• BananaSpike@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      I do like socks, but I’m no puppet. I’m interested in discussion about this article because it looks legitimate, which is horrifying. If you’re able to disprove the claims, that would be a relief.

        • BananaSpike@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          How about this? “WPATH removed lower age limits in SOC8 while consulting with child castration fetishists”

          • BobaFuttbucker@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            That single statement contains 1 claim:

            WPATH removed lower age limits in SOC8.

            This is true.

            It also contains another claim:

            They did this while consulting with child castration fetishists.

            Based on the article provided, it appears to be true. If that’s the case then I think most sane people would agree they should not consult with them anymore, and revisit any influence they might have had on policy.

            Having said that, gender-affirming care has been shown to be a net positive to individuals and society as a whole, so I’m not sure if you’re then trying to go the next step and discredit that in general as a result of this, because that’s how the article reads and is a separate discussion entirely.

            I’m not seeking to disprove anything in this article, merely understand what kind of discussion you want to have about it.

            • BananaSpike@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              4 months ago

              This is the sort of useful conversation I was looking to have. I think we’re in agreement. In another comment, I wrote this:

              WPATH should clean house and purge all pedophiles, retract SOC 8, publish an apology, and write a new version that doesn’t have input from known pedophiles.

              Which might not be how you would phrase it, but largely agrees with:

              If that’s the case then I think most sane people would agree they should not consult with them anymore, and revisit any influence they might have had on policy.