[HN Gopher] It's not Tourette's but a new type of mass sociogeni...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       It's not Tourette's but a new type of mass sociogenic illness
        
       Author : mpweiher
       Score  : 241 points
       Date   : 2022-12-06 11:21 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (academic.oup.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (academic.oup.com)
        
       | screye wrote:
       | I wonder how similar this is to (sexy baby) valley girl upspeak &
       | vocal fry.
       | 
       | Many young women picked this up from the Kardashians/Paris Hilton
       | and now cannot "turn it off". We know this is not their 'natural'
       | voice because if you ask them to make weird sounds and then a
       | normal voice, then their normal voice sounds completely different
       | than the sexy baby voice.
       | 
       | The weird thing is that the women themselves are surprised by
       | this sound they're hearing and cannot easily reproduce it because
       | the sexy baby voice is so deeply internalized.
       | 
       | Sounds rather similar to these involutory ticks.
        
         | dr-detroit wrote:
        
         | my-god-hn wrote:
        
           | shredprez wrote:
           | And deprive the world of instant classics like "valley girl
           | accent considered harmful"? Do you hate joy?
        
         | Invictus0 wrote:
         | Curious: What is the sexy baby voice? And where can I see this
         | weird sounds and then normal voice experiment?
        
           | hotpotamus wrote:
           | 30 Rock had a good example of the whole act
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm-ZF9AfN40
        
             | throwaway743 wrote:
             | Off topic, but Hannibal rules
        
           | yarg wrote:
           | Think Marilyn Monroe/Betty Boop.
        
           | screye wrote:
           | This is a good place to start -
           | https://omny.fm/shows/revisionist-history/from-inside-
           | voice-...
           | 
           | Lake Bell asks the person to speak in their highest note and
           | then their lowest note and then yodel for a couple of times.
           | Then to asks her to just speak, and the voice that comes out
           | much closer to what we associate with a 'normal' woman's
           | voice.
           | 
           | I guess having to manually change tone to such extremes
           | resets the body's ability to recover this incredibly specific
           | learnt behavior, and the person momentarily reverts to a
           | clean sample of their own voice.
        
             | badRNG wrote:
             | > resets the body's ability to recover this incredibly
             | specific learnt behavior, and the person momentarily
             | reverts to a clean sample of their own voice.
             | 
             | What is one's "own voice?"
             | 
             | Nearly all speech patterns, dialects, accents, patterns and
             | phrasing is learned from one's social circle. Speech itself
             | is "learnt behavior." It makes sense that those engaged in
             | a subculture or online community may take up the way people
             | talk in that sphere of social influence. Before hand,
             | speech patterns evolved apart from one another due to
             | geographic distance. In the modern era, it doesn't seem
             | unreasonable that one would have greater influence from an
             | online community than a local one.
             | 
             | I don't see any reason to privilege a specific, arbitrary
             | way of speaking to be "normal" and one's "own voice" and
             | others to be learnt behavior one "recovers" from.
        
               | upsidesinclude wrote:
               | Perhaps that is a difference of definition.
               | 
               | Your 'own voice' refers to the unaugmented tone from your
               | vocal cords. It is distinct to you because that is your
               | physiology.
               | 
               | To find the tone you can take a deep breath and sigh. You
               | can hear your tone. You have to sigh like you mean it
               | though and relax, let it out.
               | 
               | Uuuuuuuuhhhhh
               | 
               | Other than the resonance of you oronasal cavity, all
               | other aspects are some type of learned
               | behaviors/impediments
        
               | smodo wrote:
               | Well... In my country there is a well known sociolect
               | among well educated females. It also involves speaking in
               | a low register. Doctors have found that this causes vocal
               | chord scarring for some people. Not all learned behavior
               | is favoured by the body, shall we say.
        
         | jamal-kumar wrote:
         | That's just like a southern california accent at this point,
         | even men talk like that somewhat over there [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.spreaker.com/user/7768747/california-accent-
         | voca...
        
         | coding123 wrote:
         | Probably also, gay voice. I'm pretty sure a lot of young (not
         | yet gay) men don't have that voice until later in life.
        
           | rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
           | I was friends with a nurse who told a story about a gay man
           | who went into surgery. He had a heavy, stereotypical gay
           | accent. But when he initially woke up after the surgery it
           | was gone, and as the anesthesia faded, the accent slowly came
           | back.
           | 
           | I'm sure it varies for each individual, but for at least some
           | gay men, some portion of their accent might be an affectation
           | (even if it's largely subconscious).
        
       | labrador wrote:
       | I picked up a mental weirdness from the internet and now can't
       | get rid of it: Trypophobia. I never experienced anything like it
       | until Trypophobia was trending a few years back.
       | 
       | https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21834-trypoph...
        
         | RankingMember wrote:
         | It was that awful seed pod boob photoshop image that did it to
         | you too, wasn't it?
        
           | labrador wrote:
           | Awful doesn't even begin to describe those images. There's a
           | another phobia transmitted by the internet, but I'm immune to
           | it: Thalassophobia. There's even a reddit group dedicated to
           | it:
           | 
           | https://old.reddit.com/r/thalassophobia/
           | 
           | There's a group allegedly devoted to trypophobia. I say
           | allegedly because I refuse to click on the link:
           | 
           | https://old.reddit.com/r/trypophobia/
        
       | bythreads wrote:
       | Reads like ai
        
       | Traubenfuchs wrote:
       | > mass sociogenic illness
       | 
       | > Over the past 2 years, a remarkably high number of young
       | patients have been referred to our specialized Tourette
       | outpatient clinic
       | 
       | > A large number of young people across different countries
       | 
       | How many exactly? Without numbers, calling it mass-anything is
       | blowing this way out of proportion. So called fakeDisorderCringe
       | has been a thing for a while, thanks to TikTok. But is there any
       | sign that a) it is seriously widespread and b) doesn't "go away
       | by itself", when the kids get bored of pretending?
       | 
       | This appears to be nothing more than a short lived cringy TikTok
       | / YouTube trend that will be over sooner than later, no different
       | from goth culture. God I am glad I will never have children that
       | I need to keep from melting their brains with social media.
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | If it's an unconscious thing which transfers into "real life",
         | that seems potentially important. It raises the question of
         | what other unconscious behaviours (potentially harmful) are
         | picked up in a similar way? Definitely an interesting starting
         | point for further research.
        
           | Traubenfuchs wrote:
           | > If it's an unconscious thing which transfers into "real
           | life", that seems potentially important.
           | 
           | Humans of all ages copy behavior they see in (social) media.
           | Not every unusual behavior should be classified as mental
           | illness.
           | 
           | > Definitely an interesting starting point for further
           | research.
           | 
           | Maybe, but for psychology and sociology, not psychiatry and
           | brain science.
        
       | AstixAndBelix wrote:
       | If social contagion can get people to develop serious ticks
       | imagine how many things we automatically do or feel or think that
       | are a mere result of random social pressures
        
         | dusted wrote:
         | My main concern is how to induce specifics in people and start
         | profiting from it :D
         | 
         | Wouldn't it just be wonderfully dystopic if we could induce
         | ticks in people that made them clean the streets and do the
         | grunt work? :D
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | > how to induce specifics in people and start profiting from
           | it
           | 
           | Have you heard of "advertising"?
        
           | kneebonian wrote:
           | "A SQUAT grey building of only thirty-four stories. Over the
           | main entrance the words, CENTRAL LONDON HATCHERY AND
           | CONDITIONING CENTRE, and, in a shield, the World State's
           | motto, COMMUNITY, IDENTITY, STABILITY." - A Brave New World
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | martyvis wrote:
       | Is this different from any other learned behaviour? If a baby
       | hangs around English speaking people they are going to learn to
       | speak the language with the same accent. Then you see a group of
       | kids where every sentence is peppered with the F-bomb, it's all
       | the same right?
        
       | t0lo wrote:
        
       | NaturalPhallacy wrote:
       | A sub on reddit has been all over this:
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/fakedisordercringe/
        
       | pessimizer wrote:
       | The fact that NXIVM could successfully suppress crippling
       | Tourette's in a number of cases has to at least mean that
       | Tourette's itself (or some subset of what is grouped under
       | Tourette's) isn't strictly biological.
       | 
       | It seems this was done through Nancy Salzman's application of the
       | NLP voodoo she had used as a chronic pain therapist, and possibly
       | boosted by immense pressure to not tic or else be seen as both a
       | failure and a PR danger to the cult. However it was done, it was
       | clearly successful. Are there any studies about "actual" (non-
       | internet video related) Tourette's patients transmitting tics to
       | each other?
       | 
       | https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/overthinking-tv/20...
        
       | lo_zamoyski wrote:
       | "they can be viewed as the 21st century expression of a culture-
       | bound stress reaction of our post-modern society emphasizing the
       | uniqueness of individuals and valuing their alleged
       | exceptionality, thus promoting attention-seeking behaviours and
       | aggravating the permanent identity crisis of modern man."
       | 
       | There is a tendency to reify aberrations and disorders and to
       | identify with them because it gives you another way of attaining
       | a _feeling_ of (false)  "uniqueness" and exceptionality, or a way
       | of trying to manipulate people into showing you "compassion" or
       | pity. It's a disease of our age. "The spectrum" seems to be a
       | popular example. These are afflictions, not identities. They're
       | nothing to be proud of when you have them, _if_ you have them,
       | nor are they things to be desired.
       | 
       | There may also be passive-aggressive motives. Personal autonomy
       | and the absolute sovereignty of the individual and his desires
       | are a superordinate value today. We chafe under any perceived
       | constraint or restraint on our desires. What do some people do
       | when they don't want to follow some rule they should, but fear
       | opposing that rule overtly? They rebel through small, passive-
       | aggressive ways. Imagine now you are faced with the internalized
       | emotional compulsion or fear to behave or not behave a certain
       | way that you don't want to submit to, but fear opposing or
       | ignoring for whatever reason. Simulating tics could be an
       | interior rebellion against that undesired compulsion. Repeat
       | something often enough, and it becomes a habit.
       | 
       | (Curiously, I would attribute the very cause of this inner
       | struggle to our disordered attitude toward desire and appetite in
       | the first place where the tail is essentially wagging the dog.
       | Putting reason before desire and submitting to the truth
       | liberates a person from the capricious tyranny of appetite.)
        
       | mfrankpb wrote:
       | Previously discussed here:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28302725 (August 2021)
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Thanks! I missed that. Macroexpanded:
         | 
         |  _It's not Tourette's but a new type of mass sociogenic
         | illness_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28302725 - Aug
         | 2021 (80 comments)
        
       | monkeydreams wrote:
       | While this article and many like it suggest a sudden rise in
       | cases due to a 2021 Youtube influencer, this was already
       | spreading in 2020. Girls in my daughter's social network were
       | displaying tic behaviour in the months after the first major
       | lockdowns.
        
       | air7 wrote:
       | This reminded me of the Dancing Plague[0] that happened in
       | medieval Europe.
       | 
       | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_mania
        
         | boringg wrote:
         | Is this real? That's bananas.
        
         | CadmiumYellow wrote:
         | Wow I thought "choreomania" was just the name of a Florence and
         | the Machine song...this is crazy...
        
       | fullstackchris wrote:
       | I just experienced this today; I was walking down the street and
       | a teenager walking by himself abruptly made this sharp random
       | shrieking sound to no one in particular and then kept walking
       | along.
       | 
       | Could he actually have Tourette's by traditional clinical
       | definition? Certainly. But I'm inclined to beleive that it has
       | much more to do with this article's definition and how f***d the
       | youth are against the whole social media scene today.
        
         | filoleg wrote:
         | Could be many reasons, who knows. Maybe they were looking at
         | something on their phone that evoked their reaction, maybe they
         | heard something in their earphones, maybe they suddenly saw a
         | bird nearby that scared them, or maybe they just remembered
         | something which ended up causing it.
         | 
         | The latter happens to me occasionally, and I am fairly certain
         | it has nothing to do with Tourette's. Usually it is me walking
         | somewhere, then remembering something I forgot that i needed to
         | do or having some realization, and I just end up going "oh
         | fuck" or "ooooh". Not loudly like a yell, but definitely
         | audible to someone within a 5-10 feet range.
         | 
         | It could also be what you are suspecting as well, but without
         | actually talking to the person, there is quite literally no way
         | to know. So imo it is a rather pointless exercise.
        
         | emptysea wrote:
         | I'm guessing they're looking for a reaction. Similar to people
         | driving by and yelling out the window
        
         | Centigonal wrote:
         | maybe he was going through something
        
       | snorkel wrote:
       | Sounds like the mania over Pokemon flashing induced seizures
        
       | werdnapk wrote:
       | When I was in high school, one of the "popular" kids used to talk
       | a bit odd on purpose and sure, it generated a bit of a chuckle at
       | first, but he kept doing it and a lot of kids also adopted a
       | similar vocal tic to seem like they were part of the cool group
       | as well. Monkey see, monkey do.
        
         | out-of-ideas wrote:
         | it sounds similar to how catch-phrases like simpsons and other
         | shows become common things for kids to adopt and (over)use. i'd
         | say it's hard to break patterns developed when young and seems
         | to be what others around you are doing... downward spiral?
        
         | toyg wrote:
         | Stop trying to make tourette happen! It's NOT GONNA HAPPEN!
        
         | adolph wrote:
         | _The Mid-Atlantic accent, or Transatlantic accent, is a
         | consciously learned accent of English, fashionably used by the
         | late 19th-century and early 20th-century American upper class
         | and entertainment industry, which blended together features
         | regarded as the most prestigious from both American and British
         | English (specifically Received Pronunciation). It is not a
         | native or regional accent; rather, according to voice and drama
         | professor Dudley Knight, "its earliest advocates bragged that
         | its chief quality was that no Americans actually spoke it
         | unless educated to do so". The accent was embraced in private
         | independent preparatory schools, especially by members of the
         | American Northeastern upper class, as well as in schools for
         | film and stage acting, with its overall use sharply declining
         | after the Second World War._
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic_accent
        
           | extragood wrote:
           | Frasier, the TV character played by Kelsey Grammer, uses an
           | exaggerated Mid-Atlantic accent.
        
           | a9h74j wrote:
           | Not Mid-Atlantic, but I've heard that one way to acquire a
           | "standard" Mid-Western US accent is to speak along with a
           | trained speaker, such as a particular newscaster. And "You
           | are supposed to stop before sounding just like that person."
        
         | twobitshifter wrote:
         | I worked with a couple of college classmates, who when they
         | were taking to each other would use this hurry up to stop type
         | of speech pattern. A few really quick words, then a pause, and
         | a few more words. For autistic people this is called
         | cluttering, but they talked to clients and others and didn't
         | talk that way, so I always wondered where it came from.
        
       | gtirloni wrote:
       | _> with considerable impact on health care systems and society as
       | a whole_
       | 
       | (X) Doubt
        
       | TechBro8615 wrote:
       | If you delete TikTok does the illness dissipate?
        
       | winReInstall wrote:
       | Imagine you start the same trend, but everyone tries for once to
       | contribute something science wise original to society, so the
       | problem is real, but the potential is greater.
       | 
       | Now comes the part, were advertisers try to create sociogenic
       | illnesses that spread theire product/brands information.
       | 
       | We can also skip directly to the part, were we mourn the youtfull
       | ideals of a idea, taken over by scammers.
        
         | Sebb767 wrote:
         | > Imagine you start the same trend, but everyone tries for once
         | to contribute something science wise original to society, so
         | the problem is real, but the potential is greater.
         | 
         | I know you aren't totally serious, but this won't work, most
         | likely. The "advantage" of having a tick like that is not just
         | that it gives you attention, it's something absolutely low-
         | effort and instant gratification. Contributing to science is
         | anything but. Plus, even if individuals tried to do so, it's
         | quite easy to miss newest research or fall for a fallacy, which
         | will make for a net-negative contribution if you are not
         | careful.
        
         | dpc050505 wrote:
         | >were advertisers try to create sociogenic illnesses that
         | spread theire product/brands information.
         | 
         | I can think of a lot of advertising jingles that work this way.
        
           | riskable wrote:
           | Plop plop         Fizz fizz         Oh how like Tourette's it
           | is
        
         | secondcoming wrote:
         | There was the alcohol drinks company's WASSSUP ad campaign that
         | ruined everyone's life for a while.
        
           | mcphage wrote:
           | That still lives rent-free in my head, and comes out every
           | once in a while.
        
         | dejj wrote:
         | Link this with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and
         | receive prescribed brand candy/placebos for saying "Arr!" too
         | much. Also prosthetics or an assistance bird.
        
       | theGnuMe wrote:
       | There's a new Netflix series called Hot Skull around this theme.
       | I haven't watched it yet but it looks like the premise is that a
       | word virus infects people and they start talking gibberish.
        
         | kridsdale1 wrote:
         | Hey Hiro. You want to try some Snow Crash?
        
           | gnu8 wrote:
           | Does it fuck up your brain, or your computer?
        
       | _nalply wrote:
       | Somewhere I already read about that. It's a fad. A youtuber shows
       | Tourette's symptoms and people copy them. Perhaps it's like
       | stimming. And you can't stop fads and stimming. We see that some
       | people are annoyed. (shrugs)
        
         | mcv wrote:
         | > And you can't stop fads and stimming.
         | 
         | But if they claim it's a disease, and it's clearly spreading
         | through social media, then the obvious measure to stop it from
         | spreading, is to block the channels through which it's
         | spreading.
        
         | lakomen wrote:
         | You copy what's fun to you. That said, POMMES!
        
         | bowsamic wrote:
         | But when a fad becomes destructive to someone's life to the
         | point where they can't voluntarily stop it and seek
         | professional treatment for it, it becomes an illness and is
         | worth investigating.
         | 
         | > (shrugs)
         | 
         | Those affected by it don't seem to be able to shrug it off.
         | It's having a negative effect on their quality of life
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | nailer wrote:
       | Similarly: https://brightonjournal.co.uk/debate-gender-report-
       | brighton-...
        
       | frereubu wrote:
       | For those who think this is "just" a fad, there are some
       | descriptions of the emotional harm that that it can cause in this
       | article from February:
       | https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/02/social-med...
       | The semantics of "mass sociogenic illness" aside, there do seem
       | to be damaging real-world consequences.
        
       | informalo wrote:
       | For anyone looking to be infected by this mass sociogenic
       | illness, here is his most popular video:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLhaYHJTXmI
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | infradig wrote:
       | I've read this before on HN, even some comments. Getting a weird
       | deja-vu vibe.
        
       | gadders wrote:
       | I don't think this is the only mass sociogenic illness affecting
       | young girls currently....
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | > the only mass sociogenic illness affecting young girls
         | 
         | Is it a mass illness, or a semi-rational reaction to the
         | prospect of facing life as a female in our society?
        
         | mathgeek wrote:
         | Care to elaborate? As written, your comment can come off as
         | rather ageist/sexist, which is a shame if you meant a specific
         | trend.
        
           | Veen wrote:
           | I imagine many people have a specific phenomenon in mind
           | which they will avoid mentioning because it's considered
           | impolite and impolitic.
        
             | maxbond wrote:
             | Either it is a real issue, in which case, we should have a
             | discussion about it.
             | 
             | Or it is not a real issue, in which case, it is not worth
             | vagueposting about.
             | 
             | Taking the most charitable interpretation, this creates
             | cover for dog whistling while not adding to the
             | conversation.
             | 
             | The other possibility is that it _is_ dog whistling in
             | order to promote bigotry.
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | So either discuss it directly and be a bigot, talk around
               | it and be a bigot, or silence all discussion about it and
               | be a hero.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | There's no heroes and no villains here, but if someone
               | has got something bigoted to say, then they should
               | dispose of their waste or surrender the restroom. It
               | doesn't make it any more or less bigoted to be
               | circumspect, it only makes it difficulty to have a proper
               | discussion. If they believe what they have to say isn't
               | bigoted, they should take courage in their convictions
               | and speak their mind. If they're punished in a way that's
               | unfair, then that's something with bringing to the
               | community's attention. If they don't actually have
               | confidence in their convictions, maybe their ideas need
               | some more time to develop before they're comfortable
               | sharing them (and maybe the reason they're uncomfortable
               | is that there's a problem).
               | 
               | I'm not trying to silence anyone, when people vaguepost,
               | clearly there's something on their mind, and I'm inviting
               | them to express it.
               | 
               | Do you think that's an unfair position for me to take?
               | What I see is that they did say what was on their mind,
               | we had a substantive discussion, no one got flagged, no
               | one got banned, their comment isn't even gray. The
               | reports of HN being hostile to this discussion are
               | greatly overstated.
        
           | gadders wrote:
           | Fuck it, I'll take the karma hit. I am of course referring to
           | young girls identifying as male/non-binary.
           | 
           | I'm sure some of the cases are genuine, but not all. And I'm
           | not saying these girls aren't troubled or have other things
           | going on that they need help with.
        
             | bjelkeman-again wrote:
             | I think that characterising once thoughts around once
             | gender as a social illness is deeply disrespectful against
             | those individuals.
        
             | Eumenes wrote:
             | It is mass psychosis at this stage. Friend is a teacher in
             | a very wealthy suburban area and 50%+ of the class
             | identifies as non-binary (apparently). We're supposed to
             | believe this is organic and totally normal?
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | Non-binary simply mean that you do not identify with the
               | two currently accepted gender identity or that you do not
               | perceive gender as a binary system but as a spectrum.
               | That's it. It does not mean that the person suffers from
               | gender dysphoria or that they want to transition. For
               | many, it's simply a way to describe their existing social
               | behavior. It is also an umbrella word that houses many
               | other identies.
               | 
               | I'd also challenge the "50%" number you advance.
               | 
               | Canada asked the question in last year's census and it
               | was under 1%. 50% would be enormous.
               | 
               | "Younger generations had larger shares of those who were
               | transgender or non-binary. The proportions of transgender
               | and non-binary people were three to seven times higher
               | for Generation Z (0.79%) and millennials (0.51%) than for
               | Generation X (0.19%), baby boomers (0.15%) and the
               | Interwar and Greatest Generations (0.12%).
               | 
               | Together, over 1 in 6 non-binary people described their
               | gender as "fluid" (7.3%), "agender" (5.1%) or "queer"
               | (4.1%). Other responses included "gender neutral" (2.9%),
               | "Two-Spirit" (2.2%), "neither man nor woman" (1.3%) and
               | "gender-nonconforming" (1.1%)."
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | "Non-binary" is commonly described as a trans identity,
               | and the word "trans" is etymologically related to
               | "transition". If there really was nothing else to it than
               | the truism that "gender is not merely a binary system but
               | a spectrum", no one would be talking about non-binary as
               | an identity of its own - since this has been a consensus
               | POV for decades.
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | It is not tran[sition]gender. It is the "trans-" Latin
               | prefix meaning "across", "beyond" or "on the other side
               | of" + gender.
               | 
               | In other words, people who moved on from the gender
               | assigned to them at birth.
               | 
               | Some non-binary people identify as transgender but not
               | all of them do. Just like non-binary is both an umbrella
               | term and a spicific gender identity, transgender is both
               | an umbrella term and a specific gender identity. You'll
               | often see the shorthand "trans*" to describe the umbrella
               | term and the shorthand "enby" to describe the specific
               | gender identity.
               | 
               | Examples of clear gender identities that are not used as
               | umbrella terms are: trans women, trans men, genderfluid,
               | agender, demigirl, etc.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > In other words, people who moved on from the gender
               | assigned to them at birth.
               | 
               | Yes, and the Latin word transeo (nominal form transitio -
               | English: transition) means exactly to "go on across", "go
               | beyond". Trans ("across, beyond") + eo, it ("I go,
               | he/she/it goes") + tio (- English: "-tion"). It's a
               | distinction without a difference.
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | My point is that they share a source and are siblings,
               | but one is not the parent of the other. Being transgender
               | is not about the medical or social transition, it is
               | about how the person identifies.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > it is about how the person identifies.
               | 
               | What does it mean to "identify" with a claim about what
               | society is like - namely that "binary" gender might be
               | more of a spectrum, with weird liminal stages in-between?
               | You've said that this is what "non-binary" is about. How
               | does this even begin to square with all those other
               | notions about gender identity being something exceedingly
               | clearcut, that someone can base major life decisions on?
        
               | Eumenes wrote:
               | That 50% number is anecdotal, from a friend whose a
               | teacher in a middle school (norther Virginia) ... My
               | guess is 100% of these children are on Tiktok/Snapchat,
               | ingesting whatever content is being fed to their
               | impressionable minds. Its certainly an internet driven
               | phenomenon.
        
               | Karawebnetwork wrote:
               | > That 50% number is anecdotal
               | 
               | Then it is meaningless and hazardous to build an opinion
               | upon it.
               | 
               | > My guess is 100% of these children are on
               | Tiktok/Snapchat
               | 
               | TikTok usage is at 32.2% for children aged 10-19.
               | Snapchat usage is at 59% for children aged 13-24. That
               | would be unlikely. Those two platforms also share little
               | in term of features and functionality. How are they
               | relevant here and why single them out?
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | It's pretty easily explained, they think it's cool to say
               | they are nonbinary, or pansexual, or genderfluid, or
               | something along those lines. One popular/alpha kid says
               | it and soon their entire clique gloms on. Adding to the
               | allure for teens is that some adults find this shocking.
               | They are not really committing to anything, and they know
               | it. They're doing it for social karma. Teens have done
               | this kind of thing forever.
        
             | astura wrote:
             | You appear to confuse sociogenic illness with faking or
             | being otherwise "non-genuine."
             | 
             | This is not true. Sociogenic illness, including the one the
             | article is about, are very real to those affected. The
             | symptoms are real and genuine.
        
               | gadders wrote:
               | I think the symptoms they have are very real to them. I
               | just don't think that the cure is more likely to be
               | psychological then surgical.
        
             | maxbond wrote:
             | I appreciate your being willing to speak your mind without
             | hiding behind vaguery. We can risk a karma hit together.
             | 
             | You are referring to a myth called "Rapid-Onset Gender
             | Dysphoria," which has been debunked. Gender identity is not
             | a socially transmitted pathology. I don't believe you meant
             | this in a hateful way, but let me explain what the problem
             | is with this idea. This is sophistry about how LGBTQ people
             | should remain in the closet, or they'll "infect" people,
             | and the evidence is that as we tolerate LGBTQ people more,
             | more of them come out of the closet. It's a reversal of
             | cause and effect, from the same school as "discussing the
             | history of racism is racist".
        
