Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by breakyerself on Sunday June 25, 2023 @08:03PM
(#36474022)
Because both sexes are required for the species to survive. Killing all men would mean the end of all women too.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by yarg on Sunday June 25, 2023 @08:24PM
(#36474146)
Dude, they're also convincing children that the sexes are interchangeable, then neutering them.
Do you think that maybe human extinction is part of the goal?
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by yowlingcat on Sunday June 25, 2023 @10:30PM
(#36475041)
But if you talk about that, then all of a sudden you are a conspiracy theorist. Nevermind the incentives in play that would make that solve a very significant amount of otherwise seemingly intractable problems humans face in the present decade.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by yarg on Sunday June 25, 2023 @11:14PM
(#36475331)
We've been (I say we) sexually reproducing for over 1,000,000,000 years.
And yet somehow we've reached the point where if you acknowledge human sexual dimorphism, you're a fascist.
It's a damned weird ideology, and if it doesn't go away it should at least be acknowledged as a religion.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by breakyerself on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:19PM
(#36576061)
Acknowledging how things are isn't fascism. Imposing your ideas about how things should be in a way that harms trans people is fascist.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by type0 on Monday June 26, 2023 @06:13PM
(#36486589)
The goal is parthenogenesis, I think Seksmisja movie is prophetic in some sense
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by breakyerself on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:18PM
(#36576049)
Hey nice hyperbolic strawman you've got there. It's actually the opposite. Transphobes think sex is interchangeable and can be imposed from the outside. The rest of us think gender comes from the inside and simply believe in loving and supporting people regardless of how THEY express their own gender.
People like you want to impose an external concept of gender onto trans people that doesn't comport with their self image. You want to forgo the medical science and drive trans people into depression and suicide because the idea of it makes you feel yucky.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by nyokodo on Sunday June 25, 2023 @08:24PM
(#36474147)
> Killing all men would mean the end of all women too.
There is some percentage of “feminists” who don’t love women but simply hate men.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by arp242 on Sunday June 25, 2023 @08:43PM
(#36474275)
There is some percentage of $x who hate $y for almost any value and combination of $x ad $y. It's not meaningful or constructive to look at the extreme nutjob examples when examining a movement in its entirety.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by dumpsterdiver on Monday June 26, 2023 @01:36AM
(#36476069)
I completely disagree. As you know, the extreme nut job examples are always the loudest people in the group. It is not meaningless to account for them.
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by arp242 on Monday June 26, 2023 @08:55AM
(#36479122)
I agree many have an apparent outsized influence, but with some exceptions in most cases I think this is only optics, and they don't really represent all that many people.
"280 character soundbite" social media isn't helping either here, nor is "zomg person X said something ridiculous"-type "journalism".
Re:Ignoring Boys' Emotional Needs Fuels Public Health Risks
by tbrownaw on Sunday June 25, 2023 @10:08PM
(#36474899)
Well, someone did seriously suggest getting rid of 90% of men, and invented a fairly popular slogan in the process. "The future -- if there is one -- is female" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart