I think that gender dysphoria is a mental illness, as it causes mental distress if not alleviated with transition, but that it's not shameful to have it any more than it's shameful to have autism, conversion therapy has been scientifically proven not to work, and just as people with diabetes manage their condition with insulin, transition is the best way to manage it so people with it can live happy lives.
this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2025
51 points (98.1% liked)
Ask Lemmy
35766 readers
1106 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
gender dysphoria is a mental illness
I think that's the general consensus.
I seem to constantly interact with people decrying the 'transmedicalist perspective'
That people take issue with this point of view speaks to a general stigma around 'mental illness' as a category. Some strides have been made but we're still not where I'd like us to be.
Yes, gender dysphoria is a psychological condition. Yes, in many cases acceptance of identified gender and medical transition can reduce the suffering caused by the condition. It's not like there's been resounding success/better 'patient' outcomes for the alternatives.
It's just such an obvious line of reasoning to me that I have a hard time understanding how some people don't grok it, unless they've been poisoned by shitty preachers.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I don't hate AI. It's fine. I don't love it either, but it's neat and often useful.
Just gonna vent a little, don't mind me. I don't hate AI. I hate how it's being used. In a vacuum, AI is fine. But we don't live in a vacuum, we live in a capitalist hellscape where everyone saw how AI was going to be abused even before corporations started jumping on every chance they got to do so. Now we're stuck in the timeline where the public consensus is that using AI for any reason at all is seen as fundamentally unethical. People are zealously anti-AI and the nail is only getting pounded in further with new reasons to hate it appearing every other day. And it didn't have to be this way. Photography didn't try to pass itself off as painting, it had time to develop into its own art form. But AI didn't. Out the gate, it was being used deceptively, and continuously became worse. People want to abolish AI as a whole, but it isn't the problem. The problems run way deeper. Our world is a sinking boat and AI is showing us where all the leaks are. Lack of education, lack of access to mental health professionals, those in power using every chance they get to screw over the working class by cutting every corner. Any new technology in any form that can be used to exploit people, WILL be used to exploit people. The hate on AI may be justified but it's too generalized and unfocused to bring about any meaningful change. There needs to be regulation, but I fear that any laws that are passed will only benefit the rich and horrible.
load more comments
(4 replies)
That Lemmy can be just as bigoted, hostile, and close-minded as the sites it set out to replace; it drives out views which aren't in line with the gestalt majority. This thread, then, mostly gets answers which are on the mildest end because those who actually hold opinions out of step with the majority know damn well not to speak up, or, well... be immediately othered.
Turns out that people are assholes regardless of platform
in my experience that's especially true of certain instances, but not others. mostly along ideological lines.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Im a liberal who loves guns and offensive comedy.
I think trans athletes should be able to compete only in their assigned gender at birth category, if the sport is gender-segregated.
Yeah, I got into a discussion on this topic and my suggestion is that sports split on other categories, not just gender. Boxing already does weight classes, which is good, more sports should do that. Can't we have sports for people under 5'8"? I'm sure there's lots of shortkings who'd love to compete seriously in a league where there height wasnt an detriment.
This approach seemed to offend both sides of the trans sports debate.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I think sports governing bodies should be able to determine this for themselves and their particular sport. But that's a little too pragmatic for a lot of folks.
But yeah, this gets you labeled an anti-trans bigot these days. Despite the fact practically speaking the particularities are involve really can't be generalized. In some cases there will be a unfair advantage, in others, not.
Transgender ladies who are on oestrogen and testosterone blockers aren't any stronger or faster than cis ladies.
Gender-affirming care massively reduces the difference, but transwomen are still likely to be faster than AFAB women:
Prior to gender affirming hormones, transwomen performed 31% more push-ups and 15% more sit-ups in 1 min and ran 1.5 miles 21% faster than their female counterparts. After 2 years of taking feminising hormones, the push-up and sit-up differences disappeared but transwomen were still 12% faster. Prior to gender affirming hormones, transmen performed 43% fewer push-ups and ran 1.5 miles 15% slower than their male counterparts. After 1 year of taking masculinising hormones, there was no longer a difference in push-ups or run times, and the number of sit-ups performed in 1 min by transmen exceeded the average performance of their male counterparts.
But what season you're born in also influences your strength and fitness:
There were significant main effects of birth-month for cardiorespiratory fitness (F=4.54, p<0.001), strength (F=6.81, p<0.001) and power (F=3.67, p<0.001). Children born in November were fitter and more powerful than those born at other times, particularly the summer months (April, May and June). October-born children were stronger than those born in all months except September and November. This relationship was evident despite controlling for decimal age and despite no significant inter-month differences in anthropometric characteristics.