               | throwaway27727 wrote:
               | > which has been debunked
               | 
               | That is, unfortunately, not an argument. To apply your
               | line of thinking to the OP, would you say that "children
               | displaying Tourette's symptoms from watching a YouTuber
               | is a reversal of cause and effect"? The OP does not make
               | that conclusion, and most of this comment section accepts
               | that as well. I, like GP, would be interested to hear how
               | this would be reconciled.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | Highlighting a comment that does a better job:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33879534
               | 
               | This is a valid criticism. What you have highlighted is a
               | shortcoming in my ability to elucidate this topic.
               | 
               | My comment is more an invitation to explore the argument
               | yourself. This isn't a formal debate where I've shown up
               | prepared with notes, I didn't know I'd be speaking about
               | this topic today. If I tell you what I know, you can
               | think about whether it makes sense to you, and you can
               | use extract search terms to research and learn more. You
               | don't have to take my word for anything, but I don't have
               | to remember how I learned something to participate in a
               | casual forum conversation either.
               | 
               | That being said, I am starting to make an effort to
               | catalog resources and be able to share them, because I do
               | think it makes my comments better, but this is a work in
               | progress. C'est la vie.
               | 
               | As to how this argument relates to the Tourettes-like
               | symptoms discussed in the article, these are simply
               | different phenomena. It's reasonable to observe this
               | phenomenon and ask, "Does this apply to other
               | phenomena?", and in the case of the increasing number of
               | open trans people in our society, I'm telling you the
               | answer is "no" and doing my best to explain why.
        
               | joenot443 wrote:
               | Has ROGD been absolutely debunked? Last I checked it was
               | still pretty debated, I see discussions about it all the
               | time still. When I search for papers I see the original
               | [1], criticisms [2], and a correction issued by the
               | original authors [3] which holds to most of their
               | starting claims.
               | 
               | Obviously being cis and childless I don't have a horse in
               | this race, but it seems to me that there's still a fair
               | amount of disagreement in the field, and the ROGD's
               | existence or non-existence isn't really settled. The
               | result found by the original paper may be unpopular, but
               | it's bad science to hide it away solely for that reason.
               | 
               | [1] https://rogd.fi/wp-
               | content/uploads/2021/10/pone.0214157.s001... [2] https://
               | journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/003802612093469...
               | [3] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
               | journal...
        
               | mcv wrote:
               | This is an issue I'm somewhat concerned about.
               | 
               | Let's first be clear that gender dysphoria is a real
               | thing, and transitioning has been a very real solution
               | for many people, and has helped people from depression,
               | possibly suicidal, to a much happier state, and that's
               | great. It's vital we don't lose that.
               | 
               | At the same time, it's been politicised; there's a lot of
               | conservative pushback claiming this isn't real, leading
               | to resistance against this pushback, where I wonder if
               | some people may sympathise with transgender people to the
               | point that they also identify as transgender despite a
               | lack of gender dysphoria, and that might create a fad
               | that might cause more people to transition and later
               | regret it.
               | 
               | Gender dysphoria is a serious medical issue, and should
               | not be a fad or a cultural or political issue.
               | Transitioning is effective treatment, and not some fun
               | thing to do like getting a tattoo, nor should it be
               | considered an assault on anyone's cultural, religious or
               | political beliefs.
               | 
               | And if it really is happening more to girls than boys,
               | maybe consider if cultural sexism might cause some women
               | to not want to identify as such anymore. Especially in
               | the face of issues like rape, bodily autonomy, but also
               | acceptable jobs and behaviours. Maybe we should be more
               | tolerant of cross-dressing.
        
               | aliqot wrote:
               | its much more important to young girls to be accepted
               | socially than it is to boys.
        
               | LawTalkingGuy wrote:
               | > Let's first be clear that gender dysphoria is a real
               | thing
               | 
               | To be clear, the pain someone is feeling is real but the
               | "reality" of a condition is a bit of an unclear concept.
               | We can't really address this until we try to control for
               | the gendered expectations of the sufferer, their
               | surroundings, and any observers. Suzie Green of Mermaids
               | has said that some of their motivation in transing their
               | son as a toddler was his father's discomfort with some of
               | the toys he was playing with and the homosexual
               | connotations. Likely if the boy had tolerant and unbiased
               | parents he'd be happy as a man, and thus it's unlikely he
               | truly had "gender dysphoria" unless you count whatever
               | his parents conditioned into him.
               | 
               | > and transitioning has been a very real solution for
               | many people
               | 
               | Again, hard to say given that the decision probably was
               | not made in isolation from heavily gendered expectations.
               | There's reason to think that removing those expectations
               | would have made them at least as happy, if not more.
               | 
               | > Transitioning is [...] treatment, and not [...] an
               | assault on anyone's cultural, religious or political
               | beliefs.
               | 
               | For an adult it's a personal choice and we should have
               | pretty wide latitude in things that only impact us. It
               | becomes a societal and political issue when it's brought
               | into schools, or when males are given access to women's
               | spaces and opportunities.
               | 
               | > And if it really is happening more to girls than boys,
               | maybe consider if cultural sexism might cause some women
               | to not want to identify as such anymore. Especially in
               | the face of issues like rape, bodily autonomy, but also
               | acceptable jobs and behaviours. Maybe we should be more
               | tolerant of cross-dressing.
               | 
               | Errr, that's the wrong takeaway. If a woman wasn't going
               | to get promoted then her putting on pants won't help, and
               | if she was going to get abused it wouldn't trick her
               | attacker. We should work to remove or mitigate those
               | problems so she doesn't feel the need to hide her true
               | self.
               | 
               | If a woman is thought to be able to avoid rape by
               | dressing like a man and/or having surgeries to reduce her
               | sexual attractiveness then women will be thought to be
               | asking for it ("How was she dressed? Did she still have
               | her breasts?") for not doing those things.
        
               | gadders wrote:
               | Debunked by whom? Happy to read a paper or two.
               | 
               | I don't think at all that LGBTQ people "infect" people -
               | that is your choice of words, not mine.
               | 
               | But it seems strange to think that tourettes, anorexia,
               | self-harming and even suicide can be socially transmitted
               | but for this one specific condition (for which there is
               | no medical test) it's impossible and has never happened.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | I understand these are not the words you used, or
               | necessarily ideas you hold; what I am describing is the
               | role it plays in the wider rhetorical space. I should
               | have made that more clear, it does look like I was
               | calling you out for that. I'll see if I can edit it in a
               | better way.
               | 
               | Recommending literature is a skill I am still working on;
               | I know things about this or that, but I didn't keep a
               | record of how I learned them, and it's been months or
               | years now. The Wikipedia article has discussion of
               | criticism which may be a good place to start. If you're
               | interested in YouTube videos, there is a large community
               | of trans people who discuss their experiences in the form
               | of video essays. ContraPoints and Philosophy Tube are
               | some of the best known; you may or may not appreciate
               | their politics, that's not what I'm suggesting, but they
               | have a lot of content about what it's like to be a trans
               | person, why they're trans, how they became trans, etc.
               | that's just very difficult information to come by any
               | other way.
               | 
               | I appreciate your good faith and curious engagement with
               | me.
        
               | Kye wrote:
               | It's honestly enough to remember and point out the whole
               | concept is based on a study that only polled parents who
               | aren't supportive of their trans kids. Anyone with a
               | shred of genuine interest in being fair and accurate
               | should be able to see right through the study. It's so
               | bad that even prominent transphobes don't seem to talk
               | about it anymore.
        
               | vinegarden wrote:
               | ROGD is the term given to the phenomenon of teenagers
               | with no history of gender dysphoria suddenly announcing a
               | transgender identity, typically after spending massive
               | amounts of time online, and often after a friend has
               | announced that they are trans. Who would be better placed
               | to notice this set of circumstances than their parents?
        
       | LeonTheremin wrote:
       | >Stop that!
       | 
       | Send them to a submarine trip undersea. If the symptoms disappear
       | it is because they were the result of outside electromagnetic
       | interference.
       | 
       | Not a medical problem, a criminal problem: computer hacking all
       | the way, the human body, a computer, is the victim.
        
       | hanoz wrote:
       | Wow. So now that I know that mass sociogenic illness is a thing,
       | where do I draw the line in applying that label?
        
         | efkiel wrote:
         | Obviously <OUTGROUP_IDEOLOGY> always was, and always will be a
         | mass sociogenic illness.
        
           | snapcaster wrote:
           | I do wish <OUTGROUP_IDEOLOGY_MEMBERS> could just be rational
           | for once and stop falling for demagogues and pseudoscience
        
         | lzaaz wrote:
        
           | dusted wrote:
           | I agree with your examples, though they cannot be said..
           | Hopefully in a saner future, it becomes possible to have a
           | debate about that again.
        
           | maxbond wrote:
           | If it's not worth saying, it's not worth vagueposting about
           | either.
        
             | lzaaz wrote:
             | It's worth saying but if I say it the comment gets flagged
             | and no one gets to read it.
        
               | rjbwork wrote:
               | I read flagged and dead comments. Vagueposting is now
               | getting you flagged and deaded anyway.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | I always read flagged comments, and I vouch for them when
               | I feel they've been unfairly flagged (or when they're
               | from banned accounts that are automatically flagged, but
               | the comment is unobjectionable).
               | 
               | This is however a tacit admission that what you have to
               | say is against the guidelines of this site and that, were
               | you to let it compete in the market place of ideas, it
               | would be fail completely.
        
               | lzaaz wrote:
               | The fact that an opinion is censored by the means of
               | flagging means that it doesn't have a chance to compete
               | in the "marketplace of ideas".
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | No, that is the idea being assigned a negative value.
        
               | lzaaz wrote:
               | If an idea goes against the guidelines of a website that
               | doesn't mean it has a negative value, especially if users
               | aren't allowed to interact with it at all.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | They did interact with it. They flagged it. People
               | generally don't consult the site's guidelines when
               | flagging, but their own set of values.
        
               | throwaway27727 wrote:
               | Not all scientific discussion is pleasant to hear, but it
               | would be worth discussing, even if flagged and down
               | voted, rather than "We were always at war with Eurasia".
        
             | christophilus wrote:
             | If it's not worth vagueposting about, it's worth tweeting
             | and TikToking about.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | You are saying, because you are uncomfortable discussing
               | it, no one should discuss it? Feel free to correct me if
               | I'm misreading you, it sounds like you're more or less
               | saying, "things I don't like should go away and stop
               | existing."
        
       | reilly3000 wrote:
       | This is alarmist BS. Facebook group fodder. "Humans have working
       | mirror neurons" could have been the headline.
       | 
       | All of you futurists who have slipped down the slope are worried
       | about media spreading "sociogenic illness". Of course media is
       | powerful. It always has been. There has been about 75 years of
       | fears and schemes about using TV to mass hypnotize its watchers.
       | The same with radio before it.
       | 
       | What is happening is mass unstructured clustering by social
       | algos, specifically TikTok. Historically content and ad
       | algorithms have focused on contextual relevance with structured
       | categories. Graphs have extended that to included social context.
       | TikTok has novel input parameters about user behavior. There have
       | been many reports that this unstructured clustering is surfacing
       | niche medical diagnoses regularly.
       | 
       | A lot of neurodivergent traits have historically been under
       | diagnosed for the same goddamn ignorance as OP's piece: "it's
       | just attention seeking". This type of dismissal by parents,
       | teachers, and doctors alike have lead to millions of people
       | leading shorter, harder lives. ADHD, Autism, Tourette's, Bipolar,
       | schizophrenia, etc are present in larger numbers than are
       | diagnosed. Often time these lifelong genetic differences lead to
       | 10x+ higher suicide rates, inability to sustain work, and myriad
       | health issues. It's really common that mental health issues that
       | don't result in property damage just get ignored, downplayed, or
       | under treated even if acknowledged.
       | 
       | I was diagnosed with ADHD at age 29. Having that information
       | combined with medication, therapy, and exercise has changed my
       | life for the better dramatically. If TikTok was the surface where
       | I discovered that, I would have likely been dismissed or even
       | openly mocked by my doctors, and continued with a life of
       | suffering or worse.
       | 
       | By the way, it seems people cited in the article are experiencing
       | a form of Tourette's syndrome that is a typical neurological
       | trait associated with other pathology. Echolalia has far less
       | cultural awareness, but accurate describes the behavior:
       | "Echolalia is not only associated with Autism, but also with
       | several other conditions, including congenital blindness,
       | intellectual disability, developmental delay, language delay,
       | Tourette's syndrome, schizophrenia and others." it's not just
       | swear words like on TV. My child does this. What happened to
       | start as a YouTube ad for "Raid Shadow Legends" turned into a
       | joke punchline, turned into a phrase that they cannot stop
       | themselves from saying compulsively at odd times, after multiple
       | years. It's sub-clinical by itself, but is consistent with the
       | diagnosis they do have.
       | 
       | This article is red meat, BS fear bait at best, dangerous at
       | worst. To the extent content like this actually promotes
       | diagnosis denial, it's complicit in very literal harm of patients
       | and those around them.
        
         | denton-scratch wrote:
         | > these lifelong genetic differences
         | 
         | I'm not aware of convincing evidence that bipolar and
         | schizophrenia are of genetic origin (other than that
         | schizophrenia sometimes runs in families). There are serious
         | people that insist that they originate in childhood trauma. And
         | since childhood trauma also sometimes runs in families, family
         | histories of schizophrenia aren't that convincing either.
        
           | waterhouse wrote:
           | Wiki says "Genetic factors account for about 70-90% of the
           | risk of developing bipolar disorder."
           | https://www.blackdoginstitute.org.au/resources-
           | support/bipol... says 80%, and says "If one parent has
           | bipolar disorder, there's a 10% chance that their child will
           | develop the illness. / If both parents have bipolar disorder,
           | the likelihood of their child developing bipolar disorder
           | rises to 40%."
           | 
           | One of the cited papers is "Family, twin, and adoption
           | studies of bipolar disorder". Link that gives only the
           | abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14601036/
           | 
           | I haven't dug into the paper yet, but there's a starting
           | point.
           | 
           | Edit: The paper says "More recent (and rigorous) studies that
           | have compared concordance rates specifically of bipolar
           | disorder among MZ [monozygotic] and DZ [dizygotic] twin pairs
           | are summarized in table 2." The table shows four studies that
           | gave concordances of 0.00-0.08 for dizygotic twins, and
           | 0.36-0.75 for monozygotic twins.
        
       | pjc50 wrote:
       | (content warning)
       | 
       | It's not commonly discussed, but suicide seems to be a
       | "sociogenic illness" in that reporting on suicides as such can
       | cause more suicides. You may have noticed this in the reporting
       | on celebrity deaths; a young person who "dies suddenly" may be
       | suicide, but news reports will tend to avoid saying that out of
       | concern for the sociogenic effects.
        
         | screye wrote:
         | I have anecdotally noticed this too.
         | 
         | My university went 6 years without a suicide, and then had 3
         | highly publicized suicides over the year. They then put in a
         | lot of effort to bury it as much as possible, students went
         | home for the summer, and the university had a few suicide-free
         | years right after
        
           | abfan1127 wrote:
           | those suicides could also be Black Swan events, very rare,
           | nothing done actually did anything. But human behavior is
           | weird, so who knows.
        
             | screye wrote:
             | Unfortunately I knew 2/3, and it was well known to be due
             | to the risk of failing a course. Now the university makes
             | sure that no-one knows if there was suicide note and the
             | details of they committed suicide.
             | 
             | The eerie thing was the fact that they all killed
             | themselves in exactly the same way. (hanging off a the
             | ceiling)
             | 
             | But ofc, the plural of anecdotes is not data. There I agree
             | with you.
        
         | Loughla wrote:
         | >It's not commonly discussed,
         | 
         | It absolutely is commonly discussed in mental health circles.
         | Suicides cluster is a common theme among health experts. When
         | you see one suicide among a target population (youth for
         | example), you will commonly see multiples.
         | 
         | https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/resources/suicide-clusters.html
        
         | walkhour wrote:
         | For the reason you discuss you should delete your comment.
         | Airplanes crashes rise when the media discusses these topics:
         | https://www.jstor.org/stable/1746810.
        
           | elil17 wrote:
           | It's not clear to me that discussing the effect causes the
           | effect. It's an effect that's been specifically documented in
           | response to media coverage of suicide. The consensus from
           | suicide prevention orgs seems to be that compassionate,
           | interpersonal discussions about suicide prevention are
           | probably helpful. Not sure if that's backed by research.
        
           | civopsec wrote:
           | Can't delete something that has been replied to.
        
         | Karawebnetwork wrote:
         | This comes to mind: "Association Between the Release of
         | Netflix's 13 Reasons Why and Suicide Rates in the United
         | States"
         | 
         | Relevant studies:
         | https://www.jaacap.org/article/S0890-8567(19)30288-6/fulltex...
         | https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
        
         | munificent wrote:
         | The "Werther effect" is the name for this:
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide
        
       | guywithahat wrote:
       | hot take: the definition of tourette's will soon be changed to
       | include this "sociogenic illness" to avoid offending those who
       | develop tics from watching online videos. Otherwise you'll be
       | implicitly offending those with it as being less legitimate
       | (which they are, but that's besides the point)
        
       | Ekaros wrote:
       | Is this what Dawkins originally meant by a meme?
        
       | ccity88 wrote:
       | What's interesting to me is that if we're able to accept the idea
       | that mass social media-induced illness can be developed just by
       | virtue of video watching TikTok or YouTube, then this opens new
       | doors to examining the behaviour of other illnesses such as
       | gender dysphoria that are statistically over represented. This is
       | probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because nobody wants
       | to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want to be another
       | gender. But I think there's some interesting parallels to be
       | observed here, and discounting that based on "moral virtue" or
       | "denying hate speech" or whatever i'll be attacked with is just
       | moving the target.
        
         | agileAlligator wrote:
        
         | brnt wrote:
         | Recently read the story of a detransitioner and the statistic
         | that about a third falls of the radar (and due missing their
         | hormones, almost certainly are unhappy about the treatment).
         | Social media are implicated in the spread of these ideas (all
         | ideas), and the detransitioner pleaded for better info from
         | professionals and an end to doctor neutrality for underage
         | trans people.
         | 
         | Changed my mind a bit.
        
           | somedude895 wrote:
           | Could be part of the Tavistock Center[0] story?
           | 
           | The state of affairs around transsexuality is horrifying.
           | Critical discussion is basically not allowed on moral grounds
           | and most people who "study" the topic (eg gender studies),
           | care for said patients (eg gender clinics), etc are the same
           | people who already adhere to that no-criticism-allowed
           | agenda.
           | 
           | [0] https://news.sky.com/story/amp/nhs-gender-clinic-the-
           | tavisto...
        
           | DarkWiiPlayer wrote:
           | Less than 1%. That's the number of people who detransition
           | simply because they didn't feel it was the right thing for
           | them.
           | 
           | Of the less than 2% of detransitioners overall, the vast
           | majority names reasons like social pressure, transitioning
           | being too difficult, etc.
           | 
           | Dunno what numbers _you_ are talking about, but the ones I
           | know certainly underline gender dysphoria being a very real
           | thing and not some sort of  "social contagion", and my
           | personal experience definitely aligns with this as well: I
           | don't know a single trans person who seems to regret
           | transitioning, but a whole number of trans people who are
           | struggling with the constant hate they get, fuelled in part
           | by this sort of rhetoric.
           | 
           | And since the article in one of the replies mentioned puberty
           | blockers: They are 1. entirely reversible, 2. routinely
           | prescribed to cis children for other medical reasons and 3.
           | unlike these blockers, puberty is not reversible.
           | 
           | Can I change your mind, even if just a little bit? I don't
           | know; but if you really want to change your mind, start
           | looking closely into the "statistics" of the right. Their
           | misrepresentations are often absurdly superficial. It's all a
           | lie, and the parts that aren't, usually aren't that bad.
        
             | brnt wrote:
             | > Less than 1%. That's the number of people who
             | detransition simply because they didn't feel it was the
             | right thing for them.
             | 
             | About 1% who do so through the hospital procrdures. About a
             | third just stops showing up for followups and hormones.
             | According to the detransitioner, who falls into that
             | category, and has found a small community of similar
             | people, this is what's wrong with the statistic: it's
             | extremely important to not exclude the group that falls of
             | the radar. Since they're not getting hormones anymore, the
             | safest assumption is that they are stopping their
             | transition (because they are) or detransitioning.
             | 
             | A third is a very high amount.
             | 
             | This is the NL btw.
        
           | ReactiveJelly wrote:
           | idk I got a stapled packet of info from my provider and the
           | effects are listed on Wikipedia these days for the stuff I'm
           | on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminizing_hormone_therapy#
           | Eff...
           | 
           | It's a tradeoff. At least we can all agree that adults have
           | the right to transition under an Informed Consent model.
           | Countries like the UK, without IC, are hellholes for trans
           | medical care. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1eWIshUzr8
        
             | brnt wrote:
             | This is in the NL. Yes, they got a pile of folders, but in
             | retrospect they would have wanted psychiatric care, because
             | these issues were not treated and instead channelled into
             | gender disphoria.
        
         | djexjms wrote:
         | My partner of the last six years is trans. Your post doesn't
         | strike me as hate speech, but what Hacker News commenters seem
         | not to understand is that making overly general statements
         | about entire groups of people can often lead to an
         | oversimplified view of the situation (see what I did there).
         | 
         | Let's start with the assumption that people can and do learn to
         | "want" to be a particular gender. I am not an anthropologist,
         | but I feel like this is a pretty uncontroversial take, and is
         | the mechanism for how cis-gendered people learn to follow the
         | gender norms of the culture they find themselves in. This is
         | the key difference between gender and sex. Gender norms seem to
         | be a cultural universal, but the form those norms take is
         | dependent on time and place.
         | 
         | What this means is that in any society there are two sets of
         | behavioral norms, one for perceived men, and one for perceived
         | women. If a person in this society has a strong preference
         | about which set of norms they prefer, and if the set of norms
         | they prefer doesn't line up with their sex, you have the
         | potential for that person to identify with the other gender.
         | The term "transgender" is new, but behaviors associated with
         | the term go back as far as you care to look.
         | 
         | So you have this potential tension where a person might prefer
         | the gender norms of the other sex, but you also have the fact
         | that questioning norms of any kind in a society is always
         | somewhat taboo. A few very dedicated people would live their
         | lives as the other gender. Many more probably would have liked
         | to if they were aware that it was an option, but were not (in
         | other words, even questioning a social norm can be difficult if
         | there isn't already public discussion about it).
         | 
         | So if the sudden perceived increase in trans people seems like
         | a sociogenic disease to you, I can see how you might think
         | that. I can also see how hurtful it is to many people to frame
         | it in those terms. If we take a closer look at the linked
         | paper, they hypothesize that one of the drivers of the
         | tourettes-like disease is attention seeking behavior. Are there
         | people who decide to transition ultimately because they believe
         | they will get more attention? I'm sure some do. But thinking
         | that is the motivation for most trans people is a very hurtful
         | overgeneralization and is unhelpful because it is just wrong.
         | The trans people that I am personally acquainted with don't
         | want more attention. They want less of it. If you even glance
         | at common discussion topics in trans discussion forums, you
         | will see that there is a lot of discussion about "passing".
         | Passing doesn't seem like attention-seeking behavior to me, it
         | seems like the exact opposite.
         | 
         | Does social media have no role to play in explaining the
         | increase in people who identify as trans? It probably does have
         | some role there. But its only accelerating and amplifying
         | trends that already existed. LGBT+ issues in general have been
         | getting less and less taboo to talk about for the last several
         | decades. The internet and communications technology more
         | generally is exposing people to more cultures and norms. My
         | hypothesis is that there were many preexisting people who were
         | unsatisfied with the gender roles that they were expected to
         | fulfill, and that growing acceptance and discussion of LGBT+
         | issues made them realize that there was no reason to keep
         | putting up with them anymore.
        
         | naasking wrote:
         | > then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other
         | illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over
         | represented
         | 
         | I don't think this is necessarily new. Anorexia seems to
         | increase proportionally to public awareness of anorexia. It's
         | not just that diagnosis actually improves, it literally appears
         | to be a causal connection, as in, hospitalizations for health
         | problems due to undereating increase dramatically after public
         | awareness about anorexia increases in response to media
         | coverage or public awareness campaigns. Pretty wild.
         | 
         | This was discussed in the book "Crazy Like Us: The
         | Globalization of the American Psyche".
        
         | mnsc wrote:
         | Since there is a school of thought that gender to a great
         | extent is socially learned behaviour the idea that you by
         | learning more about gender transgression would "create" a
         | desire that "I would be more comfortable in 'that gender' over
         | there" is not far-fetched although I'm not aware of any
         | research. The issue is mostly by those who pathologize that
         | state of not being comfortable in ones "gender assigned at
         | birth", like saying "...other illnesses such as gender
         | dysphoria" and then wanting to "cure" this dysphoria in other
         | ways than enabling a safe and informed transition. Like for
         | instance banning people talking about their experiences, good
         | and bad, in transitioning.
        
           | DSingularity wrote:
           | How can there ever be an informed transition with something
           | like shifting genders?
        
             | ReactiveJelly wrote:
             | You can practice presenting differently in safe social
             | situations, that's reversible. (e.g. crossdressing)
             | 
             | Trans fem people can remove their facial hair without doing
             | other medical transition steps.
             | 
             | The effects of hormone replacement are so slow that you can
             | safely "try them out" for a month or two and not have a
             | huge permanent burden.
             | 
             | You talk to people and think about it real hard and sleep
             | on it for years. It looks sudden from the outside because
             | there's such a stigma over saying "Hey I'm thinking about
             | trying on a new gender, do you think it would work?"
             | 
             | It's not too different from other body modification like
             | tattoos or vasectomies. You can't fully know for sure, but
             | there is a point where you decide that the risk is worth
             | it, because the potential payoff seems worth it. Then it
             | usually turns out it is. Most "de-transition" cases are
             | people who couldn't afford the monetary cost or social cost
             | of presenting as transgender. It's un-common to transition
             | and then find out you're actually cis.
        
               | DSingularity wrote:
               | What is cis?
               | 
               | This makes sense except the part about the slow acting
               | hormones. If they are slow acting then one wouldn't know
               | their effects until later. How much later? And is it
               | guaranteed that they will be reversible at that point?
               | 
               | Modulo what is above, in summary: you are saying there
               | can be informed decisions because the teenagers can: -
               | try out cross dressing - try out the hormone therapy to
               | some point before it has non-reversible long term
               | consequences
        
             | jackmott42 wrote:
             | If you suppose that understanding this well is not
             | possible, that would imply you also do not understand it
             | well, so perhaps you should leave other people alone to do
             | what they will, unless some good reason is revealed not to.
        
               | DSingularity wrote:
               | Agreed -- until it starts to harm people. Some are
               | suggesting that this is creating harm for minors.
        
           | vinegarden wrote:
           | Your comment reminds me of a very interesting interview with
           | Dr Az Hakeem, a psychiatrist and psychotherapist who set up
           | group therapy sessions for gender dysphoric patients:
           | https://open.spotify.com/episode/5ycqNoareUT6Y6s85LrJSF
           | 
           | He would include in these groups people at all stages in
           | their transitions, so those considering transitioning further
           | could be informed and challenged by those who had gone the
           | whole way with surgery and all.
        
