Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

closer would be suppressing a paper on the effect of the CCR5 delta-32 mutation on HIV infection rates, because "it might incite racists to label black people inferior"


 

[Rockeater]

Sorry, I used to hear videos and check sources later, an essay:
https://medium.com/@juliaserano/everything-you-need-to-know-about-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria-1940b8afdeba

[Parsely]

(also:a 40 minute video, really? nobody has time to watch all of that and decide if the arguments are even valid or whether it's filled with irrelevant fluff. Can you find an actual written link from a reputable journal, and not some no-name youtuber. Or at least pinpoint where in the video the relevant statements are made. Just saying "you're wrong" and dumping a 40 minute video link is kinda trollish. not everything in that video is even going to be relevant, for sure)

There are time stamps in the description of the video that let you skip to the conclusion, they also posted the transcript of their video so you can skim it instead. I don't see their posting the video as trolling, they may not have watched the video yet. I'm still listening to it but it all seems quite relevant, so I think Rockeater was just being nice and trying to share an analysis so you don't have to read the journal article and interpret it yourself.

[wierd]

The cherry picking accusation is quite damning, I will admit-- but these kinds of criticisms are exactly what peer review is. Rather than assert "Hey, that study is specious bullshit!", to me they really assert "Hey, conduct your methodology with better controls, and a wider scope of candidate selection, and see if your trend holds."

Once you do that, and should the author of the paper engage in the suggested followup research, then COMBINED, the two sets of conclusions can be used constructively to better quantify the situation that the objecting article asserts:  Parents are dismissing their child's gender disphoria as illusory out of systemic bias that is reinforced by an echo chamber.  (by comparing the trend data, you can get actual demonstrable statistics on how much of that is actually happening or not.)

In this way, even a cherry picked study can become useful as a diagnostic tool, due to the very fact that it was cherry picked. (it gives better analytics and optics to the features of the cherry picked sample, and how the actual distribution of that subset is manifest in the larger, random sample, which can be used to help correct the conclusions of other biased papers that make use of the same demographic as the sample source.)

[Rockeater]

(also:a 40 minute video, really? nobody has time to watch all of that and decide if the arguments are even valid or whether it's filled with irrelevant fluff. Can you find an actual written link from a reputable journal, and not some no-name youtuber. Or at least pinpoint where in the video the relevant statements are made. Just saying "you're wrong" and dumping a 40 minute video link is kinda trollish. not everything in that video is even going to be relevant, for sure)

There are time stamps in the description of the video that let you skip to the conclusion, they also posted the transcript of their video so you can skim it instead. I don't see their posting the video as trolling, they may not have watched the video yet. I'm still listening to it but it all seems quite relevant, so I think Rockeater was just being nice and trying to share an analysis so you don't have to read the journal article and interpret it yourself.

Yea, I saw the video, I usually see this kind of videos while doing menial tasks so I don't notice the time so much

[Tack]

I recently stopped doing that after CGP dropped a video on attention economics which got me thinking an annoyingly long time.

[Ghills]

Heard the study wasn't reliable, one of the main problems were that the survey was of the parents of the people and not the transgenders themselves
A more complete critic:
https://youtu.be/JvLuuGZVcfw

An important note: they used diagnostic guidelines actually used for gender dysphoria. Bringing up "but they asked the parents" is irrelevant, since the diagnostic guidelines already state that you ask the parents. Asking the parents about the 8 pre-existing symptoms is in fact the normal way that it's determined that the transgender condition existed. It's like ... this one study didn't find results that back up the pro-transgender medical industry, now that industry is slamming the study for adhering to methods that the same industry itself developed and promotes.

also, asking the children is *problematic* for the reasons I brought up in relation to the 1980s child abuse moral panic. Researchers influence the child to respond in the way that pleases the researcher. A pro-transgender researcher and the child who is claiming to be transgender aren't any more impartial than the parents. Why would you assume that that alternate methodology is better?

So, you say the parents are biased against the transgender thing, right? But, how does that explain why it's almost entirely parents of girls who are reporting this. Presumably parents of a boy who said they're a transgender girl would be equally if not more upset about that, but those aren't the parents reporting this phenomena. So just saying "parents are biased against transgender" clearly fails to account for the variables here.

