• FinnFooted@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      If they actually cared, they would take the time to understand the actual situation and realize that puberty blockers aren’t experimental or dangerous.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes, I can. But this law is the opposite of caring about others. You’re just able to twist anything and disguise it as empathy “for the children” and couldn’t care the least what the children actually want.

        • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          The difference is that a blanket ban, even a temporary one “just in case”, is actively hurting children. In the UK, trans teenagers need several years of counseling and doctor visits and jumping through hoops before they can actively start transitioning. These drugs help at least halting puberty, otherwise total transition is much harder or impossible. I don’t think these drugs should be easily accessible, but right now it’s already so hard to get, that kids are getting them from the dark web in secret!

          Sure, there are bad parents, and abusive parents. But you can’t justify saving children by hurting other children. I’m not “assuming” anything. Defending this ban is literally hurting children.

            • bc93@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              So, if I had some “””genuine concerns””” about how Jews control the world through a shadowy cabal of financial institutions, owned the world media, etc. etc. would you argue that people should hear me out, empathise and discuss the topic with me?

                • bc93@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  That’s a really idealistic position to hold, and I gotta say that I disagree with your conclusion. There are some opinions that we must not tolerate in society for it to work, and I’d say this is one of those positions - it’s the whole paradox of intolerance - if you have a bar that lets nazis hang out there, you end up with a nazi bar.

                  I’m not saying that there aren’t regular, reasonable people who have genuine concern based in the wellbeing of kids who feel uncomfortable about gender affirming care, of course those people exist and it’s great that there are people willing to talk to those individuals and try to help them realise why their concerns are unfounded. But I have to say that I feel like your position, that we should engage in good faith with people purporting extreme hateful ideology, is extremely harmful. If you want to do it, sure, go ahead, but tone policing people is really unacceptable imo.

    • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      You’re missing the fact that you could easily replace “science” in their comment with “Facebook”, because those are the “scientists” they’re referring to