         | mschuster91 wrote:
         | > then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other
         | illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over
         | represented. This is probably going to get downvoted to
         | oblivion, because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can
         | _learn_ to want to be another gender.
         | 
         | It's very, very simple. There always have been about 10% of
         | people who are left-handed - but for a time in history,
         | teachers and society (sometimes brutally) repressed that and
         | forced left-handed children to use their right hand. Once that
         | relaxed and children were left to freely be who they were, the
         | left-handed ratio went back to its historic norm [1].
         | 
         | Obviously, it's been the same for gay, trans and other
         | sexuality/gender-nonmainstream people. They have always been
         | part of human history - from the old Greeks [2] to early
         | Islamic and Hindu ages [3], but as long as there was an heir
         | available for a long time many simply didn't bother to care or
         | looked away in historic Catholic regions. The repression only
         | went really bad with the Nazis, who destroyed the Institute for
         | Sexology [4] and later on with anti-LGBT laws still remaining
         | on the books for decades, then the anti-gay panic with AIDS,
         | and only nowadays public opinion is beginning to relax.
         | 
         | The problem is that Conservatives not just don't get that
         | simple historic fact, they actively _deny_ it based on their
         | morals, and as a result young LGBT people have shockingly high
         | suicide rates (in thoughts, attempts and success [5]).
         | 
         | [1] https://www.truthorfiction.com/the-history-of-left-
         | handednes...
         | 
         | [2]
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greec...
         | 
         | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia)
         | 
         | [4]
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissen...
         | 
         | [5] https://www.npr.org/2022/05/05/1096920693/lgbtq-youth-
         | though...
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | mrpopo wrote:
           | There's no denying that gender dysphoria exists and has
           | always existed. OP made the claim that it might be
           | statistically over-represented.
           | 
           | Looking at the Hijra example, it looks like the Hijra
           | demographics are around 0.5-1% of the population.
           | 
           | In the latest polls [0], the proportion of Gen Z that
           | identify as transgender is over 2%.
           | 
           | Is there repression/stigma in South Asia keeping some people
           | in the closet? Is the culture difference having an effect on
           | gender dysphoria? Is there a gender dysphoria "contagious"
           | effect? I don't know, but those are interesting questions.
           | 
           | [0] https://news.gallup.com/poll/389792/lgbt-identification-
           | tick...
        
             | Karawebnetwork wrote:
             | According to Gallup's poll, which they present as
             | estimates, it is 0.7% in the US. In India, 0.6% people
             | self-identified as hijra (Sahastrabuddhe et al., 2012). In
             | the 2011 census in India, 0.04% answered with "Other" when
             | asked to choose between "Male", "Female" and "Other".
             | 
             | Canada included the question in their latest census. In my
             | opinion, a mandatory government census provides data that
             | is more accurate than Gallup's phone poll.
             | 
             | "In Canada, 0.2% of the population aged 18 and older was
             | transgender in 2021. Belgium (0.5% among people aged 18 to
             | 75 in 2021) and New Zealand (0.5% among people aged 18 and
             | older in 2020) have also published representative survey-
             | based data on their transgender populations."
             | 
             | "The proportions of transgender and non-binary people were
             | three to seven times higher for Generation Z (born between
             | 1997 and 2006, 0.79%) and millennials (born between 1981
             | and 1996, 0.51%) than for Generation X (born between 1966
             | and 1980, 0.19%), baby boomers (born between 1946 and 1965,
             | 0.15%) and the Interwar and Greatest Generations (born in
             | 1945 or earlier, 0.12%)."
             | 
             | "Other countries have published 2021 data on transgender
             | people using crowdsourcing and non-representative surveys,
             | including Ireland (0.6% among people aged 18 and older),
             | England and Wales (0.6% among people aged 16 and older),
             | and the United States (0.8% among people aged 18 and
             | older)."
        
             | mschuster91 wrote:
             | And what the fuck would be the problem if GenZ had an
             | "over-representation" of LGBT?!
             | 
             | We don't live in the dark ages, almost all Western
             | constitutions have some sort of "freedom of expression" on
             | their books. Just let people live their lifes however they
             | want to do it, as long as they don't harm anybody. Trans
             | people or kissing gays on the street don't harm anyone but
             | the feelings of some poor Conservatives who are secretly in
             | the closet and envious about the freedom today's youth has.
             | 
             | Just look how many of the loud pearl clutching
             | Conservatives turned out to be gay or adulterous. It's
             | nothing but projection and pure envy.
        
               | monodeldiablo wrote:
               | One potential danger is that some of the more extreme
               | therapies for gender transition are permanent and work
               | best when used early. If a person's trans orientation is
               | the result of a poorly formed sense of identity, as
               | alleged by the article, there's a stronger chance they
               | may change their mind later, after irreversible harm has
               | been wrought.
               | 
               | In other words, there's a chance that some kids may not
               | be "really" trans, but rather attention-seeking or
               | mentally ill. And for those kids, transitioning would, in
               | fact, be harmful in the long run.
               | 
               | Do we, as a society, have an obligation to prevent these
               | children and young adults from harming themselves in this
               | way?
               | 
               | I don't have a firm answer because it's a difficult and
               | emotional subject, but I think it's extreme to pretend
               | this is not an issue, and equally extreme to encourage
               | kids for whom it might not be safe to transition.
               | 
               | Perhaps the informal controls we have in place prior to
               | gender reassignment surgery are already adequate to
               | filter out these vulnerable kids. Perhaps there are other
               | interventions I'm not aware of that are already in use.
               | But I don't see the harm in discussing and exploring
               | whether there is a proportion of the trans population
               | that is, in fact, suffering from social or mental illness
               | and not actually a more innate form of gender dysphoria.
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | > One potential danger is that some of the more extreme
               | therapies for gender transition are permanent and work
               | best when used early.
               | 
               | There is virtually only one, and that's puberty blockers,
               | stuff that has been used for _decades_ to treat
               | precocious puberty. We know these medicines are safe and
               | we also know that nature will run its course again all by
               | itself after the medicines are left out.
               | 
               | Genital surgery, the second option, is extremely rare in
               | people under 18, and most of it is done on inter-gender
               | children shortly after birth which is a grave mistake
               | anyway and some countries have banned that as a result
               | [1].
               | 
               | And in any case: Puberty blockers are reversible -
               | puberty itself is not. Some things (e.g. the growth of
               | breast tissue) can be reversed but at a high cost, some
               | like the vocal cords changing for hormonal males cannot
               | be reversed at all. It is way, _way_ better for trans
               | children to not force them through puberty.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-lgbt-
               | health-idUSK...
        
             | hijrathrowaway wrote:
             | The Hijra cult kidnaps children, forcibly castrates in a
             | brutal ritual which many don't survive, and then pimps them
             | out. These are not people who voluntarily "identify as
             | transgender"; these are people who were violently feminized
             | to satisfy others' sexual desires. It continues to amaze
             | that people trot such a terrible thing out as some kind of
             | positive example.
             | 
             | https://www.rediff.com/news/1998/oct/20hijra.htm
             | 
             | https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/special-
             | report/story/1994...
        
         | bognition wrote:
         | Counter hypothesis. For the last several decades society put
         | massive pressure on kids to conform to heteronormativity. With
         | these pressures lessening more and more people are feeling
         | empowered to explore their sexuality.
         | 
         | Social media is absolutely involved, but we really don't know
         | what the base rate would be in a society devoid of this kind of
         | pressure.
        
           | throwaway049 wrote:
           | 'The last several decades' is an odd specification. Are you
           | saying there was a point in the quite recent past when this
           | was different?
        
             | niom wrote:
             | Yes. Outright bans and persecution of homosexuality is
             | relatively new. Effeminate gays were practically
             | eradicated, Europe had the Nazis do it, the US had the
             | lavender scare (because gay=communist), the Soviets under
             | Stalin did much like the Nazis. This is why gays reinvented
             | themselves into the hypermasculine leather culture starting
             | in the 50s. It's why older gay men have negative attitudes
             | towards younger effeminate gays and the reason why the same
             | parts of the gay community look down on bottoms who aren't
             | vers.
        
               | simiones wrote:
               | > Outright bans and persecution of homosexuality is
               | relatively new.
               | 
               | In most of Europe at least, homosexuality could not be
               | openly practiced for most of the middle ages. There were
               | certain exceptions, but it was not generally considered
               | acceptable, and it was persecuted by the church or other
               | moral authorities, at the very least as ostracism if not
               | outright legal punishments - usually seen as a deviant
               | sexual act, which were also routinely punished. Since the
               | states were far weaker than modern states, it wasn't as
               | systematic and universal as the Nazis attempted, but it
               | was still happening.
               | 
               | Even in societies we perceive as more open such as
               | ancient Rome, homosexual acts were often not explicitly
               | accepted as normal, except for some we today would
               | (rightly) consider abhorrent - adult men having sex with
               | teenagers, but never the other way around.
        
               | niom wrote:
               | Ancient acceptance of MSM generally depended on who did
               | the penetrating, because in a nutshell penetrating was
               | manly and A-OK while being penetrated (orally / anally /
               | vaginally) was womanly and hence bad. MSM was an exercise
               | of social power.
        
               | red_admiral wrote:
               | Upvote.
               | 
               | For anyone else wanting more context, this is an ok
               | starting point:
               | https://www.artofmanliness.com/people/relationships/the-
               | hist... (but note that the side of the story from inside
               | the gay community is yet another matter, as niom hints
               | at)
               | 
               | Basically, before most people knew that "gay" was a
               | thing, there was much less pressure on men to be
               | performatively straight.
        
           | api wrote:
           | This brings to mind one of my rules about conservative
           | panics:
           | 
           | If laws against witchcraft are removed and/or witchcraft is
           | destigmatized and then all the sudden there appears to be an
           | explosion of witches, the explanation is probably _not_ that
           | hordes of people are adopting witchcraft.
           | 
           | I'll leave it to the reader to guess the simplest and most
           | likely explanation.
        
             | naasking wrote:
             | > the explanation is probably not that hordes of people are
             | adopting witchcraft.
             | 
             | I don't know how you can a priori gauge this probability.
             | If something illegal suddenly becomes legal but is still
             | somewhat taboo, that obviously attracts experimentation, at
             | least from rebellious youth.
        
             | rowanG077 wrote:
             | Why not? If something illegal/destigmatized which has some
             | advantages becomes legal I would absolutely expect there to
             | be an explosion of people who now start adopting that
             | thing.
        
             | conchrat wrote:
             | I understand your point but I think witchcraft might not be
             | the best example. If witchcraft started going viral, I
             | would absolutely be tempted to give it a shot lol. Would
             | not surprise me if I was not in the minority there
        
               | alisonatwork wrote:
               | Sure. Adventurous or curious people might give something
               | a try just for the hell of it. For some it will stick.
               | For many it won't.
               | 
               | This is what I find so exhausting about those who try to
               | drum up some kind of controversy around gender identity.
               | Assuming it is all just a fad, who cares? Where's the
               | issue when people decide to switch their gender on a
               | whim? It's their lives. People do all kinds of things on
               | a whim. Adults, teens and children too. Especially
               | children, in fact. Sometimes people regret the things
               | they did, sometimes they don't. Oh well, it's part of
               | life.
               | 
               | I could understand being concerned about a social trend
               | if it was causing violent behavior that negatively
               | affected other people's lives, but this isn't that. Who
               | is it hurting if someone decides to identify as another
               | gender? Even if they pursue medical intervention, it's
               | only going to affect them at worst. If anything the small
               | government/pro-freedom position should be to defend the
               | right of those people to live how they want.
        
               | dahfizz wrote:
               | > Where's the issue when people decide to switch their
               | gender on a whim?
               | 
               | The issue, at least for me, starts when we give children
               | drugs and surgeries to enable them to switch genders.
               | 
               | There's nothing wrong with little Timmy wanting to play
               | with Barbies. He doesn't need hormone injections because
               | of it.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | These same points are made & rebutted in this thread:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33880094
        
               | dmm wrote:
               | > Even if they pursue medical intervention, it's only
               | going to affect them at worst.
               | 
               | People are worried about their kids. People are scared
               | and the media amplifies the most extreme voices.
               | Establishing scientifically the effectiveness of medical
               | interventions is difficult in the best of circumstances
               | and most psychology is non-reproducible, so it's hard to
               | know what to believe is best.
        
             | wwilim wrote:
             | Captain Obvious here - the witches were already there, they
             | were just closeted
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Maybe the real witches were the friends we made along the
             | way
        
             | nmadden wrote:
             | An explosion of witches is usually down to too much eye of
             | newt.
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | _The Satanic panic is a moral panic consisting of over
             | 12,000 unsubstantiated cases of Satanic ritual abuse (SRA,
             | sometimes known as ritual abuse, ritualistic abuse,
             | organized abuse, or sadistic ritual abuse) starting in the
             | United States in the 1980s, spreading throughout many parts
             | of the world by the late 1990s, and persisting today._
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_panic
        
               | mc32 wrote:
               | Well, there were actual cases of it, but it was
               | exaggerated in the media.
               | 
               | Just as the media makes it out like the next stop by a
               | cop could end up in an execution if you're not the same
               | ethnicity as the cop. It's still rather rare, or at least
               | not happening at the rate the media portrays it.
        
               | actionfromafar wrote:
               | Yeah, but the ethnicity of cops is blue.
        
               | denton-scratch wrote:
               | Why can't blue men sing the whites?
        
               | adolph wrote:
               | Exaggeration of the actual happens for cause and effect
               | alike. It is often hard to tell which side exaggeration
               | favors until time passes.
        
             | rendall wrote:
             | > _one of my rules about conservative panic..._
             | 
             |  _Rule_ implies that it applies to past conservative moral
             | panics. Is there a past moral panic in which lots of
             | formerly suppressed identities suddenly expressed
             | themselves once the moral panic was over?
        
               | pjc50 wrote:
               | A lot of people came out after homosexuality was
               | decriminalised.
               | 
               | Freedom of religion allowed a lot of people to express
               | their religious identity which was formerly suppressed?
        
               | amarant wrote:
               | A bit of an obscure example, but: Capoeira was forbidden
               | in Brazil for a very long time, mostly because of a moral
               | panic(for brevity I'll leave the complexities of this
               | situation out of this comment), then when it was
               | legalised, and the stigma around it began to disappear,
               | it quickly became very popular, both in Brazil and
               | internationally!
        
               | cshimmin wrote:
               | This seems to be to opposite of the example GP was
               | seeking. Unless you mean to say that a great many people
               | (both in Brazil and internationally) were already
               | practicing Capoeira before it was legalized...
        
               | bigbillheck wrote:
               | Left-handed people.
        
               | trelane wrote:
               | Most sinister[1] example
               | 
               | [1] See notes on etymology etc. at https://www.merriam-
               | webster.com/dictionary/sinister
        
               | api wrote:
               | I bring this one up every time someone brings up
               | Chesterton's Fence arguments about stuff like this.
               | 
               | Why was left handedness considered taboo and evil? Do we
               | need to figure out a legitimate reason for this before we
               | can remove the fence? Could there possibly be a
               | legitimate reason for something that clearly absurd?
        
               | tpmoney wrote:
               | I mean the point of the argument is to try to find out if
               | there is possibly a legitimate reason, not to assume
               | there was and not explore removing the fence. Sometimes
               | no there was no good reason. Sometimes there was but it's
               | no longer applicable.For example lots of religious
               | dietary restrictions have reasonable health benefits,
               | especially in a society before modern refrigeration and
               | food safety standards. So while there was a legitimate
               | reason, it's not nearly as applicable anymore.
               | Discouraging sexual freedom and promiscuity makes a lot
               | more sense in a society without birth control and where
               | every additional mouth to feed means someone isn't making
               | it through the winter. Less so in a modern society. And
               | sometimes there are absolutely legitimate reasons that
               | have just been lost to time (most commonly captured in
               | the idea that most safety rules and regulations are
               | written in blood)
        
               | brookst wrote:
               | There could be, but I think the presumption should be
               | that it is normal social evolution to stigmatize
               | minorities. Red-headed people, Jewish/Semitic people,
               | people with cleft palates, on and on.
               | 
               | There seems to be a representation threshold below which
               | any observable minority is considered undesirable. To the
               | extent there is a "legitimate reason" it is probably
               | rooted in evolutionary psychology for avoiding too much
               | genetic variation in small tribes. I submit those fences
               | are the opposite of Chesterton's fence and can happily be
               | ignored in today's society.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | > _evolutionary psychology for avoiding too much genetic
               | variation in small tribes_
               | 
               | Hmm. I suspect it's just "other tribes". We humans will
               | make tribes out of literally any distinction, even
               | athletic team preferences. It's kind of our thing.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | > Could there possibly be a legitimate reason for
               | something that clearly absurd?
               | 
               | Yes: https://www.straightdope.com/21343459/in-the-third-
               | world-do-...
        
               | cshimmin wrote:
               | No comment about Chesterton's Fence but I have heard (but
               | never confirmed!) one reason for left-handed stigma is to
               | do with hygiene. The idea is that before modern hygienic
               | standards (e.g. sinks with soap in every
               | bathroom/kitchen), the left hand was reserved for "dirty
               | work" (we are also considering a time before toilet
               | paper...). So for example when you reach out to shake
               | someone's hand, it would be rude to use the left.
        
               | denton-scratch wrote:
               | Your right hand is your sword hand; by offering to shake
               | hands, you demonstrate that you are not about to run your
               | counterparty through.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | This is apocryphal
        
               | leephillips wrote:
               | For me, the Chesterton's Fence principle doesn't insist
               | that there's a good reason for everything that needs to
               | be discovered. It says, don't remove the thing until you
               | understand why it was put there. If you're sure there's
               | no good reason, go ahead. But find out first.
        
           | xd wrote:
           | As a parent I have no idea what you are trying to say with
           | this idea of pushing "heteronormativity" - I don't and don't
           | know any parents that push anything sexual let alone
           | encouraging kids to explore sexuality .. they are kids and
           | will be kids until they mature and begin to feel the urge to
           | explore. This normalising of sexualising of children is
           | abhorrent.
           | 
           | Edit: the voting on this comment is crazy.. the number of HN
           | users that feel sexualisation of children isn't bad is
           | utterly shameful.
        
             | pjc50 wrote:
             | You've not noticed the pink for girls/blue for boys
             | distinction?
        
               | xd wrote:
               | Yes and me and my wife laugh about it but there is an
               | obvious distinctive preference for kids male and female
               | which will play into sales .. no one is forcing anyone to
               | buy anything and even back in the 80s growing up I knew
               | kids that would buy toys you'd associate with the other
               | gender.
        
               | the_af wrote:
               | A societal pressure doesn't mean it's forced. Most
               | societal pressures aren't. Instead, they are _strong_
               | expectations and in occasions, frowning upon behavior
               | that deviates from the expectation. This creates
               | tremendous pressure. Just look at teenager social
               | dynamics, lots of  "unenforced" expectations become
               | critical for them.
        
               | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
               | How is that " massive pressure on kids to conform to
               | heteronormativity"?
        
               | acdha wrote:
               | That distinction goes back to decisions made by a few
               | department store managers around WWII. It's nothing but a
               | cultural norm reinforced everywhere so pervasively most
               | of us aren't even aware of the pressure.
               | 
               | https://www.thelist.com/32342/real-reasons-behind-blue-
               | boys-...
        
               | TrispusAttucks wrote:
               | The colors used to be switched in the 1800s. Pink for
               | boys and blue for girls.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | That just says that gender norms are malleable, not that
               | they don't exist. Both in the 1800s and today there were
               | strong expectations in terms of "expected" roles for
               | different genders.
        
               | mc32 wrote:
               | And before that color was too expensive. But one wouldn't
               | say that gender roles did not exist. Color is nothing but
               | an added expression like lipstick or horsehair wigs.
               | 
               | For some today black is the macho color, for others it's
               | the artistic color.
        
               | TrispusAttucks wrote:
               | My only point is that because of the color switch we can
               | see that certain concepts of gender identity preference,
               | "color", are social constructs that influence society.
        
             | Macha wrote:
             | The assumption that this is inherently sex related is where
             | the issue starts. This is why the discussion shifted from
             | talking about sexuality to talking about gender nearly 20
             | years ago. Ideas like boys cannot wear skirts or play with
             | barbies are present from a young age, yet we don't accuse
             | people opposed to boys with skirts/barbies of thinking
             | about said boys future sexuality.
        
               | Closi wrote:
               | > The assumption that this is inherently sex related is
               | where the issue starts. This is why the discussion
               | shifted from talking about sexuality to talking about
               | gender nearly 20 years ago.
               | 
               | Well it was the parent comment that was linking this to
               | sexuality - Hetronormativity is inherently about
               | sexuality (i.e. Hetro-Normativity - Hetro ->
               | Heterosexual: of, pertaining to, or being a heterosexual
               | person).
        
             | acdha wrote:
             | I think the downvotes are coming because you're insisting
             | on treating this as a question of sexualization. Gender is
             | distinct and it's reinforced early on - my son is 5 and
             | most of his classmates have had things like "pink and
             | skirts and dolls are for girls", "trucks and blue and guns
             | are for boys" established as the norm for years. That's not
             | perfectly reliable - we know more sparkly princesses who
             | climb trees and drive race cars than I did at his age - but
             | it's _everywhere_, and the religious conservatives who call
             | any acknowledgment of LGBTQ people "grooming" would 100% be
             | locking and loading if even 10% of that reinforcement
             | energy was going into LGBTQ acceptance.
             | 
             | Also note that none of this is about having sex: it's about
             | telling kids which archetypes are available for them as
             | grownups. If we want to talk about sex, however, look at
             | the degree to which girl's clothing mimics the styles of
             | adult women even at the expense of practicality for the
             | things kids actually do and how many stories even for young
             | children revolve around the major life goal being an
             | exclusive relationship with a man. Again, the stuff people
             | are complaining about now is an order of magnitude less
             | than what kids are already getting to reinforce traditional
             | gender norms.
        
             | dsiegel2275 wrote:
             | I think "pushing heteronormativity" doesn't need to be a
             | conscious, deliberate act and it doesn't need to be
             | anything related to sex. It can be as simple as a parent
             | buying their son a toy truck for their birthday while
             | buying a barbie doll for their daughter: a reinforcement of
             | socially acceptable gender roles
        
               | xd wrote:
               | I've never known a kid to not ask for toys they prefer..
               | you make the simple act of giving a child a gift sound
               | sinister.. what a world we live in.
        
               | bognition wrote:
               | It's not sinister in the slightest, but people should
               | understand the larger picture.
               | 
               | Where do those preferences come from? I've seen first
               | hand the impact that media, advertising, and social
               | pressures at school have had on my children's
               | preferences.
        
               | naasking wrote:
               | > Where do those preferences come from? I've seen first
               | hand the impact that media, advertising, and social
               | pressures at school have had on my children's
               | preferences.
               | 
               | Sure, but why is that a problem? Our preferences are of
               | course sculpted by our environment, and that's not a
               | problem as long the people who fall outside of those
               | norms aren't punished for it. Assuming those norms aren't
               | harmful of course, eg. not good to normalize psychopathy.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | It's basically inevitable that children are going to
               | exposed to some normative behaviour, particularly around
               | gender. I think the important part is that we're not so
               | quick to denounce and suppress any messaging that exposes
               | children to the existence of behaviour outside of those
               | gender norms, that's when it goes from just existing in a
               | society where gender norms exist to maintaining and
               | enforcing those gender norms.
        
               | refurb wrote:
               | Your use of "heteronormative" doesn't make a lot of
               | sense.
               | 
               | Heteronormativity is "heterosexual is the normal state of
               | being".
               | 
               | Playing with trucks if you're a girl has nothing to do
               | with whether you're hetero or homosexual.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | It ties into a larger concept of gender roles (which is
               | probably more applicable to discussion of trans folks
               | than sexuality, "heteronormativity" was probably not the
               | best word choice)
        
             | Broken_Hippo wrote:
             | _I don 't and don't know any parents that push anything
             | sexual let alone encouraging kids to explore sexuality_
             | 
             | I definitely learned before age 13 that being gay/lesbian
             | was bad (I'm bisexual and in my mid 40s). I definitely
             | learned that I was expected to grow up and get married and
             | have kids and if I worked, it was really to help the
             | spouse. I remember my parents suddenly getting upset that I
             | had male friends and didn't want me spending time with them
             | the same way (this was around age 10). No one talked to me
             | about attraction and if they did, never explained that I
             | might feel that way about women as well as men. This is
             | what heteronormativity is. This is pushing sexual
             | preferences on youth.
             | 
             | Exploring sexuality isn't about actual sex acts, but more
             | about learning who you are and who you are attracted to.
             | You know, the sorts of folks you'd like to date and
             | eventually, the sorts of folks you want to spend your life
             | with. This sort of thing is most definitely encouraged, but
             | sometimes the only acceptable option presented is the
             | hetronormativity - you know, "biblical" monogamous
             | relationships that produce children, and if you are female
             | and don't want children, you are broken.
             | 
             | This isn't sexualisation of children.
        
             | maxbond wrote:
             | Gender identity and sexual orientation are different
             | concepts. Exploring gender identity is not the same as
             | exploring sexuality. Children are constantly exploring
             | identity, as I'm sure you have observed. For instance, I am
             | a straight man, but when I was a child I sometimes stole my
             | mother's lipstick and tried to put it on, or I would play
             | with Barbie dolls. I saw that other people incorporated
             | these activities in their identities, and I wanted to try
             | it. This was no more sexual than when I play acted as a
             | soldier or decided I liked to wear cargo pants; I was
             | experimenting with who I was or could become, because that
             | is what children do.
             | 
             | This is a convenient segue to heteronormativity.
             | Heteronormativity is the societal pressure to conform to
             | the traditional gender roles of men and women who pursue
             | heterosexual relationships. My parents didn't like me
             | playing with Barbie dolls; they explicitly told me that it
             | wasn't something boys did. This transmits a set of
             | expectations about how I should behave, based on my gender.
             | Notice that their telling me it was wrong to play with
             | dolls was no more sexual than if they had allowed me to
             | play with the dolls.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | This is a straw man.
               | 
               | 1. This is not a good faith representation of what trans
               | people are arguing for; no one is saying that playing
               | with dolls makes you trans.
               | 
               | 2. Trans healthcare for kids does not involve surgery.
               | Surgeries are not performed for people under the age of
               | 18. Trans healthcare for kids largely involves letting
               | them choose what clothes they wear, pronouns they use,
               | perhaps changing their name. The most that might happen
               | is that they take puberty blockers, a reversible and safe
               | treatment.
               | 
               | 3. I can see why people would be upset by your straw man,
               | were it the reality, but trans people are not an
               | abomination, and directing dehumanizing language towards
               | a group of people who are frequently targeted for
               | violence is profoundly not okay. It's been less than 3
               | weeks since a terrorist entered an LGBTQ nightclub in
               | Colorado Springs and opened fire, and this has happened
               | more times than anyone can count; don't contribute to
               | this. And your straw man is just that.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > no one is saying
               | 
               | That's a rather extreme claim, don't you think? There's
               | been a significant shift in recent years from "gender
               | fluid" behavior being considered a matter of _expression_
               | , to it being regarded as an almost mandatory matter of
               | identity - either as a sign of identifying with the
               | opposite gender, or as being "non binary".
               | 
               | > Trans healthcare for kids does not involve surgery.
               | 
               | The heavy medicalization of "trans healthcare" creates a
               | rigid path from "affirmation" of the supposedly expressed
               | gender, to puberty blockers/hormones, to surgical
               | reassignment. There are significant social drawbacks for
               | those who choose to stray, since 'community' support is
               | conditional on picking the "right" choices at any given
               | step.
               | 
               | > I can see why people would be upset by your straw man,
               | were it the reality, but trans people are not an
               | abomination
               | 
               | The latter is not something I ever said, of course. You
               | might be pattern-matching my comment with things that are
               | just not there. I agree that most trans people just want
               | to live their lives and not be at risk for violence, but
               | this much is obvious. In general, the most extreme
               | "activism" on either side gets a lot of visibility while
               | being unrepresentative of what real people think.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | > There's been a significant shift in recent years from
               | "gender fluid" behavior being considered a matter of
               | expression, to it being regarded as an almost mandatory
               | 
               | Who exactly is arguing that it is _mandatory_ to be
               | gender fluid? I 've never heard such a thing.
               | 
               | What I do hear trans people arguing for is that they have
               | a right to exist, that they are under threat of violence,
               | and that the require awareness of their condition and
               | protection under the law as a matter of survival.
               | 
               | > The heavy medicalization of "trans healthcare" creates
               | a rigid path from "affirmation" of the supposedly
               | expressed gender, to puberty blockers/hormones, to
               | surgical reassignment. There are significant social
               | drawbacks for those who choose to stray, since
               | 'community' support is conditional on picking the "right"
               | choices at any given step.
               | 
               | You're just kinda putting quotes on things to make them
               | sound scary. Do you object to surgery, or surgery being
               | performed on children? If teenagers go on puberty
               | blockers, and they decide they don't want to pursue
               | surgery when they become adults - no worries, no surgery
               | was performed. If they become adults, having considered
               | the decision for a long time at this point - by what you
               | were saying before now, that would seem to be okay; you
               | were saying it was an unacceptable to impose a surgery on
               | children, are you now saying that this isn't a choice
               | you're ever okay with? I'm starting to get the feeling
               | maybe you just feel trans people are unacceptable in
               | general and that, whatever they did, you would disapprove
               | of it.
               | 
               | I'm not deeply involved with the LGBTQ community, but I'm
               | confident none of the people I know would bully someone
               | who decided against transitioning. And none of the LGBTQ
               | communities I've ever intersected with have been stingy
               | or withholding of their support; they're happy to discuss
               | my feelings about gender with me, for example, though I'm
               | a straight man with a "by the book" gender presentation
               | (and I have my frustrations with my gender and the
               | expectations that come with it all the same, which I'm
               | sure many men can relate to).
               | 
               | I'm sure there are toxic personalities within these
               | communities, but it is certainly not the norm or
               | generally tolerated, as bullying exists in virtually all
               | communities but generally is not tolerated.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | If I can responsibly say to "object" to anything it's
               | people being _rushed_ on a path to gender transition,
               | given the heavy costs that this involves in practice and
               | the fact that some steps are irreversible (including male
               | hormones for those AFAB - though admittedly this might
               | also make it more justifiably salient for someone AMAB to
               | seek to delay their puberty).
               | 
               | This applies to kids the most (they of course aren't at
               | risk for surgery, but the usual notion of a fixed "gender
               | identity" is also least sensibly applied to them), but
               | people in young adulthood should also be a bit concerned.
               | Research seems to show that, by and large, those who
               | transition in middle-age are the happiest post-
               | transition. I'm not sure how that squares with your
               | feeling that someone with my views might just find "trans
               | people unacceptable in general"; my concerns are derived
               | from real-world practicality.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | There's no rush, but they're also under no obligation to
               | respect _your_ timetable. People make up their own minds
               | about these things, there isn 't a conspiracy to trans
               | the kids as fast as possible, as you make it sound.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | I'm not setting a fixed timetable, but the medical
               | establishment sure has their own opinions as to how fast
               | people should transition. The "conspiracy" is out in the
               | open - and these opinions aren't always comprehensively
               | informed by research about good outcomes.
        
               | vinegarden wrote:
               | > Trans healthcare for kids does not involve surgery.
               | Surgeries are not performed for people under the age of
               | 18.
               | 
               | Unfortunately that is not true.
               | 
               | There are surgeons who perform 'gender affirming' double
               | mastectomies on girls as young as 13. This is documented
               | in the medical literature.
               | 
               | The former CEO of Mermaids, a UK-based charity for
               | children who identify as transgender, had her child
               | castrated and given a penile inversion at the age of 16,
               | by a surgeon who specializes in constructing
               | 'neovaginas'.
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | > My parents didn't like me playing with Barbie dolls;
               | they explicitly told me that it wasn't something boys
               | did.
               | 
               | Same with me, but let me ask you a question. Were you the
               | sort of kid that actually listens to their parents?
               | Because i didn't, and most of my peers didn't, either.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | No, I was stubborn like mule. I wore my parents down
               | until they caved. That doesn't mean it didn't have an
               | impact though, I certainly picked up what they were
               | putting down.
               | 
               | Now, the reaction of my friends when they came over and
               | looked at me funny when I tried to show them my awesome
               | Princess Gwenevere and the Jewel Riders doll (it had
               | wings and could fly if you pulled a ripcord! That's
               | objectively cool. Also, dangerous, especially to taller
               | adults in the area.), _that_ was painful.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | If it's your parents and your peers and virtually all
               | popular media, it's massively naive to think that isn't
               | going to have a normalizing effect on people.
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | For people with your attitude, yes.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | To be clear, I'm making a descriptive and not a
               | prescriptive statement. I'm not saying that people
               | _should_ conform to societal norms, just that right now
               | they do (and that doesn 't seem like a trivial thing to
               | change).
        
               | blueflow wrote:
               | I'm sorry, it should have been:
               | 
               | For people with that attitude, yes.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | > _Gender identity and sexual orientation are different
               | concepts. Exploring gender identity is not the same as
               | exploring sexuality._
               | 
               | While true, to be fair GP was responding to this:
               | 
               | >>> " _For the last several decades society put massive
               | pressure on kids to conform to_ *heteronormativity*.
               | _With these pressures lessening more and more people are
               | feeling empowered to explore their_ *sexuality*. "
               | [emphasis mine]
               | 
               | To muddy the distinction further, there is a small
               | minority of men whose sexual kink is to be perceived as
               | women. These seem to be the people who are making the
               | most trouble for trans women who just want to quietly go
               | about living as women without fuss.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | Kinks are impossible to pin down or fence in, people can
               | get turned on by literally anything.
               | https://xkcd.com/468/ This doesn't really muddy the
               | waters; the concepts remain distinct, and people making
               | it a kink to conflate them is kinda like how a joke isn't
               | true but is only funny if you know the truth it refers
               | to.
               | 
               | Heteronormativity conflates gender and sexuality; I'd
               | guess (while acknowledging I don't know the content of
               | anyone else's mind) that is what is responsible for their
               | confusion, because they have been raised in a
               | heteronormative society, the distinction doesn't exist in
               | _their_ mind.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | > _Kinks are impossible to pin down or fence in, people
               | can get turned on by literally anything._
               | 
               | While a true statement it's also a non-sequitur.
               | Anglosphere society is roiled with social turmoil about
               | trans-gender identity. One faction would like society to
               | recognize that some people's gender does not fit their
               | sex, and to normalize accommodating these people's gender
               | expression without intrusive and oppressive questioning.
               | Another faction, perhaps motivated by genuine concern, or
               | perhaps by simple hatred of difference and change, throw
               | a spanner into the works by asking hard questions about
               | bathrooms and prisons and athletics and such. If the only
               | people interested in entering women's bathrooms and
               | prisons were genuinely only women who happened to be born
               | in a male body, then everything would be clear and
               | unmuddied. However, the existence of some fraction of men
               | who would happily identify as women in order to gain
               | easier sexual access to women does complicate the simple
               | distinction. Is a trans woman lesbian with a penis really
               | trans, or a predatory man with a kink? Ignoring or
               | dismissing the muddy implications of the question will
               | not make the second faction go away.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | This narrative of predatory trans people does not bare
               | out, trans people are not assaulting people in bathrooms,
               | and what you're describing is really using the way our
               | society is built to be hostile to people who do not fit
               | into gender norms as a way to justify further hostility.
               | It's saying, oh look, we built bathrooms and prisons in a
               | way that reinforces these norms, well, I guess we're
               | stuck with them.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | > _This narrative of predatory trans people does not bare
               | out..._
               | 
               | I didn't say predatory trans people. I said predatory
               | men. Have you met men? Some men will put on a dress, call
               | themselves trans, and fondle themselves in a women's
               | locker room.
               | 
               | Again, pretending this is about trans people is
               | disingenuous. This is about (some) men.
               | 
               | And, again, whether you genuinely dismiss the concern
               | because you genuinely disbelieve that any man ever would
               | take advantage of the situation, the faction that bring
               | it up do genuinely believe that some men will take
               | advantage of it. This faction will not go away. So,
               | probably best to at least acknowledge their concerns so
               | that trans people can get on with the business of doing
               | their business.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | I have heard some men say things about women when they
               | weren't around that I find appalling; I've had to work on
               | eliminating misogyny from my own thinking, and it is a
               | work in progress; I'm well aware of men and the toxicity
               | that often goes along with them.
               | 
               | The narrative you have presented is frequently
               | weaponized, specifically by the adherents to the ideology
               | of Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminism, to argue that
               | trans women are "men in dresses" who's real goal is to
               | infiltrate women's spaces in order to assault them (or,
               | in the example you gave, violate their privacy and
               | dignity). In practice this a widespread phenomenon. TERF
               | activists use this narrative to attempt to enact
               | legislation barring trans people from the bathroom of
               | their gender - forcing trans women into _men 's
               | bathrooms_, and I'm sure that, as someone concerned about
               | problematic men and bathrooms, that won't sound like a
               | good prospect to you. I take you at your word this was
               | context you weren't aware of; now that I've brought it to
               | your attention, I hope you'll consider it and see if it
               | alters your thinking.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | > _The narrative you have presented is frequently
               | weaponized..._
               | 
               | Indeed. This is both true, and a non-sequitur. Bad-faith
               | arguers exist. Let us acknowledge the fact that some
               | people will reprehensibly refer to every trans woman as a
               | "man in a dress". Let's assume the best about each other.
               | 
               | If you're trying to say that everyone is a TERF who
               | points out that some men (again, not trans women) will
               | take advantage, or that only bad people point this out,
               | then you're not addressing the concern, but dismissing
               | it. Addressing and empathizing with the actual concern
               | will get trans people into their preferred bathrooms and
               | keep bad men out.
               | 
               | Anyway, you and I won't litigate this here, so if you
               | have more to add, know that I'll read whatever you have
               | to say but might not reply. Be well.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | > [Y]ou're not addressing the concern, but dismissing it.
               | 
               | You're right, I should have done better there. To me,
               | until this comment where you described this as
               | "reprehensible", it sounded like you were employing "just
               | asking questions" rhetoric, because you were asking all
               | the same questions as TERFs, and to me it appeared you
               | were only holding back the transphobic conclusions.
               | However, that I should have done a better job assuming
               | good faith on your part, and I apologize.
               | 
               | > This is both true, and a non-sequitur.
               | 
               | It isn't a non-sequitur though, I'm explaining to you
               | what my issue is. If you were aware of the context around
               | this narrative the whole time, you could addressed it
               | instead of implying I was being disingenuous; the best-
               | faith interpretation I could see was that you didn't
               | understand my objection, so I added more detail. I would
               | like to engage with you presuming the best, but can you
               | see how saying I'm being disingenuous and that my points
               | are non-sequitur (when it seems like you do understand
               | what TERFs are, what bathroom bills are, and what it was
               | I was getting at and how it relates to our discussion)
               | made that difficult for me?
               | 
               | > Addressing and empathizing with the actual concern will
               | get trans people into their preferred bathrooms and keep
               | bad men out.
               | 
               | Happy to listen to what you may propose, but I don't have
               | any thoughts. I certainly empathize with women's feeling
               | of unsafety and the desire to create spaces without men,
               | to the extent I can as a man. But I understand if you are
               | done with this conversation, I myself need to log off for
               | a few hours to attend to things, and of course you don't
               | owe me any of your time.
               | 
               | All the best to you, as well.
        
               | michaelmrose wrote:
               | This is a meaningless concern. Any man who would put on a
               | dress to come assault you in the bathroom could skip the
               | dress part and just come in the bathroom and assault you.
               | It's like saying some rapists have red hair. It's true
               | but its not meaningful because no fruitful thing can be
               | derived from the fact nor strategy obtained.
               | 
               | There are millions of trans people in the world but
               | presumably few rapists in dresses. The spurious focus on
               | pointless concerns suggests we ought to harm the dignity
               | of millions for a fictional advantage.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | throwaway049 wrote:
               | Sometimes they are doing exactly that
               | 
               | https://www.theguardian.com/uk-
               | news/2018/oct/11/transgender-...
        
               | mc32 wrote:
               | My take is kids play with whatever is around.
               | 
               | If your dad has acetylene torches around and your mom has
               | axes around the house you're going to play with them.
               | 
               | It does not mean or imply or predict that you want to
               | burn the house down or you want to become a butcher or
               | axe murderer. You're not exploring being a pyromaniac or
               | a murderer. You're just playing, that's it.
               | 
               | Same with high heels, smoking pipes, hunting rifles or
               | lipstick. Kids don't know their meaning yet (context of
               | usage).
        
               | refurb wrote:
               | _For instance, I am a straight man, but when I was a
               | child I sometimes stole my mother 's lipstick and tried
               | to put it on, or I would play with Barbie dolls._
               | 
               | I wouldn't see trying on lipstick or playing with Barbie
               | dolls as "exploring a gender identity" as neither of
               | those are exclusive to one gender, even in a
               | heteronormative world.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | I'm not saying you are wrong, but in the culture of my
               | household, my school, and the people I had contact with
               | as a child, this was seen as strange and something to be
               | discouraged, because these things were seen as gendered.
               | 
               | I think these things were much more gendered at the time,
               | as well. It is crazy for me to look back and remember how
               | there was a time when I hadn't made up my mind about
               | whether gay marriage was okay or not. Things have changed
               | a lot over the past 20 years or so.
        
               | rendall wrote:
               | I dunno. My social set would never discourage a child
               | from this at all. However, of those of us who had
               | children, only one (out of, like 50+ children in our
               | extended set) was gender non-conforming boy at 3 and
               | liked to wear girl's clothes and play with dolls.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | zztop44 wrote:
               | I think you might be missing the forest for the trees.
               | Barbies and lipstick are not exclusive to one gender, but
               | they are _associated_ with one gender. I don't think it's
               | controversial to say that people in general will respond
               | differently to a little boy who likes playing with
               | lipstick and barbie dolls compared to a little girl.
        
             | simiones wrote:
             | Have you never asked or seen others ask your boy(s) what
             | girl(s) they prefer at school, or vice versa?
             | 
             | Have you never seen anyone upset if their boys are playing
             | with dolls or their girls are playing with toy swords?
             | 
             | How do you think most parents would react if someone bought
             | a pink dress as a present for for their 6 month old boy, or
             | blue pants for their 6 month old girl?
             | 
             | How would most parents react even today to a children's
             | cartoon featuring two little boys holding hands and kissing
             | on the cheek, or a story about prince charming saving and
             | marrying another prince charming?
             | 
             | Pretending heteronormativity is just some sex related thing
             | that no one actually talks about is absurd.
        
             | ryanbrunner wrote:
             | How many Disney movies has your child watched?
             | Heteronormativity is 100% prevalent in nearly all media.
             | 
             | You don't even have to single out Disney, 99% of popular
             | media will present heterosexual relationships as the norm,
             | and children's media that shows something as benign as a
             | same sex couple holding hands or hugging is viewed as
             | mildly transgressive or at least newsworthy.
             | 
             | Gender non-comforming behaviour is 100% absent outside of
             | maybe a "tomboy" female character (and even that seems less
             | present than it used to be).
        
             | iwillbenice wrote:
        
             | em-bee wrote:
             | it's not the parents, it's everyone around us. i can buy
             | gender neutral toys, clothing and encourage the children to
             | explore everything and not just gender conform activities
             | as much as i want.
             | 
             | but when almost every other friend, relative, other
             | kindergarten/school parents teachers push their own ideas
             | of what is appropriate for girls or boys, my influence ends
             | up being rather small.
             | 
             | i can't push my own ideas here. i can only encourage and
             | protect the diverse interests that my kids develop on their
             | own.
        
             | bognition wrote:
             | I get it that this stuff is confusing and can be hard to
             | make sense of at first, but gender identity and sexuality
             | are completely different things.
             | 
             | Also I'm not accusing anyone of pushing this on their kids,
             | rather, our society does it in massive doses. Watch most
             | children's TV shows or movies and heteronormativity is
             | abundant.
             | 
             | For a pretty clean example of this check out the movie Up
             | by Pixar. The first 10 minutes of the movie are devoted to
             | Carl & Ellie's relationship and the loss of that
             | relationship serves as a major driver for the movie.
             | 
             | Also there's nothing wrong with showing children this kind
             | of content. It helps them make sense of the world. However,
             | there is an issue with representation. When it's all they
             | see then it constrains their minds as to what is possible.
        
               | dahfizz wrote:
               | > I get it that this stuff is confusing and can be hard
               | to make sense of at first, but gender identity and
               | sexuality are completely different things.
               | 
               | Yeah, but the comment OP is responding to was explicitly
               | about letting kids " _explore their sexuality_ ".
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | > With these pressures lessening more and more _people_
               | are feeling empowered to explore their sexuality.
               | 
               | Emphasis mine. The comment is not, in fact, about letting
               | _children_ explore their sexuality, but _people_. (When
               | you consider the parent of that comment, that still does
               | not add context implying that we 're talking about kids.)
               | 
               | The only part of the comment which discusses children is
               | this:
               | 
               | > For the last several decades society put massive
               | pressure on kids to conform to heteronormativity.
               | 
               | To read this as sexualizing children is misunderstanding
               | the term heteronormativity, but regardless, this is the
               | behavior that is being criticized, not championed.
        
               | dahfizz wrote:
               | You chopped the one statement into different "parts".
               | Here is the comment in question:
               | 
               | > For the last several decades society put massive
               | pressure on kids to conform to heteronormativity. With
               | these pressures lessening more and more people are
               | feeling empowered to explore their sexuality.
               | 
               | In a maximally generous interpretation, you could say
               | that the "kids" in the first half and the "people" in the
               | second half of the statement are completely different
               | subjects. I think that is a bit of a stretch, though.
               | 
               | "For years I have been pruning the tomato plants in my
               | garden. Now, I just let the _plants_ grow".
               | 
               | Anyone reading that would assume "plants" refers to the
               | aforementioned tomato plants, not cucumbers.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | They are different subjects, or if you prefer, the same
               | subject at different times in their life. They're
               | asserting that societal pressure experienced during
               | childhood has an effect on how sexuality is expressed
               | during adulthood. I chopped it into different parts in
               | order to dissect and analyze it; I ultimately included
               | the entire comment (except a sentence neither of us found
               | relevant and you yourself didn't include), and I was not
               | hiding anything; the entire comment was always available
               | to be inspected, the structure and content of the comment
               | was not in dispute, only it's interpretation.
               | 
               | Consider that, in the example sentence you came up with,
               | you are referring to the same subject, _at different
               | times_.
        
             | notadev wrote:
             | Terms like "heteronormativity" and "cisgender" are just
             | ways they attempt to marginalize normal people and their
             | normal sexual development. These people who use these terms
             | are objectively and statistically outliers in society. And
             | since they can't convince anyone to accept their
             | abnormality, they instead try to change language to remove
             | the idea of there being a standard/normal baseline.
             | 
             | They think that because you're not trying to make them
             | "explore their gender identity" while teaching them ABCs
             | that you are pushing something. It's absolute projection. I
             | support all people to live their lives how they see fit,
             | but I refuse to use their newspeak or pretend like there is
             | not a natural normal.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | Interestingly, newspeak was about removing words from
               | language so that certain ideas couldn't be expressed. It
               | was explicitly not about adding words to the language,
               | and certainly not about adding words to convey additional
               | nuance and precision where there was previously none.
               | 
               | It seems to me like you're actually arguing to try and
               | remove words that people have introduced to the language,
               | and to erase the nuances they convey, because you don't
               | find it to be "normal" or "natural". What is normal or
               | natural is entirely subjective, and varies across
               | cultures and across time, and in any case we don't
               | generally yoke ourselves to what is natural (we are,
               | after all, speaking through an artificial medium because
               | we find it advantageous, and though we weren't born with
               | wings we often find it advantageous to fly.)
               | 
               | It might be interesting to give 1984 another read.
        
               | notadev wrote:
               | I know it's from 1984, but it's considered a word itself
               | as far as I can tell. I was using it as "Deliberately
               | ambiguous and contradictory language used to mislead and
               | manipulate the public." Heterosexuality is the norm, it
               | is the default. Heteronormativity is some nonsense phrase
               | that is used in place of "normal" to try and draw a false
               | equivalency between normal and abnormal. It is intended
               | to muddy the waters and mislead like most contemporary
               | "woke" language.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | There's nothing ambiguous or misleading, what you're
               | actually objecting to is the _concrete_ and _specific_
               | use of language to describe ideas you don 't like and
               | which you don't want to see proliferate. You aren't
               | objecting to people being mislead, you're objecting to
               | people understanding. Do give 1984 a read, I think you'll
               | find the irony that you are appropriating a term used in
               | that book in order to invert it's meaning and to take the
               | very actions that the book is criticizing quite amusing,
               | and then we can be in on the joke together.
               | 
               | Heterosexuality doesn't have to be the default, and
               | indeed, that era is ending. The evidence for it is right
               | here; you feel compelled to go to bat for the notion, not
               | something you'd need to do if it really were mystically
               | natural and inextricably true. Heterosexuality is
               | promulgated as a default because it is key to a power
               | structure called the patriarchy. The patriarchy works by
               | assigning certain gender roles to men and women; these
               | roles allow men to subjugate women, and also allow men to
               | be subjugated by other men. The patriarchy's strength
               | lies in the rigidity of those gender roles, and as the
               | gender roles are loosened the patriarchy gets weaker.
               | Lots of power within our society is expressed through
               | patriarchy, for instance, the idea that men express their
               | agency through violence instead of through emotion and
               | that they should readily throw their lives away in
               | service of a cause is useful for recruiting men as
               | soldiers and police, and soldiers and police are useful
               | in upholding many other power structures (like state
               | power or the power of the rich). So over the last few
               | millenia, many different power structures have come to
               | rely on the existence of patriarchy, and it's been woven
               | into our mythology and the fabric of our society. The
               | fluidity of gender roles is a direct challenge to
               | patriarchy, and people with nonconforming identities have
               | been forced into the closet through violence and social
               | reprisal.
               | 
               | This was a natural series of events in the sense that all
               | of history took place in the context of the natural
               | world, sure. But cancer is natural, we don't have to
               | accept it. In the same way, I reject your
               | heteronormativity. I think it sucks. I don't think people
               | are "naturally" any particular gender, it's a role we
               | learn to play as we're socialized. That doesn't make it
               | bad, there's nothing wrong with being a man or a woman,
               | there's nothing wrong with embracing very traditional
               | views of what that means if that's what makes you happy.
               | I live my life as a pretty traditional man. But that
               | isn't all there is to life, and that's not all it should
               | mean to be human.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | Heterosexuality being prevalent within the population
               | (note that I purposefully avoid idioms like "X is the
               | norm" as ambiguous, especially in this context) is merely
               | the flip side of LGBTQIA+ folks being a minority. Now, a
               | minority can have a robust subculture - and one can
               | certainly make that claim about LGBTQ identity today -
               | but that doesn't somehow make it into not-a-minority.
               | 
               | Social and cultural norms are beside the point here; in
               | fact, the most traditional societies are those that tend
               | to feature the _most_ salient spaces for same-sex quasi-
               | romantic affection and emotionality, with such things as
               | _compadrazgo_ and sworn brotherhood /sisterhood. So it's
               | just not clear how "heteronormativity" is supposed to be
               | an internally coherent concept.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | You're conflating heterosexuality and heteronormativity.
               | You could have a society where heterosexuality is
               | prevalent, without having heteronormativity.
               | Heteronormativity encompasses both heterosexuality and a
               | specific set of gender roles for men and women; so it is
               | not enough for heterosexuality to be prevalent. You need
               | to conflate these genders with heterosexuality, prescribe
               | them, and marginalize sexual and gender identities that
               | do not conform to this.
               | 
               | Heteronormativity isn't an epistemology, there's no
               | burden for it to be consistent. It's a set of beliefs and
               | attitudes, and a label that allows you to critique them.
               | Why would we expect that to be any more consistent than
               | the human behavior it describes (which is to say, only
               | somewhat)? Will this label break down and stop making
               | sense as society changes? Yes, I imagine it will. Will it
               | become unwieldy and eventually fail altogether if we
               | employ it in an analysis spanning cultures with very
               | different conceptions of gender? Absolutely. But you
               | might as well ask whether the concept of pop music is
               | consistent and relate it to the works of Beethoven, if
               | you think that's useful in your analysis than go for it,
               | but if it doesn't work in that circumstance it isn't a
               | condemnation of the idea. The only burden on
               | heteronormativity is to be useful in describing real
               | world behavior, which it clearly is.
               | 
               | If you want to know whether heteronormativity is a real
               | phenomenon, you need look no further than the comment I
               | criticized. It doesn't say, heterosexuality is prevalent;
               | it says, heterosexuality is _total_ , that it is
               | "natural" and "normal", that it is inseparable from
               | gender, and that people living as (or even describing)
               | other gender and sexual identities are doing it to trick
               | you.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > you need look no further than the comment I criticized.
               | It doesn't say, heterosexuality is prevalent; it says,
               | heterosexuality is total
               | 
               | That comment actually said "heterosexuality is normal",
               | which is of course ambiguous - it could mean either of
               | "prevalent" or "not merely prevalent but standard, with
               | deviations from it being seen as undesirable".
               | Heteronormativity might be a description of the latter
               | claim, but to deny that heterosexuality is especially
               | common would be mere wishful thinking.
               | 
               | The claim that gender and sexual orientation are linked
               | would've been quite recognizable to ancient cultures
               | including classical Greece and Rome, where heterosexual
               | behavior was not normative and other sexual arrangements
               | were often celebrated (though their dark, exploitive
               | side, linked to the ubiquity of rape culture as
               | purposeful male domination, was not unrecognized either;
               | and this later fed into Christian condemnation of such
               | practices). So it makes little sense to view that as
               | "heteronormative" either.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | It isn't ambiguous if you consider the entire comment,
               | where they go on to clarify what they mean by invoking a
               | naturalism fallacy and contrasting it with other
               | identities (which they clearly describe in pejorative
               | terms as "abnormal" and "misleading" with an overall tone
               | of derision). Of course I acknowledge that most people
               | are heterosexual, that's such misrepresentation of what
               | I'm saying (including that I've _directly acknowledged
               | this point_ already) I can 't suspend my disbelief it
               | isn't willful. I've provided definitions for all of this,
               | you're choosing not to engage with them.
               | 
               | I make no claims about heteronormativity in Greece or
               | Rome (I do say that the patriarchy is several millennia
               | old, so this could be read as an implicit claim that
               | patriarchy existed in Greece and Rome [and I wouldn't
               | take issue with that claim], but I don't think you'd find
               | this disagreeable, given the "rape culture as purposeful
               | male domination" you reference, and that the definition
               | of patiarchy I provided specifically calls out the
               | domination of men), and gender and sexual identities
               | certainly are linked in the sense that certain
               | combinations are more common than others - they just
               | aren't _synonyms_. As I noted, there is no burden for
               | this concept to translate to other cultures and time
               | periods in order for us to accept it as a useful model
               | for the purposes of our discussion; I 've not seen a
               | counterargument from you on this, so I don't see why I
               | would accept these observations of Greece and Rome as
               | being deleterious to my point, anyway.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | But what I'm taking issue with is merely your claim of
               | heteronormativity as a "set of beliefs and attitudes"
               | that one can ascertain in anything like a consistent way.
               | If _compadrazgo_ and sworn brotherhood are too exotic for
               | you, consider contemporary  "bro" subculture; is it
               | heteronormative? Some people might certainly claim as
               | much, calling it especially misogynistic. Yet it also
               | reportedly involves a lot of emotional affection and
               | bonding among males. By and large, it just doesn't square
               | with what you've been supposing in your earlier comments.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | If you'd like to explain why we should demand that a
               | label describing a set of human behaviors be entirely
               | consistent in order to be considered, when the human
               | behaviors we're describing are frequently inconsistent
               | and contradictory (but still real and worth discussing),
               | then I'm happy to respond. I don't see anything wrong
               | with your examples, I'm not familiar with _compadrazgo_
               | or sworn brotherhood but I 'd be willing to learn more
               | (and until such a time as I read up on them am willing to
               | take what you say about them on face value), I think bro
               | culture is a super interesting thread to tug on and an
               | incisive choice on your part, but if you repeat your
               | argument without engaging with mine, I don't see what you
               | expect me to do other than repeat myself (which I
               | respectfully decline to do).
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Heteronormativity encompasses both heterosexuality and
               | a specific set of gender roles for men and women
               | 
               | Heteronormativity is just heterosexuality as a normative
               | element of social structures (not merely prevalent in
               | society, but where deviation from it is viewed as
               | transgressive.) In modern societies, it is typically tied
               | to patriarchy (a particular normatige structure of gender
               | roles, in which social power is attached to male roles),
               | cisnormativity, and, in particular societies, it may be
               | attached to things like White supremacy that are
               | superficially farther from sex/gender dynamics, but these
               | are nevertheless distinct if linked elements of the
               | cultures they appear in.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | Hmm, pardon, where is it we differ? The word "just" makes
               | me think this is a correction, but I agree with all of
               | that, and I feel like if you that if you take all of that
               | to be true, you get the sentence of mine you've quoted.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | I don't see it as a strong disagreement, but there is a
               | slight but sometimes important difference between
               | heteronormativity _including_ , e.g., cisnormativity and
               | patriarchy, versus heteronormativity being distinct from
               | them but frequently co-occurring with them.
               | 
               | But we certainly agree that heteronormativity is
               | different than society having a majority heterosexual
               | orientation.
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | For sure, I can see how I elided some concepts there; I
               | think my definition was appropriate to the context of
               | this conversation, but I appreciate you keeping me
               | honest.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | > where deviation from it is viewed as transgressive
               | 
               | Note that by this standard, much of LGBTQ+ culture might
               | well be described as heteronormative, since glorifying
               | social transgression _as such_ (not merely inasmuch as it
               | might inevitably follow from having a non-majority gender
               | or sexual orientation) has long been a staple of that
               | particular identity.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | kayodelycaon wrote:
             | It's pretty simple. I grew up with the social expectation I
             | would be some special attraction to girls beyond
             | friendship. There were some people shamefully attracted to
             | boys.
             | 
             | I'm neither of these. I've never experienced sexual
             | attraction to anyone. Every relationship I have is happily
             | platonic. I have several good, close friends, so I capable
             | of deep emotional bonds to people of any gender.
             | 
             | This would have been fine if I didn't have a high sex
             | drive. But I do. You're not supposed to have a high sex
             | drive while being completely uninterested.
             | 
             | I've wondered most of my life why I was broken. It was
             | extremely isolating to be constantly surrounded by messages
             | telling me there is something wrong with me.
             | 
             | Then I found out what asexuality is. That's what I am.
             | Romantic attraction can be completely devoid of sexual
             | attraction. Someone's sex drive can be independent of a
             | person's sexuality.
             | 
             | It hasn't been any less isolating, but at least I know
             | there is nothing wrong with me as a person.
        
