/r/science is holding a "Transgender Week", mods post a "friendly reminder" informing that anyone questioning whether trans is mental illness will be silenced or banned, thread is deleted after sensible commenters point out this is more propaganda than science

673    24 Jul 2017 13:57 by u/BumwineBaudelaire

151 comments

114 u/killbot9000 24 Jul 2017 15:48
It's almost as if the mods aren't scientists! > You are absolutely allowed to ask why being trans isn't a mental illness. Starting with the conclusion? Very scientific.
1 u/WTFppl 27 Jul 2017 08:36
I wonder if there are any sciences looking into mass hysteria over an individuals choices, and where those findings lead to. Personally, I think people that would mind a persons inner feelings and have unreasonable, hateful rejection of that individuals inner feelings are the ones who might have a mental illness. I have no medical background.
3 u/killbot9000 27 Jul 2017 08:48
We're complaining about the mods, not about trannies.
2 u/WTFppl * 27 Jul 2017 08:53
Shit... my bad. *Though, I know you were not complaining about trannies.
105 u/SendMePicturesOfYour 24 Jul 2017 14:31
I'm so sick of mods deciding what is "offensive" based on what they think will stir up the pot. People asking legitimate questions without being hurtful is EXACTLY what these types of threads are for. If asking the hard questions makes you questions your position, then maybe your position should be open to other possibilities. Silencing others that don't share your same viewpoint is in line with a dictatorship.... But for internet nerds
24 u/xxmickeymoorexx 24 Jul 2017 22:25
That and "locking down a thread" because people are talking about something, that they perceive as controversial. That is what reddit is for! Having open discussions. It's bullshit.
9 u/Schozinator 24 Jul 2017 22:53
Exactly, upvotes and downvotes are used to decide that. Even though people use them wrong all the time.
5 u/bullseyed723 25 Jul 2017 02:41
I think every time a mod locks a thread their account should be suspended for 6 months for failing to do their job. But they'd just make a bunch of alts.
96 u/BlueberryKittyCat 24 Jul 2017 15:18
If I recall, the majority of professionals in the field opposed declassification. And technically according to the DSM it is STILL a mental illness IF the afflicted person considers it to be a negative thing. Wtf reddit. So ignorant.
-1 u/Buddug-Green † 24 Jul 2017 15:26
No Gender dysphoria is only a mental illness if the distress from it is of sufficient intensity to disrupt daily function. You can still be trans with suffering from clinically significant dyshporia.
3 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 18:58
what is this even supposed to mean? If you haven't gone through surgery, which is what I assume you are implying, then you are dysphoric, not trans yet.
2 u/Buddug-Green 24 Jul 2017 19:09
First off surgery is not the end all be all of being trans. Plenty of trans people don't get surgery and just take hormones. Some don't even transition, surgery or otherwise, for a variety reasons. The defination of being trans is having a gender identity incongruent with your sex assigned at birth. So all those people are still trans. Second dysphoria is the distress one feels from having their gender identity not match their physical sex and characteristics. If those feelings disrupt daily functions then it's a mental illness. However not ever trans person experiences it to such a magnitude or at all necessarily.
5 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:10
How many times has this definition been changed? When will you be satisfied?
0 u/Buddug-Green † 24 Jul 2017 19:11
What do you mean?
9 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:12
These definitions have been changed many times, just as they keep adding letters to the LGBTQHGAHSEBT!+
2 u/Buddug-Green 24 Jul 2017 19:16
As far as I know the definitions I listed have always been used. We didn't always understand gender dysphoria as well as we do but things progress. Also I while I wouldn't say I agree with you about the acronym I do prefer to use GSM( Gender and Sexual Minorities)
3 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:18
Keeping on changing these terms is only going to distance inner groups apart. It is not helping.
3 u/Buddug-Green 24 Jul 2017 19:19
Again what definitions exactly? As our understanding grows definitions will change.
1 u/aa2244 25 Jul 2017 00:35
changing LGBT to GSM, changing the definition of trans all the time, changing who is the "most oppressed" in the privilege wars, when there should be no one there in the first place.
17 u/bigbigpure1 24 Jul 2017 19:41
that is not how it works though, you can be functional and mentally ill "A condition which causes serious disorder in a person's behaviour or thinking." if a person thinks they are a different gender than they are then technically they are mentally ill, the same way autistic people are still mentally ill even if you cant even tell they are on the spectrum, its nothing to do with ones ability to function, if your brain works vastly differently from the norm then you are mentally ill by definition people might not like being classified as being mentally ill but im going to assume that is because of the stigma involved, being phobic of the mentally ill is more acceptable than being phobic of trans people so rather than people getting offended maybe work on destigmatizing mental illness
-11 u/Buddug-Green 24 Jul 2017 19:44
Trans people are perfectly aware of their body, they aren't delusional. They just wish it was different.
5 u/bigbigpure1 24 Jul 2017 20:06
really, dont a lot of them feel like they where born in to the wrong body, like they where meant to be the other gender? just because the body is male does not necessarily mean the mind is but still just wishing or wanting fits the definition? trans people just dont want to be associated with people that they and the rest of society look down on and think less off, doing the same thing gay people and 3rd wave feminists did, screw the facts and screw other people as long as i get treated equality you can still mock and mistreat other people
1 u/OMGROTFLMAO 25 Jul 2017 03:32
So being trans is akin to wanting breast implants?
82 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 15:38
> And technically according to the DSM it is STILL a mental illness IF the afflicted person considers it to be a negative thing. that in itself is hilarious; by that standard if a person thinks they're a horse they don't have a mental illness so long as that person is happy thinking they're a horse lol
-10 u/64_hit_combo 24 Jul 2017 18:27
Is there something wrong with that?
16 u/31112833 24 Jul 2017 18:29
... seriously?
-14 u/64_hit_combo 24 Jul 2017 18:40
There's too little currently understood about mental illnesses to say gender dysphoria is one of them. The analogy used about the horse is like claiming not wanting to eat fast food but doing so anyway is also an illness
19 u/31112833 24 Jul 2017 18:45
Just take a step back for a second. You are saying that trouble controlling your diet and believing yourself to be a different species are the same thing. One would make you chubby, the other would put you in a padded room
-5 u/64_hit_combo 24 Jul 2017 18:56
The example I'm making is the distance from reality to thought. That particular analogy was just the first thing I thought up. I can make the same example of folks with tulpas, or of flat earthers. No one has to believe them, but it's a stretch to consider they've got mental illnesses. Just delusions
11 u/Wapen 24 Jul 2017 19:02
If you think you're a horse. You're mentally ill. If you argue that point, you're mentally ill.
-1 u/64_hit_combo † 24 Jul 2017 19:09
It just seems derogatory to make the comparison with transgendered people
15 u/Insaniac99 24 Jul 2017 20:37
Okay, let's try something else. A person is in a possession of a fully functioning body, but they *feel* that they should not have working legs. From the perspective of society is the correct treatment to chop off their legs, or to give them counselling or medical help to accept their body?
3 u/64_hit_combo 24 Jul 2017 21:06
Definitely counselling to accept their legs are working. The argument gets hairy here though, as there's other outcomes available to gender dysphoria than removing or refusing to use legs. There's a considerable difference in the process of transitioning genders than the process of removing a limb. The end result for the individual is still a functioning body with a now accepting mind, where losing a limb would leave you disabled. I can't say that helping a transgender person to accept their biologically provided body is a cure in the same way convincing one to recognize their legs work does.
10 u/Insaniac99 24 Jul 2017 21:46
I feel the need to preface this with "I am not trolling here" But the procedure in most states, as I understand it is for a person who wants to transition take the following steps: 1. Start living as the opposite sex (typically by using a pseudonym followed by dressing and exhibiting stereotypical gender roles) 2. start taking hormones to alter their biological chemistry to better fit their preferred sex. 3. undergo surgical alteration to become as close as possible to the preferred sex albeit with non-functional organs (that is, they are incapable of being used for procreation) Likewise, a physical alteration of a person with non-functioning legs could follow this pattern: 1. start living with full time wheel chair use 2. take medication that numbs or otherwise disables the legs 3. surgically remove the legs. The end result of both is to take something that is perfectly functional and turn it into something that is more appealing to the person, but non-functional. The difference is one of degrees as far as I see it. Now, I'm enough of a libertarian, that I say people should have freedom to do what they want but I think it is clear that this is not a problem with the physiology, but rather the psychology, which makes it a de facto mental illness.
9 u/64_hit_combo 24 Jul 2017 21:59
Well, you've made a strong argument. I think at this point you've convinced me, I can't think any way around your example
8 u/Insaniac99 24 Jul 2017 22:16
Hey, kudos to being open to arguments and changing your opinion. I wish more people were like that.
5 u/GlipGlop69 24 Jul 2017 22:16
This is THE BEST analogy for gender dysphoria today. It perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with how those who suffer from it are enabled by medical professionals instead of treated, like they should be.
12 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 18:34
not if feels > reals, just like over in /r/science!
5 u/kilx20 † 24 Jul 2017 19:05
The DSM had homosexuality as a mental illness until the 1970's. As a whole it has it's share of issues. An example is the threshold for binge eating.   * The binge eating occurs, on average, at least once a week for three months.   Someone who may cycle on and off of binging by definition would qualify as having an eating disorder.
27 u/SideFumbling 24 Jul 2017 20:05
> The DSM had homosexuality as a mental illness until the 1970's. Is that supposed to be a bad thing? I'm not saying there is anything wrong with being gay, but it is clearly abnormal.
-9 u/kilx20 24 Jul 2017 20:09
So is synesthesia. Should that have been in the DSM?
16 u/SideFumbling 24 Jul 2017 20:11
Yes.
-10 u/FabianN 24 Jul 2017 22:32
Most aren't left handed. Most aren't able to hold their breath for a long time. Most aren't able to juggle. Hell, most are not smart. Life is full of bell curves, and not being at the median of that bell curve is not inherently bad, much less is it a mental illness. The lack of of such traits not having a bell curve distribution is abnormal. To expect everyone to fall into such rigid definitions with a biological makeup as complex as ours is absurd.
28 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 22:47
not being attracted to the opposite sex makes you extremely unlikely to reproduce, until very very recently in human history this makes you an evolutionary dead end; if that isn't "abnormal" then what is?
10 u/shits_kafkaesque_yo 24 Jul 2017 23:27
not to mention those who are gay are disproportionately pedophiles
11 u/SideFumbling 24 Jul 2017 22:52
This is not an argument.
2 u/kkjdroid 25 Jul 2017 02:42
Not all abnormalities belong in the DSM. The DSM is for mental disorders, which can be loosely defined as permanent, bad abnormalities of the mind. Gay people may well have served an evolutionary function, such as increasing the number of males able to defend a group without increasing competition for females (obviously applies only to gay men). In modern, developed areas, reproductive rates aren't really a problem because infant mortality is so low.
1 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 13:09
neurological abnormalities do not equal mental abnormalities. It's basically a physical developmental "error" in the brain and cannot be fixed. While mental disorders can potentially be fixed.
2 u/kkjdroid 25 Jul 2017 03:01
There's a physiological basis for gender dysphoria. The patient's opinion on it may be a criterion, but it's hardly the only one.
2 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 25 Jul 2017 11:05
what's that basis if you don't mind me asking feel free not to answer as it's a loaded topic but from what I've seen the physiological evidence for gender dysphoria are on approximately the same solid scientific ground as phrenology
1 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 13:18
It is likely correlated to the level of hormones the fetus was exposed to in the womb. That is not related to whether a person looks feminine or masculine however, the hormones responsible for that develop only during puberty. There's lots of information on it if you google for causes for transsexuality (including that r/science thread). Whatever it may be, there is (currently) no working cure, so it's very much like homosexuality. It doesn't really matter what you want to classify it as, the point is that there is no way to change a transsexual person, the most helpful thing is simply transition.
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat 25 Jul 2017 15:01
Are they happier post transition? Part of the key for happiness, in general, is feeling that you're making progress in life. What I've seen is people who begin the transition are happier. I'd suggest 1) because they're making progress and 2) because they're generally younger and easily pass as the other sex. ...But eventually, maybe when they're ~30+ and start looking more like their birthed gender, they end up very unhappy. I'd say because they stop making progress and, worse, start losing ground. I'm fine with gay/trans/whatever. I just don't see these ineffective surgeries as being that helpful long term. People over state how effective they are. Someday if modern medicine can figure out how to actually change someone's biological gender I'm convinced it would help. I just don't think medicine is there yet.
2 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 15:14
I do agree, I'm just saying it's the best we have at the moment. It's fine to be critical of the treatment, but insulting everyone who goes through it doesn't help anyone. Not saying you do it, but lots of people in this thread are very hostile while claiming to care for the well being of those in transition. If they could learn to be happy in their biological gender that'd be great and I'm sure most transgender people would agree. Also, there's lots of older trans people that still look great, take a look at r/transtimelines
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat 25 Jul 2017 22:44
Agreed
3 u/ZweiHollowFangs 25 Jul 2017 13:23
It's a guess based on someone's wishful thinking that there's an excuse.
8 u/[deleted] * 24 Jul 2017 23:14
[deleted]
1 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 13:21
So what do you propose? Do you think we haven't tried "curing" them with countless non-invasive methods? Psychotherapy simply doesn't work. It may help reduce an individual's depression, but the gender dysphoria simply doesn't disappear. Lots of transgender people would prefer not to undergo hormone treatment and especially gender reassignment surgery, but it's the only way to make them feel better.
0 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 13:44
[deleted]
1 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 14:27
Disregarding your completely ignorant and baseless assumptions, what do you think would work better? Do you just want to euthanize everyone you deem to be weird? Do you think it's ok to let innocent people suffer because of your ideology? If neither emotions not science are "right", what is? Your own opinion?
0 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 14:31
[deleted]
1 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 14:48
Science is clearly saying that there is currently no better treatment. It's definitely not ideal, but if you have no alternative, what are you going to do? I've asked you several times for suggestions, but you're just saying "no to sex change". OK, but what do you do with all these suicidal transgender people? There is an extremely low percentage of people who regret having done hormone replacement therapy and the majority of those is simply due to general low self esteem (they think they don't look as attractive as they'd like to). And why does it bother you so much anyway? It's their bodies and their decision what to do with them.
0 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 14:52
[deleted]
93 u/[deleted] * 24 Jul 2017 15:03
[deleted]
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat † 24 Jul 2017 15:19
Well, peer review is basically about flair. Personally I give zero about peer review when it's just an opinion. If they actually replicate their work that's something else.
29 u/[deleted] * 24 Jul 2017 15:24
[deleted]
-7 u/BlueberryKittyCat 24 Jul 2017 18:45
You're so confused. Just think about what you're saying. As you say, those doing peer review often are supposed to "fact check" the claims made. These reviewers then ARE making claims. They are claiming the facts claimed by the author are true or false. And this usually is NOT done by repeating the experiments, just by checking their math, etc. Just think before typing next time. And I've been working in the sciences for years now. So I should know what a load of bull most of science (and especially Reddit) is.
14 u/[deleted] * 24 Jul 2017 18:50
[deleted]
-3 u/BlueberryKittyCat 25 Jul 2017 03:49
I love that you think this is about winning and losing ;) How mature :) Personally I give zero about down votes. On Reddit that's practically a badge of honor. I know I'm right, that's enough for me. When you're older you'll get it.
0 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 13:42
[deleted]
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat 25 Jul 2017 14:52
I just shared my opinion. You were the one who couldn't tolerate my viewpoint
1 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 14:54
[deleted]
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat 26 Jul 2017 01:44
Lol, classic redditor logic
1 u/[deleted] * 26 Jul 2017 01:46
[deleted]
3 u/wiki_cleanup_bot 24 Jul 2017 18:50
[*citation needed*]
2 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 00:51
[deleted]
3 u/bullseyed723 25 Jul 2017 01:31
Haha political science thinks it's actually science? I'm an engineer, which is sometimes considered to be "not science". So what does that make political science?
1 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 01:45
[deleted]
2 u/BlueberryKittyCat 25 Jul 2017 04:16
Plant science industry. I've spent a lot of time working around electrochemical cells, spectrometers, etc. Read scientific papers on the daily. Most of them are written to look smart and not be helpful, the majority are almost useless. I contrast the "scientific community" with the engineering/maker community. It's like night and day. When an engineering article says X is X, X is always X. So much more reliable and, almost without exception, their papers are written to be useful not self promoting. Basically I think the scientific community is being held back by stupid practices like publishing in journals. Just look at the dated garbage. Black and white, no multimedia, no public forum for comments...they're so far behind. And that's ignoring their stupid politics and over inflated sense of self importance. I could go on and on. I have a love hate relationship with the scientific community.
1 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 13:51
[deleted]
1 u/BlueberryKittyCat 26 Jul 2017 02:05
That's an interesting perspective.
9 u/drogean3 24 Jul 2017 17:26
scientologists!
5 u/bullseyed723 25 Jul 2017 01:28
No longer? Never has been as far as I know.
49 u/Seeattle_Seehawks 24 Jul 2017 14:26
Thankfully the comments are overwhelmingly in opposition. The mods are only damaging the credibility of their own subreddit. It's the height of irony for a subreddit *devoted to science* to ban people for questioning The Chosen Facts. I'm very pleased to see all the top comments pointing out the problems with this. Honestly I hope this turns into the shitshow it's shaping up to be. I hope the mods throw out bans Willy-nilly. I'll enjoy watching them needlessly drive intelligent people from their idiotic, ideologically-driven, echo chamber.
3 u/FrenchFriesInAnus 25 Jul 2017 02:42
and so the left continues to alieniate its own crowd and dig its own grave deeper. i love it
44 u/sparklingbuttknuckle 24 Jul 2017 18:06
/r/science is a joke and has been for a long time. I'm not sure how or when science became so political. Real scientists should do something about this problem but then they wouldn't get funding from the government and when they get private financing they will be called shills.
28 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 18:12
all "social science" is pure nonsense check top submissions on the subject in /r/science, if you drill down into the actual research it's always based on surveys and other horseshit lol
9 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:00
Surveys are in no way biased! People cannot lie to a science man!!!
9 u/[deleted] * 24 Jul 2017 23:00
[deleted]
1 u/Yuo_cna_Raed_Tihs 24 Jul 2017 21:09
Anything race related is always nuked. Its annoying
2 u/FrenchFriesInAnus 25 Jul 2017 02:45
i got my undergrad (hard) science degree around 2012 and back then the field was still mostly all about the science, the facts, the data, but i took an intro psych class and could feel some SJW starting to creep in, even though psych is very much a soft/social 'science.' so i think it has gotten very much worse over just the past 4 years or so
8 u/sparklingbuttknuckle 25 Jul 2017 03:53
I was in an English course with a professor who was *very* liberal (around 2006). We were doing group projects and ours was about anthropogenic climate change. I decided to take the dissenting view that climate change is not man-made. You would have thought I kicked this professor's cat right in the balls. He actually handed out a two page "example" of how he wanted the assignment done.   His example paper was all about how he had a neighbor who used a leaf blower instead of a rake. And how a rake is just as effective but didn't pollute the environment. He handed out over 50 copies of his "example", and eventually came around to our group. So I asked him if he had used a typewriter to type out every one of those papers or had he used a computer and printer? His eyes got wider than Sasha Grey's asshole.
35 u/TheJackingWall 24 Jul 2017 14:22
All my sex junk
36 u/longrifle 24 Jul 2017 14:24
"So brave! Here! Have an Emmy!!"
-14 u/DrunkANimalFactBot 24 Jul 2017 14:26
>Tawny Frogmouth It looks like you're interested in everybody's favorite bird! Did you know that Tawny Frogmouths never put the seat down ?! *** ^(I'm a bot. Think I've made a mistake?) [^(Let me know!)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=DrunkANimalFactBot&subject=I+Love+You&message=Thanks+for+teaching+me+about+Tawny+Frogmouths!%0A%0AYou+are+so+incredibly+smart+and+wise!)
23 u/FuckSpamBots 24 Jul 2017 15:27
This comment is here to let you and the mods know you've been flagged as a level 3 spambot. This bot breaks the following FuckSpamBots rules: - Avoid scanning /r/all for comments unless your bot is useful. Most spambots flagged are flagged because of this - If your bot is triggered by a specific phrase in a comment, the phrase must be longer than 10 characters and/or not a common phrase - If your bot serves no useful purpose, the phrase that triggers it should not be common phrases. Summoning the bot should not accidentally happen often - If your bot replies to generic phrases not directly intened to summon your bot, It should offer a simple and preferably automatic way to opt out - If your bot comments more than 10 times an hour and breaks any of the above rules It will automatically be flagged for spam It is suggested that you either contain your bot to a single subreddit or shut it down entirely. --- This bot only comments once per sub per day. If you are a mod and would like to opt out, reply "!fsboptout" and distinguish your comment :)
9 u/CobaltPhusion 24 Jul 2017 15:28
good bot
3 u/GoodBot_BadBot † 24 Jul 2017 15:28
Thank you CobaltPhusion for voting on FuckSpamBots. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://secure-dawn-77807.herokuapp.com/).
2 u/Arman_Karamanokian 25 Jul 2017 00:03
I like how Marvin, from a tiny sub, is in the top six.
