4W

"Wokeness" is what results in horrifying outcomes of policy like this: https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california… This is a direct result of "progressive" beliefs being translated into policy. It should be no surprise that people start to question and reject these beliefs when they begin to understand the harm they cause.

> Self-identity isn't a political position It is when policy is changed to prioritize self-identity over material reality. The outcomes of such policy are often harmful, for example: https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california…

It is a very real threat. At the worst, we see cases like this, where female prisoners are raped and sexually assaulted by males who were transferred to women's prisons: https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california… We see unfair competition and lost opportunities from male disruption of female sports, for example: https://quillette.com/2024/11/01/college-volleyballs-spartan-meltdown We see lesbian women being harassed and attacked by males who they reject, such as: https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/04/03/trans-activists-shut-down-my-… And many, many more cases like these. It's a pattern of abusive male entitlement and, even worse, far too many people with power enabling this while ignoring the harms to women and girls.

> I wouldn't take anything they said seriously. Also I clicked two of those links and found no allegations of rape, See https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california… This is the inevitable consequence of SB132, and similar laws elsewhere.

Yes it is, girls as young as 13 are having their breasts removed for exactly that reason, see these news articles: https://4w.pub/tiktok-gender-doctor-per-breast-removal-on-13-year-old-… https://thefederalist.com/2018/09/12/u-s-doctors-performing-double-mas… And the demographic data in this research paper, published in a pediatrics medical journal: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/26740… I hope you would agree that this is a horrific practice and that these minors can't possibly meaningfully consent to this.

What about this then: https://4w.pub/tiktok-gender-doctor-per-breast-removal-on-13-year-old-… Or this: https://thefederalist.com/2018/09/12/u-s-doctors-performing-double-mas… And this: https://ovarit.com/o/GenderCritical/27768/in-the-usa-kids-with-gender-… You're describing how this process used to work, not how it is now. It's morphed into a large-scale medical experiment on vulnerable children.

Some in the modern medical establishment appear to have taken his cue and ran with it, to similarly horrifying outcomes, e.g. https://4w.pub/tiktok-gender-doctor-per-breast-removal-on-13-year-old-…

Something I've wondered about this is the social pressure around dysphoria. Dysphoria, ironically, has become trendy, particularly about social media. See the "cis is boring" view that's been in vogue for some time across multiple social media platforms. This article on increasing rates of desistance after lockdown [1] (Disclaimer: Evidence isn't well structured and is arguably anecdotal) makes me consider the positive impact of social pressure on transition. That detransition seems like a clear blind spot in the literature (deliberately? it's another r/l culture war hotspot) means that all we get is anecdote for now though. Do note that other studies seem to report relatively high rates of desistance amongst children transitioners as compared to adults. [1] https://4w.pub/social-media-trends-indicate-rise-in-gender-detransitio…

I think the essay that got Professor Hughes in trouble https://4w.pub/fantasy-worlds-on-the-political-right-and-left-qanon-an… is good.

It's a website created by feminist women to document the effect on female athletes of male-inclusive policy in women's sport. Again, not hateful - just pointing out the problem. As I mentioned above, this is only one area of many where women are disadvantaged and harmed by such policy. Another is women's prisons. In some jurisdictions, male inmates are allowed to transfer to the female prison estate if they claim to have a so-called "female gender identity". In every prison system that has introduced this, female prisoners have been sexually assaulted, raped and even impregnated by these males. Some examples: - https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california… - https://nypost.com/2022/04/25/transgender-rikers-inmate-gets-7-years-f… - https://news.wttw.com/2020/02/19/lawsuit-female-prisoner-says-she-was-… It is clear that this policy has had a horrendous impact on women prisoners. Do you agree that politicians on the left made a grave error of judgement, to say the least, in supporting and promoting it? Criticizing the left does not imply endorsement of the right. Why do you assume I support conservative politicians? Actually I've never voted for one in my life, and don't intend to. I don't support their policy on banning abortion either. That list you linked is very relevant to my point, however, in that every single abuser on there is male. It's the same…

