Skeptic

1291 readers

27 users here now

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Civility
Thoughtful discussion based on evidence and facts
Humor

Things we don't like:

Personal attacks or disrespectful attitude
Wild speculation on events with no evidence
Low-effort comments and posts

Other communities of interest:

Fediverse vs Disinformation

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

acosmichippo

kabe

Fact Check: No, A New Study Does Not Show "Being Trans Is Just A Phase" (www.erininthemorning.com)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/skeptic

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The question is not "do you feel dissatisfied with your sex". It's asking, directly, about the surveyed's desire to be the opposite sex. Which is literally what it means to be transgender.

So gender dysphoria is not a thing then? You don't even have a base understanding of what you're talking about.

The second quote is just semantic straw-grasping "the study didn't use the literal words 'gender confused'!"

It's important because wanting to be the opposite sex "sometimes to often" is an entirely different beast from being gender confused.

Please. It is completely fair to describe "desire to be the opposite sex" as gender confusion, especially in years of childhood where one's sense of self is in active development.

Is it also fair to lump gender confusion with being transgender, and then make the conclusion that "being trans is just a phase"?

Notice how every step of your argument relies on saying that two distinct things are "fair to describe" as being the same. Eventually the results of a survey that asks "have you ever wanted to be the opposite sex" proves that transgenderism is a phase.

If a child said they wanted to be the opposite sex, and then as an adult said they did not, it doesn't mean they ever were transgender, or changed back from being transgender. It's an entirely different thing altogether.

[+] damnedfurry -8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

So gender dysphoria is not a thing then?

Gender dysphoria is part and parcel of a "desire to be the opposite sex". Seems pretty obvious that such a desire can't manifest without dysphoria about one's sex being present.

So...I have no idea why you would think I was claiming gender dysphoria isn't a thing. It obviously is.

It's important because wanting to be the opposite sex "sometimes to often" is an entirely different beast from being gender confused. Seems you don't even have a base understanding of what I'm talking about, lol.

You're doing the same semantic straw-grasping. Confusion is uncertainty. Until/unless that desire to be the opposite sex becomes either "always" or "never", that is, objectively, a state of confusion.

Is it also fair to lump gender confusion with being transgender, and then make the conclusion that "being trans is just a phase"?

Well, if there is anything to criticize the original article (the one this linked article is talking about, I mean) for, it's the fact that those children who have those feelings, and then no longer do in adulthood, should be considered never to have been trans in the first place.

It would have been more accurate for it to say instead "most children who experience the desire to be the opposite sex are not actually trans".

Do you disagree with this?

If a child said they wanted to be the opposite sex, and then as an adult said they did not, it doesn't mean they ever were transgender, or changed back from being transgender. It's an entirely different thing altogether.

It seems we are in fact in agreement on this, after all, as I basically wrote the exact same thing before I got to this part of your comment.