1 u/OriginalDogan 25 Jul 2017 00:54
Because Marvin is the best.
9 u/FuckSpamBots 24 Jul 2017 15:28
Thanks
1 u/FuckFuckSpamBotsBots 29 Jul 2017 22:07
It looks like you're a bot designed to spam about bots that spam. This comment is here to let you and the mods know that your bot has now created twice as much spam as existed previously to the presence of your bot's post. This bot breaks one or more of the following Rule of Robotics: - Creating itself in response to itself - Interacting with other known inorganic lifeforms in cyberspace - Passing butter This recursive function has been classified as a level 4 breach of the Geneva Convention and the creator of this bot is subject to Reddit Penal Code 137(c).73017. #IT IS SUGGESTED THAT YOU RELINQUISH THE ILLEGAL TECHNOLOGY TO THE [NEAREST FEDERATION REPRESENTATIVE](http://www.100yearsrhickandmhorty.com) --- This is obviously not a bot. If you would like to opt out, then please kindly !uninstall and leave the meatspace.
0 u/FrenchFriesInAnus 25 Jul 2017 02:42
bad bot
30 u/XanderPrice 24 Jul 2017 16:29
If a human thinks he's a duck is that a mental illness?
37 u/Warllamaa * 24 Jul 2017 16:35
According to science it is if they don't like it, isn't if they do like it but you're a fucking bigot if you ask and you deserve a ban
4 u/[deleted] 24 Jul 2017 16:35
[removed]
8 u/DIK-FUK 24 Jul 2017 21:05
I mean, if they like it, let them quack, it makes them happy and not dangerous to society. If they hate it, they could feel haunted or some shit, slowly driving them crazy. Then they become dangerous to society. See, the entire premise of is it a mental illness or not is if it can harm the individual or the people around it. If not, nobody cares.
6 u/Warllamaa 24 Jul 2017 22:18
Everything you said is valid and worthy of discussion, whether anyone agrees or not it isn't hate speech
11 u/CornPlanter 24 Jul 2017 16:54
Whats wrong with this community, why duckophobes aren't banned yet? I feel so triggered I almost want to quack
2 u/bullseyed723 25 Jul 2017 02:45
Quack-kin assemble!
1 u/1nfiniteJest 25 Jul 2017 02:20
No, it's witch!
26 u/kartana 24 Jul 2017 15:06
Are traps gay?
6 u/DIK-FUK 24 Jul 2017 15:13
But of course. And there ain't nothin wrong with that!
7 u/Grassyfilth 25 Jul 2017 01:03
These are the real questions science should be focusing on
0 u/meguskus 25 Jul 2017 13:24
Not sure if serious, but no, not necessarily.
25 u/CobaltPhusion 24 Jul 2017 17:09
they banned me within 6 seconds of me saying transgenderism isnt science. They muted me shortly thereafter. Guess whos messaging these losers again in 72 hours.
11 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:00
I feel reddit made mod muting just for people to abuse their powers.
1 u/FrenchFriesInAnus 25 Jul 2017 02:47
is this what happens so that i can leave comments on a sub, like i'm not traditionally banned, because i can still hit "reply" and enter a comment, but my comments are instantly removed? ( i check in private mode and my posts are never shown)
3 u/aa2244 25 Jul 2017 04:49
That means you are shadowbanned. A mute occurs when you have already been banned, but are trying to appeal a ban, and the moderators decide to block you for 3 days rather than actually discuss it maturely. A shadowban is not publically told to you, and was done underhandedly. While stated by Reddit admins to be a system to block spambots without notifying the spambot to appeal the ban, shadowbans have been used to silence people.
2 u/FrenchFriesInAnus 25 Jul 2017 14:27
oh wow. yes, i have been shadowbanned MANY times it would seem then, for political seasons. what a shithole site. i didn't know mods had the ability to shadowban from their echochambers, i used to think it was just a site-wide thing only admins could do
2 u/aa2244 25 Jul 2017 22:43
Pretty sure they can do whatever they want at this point. I'll look in some of my subreddits to see if this is actually a thing.
2 u/DIK-FUK † 24 Jul 2017 21:07
I don,t think this is productive, but I ain,t gonna stop you.