I don't believe that either the Republicans or the Democrats are defending women, no. They're both patriarchal institutions that are misogynistic in different ways. > They do not, nor has anyone, "demanded everything that's been set up for women now has to include any male who says he's a woman". Sorry but you have been misinformed, this is the currently the actual progressive position. And it has led to horrifying outcomes when enacted into law, such as SB132 in California which allows imprisoned men to transfer to the women's prisons if they claim to be women: https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-california… > These labels, man and woman, are flexible social labels, not the rigorous biological category they've convinced simpletons to believe in as some sort of personal axiom. No, what you're describing is a sexist redefinition of woman and man. There's really no need for it. It just reifies sex-role stereotypes.

> Actually, the current guidelines by health authorities do not allow irreversible treatments for minors. Nonetheless, girls under the age of 18 are having their healthy breasts removed for reasons of 'gender affirmation'. With some bitterly regretting it when they become adults. Here's one particularly shocking example of this being done, to a 13-year-old girl: https://4w.pub/tiktok-gender-doctor-per-breast-removal-on-13-year-old-… And here's a peer-reviewed paper describing a cohort who had such surgery, many of whom were minors: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/26740… (see the figure titled "Age at Chest Surgery in the Postsurgical Cohort" - it shows that 33 of the 68 study participants were under the age of 18 when they had the surgery). > They do allow puberty blockers, which are commonly used in cisgender children who experience precocious puberty, and are reversible. It's only reversible up to a point. And the long-term side effects of using these drugs for children with a gender dysphoria diagnosis (who may be prescribed these at a later age range than children with precocious puberty) are unknown. There is currently much concern within the medical establishment about potentially damaging effects on teenage brain and bone development. > Your claim of brainwashing is unhelpful to any conversation. The commenter above used strong language, but that does indeed seem to be what is happening for many young people in this…

Unhindered access to the Internet for children means unlimited access by advertisers, politicians and advocacy groups to push literally whatever they want into the child's head, regardless of what that might be. For example, should it be possible for an organization like Prostasia ( https://4w.pub/prostasia-normalize-pedophilia/ ) to have unmonitored and unlimited conversations with a child through its media campaigns? The Internet as some amoral ocean of voluntarily accessed objective knowledge is such an unbelievably naive old meme by now that it is extremely disappointing to still see it crop up on HN. Humans have sorely limited attention bandwidth, and we live in a world where every bad actor (including even the Taliban https://old.reddit.com/r/MalangKhostay/ ) has learned how to game attention to push every manner of ideological garbage down our throats in tiny increments. As an adult it's almost impossible to avoid falling prey to influencing tactics on a daily basis, why would we expect children to be more adept at navigating a global and almost completely unregulated media machine?

"Gender critical" people claim that someone's sex cannot be changed, not even using surgery and hormones. So what is sex then? Obviously not one's hormones as those can be replaced just fine. That leaves chromosomes, primary and secondary characteristics. They also claim that gender is more important than sex. When they, for example, address someone as "Dear Mr. Smith", they must be referring to their sex then. Which means they mean something like: - "Dear Smith, who has XY chromosomes" - "Dear Smith, who has a natural grown penis" - "Dear Smith, who has a penis that works well enough that I consider them a man - "Dear Smith, who can grow a beard" - "Dear Smith, whose shoulder width is typical for a human male" All of these are either bafflingly irrelevant, fucked up or inaccurate. So how exactly is one's sex relevant to anyone except their doctors and partners? > In February, when Donna Hughes, a professor of women\u2019s studies at Rhode Island University, published an article critical of gender ideology, petitions sprouted calling for her to be fired. The article, which the Economist didn't bother to link to: https://4w.pub/fantasy-worlds-on-the-political-right-and-left-qanon-an… It's more of a pamphlet filled with lies, sexism and conspiracy theories. I think academic freedom is too important to fire her over this, but I understand the petitions. > In February Holly Lawford-Smith, a professor of philosophy at the University of Melbourne,…