right think what the left wants for everyone. I know this is not a thing that happens and is complete bullshit.

> For the record, just because OAN is even more reactionary than you, doesn't make the things you're saying centrist, they're still reactionary and bigoted.

Apologies if you misunderstood, I should have rephrased it, this is mostly what people complain about during off-corpnet casual team chats and whatnot re: eggshells. I don't think that they are/were reasonable opinions myself and I am fully aware that giving puberty blockers after puberty is rather pointless, for example.

I am Indian but I speak English as a second language and it feels like a lot of older hyper-conservative coworkers are more at ease to openly discuss these things with someone they think is from the same background and in their language.

>the puberty blocker exists solely to give them the time to choose, it's not the same thing as transitioning itself. Denying puberty blockers is letting nature force the choice.

Giving puberty blockers (steroids) to children cause irreversible developments (undersized genitalia, irreversible higher pitched voiced, etc. to males) and absolutely should not be given. Not allowing children to go through puberty is a crime against their humanity.

Children go through puberty anywhere from 8 to 19. Generations ago, 16 to 18 was fairly common. Going through puberty late does not equal never going through puberty.

That's natural puberty according to their natural biology. Feeding them hormones to "pause" puberty is denying them their basic humanity to go through puberty naturally.

No medical treatment is natural. You know what's natural? Infant mortality. Nature sucks.

If you cared about these kids you would learn about why they want puberty blockers rather than suggesting we torture them by denying them medical treatment because of some concept of "natural".

>No medical treatment is natural.

Wrong. Giving water to a dehydrated person is a natural medical treatment. Your entire premise is now disproven.

>You know what's natural? Infant mortality. Nature sucks.

You know what's natural? Children having identity crises and not being mentally developed enough to know the long term effects of their decisions. Nature sucks.

>If you cared about these kids you would learn about why they want puberty blockers rather than suggesting we torture them by denying them medical treatment because of some concept of "natural".

If you cared about these kids you would learn about why they want puberty blockers rather than suggesting we torture them by pumping them full of steroids to destroy their bodies and denying them their natural development because it's politically expedient.

"Treating" "trans children" is a crime against humanity. Much the same way lobotomies, FGM, etc. are.

"...not being mentally developed enough to know the long term effects of their decisions"

This is false. You question ask a minor about the consequences of a procedure and judge if they understand it by how they respond.

But it's clear you, personally, are not capable of doing such a thing because you would instead prefer gaslighting.

>This is false

Wrong. That is true.

>You question ask a minor about the consequences of a procedure and judge if they understand it by how they respond.

OK groomer. This is the same logic pedophiles use. Children are not legally nor mentally capable of making such decisions. Full stop.

>But it's clear you, personally, are not capable of doing such a thing because you would instead prefer gaslighting.

Projecting about gaslighting is one of the signs of grooming. You're right, I'm not capable of doing something as morally bankrupt like grooming children.

This is an insane worldview. I hope you’re around to see the mental health issues this will cause on children who had their natural development destroyed by pharmaceutical companies and dumb parents.

There’s nothing bigoted about this, and you’re just using that language as a political weapon to demonize and guilt dissent.

GP is not expressing those views personally but narrating views held by people who believe they need to walk on eggshells all the time lest they get in trouble with the “woke police.”

fyi /r/eve is an extension of the /r/conservative subreddit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com