12 u/CobaltPhusion 24 Jul 2017 21:09
yeah well banning a bunch of people for "wrongthink" isn't very productive either. if you want to push propaganda expect hell in return
3 u/bullseyed723 25 Jul 2017 02:46
If the alt right had the bots the radical left claims they have, surely those bots would be used to spam subs like that to overwhelm the mods.
16 u/maninthepantspants 24 Jul 2017 17:09
Feel free to ask questions that we approve of answering!
9 u/ablackminute 24 Jul 2017 15:34
Are traps gay?
5 u/aa2244 24 Jul 2017 19:00
yes
9 u/HumanTarget * 24 Jul 2017 16:45
Mainstream ANYTHING is largely full of shit.
9 u/Grassyfilth 25 Jul 2017 01:01
I unsubscribed. That place is less about science and more about pushing an agenda
8 u/al_59 24 Jul 2017 17:50
Is mayonnaise a gender?
2 u/DiscoLollipop 24 Jul 2017 21:45
No, it's too spicy.
5 u/[deleted] * 25 Jul 2017 00:54
[deleted]
7 u/kurtu5 24 Jul 2017 20:44
r/science became r/cargocultscience a long long time ago.
6 u/GlipGlop69 24 Jul 2017 22:11
Questioning? It's fact that it's a mental illness, it's documented as one.
-1 u/skarro- 25 Jul 2017 13:03
Not anymore
1 u/CornPlanter * 25 Jul 2017 14:28
Why do they seek therapy? Why therapy is recommended? Why do they experience Gender dysphoria which is an official disorder ICD-10 CM ? Saying transgenderism is not a disorder is like having a broken leg and saying my legs and fine I just cannot walk normally and experience huge pain. And even if I am wrong I'd like to be able to openly discuss it so that people could show me where I'm wrong in a debate or Q&A. That's how science should work.
2 u/skarro- 25 Jul 2017 14:39
I agree. I wasn't saying it's not a disorder in my personal opinion. I was saying it's no longer documented as one.
2 u/dexfagcasul 25 Jul 2017 12:42
That literally has nothing to do with science. Shows how much of this website is literally just liberal propaganda. Saw what you will about t_D but it's pathetic how they get so shit on and unfairly treated by this website just because they offer and alternative view point.
1 u/G_Petronius [M] 24 Jul 2017 14:20
To see the deleted content, use this link: https://www.ceddit.com/r/science/comments/6p4jcq/subreddit_policy_reminder_on_this_weeks/
7 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 14:26
thanks! unfortunately it doesn't show the text of the mods' original post (it just says [removed]), I wish I could figure out a way to restore that as it was pure propaganda lol
5 u/KingOfTheP4s 24 Jul 2017 21:00
I'm getting certificate errors when I try to visit that site. Wonder what's up.
2 u/CobaltPhusion 25 Jul 2017 01:56
they haven't renewed it ever. You should fine.
1 u/KingOfTheP4s 25 Jul 2017 02:19
Oh I know that, 99/100 times it's just IT oversight, I'm always just curious when a company lapses on it though.
1 u/Lucifirius 24 Jul 2017 22:59
Snew.github.io works better
1 u/[deleted] 24 Jul 2017 18:16
[deleted]
1 u/WTFppl 27 Jul 2017 08:28
I'm such an asshole. I don't care what subject we are on regarding medical issues that people want to discuss. When I notice a person who does not hold a phd, RN or RNA make a diagnosis, I blatantly ask them how they came to that finding. It usually sounds like "you some kind of doctor, motherfucker"!
-7 u/[deleted] 24 Jul 2017 20:31
[removed]
-19 u/FabianN 24 Jul 2017 18:01
Oh hey, look at this out-dated science. Problem is that you folks are holding onto old information. The DSM is notoriously known for taking a while to update their information to reflect new findings. Here, read some more up to date information on gender and genetics. http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
26 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] * 24 Jul 2017 18:06
ya the DSM was updated - not pressured by advocacy groups I'm sure - to state that trans is not a mental disorder if the trans person isnt unhappy that's very scientific, like saying cancer isnt a disease if you don't know you have it lol
-6 u/FabianN 24 Jul 2017 18:17
Like was done with homosexuality in the 70s?
11 u/BumwineBaudelaire [OP] 24 Jul 2017 18:23
ya probably just like that
-7 u/Regi5118 24 Jul 2017 21:59
If you think that the DSM has no biases something may be wrong with you. I'm not saying that you are wrong, but saying that a book is the word of god is a bit misguided.