Canadian Politics Thread

[Master Mind]

54 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

That's kind of what happens when people begin with a disingenuous premise.

 

Sometimes sure.

 

But many times it seems this becomes the result even when the conversation was started with good intentions. My 2 cents at least.

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, Master Mind said:

 

Why wouldn't I? Those responses weren't even all to the same person, so it's clearly a pattern, and thus just so ironic.

 

I disagree with that assessment of @5forFighting

 

I do think some of that applies more accurately to some others though. I see a lot of disingenuous discussion whenever this topic comes up. The nuanced questions are often ignored, or attacked, rather than given thoughtful answers.

I mean you can check back on the links and research posted that 5 ignores.  He's been pretty selective on his responses. And honestly at this point it feels more like getting a rise out of people than an intellectually honest debate.

 

Where's the nuance when the go to response is him going back to cutting genitals off kids or cutting off a kids leg if they want to play pirates. 

 

I really don't get the sense you're applying the same standard here and really just laser focusing on Joe here. It's ironic sure, does it invalidate the arguments made by others?

 

Just backing Wiggums who is on record for saying that trans people just want to flash kids in bathrooms on top of other misinfo. And 5s automatically labelling anyone who is for gender affirming care a sicko. You're entitled to your opinion. I'll just be inclined to disagree with your assessment.

 

I don't necessarily agree with the ban hammer because its important to know these voices and views are in our country. (And if Rob eh didn't get banned for calling trans folks 'degenerates' I'm not expecting much either)

 

Y'all gotta vote and be politically active/conscious.

Edited February 5 by DSVII

[DSVII]

2 hours ago, The Lock said:

I will say that I've stopped coming to this thread because of 5forFighting

And that's how the far right takes over the schoolboards unironically. 

Edited February 5 by DSVII

[Master Mind]

5 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

He is commenting directly to what I believe to be two of the crummiest posters on this forum.  They continually spread lies and hatred.  And when everyone piles on the evidence about how they're wrong, they just double down and say something stupid, starting the cycle all over.  Joey's opinions are in line with most of the people here.  This is beyond disagreement.  Ask anyone here.  I have tussled with everyone.  I've fought with Worms, EP, Lock, Bob, Hippy... all of them.  I don't think of any of them as shitty or stupid.

 

But I can tell you see things differently.  What I'm asking you is what part of their message/attitude you specifically agree with.  Do you agree with their arguments?  Their sources?  Their interpretations of those sources?  Their logic?  Their sense of humour, even?

 

So, not liking the posters means you can tell them off however you'd like? That doesn't sound right to me. I don't see them continually spreading hatred. I see that happening from others though.

 

There are some arguments they make that I agree with and some I disagree with. I'm not going to provide a full comprehensive breakdown on my thoughts about them on each aspect. But since you asked for an example, here was one of my posts expanding on one of theirs.

 

Quote

children are much more easily influenced and much more likely to come to false conclusions.

 

The younger generation is being told by many that if they aren't happy with their body, they should change it (which is the opposite of what we often tell our kids). And how many kids are happy with their body? Teenage girls in particular, I'm sure we're all aware how common that is for them to unhappy with their body.

 

It's understandable that people want to protect and help those who need it, but there is an offsetting cost that is harmful to many others, leading them down a path that ultimately wasn't for them. This group is almost always ignored unfortunately, and that is very concerning.

 

[Master Mind]

5 minutes ago, DSVII said:

I mean you can check back on the links and research posted that 5 ignores. Including people reading the nat post sources he posted for more detail. He's been pretty selective on his responses. And honestly at this point it feels more like getting a rise out of people than an intellectually honest debate.

 

Where's the nuance when the go to response is him going back to cutting genitals off kids or cutting off a kids leg if they want to play pirates. 

 

I really don't get the sense you're applying the same standard here and really just laser focusing on Joe here. It's ironic sure, does it invalidate the arguments?

 

Just backing Wiggums who is on record for saying that trans people just want to flash kids in bathrooms on top of other misinfo. And 5s automatically labelling anyone who is for gender affirming care a sicko. You're entitled to your opinion. I'll just be inclined to disagree with your assessment.

 

I don't necessarily agree with the ban hammer because its important to know these voices and views are in our country. (And if Rob eh didn't get banned for calling trans folks 'degenerates' I'm not expecting much either)

 

Y'all gotta vote and be politically active/conscious.

 

You comment on 5 ignoring, yet you ignored my reply to one of your posts earlier.

 

I feel like there are some exaggerations being made in the rest of your post here, for them and myself.

 

I made one comment (and only spoke about it further when Miss Korea asked), and that's somehow laser focusing?

 

This is what I mean by disingenuous conversation. This is disappointing to see.

[DSVII]

18 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

 

You comment on 5 ignoring, yet you ignored my reply to one of your posts earlier.

 

I feel like there are some exaggerations being made in the rest of your post here, for them and myself.

 

I made one comment (and only spoke about it further when Miss Korea asked), and that's somehow laser focusing?

 

This is what I mean by disingenuous conversation. This is disappointing to see.

No exagerations at all on them. Though I wouldn't venture to name call, their points are well known in the choice of words in posts. 

 

Ironically, I remember reading your reply and didn't think to post because funny enough, I agreed with the take presented. You certainly presented the arguments better and made me think of other ramifications down the line (bionics for instance in the case of prosthetics).  So apologies i should have at the very least given it a cheers.

 

 

à 

Quote

I don't think the connection is so much about being a pirate in particular, but rather if we wouldn't remove a child's leg, should a child be able to remove breasts, or other body parts if fully healthy? Granted, the latter is rare, but if kids are being told that that is a good solution, then they'd be more likely to do it as an adult. To be clear, I'm not saying schools are sending that message, but this is often encouraged on social media.

 

I think for here, I think "healthy" will need to be determined by a wide range of experts.  That's really something that's too complex to be addressed by a catch all legislation. It has to be unique to the individual with consultation from as many experts as plausible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 5 by DSVII

[Miss Korea]

5 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

So, not liking the posters means you can tell them off however you'd like? That doesn't sound right to me. I don't see them continually spreading hatred. I see that happening from others though.

 

There are some arguments they make that I agree with and some I disagree with. I'm not going to provide a full comprehensive breakdown on my thoughts about them on each aspect. But since you asked for an example, here was one of my posts expanding on one of theirs.

 

Okay, so I'm not necessarily condoning the response that Joey had against those two, but he is essentially speaking for pretty much anyone who even tried to debate with them.  This discussion has never, ever EVER been about parents' rights.  The laws we observe here in BC were established thirty fucking years ago.  People have only started complaining about it recently and have framed it as a parent/child issue because they're trying to avoid being labeled as transphobic.  But Wiggum and 5 are not such people who are afraid - they don't care and are full on trans haters.  If you don't see that, then you are being deliberately ignorant to the hateful message they are both guilty of spewing out.  

 

And now you're condemning @DSVII's reply, which I fully agree with, as disingenuous.  Every single statement Wiggum and 5 have tried to construct as fact has been debunked and disproven by multiple posters.  Every single statement those two have tried to construct as opinion... is borderline hate speech against trans people.  Even your own statement you quoted can be laid to rest as fear mongering and misinformation.  You are conflating gender dysphoria with body image concerns, and you are also applying a blanket judgment of irreversibility to gender-reaffirming care, which the majority of care in Canada is reversible. 

 

The type of irreversible gender-affirming care that everyone is so spooked over... is nearly impossible to get as a youth in Canada.  Do you understand how complicated and long of a process it takes to get reassignment surgery?  I have a 26-year old friend who has been seeking surgery since she was in high school.  She'd have to go to Quebec just to get it.  I know two other friends who have killed themselves because they could not get adequate care here in Canada.  So do you understand?  Do you understand how ignorant your own comments sound like just now?

[Master Mind]

4 minutes ago, DSVII said:

No exagerations at all on them. Though I wouldn't venture to name call, their points are well known in the choice of words in posts. 

 

Ironically, I remember reading your reply and didn't think to post because funny enough, I agreed with the take presented. You certainly presented the arguments better and made me think of other ramifications down the line (bionics for instance in the case of prosthetics).  So apologies i should have at the very least given it a cheers.

 

 

[Quote]I  I don't think the connection is so much about being a pirate in particular, but rather if we wouldn't remove a child's leg, should a child be able to remove breasts, or other body parts if fully healthy? Granted, the latter is rare, but if kids are being told that that is a good solution, then they'd be more likely to do it as an adult. To be clear, I'm not saying schools are sending that message, but this is often encouraged on social media.[/quote]

 

I think for here, I think "healthy" will need to be determined by a wide range of experts.  That's really something that's too complex to be addressed by a catch all legislation. It has to be unique to the individual with consultation from as many experts as plausible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From what I've read, they believe that some people fall into those categories. You describe it as more absolute. Maybe I've missed some posts, but that isn't how I perceived them.

 

By "healthy", I'm referring to the body part itself. I.e. it is fully functional. I appreciate you getting back to me on this.

[Master Mind]

11 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Okay, so I'm not necessarily condoning the response that Joey had against those two, but he is essentially speaking for pretty much anyone who even tried to debate with them.  This discussion has never, ever EVER been about parents' rights.  The laws we observe here in BC were established thirty fucking years ago.  People have only started complaining about it recently and have framed it as a parent/child issue because they're trying to avoid being labeled as transphobic.  But Wiggum and 5 are not such people who are afraid - they don't care and are full on trans haters.  If you don't see that, then you are being deliberately ignorant to the hateful message they are both guilty of spewing out.  

 

And now you're condemning @DSVII's reply, which I fully agree with, as disingenuous.  Every single statement Wiggum and 5 have tried to construct as fact has been debunked and disproven by multiple posters.  Every single statement those two have tried to construct as opinion... is borderline hate speech against trans people.  Even your own statement you quoted can be laid to rest as fear mongering and misinformation.  You are conflating gender dysphoria with body image concerns, and you are also applying a blanket judgment of irreversibility to gender-reaffirming care, which the majority of care in Canada is reversible. 

 

The type of irreversible gender-affirming care that everyone is so spooked over... is nearly impossible to get as a youth in Canada.  Do you understand how complicated and long of a process it takes to get reassignment surgery?  I have a 26-year old friend who has been seeking surgery since she was in high school.  She'd have to go to Quebec just to get it.  I know two other friends who have killed themselves because they could not get adequate care here in Canada.  So do you understand?  Do you understand how ignorant your own comments sound like just now?

 

Firstly I have a tough time believing your comments apply to "every single statement" they made. These exaggerations aren't helpful.

 

How is my comment fear mongering and misinformation? It's what I'm seeing first hand with the kids in my child's grade. For the record I'm referring to in media/social media, not what the schools teach. I'm not conflating gender dysphoria with body image issues, that's what people on social media conflate and pass that on to the kids. So then when kids take those messages to school, and start to believe they are a different gender and want to be called as such, with a different name, I think it's reasonable for the parents to know so they can then talk to their child about it. Some things as you say are irreversible, and even the things that are reversible, why would we want to encourage that on people when it might not be best for them? I don't think that should be one of the first solutions suggested to kids, yet it is (again, on social media).

 

I understand there are some homes where opening up can go very very poorly. I don't think there is a solution that can help everyone, at least I haven't heard of one yet. By not telling the parents, you can help the kids with a dangerous home, but at the same time hurt the kids who would have benefited from their parents knowing and talking to them. A common response I see to this is "if your kids wouldn't come tell you on their own, you haven't made it welcoming enough". I don't buy this, as kids hide things from their parents all the time, regardless of how welcoming the parents are. I don't see this as transphobic -- that would be an irrational fear/hatred, which is not the case here. That word gets used too loosely imo, same with other derogatory words. Takes away the meaning from those that it truly applies to.

 

I have a friend who transitioned so I'm aware of the process. I'm sorry to hear of your losses.

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Master Mind said:

 

 

 

 

That's some next level irony seeing you ask this question given how you interact with people.

 

Joey’s people skills need a lot of work but I can bet you dollars to doughnuts he can answer a complicated Calculus question in less than one page…

[Elias Pettersson]

So how about that Trudeau dude?  