EDIT: there's another issue. These diagnostic guidelines already existed and had no problem diagnosing transgender children previously. It's only now post-social-media that teen girls are starting to develop "transgender" behaviors that don't show up when you apply the childhood surveys. If it was just general resistance to the idea on behalf of parents it should just run through the whole history of the application of these diagnostic methods and not be a new thing.

(also:a 40 minute video, really? nobody has time to watch all of that and find the few bits that will be relevant. Find it in print plz. Dropping a video as an argument, especially a long one with summazing the points isn't an argument)

EDIT: the paper was also pulled from the university not because of the methodology, but because of a logical fallacy: the "appeal to consequences"

"Brown community members expressing concerns that the conclusions of the study could be used to discredit efforts to support transgender youth and invalidate the perspectives of members of the transgender community.”

"Appeal to consequences" is a fallacy because the outcomes caused by knowing some bit of information have no bearing on whether that bit of information is true or not. It would be like rejecting the scientific validity of a paper nuclear fission because if the paper was true, then you could make atom bombs.

I think you're seriously overlooking the issue of how parents treat and believe male vs female children, and also the very serious issues of sample bias in the survey.  The medium piece about it has some very damning criticisms. The survey doesn't seem to have been done in a scientific way, and it was published in PLOS which is an online publication that has no substantive peer review or quality controls so it's entirely possible the whole thing was actually just made up for funding and name recognition.

Being skeptical about random one-off papers published in sketchy journals that have no corroborating science done by unrelated researchers is usually wise.

There's a follow-up that delves even more deeply into why this survey is unconvincing: https://medium.com/@juliaserano/rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria-scientific-debate-and-suppressing-speech-fd88a83bcd60

I also think that we do need to think of the consequences of relying on bad science to make health decisions. Or, as the essay author puts it:

Back when I was studying crustacean Hox genes, if I published a sloppy study that squeaked through peer review, the worst-case scenario would be that I had wasted other researchers’ time reading my article and possibly attempting to verify my results. But in the case of Littman’s paper — which argues that some members of a stigmatized minority group (i.e., trans people) are not really what they say they are (i.e., experiencing bona fide gender dysphoria)— the ramifications can be horrifying.

Like I said, I did not write my essay solely in response to the Littman paper. I did so because large swaths of people who espouse anti-transgender agendas are already citing the concept of ROGD (pre-Littman paper) as an excuse to disaffirm children’s gender identities and to isolate trans children from their peers, information, and resources. Frankly, it is irresponsible to consider the Littman paper without any acknowledgement of the potential social implications of its publication, and how it might be used to further stigmatize or dismiss trans youth.

This isn't just in mental health.  Anti-vaxxers are a well-known example of parents taking a single flawed study and using it to excuse actions that expose their kids to harm.

[Senator Jim Death]

Doing homework while listening to youtube. Accidentally hit the mouse with my hand. DAGOTHWAVE starts playing.

Youtube's suggested videos thing is frigging wonderful.

Christ, I miss having a mouse. And a desk to use it on. And a room to put the desk in.

[Rockeater]

Doing homework while listening to youtube. Accidentally hit the mouse with my hand. DAGOTHWAVE starts playing.

Youtube's suggested videos thing is frigging wonderful.

Happend to me with so many wierd songs

[TD1]

The death throes of a giant are particularly painful to watch.

https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/world-45743376?ocid

[GPeter]

https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/world-45743376?ocid

What the fuck did I just read?

[pisskop]

Anoda woman don die afta 'Brazilian bum-bum' to add extra ikebe

'One pesin dey die among 3,000 wey do'

Di Brazilian butt lift (BBL) na cosmetic procedure wey dem dey take fat from one part of di bodi and then inject am enta di bum-bum.

Baaps tell BBC Victoria Derbyshire programme say like one out of 3,000 pipo dey die worldwide because of oda problems wey go later happun afta di operation.

For August, 29-year-old Leah Cambridge die as im dey do BBL procedure for Turkey


- - -



'My bum begin dey leak'

One 23-year-old woman from Wales - wey no want make dem call her name - get permanent mark now for her bodi afta she go do BBL surgery inside Turkey for February.

Three months afta di operation, holes wit infection appear for her bum-bum.

"I no fit waka well for plenti days," she tok.



P:

So dont get your bum-bum surgery in Turkey?

[overseer05-15]

Do u kno de wae

[A Thing]

I feel like I just read a bit from the Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

[Eric Blank]

If your butt becomes temperamental, "the moon is a harsh mistress" becomes a very effective descriptive term.