             | efkiel wrote:
             | heteronormativity include sexual behavior, but mostly
             | contains other behavior. Like the way you dress, talk or
             | present yourself, the activities or kind of play you do or
             | like. Parent comment is mostly talking about non-sexual
             | heteronormativity, which is often presented as the norm. An
             | obvious example would be an adult insisting that pink is
             | for girl and blue for boys, and shaming a kid for liking
             | what's not the (hetero-)norm.
        
             | jasonlotito wrote:
             | Heteronormativity isn't sexualizing anything. The only
             | person talking about sexualizing children is you.
             | 
             | The voting on your comment is crazy because your ignorance
             | on the topic is showing and it's dangerous and insulting.
             | 
             | Educate yourself.
        
               | dahfizz wrote:
               | Read bognition's comment. They literally say that kids
               | are "empowered to explore their sexuality".
        
               | maxbond wrote:
               | This is incorrect, as you and I discuss here:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33879888
        
               | jasonlotito wrote:
               | This comment is a lie.
               | 
               | They literally do not say "kids are empowered to explore
               | their sexuality."
               | 
               | Kids grow up into adults.
               | 
               | xd is the one that brought up sexualizing children. No
               | reasonable person here would assume anyone is talking
               | about sexualizing children unless they explicitly said as
               | much.
               | 
               | Somehow you and xd are thinking "people are feeling
               | empowered to explore their sexuality" explicitly means
               | "kids" in this context. Why you are thinking that, I
               | don't know.
        
               | xd wrote:
               | "For the last several decades society put massive
               | pressure on kids to conform to heteronormativity. With
               | these pressures lessening more and more people are
               | feeling empowered to explore their sexuality."
               | 
               | He talks about society putting pressure on kids to be
               | straight and then talks about people and sexuality in the
               | same damn paragraph; are you being purposefully obtuse?
        
             | quietbritishjim wrote:
             | I have no skin in the overall debate but it's clear that a
             | prince and princess running off together in a Disney film
             | is heteronormative, while most people wouldn't consider it
             | to be abhorrently sexualising for children to watch those
             | films.
        
               | refurb wrote:
               | I mean, heterosexuality is the predominant form of
               | sexuality in humans?
               | 
               | Humans come in all forms. Most humans have two legs, but
               | not all. Some are born missing a leg and some lose them
               | from injuries. If we only show two legged characters in
               | Disney films does that mean it's some sinister message of
               | "bipedalnormativity"?
        
               | quietbritishjim wrote:
               | I never said it was sinister. I just made a statement of
               | fact that it shows a heterosexual relationship, but
               | doesn't significantly sexualise children. If anything, my
               | comment could be construed as defending that sort of film
               | rather than attacking it.
        
           | rendall wrote:
           | > _For the last several decades society put massive pressure
           | on kids to conform to heteronormativity_
           | 
           | This is patently untrue. Since the 60s, western society has
           | been increasingly accomodating to the non-gender-conforming.
           | Especially with the rise of the internet, people who once
           | felt isolated with whatever made them different were able to
           | find others like themselves.
        
             | brookst wrote:
             | I wouldn't say it's untrue, just incomplete. Kids who
             | present as the "wrong" gender are still much more likely to
             | be bullied by kids and emotionally abused by parents.
             | 
             | But that isn't a new thing in the past few decades, and
             | indeed it does seem to be getting better.
        
           | largepeepee wrote:
           | >For the last several decades society put massive pressure on
           | kids to conform to heteronormativity.
           | 
           | Only decades? You mean for all of history, where there are
           | distinct roles mostly because of anatomy.
           | 
           | In fact, it was only in recent decades with birth control
           | that was there even an option for most women to take a
           | different role for extended periods.
           | 
           | I'll say the opposite is true, the last several decades did a
           | great job and removed the notion of heterogenomativity. We
           | are just going so far past that into the illogical now.
        
             | TomSwirly wrote:
             | > it was only in recent decades with birth control that was
             | there even an option for most women to take a different
             | role for extended periods.
             | 
             | Reliable birth control methods are sixty years old. And of
             | course there have always been non-reproductive sex acts
             | since the birth of time.
        
             | red_admiral wrote:
             | I think it's a bit more complicated than that.
             | 
             | As far as "all of history" goes, ancient Greece for example
             | tolerated a particular kind of "homosexuality", but not one
             | we should try and emulate - it matched neither of two
             | conditions in "consenting adults", for example.
             | 
             | While it's true that few if any societies other than
             | "modern Western" would score as high as ours on Stonewall's
             | diversity index, there were definitely ups and downs if you
             | plotted things over time.
             | 
             | Go back several generations in the USA or Western Europe
             | and it's absolutely normal for straight men to have close
             | and emotional friendships for life; when photography was
             | first invented, it was a thing that male BFFs had photos of
             | themselves taken that I bet anyone today, if shown without
             | context, would immediately pattern-match to "gay couple".
             | I'm going to quote the "art of manliness" site, of all
             | places, on this:
             | https://www.artofmanliness.com/people/relationships/bosom-
             | bu... (warning: images may be considered NSFW at your place
             | of work, despite being absolutely non-pornographic as far
             | as I can tell)
             | 
             | Some of these men were undoubtedly gay in the sense we
             | understand the term, but the idea of having a close
             | emotional bond with another man was certainly open to
             | straight men too (and to some extent, also expected).
             | 
             | But then, to quote "The History of Male Friendships" linked
             | on that page,
             | 
             | > First, men were free to have affectionate man
             | relationships with each other without fear of being called
             | a "queer" because the concept of homosexuality as we know
             | it today didn't exist then. America didn't have the strict
             | straight/gay dichotomy that currently exists. Affectionate
             | feelings weren't strictly labeled as sexual or platonic.
             | There wasn't even a name for homosexual sex; instead, it
             | was referred to as "the crime that cannot be spoken." It
             | wasn't until the turn of the 19th century that
             | psychologists started analyzing homosexuality. When that
             | happened, men in America started to become much more self-
             | conscious about their relationships with their buds and
             | traded the close embraces for a stiff pat on the back.
             | 
             | > [...]
             | 
             | > The man friendship underwent some serious transformations
             | during the 20th century. Men went from lavishing endearing
             | words on each other and holding hands to avoiding too much
             | emotional bonding or any sort of physical affections
             | whatsoever. Fear of being called gay drove much of the
             | transformation. Ministers and politicians decried
             | homosexuality as being incompatible with true manhood. And
             | like most deviant behavior in the 1950s, homosexuality was
             | associated with Communism.
             | 
             | So, once "gay" appeared on people's radar,
             | heteronormativity shot through the roof and men were
             | expected to be performatively straight, to prove themselves
             | that they were not "tainted" by this new "affliction".
             | That's where a lot of this pressure came from, it was
             | definitely not constant throughout all of even relatively
             | modern history.
        
               | dahfizz wrote:
               | You make a case that gender norms have changed over time,
               | not that there were no gender norms in the past.
        
               | red_admiral wrote:
               | Indeed. But my argument is specifically that the norms
               | around acceptable behaviour for a straight male have
               | significantly narrowed from roughly the end of the 19th
               | century to the 1960s.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | I'd argue that the trend continued past the 1960s. While
               | yes, there is certainly more acceptance of homosexual
               | men, there is also a continuing trend towards an
               | exaggerated extreme masculinity that would have felt out
               | of place in the 1960s.
               | 
               | Maybe it's more accurate to say Western (and in
               | particular American) culture has fragmented, and one of
               | those cultures has increasingly put stricter and stricter
               | norms around acceptable heterosexual male behaviour to
               | the point where it's nearly parody.
        
         | JKCalhoun wrote:
         | Tough call since it is also possible a certain number of people
         | have always felt this way but only by others "coming out" do
         | they now feel comfortable expressing themselves as well.
        
         | fredley wrote:
         | This reminds me of the virus in _Snow Crash_ which is spread
         | virtually, but affects its victims physically.
        
         | DarkWiiPlayer wrote:
         | > because nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_
         | to want to be another gender.
         | 
         | Because we can't. And trust me, I have tried. Trans people are
         | neither "over represented" nor a contagion.
         | 
         | And it's not about "hate speech"; it's about stopping the
         | spread of lies and extremist propaganda. The lie that "being
         | trans is a choice" is just one little moving part in the
         | massive machinery of oppressing, persecuting and killing trans
         | people. You don't need actual hate speech to cause harm.
        
           | ergonaught wrote:
           | Are there actual people with Tourette's? Yes.
           | 
           | Are there actual people who "learned" to have something
           | Tourette's-like? Yes.
           | 
           | If you don't distinguish between the two, then Tourette's is
           | absolutely overrepresented.
           | 
           | Denying that this can be the case for gender dysmorphia is
           | neither reasoned nor logical and can absolutely lead to harm.
           | 
           | There has to be a way to respect and help people without
           | turning off our brains.
        
         | claudiawerner wrote:
         | >This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because
         | nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want
         | to be another gender.
         | 
         | Did you _really_ think this was going to be downvoted on Hacker
         | News of all places?
        
           | spoils19 wrote:
           | The famously 'progressive' HackerNews? Years of reading the
           | comments has led me to believe that the GPs assumption is
           | mostly correct.
        
             | claudiawerner wrote:
             | It could be my own bias, but I don't see HN as a
             | particularly progressive place, at least as compared to,
             | say, Reddit. Granted, it can be a good or a bad thing, but
             | HN has a far wider spectrum of opinions that get upvoted;
             | IME trans issues in particular dominate comment threads
             | when it comes to LGBT issues.
        
         | denton-scratch wrote:
         | > illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically
         | over represented
         | 
         | Can you explain what it means for an illness to be
         | "statistically over-represented"?
         | 
         | I can parse it several ways, but not so it makes sense. E.g.
         | 
         | - Gender dysphoria is more common than influenza
         | 
         | - Gender dysphoria is more common in human societies than in
         | gendered alien communities
         | 
         | - Gender dysphoria is discussed by a greater proportion of
         | Youtube posters than you'd expect from it's rate in the
         | population
         | 
         | I'm guessing you mean the last; but I have no idea how mmuch
         | it's discussed on Youtube, and I doubt there are reliable
         | figures for its occurrence in the population.
        
         | kome wrote:
         | very very good point. and anecdotally, i think it's indeed the
         | case for gender dysphoria...
         | 
         | btw, not long ago there was a sociologist from columbia,
         | working on the autism epidemics, pointing out how autism is
         | "contagious" among parents
         | https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122411399389 - so
         | it's not for the first time that we point out at the
         | sociogenesis of mental illness
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | Hell no it's not. Gender non-conforming people have been a
           | staple throughout human history, with examples dating back to
           | _at least_ the 2nd century AD [1], and not just in Europe but
           | in South Asia as well [2].
           | 
           | The thing is, many societies didn't care for a long time, and
           | only in the 20th century repression really took off with the
           | rise of ultra-fundamentalist religions. Now we're seeing the
           | backlash against that and people obviously are way more free
           | to be who they are once again - so neither a surprise nor an
           | epidemic.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elagabalus
           | 
           | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_(South_Asia)
        
             | kome wrote:
             | i know it has been a staple throughout human history, and
             | i'm not contesting that. i just posit that the proportion
             | of it, nowadays, might be inflated by social media and
             | mimetic behaviors. edit, a very enlightening comment:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33879136
        
         | 4gotunameagain wrote:
         | This is the direct outcome of "political correctness", and of
         | silencing people that disagree with you.
         | 
         | Even suggesting the fact that mass sociogenic illnesses
         | (formerly called mass hysteria) primarily affect girls [1] goes
         | against the new religion and is vilified immediately.
         | 
         | [1] https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/106/5/420.full.pdf
        
           | ryanbrunner wrote:
           | Most objections of claims about mass sociogenic illnesses
           | that I've seen have to do with people using it to dismiss
           | behaviour they don't like, often without any real evidence
           | that this is "mass sociogenic illness".
           | 
           | Even this article doesn't really make any attempt to disprove
           | a null hypothesis and we basically are required to take these
           | people at their word that a) the behaviour expressed is not
           | consistent with Tourette's and the patients don't actually
           | have it, and b) the source of this is due to the YouTuber
           | mentioned. There's no control group or anything to prove
           | these two facts beyond the author's opinion.
        
         | RC_ITR wrote:
         | >then this opens new doors to examining the behaviour of other
         | illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically over
         | represented.
         | 
         | Don't fall into the trap of assuming that 1950's Western norms
         | are a 'baseline.'
         | 
         | History shows us that almost _all_ expressions of gender are
         | fluid. The idea of  "men and women need to be segregated in
         | certain places (particularly when nude) and must dress
         | differently' is likely _the cause_ of how prevalent transgender
         | people have become. It was always an unsustainable system that
         | was only allowed to flourish because a powerful minority wanted
         | it to. Like are you a boy that relates primarily to women? Well
         | you either endure being separated from them for _a ton_ of
         | meaningful developmental activities _or_ you become
         | transgender.
         | 
         | I think there are plenty of people who would be fine with their
         | biological sex _if it didn 't come with so much societal
         | baggage._
        
           | SavageBeast wrote:
           | > ... and must dress differently
           | 
           | Operating based on a sampling of women I know - Im going to
           | perform an experiment - I have some clothes of mine that I
           | (Male with a capital M) no longer wear and Im going to give
           | them to some Female friends for their own use.
           | 
           | We'll see what happens but I bet Im going to be met with
           | confusing expressions and laughed at - at best.
           | 
           | Men and women do not dress differently on the count of
           | societal pressures but rather express themselves differently
           | on the count of different imperatives. You can slice it 6
           | different ways but outside of a small minority of people with
           | non-standard gender ideals, the vast majority of women want
           | to "be pretty" in whatever way that means to them and the
           | vast majority of men want to "look like a man" for their
           | various reasons and in whatever way that means to them.
           | 
           | I realize this is a terribly "incorrect" thing to say these
           | days but at the same time its among the most pervasive ideals
           | I can think of - right up there with the understanding that
           | water is wet. Out side of groups where the word "Patriarchy"
           | is thrown around, men are men and women are women and neither
           | would have it any other way. This isn't due to societal
           | pressure to conform either. This is prevailing behavior of
           | both genders at work.
           | 
           | I personally do not understand why a minority of people
           | choosing alternative, non-birth gender roles needs to be cast
           | into some movement where everyones gender is in question. Im
           | not sure I know anyone who has ever so much as questioned the
           | "baggage" their bio-gender is supposedly saddled with.
           | According to modern psychiatry (which for the purposes of
           | this conversation we'll assume is valid since we all agree
           | Sociopathy and Eating Disorders are real things too), the
           | DSM-5 includes Gender Dysphoria. Psychiatry considers that a
           | real thing right next to some other things I think we can all
           | agree are real.
           | 
           | > History shows us that almost all expressions of gender are
           | fluid.
           | 
           | politely said: CITATION PLEASE
        
             | RC_ITR wrote:
             | >Operating based on a sampling of women I know
             | 
             | How big and diverse is _that_ sample?
             | 
             | >You can slice it 6 different ways but outside of a small
             | minority
             | 
             | How small is that minority?
             | 
             | >the vast majority of women want to "be pretty"
             | 
             | Are you implying that there's an objective idea of 'pretty'
             | as it relates to fashion? That a woman in pants can't be
             | 'pretty'? Can I point you to powerful men in high-heeled
             | shoes in the 10th Century? Lots of women were attracted to
             | _that_ back then, _because of what it meant from a societal
             | standpoint_.
             | 
             |  _Or_ are you implying that it 's fine for men to dress in
             | women's clothes? Because if so then why are we here?
             | 
             | >I realize this is a terribly "incorrect" thing to say
             | 
             | It's not 'incorrect,' it's intellectually lazy.
             | 
             | >I personally do not understand why a minority of people
             | choosing alternative, non-birth gender roles needs to be
             | cast into some movement where everyones gender is in
             | question.
             | 
             | Luckily, that's a strawman so you can stop being confused
             | by it.
             | 
             | > History shows us that almost all expressions of gender
             | are fluid
             | 
             | Again, are high heels for boys or girls? History's opinion
             | will surprise you!
             | 
             | Now listen, outside of snark, I _understand_ its hard to
             | see outside of the environment you 've lived for your
             | entire life, but this is a forum for _hackers_ so maybe be
             | a little bit more open to people questioning and
             | challenging things you hold dear?
             | 
             | EDIT: You know what, here's one of many phenomenon that you
             | seem to be unaware of:
             | 
             |  _Although Europeans were first attracted to heels because
             | the Persian connection gave them a macho air, a craze in
             | women 's fashion for adopting elements of men's dress meant
             | their use soon spread to women and children.
             | 
             | "In the 1630s you had women cutting their hair, adding
             | epaulettes to their outfits," says Semmelhack.
             | 
             | "They would smoke pipes, they would wear hats that were
             | very masculine. And this is why women adopted the heel - it
             | was in an effort to masculinise their outfits."
             | 
             | From that time, Europe's upper classes followed a unisex
             | shoe fashion until the end of the 17th Century, when things
             | began to change again.
             | 
             | "You start seeing a change in the heel at this point," says
             | Helen Persson, a curator at the Victoria and Albert Museum
             | in London. "Men started to have a squarer, more robust,
             | lower, stacky heel, while women's heels became more
             | slender, more curvaceous."_
             | 
             | [Citation - https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21151350]
        
           | LawTalkingGuy wrote:
           | > The idea of "men and women need to be segregated in certain
           | places (particularly when nude) and must dress differently'
           | is likely the cause of how prevalent transgender people have
           | become.
           | 
           | Have you ever been a parent? Because males and females are
           | different, and the sexual pressures on them are immensely
           | different too, for both social and physical reasons.
           | Similarly, sexual risk (to anyone, but especially children)
           | is incredibly lopsided and comes almost entirely from males.
           | 
           | If you ignore sexual differences in other children you will
           | let your children be mistreated, if you ignore sexual
           | differences in adults you will get them molested.
           | 
           | > It was always an unsustainable system that was only allowed
           | to flourish because a powerful minority wanted it to.
           | 
           | Pretty much all women know and are cautious, if not fearful,
           | of male violence. They fought for women's sex-based rights
           | because of obvious need. This isn't men putting women in
           | purdah, these are protections they've achieved for
           | themselves. Most men can see the extra work women have to do
           | for safety reasons. The need for women's spaces is far from a
           | minority opinion.
           | 
           | > Like are you a boy that relates primarily to women? Well
           | you either endure being separated from them for a ton of
           | meaningful developmental activities or you become
           | transgender.
           | 
           | If you truly empathized with women you'd realized that your
           | size and strength and biology makes you a risk that another
           | woman wouldn't be and you'd socialize with women in mixed-sex
           | areas and activities where your presence wasn't an undue
           | burden.
           | 
           | > I think there are plenty of people who would be fine with
           | their biological sex if it didn't come with so much societal
           | baggage.
           | 
           | It's the physical baggage people are wrongly trying to
           | ignore.
        
           | RobertRoberts wrote:
           | > ...if it didn't come with so much societal baggage.
           | 
           | Isn't societal baggage also a perception issue? Take 10
           | people with all the same physical traits and the same social
           | situation and you will get 10 different perspectives.
           | 
           | Why should I accept there is _any_ baggage as a fact? It may
           | just appear so for a massive amount of people, and _that_
           | could be fluid.
        
             | RC_ITR wrote:
             | So you're telling me that a boy who identifies as a boy is
             | fine to change with the girls at PE and do their
             | activities?
             | 
             |  _OR_ is there  'baggage' to being a boy in this scenario?
        
               | RobertRoberts wrote:
               | I am just saying many of these things are subjective, and
               | just because someone says "it's baggage" doesn't mean it
               | is for everyone.
        
               | RC_ITR wrote:
               | Please answer my question directly.
               | 
               | Is it 'subjective' that many activities are segregated by
               | gender in the West?
               | 
               | If a person doesn't like that, how is it not a logical
               | response to try to change their gender?
        
         | LudwigNagasena wrote:
         | What boggles my mind is that people who adamantly claim that
         | all gender behavior is socially constructed are the ones who
         | are the first to denounce the idea that you can learn to want
         | to be another gender.
        
           | GaryNumanVevo wrote:
           | It's less "learning to be another gender" but more being in a
           | society that allows an individual to express their gender as
           | something other than their sex.
        
           | funcDropShadow wrote:
           | And they are absolutely sure that you need a physical
           | modification to adapt to a socially constructed norm. And at
           | the same time they demand medical procedures while denying
           | that it is a medical condition, whose treatment needs to be
           | studied with scientific rigor. Instead they say the affected
           | persons know their best treatment.
           | 
           | Just imagine applying that same approach to addicts.
        
             | Macha wrote:
             | Is it? Transmedicalists (those who belive sex reassignment
             | is a required goal) are a minority in trans communities and
             | "truscum" was created as a derogatory term for this
             | attitude indicating its unpopularity.
             | 
             | If you mean puberty blockers for trans youth rather than
             | sex reassignment, they have much more support because of
             | their non-permanent nature. We let many teenagers make
             | decisions about things like tattoos and piercings too
        
               | smeej wrote:
               | There's still a significant ave gap between these two
               | populations, though. Tattoos and piercings can be
               | obtained by 16-18yos without parental consent, but to be
               | effective, puberty blockers need to start near or before
               | the beginning of puberty, when children are usually 10-14
               | years old.
               | 
               | We may not be talking about many years by raw count, but
               | as a percentage of the total lifespan of those involved,
               | the first group is ~50% older than the second.
        
               | leephillips wrote:
               | The use of puberty blockers to delay the normal onset of
               | puberty is experimental and there is plenty of evidence
               | that it has irreversible and serious, often tragic,
               | effects:
               | 
               | https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.
               | 100...
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | joenot443 wrote:
               | Puberty blockers being non-permanent is a misconception,
               | it's rather concerning seeing it presented otherwise.
        