[Miss Korea]

41 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

 

Firstly I have a tough time believing your comments apply to "every single statement" they made. These exaggerations aren't helpful.

 

How is my comment fear mongering and misinformation? It's what I'm seeing first hand with the kids in my child's grade. For the record I'm referring to in media/social media, not what the schools teach. I'm not conflating gender dysphoria with body image issues, that's what people on social media conflate and pass that on to the kids. So then when kids take those messages to school, and start to believe they are a different gender and want to be called as such, with a different name, I think it's reasonable for the parents to know so they can then talk to their child about it. Some things as you say are irreversible, and even the things that are reversible, why would we want to encourage that on people when it might not be best for them? I don't think that should be one of the first solutions suggested to kids, yet it is (again, on social media).

 

I understand there are some homes where opening up can go very very poorly. I don't think there is a solution that can help everyone, at least I haven't heard of one yet. By not telling the parents, you can help the kids with a dangerous home, but at the same time hurt the kids who would have benefited from their parents knowing and talking to them. A common response I see to this is "if your kids wouldn't come tell you on their own, you haven't made it welcoming enough". I don't buy this, as kids hide things from their parents all the time, regardless of how welcoming the parents are. I don't see this as transphobic -- that would be an irrational fear/hatred, which is not the case here. That word gets used too loosely imo, same with other derogatory words. Takes away the meaning from those that it truly applies to.

 

I have a friend who transitioned so I'm aware of the process. I'm sorry to hear of your losses.

There are two ways to respond to all this.  One would be to embark on a far more nuanced conversation than anything we've seen in the last 50 pages of this thread, no thanks to those two guys.  And one day I intend to come back to this.  There's a LOT I disagree with you in your response but at least you're fucking giving me something to work with here.

 

The easiest way for me to explain Wiggum and 5 to you is that you have to accept one basic premise: they are acutely transphobic.  We can take it a step further and cover why (ie. they're part of the degenerate "Fuck Trudeau" crowd where everything is a conspiracy and everything is the Liberals' fault for literally everything), but let's stick with the premise of them being massive transphobes and why that's making them impossible/miserable to deal with. 

 

We've repeatedly gone over what gender re-affirming care means, and the very limited space afforded to youth re-assignment surgery.  And yet all 5 can talk about is cutting off dicks and balls.  Non-stop.  He has kept that narrative since the very beginning even though it's completely false and misleading.  He's been proven wrong and yet stuck to it - that's why he's a liar.  Wiggum keeps talking about how femboys are trying whip out their dicks in the girls' washroom and will post any horror story he can find.  Everything he believes in and shares works off of that imagery - that trans women are just out there to rape young girls.  How much further do they have to take it for you to consider them transphobic?

 

So when I confronted both of them about these things, they posted an assortment of journal articles and news articles.  Wiggum posted an American news article about a kid in BC who got approved by court to get gender-affirming care without the consent of his parents.  Only it turns out, the law was written in '97.  And then it turns out the mother was involved the whole time and approved of the care while the father did not.  So it was really a parenting issue... and yet Wiggum stood his ground, bragging about how he found evidence.  5 posted a journal study earlier today, asserting that re-assignment surgery wasn't working and resulting in suicides.  That was just a complete, utter falsification of the study's arguments, and the lead author herself has publicly talked in the media about how her study has been co-opted by anti-trans folk. 

 

So you got one person who tried posting a right-wing American source that got completely debunked, and another person who tried misrepresenting a journal article in a way that the lead author herself went out of the way to say "don't do that".  And when they were proven wrong, one just went back to "perverts whipping out dicks" and the other went to "they can identify as being black, or a dolphin, or a helicopter".  These stories are examples of the infinite falsehoods and hatred they've spewed out.  It's not like they're lucky one day or that they're nicer one day and post something more agreeable - they're fucking transphobes who hate the idea of them existing in school and naturally they blame the woke, Trudeau-loving left for all of this.  Both of them have personally insulted me and many others here in this thread, so it is very suspicious why you seem so eager to defend them and give them the benefit of the doubt.  Even now you are instantly doubting me and a bunch of others here who are completely fed up with the bullshit from those two.

