Well, that's not so much about "recognizing trans rights"

but about imposing new "rights" based on gender identity.

trans people continue to have rights, just like everyone else

it is plausable that trans people come in many varieties for example, and for many differnt reasons, and making it illegal to misgender a trans person for example, might be enabling a solvable mental illness

only people that are meming are saying we should take away the rights of trans people :p

I'm really concerned about how the current orthodoxy basically has no ability to deal with other forms of dysphoria

Where we're getting trans-able activists and shit

ofc they still have all other rights, the contention is always about the additional protections and rights they get in liu of being trans

Well, it's all very confusing to me, because having met and worked with plenty of trans people, I'm almost certain they (the ones I've met, that is) would prefer not to be recognized particularly differently from their preferred/desired gender unless absolutely necessary; which is why I am skeptical about people who identify as "trans" rather than just as a chick or dood.

Well we said gay was okay

And that's faulty wiring as well

it is ok, and faulty wiring

brains are so complicated our brains cant even understand them

That's another thing I find strange yeah, the recent trend towards identifying as a reminder that you transitioned

But we have to say gay is normal now

if you HAVE to, i pitty your environment

It is okay but not normal 🤔

Broken arms and psychosis are not immoral. There is of course some difficulty around mental health affecting a propensity for immoral behaviour: the question arises as to whether being broken absolves you of responsibility for some actions in some circumstances.

When studies show that actually mental health outcomes tend to be worse when trans people are identified as trans and not their preferred gender

but yes i imagine many places where that would get you BTFOs

So I am sympathetic to the argument that there is room for specific protection of mental disturbances from scrutiny, in some circumstances.

Which was one of the arguments in favour of "preferred pronouns"

i dont believe there is room for specific protections of mental illnesses if those violate others rights (to free speech for example)

I mean, five years ago I was just humouring it, and it was okay, and nobody was hurt.

Now you have to do some dance between _noticing_ and _not noticing_, at least in some circles, it all gets very confusing.

people who cant live in free society cause of mental illness belong in a psychiatric institution, its what they are there for

Mental outcomes tend to be worse for me when people don't recognize me as a famous basketball player rather than a physical laborer

i mean if youve ever had a friend whos schizophrenic and was having a psycosis

🤔

indulging their delusion is the last thign you want to do

I think the problem is that there's not a lot of nuance in the primary positions

is there ever?

It's either you're for the whole package or against the whole package and neither is a viable solution

i mean ive had it happen

@JULZIFICATOR Yeah, though it's complicated, because it's not necessarily true that you should contradict the delusion directly either.

yeah exactly

calling them crazy as its happening is pretty much a no-no

not many people subscribe to international enlightened lone wolf alt centrist collective viewpoints

not to mention can be dangerous

>lone wolf
Just look at the data

its part of the joke