               | aliqot wrote:
               | puberty blockers are not non permanent, thats just the
               | acute effects.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | monodeldiablo wrote:
               | I find it very concerning that anyone would attempt to
               | present puberty blockers as "non-permanent".
               | Extraordinary claims like that require extraordinary
               | evidence.
        
           | simiones wrote:
           | I don't think that happens too often. The problem is that
           | there are at least two different and often opposing currents
           | in pro-trans movements.
           | 
           | One is from the "gender is a social construct" post-modernist
           | side, which views the very idea that people are either men or
           | women with some suspicion, and leads to concepts such as
           | gender fluidity, non-binary identities, and the idea that
           | maybe young kids should not be gendered at all unless and
           | until they chose to assume some gender.
           | 
           | The other current is much more conservative, and starts with
           | the simple observation that some people experience extreme
           | gender dysphoria that has only successfully been cured (or at
           | least alleviated) by gender-affirming care (from gender
           | expression to hormone treatments to top/bottom surgery to
           | facial feminization/masculinization surgery and beyond). This
           | current considers it much more clear that humans are
           | generally either men or women, with relatively clear
           | associated characteristics, and simply considers that some
           | people happen to have the "wrong" characteristics. Rather
           | than investigating the philosophical reasoning of why this
           | might be happening and what it means for the concepts
           | woman/man, it is much more concerned with the practical
           | problem of how to make life better for people who feel like
           | this.
           | 
           | My impression is that the second group is much much more
           | prevalent, but also seen as problematic by the first group.
           | The first group is much more extreme, and has much more
           | "interesting" talking points, so it is significantly over-
           | represented in online discussions and media.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | nicoburns wrote:
             | > My impression is that the second group is much much more
             | prevalent, but also seen as problematic by the first group.
             | The first group is much more extreme, and has much more
             | "interesting" talking points, so it is significantly over-
             | represented in online discussions and media.
             | 
             | My impression is that extreme opinions are mostly from two
             | subgroups of the second group:
             | 
             | - Those who believe that gender is essentially defined by
             | physical characteristics
             | 
             | - Those who believe that gender is essentially defined by
             | social characteristics.
             | 
             | Their inability (or unwillingness) to more deeply consider
             | the concepts of "men"/"women" place them in conflict with
             | each other because each of them want to use a different
             | concept, and neither of them are open to exploring
             | different ones.
             | 
             | The only way I can see this being resolved is by taking an
             | attitude more similar to first group.
        
               | simiones wrote:
               | True, a little bit of philosophy can be a dangerous
               | thing, since it can lead to a shallow kind of idealism
               | that can easily fall into extremism at all.
               | 
               | However, I believe that the general attitude of the trans
               | community is relatively moderate and easy to accept:
               | 
               | 1. Trans people should be able to get the kinds of
               | treatment they need (from therapy all the way to
               | aesthetic surgery), in cooperation with their doctors.
               | Children should be allowed to get some treatment, and
               | their parents should be involved (with some complexity
               | when the parents' bigotry may interfere with the best
               | interest of the child).
               | 
               | 2. Other people shouldn't be allowed to ostracize one for
               | being trans, and should seek to accommodate them (such as
               | not referring to them with the wrong pronouns or name);
               | accidental use is easily forgiven, but intentional
               | misgendering is clearly malicious; the problem of "non-
               | passing" trans people complicates this somewhat
               | 
               | 3. Trans people should be allowed to use the amenities
               | that correspond to their gender, which will, in the vast
               | majority of circumstances, correspond to their gender
               | presentation; "non-passing" trans people complicate this,
               | as does participation in competitive sports
               | 
               | However, I believe trying to modify society to dispense
               | with the concepts man & woman, or to avoid inoculating
               | them in children - as would be natural if we take the
               | position of the first group too seriously - is way beyond
               | what most people would agree with.
               | 
               | Of course, extreme positions such as trans-
               | medicalists/truscum or people insisting everyone "shares
               | their pronouns" and such are somewhat significant sub-
               | groups, as are people who insist that children should be
               | able to just take hormones without any supervision from
               | doctors or parents if they really think it's right for
               | them (I've seen this exact position on HN before). But
               | while they exist, I think they are still loud minorities,
               | even within the relatively small trans community.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | The question of how many people happen to genuinely be in
             | the liminal space between male and female gender expression
             | is very much an empirical matter, not about philosophy. In
             | the real world, seemingly clear-cut binary distinctions and
             | fuzzy, mysterious liminal phenomena are not opposed to one
             | another; they can very much coexist.
        
               | nicoburns wrote:
               | I would suggest that empirically it's pretty much
               | everybody. Almost nobody is entirely masculine or
               | feminine. And it seems to me that the world would be a
               | better place if we recognised that for everybody not just
               | those who especially struggle with a world that places us
               | into binary categories.
        
             | Kye wrote:
             | Then there's the third one that sees that there probably is
             | some biological aspect, but the way it's expressed depends
             | on the culture's concept of gender. I favor this one since
             | it provides an explanation for the existence of trans
             | people of some sort in every society throughout history
             | without discounting nature or nurture.
        
           | ReactiveJelly wrote:
           | The trouble is, the Internet is bathroom stall graffiti.
           | 
           | If I say "For me it's a choice" then it undermines the people
           | for whom it is not a choice. Because most of the audience in
           | the bathroom stall aren't doing research to put together a
           | comprehensive understanding of gender, they're just reading
           | what in front of them for that day, and then leaving.
           | 
           | If I say gender can be learned, we can spend days bickering
           | about what "learned" really means.
           | 
           | It's not fun. And I'm sorry that someone else said something
           | you think is contradictory.
        
             | LudwigNagasena wrote:
             | People have been saying "it's just the Internet" since 2007
             | or whenever Tumblr appeared. It's a tired defense. Such
             | treatment of gender that makes people feel good but only
             | makes sense on the superficial level permeates modern
             | discourse and invades institutional structures deeper each
             | day.
             | 
             | You cannot keep the society well-functioning by treating
             | the law and social norms as a bathroom stall or as
             | something that you should mindlessly follow without
             | comprehensive understanding.
        
           | MontyCarloHall wrote:
           | You've nicely explained why trans-exclusionary radical
           | feminists (TERFs) exist. Absolute belief that gender is
           | purely a social construct (a core tenet of second-wave
           | feminism) is strictly incompatible with gender dysphoria
           | existing at all, since gender dysphoria necessarily means
           | that our brains are inherently wired to be male or female.
           | 
           | The reality is more nuanced--while certain gender _roles_ are
           | purely social constructs, other aspects of gender are
           | hardwired.
        
             | nicoburns wrote:
             | > Absolute belief that gender is purely a social construct
             | (a core tenet of second-wave feminism) is strictly
             | incompatible with gender dysphoria existing at all, since
             | gender dysphoria necessarily means that our brains are
             | inherently wired to be male or female.
             | 
             | That's not true. It would just indicate that the gender
             | dysphoria is socially caused (perhaps by the imposition of
             | strong gender norms) rather than being an unavoidable part
             | of someone's nature.
             | 
             | It does lead to very different policy proposals though: if
             | gender dysphoria is socially caused then it makes sense to
             | prioritise minimising the cause (by widening the scope of
             | acceptable gender expression for each gender) rather than
             | treating the symptom (by allowing people to change their
             | recognised gender).
        
               | MontyCarloHall wrote:
               | >It would just indicate that the gender dysphoria is
               | socially caused (perhaps by the imposition of strong
               | gender norms) rather than being an unavoidable part of
               | someone's nature.
               | 
               | It seems unlikely to me that social norms alone could
               | cause gender dysphoric people to believe so strongly that
               | their gender identity mismatches their biological sex
               | (i.e. physical body) that they are willing to undergo
               | dramatic, irreversible medical procedures like gender
               | reassignment surgery and other transitioning procedures
               | to rectify the mismatch.
               | 
               | There are plenty of people who strongly defy gender norms
               | yet still strongly identify their gender as being
               | concordant with their biological sex. Gender dysphoria
               | goes far beyond mere nonconformity to gender norms; many
               | trans people explicitly say that they feel like they were
               | born into the wrong body.
        
               | nicoburns wrote:
               | > It seems unlikely to me that social norms alone could
               | cause gender dysphoric people to believe so strongly that
               | their gender identity mismatches their biological sex
               | 
               | I think it's quite likely.
               | 
               | As an analogy, it seems relatively common for people to
               | become so convinced that they are so unattractive that
               | they undergo highly invasive cosmetic surgery. It's also
               | very much the case that there are social groups where
               | this is normalised (and many people in those social
               | groups will choose to have this surgery) and social
               | groups where it is not (and people in those groups are
               | unlikely to opt for cosmetic surgery).
               | 
               | The difference seems to be that the people in one social
               | group are telling each other that the appropriate
               | solution to feeling unattractive means that one is
               | unattractive and that surgery to change one's body is an
               | appropriate response to that, whereas in the other social
               | group people might either convince each other that
               | they're attractive as they are, or seek alternative
               | remedies such as changes in clothing, grooming, make-up,
               | etc. Or even therapy, self-esteem coaching or similar.
               | 
               | Similarly, if one is an environment where one is
               | constantly told that men (or women) are or should act/be
               | a certain way, then it is hardly surprising that one
               | might develop the notion that one isn't a man/woman. Such
               | an environment is commonly created by people with
               | traditional notions of gender. But it's reinforced by
               | people suggesting that transitioning might be the
               | solution to not fitting one's gender norms.
               | 
               | Which isn't to say that there aren't people for whom
               | physically transitioning is the right answer (the best
               | solution for them), or that do have an inherent dislike
               | of their body that isn't externally influenced. Likewise,
               | there are people for whom cosmetic surgery is absolutely
               | the right solution (e.g. people with a cleft palate or
               | who have suffered from severe burns). But I question the
               | way it currently seems to being positioned (by some
               | people) as the default response to not fitting in with
               | the norms of one's existing gender, and I also question
               | the idea that it is innate and not socially influenced.
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | People will do practically anything in order to be
               | socially accepted. The followers of the ancient goddess
               | Cybele famously underwent ritual gender transition, as
               | related most effectively in Catullus 63.
        
         | lukev wrote:
         | This is a dangerous rhetorical maneuver, though, because it:
         | 
         | 1. Accepts the existence and influence of social-media-induced
         | illness:
         | 
         | 2. Does not rigorously define the condition, it's symptoms,
         | scope or mechanism:
         | 
         | 3. Therefore, leaving us free to apply it to gender identity or
         | really, anything at all.
         | 
         | Trumpism? SMII. Wokeness? SMII. Pro-union sentiment? You're not
         | gonna believe this, also a SMII.
         | 
         | And once you call something a "disease" the implication is that
         | it should be "cured" which gets scary quick.
        
         | Karawebnetwork wrote:
         | According to Gallup's poll in early 2022, which they present as
         | estimates, 0.7% of the US population is trans. In India, 0.6%
         | people self-identified as hijra (Sahastrabuddhe et al., 2012).
         | In the 2011 census in India, 0.04% answered with "Other" when
         | asked to choose between "Male", "Female" and "Other".
         | 
         | Canada included the question in their latest census and the
         | result was 0.2%. In my opinion, a mandatory government census
         | provides data that is more accurate than Gallup's phone poll.
         | 
         | "The proportions of transgender and non-binary people were
         | three to seven times higher for Generation Z (born between 1997
         | and 2006, 0.79%) and millennials (born between 1981 and 1996,
         | 0.51%) than for Generation X (born between 1966 and 1980,
         | 0.19%), baby boomers (born between 1946 and 1965, 0.15%) and
         | the Interwar and Greatest Generations (born in 1945 or earlier,
         | 0.12%)."
         | 
         | Canada's government also adds this under their data
         | comparability section: "Belgium (0.5% among people aged 18 to
         | 75 in 2021) and New Zealand (0.5% among people aged 18 and
         | older in 2020) have also published representative survey-based
         | data on their transgender populations.
         | 
         | Other countries have published 2021 data on transgender people
         | using crowdsourcing and non-representative surveys, including
         | Ireland (0.6% among people aged 18 and older), England and
         | Wales (0.6% among people aged 16 and older), and the United
         | States (0.8% among people aged 18 and older)."
         | 
         | Being transgender is not a mental disorder or illness, but
         | rather a natural variation of human diversity. Everyone has the
         | right to express their gender identity in a way that is
         | authentic and comfortable for them. I fail to see how the topic
         | of a mass social media-induced illness applies here.
        
         | Macha wrote:
         | Of course if gender non-normativity can be learned, so too can
         | gender normativity (e.g. bro culture is arguably a form of men
         | learning to do what their local culture considers male things).
         | I don't think all trans people would disagree with that part as
         | much as you think (see the "I never knew that could be an
         | option" thoughts from some late transitioners reflecting back),
         | the bit they'd disagree with is the idea that there is an
         | aberration or problem to those who opt to identify with a
         | gender other than their identified at birth sex.
        
           | Ord3rChaos wrote:
           | Normativity by definition is related to actions/outcomes that
           | society deems good/desirable/permissible; non-normativity,
           | the opposite. Societal goals are always a moving target, so
           | it follows that normativity is as well.
           | 
           | My dad still uses language like "C'mon! Be a man and do {this
           | thing}."
           | 
           | Personally, I believe when I'm old and crotchety the winds of
           | society will leave my language at something like "C'mon! You
           | should do {this thing}." and leave the gender out of it
           | entirely.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | > "I never knew that could be an option" thoughts from some
           | late transitioners
           | 
           | Anedotally, the three people I knew before transition who
           | later transitioned have all expressed some form of process "I
           | was depressed and didn't understand why" -> "I had these
           | thoughts but suppressed them because I felt they were weird /
           | unacceptable" -> "I learned what transition is and the pieces
           | fell into place".
           | 
           | Edit: over a period of many years, that's why they were late
           | transitioners!
        
           | ReactiveJelly wrote:
           | Yeah the reason that the "social contagion" stuff makes my
           | blood pressure spike is because it's almost always a prelude
           | to some kind of "And they're trying to force-feminize
           | everyone and then they're gonna take our children" stuff.
           | 
           | You know like, Quentin Tarantino isn't racist even though he
           | said the N word, but if I'm walking down the street and a
           | total stranger comes up to me and starts throwing the N word
           | around, safe bet they're saying something dumb.
           | 
           | See my comment a few days ago about "The Internet is graffiti
           | in a bathroom stall". I could probably have a calm good-faith
           | conversation with any of you in real life about gender. But
           | not on a web forum.
        
         | TomSwirly wrote:
         | I downvoted you because I knew that your comment would prevent
         | any discussion about the actual article, and that was in fact
         | what occurred.
         | 
         | This whole "I'm going to say [something offtopic and offensive
         | to a lot of people]. This is probably going to get downvoted to
         | oblivion, because nobody [ridiculous generalization about
         | humans]" is feckless and intellectually dishonest. You do this
         | _because_ it will be downvoted.
        
         | causi wrote:
         | The way we have leapt from one societal belief to the other end
         | of the spectrum is, I believe, interfering with objective
         | healthcare. We started at "people who believe and behave
         | outside of gender norms are perverted freaks" and we jumped
         | straight to "you are whatever you think you are." Between those
         | two paradigms there are questions it has become very difficult
         | to research. Questions like "is it possible we are categorizing
         | more than one mental state as _being transgender_ " as an
         | explanation for why some people greatly benefit from
         | transitioning while others are destroyed by it. Questions like
         | "is modifying the body a better treatment than modifying the
         | mind at our current level of medical capability?"
        
           | ryanbrunner wrote:
           | > "you are whatever you think you are."
           | 
           | You should do some reading on how gender affirming therapy
           | and treatment works, because it is absolutely not standard to
           | pursue treatment immediately without any process or
           | consultation.
           | 
           | Whether transition is the right option is absolutely
           | explored, it's just explored in a way that allows the patient
           | to come to a decision rather than a doctor making the
           | gatekeeping whether this person is "really transgendered".
        
         | johnnymorgan wrote:
         | High performance people have been saying this for generations.
         | 
         | Surround yourself with positive, talented people to keep your
         | mind clean.
         | 
         | Hell even vogue and trash mags call out 'energy vampires' (lol)
         | but it's all the same thing.
         | 
         | I legit decided to not listen to gangster rap in the 90s
         | because a dude said to me 'that shit will warp your mind ' but
         | I realized all music and influences do that.
         | 
         | So books it was...god I was a nerd!
         | 
         | I cut the cord on much of it early on, mostly because the value
         | was terrible (aka music industry in the 90s was just bad
         | value).
         | 
         | Now it's the odd anime that had a deep story that pulls me
         | in...and lectures..Holy fug I love watching smart people talk
         | :)
        
           | ReactiveJelly wrote:
           | Amen. In 2011 I watched a really good anime, Puella Magi
           | Madoka Magica, and it helped me realize I'm transgender, and
           | now that I've transitioned I love my body and myself more.
        
           | meowfly wrote:
           | I still listen to "gangster rap" and I'm doing well enough.
           | It's entirely possible to listen to Trap and not drink lean.
           | There are plenty of dorks (I use the word affectionately)
           | watching anime whose fandom has subsumed their ability to be
           | successful. I do think that a person's life trajectory is
           | affected by their closest friends, especially in high school.
        
             | Ord3rChaos wrote:
             | Can you honestly say that your lived experience hasn't
             | changed you? It's clear "gangster rap" doesn't ruin
             | anyone's lives like the parents of the 90's thought it
             | might. That doesn't absolve it from affecting you in more
             | subtle ways (good and bad).
        
               | meowfly wrote:
               | Maybe I don't understand the question but of course a
               | persons lived experience affects them. It seems like
               | you've moved the goal posts.
               | 
               | What I'm pointing out is that OPs moralizing on good
               | media "Anime, Books" vs bad media "Rap, Trash Magazines"
               | is likely focusing on the wrong things. A person's
               | friends are ultimately what matter in prioritizing values
               | (as far as values can be shaped by environment).
               | 
               | But the claim about "gangster rap" (a term I don't like)
               | was "that shit will warp your mind." is false. Moreover,
               | Anime has tons of content that's way darker than anything
               | you'll find in rap. But again, I don't think it really
               | matters.
        
               | johnnymorgan wrote:
               | Lol I'm not moralizing at all, I stated it applies to all
               | information regardless and so I cut the cord.
               | 
               | 24 hour news is worse for this than gangster rap and
               | turned off both so the same reason, I didn't like the
               | messaging coming from it. NWO and Ghetto boys pushed me
               | out of the genre, that doesn't the music is bad just
               | something I choose to not engage with based off their
               | content.
               | 
               | You got super defensive over what should be obvious, the
               | content and people you engage with will define your
               | character.
        
         | aordano wrote:
         | Disclaimer: I am transgender and i have done actual research on
         | transgenderism a couple years back.
         | 
         | I have seen this firsthand on some acquaintances. Social media
         | has a massive influence on people and there are some persons
         | specifically that have a weaker sense of identity (usually
         | associated with poor development or some mental disorder like
         | schizophrenia, STPD, or BPD), and those persons can be
         | influenced to the point of actually, legit molding their own
         | identity by their own media consumption.
         | 
         | This consumption in most people only plants seeds that will
         | lead to questioning or trying stuff, but won't have a long-
         | lasting impact on their core identity. So for most people this
         | kind of exposition will be something either transitory or will
         | just provide awareness. People grow out of it and it actually
         | it's "just a phase" for many.
         | 
         | So yes people can learn to have a new identity if they don't
         | have a strong core identity formed yet or if it is weak or
         | broken enough.
         | 
         | OTOH, i am unsure what do you mean by a statistical over-
         | representation of GD. There are no bounds set for deviation of
         | the norm for the general population (i.e. normalized rate of
         | growth of % of population that is transgender is not an outlier
         | vs the rate of growth of other emergent behaviors afforded by
         | greater overall inclusion and reduction of discrimination). The
         | places where it is statistically over-represented, like on
         | people within the Autism Spectrum, are under investigation.
         | 
         | In any case the risks of social media brainwashing are not
         | restricted to stuff like disorders but go way beyond and i
         | think the solution to this stuff is, like for many other
         | things, more education and awareness of risks, tradeoffs, what
         | is gender, what is identity, and how they work both
         | intrinsically and within the bounds of social interactions.
        
           | class4behavior wrote:
           | Parent might be falsely inferring an over-representation of
           | GD from the statistical discrepancy between younger and older
           | age groups of those who identify as LGTBQ+.
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | IIRC, research also shows that those who identify as trans
             | in middle age are much more likely to be happy when they do
             | choose to transition, compared to the younger folks.
        
               | f38zf5vdt wrote:
               | I don't see anything to support this in the literature.
               | The overwhelming majority (94-98%) of youth who
               | transition maintain their gender identity many years
               | later as adults. [1][2] It's hard to imagine they would
               | continue treatment if it was making them miserable.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/transgender-kids-
               | tend-to...
               | 
               | [2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PII
               | S2352-4...
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | AIUI, another user ITT has mentioned
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33883438 that this
               | is merely statistics of how many transitioners _formally_
               | pursue detransition, and that the numbers of those who
               | practically desist from treatment are a lot higher than
               | that.
        
               | f38zf5vdt wrote:
               | The number of individuals failing to follow up on a study
               | or even treatment for any disease at the same medical
               | office is high, for example it's approximately 50% for
               | _cancer_. [1] You're welcome to extrapolate to your own
               | taste, but it's still simply an unknown -- unlike the
               | people you _do_ have data for.
               | 
               | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29028642/
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | But the whole question is why people are desisting from
               | treatment that's supposed to help them reaffirm their
               | gender. Everyone knows that cancer treatment has very
               | uncomfortable side effects; it's not surprising that
               | people might neglect that. Gender treatment is literally
               | supposed to make you feel good, by treating disphoria.
        
               | f38zf5vdt wrote:
               | Lost to follow up is not necessarily discontinuation of
               | treatment is the issue. The person may have moved out of
               | state or out of country, or simply have moved to be
               | treated by a different physician. Consider also the
               | perspective of the detransitioning person: in trying to
               | reconcile their experience, they project that there must
               | be more people out there like themselves and point to a
               | known unknown to justify it.
        
               | class4behavior wrote:
               | Is there any statistical significance to that. Have the
               | emotional baggage and social complexity younger people
               | are dealing with and the share of middle aged people who
               | did or could not transition been accounted for?
        
           | the_third_wave wrote:
           | > OTOH, i am unsure what do you mean by a statistical over-
           | representation of GD.
           | 
           | This is quite clear to me and I do not think gender dysphoria
           | - which is a DSM-5 diagnosis [1] - is the correct term to
           | use. Compared to previous years or decades (or centuries)
           | there is a markedly higher percentage of children/young
           | adults who "self-identify as 'trans'", often clustered and in
           | waves. This did not use to be so but that does not mean
           | similar phenomena did not occur, they just did not get a
           | diagnosis attached to them. It is highly probable (and feed
           | for a dissertation if there is a university which would
           | accept such a politically charged project) that the same
           | character types who now "self-identify as 'trans'" were those
           | who would style themselves as "goth" or "emo" or (in the late
           | 80's and 90's) "metrosexual" or any other androgynous style.
           | The difference is that these earlier style figures did not
           | come with a diagnosis nor were they adopted by any mainstream
           | political movement and as such were taken less seriously. You
           | could be a goth just like you could be a metalhead or a prep
           | and be part of your in-crowd by just wearing the right
           | clothes (and, for some crowds, make-up) and listening to the
           | right bands. It was accepted as a way for children and young
           | adults to "belong" without coming with much baggage.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-
           | dysphori...
        
             | JeremyNT wrote:
             | > Compared to previous years or decades (or centuries)
             | there is a markedly higher percentage of children/young
             | adults who "self-identify as 'trans'", often clustered and
             | in waves.
             | 
             | I don't see how you could usefully extrapolate a "real"
             | baseline rate based on what prior generations did. Atypical
             | sexual/gender identities have been taboo for almost the
             | entirety of human civilization, and only as these taboos
             | are now being lifted are people able to express these
             | traits without fear of horrific repercussions.
        
               | the_third_wave wrote:
               | The current wave of "self-identification" was markedly
               | absent in the wake of the '68 revolts and the ensuing
               | "free love generation" which casts doubt upon your
               | thesis. It is far more likely that these current "self-
               | identification" trends are emergent properties of the
               | availability of direct one-to-many communications media -
               | social media and the like - which make it possible for
               | these identity groups to emerge and grow rapidly.
        
         | VictorPath wrote:
         | > we can _learn_ to want to be another gender
         | 
         | If that is true, then cookie cutter expected gender behavior
         | can be "learned" as well. In fact much of it was illegal in the
         | US a few decades ago.
        
         | RocketOne wrote:
         | This is exactly what I thought of when I saw "social media-
         | induced illness": MSMI
         | 
         | I saw this in the school I led, especially in young girls. One
         | of them starts cutting, suddenly we have multiple girls
         | cutting. One of them struggles with bulimia, suddenly the
         | guidance counselor is reporting that she has an inordinate
         | number of girls coming in for counselling about bulimia.
         | 
         | I dont think its any different with claiming to be transgender.
         | And my current school counselor contact confirms that - for
         | every one child she sees that she believes may actually
         | struggle with body dysmorphia and she believes may be trans,
         | there are 10 more coming in because its the 'thing' to be.
         | These are usually kids who are troubled and are desperately
         | seeking attention and care, legit needs, but going about it the
         | only way they see that's acceptable. They gain attention, they
         | gain power, and in an odd way, status among their peers for
         | 'being who they are.'
        
           | simplotek wrote:
           | > I saw this in the school I led, especially in young girls.
           | One of them starts cutting, suddenly we have multiple girls
           | cutting. One of them struggles with bulimia, suddenly the
           | guidance counselor is reporting that she has an inordinate
           | number of girls coming in for counselling about bulimia.
           | 
           | When you showcase suicides on TV you also have upticks in
           | suicides. Same goes for mass shootings, copycat murderers,
           | and even political protests.
           | 
           | When the 101 dalmatians movie was released, there was also an
           | uptick in demand for dalmatians.
           | 
           | I fail to see how this means it's ok to fabricate diseases to
           | downplay the effect that mass media has on people.
        
         | leephillips wrote:
         | "nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want
         | to be another gender."
         | 
         | It's impossible to have the idea that you want to be another
         | "gender" unless you have learned to want it. The ideas of
         | "gender" and that you can switch yours have to come from
         | somewhere; you have to learn them. Just as: you can't want to
         | be a doctor unless you've learned that there is such a thing as
         | a doctor and that it's something you can be.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | Very confident to assert that this act of imagination is
           | impossible, that nobody in history has ever spontaneously had
           | the idea of trying on another gender's gender-marker clothing
           | and worked from there.
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | Did this somebody from history also spontaneously know that
             | the clothes were markers of another gender?
        