So maybe it's not fair for all those poor summer babies to compete against unfairly blessed autumn athletes?
There's enough biological diversity that fairness is basically an illusion anyway. I don't care enough about sports to have a strong opinion. I think it's fine to say giving up competitive sports is a cost of gender transition. I might think it's also fine to let trans athletes compete except I would hate it if the women's league became the trans league or if poor young kids felt pressure to transition in order to compete at a higher level and get life-changing scholarships or even a professional career.
Is that a legitimate fear? Maybe not. At the end of the day, I rarely watch sports. I would support letting them compete and seeing if it is a problem before passing laws to fix issues that don't actually exist.
I think it’s fine to say giving up competitive sports is a cost of gender transition.
Yeah, I agree. This is a take I rarely see. And it's just... a choice lots of kids make regardless of their gender identity for lots of social or physical reasons. I've known people who had accidents, then pulled out of it for fear of permanent physical harm. Lots of people also would love to play, but physically are unable to due to a too much/too little body mass for that sport. You can't be a football offensive lineman if you weigh 120lbs and are 5'2". My nephew spent years training for baseball and was very good, but he physically wasn't large enough to be competitive, so he had to give it up.
The notion that one MUST be able to play competitive sports is so... bizarre to me. If they can compete, great. But if they are wiping the floor with their peers because of their physical advantages... they should probably be playing as a man w/ men. And that's not unprecedented. We had a few larger/stronger women play with boys when I was growing up and everyone was cool with it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I think violence should be the last resort, not the first, when speaking of revolution.
My sincerest wish is that you're correct. And to see it come true, of course.
load more comments
(5 replies)
My anarchism.
Anarchism in general makes me the other when dealing with most people, but the specifics of my views on it also generally make me the other when dealing with most "anarchists." (I oppose any and all attempts to institute anarchism - I believe it will arise organically or not at all - and I similarly reject any and all stipulations regarding what sort of standards, norms or systems may, may not, must or must not be a part of an anarchistic society),
Hey friend. This is basically what I came to write. I consider myself a "dictionary anarchist" which to me just means a complete lack of hierarchy whether natural or imposed.
I don't think of it as a political philosophy but more just as a description of how I believe the world actually is when stripped of the systems we've laid on top of everything.
I also have no interest in figuring out or enforcing this belief on other people or groups.
I'm amazed and pleased. I almost never encounter anyone who shares my views, even among self-described 'anarchists."
Most of them carry around lists (figuratively at least) of all of the things that will be required and all of the things that will be prohibited in their "anarchism," antagonistically immune to the fact that by doing so, they've already stipulated institutionalized, hierarchical authority and thus proactively eliminated anarchism.
I don’t think of it as a political philosophy but more just as a description of how I believe the world actually is when stripped of the systems we’ve laid on top of everything.
Very much yes.
My anarchism is rooted in my view that authority is a contrivance, and an ultimately unjustifiable one.
Tom lives alone on a desert island. That means that Tom, within the constraints necessarily imposed by simple reality (he can't, for instance, flap his arms and fly) enjoys complete freedom of choice.
The only way that that freedom can be constrained is if another person is introduced and that other person acts to constrain Tom's freedom.
So as you note, the state of affairs in which Tom's freedom is constrained beyond anything determined by simple reality is some additional element that's laid on top of the base state.
And as such, it's the thing that must be justified. Tom doesn't have to justify being free from constraint imposed by another - he already was so free, and would have remained so were it not for the fact that the other has chosen to try to introduce constraint.
Therefore, the introduction of constraint is the thing that must be justified
And there's no possible justification for it that doesn't ultimately establish a hierarchy by which the other person is seen to effectively be a superior being, such that their determination of what Tom may, may not, must or must not do is superior even to Tom's
If the tacit presumption of innate superiority isn't made, then any and all noninal justifications for authority over Tom's decisions fail, since any argument by which any other party might justify imposing their will on Tom is also an argument by which Tom might justify imposing his will on them, and any argument by which they might claim to be rightly free of the imposition of Tom's will is also an argument by which Tom might claim to be rightfully free of the imposition of their will upon him.
This is where and why institutionalized authority inevitably goes wrong, which in turn is why I'm an anarchist.
load more comments
(5 replies)
In my personal case, especially among the people I hang with here, my positive attitude toward generative AI seems like one of the major ones. Many people really don't seem to like it when someone mentions enjoying using these tools.
