あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]snobocracy 78ポイント79ポイント  (36子コメント)

Our official stance is that transgender is not a mental illness

I didn't realize science had an "official stance".

So now that people will be punished for saying "transgenderism is a mental disease", will there also be punishments for people who postulate "transgenders tend to have more mental diseases"?

Or, better yet, will there be a distinction between:
"Transgenders tend to have more mental diseases, and that's due to prejudicial society"; and
"Transgenders tend to have more mental diseases, and that seems to be naturally related to their transgenderism"

Also, will trans-ableism also be off-topic?
You know, people who think they are "a disabled person in an abled person's body"?
What about trans-racialism?

[–]baserace 40ポイント41ポイント  (13子コメント)

I didn't realize science had an "official stance".

Indeed. Really quite disturbing for a 'science' sub.

[–]feedmahfishGrad Student|Stream Biogeography|Macroecological Modeling 36ポイント37ポイント  (7子コメント)

There are official stances in all of science. Like Evolution, Round Earth, Continental Drift, and Global Warming.

Edit: A user deleted his comment so I will clarify even further.

The biomedical studies on folks who are transgender are all strongly falsifiable if you are referring to the requirement of Popperian Falsifiability, with conclusions following the guidelines of Plattian Inference, and it uses data that has strong Ayerian Verifiability with multiple replications and expansions on the topic; i.e., transgender is not some academic dart thrown at the wall to create a new buzzword for people who see themselves differently. That's what we are stating. The transgender condition that many people define themselves as has biological significance and no evidence supports it as some random mental illness/defect. That's the official stance of /r/science, which follows scientific consensus.

[–]regypt 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Exactly. It's more like, listen, evolution is a thing, ok? if you're going to say that it isn't, you're going to need to show something extraordinary and not just small-mindedness. For the sake of keeping discussion on topic, we're going to go ahead and remove dumb posts that try to argue that evolution isn't a thing.

[–]Eurynom0s 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Official stance" heavily implies opinion. The way to phrase this, if they wanted to not stir the shitpot, was "the current scientific consensus is..."

[–]feedmahfishGrad Student|Stream Biogeography|Macroecological Modeling -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I personally believe the differentiation is a bit pedantic, but I see the point. However, we're not really worried in this case.

[–]Sexatoo [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The difference is that if somebody argues against global warming, sure they're 'wrong' when compared to the overwhelming scientific consensus but they're not banned for it.

[–]calf [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Since you are utilizing philosophy of science terminology, I'm interested in a technicality. Could you clarify if you are using those terms/concepts (specific forms of falsifiability, inference, and verifiability) to help suggest an argument or intuition for the validity of the consensus theory, or are you using those terms because they are actually sufficient for validity? The way you said it is not obvious, because you separated two clauses with a semicolon without explaining the connection.

[edit: clarity]

[–]thefinestpos 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is an official stance for the sub to curb bigoted behavior, not an all encompassing stance on the science behind transgenderism and articles that are allowed. If you're not making comments that are derogatory in nature (ie. calling trans-folks mean spirited names or saying transgenderism isn't real or a mental illnes), then it's not going to be a problem.

[–]beerybeardybear -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Clearly, you're not a scientist.

[–]legayredditmodditors -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Science is the celebration of spirited discussion, not a limitation of it.

[–]beerybeardybear 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, let's all spiritedly discuss phrenology. I'm sure that that will be ~valuable conversation.~

[–]fsmpastafarianPhD | Clinical Psychology 26ポイント27ポイント  (1子コメント)

I didn't realize science had an "official stance".

Being transgender is quite literally not a mental disorder someone can be diagnosed with. The current, most related diagnosis is Gender Dysphoria, which refers to someone who is transgender and also experiences significant distress about their being transgender. You'll note from this diagnosis, that being transgender alone is not enough to be considered meeting criteria for the diagnosis, and in fact many transgender individuals never do. Others who meet the diagnosis at one point, may no longer meet criteria once they transition.

[–]kycube 6ポイント7ポイント  (8子コメント)

Well you're using the phrase "transgenders" so I think I can safely assume you don't know much about the subject in general.

[–]BewilderedDash -4ポイント-3ポイント  (4子コメント)

When someone uses transgender as anything other than an adjective you know you're in for a rough time.

[–]sierraescape 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

You just used it as a noun...

[–]Mindelan 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

When someone uses transgender as anything other than an adjective [when referring to individuals] you know you're in for a rough time.

For clarity, since you seemed to misunderstand.

[–]sierraescape 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just giving you a hard time. :P

[–]nusyahus -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Think that's his "the_donald" side leaking

[–]Bulldawglady 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Trans-racialism, despite your obnoxious concern trolling, was originally coined and used by academics to describe an adopted child raised by a family of a different race.

[–]KorianHUN -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is everything that says otherwise than you want it to is concern trolling?

[–]msgallows 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's detestable to compare transgenderism to body integrity disorders. There are a massive amount of harmless reasons why someone might feel maleness or femaleness, as these are essential to the human condition. Feeling your arm just needs to be amputated just because is NOT in the realm of normal human life. Unlike being a woman, unlike being a man, unlike being people who seem to blur those lines.

[–]Avery3R -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

You can't -ism an adjective.

[–]GiskardReventlov 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

What kind of prescriptivism is this?

[–]Omena123 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

/r/science = science ? how about the moderation teams stance. stop the concern trolling