-21
submitted 2 months ago by BananaSpike@lemm.ee to c/conservative@lemm.ee
all 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Alice@hilariouschaos.com -5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Here's my assumption of this article: A professor engages in deviant and illegal behaviors, participating in graphic contents that exploit children sexually using transgederism as a Catalyst.

If you could just tell me what the main point is about this article I'd appreciate it. Genuinely I would. Because I'm not sure what the exact point is supposed to be after reading it.

Anyway

Going off of my assumption as I stated, I think it's important NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC IS OK GUYS ? That when it ultimately comes to children there needs to be safeguards. I don't care what the topics are. It could be sex, violence, guns, and the trans topic.

anything that could be used to manipulate a growing mind, needs to be handled with zero bias and influence.

do not influence children instead, teach them provide them BOTH sides of an argument no matter what. Let them come to their own conclusions. That is how shit should be anyway.

The issue in my opinion is people personalize things. Making it about them and how their own personal experiences stand as ultimate fact.

That is not genuine and it is harmful to others

[-] BananaSpike@lemm.ee -4 points 2 months ago

Your assumption doesn't really capture the article. It's not about a single pedophile, it's about rot within WPATH, which might turn back the clock on trans rights.

To summarize, WPATH published a new standard of care that removed lower age limits. It did this while consulting with at least one child castration fetishist, which is a huge and disgusting conflict of interest. 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.

Aside from the pedophilia angle, the eunuch chapter was done while consulting with said eunuch fetishists. If WPATH is just publishing fetish material, maybe Ray Blanchard is right and trans people are just AGPs, trans women are just men in dresses, etc, etc. It's a bad look.

I don't think it's a good idea to ignore this. This is the sort of thing that can strongly influence public opinion.

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
-21 points (25.6% liked)

Conservative

352 readers
43 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS