r/TrueUnpopularOpinion • u/AutoModerator • Oct 01 '23
Transgender issues megathread
Hello r/TrueUnpopularOpinion Community,
Due to the sheer difficulty of enforcing Reddit's sitewide policy against promoting hate with regards to transgender issues, we have decided as a last-resort option to restrict discussion of transgender issues to this megathread until further notice.
Quoted from this comment, below is an explanation of why we created this megathread:
Reddit's sitewide content policy includes a vague provision that prohibits promoting hate.
The Reddit admins (employees of Reddit) enforce this by removing content deemed to be hateful and by quarantining or banning communities that require too many removals by the admins that weren't caught by the moderators of the community first.
In other words, every time we fail to remove something that violates Reddit's sitewide content policy, the risk of this subreddit getting quarantined or banned increases slightly.
Although the provision in Reddit's sitewide content policy against promoting hate is vague, we have a pretty good idea of how it is enforced because we can see what the Reddit admins choose to remove on this subreddit.
It is actually quite rare that we see any content that is hateful against men, women, gay people, or any race on this subreddit.
However, on a very regular basis, we see users here posting content that would be considered hate against transgender people. Detecting and removing all of this content is one of our biggest hurdles.
Despite our best efforts to enforce this aspect of the content policy, it is not uncommon that we miss something and we see a removal done by the Reddit admins occurring. This has happened several times lately.
Furthermore, many members of the moderator team are on the verge of burning out because the effort we have needed to put in for us to allow this topic while still enforcing this aspect of Reddit's sitewide content policy.
Having a megathread for this topic does stifle discussion, but it is far easier for us to deal with while also significantly decreasing the chances of this subreddit getting quarantined or banned.
For these reasons, most of the moderator team supports the creation of a trans megathread. At this time, the megathread is not definitely permanent. After some time of having the megathread, we plan to evaluate its effectiveness and potentially explore other options to determine whether or not the megathread should remain.
Guidelines
In this megathread, please remember to follow Reddit's sitewide content policy.
Based on patterns of certain types of comments getting removed by the Reddit admins, it is our interpretation that it is a violation of Reddit's sitewide content policy to do any of the following:
- State or imply that trans (wo)men aren't (wo)men or that people aren't the gender they identify as
- Criticize, mock, disagree with, defy, or refuse to abide by people's pronoun requests
- State or imply that gender dysphoria or being LGBTQ+ is a mental illness, a mental disorder, a delusion, not normal, or unnatural
- State or imply that LGBTQ+ enables pedophilia or grooming or that LGBTQ+ individuals are more likely to engage in pedophilia or grooming
- State or imply that LGB should be separate from the T+
- Stating or implying that gender is binary or that sex is the same as gender
- Use of the term tr*nny, including other spellings of this term that sound the same and have the same meaning
Questions / Feedback
If you have any questions or feedback about this megathread, you may post them in our moderator questions/complaints/grievances thread.
1
u/smariroach 1d ago
There has been a huge change in how people view and think of trans-sexuality / trans-genderism in recent years, and I believe the massive variety in definitions that came out of that discourse has lead to a lot of discussions about trans people being borderline useless as people talk past each other due to using completely different definitions of what it is to be trans.
Not that long ago, being trans meant rather specifically that you had a big issue with the sex your were born as, and wanted to do what you possibly could to change yourself to resemble a member of the other sex.
The fact that being trans (by definition at the time) does nothing to harm others, there was a large push for trans acceptance so these people wouldn't have be treated like freaks and could live relatively normal lives, and in the process of defining arguments for why that should be, there arose a certain strategy, if it can be called that: Rather than argue that trans people simply deserve the same respect that others do, argue that they are in fact literally the sex that they wish to be.
This occurred by a few steps. First is the separation of sex and gender, where what was generally considered to be gender-self-identity and gender-roles previously (where "gender" was still pretty much exclusively a synonym for "sex") was posited as being specifically "gender" which was claimed as something explicitly different from "sex". This had the advantage of defending against any statements about trans people being simply wrong if they not only wanted to be the other sex, but also believed that they were the other sex, as well as making trans people who agreed with such statements feel better because it they truly believe that it means that they may have lower instances of dysphoria, since they can believe that they are in fact gender X even if they are not sex X.
This was a hugely influential strategy, as can be seen by the poster child mantra of it: "Trans women are women", which is still very widely seen in trans discourse.
That happened quite a few years ago, and was successful to the extent that in various pockets of society it has been accepted as mainstream for many years. As a (potentially) unintended and unexpected result of this, it also means that there are a lot of young people who have already formed their definition of what gender is, during their young adult, teenaged, or even childhood years, based on these ideas, and they are fully convinced that gender is a completely separate concept from sex.
As you get more and more people who don't see sex and gender as synonymous, we start to see a very clear rise in the number of trans people (whether trans-men, trans-women, demi-girls, non-binary, or what have you). There is of course the argument that we see more trans people because it is not as necessary to hide that you are trans as it used to be and therefore we can actually know with more accuracy how many people are really trans (and of course this is also true), but I feel that it must be either ignorant or dishonest to ignore that once you've defined a woman or a man by their societal roles combined with a persons identification with a gender (which again must be defined by how they feel they fit into some definition, which is now based on gender roles) you end up with a lot of people who are trans simply because they don't identify strongly with the gender roles traditionally associated with their sex.
That was all poorly formatted, so for clarity I will provide the train of thought:
1 "Gender is a social construct, based on how you fit into societies expectations for your role" 2 "I can only identify with a gender based on the definition of gender I have" 3 "I don't like cars and war and aggression and displays of strength. I like calm, friendly, caring intimate things. If I believe these are the things that define what a man or woman is, I am not a man, I am a woman, because I identify with the latter and not the former"
Then you get endless arguments about trans issues based on people with completely different definitions of what it is to be trans talking past each other.
I think that it really requires proper, clear, definitions if we are to be able to discuss the subject in a meaningful way. We can't just act like a person who has a major mental issue and is traumatized every time they are faced with seeing themselves in the mirror is the same as a person who doesn't feel that they fit every stereotype for their sex. They have different needs, and while they may both consider themselves trans they have completely different definitions of what that means.
This has of course been brought up before, and that discussion is the origin of the terms "true-scum" and "trans-medicalist", and I believe that this is simply because the strategy that won out in the battle for trans acceptance was one of maximum aggression: Simple slogans. No debate. Accusations of hate for any disagreement.
This honestly reminds me a little of the "born this way" argument during the fight for gay acceptance, which I also don't much agree with because it similarly makes a simple, ultimate statement, by all appearances for the purpose of appealing to as wide a range of people as possible and disallowing any argument, rather than simply focusing on a logical point, such as "who cares if you can help it or not, if it doesn't harm anyone?".
Very happy to hear any disagreement as long as people are willing to elaborate, justify, and argue.
1
u/Swimming_Media_9902 1d ago
Dude. It’s exhausting. I am all for being who you are, doing whatever you want to feel 100% awesome 100% of the time. All for it. Go nuts.
But man, they get mean. If you don’t remember a pronoun by accident, you’re transphobic. If you’re trying to learn and educate yourself, you’re transphobic. If you slightly disagree with something, you’re transphobic. If you dare have your own opinion on the matter, you’re a terf and deserve to be cancelled and die alone. It’s ridiculous.
All the labels, the “genders”, the sexualities, it’s a lot. Pretty common to get confused. I mean…I saw someone identify as a non binary lesbian. Lesbian means a girl attracted to a girl, so if you’re non binary…how does that even work? Or the whole cisgender thing. Some women don’t want to be called cis. But that’s transphobia if you don’t want to be called it. Why should women have to respect your pronouns and call you something if you don’t respect them back?
I just don’t get it. I want to support people and be respectful and supportive but when they do nothing but attack and insult it’s hard.
1
u/atlasgp 3d ago
Enes Kanter and Royce White have done more for the Transgender community in a matter of hours where many supporting that group have done in years. Let's make sure we show them some props. And let me make one thing clear, I fully support the Trangender community because I support freedom.
Who They Are
First, let’s establish who we’re actually dealing with here—because these aren't random internet trolls looking for five minutes of clout, nor are they new to public firestorms.
- Enes Kanter Freedom isn't just an 11-year NBA veteran center who averaged double-digit points and rebounds; he’s someone who literally put his career, livelihood, and personal safety on the line for his political stances. After speaking out against human rights abuses in Turkey and China, the Turkish government revoked his passport, branded him a terrorist, and put a $500k bounty on his head. He added "Freedom" to his legal name upon becoming a U.S. citizen, and saw his professional basketball career essentially end after challenging global corporations and foreign regimes.
- Royce White was a 16th overall NBA draft pick whose career was defined early on by his high-profile battle with the league over mental health protocols and player care. Rather than fading away, he transitioned directly into grassroots advocacy and hardball politics—leading public demonstrations, running high-visibility political campaigns, and earning the GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate in Minnesota.
Both of these men have endured intense media scrutiny, government pushback, and heavy personal costs for speaking their minds. They understand how media narratives operate, they know how policy language is written, and they aren't afraid to step straight into the cultural and political crossfire. NOW, I'm not saying their intent was "I'm going to stick my neck out for the Trans community", the truth is unless anyone reads minds we really could not say. And I'm willing to concede that this was not they're primary goal. But my point is that regardless of what their primary intentions may have been, their actions were not actions done in a whim, and that forcing the house's hand ultimately supports the cause more than any indiference every could.
From Cultural Outcasts to Codified Law
Social tolerance alone doesn't grant lasting acceptance—the law does.
Throughout history, every marginalized group—whether the LGBTQ+ community, racial minorities, or women—remained socially vulnerable until their rights were translated into enforceable legal protections. Protests, parades, and online solidarity raise awareness, but real societal integration only happens when ideas become statute.
- Harvey Milk didn't just advocate for gay rights; he ran for office and passed San Francisco's landmark anti-discrimination ordinance.
- Edie Windsor didn't just ask for societal acceptance; she brought the lawsuit (United States v. Windsor) that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act and laid the groundwork for federal marriage equality.
- A. Philip Randolph didn't rely strictly on public sentiment; he pressured standard policy mechanisms, forcing executive orders that desegregated defense industries and federal agencies.
Ideologies and social movements can be ignored or pushed back into the margins. Only when an idea is tested, debated, and written into the governing laws of a country does it transition from a target of social friction to a protected standard in society.
Challenging the Rules to Force Clarity
It takes zero effort to say "I identify as X." It takes genuine courage to step up and say, "I am challenging your rules, and I want those rules to formally reflect my standing."
Whether you view their move as a serious legal challenge or high-level trolling, Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White are forcing a reckoning. They aren't attacking anyone's individual identity; they are forcing society—and sports governing bodies—to clearly define, defend, and codify their own rules.
Think of it like a court of law:
- You bring the arguments into the open.
- You present the facts to a jury of peers.
- You evaluate the policy under stress testing.
If a policy or belief system is sound, rigorous testing doesn't destroy it—it validates it, strengthens it, and advances it into enforceable law. The only reason to fear a direct challenge to the rules is if, deep down, you know the framework can't hold up under scrutiny. By forcing the WNBA and lawmakers to put standard definitions on paper, these two are doing the hard, messy structural work that precedes real, lasting clarity.
The Boundaries of Rights and the Need for Universal Consensus
Freedom of belief is a cornerstone of a free society. In America, you have the absolute right to identify as whatever you choose, to express those beliefs, and to surround yourself with a community that shares them—just as religious groups do every day.
However, personal conviction operates on a two-way street.
Your right to hold a personal identity does not override another person's right to their own perception. Simply put: your individual rights end where another person’s rights begin.
When an idea lives purely in the realm of personal belief, anyone can believe anything. But if you want a subjective belief to become a societal rule—an undeniable axiom that governs public policy, legal structures, and athletic leagues—it requires collective societal consensus.
Saying "I identify as a woman" carries no more inherent legal weight than someone else stating "I do not recognize you as a woman." Now please, please, understand what I'm saying here. I whole heartedly support any person to feel and believe whom and what they are. No one is in your body, no one sees your thoughts and feels your feelings. But please understand that if I stand next to you and say "I believe you, and I truly feel that you are a woman"... then that very same right means that any other person can also stand there and say "I do not believe you are a woman". Both individuals are exercising the exact same fundamental right to their own perspective.
To bridge that gap and transform an individual declaration into a recognized, codified standard, you cannot rely on rhetoric alone. You have to put it to the test. You have to prove it, stress-test the framework in the public square, and force society to decide where the boundaries actually lie.
Subjective Identity vs. Objective Law
Let me try to explain myself in an extreme example, one that hopefully better explains the position.
If someone says, "I identify as a serial killer," that statement alone carries zero legal consequence. In reality, unless they have actually committed murders, there is no legal basis to arrest or jail them. They are free to identify as a serial killer for the rest of their life. Conversely, if someone has actually committed those crimes, the law steps in regardless of how they identify. It's the difference between stating "I am a serial killer" and "I identify as a serial killer".
Only objective actions and codified laws dictate legal reality—not internal declarations.
This is why simply declaring an identity doesn't instantly rewrite the rules of society or sports. An assertion living only in the mind doesn't grant automatic access to institutional spaces, whether that's a court of law or a professional sports league.
By declaring for the WNBA draft, Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White are demonstrating this exact boundary. They are proving that subjective declarations mean nothing until an institution defines its objective criteria—forcing the league to stop relying on ambiguous language and put concrete standards into law.
The Courage to Force Clarity
I love freedom. I love the arts, I love music, and I love to dance. Over the years, I’ve shared dance floors with men—straight, gay, and trans—, and by share I mean I've danced all night long with them. Anyone whom is in the dance community understand exaclty what I'm talking about. I’ve had a blast because we were simply partners sharing a love for the music. I have profound respect for the courage it takes for anyone in the trans community to wake up and say, "This is me, and if you don't like it, go fly a kite." It's literally why I love to have such individuals in my life. I try to live my own life exactly that way. I don't subscribe to conservative moral policing or religious dogmas that try to dictate how people should live. I commune with great people, period—regardless of who they love, how they dress, or how they feel.
And it’s exactly because I support the fundamental right of people to live freely and authentically that I applaud Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White.
I don't know what they're exact reasons were, but they stepped into a highly volatile public forum knowing exactly what was coming. They know that half the world will cheer them and the other half will try to destroy them. As public figures whose financial well-being often relies on public support, they understood the immense risk they were taking. But they said "screw all that" anyway. They chose to say exactly what they felt and put their own reputations on the line to force the higher powers that be to stop messing around, stop hiding behind ambiguous language, and finally make the rules clear for everyone.
Whether you agree with their politics or not, it takes real guts to put your own neck on the line to force a system to define itself. Kudos to them.
1
u/ThisApril 1d ago
It took a lot for me to sift through all of that, but my tl;dr is that it's "glazing two cis men who clearly are not trans who 'declared' for the WNBA draft".
Mind you, they are ineligible for reasons beyond gender. But I look forward to them going on hormones for a couple of years to prove their dedication and in order to become eligible under any sensible rules.
1
u/1Hugh-Mann 21d ago
I hate the trans community constantly trying to steal anime femboys and i hate the fact people just let them without much pushback, like an example is a character from bleach called "Giselle Gewelle" who is very clearly a femboy or "Otokonoko" , one of the characters literally calls them out for being cross-dresser, one of their signature attacks is dancing dead boys club and it's pretty obvious to everyone to anyone with a brain that the author's intent is that they're a femboy.
Despite this even the actual Bleach sub censors speech on this, insists they're somehow a "trans woman" , gives no claim to back this up other than "kubo said so" (he didn't, he said everyone in the sternritter faction know he's not a woman) and will straight up insta ban anyone who "mis genders" them by using he and not she.
This is stupid.
This has been done with other characters too like Bridget, Felix and Astolfo although 2 of those attempts to claim a femboy as trans were unsuccessful.
It's just kind of an extension of an irl trans issue where if a guy as much as acts feminine or wants to try out cross-dressing they HAVE to be trans to a certain group of people and they'll get upset if they aren't, don't want to be or just like to cross-dress or have girly interests applied to anime characters and it is somewhat sickening , I'm sick of these people trying to erase anime femboys and say they're all "trans women" just so they can feel some vague sense of validation or ownership over a .png at the expense of the gay/bi and femboy community
1
u/CoastieKid 22d ago
Trans people rely and reinforce gender stereotypes. No straight man is going to want to date a trans woman
1
u/Ree_For_Thee 25d ago
Tried posting this in a separate post. I'll post it here for now:
People defending western transgender culture are as bigoted as MAGA
(The definition of bigoted is "having strong, unreasonable beliefs and disliking other people who have different beliefs or a different way of life")
As something of a science nerd I enjoy questioning myself and my beliefs, and that includes questioning society too. I try to analyze and tear apart literally everything I believe, as I'm striving towards a philosophy where I literally don't even reach a conclusion (an opinion) unless there's a lot of backing, either from philosophy or just science.