         | red_admiral wrote:
         | I have gender dysphoria myself, and you get an upvote from me
         | because I think you are speaking the truth in a way that would
         | lead to better outcomes for many of the affected people, if one
         | properly thought through the implications.
         | 
         | I understand gender dysphoria (as opposed to body
         | dysphoria/dysmorphia in a stricter sense) to be a mismatch
         | between someone's own preferences, interests etc. inasfar as
         | they touch on categories that society has declared to be
         | gendered, and society's expectations of the same - at least
         | those of your local bubble of society.
         | 
         | This means there are two non-mutually-exclusive ways to make
         | the lives of gender dysphoric people better: (1) let them
         | change themselves (many options from pronouns to hormones and
         | surgery), or (2) change society's expectations. Out of sympathy
         | for people suffering from gender dysphoria, I wish for a bit
         | more of (2) in the world.
         | 
         | Even in a vastly improved society, there will be people who
         | decide that medical changes such as hormones/surgery are right
         | for them, and as far as possible we should support them. These
         | people existed, in small numbers, before "trans" was cool, and
         | they will still exist when the media interest has picked up
         | some new favourite category. (By analogy, Tourette's syndrome
         | is also a real thing that existed before the internet, and will
         | still exist when this particular media spike has died down.)
        
           | niom wrote:
           | The "trans/gay/lesbian is cool now" explanation doesn't hold
           | a lot of water to me. If I had the choice to not be gay, I
           | wouldn't be. Life would be so much easier, emotionally and
           | otherwise. Sex would be lower risk and it would be much
           | easier to find a romantic partner. I spent a long time - two
           | decades - suppressing it, as hard as I could, and it did not
           | go away. Instead I was anxious and depressed. After I started
           | to accept myself, those things became a lot better. I look
           | forward to the day I come out.
           | 
           | Transitioning is 100x harder. The nonconformity is obvious.
           | The antagonism directed at transitioning people is
           | unavoidable, strong and potentially deadly - violent and
           | lethal attacks on trans people are becoming much more common
           | every year. Compulsory sterilization for people legally
           | transitioning is still mandated in many countries and was
           | only abolished in progressive countries in the last few
           | years.
           | 
           | No, nobody is doing any of this because it's "cool".
        
             | red_admiral wrote:
             | It is "cool" inside a very small, but very powerful,
             | stratum of society. You are right that there are still a
             | lot of places where being queer (whether of the LGB or T
             | variety) is a huge disadvantage.
        
               | ryanbrunner wrote:
               | Even within that stratum, I'd argue that it's more
               | "acceptable" than specifically "cool". Or if it is
               | "cool", it's in a superficial sort of way that doesn't
               | relay any real benefits or privilege.
        
               | red_admiral wrote:
               | I guess one could argue whether getting upvotes, likes,
               | views and such on social media counts as "real benefits",
               | but that seems to be exactly what's going on with some of
               | the Tourettes-on-TikTok people. You get lots of
               | validation coming your way, you get to be part of a
               | community, and you get +1 armor against trolls who claim
               | it's ok to punch as long as you're only punching up.
        
         | YellowStuDregg wrote:
         | Could people feel dismissive towards your opinion because it
         | sounds like confabulation, rather than a carefully reasoned
         | argument based on data that could spawn a good faith
         | discussion?
         | 
         | > What's interesting to me
         | 
         | Shower thought, then
         | 
         | > This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because
         | nobody wants to confront the idea that...
         | 
         | Alright you win!
        
           | throwaway27727 wrote:
           | Or because it's a controversial topic and GP is worried about
           | being taken as offensive but still would like to make their
           | point.
        
             | jackmott42 wrote:
             | Our neural networks have learned that people tend to say
             | "I'm sure I'll get downvoted" right before or after saying
             | some nasty racist or sexist shit. So, maybe avoid the
             | phrase if you aren't doing that.
        
         | bsaul wrote:
         | Indeed. It seems pretty obvious to anyone that has ever
         | witnessed a high school hall that teenagers mimic far more than
         | just clothes. Fashion goes way beyond that.
        
         | nathias wrote:
         | I think this generation is forced into gender essentialism,
         | gender non-conformity used to be much more normal, now it's
         | redefined as if really a conformity to another gender ... very
         | totalitarian
        
           | blueflow wrote:
           | Decades ago, a woman had to do the cleaning chores...
           | nowadays you are the women because you do the cleaning
           | chores. Its the same sexism thinking, but the path is walked
           | the other way.
           | 
           | Always be wary of persons who sort your behavior into 'male'
           | and 'female' categories.
        
         | brookst wrote:
         | > statistically over represented
         | 
         | Over represented compared to what? The incidence of these
         | disorders back when admitting them would get you bullied /
         | raped / killed?
         | 
         | An alternative explanation is that reducing the social
         | straitjackets that enforced conformity is leading to greater
         | diversity of human behavior. Maybe yes, maybe no, but it's at
         | least a hypothesis worth considering.
         | 
         | BTW your point would be stronger without the persecution
         | complex. And stronger yet with an acknowledgement that, while
         | tic-like behavior and multi-year cognitive identity issues may
         | have correlations, also they may not.
        
           | nicoburns wrote:
           | > Over represented compared to what?
           | 
           | In the case of gender dysphoria, the obvious comparison would
           | be, compared to a society where one can subvert gender norms
           | and be accepted _without_ changing one 's identity. The
           | emergence of trans movement has created a space where gender-
           | nonconforming people can find more acceptance, but it comes
           | with own set of norms and requirements.
           | 
           | One of which is that one must change their identity and, in
           | many cases, conform to the norms of your newly chosen
           | identity (certainly not everyone in the trans community
           | enforces identity-based gender norms, but that's also true of
           | general society when it comes to sex-based norms. In my
           | experience, they're both about as bad as each other. I've
           | lost count of the number of times people have told me that I
           | must be a certain way or have had certain experiences because
           | of my gender identity).
        
             | brookst wrote:
             | I kept waiting for you to support the "over represented"
             | claim. Much disappointment.
             | 
             | Over represented compared to what _real_ thing? What should
             | the representation be, in terms of percent, compared to
             | what we see today?
        
               | nicoburns wrote:
               | The "real" thing would be the gender dysphoria present if
               | people weren't subject to a society telling them that if
               | they don't conform to the norms of <gender> then they
               | can't be <gender>, they must be <other gender>. A society
               | that conflates wanting to live and present in a certain
               | way with wanting a certain body type (these are both
               | valid things to want, but they ought to be treated as
               | independent phenomena rather than as being linked by an
               | abstract concept of gender).
               | 
               | Having such an escape is better than not having it, but
               | it's far from an ideal gender free society (where we
               | effectively treat everyone as having a non-binary
               | gender), in which I suspect we would see a lot less
               | gender dysphoria. Allowing people to choose which set of
               | gender norms they want to follow is still enforcing
               | gender norms if you expect people to choose a single
               | identity and don't allow people to freely mix and match.
        
         | totemandtoken wrote:
         | >> This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because
         | nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want
         | to be another gender.
         | 
         | Except this was disproven. Dr. Money and David Rimer is the
         | infamous case study I believe
        
         | poulpy123 wrote:
         | Didn't a researcher shown that's it was indeed the case ?
        
           | rippercushions wrote:
           | That would be the "rapid onset gender dysphoria" controversy,
           | which is so politically charged that lay observers (/me
           | waves) will have a very hard time separating science from
           | ideology.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid-
           | onset_gender_dysphoria_c...
        
         | ReactiveJelly wrote:
         | You're already getting swamped but I wanna take this bit in
         | good faith:
         | 
         | > illnesses such as gender dysphoria that are statistically
         | over represented
         | 
         | If it was true that gender dysphoria had a major "social
         | contagion" component, what would you want to do about that?
         | 
         | Censor speech so children can't discuss gender? Like how some
         | people think censor sex ed was a treatment for teen pregnancy?
         | 
         | Put up bureaucratic barriers to transition, at the cost of
         | hurting people who really are transgender?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | simplotek wrote:
         | > This is probably going to get downvoted to oblivion, because
         | nobody wants to confront the idea that we can _learn_ to want
         | to be another gender. But I think there's some interesting
         | parallels to be observed here, and discounting that based on
         | "moral virtue" or "denying hate speech" or whatever i'll be
         | attacked with is just moving the target.
         | 
         | I feel you're grossly misrepresenting the issue. It means
         | nothing if you believe people can be re-educated to cease to
         | identify as a specific gender or repress their sexuality
         | throughout their whole lives. That's completely irrelevant. You
         | can also argue that you can re-educated men to be ok with being
         | impotent or be bald or not need glasses, but somehow the
         | conservative side of society is perfectly ok with having whole
         | industries devoted to pumping out erectile disfuncion pills to
         | circumvent natural health issues.
         | 
         | So you have to ask yourself why do you feel it's ok to repress
         | whole segments of society because they don't feel comfortable
         | with who they are, while you are perfectly ok with other
         | segments pulling nature's cheat codes to achieve the exact same
         | thing.
         | 
         | This is exactly the point: the authoritarian motivation behind
         | repressing minorities, and the hate speech that goes along with
         | it.
        
           | naasking wrote:
           | > It means nothing if you believe people can be re-educated
           | to cease to identify as a specific gender or repress their
           | sexuality throughout their whole lives. That's completely
           | irrelevant. You can also argue that you can re-educated men
           | to be ok with being impotent or be bald or not need glasses,
           | but somehow the conservative side of society is perfectly ok
           | with having whole industries devoted to pumping out erectile
           | disfuncion pills to circumvent natural health issues.
           | 
           | I don't understand this. The core problem with gender
           | dysphoria is that you feel significant discomfort with your
           | biological sex. If it were possible to _legitimately_ "re-
           | educate" oneself to not feel this discomfort, that would be
           | considerably cheaper, less invasive and less problematic
           | overall than trying to change one's sex. All surgery carries
           | risk of death after all, and lifetime of hormone therapy is
           | annoying to say the least.
           | 
           | Being bald is not just a feeling of discomfort with having no
           | hair, it has real consequences. Baldness is generally
           | considered to be less attractive, and attractiveness impacts
           | career and dating prospects, for instance.
           | 
           | Being impotent also has real-world consequences. It impacts
           | dating and also impacts your ability to conceive.
           | 
           | Arguably, being trans also has real-world consequences as
           | well, so if a solution became available that could eliminate
           | the gender dysphoria without changing your sex, I would be
           | very surprised if plenty of trans people wouldn't choose that
           | option, and not just because of social stigma.
           | 
           | The resistance to such a solution comes from two
           | understandable directions: a) terrible gay conversion therapy
           | that doesn't actually work, and b) the (mistaken) notion of
           | mind-body dualism that many people internalize over their
           | lives, that their identity, their mind, is separate from
           | their body and has more primacy.
        
             | simplotek wrote:
             | > I don't understand this. The core problem with gender
             | dysphoria is that you feel significant discomfort with your
             | biological sex.
             | 
             | Indeed, and that's why you see people undergoing medical
             | treatments to address that problem.
             | 
             | Why anyone in their right mind would be against people
             | seeking medical treatments to address their health issues
             | is beyond me.
             | 
             | > If it were possible to legitimately "re-educate" oneself
             | to not feel this discomfort, that would be considerably
             | cheaper, less invasive and less problematic overall than
             | trying to change one's sex.
             | 
             | You're desperately trying to avoid the point.
             | 
             | I repeat. You can reeducate an impotent man to stop
             | worrying about his erectile dysfunction. You can reeducate
             | a man to stop bothering with being bald.
             | 
             | Why is that somehow not targeted by this authoritarian
             | belief that you're entitled to force upon others to undergo
             | reeducation camps to accept an outcome they don't want nor
             | feel comfortable with?
             | 
             | Why is that only minorities vilified by certain religious
             | conservative pressure groups should have no say in what
             | they can and cannot do regarding their health and personal
             | well-being?
        
         | roody15 wrote:
         | It reminds me of the old saying "Monkey see .. Monkey do".
         | 
         | An over simplification perhaps but there is no question we
         | "mimic" all the time.
        
           | anenefan wrote:
           | I think similarly.
           | 
           | I am wondering how they differentiate this specific extreme
           | behaviour moving "socially," to other subtle behaviours which
           | are copied and mirrored within small tight knit social groups
           | - especially kids / teenagers? I found the 9:1 ratio of girls
           | to boys intriguing, given the same or very similar mechanism
           | might been a huge benefit to females in past ages where they
           | might be married into a strange culture.
        
       | boyanlevchev wrote:
       | A freaky thing that this paper doesn't mention is that in some
       | cases these tics have gotten so extreme, that one patient began
       | having almost constant seizures and became wheelchair-bound.
       | Imagine being "infected" by watching a video on TikTok! It sounds
       | like a horror movie.
       | 
       | From The Guardian: "Over the next few weeks, Wacek noticed that
       | she was having tics. "They were just little noises," she says.
       | "Nothing to write home about." She would scrunch up her nose, or
       | huff. The tics escalated from sounds into words and phrases. Then
       | the motor tics kicked in. "I started punching walls and throwing
       | myself at things," she says. By July, Wacek was having seizures.
       | She had to stop work. "Being a chef with seizures is not safe at
       | all," she says. Her GP referred her to a neurologist, who
       | diagnosed her with functional neurological syndrome (FND). People
       | with FND have a neurological condition that cannot be medically
       | explained, but can be extremely debilitating. "In a general
       | neurological clinic, around 30% of the conditions we see are not
       | fully explainable," says Dr Jeremy Stern, a neurologist with the
       | charity Tourettes Action. In Wacek's case, FND manifested in
       | verbal and motor tics, not dissimilar from how Tourette syndrome
       | appears to lay people, although the two conditions are distinct.
       | Wacek has up to 20 seizures a day and currently has to use a
       | wheelchair."
       | 
       | Source: https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2021/nov/16/the-
       | unknown-is...
        
         | _aavaa_ wrote:
         | > It sounds like a horror movie.
         | 
         | Might I interest you in Snow Crash by Neal Stephenson.
        
           | Zezima wrote:
           | So happy I found this comment! Yes Snow Crash is a mist
           | recommendation and insanely relevant to mass hysteria and
           | "babbling"
        
         | quux wrote:
         | Wow, This reminds me of the virus in Snow Crash
        
         | Spivak wrote:
         | Yeah, I'm surprised on a forum like this people are using it as
         | an opportunity to be like "ugh kids these days in $current_year
         | seeking attention" and not "holy shit this is fascinating."
         | Social media turned "picking up an accent" up to 11 in a way
         | that actually manifests in tangible problems.
        
         | nsxwolf wrote:
         | This reminds me of "Blipverts" on the 80s TV show "Max
         | Headroom". TV commercials that were so stimulating they would
         | cause some viewers to explode.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekg45ub8bsk
        
       | pfortuny wrote:
       | The exclamation mark after that (!) is very relevant, @dang.
       | 
       | Thanks.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | If you edit it, it will save without modification (auto-
         | stripping of certain things happens only on first save) -
         | though in this case it's probably better just to remove 'stop
         | that' altogether?
        
           | bowsamic wrote:
           | The "Stop that!" is part of the paper's title
        
             | OJFord wrote:
             | Yes.
        
           | pfortuny wrote:
           | Sorry, I did not submit it. Was just pointing him to the
           | (important) difference.
        
       | incomingpain wrote:
       | This is the next big area of research in social sciences. You
       | must research this for national security reasons. Early research
       | came in with the idea of mirror neurons but it went further.
       | 
       | Statistically you're always going to have 'hot spots' for
       | suicide. # per capita etc. So governments trying to help setup
       | suicide hotlines. Not much uptake on this. So they advertised the
       | suicide hotline and suddenly has mass suicide problems.
       | 
       | Been replicated/reported many times, even on Canadian reserves.
       | Cultural, racial doesnt seem to change anything.
       | 
       | Then you have the general crisis in mental health where suddenly
       | lots of people think they have some sort of disorder. Lots of
       | OCD, when really they dont have anything. But it came from
       | advertising and awareness campaigns.
       | 
       | Do the flipside, how about all the motivational speakers who
       | abuse this same mechanism but in a good way? Same with
       | mentalists.
       | 
       | How about people who are being radicalized into violence? How
       | about all the kids suddenly becoming trans? All the same umbrella
       | which social sciences is working on.
        
         | deanCommie wrote:
         | > How about all the kids suddenly becoming trans?
         | 
         | Please do not repeat this right-wing talking point. It is a
         | moral panic, and it causes real harm to kids who need genuine
         | mental health support who are instead being dismissed as being
         | part of a trend.
         | 
         | "all the kids" are not suddenly becoming trans - the incident
         | rates in society are still extremely small.
         | 
         | All rises in incidents of transgenderism are easily explained
         | by a more tolerant society accepting it. The same appeared when
         | we stopped pathologizing left-handedness - all the kids didn't
         | suddenly become left-handed, but the ones that were felt
         | comfortable no longer hiding it.
         | 
         | And by and large, with some exceptions that get consistently
         | magnified by those with an agenda, it is not something you can
         | just do on a whim, and generally requires a lot of counselling
         | and a lot of effort to pursue hormonal or surgical changes.
         | 
         | There are incidents of detransitioning and those that regret
         | it. Those rates are lower than those that regret knee
         | replacements.
         | 
         | Happy to answer any other questions if needed.
        
           | vinegarden wrote:
           | > All rises in incidents of transgenderism are easily
           | explained by a more tolerant society accepting it.
           | 
           | This doesn't explain the disproportionate rise in teenage
           | girls seeking treatment at gender clinics though.
           | 
           | Here's a fascinating essay by a detransitioner on how she
           | began thinking of herself first as 'non-binary' and later as
           | male, and ended up being prescribed testosterone medication
           | for this: https://lacroicsz.substack.com/p/by-any-other-name.
           | She goes into quite some detail about how being exposed to
           | gender identity ideology on Tumblr over a period of years was
           | what influenced her to transition.
           | 
           | Other detransitioners have described similar online
           | influences. It seems likely that this is at least one of the
           | factors causing such an increase, and may well explain why
           | the rise in referrals to gender clinics are so skewed toward
           | female teenagers, who are the primary demographic of sites
           | like Tumblr, and who are particularly vulnerable to social
           | contagions.
        
           | LawTalkingGuy wrote:
           | > Please do not repeat this right-wing talking point.
           | 
           | Please do not make this a partisan issue. Some of us have
           | been following the sexually regressive trend of calling our
           | children's bodies defective and broken because they don't
           | match the viewers' sexual stereotypes for quite a while now,
           | and there was pretty widespread consensus across political
           | and religious ideologies that our kids didn't need surgery to
           | be okay.
           | 
           | > It is a moral panic, and it causes real harm to kids who
           | need genuine mental health support who are instead being
           | dismissed as being part of a trend.
           | 
           | That's circular. They need help because they're caught in a
           | trend which ignores the actual issues in _their_ lives
           | (bullying, divorce, academics, etc) and provides a one-size-
           | fits-all solution of body modification.
           | 
           | > All rises in incidents of transgenderism are easily
           | explained by a more tolerant society accepting it. The same
           | appeared when we stopped pathologizing left-handedness - all
           | the kids didn't suddenly become left-handed, but the ones
           | that were felt comfortable no longer hiding it.
           | 
           | This sounds compelling but is not accurate. Left-handedness
           | is a testable "condition" whereas transgender is some adults'
           | interpretation of how people and their genitals should look
           | based on how they act, especially with regard to things the
           | observer thinks of as sexualized, such as who plays with
           | dolls. Society was getting more tolerant, back in the 00s
           | you'd never have a teacher scold a child for using wrong-sex
           | toys because we'd largely gotten rid of the concept. Now it's
           | back and we're telling children their actions and desires are
           | wrong, BUT we've got a surgical solution!
           | 
           | Fifteen years ago a boy could have worn a dress to elementary
           | and wouldn't have socially risked anything worse than if they
           | wore the wrong brand. Now they risk their teachers "helping"
           | them make huge life decisions they can't even comprehend, and
           | telling them to keep the discussions secret from their
           | parents. That's a lot less accepting than it used to be.
           | 
           | > with some exceptions that get consistently magnified by
           | those with an agenda, it is not something you can just do on
           | a whim, and generally requires a lot of counselling and a lot
           | of effort to pursue hormonal or surgical changes.
           | 
           | This isn't true, the fast track (affirmative care) is the
           | only one allowed in most schools and clinics and by WPATH
           | guidelines. Very rarely do teachers, counsellors, therapists,
           | or health care providers pause to help children with
           | preexisting issues before literally telling them that they're
           | born incorrectly and offering solutions - even if those
           | solutions (drugs and surgery) aren't always immediate.
           | 
           | > There are incidents of detransitioning and those that
           | regret it. Those rates are lower than those that regret knee
           | replacements.
           | 
           | This is not correct. There are no proper studies that follow
           | medical transitioners long enough to usefully make that
           | claim. The studies that exist have egregious failures such as
           | not accounting for dropouts or controlling for comorbidities.
           | And knee surgery is widely known to be almost ineffective for
           | many people, making it an exceptionally misleading
           | comparison.
        
             | beckon69 wrote:
             | I appreciated this thoughtful response (rebuttal) to OP. I
             | agree with your concept of "back in the 00s you'd never
             | have a teacher scold a child for using wrong-sex
             | clothes/toys because we'd largely gotten rid of the
             | concept". This dovetails into one of the paradox's of the
             | trans-adjacent ideology that I haven't been able to square
             | in my own head, which is that transitioning genders is
             | predicated on strong gender norms existing in a society. In
             | other words, it seems less accepting to be a male and
             | exhibit feminine traits (and by the way, we are in fact
             | acknowledging traditional societal ideas of gender roles
             | now, rather than moving beyond them).
        
               | zozbot234 wrote:
               | Even weirder is how those who don't acknowledge
               | traditional societal ideas of gender roles are being
               | directed to adopt an identity of their own: "non-binary"
               | or "genderfluid". So the strong gender norms have now
               | become a thoroughly self-reinforcing cycle: even if you
               | disagree with them, you're just treated and reassigned in
               | accordance with these same norms.
        
           | at_a_remove wrote:
           | You know what else causes "real harm to kids"? Telling them
           | that puberty blockers are like, _totes_ reversible and have
           | zero side effects.
        
           | LargeTomato wrote:
           | >All rises in incidents of transgenderism are easily
           | explained by a more tolerant society accepting it. The same
           | appeared when we stopped pathologizing left-handedness - all
           | the kids didn't suddenly become left-handed, but the ones
           | that were felt comfortable no longer hiding it.
           | 
           | I think you are repeating talking points from John Oliver. If
           | trans identifying people were evenly distributed among the
           | population then it would appear a natural phenomenon.
           | Unfortunately in some cases this is not true. Groups of young
           | girls are coming out as trans together. Trans youth are
           | clustered by social circle, not randomly distributed. Being
           | trans is a legitimate identity but it is false to say that
           | every single person who announces that they are trans is in
           | fact trans.
        
           | fock wrote:
           | > All rises in incidents of transgenderism are easily
           | explained by a more tolerant society accepting it. The same
           | appeared when we stopped.
           | 
           | Explained (aka semi-solid empirical experiments - where are
           | those?) or imagined (aka ideological beliefs, much like the
           | right)?
           | 
           | > And by and large, with some exceptions that get
           | consistently magnified by those with an agenda, it is not
           | something you can just do on a whim, and generally requires a
           | lot of counselling and a lot of effort to pursue hormonal or
           | surgical changes.
           | 
           | And yet every other week I see a talkshow on public TV
           | discussing this. Prominently hosting a person that thinks the
           | rules in place are faaaar to rigid, while most sane people
           | would agree they are fine and problems lie in other areas.
           | For example, while I agree that in many cases physiological
           | "modifications" might be the most economic solution putting
           | this solely to the purview of the individual might a) incur
           | follow-up costs on society (here, these things are not self-
           | paid) and b) raises the question why we don't amputate the
           | legs of those who think they have one too many. The latter
           | thing is something, which I would really like explained once
           | by someone.
        
       | Fr0styMatt88 wrote:
       | I have to wonder if mirror neurons play a part in this. Perhaps
       | there's something that's fundamentally common to both 'real' tics
       | and these types of non-Tourette's tics. A person could already be
       | predisposed to something like Tourette's and seeing these videos
       | could be the thing that ignites the kindling for them.
        
       | jlrubin wrote:
       | anecdotally, i had a professor (if you're reading this, hi) who
       | would wink in conversation at exactly the right point to add a
       | little "isn't the world a funny place" comedy to whatever he was
       | saying... wasn't clear if intentional or a tic for when he
       | thought he had said something clever. I noticed that habit to
       | have transferred to me for a while after, though I think now it's
       | faded.
        
       | golemiprague wrote:
        
       | themagician wrote:
       | This is South Park: Season 11, Episode 8 (Le Petit Tourette) come
       | to life.
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | From my reading of the article (which is hard to parse not being
       | an expert) it seems there is a German YouTuber with Tourette's
       | who _also_ on his YouTube shows displays non-tourette 's tics.
       | And these tics are being copied by other young people watching
       | his shows, and being presented as Tourette's until they arrive at
       | the clinic where these experts go "hang on this kid does not have
       | Tourette's but does have tics similar to the German youtuber
       | above"
       | 
       | So, the weird thing is not they pick up someone else's tics but
       | they cannot get rid of them.
       | 
       | Learnt behaviour, copying, or physical tics that once learnt get
       | stuck in the brain?
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | > Learnt behaviour, copying, or physical tics that once learnt
         | get stuck in the brain?
         | 
         | The article itself makes it clear. There's an obvious reward
         | for these behaviors. This youtuber got exceptionally popular
         | very quickly and was able to turn that into appearances on
         | other shows. The other patients are also noted to have their
         | "symptoms" express themselves during unpleasant tasks, but to
         | be missing during pleasant ones. To the point it gets them out
         | of doing the unpleasant work.
         | 
         | We've built a system that rewards this behavior because we
         | built a system that also makes this behavior profitable. To me,
         | these results shouldn't be a surprise, and I wonder if this
         | "new illness" is really just an emergent lower level expression
         | of something like Munchhausen syndrome; now given a wider and
         | less sophisticated audience to play to.
        
         | ridgeguy wrote:
         | Faceworms instead of earworms?
        
         | indigochill wrote:
         | There may be a relation to military conditioning. I spent just
         | a single week at a military academy introductory program in
         | high school and when I returned home I was "uncontrollably" (if
         | I thought about it I could avoid doing it, but if I was on
         | autopilot it happened by itself) squaring my corners and
         | calling my family "sir" and "ma'am". The thing was, those
         | patterns were my entire life for that week, and they were very
         | deliberately drilled into me. Eventually they faded because
         | they weren't reinforced outside of the academy (if anything,
         | they were "deinforced"), but there may be a connection here.
         | 
         | If someone spends many hours a day watching someone with
         | particular quirks, it doesn't seem surprising (drawing
         | parallels here to my experience) that those quirks may transfer
         | because their brain starts to make those associations through
         | observation. I would expect that stopping watching that
         | particular person would probably let the transferred tics decay
         | over a period of time (I'd give it a month).
        
           | hrnnnnnn wrote:
           | I love "deinforce" as an antonym to "reinforce". The standard
           | way to say it would maybe be "deemphasised", but it lacks the
           | symmetry of "deinforced".
        
             | elliottkember wrote:
             | In behavioural psychology the antonym is "punish". There
             | are positive/negative axes (whether a stimulus is added or
             | removed) and reinforcement/punishment axes (whether the
             | consequence is desired).
             | 
             | Negative reinforcement is what boot camp uses. If you
             | square your corners, you won't get shouted at. The
             | "negative" aspect relates to the lack of shouting, and the
             | reinforcement relates to the fact that the shouting is
             | unpleasant.
             | 
             | At home, positive punishment would be making fun of the
             | tendencies, and negative punishment would have meant
             | receiving no validation for the behaviour.
        
               | labster wrote:
               | I think GP meant deinforce to be a complimentary antonym,
               | where you gave the gradable antonym.
        
               | CognitiveLens wrote:
               | @elliottkember is giving the correct complimentary
               | antonym to "reinforce" in behavioral psych - "punishment"
               | reduces the frequency of a behavior, "reinforcement"
               | increases the frequency. There's a spectrum, but the
               | terms only refer to the opposing effects on behavior
               | rates. In the GP's comment, "deinforcement" appears to
               | also mean "actively reducing the frequency of the
               | behavior".
        
           | albert_e wrote:
           | I read about "mirror neurons" where humans watching others do
           | physical activity also have some of the same neural pathways
           | fire.
           | 
           | (V. S. RAMACHANDRAN)
           | 
           | The author/researcher says he believes that is one of the
           | main mechanisms of human learning (babies look at adults and
           | imitate. Adults look at other adults and imitate.
           | Subconsciously)
           | 
           | What you are describing sounds very similar.
        
             | boole1854 wrote:
             | When I was raising my first child, I discovered a strange,
             | apparently innate instinct which presumably is related to
             | the mirror neurons:
             | 
             | At some point the child gets old enough that you start to
             | feed them 'baby food' on a spoon. The child isn't used to
             | eating off of a spoon so for many weeks the process is
             | messy. The initial challenge is getting them to open their
             | mouth wide enough for the spoon to enter. And telling them
             | 'open your mouth' is not particularly useful since they
             | don't understand English at that age.
             | 
             | Instead, the following instinct kicks in: as you approach
             | their mouth with the spoon, _your own mouth opens_. They
             | see your mouth open and then open theirs. The crazy part is
             | that your own mouth opening happens involuntarily at the
             | moment you want their mouth to open. It is _physically
             | difficult_ to suppress it, even if you try.
             | 
             | I've also noticed the reverse. When the child gets a little
             | older, they at some point want _you_ to open your mouth,
             | because they want to feed you something or they are curious
             | about the inside of your mouth (this is a phase they go
             | through). They seem to also involuntarily open their mouth
             | wide when they want you to open yours.
        
           | adolph wrote:
           | After your first sentence I thought the next would be
           | "uncontrollably dropping two f-bombs for every noun and one
           | for every verb" but the classic hallway "at ease, make way"
           | is good fun too. It was hilarious how it could travel in
           | waves up a hall ahead of the drill like a preceding shadow.
           | My floor was enthusiastically and maliciously conformant and
           | loud about it.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning
        
           | kuhewa wrote:
           | The article says that one thing differentiating these kids
           | from acutal Tourette symptoms is that instead of symptoms
           | waxing and waning, they only deteriorate. So that definitely
           | squares
        
           | jelliclesfarm wrote:
           | Reminds me of how Americans spend a couple of months in the
           | UK and return with an affected British accent.
           | 
           | Before social media, there were movies that molded society.
           | Bollywood and more recently K-dramas/K-pop have influenced an
           | entire generation.
           | 
           | Often these were used for shaping a younger generation as a
           | long term strategy for a desirable adult demographic. To a
           | certain extent, it is happening in our American public school
           | system. Everyone who comes through it are kind of identical.
           | It may not be apparent to those who have never stepped out of
           | the States, but it is obvious to those outside or have known
           | other cultures.
           | 
           | With social media impacts, its effect is like an oil spill.
           | Even if you can contain it, it will be messy, expensive and
           | traumatic for years and years. This is a Faustian bargain we
           | have made.
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | I feel that might be overstating things. Otherwise we would
             | all be speaking in a transatlantic accent.
        
             | filoleg wrote:
             | > Reminds me of how Americans spend a couple of months in
             | the UK and return with an affected British accent.
             | 
             | As someone who moved to the US in his mid-teens (from a
             | non-english-speaking country), that's quite literally me
             | with British movies.
             | 
             | After watching a few over a weekend, Mondays are usually
             | rough, as I end up saying random words in British accent
             | and immediately correcting myself.
        
         | rubidium wrote:
         | All behavior is total behavior, so it doesn't really matter.
         | Article makes the point that this is attention seeking behavior
         | and often used as an excuse to avoid unpleasant tasks. Whether
         | the teens are aware they are choosing the tic, eventually it
         | becomes habitual and they "can't stop". Except they can after
         | meeting with a trained phycologist. Get to the root of the
         | behavior and usually the behavior goes away.
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | Many OCD sufferers will not agree.
        
             | elil17 wrote:
             | I think they were referring to behaviors associated with
             | mass psychogenic illness, which is probably a lot more
             | curable than many OCD cases.
        
         | lisper wrote:
         | It's plausible [1] [2].
         | 
         | I am by all accounts neurotypical (except perhaps for a touch
         | of Aspergers) but I have an involuntary tic. Every now and then
         | (like once or twice a week) a memory of some incredibly stupid
         | thing that I once did -- sometimes decades ago -- will pop into
         | my head and before I can re-establish conscious control I'll
         | make a vocalization that sounds like a cross between a whimper
         | and a sneeze. It's kind of embarrassing, but usually I cover it
         | up with a cough afterwards. I don't think anyone has ever
         | actually noticed except me.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earworm
         | 
         | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrusive_thought
        
           | snapcaster wrote:
           | Holy shit, I thought this only happened to me. Hey fellow
           | weirdo! Glad to know i'm not alone
        
           | wussboy wrote:
           | I had a significant tic, and found profound relief through
           | Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). I strongly recommend
           | "Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life".
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | theGnuMe wrote:
           | Interesting.
           | 
           | I am wondering if you've tried EMDR after the event happens?
           | So you have the thought that triggers the tic and then you'd
           | focus intensely on the event and do the EMDR stuff. That may
           | reduce the intensity of the past event and reprogram your
           | nervous system to not trigger so intensely on it.
        
             | lisper wrote:
             | See my response here:
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=33887467
        
           | HEmanZ wrote:
           | Happens at least twice a day to me, sometimes a lot more. My
           | wife finds it bewildering so I'm not sure it's totally
           | normal, but I know it's not uncommon either.
        
           | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
           | I have SAD and this happens to me several times a day. Though
           | it's not so much that it pops into my head, more that my
           | train of thought leads me there by association.
           | 
           | In a lot of ways SAD feels like a form of PTSD where instead
           | of a single extremely traumatic experience, or many extreme
           | experiences(known as complex PTSD), it's a huge amount of
           | slightly traumatic ones. So it's sort of like a flashback.
           | 
           | One of the things I've noticed is that when I'm on SSRIs and
           | they're working(which has never been a long-lived state of
           | affairs, unfortunately), this phenomenon is drastically
           | reduced or even gone altogether.
        
             | geocrasher wrote:
             | Are you talking about Seasonal Affective Disorder? Or can
             | you define what SAD is if not?
        
               | Scarblac wrote:
               | From context my guess is Social Anxiety Disorder.
        
               | geocrasher wrote:
               | That makes more sense. Thanks.
        
               | mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
               | Sorry, forgot about seasonal affective disorder, which I
               | also have, ironically. But I was referring to social
               | anxiety disorder.
        
           | geocrasher wrote:
           | I too have issues with these kinds of thoughts that very
           | nearly cause a whole-body shudder, followed by a kind of yell
           | just to get it out of my system. It doesn't happen often, but
           | hearing others talk about this gives me hope that I'm not a
           | total weirdo... even though I know I am in many other ways
           | LOL!
           | 
           | I've also wondered if my ADHD somehow factors into it, but
           | that I don't know.
        
             | ljf wrote:
             | As a someone who recently realised/accepted that I have
             | loads of adhd traits, I can see the connection. I
             | personally think that the fact my mind is never really
             | "calm" means I/we have more opportunities to play over
             | these things when doing other tasks.
             | 
             | I get the impression those without adhd can just
             | concentrate without a mind full of fluff - I can't imagine
             | what that must be like!
        
           | evilos wrote:
           | I think this is a bit different from a tic though that's an
           | unqualified opinion.
           | 
           | This happens to me as well, but usually I just kind of mutter
           | 'damnit' under my breath or 'ugh'. Maybe shake my head a
           | little.
        
           | Lochleg wrote:
           | EMDR therapy may help with something like that.
        
             | lisper wrote:
             | EMDR looks mighty hinky to me.
             | 
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11393607/
             | 
             | "In sum, EMDR appears to be no more effective than other
             | exposure techniques, and evidence suggests that the eye
             | movements integral to the treatment, and to its name, are
             | unnecessary."
        
               | theGnuMe wrote:
               | That research is likely out of date.
        
           | throw__away7391 wrote:
           | Is this not totally normal and very common though? This exact
           | thing happens to me all the time, with some specific memories
           | linked to seemingly random acts like shaving the left side of
           | my neck.
        
             | twic wrote:
             | Yes, loads of people get this. A couple of random reddit
             | threads:
             | 
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/socialskills/comments/hzgm1n/how_t
             | o...
             | 
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/socialskills/comments/2nnff4/how_t
             | o...
             | 
             | I do it. When i'm alone, and one of those thoughts hits,
             | me, i often vocalise a bit. If i'm in company i just wince
             | (if i made a noise in front of other people when i thought
             | of something embarrassing, that would be embarrassing, so
             | that would lead to a sort of embarrassment Kessler
             | syndrome).
        
               | cscheid wrote:
               | > embarrassment Kessler syndrome
               | 
               | Thank you, this is a genuinely great turn of phrase.
        
             | lisper wrote:
             | I have no idea if it's common or not. It might be. It's not
             | the sort of thing people generally discuss. This is the
             | first time I've ever talked about it.
        
               | tgv wrote:
               | A (long) time ago, I noticed something not dissimilar in
               | my behavior. I've never noticed it in others, so it quite
               | likely that your behavior goes unnoticed too.
               | 
               | But what I did was tell myself to not react like that
               | again next time. Of course, that didn't work, but it made
               | me notice it better. And after repeating that for some
               | time, I had timely control over the reaction (not over
               | the stimulus that provoked it). If your tic is light and
               | annoys you, you could try that. Your subconscious is
               | capable of picking up more than you think, and it is
               | (somewhat) malleable.
        
           | kneebonian wrote:
           | I have this happen to I've always assumed it was an anxiety
           | response. The interesting things is I am able to control it
           | to some extent, I used to hit myself, now I mutter
           | profanities. Anyone else do something like this?
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | rjbwork wrote:
             | Yup. I just say fuck and shake my head. Apparently this is
             | rather normal behavior...
        
               | sgu999 wrote:
               | According to who? I have the same issue and it's
               | annoying.
        
               | rjbwork wrote:
               | Well, there are a bunch of us in this thread, and I've
               | heard many people talk about it over the years both IRL
               | and elsewhere on the internet. Maybe "normal" is the
               | wrong word, but it does seem to be exceedingly common.
               | 
               | https://img.ifunny.co/images/81b1345612c2c66153ac111e99d4
               | 1b2...
               | 
               | https://www.thecut.com/article/how-to-stop-reliving-
               | embarras...
               | 
               | https://harleytherapy.com/blog/posts/cringe-attacks
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | Well sure? Remembering embarrassing stuff is annoying.
               | 
               | I've found that sitting with the thought for a little
               | while and processing the emotion prevents it from coming
               | up again. You can't just remember that girl in first year
               | of uni that made an effort to hug you every day and flee
               | the thought every time, painful as it is. You have to sit
               | there and go through it. Yes I was young and stupid, but
               | the reason I even cringe thinking about it is because I
               | am now better. And that is ok.
        
           | dEnigma wrote:
           | I also do that from time to time, though less regularly,
           | maybe once a month. But then I also sometimes talk to myself
           | (not excessively, just occasionally when I take a walk or
           | while at home, replaying some conversation or imagining a
           | possible situation). I thought this was rather normal, or at
           | least not too far from normal.
        
           | ljf wrote:
           | This is me to a tee! I either get a neck spasm when my chin
           | gets brought down (also happens spontaneously, but often with
           | a cringe worthy thought from the past), or I'll 'almost' same
           | something out loud while replaying something.
           | 
           | Assumed it wasn't just me who did this but glad to know there
           | are others.
        
         | somedude895 wrote:
         | It's the mere suggestion that they might have those tics, but
         | the article says:
         | 
         | > Fourth, in some patients, a rapid and complete remission
         | occurred after exclusion of the diagnosis of Tourette syndrome.
         | 
         | It also mentions other examples of MSI, where symptoms across
         | the group would subside after a couple weeks or months. So
         | yeah, in most cases all it needs is someone to say Stop That!
         | You're imagining things
        
         | kuhewa wrote:
         | > First, all patients presented with nearly identical movements
         | and vocalizations that not only resemble Jan Zimmermann's
         | symptoms, but are in part exactly the same, such as shouting
         | the German words Pommes (English: potatoes), Bombe (English:
         | bomb), Heil Hitler, Du bist hasslich (English: you are ugly)
         | and Fliegende Haie (English: flying sharks) as well as bizarre
         | and complex behaviours such as throwing pens at school and
         | dishes at home, and crushing eggs in the kitchen. > Fourth, in
         | some patients, a rapid and complete remission occurred after
         | exclusion of the diagnosis of Tourette syndrome.
         | 
         | To a first approximation, the kids are 'faking it'. The third
         | point I didn't quote was that symptoms appear when it will
         | preclude then from doing a tedious task, and then disappear
         | when they are doing something they want to do.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | rocketbop wrote:
       | Link is 403 Forbidden for me.
        
         | Traubenfuchs wrote:
         | https://archive.ph/ZhKaL
        
       | lynx23 wrote:
       | So, these people are trying to convince us that SnowCrash is
       | basically a realistic story, and no, modern society is not fed up
       | with what happened in the recent years. I believe neither.
       | "Outbreak" your a*!
        
       | cnity wrote:
       | Ironically categorising this as an outbreak of illness
       | legitimises the attention-seeking behaviour which is firmly
       | predicated on being perceived as a sufferer of illness.
        
         | TeMPOraL wrote:
         | I don't think it does. I understand the implication here being
         | the people affected are suffering from Tiktokitis, i.e.
         | symptoms of a different disease, but caused by social media
         | exposure. Suffering from that isn't going to earn you much
         | compassion or street cred, particularly when the cure is to
         | spend less time on social media.
        
       | 01100011 wrote:
       | This sucks as someone who has had movement disorders(essential
       | tremor, tics) for decades. It also sucks because the covid
       | booster, like a flu shot years ago(only one, I get them every
       | year) caused a dramatic worsening of my tics for a few months.
       | 
       | I didn't realize the whole 'covid tic hysteria' was even a thing
       | until I googled 'covid vaccine tics' after personally
       | experiencing a dramatic worsening of symptoms.
        
       | teekert wrote:
       | It almost feels like gpt created literature when you start to
       | read it, seemingly linking unrelated issues and concepts. But
       | later in I became convinced it's real and very interesting. Very
       | meme-like, in the original definition of meme that is. A "virus"
       | of the mind.
        
         | gary_0 wrote:
         | It read like parody to me at first, but I verified the
         | domain[0] and it's not.
         | 
         | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Press
        
           | Traubenfuchs wrote:
           | This has been a thing for a while.
           | 
           | https://www.reddit.com/r/fakedisordercringe/
           | 
           | It's status as illness though, let alone mass-illness is
           | dubious at best.
        
             | bowsamic wrote:
             | If you can't voluntarily stop it and it's causing negative
             | effects to your quality of life then why can't it be called
             | an illness? These people aren't going to get professional
             | help just for the fun of it
        
               | tedunangst wrote:
               | > Third, patients often reported to be unable to perform
               | unpleasant tasks because of their symptoms resulting in
               | release from obligations at school and home, while
               | symptoms temporarily completely disappear while
               | conducting favourite activities.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | That makes no comment about whether the symptoms are on
               | purpose, or unconscious. Ask any ADHD or OCD person about
               | "symptoms that arise around unpleasant tasks"
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | How does that imply that it's voluntary?
        
             | astura wrote:
             | These illnesses appear to be very real, even if
             | sociogenetic in origin.
             | 
             | Someone researching the same thing has this to say
             | 
             | https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/nov/16/the-unknown-
             | is...
             | 
             | >Olvera's research has not gone down well in some quarters.
             | "I'm frustrated," she says. "I've tried to stop reading a
             | lot of what is written out there." She's received "lots" of
             | angry emails. "My colleagues have had a positive response
             | to my research," she says, "but I don't know if it's been
             | perceived appropriately by the public. The last thing I
             | would want is for my patients to walk away from this
             | thinking that their disorder is fake or not worthwhile."
             | 
             | >Much of the controversy arises from the misapprehension
             | that doctors are accusing young people of faking Tourette's
             | for attention, or arguing that TikTok is giving people
             | Tourette's. Neither claim is true. "What the media has
             | boiled it down to," says Olvera, "is that if it's not
             | Tourette syndrome, it's fake. But just because it's not
             | Tourette syndrome doesn't mean it's fake. This is a real
             | condition. Even though it's not typical Tourette's, it's
             | very disruptive and stressful."
        
               | bowsamic wrote:
               | A lot of the responses in this thread demonstrate the
               | same dismissal that she discusses
        
         | ejolto wrote:
         | The last sentence of the abstract felt especially unnatural:
         | 
         | > since spread via social media is no longer restricted to
         | specific locations such as local communities or school
         | environments spread via social media is no longer restricted to
         | specific locations such as schools or towns.
        
           | DanSmooth wrote:
           | The whole sentence could use some more punctuation marks,
           | like so:
           | 
           | A large number of young people across different countries are
           | affected, with considerable impact on health care systems and
           | society as a whole. Since spread via social media is no
           | longer restricted to specific locations such as local
           | communities or school environments, spread via social media
           | is no longer restricted to specific locations such as schools
           | or towns.
        
             | indigochill wrote:
             | The second sentence both says the same thing twice and
             | actually doesn't make any sense when you parse it.
             | 
             | > Since spread via social media is no longer restricted to
             | specific locations such as local communities or school
             | environments, spread via social media is no longer
             | restricted to specific locations such as schools or towns.
             | 
             | The sequence "spread via social media is no longer
             | restricted to specific locations" appears in exactly that
             | sequence twice in that sentence. If you cut the redundancy
             | down to "spread via social media is no longer restricted to
             | specific locations", that doesn't make sense either since
             | social media was never restricted to specific locations.
             | 
             | I'm not saying it's definitely written entirely by GPT, but
             | mindlessly repeating sequences is very GPT-like behavior.
             | Maybe academics are using GPT to pad their word count? Or
             | maybe the authors and their editors just need more coffee?
        
           | caf wrote:
           | Yes, I too got to that sentence and thought "Are we being
           | pranked by a GPT-written academic article?"
        
           | bowsamic wrote:
           | As someone in academia, that reads just like a sentence that
           | wasn't peer reviewed by a native English speaker.
        
           | HPsquared wrote:
           | It's just missing a comma.
        
             | mahathu wrote:
             | A comma would help, but it's not just that.
             | 
             | They used the phrase "spread via social media" and pointed
             | out that spread isn't locally restricted anymore twice for
             | no reason. They're also using circular reasoning. A more
             | concise way to phrase this would have been:
             | 
             | > since [the images and videos] are shared via social
             | media, spread is no longer restricted to specific locations
             | such as local communities or school environments.
        
           | NaturalPhallacy wrote:
           | I think someone's just been steeped in academia a little too
           | long.
        
       | goda90 wrote:
       | Stuff like this makes me wonder if taboo and stigma "evolved" in
       | societies as defense against the spread of behavior that could
       | cause a breakdown of social order. For example, if something like
       | dancing mania[0] got out of hand, then important jobs could be
       | left undone and people starve or whatever. So if the notion that
       | such behavior is bad is drilled into everyone's mind before being
       | exposed, then they are more likely to avoid "catching" it.
       | 
       | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_mania
        
         | ttpphd wrote:
         | Taboo and stigma are also what drive irrational prejudices, so
         | I'm not sure about the rush to judgment about, ummm, "important
         | jobs" which definitely were not how society was organized
         | during the vast majority of our evolution.
        
         | fncivivue7 wrote:
         | I've been starting to think the bible and other religions have
         | their place due to this. Plot people on a bell curve, that's a
         | lot of people that can't grasp basic nuance and critical
         | reasoning.
        
         | lo_zamoyski wrote:
         | There's no need for convoluted explanations. A good taboo,
         | understood as a restriction on certain kinds of behavior or
         | speech at least in certain circumstances, exists to protect
         | some good. It's the same reason (or one of the reasons) we
         | partition our houses into rooms by purpose. Human flourishing
         | requires certain limits, not letting it all hang out. The
         | latter is more akin to the liberal notion of freedom understood
         | as "do what thou wilt" and limitless indulgence of the
         | appetites and desires. The classical understanding of freedom
         | is the ability to do what you ought. Guess which leads to
         | happiness and which leads to misery.
        
           | el_nahual wrote:
           | "limitless indulgence of the appetites and desires" has a
           | different word. That's not _freedom_ , that's called
           | _debauchery_ and has absolutely nothing to do with
           | "liberalism" in the political science meaning of the term.
        
           | ravenstine wrote:
           | > There's no need for convoluted explanations.
           | 
           | I don't see how it's at all convoluted. If anything, it's too
           | reductive.
           | 
           | Taboos, traditions, etc., don't need to exist because of a
           | reason that's explicit. Sometimes, they do, but that doesn't
           | explain the taboos that don't make obvious sense. A taboo can
           | be more or less a form of "cultural neuron" that doesn't have
           | an explicit purpose but incidentally changes the balance of
           | the system towards something that society at a given time may
           | benefit from without even knowing it. A religion featuring
           | more ornate hats than others may have more true believers, or
           | perhaps the other way around for all we know. If that's at
           | least plausible, if not true, that wouldn't necessarily mean
           | a reverend at one point decided to declare a certain kind of
           | hat wearing because of the "good of the church."
           | 
           | The inverse can also be true. Take for instance the taboo of
           | _sexism_. Makes sense, right? Given modern western
           | principles, why should culture allow for discrimination based
           | on sex? On the other hand, there 's evidence that many women,
           | regardless of their political positions, actually appreciate
           | men who are "benevolently sexist." It's a phenomenon
           | compelling enough that even Psychology Today, a publication
           | heavily biased against anything unflattering to women, has
           | reported on it more than once. By making sexism a taboo, and
           | far more taboo as of late, society has raised the bar for
           | just how confident a man has to be to attract a woman. We
           | really don't need a study to demonstrate that, on average,
           | women are attracted to confidence. An effect of making sexism
           | taboo is it changes the signal to noise ratio, allowing women
           | to better identify which men they'll actually be attracted
           | to. Maybe there were some people arguing against sexism with
           | this in mind, but I imagine they are an extreme minority.
           | Most anti-sexists probably weren't thinking along those
           | lines.
           | 
           | At least that taboo makes some reasonable sense in isolation,
           | and even the fashion of religious garb can be made sense of,
           | but what about a taboo that makes no sense? What about merely
           | making a mouth-noise that comes out sounding like "shit?"
           | 
           | It makes little explicit sense that saying the word "shit" be
           | a faux pas. You can say poop, doodie, scat, dung, and even
           | crap, but shit is considered a curse word. It's really pretty
           | stupid.
           | 
           | Except I would argue that having any form of taboo can have a
           | positive effect, even if it barely makes sense. By having
           | cultural limits of any kind, it puts the society on the same
           | page and creates a mindset where individuals try to at least
           | maintain some level of basic class as a mindset. Personally,
           | I like saying the word shit, but adding virtually any
           | variable to a chaotic system can have effects that weren't
           | explicitly predicted.
        
         | polishdude20 wrote:
         | Oh yeah definitely. It's easier to just have a general learned
         | feeling of a taboo than to have to explain to everyone the
         | historical and societal consequences of it to every person.
         | It's a learned behavior that helps perpetuate a higher survival
         | rate not because the thing itself is bad if done a handful of
         | times but because it can get out of hand and be done by the
         | whole population.
        
           | wahern wrote:
           | > It's a learned behavior that helps perpetuate a higher
           | survival rate
           | 
           | Taboo is the learned behavior, _shame_ would be the
           | evolutionary corollary, though both of those words are doing
           | alot of work. IMO, until we figure out the evolutionary
           | mechanics of how human social behavior evolved, I 'd be
           | cautious discussing survival rates; it only begs the question
           | of who's survival rate--the group or the individual?
           | Presumably _at_ _least_ the individual, but it 's definitely
           | still an open question. And without properly resolving the
           | question (really, a whole host of questions, many of which we
           | probably can't even articulate, yet) there are many other
           | evolutionary phenomena we can't or shouldn't imply, not to
           | mention cultural phenomena we won't be able to fully
           | understand.
        
       | poulpy123 wrote:
       | There is also the same thing with Dissociative identity disorder
       | that had (have ?) a boom after some people from tiktok started to
       | pretend have it
        
       | azangru wrote:
       | This passage from the abstract:
       | 
       | > Moreover, they can be viewed as the 21st century expression of
       | a culture-bound stress reaction of our post-modern society
       | emphasizing the uniqueness of individuals and valuing their
       | alleged exceptionality, thus promoting attention-seeking
       | behaviours and aggravating the permanent identity crisis of
       | modern man.
       | 
       | is rather peculiar. I didn't expect that this is how neurologists
       | and neuroscientists would speak these days. "Our postmodern
       | society", "permanent identity crisis of the modern man" - these
       | sentiments sound like they've been transplanted from a humanities
       | paper.
        
         | damagednoob wrote:
         | Yes this struck me too. I wouldn't describe the language used
         | as 'neutral'.
        
         | CognitiveLens wrote:
         | This language style is a bit more common in academic writing
         | outside of the Anglo tradition that is most commonly reported
         | in the English-speaking world. British and American university
         | training emphasises more clinical language, for better and
         | worse.
        
           | quonn wrote:
           | This reminds me of analytical (formal) vs continental
           | philosophy which is similar.
        
         | somedude895 wrote:
         | I agree. It is a bit weird to see such subjective takes and
         | cultural pessimism in an article like this. Hadn't noticed it
         | the first time around, probably due to my own biases. So thanks
         | for pointing it out.
        
       | boomchinolo78 wrote:
       | Surely not the vaksine
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-06 23:00 UTC)