Hey, props for separating your question and response, though.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I believe privately owned cars and on-street parking should be banned in cities, except for very few regulated exceptions, and replaced with municipal car sharing.
Having children is borderline unethical given the capitalist hellscape they will be born into, the relatively high likelihood that they will not be able to live to old age due to risk of large parts of the planet becoming uninhabitable with climate change, and considering that reduced birth rates is the most ethical path to a lower population on the planet, which, though technically not a strict requirement of a greener future, certainly makes it a lot easier.
No shade for any kids living today or parents who choose to have them despite the above. I understand why people do it and I don't blame anyone for it. But it is worth pointing out that current birth rates in most countries are not sustainable, and the seemingly constant fearmongering about falling birthrates in places where it's low needs to go away. Yes, it's bad for the economy if the new generation is smaller than their parents. That's a problem with the system and its design (one of many), and not at all a rationale for having kids.
The trouble is, if all the considerate people who don’t want kids don’t have kids, the only people left will be the kids of the kids that did want kids.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I’m a Democrat who values the 2nd amendment and doesn’t think we should just ban guns in the U.S. Stronger regulations and safety measures? Sure, absolutely. But I do think people should have the right to own and use firearms for recreation, hunting, personal protection, etc.
I agree up to the point where the amendment is pointed at as disallowing reasonable regulation. If that's the case, end 2A. But my goal is regulation, not abolishment. If 2A folks (mainly the Supreme Court here) can accept regulation existing in parallel with 2A, then I'm happy.
I'm mainly thinking about preventing school shootings and domestic violence and murder, so restrictions of some sort on mental health / violent history.
load more comments
(7 replies)
I hate being drunk as well as being around others who are drunk. So yeah, I'm real fun at parties.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm a militant ethical vegan. I basically don't talk about it unless directly asked, because it's probably a fight otherwise.
Isn't that what "militant" implies?
No they use rocket propelled grenades.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Pro-gun" - am left-of-center, anti-estsblishment, progressive US Democrat, people probably assume I'm far-right if I just say that no context
"反共" ("Anti-CCP") - Amongst Mainland Chinese, they'd probably look at me like the classroom "troublemaker", even my parents don't like me talking shit about CCP at home, we don't even live in China. Someone from a Chinese Lemmy instance probably assumed I was a white dude that hated China and Chinese people and asked why I "hated China". I had to use pinyin to type my response in Chinese, my native language, explaning I'm ethnic Chinese and born in mainland China and I only hate the party/government. Their response afterwards was quite "chill", very understanding. Amongst westerners, if I say I'm anti-CCP, they'd probably assume I'm a conservative lol, nah fam, fuck the rightwing radical lunatics and fuck tankies
Me prefering visual media over books - Lemmy seems to overwhelmingly like books better, for me, nah, partial aphantasia, hard to imagine things like someone elses thoughts, I can picture my memories quite well tho...
I voted to leave the EU. I work in agriculture and the CAP just funds wealthy landowners and has incentivised the destruction of the environment.
load more comments
(4 replies)
That women are vastly more interested in sex than men. To the point that it becomes a core pillar of identity.
What do guys discuss on guys night? Cars, video games, work, local politics, their kids, sports and poker.
What do women discuss on girls' night? Men, penis sizes, relationships, sexual behavior/conquest.
I think women are very interested in sex, and pre-modern times the stereotype was that women were the horny gender.
But I think what you're describing is more about gendered social norms in conversation. The fact that (some) groups of men don't talk about sex that openly is because sexual prowess is tied up with social status and most men wouldn't feel comfortable discussing sexual problems, failing to satisfy their partners, not really enjoying sex or anything like that for fear it makes them less of a man. And because of that, guys talking about how much sex they're having, or how they tried this new thing and their lady went wild for it, kinda come across like they're bragging.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Religion and spirituality, broadly considered, are not inherently evil. That organized religion can justify great evils is a function of human weakness, nothing more.
Then again, this is coupled with a 'there is no god but that we create ourselves/god has no material existence, but is no less powerful for that'' POV, which is admittedly a weird one that I've been pulling at for a bit. Nothing to do with the nature of our reality or first causes, everything to do with our relationship to reality.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I'm a Christian who doesn't celebrate Christmas. You can imagine how that goes over with the family. But it's definitely a super pagan celebration. 🤷
view more: next ›