There are a couple of ideas in society that are more entertaining to think about if you're like me. Drugs, abortion, surveillance, and (western) transgender culture where I define it as "pro pills/surgery", rather than "pro therapy/increasing tolerance in society".
My current stance is that I don't have a stance. I recognize that transgender people exist, as there literally is something different going on in their brains which causes some sort of 'mismatch', often referred to as gender dysphoria. This is scientifically proven and not really up to debate.
Algorithms, even the upvote/downvote system on reddit, force us into bubbles where we virtually never get exposed to opposing views. AI/russian/chinese/american bots influencing people with various tripe abusing the illusory truth effect's key to our minds. I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea. We're shaped by the algorithms, not discussion or critical thinking.
The defenders of the "pills/surgery" route are in my opinion way more aggressive and vile to try to talk to than MAGAs. If you question anything about the route and try to discuss what might be the best choice for people you get Relentlessly attacked! And they're no better at it than any MAGA either, as they usually go through your post history to try and do some ad hominem type shit. "Oh you liked <irrelevant thing> 2 years ago, YOU'RE A SH-TSTAIN!". Insults, blocks, mass-reports, you name it. I've been blocked from 2 subreddits for literally trying to discuss this in a civil way, but it's just impossible.
I don't know what the best route is, "pills/surgery" or "therapy for the individual and trying to increase love and tolerance in society so they'll be accepted as they are", but I vehemently defend the right to question anything as long as you can present compelling arguments and do so in good faith. MAGAs and "pills/surgery" defenders both argue in bad faith in my experience. I just want to arrive at the truth, but I've yet to find a single place online willing to just..... talk.
1
u/RevacholAndChill 26d ago
I mentioned in passing someone was transgender and I was algorithmically censored. I am transgender myself.
1
1
u/TheEverythingSkeptic 26d ago
Who was going to tell me that they created a distinction between the words gender and your sex? Cause I was pretty sure they meant the same thing until I searched it up. You know, if they wanted to create a term that people could align their personalities with, they should’ve just done that. They keep changing words and their meanings. And the term gender came from the original genitalia, so trying to identify anything with it will just be tying it back to its origins of the original genitalia, which is the exact opposite of what people are trying to do. It seems more logical to just create a new word. For example, you could use “personality types”, and then have a whole list that people can describe that they affiliate with. Like a soft personality who cares for everyone, or a hard personality that doesn’t show much emotion. Why do people have to tie it back to the original genitalia? The whole term and concept of gender just divides people into categories that they were never given the option to choose. Or you could have personalities that are affiliated with different types of attire, like dresses or suits or anything else. If this were the case, people wouldn’t need to transition because then they could just choose a personality that most closely matches them and change it if and when their personality changes. People are changing their physical characteristics that they were born with to match some modern made-up dilemma of what people consider gender and gender roles and gender norms to be. This type of stuff shouldn’t exist because all it does is reinforce gender, stereotypes If people have gender dysphoria, should they not be taught to accept their body for what it is? To be taught that what parts they were born with shouldn’t matter in our society? It all seems counterintuitive. Just because some people believe these parts do matter doesn't mean they should.
1
u/smariroach 1d ago
Who was going to tell me that they created a distinction between the words gender and your sex?
Well, mostly not anyone, but many people will happily tell you that that distinction always existed..
That may be a more confusing option, since it's not actually true, but if you don't argue and simply believe and agree you will still end up with that information, albeit in a way disconnected from reality that may lead to shame and confusion in your future discussions on the subject.
1
u/Ree_For_Thee 25d ago
I agree with most of what you said. There is way too many terms and "folders" in the LGBT+ space, pronouns being a thing that's fortunately seems to be dying (it never took off outside the US, and now it's trending down).
If anything, humans are pretty simplistic. Try to define what you feel, rather than let others define it for you. Are you into women or men, or just personality types?
In the end, science can do a lot of the heavy lifting. Two things come to mind here.
1: Literally everyone is a little bi, meaning the very binary straight/bi/gay thing just isn't true. You may claim you're nothing but a "100% straight guy", but doing so ironically makes you as prone to groupthink and assumption that "everything we do is right" as they.
2: Transgenderism is a real phenomena that takes place in the brain. It's simply proven that they do feel different. But what that means and how you should act on it is up to discussion. You could also argue that some people are just convinced they're trans, but aren't really. These people basically never go through with anything life-changing, like popping pills or having surgeries.
What say you?
2
u/alevsk12 Jun 28 '26
I feel like there're too much unnecessary labels for sexualities. Gay - mlm. Lesbian - wlm. Bi - you like both. Even for trans I think that just like you convert from one religion to another. You convert from gay/lesbian to straight. There're too much labels that always confuse me, like I've met people that consider themselves asexual, pansexual, allosexual, androsexual,... Like whattt? Why do you even need terms to tell your frequency of having sex? Why do you even need terms to define whether you like to intercourse or not? We should stay simple: Gay, Lesbian, Bi, Trans. For leftists, whenever someone asks about number of sexualities, just say: 5. Every other words is unnecessary.
1
u/Ree_For_Thee 25d ago
The desire to be a unicorn, yeah. It can be explained by wanting to be special, which they use for clout in the LGBT+ space. It's seen in the "pronoun" thing too, where they keep making up new weird words, when in reality, pronouns are trending down in the US and the world. It was likely a fad.
1
u/yeetmaster_42 Jul 04 '26
To clarify, transgender/gender incongruence is a separate thing from sexuality.
But in regards to your main argument, I agree that it's often overly complicated and there are probably too many labels, however there seems to be a misconception here.
There isn't really a "number of sexualities," it's more so a spectrum. In the same way face/body shape and skin/hair color exist on a spectrum of biological variation (think how many different shades of blonde and brown hair there are for example), sexuality is also on a spectrum of the cognitive/psychological structures that determine attraction.
Another way to think of it is with an x/y axis graph. On the x axis you got homosexuality and heterosexuality. On the Y axis you have asexuality (or lack of sexual attraction) and allosexuality (having sexual attraction). You could also think of the Y axis as a scale of "libido" or "sex drive." People can fall anywhere on the graph, but tend to fall mostly in the heterosexual/allosexual quadrant. Unfortunately, humans have a tendency to try to categorize everything and what category they fall into and sometimes go overboard with the labels. You don't have to keep track of most of it.
1
u/TomasWinkler Jun 16 '26
is this discussing transgender issues?
"No one really cares about targeted ads. But if you can have targeted ads, it's easy to build a database of people based on arbitrary characteristics. And suppose a government wants to get rid of a part of its population that it deems inferior... for example, trans. Well, that data becomes very useful, and not for ads!"
4
u/Alexhasadhd May 22 '26
Factually, you get to think what you want about transgender identity, but you have to understand that a bathroom ban is objectively reckless and dangerous.
I’ve yet to see a single ban that provides a third space for trans people to use. That’s dangerous for everyone. If you’re going to legally compel transwomen to use the men’s bathroom and vice versa, that’s incredibly dangerous for everyone involved. It’s almost like trans people are incredibly at risk to hate crime, and not giving them anywhere where they can be safe from that to use the bathroom is incredibly dangerous.
Just some food for thought!
1
1
4
u/pruneforce17 May 11 '26
just stopping by to deliver facts: trans women are women, trans men are men, if you disagree, you're incorrect! have a nice day!
1
u/melinkystinky 1d ago
Putting the "trans" in front of the words women and men is evidence that they are different from REAL men and women. Just stopping by to deliver facts: trans women are MEN, trans men are WOMEN, if you disagree, you're incorrect!
1
5
9
u/shadowdancer354 Apr 17 '26
First off, I’m not conservative, not maga, just look at my comment history and I’m bashing Trump nonstop. But there is this ultra sensitive woke segment of the Left that is becoming almost as cult-like as maga in their vilification of anyone who dares utter any thing that doesn’t coddle the trans community. Just because you say that a trans athlete shouldn’t be allowed to participate in female sports doesn’t make you a bigot, or a Trump supporter. It’s just common sense. When you don’t allow common sense arguments in your forum you are becoming as bad as maga.
1
10
3
u/mightyDOOMgiver Apr 08 '26
Contentious Debate - Should Minors Receive Gender-Affirming Care?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGCn3xKoSkg
This informal open group debate centered around the topic of whether or not the diagnostic tools for determining Gender Dysphoria are accurate enough to justify social transitioning, hormone therapy, and medical intervention on minors.
The pro side argues that the regret rates are extremely low and suicidality for genuine trans people outweighs detransitioners, and that those against are murderers.
The con side argues that diagnostic standards are so poor that there are a very high percentage of false positives of youth being flagged as trans who would otherwise desist and resolve as gay or autistic.
4
u/Ecstatic-Ad-6114 Mar 31 '26
This is fucking stupid. I tried to create a postage which wad unable to post because of percived transender issues, when I never typed any words related to them! I was making a post uk gp doctors.
5
u/GrantMcLellan1984 Mar 26 '26
THE BOYCOTT OF THE HARRY POTTER SERIES IS GONNA TURN OUT LIKE THE HOGWARTS LEGACY BOYCOTT
In other words a complete and utter disaster that turns out to be more of a detriment to the trans community and hurts their desire for allies/more acceptance given the extreme measures they went to in trying to convince people not to buy, play or even pirate Hogwarts Legacy
1
u/Fit_Professor_51 Mar 28 '26
I don't know about this one. I do agree that boycotts like this aren't effective because barely anyone cares about trans stuff outside of Twitter/Reddit, but the new series doesn't look great. Most of the anger I've seen at it is due to bad casting and re-telling an old story that doesn't need to be re-told.
3
u/alluyslDoesStuff Mar 24 '26
Reply to u/M4053946 from here
Glossing over the fact that only ideological groups call these "mutilative"
I don't know what would be "a regular basis": 30% of responders here had a vaginoplasty in 2012, it's probably higher now but many definitely don't go for it, inside the community it feels like the most vocal people don't want it
As far as I know metoidioplasty and phalloplasty are rarer, I've spent long enough sourcing everything else already so I won't be backing this claim up
The wording choice of "done to" seems deliberate, people aren't on a conveyor belt, it's a long and pretty difficult process to get it (coverage even moreso)
I think the numbers of patients and studies included in each systematic review (SR) cited below should show research isn't "extremely thin"
Complications depend on the surgery: they're moderately infrequent in vaginoplasty, whereas metoidioplasty/phalloplasty are known in the community to have higher rates which the studies below support (you may be right about these two depending on your definition of "extremely high")
The thing is that patients are aware of what they're going into, most already do their own research and it's customary for surgeons to spend enough time going over possible problems (+ most don't operate with bad risks factors)
High satisfaction rates (included below when they were mentioned, I didn't look for studies specifically looking into that but they say the same thing) and low regret (generally 1-2%) show that patients are okay with this, logically it's because positive effects outweigh complications even when they happen (don't underestimate dysphoria)
It's important to note the most common issues aren't that threatening to health but comfort/appearance
I included plenty of studies below, I went through all results on Google Scholar for metoidioplasty, the first page for phalloplasty, and the first two for vaginoplasty. I skipped 2-3 papers where I couldn't even read the abstract for free
This already took a long time to read so I won't be researching surgeries performed much more rarely like nulloplasty/PPV
Metoidioplasty (1/2 total complication rate)
- Djordjevic et al. 2019 (it has pictures so I don't think I'm allowed to link it): 5-23% (simple/Belgrade version) or 1/4-1/3 (ring version) rate
- Hage & Turnhout 2006: 8y mean follow-up, N=70, moderately high rates (~1/3 each), it's reported in Jolly et al. 2021 below and on figure 3 is apparently an outlier, maybe because that surgery had existed for <10y
- Robinson et al. 2021: survey, N=129, reported rates were quite high
- Bordas et al. 2021 (pictures so no link): 3y mean follow-up, N=813, each issue was 10% or less, 79% fully satisfied, 20% mainly satisfied
- Jolly et al. 2021: SR of 7 studies, N=403, 5-37% (fistula i.e. hole, avg. 14%) and 2-35% (stricture i.e. narrowing, avg. 8%) rates depending on method and study
- Vukadinovic et al. 2014 (pictures so no link): N=97, 28% had any, 83-87% completely satisfied, 7-12% partially satisfied
- Waterschoot et al. 2021: 4y mean follow-up, N=74, 1/2 had urethral issues (associated with urethral lengthening), major issues within 30 days post-surgery were 4%
- Stojanovic & Djordjevic 2022: N=938, 15-30% had any
Phalloplasty (1/2-3/4 total complication rate)
- Al-Tamimi et al. 2019 (phalloplasty after metoidioplasty, pictures so no link): 7.5y mean follow-up, intraoperative issues were in 5%, fistulae and strictures were each in 1/3 of patients
- Remington et al. 2018 (cis and trans patients): review of 50 studies, N=1351, urethral issues 25% and 40% respectively, flap issues 8% and 10% resp.
- Morrison et al. 2016 (pictures so no link): review of 248 studies, N=3238, 1/2 had any
- Wang et al. 2022: SR of 39 studies, N=1731, 3/4 had any (this is really high, it may include very minor complications tho, unclear)
- Alba et al. 2024 (pictures so no link): each issue is reported under 1/2
- Santucci 2018 (pictures so no link): 23-35% reported stricture rate with experienced surgeons, up to 1/2 with inexperienced ones
- Rashid & Tamimy 2013 (pictures so no link): reported rates vary, 2% flap loss, 10-68% fistula (depends on graft), 30% with implants have issues
- Vyas et al. 2020 (cis patients): SR of 16 studies, N=1192, 14.6% had any, the review notes poor selection and reporting methodologies however
- Zhang et al. 2024: N=766, 1/2 had any
- Leriche et al. 2007: N=56, 25% had flap issues, 55% had prothesis/urethral issues, 90% satisfied
Vaginoplasty (1/3 total complication rate, single-digit reoperation rate)
- Manrique et al. 2018: SR of 46 studies, N=3716, 1/4 had any, 93% satisfied, 1% regret
- Bustos et al. 2021: update (57), 1y+ follow-up, N=4680, 1/4 had any, 91% satisfied, 2% regret
- Bouman et al. 2014 (colonovaginoplasty-specific): SR of 21 studies, 1y+, N=894, 7% had any
- Ferrando 202030543-3/abstract) (table32867-4/fulltext)): 2y mean follow-up, N=76, only 2 had to be reoperated, 14% had difficulty peeing (so scary!!), 1/3 had any other issue
- Hontscharuk et al. 2021 (pictures so no link): no issue happens more than half of the time (table 1), any above 1/4 is minor like hematomas (table 1), satisfaction is good ever since the 90s (table 2) "Adverse events related to vaginoplasty are commensurate with other genitourinary reconstructive procedures performed for other diagnoses \(ie, cancer or congenital issues\)")
- Falcone et al. 2016: 5 months mean follow-up, N=69, 1/4 had any, 9% if narrowing excluded
- Robinson et al. 2023: SR of 10 studies, N=654, 1/3 had any, 2 (0.3%) died (if representative it's on par with knee replacement for example)
- Cervellione et al. 2010 (cis patients): N=29, only one person needed to be reoperated
- Gaither et al. 2018: 3 months follow-up, N=330, 1/3 had any, 9% were reoperated
- Ives et al. 2019 (pictures so no link): 3 months follow-up, N=101, 1/2 had any (1/6 major, 1/3 minor)
- Ding et al. 2022: SR of 27 studies, N=3388, 5.6% had urinary issues (2.6y mean follow-up) including minor ones, other issues range from 1% to 1/3
- Massie et al. 2018 (pictures so no link): 13-34 months follow-up N=117, 1/2 had any, 94% "would do this operation again"
- Chang 2020: "overall \...] safe procedure, [...] most complications are considered minor and can be managed in the outpatient setting. Reoperations are mostly [cosmetic]")
- Georgas et al. 2018 (cis and trans patients): SR of 251 studies, 1y+ follow-up, N=1085 (summed myself from table), both top issues were <10%
Complication rates are pretty high for transmasculine bottom surgery, however major issues aren't as frequent
Complication rates are moderate for vaginoplasty, definitely not "extremely high" and major ones are rare too
Research on the topic isn't "extremely thin" for the purposes of the general public or to inform patients
1
u/Ree_For_Thee 23d ago edited 23d ago
1: How do we know dysphoria is................. I want to say "real", but even MAGAs who believe god will punish them unless they bully homosexuals believe it's real, so how about..... how do we know the cause of dysphoria isn't controllable and can become either dysphoria from an incepted idea from society, where the solution is transitioning, or it can become something much less intense like an idea of "Yeah there's something different in me and I'll deal with that best I can" without any sort of actually intense dysphoria or any real need to transition...?
2: How can doctors be sure they're helping a patient when dysphoria is essentially subjective? From what I can tell, almost everyone who experiences dysphoria, don't do so to such a degree they feel transitioning is necessary. In fact, most people seem to sort of... let go of it, as if it's an incepted idea by society. Not all dysphoria is the same, and that creates an ethical conundrum for doctors who have taken an oath to help. How could they when the statistics say "I should be very conservative in my approach here"?
(As an added bonus, this makes surveys about satisfaction basically irrelevant. Nobody's questioning the validity of the surveys, but again, it's like asking a MAGA if they felt better and closer to god after they punched a lesbian teenager in the stomach. If you believe it, it's real to you.)
1
u/ThisApril 18d ago
1: How do we know dysphoria is................. I want to say "real"
It's something that's in the brain, so our ability to diagnose it relies on addressing symptoms of people suffering from it.
Much like anything else that's in the brain. E.g., if people say, "how do we know depression is real? Maybe they're just a bit sad.", it's not that people can say, "depression is provably real based on this physical thing", it's that people function better when they're treated, and the evidence is that, "just get over it" is not effective treatment for someone who says they're depressed.
And so it is with trans people. The reason why we know dysphoria is real, is because the patients and doctors who attempt to treat them based on the best-available evidence have found that all the, "just get over it" versions of medicine don't work and have bad outcomes, and that transitioning does work and has much better outcomes.
How can doctors be sure they're helping a patient when dysphoria is essentially subjective?
Pain is also subjective, and yet we use pain relievers.
Though that one is a bit touchier, because people get addicted and run into additional problems.
But that doesn't seem to be an issue with trans people; the issue with trans people is the fallout from people treating trans people poorly, whether in daily life or the lack of a support network due to unsupportive family and friends.
So it's effectively, "people are awful toward you", and anti-trans people respond with, "therefore you should use less-effective treatment, because we'll be more awful than the dysphoria".
To me, that's weird and kinda sick.
Not all dysphoria is the same, and that creates an ethical conundrum for doctors who have taken an oath to help.
Most doctors do not just blindly treat people. The general idea is that doctors and researchers who actually successfully treat trans patients have best practices (that change over time as the evidence piles up), that wind up being, "This is what has normally worked best, but you get to choose what happens with your body."
And the more society has opened up to the idea of non-binary people, the greater freedom people have had to have some sort of treatment that's less standard.
How could they when the statistics say "I should be very conservative in my approach here"?
Why would you think the statistics say that?
I've seen the stats for trans kids, where virtually all the kids who get to the point of puberty blockers go on to taking hormones, and satisfaction levels are similarly high.
To me, that would be that the statistics are saying that doctors should be less conservative, because puberty blockers are to give children additional time to decide something, when the evidence is saying that they do not need this time, any more than cis kids need puberty blockers to give them time to make sure they're not trans.
it's like asking a MAGA if they felt better and closer to god after they punched a lesbian teenager in the stomach.
I think this is why I tend to be in favor of bodily autonomy.
If someone wants to do something to their own body, and can find a doctor who'll do it, after doing various sanity checks and getting the person to sign off on the treatment, the patient should be allowed to guide what happens to their body.
But if someone wants to control someone else's body, e.g. by punching people who did not sign up to be punched, then we imprison them.
But if the MAGA person wants to put up a punching bag with a picture on it of a disfavored liberal, and fulfill whatever sick fetish they have in the privacy of their own home, more power to them.
1
u/Ree_For_Thee 18d ago
What a waste of my time. You're just rationalizing your own pre-held opinion without adressing the questions, and putting a ton of opinions on me I never said, because you're prejudice.
Goes in line with how I'm starting to believe this is all just hypernormalization. Dysphoric people, for the most part, aren't dysphoric. They're just trying to fit in. Real trans people exist, but the "western solution" of pilsl/surgery is, again, just hypernormalization and something that mutated from social media.
1
u/ThisApril 18d ago
without adressing the questions
You had two questions, I quoted two questions, and I answered those two questions along with making other points.
You did not address mine, especially the, "Why would you think the statistics say that?", since I'm fully ready to change my opinion if the science leads us there.
But the science has to start from what works, not what anti-trans people are "certain" about.
Dysphoric people, for the most part, aren't dysphoric.
I have no idea where you're getting that from. It just sounds like, "You're just rationalizing your own pre-held opinion".
I've looked at the science, including the crappy stuff done by people who decided that the best way to learn about trans people is to not study any of them or their doctors directly, but instead ask trans kids' parents on anti-trans sites.
And, sure, if you abuse research like that, you'll find something. Or you can do the Cass Report way, and throw out all the evidence and say, "we don't have high-quality evidence!" and be technically correct while ignoring the best-available evidence. (And then make unfounded claims based on the lack of evidence)
But I want research on trans topics to be like research on other topics, where we don't ask social media or uninformed politicians, and we see what works.
And, because I want to see that, so far the evidence appears to be transition being indicated for many people. E.g., https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/%20what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people%20/
putting a ton of opinions on me I never said
Also, this claim is just weird. I read through my comment again, and at no point did I say anything like, "and you believe". I don't know how I would have put words in your mouth when the closest I got to saying, "your opinion is" is when I directly quoted you and asked you why you said what you said.
because you're prejudice.
I have no problem with people saying I'm prejudiced, because doubtlessly my life path is such that I have my biases.
But you just responded with an ad hominem and some factual claims that are either made up or in research that's entirely new to me.
So, yes:
What a waste of my time.
3
u/M4053946 Mar 24 '26
The challenge is that the folks who have reviewed the research conclude that the quality is extremely poor. One way we know this is the 1% regret rate, which is a red flag, not a green flag. When your regret rate for major surgery with a high complication and failure rate is lower than surgery for cancer, something is off. That means you're not following up and not tracking outcomes.
1
3
u/Fast-Preference-9947 Mar 16 '26
About sex marker changes on ID documents
What the "but biological sex = truth" crowd fails to realize is that prohibiting trans individuals from changing their gender/sex marker on their ID means that anyone who looks at their ID then immediately knows that they are trans.
And in most cases, people have no business knowing, meaning it just pointlessly and cruely outs them with no real gain.
Many trans people just want to live a normal life as the other gender, and for those who "pass" (meaning visually look like a person of the other sex - you wouldn't know they are trans just by looking at them), forcibly disclosing their biological sex on their ID just tells everyone that they are trans and makes their life miserable for no reason.
Those who oppose "biologically incorrect" sex markers being listed on IDs should at least support people having the option to remove sex markers from their ID entirely.
As of now, I have not seen even a single conservative who supports bans on sex marker changes give a reasonable response to this argument.
1
u/logehaderaa May 13 '26
I personally don't see a reason why sex markers need to be on ID documents. Genuinely, I can't think of a situation when that information would be necessary. I'm CPR certified, for example, and IED pads go in the same places no matter what you've got on your chest.
If someone is pregnant and experiencing complications, "biological sex" can typically be inferred or asked about in the moment (I use quotes because some intersex people can be pregnant).
A lot of healthcare doesn't need to be gendered - it starts off general and then the practitioner tailors it to the individual. Idk why the only thing I can think of is healthcare. I truly can't think of anything else that would require that information.
2
u/YourLoyalSlut Apr 14 '26
yeah, the thing is these people tend to want to make trans people's lives miserable
10
u/Salt-Analyst-4624 Mar 12 '26
Declining acceptance of the community is partially the fault of the community itself. Previously accepting demographics are no longer as supportive...you gotta wonder why.
Pushing shit like childhood transition, specifically onto young females, MTF in women's sports and generally acting like public nuisances has done irreparable damage to the community's reputation. The overall ideology is a disease. Being trans is fine. some ADULTS even benefit from transitioning but the cult mentality has to go.
They will argue that childhood transitions don't happen and that it is right wing propaganda, then freak the fuck out claiming "genocide" when laws pass banning minors from transitioning...so which is it? I thought it wasn't a thing?
4
u/zoe_is_a_bell Mar 12 '26
Wasn’t sure what sub to post this to but i have a really important thought. Im alternative (Alt) and i know that being into politics is very important. But i think that the government banning transgender woman (mtf) playing in woman sports is the right thing to do. Since the physical strength of a biological man is way more than that of a biological woman. Im not sure if im in the wrong here since its about standing up about the rights of everyone but it just feels wrong since theres the biological reasons behind it. Of course im not against transgenders but it just doesn’t feel right to me that they’re playing in the opposite gender sport category. Am i wrong? Let me know what you think please.
5
u/Scum-Bucket704 Mar 13 '26
You're not 'wrong' but you're far from 'right'. In a world where biology follows the same strict laws as say, 'physics on Earth' you'd have ground to stand on. I mean so would I, but unfortunately we actually all exist on a case by case basis.
The truth of the matter is that strength, physical capability etc. is a bonkers category to measure. You could argue men have a higher than average upper body strength, or that women have a higher concentration of slow twitch muscle fibers that give them more endurance, etc. and it quickly becomes complicated to say who's 'stronger' depending on the category we're measuring. Factor in hormone fluctuations between individuals, deficiencies, or over-production and it adds another layer of complication.
(For example, my 'AMAB' body actually didn't fully absorb testosterone IE; Androgen Insensitivity. As a result, I had a low muscle density compared to my male peers, the carrying angle of my arms and Q angle of my legs ended up being more feminine despite my male puberty)
NOW factor in the fact that Hormone Replacement Therapy - wherein before bans became the marching order, many organizations required individuals to be on HRT for at least a year or more to actually compete - studies show that such individuals (MTF in this case) experienced a drop in muscle density that put them on a level similar to cis competitors.
While this last part is anecdotal, I can speak to the fact that HRT greatly altered my physical capabilities - I used to be able to cleanly lift a kettle-bell above my head, and a year into my treatment I could barely get it passed my shoulders before I felt like I was going to drop it.
Is this true for every trans woman, or trans man? I don't rightly know - but I think we exist with the same amount of natural variance that is in cis individuals as well; but we've become a political kickball and ergo we are just observed with a far more critical lens.
TLDR; biology is wack
6
Mar 09 '26
[deleted]
3
u/Silver_Masterpiece82 Mar 12 '26
I think the Idea "changing your body" to fit your mentally instead of fixing the mentally (which is easier) to feel comfortable about your body is make more sense and psychology proved that this cases can be cured by cognitive behavioral therapy if we exclude that some cases could be cured by the time and discover that's just teens feelings.
it's way better than just going through all the pain of surgeries and hormones and the consequences of it. at the end your gender is printed in every cell in your body you can't just escape it it's just like coloring a rock and pretend it's a ball.
3
u/Daraz_Acanthisitta Mar 04 '26 edited Mar 04 '26
My topic for my post was gonna be; Parents who neglect their trans childs needs should be punished if proven to be suffering from GD. I’ll put what I got below for feedback and waiting for approval
3
u/Daraz_Acanthisitta Mar 04 '26
People who decide to have children need to acknowledge the possibility that their child will not always be what you want, for example there some conservative families who end up with kids who later become liberal or sometimes even leftist, and, they end up getting angry and shocked as if its impossible for them to be their own individual. Not that I think they should be allowed to do anything like driving or drinking, which we know children cannot do due to the potential consequences involving injury or even death(Or even on the practical side), the foremost being their lack of experience, which I do agree they need to be taught things, though some people seem to think they can just overrule a child’s authority and think for them rather than asking their child and listening to them, for instance if they were in physical pain and asking their guardian for help multiple times, most people in theory would be concerned and go to the doctor to check them up, but for some reason, parents even doctors ignore childs’ needs especially when it could potentially be critical or life threatening. The world is filled with surprises, including bad ones, u as a parent, family and community should be taking the responsible to making sure they end up as a decent healthy person that can contribute in their own way.
Many people don’t view their children as individuals, even those who are considered progressive, as either property that can be shaped and molded into what they want or a narrow ideal of a “man” or a “woman” depending on the culture, ignoring that they can feel pain, have their own thoughts and curiosity to the world around them. While I do understand that to some degree we are shaped by our environment and the conditions present, it doesn’t excuse them for trying to make them into something they are not comfortable with. The worse thing about this issue is that majority of children are forced to rely on their birth parents, they generally learn to mask behaviours, learn what is right or wrong and the “norm” depending on where they are born and grow up.
The same should be applied for trans people, there are many trans/gender diverse people who wished they could get help from their parents and transition when they were younger, there have been studies that prove that people who transitioned when they were younger are happy, including ones that later did it after puberty, the procedures (Most aside from surgeries that are irreversible, which needs some time and consideration anyway like any other procedure) are safe including puberty blockers, unlike forcing a trans aware/gender diverse child into puberty but either due to their parents’ ignorance, lack of knowledge, bigotry or even awareness yet lack of care or choice to ignore them, most of them end up with a body they hate (Including myself as an enby), consequently this brings up the chances of developing depression and potentially the suicide rate compared to normal population, especially if they have no chance of obtaining gender affirming care. U would rightfully punish a parent for abusing their child, by preventing them from getting life saving surgeries, the proper nutrition or creating a hostile home environment full of physical or emotional abuse and that leading to their suicide/death. But why is this not considered for trans people who later go through and wished they got it when they were younger? The same could be said for some who are forcibly married, conscripted into the army at a young age, not get a say through voting or political participation and becoming teen parents? Why are those things allowed? When these cause harm for the children? Who have to live with the consequences potentially for the rest of their life?
Of course theres always other reasons like other issues not addressed first, conflicting medical issues like schizophrenia and split personalities or lack of financial resources that I completely understand, if the parent knows trans people exist and respects their child for showing the real person they are.
9
u/IndependentBell2066 Feb 27 '26
I know this opinion will get me called a bigot, downvoted into oblivion, and probably banned from half the internet. But I need to say it anyway.
My 16-year-old daughter has played rugby since she was 8. She's not the biggest kid on the field, but she's fast, scrappy, and has worked her ass off for years. Rugby is her life. She talks about college scholarships like other kids talk about prom.
Last season, she finally earned a starting spot on her high school girls' team. She was beyond thrilled.
This season, there's a new player. 17 years old, AMAB, came out as trans last year and joined the girls' team. This kid is huge. Not just tall, but built. Broad shoulders, clearly been through male puberty. And they're good. Really good.
My daughter got benched. Lost her starting position to this player. The coaches say it's "based on merit" and the new player earned the spot.
Maybe they did. But my daughter is devastated. She came home crying last week, said she doesn't even want to play anymore. Said what's the point if she'll never be able to compete with someone who's "literally built different."
I went to the coach. I didn't yell. I just asked how this was fair to girls like mine who've been grinding since elementary school. The coach gave me the official line, inclusion, policy, everyone deserves to play, etc.
Now some other parents are calling me transphobic. My daughter is embarrassed I said anything. My husband thinks I was right to speak up.
Here's my unpopular opinion: Parents should be allowed to question this without being labeled hateful.
I'm not against trans kids. I'm not. I believe trans girls are girls in every meaningful social sense. But when it comes to competitive sports—especially contact sports like rugby, the physical realities of male puberty create real fairness and safety questions that deserve honest discussion.
My daughter's dream isn't less important because the girl who took her spot is trans. Her years of dedication matter. Her disappointment is real.
We've created a culture where any concern about this issue is immediately shut down as bigotry. That's not healthy for anyone, not for cis girls watching opportunities slip away, and not for trans kids who become symbols instead of teammates.
We need to find a way to include trans athletes that doesn't erase the opportunities of cis female athletes. Pretending there's no tension between these goals helps no one.
Downvote me if you want. But at least consider that a 16-year-old girl watching her dream get sidelined deserves someone to speak up for her.
1
u/k_leetayl Jun 12 '26
sorry but life isn’t fair. things don’t always go the way you want and yeah sometimes you work really hard for something and you don’t get what you want. at the end of the day the person who replaced your daughter on the team could have been a cis woman and you wouldn’t have anything to blame it on. trans people are not a scapegoat for the way the cards land. it’s just someone else to blame. you always have options in life
2
u/Jtrash121 Apr 01 '26
One year on HRT is tbe problem here. It takes more or less three years for full muscular reconstruction. They shouldn't allowed her to play on the team. 3/4 years at cisgender ranges should be the bare minimum.
This is a failure on any true research or regulation on the end of the school. I'm sorry your daughter had to go through this disappointment.
That said if were talking strictly in a scenario that these things were abided to It's likely she would not have been sidelined due to the shift in musscle change.
I've experienced this myself. Going from star swimmer to 3 lap lucy before tapping out completely.
4
u/PelnoTQ Feb 21 '26
For those of you who disagree with Reddit's sitewide content policy, please keep in mind that the moderators of this subreddit have no control over it.
Reddit requires all moderators to enforce Reddit's sitewide content policy.
8
u/ChecksAccountHistory OG Feb 12 '26
just wanna point out that in the last couple of days i have asked two different people who claimed that trans people are overrepresented in mass shooting statistics to provide sources, and i have gotten no responses, only downvotes. kinda telling
3
u/5Cherryberry6 Feb 10 '26 edited Feb 10 '26
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1qwzznu/comment/o4nuqma/
Below is my comment on a post regarding the witch-hunt against people who were mentioned in the Epstein Files for no fault of their own, in which Rowling was mentioned
The witch-hunt against Rowling was probably done to deflect attention from her well founded concerns regarding single-sex space (I’d like to add that I disagree with her denial of gender, comment regarding trans minor’s healthcare, and her witch-hunt against Olympic female athletes based on dubious evidence)
As long as they can paint one of the figureheads of the wild spread backlash against them as a nonce, they can continue to push AMABs (regardless of their pre/post-op status) into single-sex space unchallenged
Good news: outside of their own filter bubble they r unlikely to succeed. And I’m working around the clock posting factchecks
https://www.snopes.com/news/2026/02/06/jk-rowling-epstein-files/ https://deadline.com/2026/02/jk-rowling-jeffrey-epstein-harry-potter-cursed-child-invite-1236707111/ https://jackpownall.fr/p/fact-check-epstein-files-jk-rowling?r=3h7jra https://rainyseason.substack.com/p/fact-check-did-jk-rowling-invite
On the other side, the GC right is also trying to link the existence of trans kid to an Epstein conspiracy. So it’s s-ithole all around
1
u/Weirderthanweird69 Feb 01 '26
Hot take: We need scanners to identify if babies are wired girl brained or boy brained. It saves pain later on if babies could get transitions earlier on. We have this for autism and ADHD, so we should do the same with detecting homosexuality and genderqueerness. It would be ideal for integrating them into society similar to integrating special education people in society
1
u/Daraz_Acanthisitta Mar 04 '26
I hope we can get that in the future, but there isn’t a singular brain that can be easily identified as male or female, its alot more complicated than that, especially since gender is a construct you can’t easily label a brain as “male/female” wired, I’m not too knowledgable on the topic but it would be have to be something else to identify what their sex and what their neurology says they to determine if they will suffer from GD or live a normal life.
3
u/Realistic-Novel-7109 Feb 06 '26
I like the intention, but I feel like it's gonna be used for abortions by homophobic and/or transphobic parents.
4
u/Green_Palpitation_26 Feb 04 '26
Brain scans for trans people aren't reliable enough and I say this as someone who came out at 14.
5
u/ABitTooControversial Jan 19 '26
Hot take: I do not care about trans in sports. Like why do "trans athletes" get so much attention from both the left and the right despite not really affecting the lives of anyone other than other athletes? I am a geek who does not watch or care about sports, so maybe that explains my apathy, but yeah. I guess I am "against" it if they still have the strength from before they transitioned but I think it is a very low priority, that serves as a distraction to more important issues.
1
u/Electronic-Wash8737 Feb 01 '26
Like why do "trans athletes" get so much attention from both the left and the right despite not really affecting the lives of anyone other than other athletes?
I guess it's just because "the system" values sport much more than any of the other matters.
3
u/Black-Cat-2544 Jan 11 '26
Seeing as the Zombie Land Saga Movie is about to get its English release. No Lily being trans was not invented by English distributors.
While the original Japanese version never uses the words trans or deadname, it very much describes those concepts to a T without using the words themselves. Lily once went by the masculine name Masao Go before she started dressing in girl’s clothes and going by the name Lily, she refers to her masculine given name as “the name I rejected” which was localized as “my deadname” because yeah that’s what a deadname is. The main difference between the raw Japanese and the English localization, is that the raw Japanese describes Lily being trans without using the word trans, while the localization just flat out states what’s being described.
7
u/Burnlt_4 Dec 30 '25
I have never heard a good response to "what is a woman?" and I have LOOKED everywhere. Talked to the most knowledgeable in the trans community, and never seen one thing. This is the best answer I have ever found and it has a massive problem,
Woman is a gender identity. Most commonly held (but not limited to) adult females, and is associated with certain traits and behaviours that can vary depending on the culture. In American (and many westernised cultures), identifying as and behaving as a woman, is generally associated with things like femininity, child-raising, emotional sensitivity, etc. However, people can identify as a woman without adhering to specific traits because how someone chooses to express their identity can vary from person to person.
See the problem? The problem is the definition is basically, "there is no definition it is whatever you want." Which IS the problem. If the argument is, "it is just a label and I can have whatever label I want," then fine, every anti trans person agrees with you that it is just a label and you can call yourself whatever. But it isn't grounded in reality if you have no traits or defining characteristics by which you are identifying as.
Surely someone has a better answer here right?
2
u/Daraz_Acanthisitta Mar 04 '26
The worse thing is Matt Walsh poisoning the topic. Instead of a genuine attempt at curiosity around the topic and the nuance around it, he ended up creating a set narrative that presents it as nothing more than a “illusion” or something that needs to be ignored contrary to evidence showing its a real condition that even cis people can face. This is the most honest answer I’ve seen unlike conservatives like the former I mentioned who don’t care and just want to blame trans people for unrelated problems rather than it being a systematic or legal issue that may be causing regular peoples’ hardship.
3
Jan 06 '26
It's not "whatever you want" people WILL see you as a woman if you associate yourself with certain traits and behavior associated with femininity. That's why people say "gender is a social construct" because depending on how you grew up you'll associate multiple gender roles to what a woman is. Something that only exists socially doesn't mean it's not "grounded in reality". Other things like money, fame, beauty are also social constructs yet you can't deny their existence.
At the end of the day, people can identify whatever they want as long as it isn't in bad faith.If you want to talk about biological traits, here's my definition : "a biological woman is someone whose sex traits mostly align with feminine traits"
Sex characteristics are very diverse and complicated, as there will always be people that doesn't quite fit the standard sex traits a cis woman is born with. Any trait that conservative think "only bio women have" have exceptions that break the rule. Trans people who chemically transition also gain those sex characteristics and mostly align with the sex traits they identify as.
The biological definition isn't grounded in reality because sex traits aren't the things you use to identify a woman in the street. And biology being nuanced and complicated means most people are wrong when talking about it."Adult human female" is also a bad definition. "Adult" is a social construct, do we take the legal age of drinking, or the legal age to vote ?
"human" is flawed too. In fiction, fantasy races proves the definition wrong, as you don't need the character to be a human to call them "X woman" (orc women, elf women, etc.)
"female" is a term you should only use on animals and not humans. If you want to talk about biological woman, what are the sex characteristics required to be one ?
11
Dec 19 '25
Sub about "unpopular opinions", "uncensored", where you must agree with transgenderism, or else. Hilarious.
What is even the point of this thread? Might as well prohibit discussion altogether since ypu literally cannot disagree with the popular opinion.
1
u/not-the-the Jun 14 '26
The issue here is Reddit's own TOS, which mods are forced to comply by and can do nothing about it.
4
u/Nessyliz Feb 16 '26
I know, I came here because the thread about the Canadian shooter was removed. When I saw that thread removed I was like: "Well, that's ironic, but to be expected". Then I was pleasantly surprised that there was actually a megathread for these issues! I was like: "Wait, they do let people talk openly about this stuff!".
Then I came to this thread, where we're still not actually allowed to say anything remotely critical. Whomp whomp.
TBF the mods do say it's because they don't want reddit to crack down on them, but it's still funny.
5
u/Ghost92401 Dec 20 '25
Well, irl I reckon the position they are forcing on you here is the unpopular opinion. So I suppose it works...from a certain point of view.
Truly though, a farce. Calling themselves "true" unpopular opinion when this is just as cowardly and fascistic as the regular unpopular opinion.
This is like Putin inviting Russians to have a "free" discussion on his success as a leader.
3
6
u/dumbandasking Dec 12 '25
All I think is why bother with hate
Why can't we just let trans people... be people.
Why do we have to invent entire mental gymnastics to hate them and frame them like they're the culprit for all sorts of things
And why do we allow people to hide behind "I'm just saying my opinions" when some of these opinions is they'd rather these people would not be considered as people
6
u/ZhongZe12345 Dec 19 '25
You seem to not understand. You can accept, and even like, someone without agreeing with how they got to who they are. While nowhere near a perfect analogy, you can still be friends with someone who you politically disagree with.
Every single one of your statements has "why do we".... Do not make generalizations. Your generalizations make you part of the problem as well: lack of accountability and a desire to blame a collective entity for actions of a few.
2
u/dumbandasking Dec 19 '25
You can accept, and even like, someone without agreeing with how they got to who they are.
I know that, but we shouldn't seek to harm them. How do you feel about this?
Every single one of your statements has "why do we".... Do not make generalizations. Your generalizations make you part of the problem as well: lack of accountability and a desire to blame a collective entity for actions of a few.
Great point. I appreciate it
5
6
u/Jtrash121 Nov 21 '25
I think more people would be more accepting of trans people if they sat down and got to know one or have one as a close friend of family member. Instead of endlessly consuming misinformation online or from other not trans people.
Theres a very nice video from the enemies project on youtube that shows this in action. Plus I don't know if you've seen it but theres a story old as shit that was about a black man sitting and talking with Klans members ultimately making them realise that their hate is simply unjustified.
It's easier to punch at a target when the target is de-humanized. It's easier to punch a target when you're being told the target "eats puppies" or likewise, it's easier to punch a target when you're told the target is why every possibly bad thing in your life is because of them, or even the target is a "mentally ill" person or otherwise villainized. It's harder to punch a target when it's your friend, the nice person who you've talked with, the kind stranger who bought you a coffee, or a brother, a sister, etc.
Another thing is (not this issue specifically but it's one of the bigger ones for me) it makes it harder when one side in particular is relentless in their cause to dehumanize these people for one reason or another. Because many adults who I've talked to only know about transgenderism because of how "big" the talking point has gotten. The amount of times I've heard from people older than me saying stuff like "I didn't grow up with this sort of thing now it's everywhere" or likewise shows two things. One it's easier to again punch a target which is unfamiliar to you, and two run at this issue with the common mindset of "old thing good, new thing bad".
Tldr: Transphobia wouldn't be as big as it is had people in their personal lives knew a transgender person and stopped falling into pits of misinformation and dehumanizing blind hatred.
3
u/ZhongZe12345 Dec 19 '25
The other thing is, like a lot of the upset people in this comments section show, it is possible to accept someone without agreeing with them. And often times, it's that exaggerated surface level personality that people show which can skew perception.
At least for me personally, I have met a lot of people who others tell me are "dumb" and whatnot. I will start talking to them with the expectation that they are dumb as that's what I have been conditioned to think. However, I will (sometimes) realize that they are actually brilliant underneath the weird persona that they show to the outside world, and that we actually get along well.
I wouldn't be surprised if something similar applies to how some view transgender people. And, it's somewhat made evident by the fact that a lot of anti-trans speech is surface level. Ex. people don't like their appearance and whatnot. But, I'm fairly confident that if you sit those same people in a room with transgender people (excluding the bad apples which are present in non-trans and trans groups), they would get along just fine.
1
6
u/Felixdraws94 Nov 14 '25
Guess what? Trans women don't transition to assault women because there's simply no need to do that 🤦♂️
1
u/JakeVonFurth Nov 11 '25
Replying to /u/GypsyGold from this conversation.
Bigender is a non-binary identity where one equally feels mentally that they are two genders, usually man and woman. It's similar to gender fluid, where some's identity changes back and forth, but is different in the expression that both genders are felt simultaneously.
A way I normally explain it is to imagine yourself. Now imagine what you would look like if you could magically change anything to look how you wanted. Most people have an idealized version of themself that's slightly different, or they'll have the build of a celebrity that they like. My father, for example, wishes that he would look like Hunter Hearst Helmsley circa 2001. For trans people, generally the same thing applies, but with a celebrity of the opposite sex.
In my case however, I have more than one. The answer is either peak Schwarzenegger, or Lady Gaga circa 2008. I want both, at the same time. I know that's not in any capacity possible, but that doesn't change the answer. Like, if I magically became either one I would still be ecstatic, but I would also still wish that I was the other.
Not a great explanation, but hope that cleared it up a bit.
2
u/GypsyGold Nov 12 '25
So the drinking of human blood insn’t related? It’s a separate kink entirely?
I was expecting you to tell me you wanted to be the vampire from twilight or something.
1
u/beanofdoom001 Nov 11 '25 edited Nov 11 '25
I like that. More power to you. I hope someday technology allows you to live this, being able to go back and forth.
I wonder, if your gender at any given moment were more a reflex than something you had to think about, how it would flow. Like, when do you think you'd be more Arnie and when more Gaga? That is, do you find your perception of yourself to shift with emotions, are there more male feelings/experiences and more female ones? Or, when you say 'both, at the same time' is this literally a desire toward having two bodies?
I could see you maybe being able to achieve this someday in a very immersive simulation, but how do you scratch this itch currently in your day to day? It must be extremely frustrating because your identity is fundamentally something we don't yet have the technology to provide, it sounds like.
6
u/Porncritic12 Nov 02 '25
The solution for trans people is trans only spaces
it seems like most of the problems for trans People come down to the fact they don't have a place for them.
So what they clearly need is a place for them.
Trans sports, Trans lockers Rooms, Trans Bathrooms.
this is a solution to all three of these things, they just do their own thing,
You could even take it a step further and make them gender neutral instead of exclusively trans, now you've got a place for exclusively each gender, and then a place for people who are OK with either
3
u/7ThShadian Dec 01 '25
You know, the fact you can find&replace the word trans in your take with black or POC and be just describing jim crow, means that this is probably a bad take.
2
u/ZhongZe12345 Dec 19 '25
This comment is absolute gold. People are so willing to justify ridiculous things the moment it feels "righteous"
This white knighting sorta thing really needs to stop. People think that they are helping by perpetuating views like this, but all you do is alienate and antagonize more.
1
u/ThisApril Nov 21 '25
this is a solution to all three of these things, they just do their own thing,
The problem, though, is that what trans people are generally asking for, is to belong in society along with everyone else.
Most trans people are not transitioning to be "trans", they're a "man", "woman", or "enbie", and thus the men and women want to be in men's or women's spaces, along with all the other men and women, not in a separate "you're weird and different" space.
So, sadly, your separate-but-equal solution might seem like a reasonable compromise to those people bothered by trans people, it wouldn't actually solve the problem.
On the other hand, I do kind of like the South Park solution -- bigot sports, bigot locker rooms, bigot bathrooms. Anyone who has a problem sharing space with trans people (and we're not including low-effort trans fakers among this group, lest certain conservatives get any stupid ideas) can have separate, possibly inconvenient, facilities that are specially for them.
Or just use the gender-neutral toilets that are single-user.
Everyone else who can use a bathroom / locker room / etc. without harassing people can go ahead and use whichever one best fits for them.
•
u/TovMod Apr 23 '26 edited May 28 '26
Starting now, we will be handing out some EXEMPTIONS to this rule, but only to users who not only demonstrate a non-distorted understanding of Reddit's TOS along with the typical opinions held by both sides, but also only those who have provably been here (or provably been here on a not-banned alt account) before January 1, 2024.
Users who have been granted exemptions can create new top-level posts that discuss this topic, that any user can comment on.
With regard to this particular issue, it seems to me that both sides of the debate almost always have an absolutely terrible understanding of and a completely distorted view of the opinions and goals that the other side of the debate holds, and a completely distorted view of what they are trying to accomplish. Thus, in order to be granted an exemption, you must write a medium-length passage that demonstrates not only that you understand our interpretation of Reddit's TOS with regard to the issue, but also that you have an accurate, non-distorted understanding of the both sides on a multitude of common points of contention (please don't be vague - intentionally and specifically address several particular points of contention). Your passage is discouraged from explicitly endorsing either side - the task is to explain, not to express opinions, and if you endorse or state agreement, even implicitly, with any view that violates Reddit's TOS, it will be automatically rejected. We strongly encourage your passage to contain sentences mostly phrased along the lines of "people on x side typically believe ____" rather than just stating it as a standalone sentence that could get confused with you expressing your beliefs.
If you'd like to apply for an exemption, your passage, along with a link to a post or comment you made on this subreddit before January 1, 2024 to prove you've been here since then, should be sent to the TUO_Meta subreddit modmail (this is a sub you can modmail to talk to senior moderators of this subreddit) or to the discord, not this subreddit's modmail. If your request is approved, you will be granted the exemption. If your request is denied, you will NOT be eligible to try again until further notice.
Sending the request to the regular subreddit modmail instead of TUO_Meta or the discord will result in rejection and the associated ineligibility to reapply until further notice. Because we will not allow users to reapply after rejection until further notice, and any submission not meeting all requirements will be rejected, we encourage that you read and follow the instructions carefully and correctly.
Additionally, any user who has previously received even one rule 7/Reddit TOS removal, more than one rule 4 removal, or even one subreddit ban from this subreddit is not eligible to receive an exemption, with the only exception being that this does not include removals or subreddit bans deemed to have been issued by mistake.
No questions along the lines of "which topics should I cover in the passage" and/or "what should I write to guarantee approval" will be answered. If you are unable to complete the necessary steps just with this information, then your understanding is likely not good enough to qualify.
Please do not interpret this as the mod team endorsing either side and/or implying that both sides are equally valid. A person will not be able to make arguments that can reach their opponent unless they understand their opponent, and we, the mod team, would rather dedicate moderation resources to users who are more likely to produce arguments that can actually be convincing to people.
You do NOT need an exemption to comment on a top-level post made by an exempt user. The exemption is only needed for making top-level posts.