[Miss Korea]

26 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So how about that Trudeau dude?  

 

Canada has a horrible tendency of voting people out rather than in, but if you really think Poilievre's attack campaign is akin to anything we've seen in the past, you are completely disregarding our country's political history.  No Conservative leader in Canadian history has ever courted with the far right the way PP has.  He has actively engaged with conspiracy theorists, hate groups, white supremacists, you name it.  Is he a far-right person himself?  I don't think so.  But he is the first major party leader in Canada willing to use that energy to promote his campaign, which when you really look into it, has very little substance apart from attacking the Liberals on everything.  

[Bob Long]

7 hours ago, Master Mind said:

 

Sometimes sure.

 

But many times it seems this becomes the result even when the conversation was started with good intentions. My 2 cents at least.

 

Have to disagree. If someone comes with honest questions and is really open to discussing something it usually goes well.

 

When we see conflict it's usually when someone makes a  statement and then digs in no matter what.

 

We also seem to get folks that are offended that their particular view isn't respected. But I blame social media for that, people have been given the idea that your opinion must be respected, when it's really only your right to have an opinion that people have to respect.

[Wiggums]

9 hours ago, 5forFighting said:

Common sense use to be common. 

 

"Make sense common again" is the slogan of the future.  

[Bob Long]

12 minutes ago, Wiggums said:

 

"Make sense common again" is the slogan of the future.  

 

The right wing needs to take this to heart.

[Miss Korea]

1 hour ago, Wiggums said:

 

"Make sense common again" is the slogan of the future.  

 

You don't have common sense or intelligence or anything

[Master Mind]

7 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

There are two ways to respond to all this.  One would be to embark on a far more nuanced conversation than anything we've seen in the last 50 pages of this thread, no thanks to those two guys.  And one day I intend to come back to this.  There's a LOT I disagree with you in your response but at least you're fucking giving me something to work with here.

 

The easiest way for me to explain Wiggum and 5 to you is that you have to accept one basic premise: they are acutely transphobic.  We can take it a step further and cover why (ie. they're part of the degenerate "Fuck Trudeau" crowd where everything is a conspiracy and everything is the Liberals' fault for literally everything), but let's stick with the premise of them being massive transphobes and why that's making them impossible/miserable to deal with. 

 

We've repeatedly gone over what gender re-affirming care means, and the very limited space afforded to youth re-assignment surgery.  And yet all 5 can talk about is cutting off dicks and balls.  Non-stop.  He has kept that narrative since the very beginning even though it's completely false and misleading.  He's been proven wrong and yet stuck to it - that's why he's a liar.  Wiggum keeps talking about how femboys are trying whip out their dicks in the girls' washroom and will post any horror story he can find.  Everything he believes in and shares works off of that imagery - that trans women are just out there to rape young girls.  How much further do they have to take it for you to consider them transphobic?

 

So when I confronted both of them about these things, they posted an assortment of journal articles and news articles.  Wiggum posted an American news article about a kid in BC who got approved by court to get gender-affirming care without the consent of his parents.  Only it turns out, the law was written in '97.  And then it turns out the mother was involved the whole time and approved of the care while the father did not.  So it was really a parenting issue... and yet Wiggum stood his ground, bragging about how he found evidence.  5 posted a journal study earlier today, asserting that re-assignment surgery wasn't working and resulting in suicides.  That was just a complete, utter falsification of the study's arguments, and the lead author herself has publicly talked in the media about how her study has been co-opted by anti-trans folk. 

 

So you got one person who tried posting a right-wing American source that got completely debunked, and another person who tried misrepresenting a journal article in a way that the lead author herself went out of the way to say "don't do that".  And when they were proven wrong, one just went back to "perverts whipping out dicks" and the other went to "they can identify as being black, or a dolphin, or a helicopter".  These stories are examples of the infinite falsehoods and hatred they've spewed out.  It's not like they're lucky one day or that they're nicer one day and post something more agreeable - they're fucking transphobes who hate the idea of them existing in school and naturally they blame the woke, Trudeau-loving left for all of this.  Both of them have personally insulted me and many others here in this thread, so it is very suspicious why you seem so eager to defend them and give them the benefit of the doubt.  Even now you are instantly doubting me and a bunch of others here who are completely fed up with the bullshit from those two.

 

Based on the evidence provided here, your conclusion could be true, but I don't think this makes it necessarily true.

 

It sounds like they're focusing on the more extreme examples. I don't think that makes their thoughts inherently irrational or as useless as you describe. Again, I don't agree with everything they post, and it would be strange if I felt that way about any poster. I wouldn't say I'm eager to defend, keep in mind that my original comment was about someone else, then you quoted me making it about them. I'm not that interested in talking about them, as they can speak for themselves. I'd be more interested in that nuanced discussion and to know which aspects of my post you disagree with, and the reasoning behind that.

[Optimist Prime]

8 hours ago, Master Mind said:

I understand there are some homes where opening up can go very very poorly. I don't think there is a solution that can help everyone, at least I haven't heard of one yet. By not telling the parents, you can help the kids with a dangerous home, but at the same time hurt the kids who would have benefited from their parents knowing and talking to them. A common response I see to this is "if your kids wouldn't come tell you on their own, you haven't made it welcoming enough".

I just don't think it is the school districts job to OUT kids to their parents. Hard stop end of my opinion. I have a few friends in the alphabet group, and I am highly sympathetic to  the historical harms the LGBTQ2S+ folks have suffered both at large in society AND within their own homes that were supposed to nurture them. I have shared about a close friend named Frankie whose dad beat her nearly unconscious when she came out as Frankie and not the Francine he baptised. I think the rights of the children far outweigh the rights of the parent and I suspect the supreme court will eventually strike down the "Schools will out kids to their parents" part of these various provincial legislations. More harm will come to children than the anecdotal 'good' that will come from schools calling parents about their kids pronouns. Again i refer this group to the inadvertent side effects of poorly thought out legislation: will nicknames and short forms now also need to be phone checked with parents? It is a ridiculous style of law, in several conservative run provinces that in fact infringes on the rights of the young people we are all aiming to 'protect' in various ways. The Parents Rights group are positing that their rights supersede their kids rights, as though those kids are chattel, much like in a Muslim run theocracy where women and children are possessions. I dislike that intensely. I believe those parts will be struck down as soon as there is a test case willing to go to the supreme court. 

 

edit: and on the surgical side of the same legislation: I have yet to hear about a minor getting surgery to change their parts in Canada, I think it is a moot point, or close enough to one if a single example or two can be found: that would be 1 in 20 million and not worth the time it takes to talk about, I think it is dog whistling from the 'good stock canadian' side of politics and I find that icky at best from D (Bag) Smith the Premier of Alberta. She is basically taking a stance that a few more young suicides is just the cost of being re-elected. 

[112]

I consider it very unfortunate how discussion has progressed in this thread. CDC was always a place that fostered (or at least refused to remove) overt transphobia, and it seems that trend has continued over to the new forum.

 

Personally I'd rather my children have exposure to, e.g., drag queens than either of 5 or Wiggum.

 

Trans women are women and trans men are men.

[Optimist Prime]

2 minutes ago, 112 said:

I consider it very unfortunate how discussion has progressed in this thread. CDC was always a place that fostered (or at least refused to remove) overt transphobia, and it seems that trend has continued over to the new forum.

 

Personally I'd rather my children have exposure to, e.g., drag queens than either of 5 or Wiggum.

 

Trans women are women and trans men are men.

hate speech will not be tolerated, I encourage folks to use the report feature of the site, as mods and admins don't read every post. Keeping in mind that for a discussion on a topic to occur requires more than one outlook on that topic. I like to use my mom as a good example, I loved my mom when she was alive and I still do after her passing, but I know she was an outright homophobic bigot. I never spoke harshly towards her about it, but we had dozens of spirited talks about gay rights and from her christian perspective on, and i quote; "The rainbow was gods covenant to humanity that he would never again cause the devastation of the great flood to destroy humanity and these (Fword ommitted) are perverting it to recruit kids". She and I could still talk to each other without personal insults going back and forth. I think this discussion can proceed without them too. Report as required. 

[aGENT]

 

 

13 hours ago, 5forFighting said:

Not sure what that means. Am I not entitled to my opinion? I am sure you can mute or block me if you like. 

 

Some here agree with me, you want to do away with them too? 

 

I've been largely avoiding responding to this discussion due to the extreme lack of value in responding your or @Wiggums posts on the subject...but yes, you are certainly entitled to an "opinion". If that opinion however is hateful, ignorant and bigoted, you're not free from the consequences of it.

 

Have a nice day.

[Satchmo]

16 hours ago, Master Mind said:

 

If some of these cluster outbreaks aren't the result of social contagion, what would you think it is?

 

Going by a personal example in my child's class, where more than half a dozen girls who were all friends before the pandemic, are suddenly forced home and put online for a significant amount of time, to then start using male pronouns when allowed back to school. Given that there is messaging online that if you aren't happy with your body, you should change it, and young girls very often have issues with their self image... that seems like too big of a coincidence that they didn't influence each other. I don't think people should be ignoring/writing off the social aspect, which many people like to do (not saying you do though).

I was reminded that I did not reply to this post yesterday.   It came in at a busy time and I forgot to get back to it until now, when I saw it again.

 

You seem to be asking a question on both cluster outbreak and rapid outbreaks.   As well as the effects of social media.  And the isolation of the pandemic.

 

Clusters happen.   Coincidences occur.  To try to explain why a particular cluster or coincidence took place would require study of all related circumstances to that event and I can't do that from here.  

 

The affects of social media on young people, both adverse and positive, is an ongoing study.    I am not equipped to comment with any authority how it fits in to sexual identity though my gut feeling is that it is more commonly associated with concerns on things like weight, hair, makeup, and being thought of as cool and popular.

 

With apologies, I have to question if the scenario you describe in your daughter's class even took place.   For one thing, I think you would have mentioned it pages ago.  For another, given typical class sizes in BC, and typical boy/girl ratios,  it would mean about 30% of the girls in that class decided to change their pronouns.  That is quite the cluster.  Or coincidence.    As you point out yourself it seems like too big a coincidence.   

 

[The Lock]

40 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

hate speech will not be tolerated, I encourage folks to use the report feature of the site, as mods and admins don't read every post. Keeping in mind that for a discussion on a topic to occur requires more than one outlook on that topic. I like to use my mom as a good example, I loved my mom when she was alive and I still do after her passing, but I know she was an outright homophobic bigot. I never spoke harshly towards her about it, but we had dozens of spirited talks about gay rights and from her christian perspective on, and i quote; "The rainbow was gods covenant to humanity that he would never again cause the devastation of the great flood to destroy humanity and these (Fword ommitted) are perverting it to recruit kids". She and I could still talk to each other without personal insults going back and forth. I think this discussion can proceed without them too. Report as required. 

 

Yeah I'll openly state I used the report feature last night. If someone has a different opinion that's perfectly fine, but hate speech goes beyond just "merely" having an opinion.

 

And I hope something gets done about it because these threads are just going to continue going downhill if not. I love that we have people with differing opinions being able to debate, but there still should be a line that shouldn't be crossed.

 

In fact, I'm going to provide a good example of someone I've noticed debating in a way that I view as being respectable even if I don't always see eye-to-eye with: @UnkNuk

Edited February 5 by The Lock

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I love that we have people with differing opinions being able to debate, but there still should be a line that shouldn't be crossed.

 

I have all the time in the world for actual debate and discussion of different view points. Nobody wants an echo chamber.

 

I however have very little  patience for what equates to "drive by' opinions without actual debate, defense or discussion, and "Facebook meme" levels of discourse. PARTICULARLY when those opinions veer in to bigoted hate speech territory. 

 

If you've got strong stances on your (non-hate/bigotry filled) political opinions, by all means. Be prepared to defend them. Be prepared to engage. Be be prepared to acknowledge when they're disproven...

Edited February 5 by aGENT