Roe v Wade

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Then how come you're not able to refer to it

---

My posts on the topic are pretty short, yet I've referred to plenty of your posts and points - not sure why you are ignoring that but on we go....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

but instead call people snowflakes, .

---

I think people who give out about others using pronouns are snowflakes. I think people who get invested in any issue for that matter, that does not affect them, and get upset, are snowflakes also. I didn't call you a snowflake directly but you've taken umbrage at the phrase, which is fine but I'm not changing my opinion on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

or make silly sarcastic comments which don't actually have a point?
.

---

You started it with your " Amn't I great for doing this" jibe - when you post silly sarcastic comments like this then you can hardly be surprised if there is a rebuttal. In general people are not as fixated on this issue as you think. Most people just see, family, friends, and colleagues be it their own or others struggling with who they are. It is pretty much beyond dispute that mis-gendering people causes them real world pain.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5061456/ Why is it so controversial that a simple way to potentially alleviate this pain is for everyone that wishes to be clearer about how they identify themselves is allowed to do it? Should organizations be forced to do it? I’m not sure about that but I could be convinced. What I do know is that in competitive recruitment fields – the top graduates these days are migrating to companies with solid D&I groups. Companies need to be able to prove that their workplaces are equal in terms of the gender pay gap, have diverse workforces and are proactive in addressing any issues that this brings. If they can’t do this people are migrating to employers that do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Putting your pronouns in your email is silly in part because in an email I'm talking to you, which bypasses pronouns. I'm also trying to avoid labelling people as virtue signalers, but as I've just lost that battle, I think many people who do it do so because of how inclusive it makes them feel. That's the wrong reason to do anything.

---

Putting your pronouns in your e-mail signature is definitely not silly. It's silly in your opinion. You raise an interesting point though about how inclusive it makes people feel. Maybe people just want to help as alluded to already. You’ve characterized the majority as virtue signalers – which you have zero evidence for anyway – and then concluded that virtue signaling is the wrong reason to do anything. Which is of course correct. There are virtue signalers on both sides of every debate – it’s easy to pick on those no matter where you sit on any issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

But more than that, I think it trivialises what seems quite a complicated issue

---

Well if you think that anyone who uses pronouns or promotes their use is virtue signaling then of course it will follow that you think the issues are being trivialized. The basic premise of your argument falls down there straight away I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

we're not even certain if the people being treated by the NHS for gender dysphoria are actually suffering from it, or depression or autism or even social media obsession. It seems rather unfair to effectively suppress proper debate on this topic (like you're trying to do by effectively taking as your starting point that gender dysphoria is always real), or to ignore the suggestion - by a leading psychiatrist working in this area - that actually it could often be a symptom of something else. There's still a high suicide rate for post-op trans people, which kind of ties in with the suggestion made that we might be treating the wrong thing. That would make it not a good thing to push people towards by trivializing the idea of adopting different pronouns and everything'll be great

---

There’s a lot in this. Fundamentally if someone was born a man and feels like a women they do not automatically have a mental illness. Gender dysphoria is not a mental illness. There may be plenty cases out there where, while being treated for GD, that it may be a symptom of something else, as alluded to in your article – not ignoring -- but the NHS and others are quite clear on that point. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/

I also do not like linking Autism to Gender dysphoria either - there is zero hard evidence for this and it is far too early to make any concrete point on it. https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and...ender-identity

Quote:

---

There is some evidence to show a link between gender dysphoria and autism, and that autistic people may be more likely than other people to have gender dysphoria. However there is little evidence about the reason(s) why, and some recent research suggests the link between autism and gender dysphoria is not so clear. More research is needed. More research is also required to develop and test assessment tools, support and treatment for autistic people experiencing gender dysphoria.

---

There seems to be a characterization running throughout your posts and this paragraph in particular - if someone suffers from Gender Dysmorphia - then there is something "wrong" with them. Its as if you don't believe someone could be born a man and believe themselves to be a woman - because sure they could believe themselves to be black as well? That is as good a way to trivialize something as anything I've said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Over to you now to make a contribution without just labelling me as a snowflake or ignoring the various arguments I've taken the time to lay out in the thread. You don't have to agree with me, but you should be able to give a proper argument to back your position up. And you haven't even tried yet.

---

Some of the basis of your arguments are pretty flimsy tbf. You characterized Marta Kauffman's apology over "Friends" as Grovelling. It was nothing of the sort. She, with the benefit of hindsight, accepted that they should not have referred to a female character as a male. It was a simple enough recognition of what they themselves perceived to be an error. I doubt that she cares either way but I guess she wants Friends to remain syndicated on TV in many locations and shown on Netflix so I doubt her motivations were relevant to the movement but to say she "Groveled" at the court of public opinion? It doesn't read like that to me.

You've also used Charlize Therons kids to help validate your point of view. Despite probably having never met her or her kids. Its none of your business anyway how anyone looks after their own kids - would you like people telling you how you should live your life?

At the risk of getting into a tedious multi-quote battle, I'll try pick out some of the main things here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I think people who give out about others using pronouns are snowflakes.

---

Your very first post on this barged in with "People who give out about pro-nous are the very definition of snowflakes imo" - no context or discussion. Just a dismissal of people as snowflakes. You can do that if you want, but it does make it harder to take your posts seriously when that's your opening argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Why is it so controversial that a simple way to potentially alleviate this pain is for everyone that wishes to be clearer about how they identify themselves is allowed to do it?

---

Well first off, again, an e-mail signature makes no sense for this, as I've suggested. You don't use pronouns when talking to someone in an e-mail. So to put them there is people thinking they're helping but not really actually doing anything. So what's the point? Adam described people who do this as self-obsessed, which ties in with social media in general making people more self-obsessed, so I'd agree with him on that.

But if we're inclusive of every little thing people think about themselves, are we not in danger of doing more harm than good? You don't (or shouldn't) indulge kids in everything they want for example; sometimes saying "no" brings pain, but can be far better in the longer term. And given rising mental health issues in modern times, maybe society could do with being told "no" every now and again. Are we just perpetuating the problem rather than addressing it? Are people really suffering from this condition, or is it a form of social media groupthink? How do we/they even know? This is the sort of debate - and there's probably more nuanced arguments too, but time doesn't permit - that this approach can smother.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Should organizations be forced to do it? I’m not sure about that but I could be convinced. What I do know is that in competitive recruitment fields – the top graduates these days are migrating to companies with solid D&I groups. Companies need to be able to prove that their workplaces are equal in terms of the gender pay gap, have diverse workforces and are proactive in addressing any issues that this brings. If they can’t do this people are migrating to employers that do.

---

Organisations should maybe be forced to make you add pronouns to your signature? Wow. Forcing people what to think is a good way towards rational constructive thought, isn't it?

The D&I stuff is getting off topic again, but it's in danger of becoming a self-fulfilling cult, and I sense you're fully invested in it. The irony in everyone becoming diverse is that if we all do it the same way, then we become the exact same, and can't break away from that mindset. (I'm reminded of this article on the hipster who sued a newspaper for using his stock image in an article on how all hipsters look the same, only to find out it wasn't actually him in the photo, thereby proving the article's point - the more diverse people think they are, the less diverse they actually are.) I'm sure there's merit in the basic idea, but taken to the conclusions I've seen, with D&I groups that aren't remotely diverse and have no-one on them to bring balance to the discussions, is something that needs to be examined more closely.

Gender pay gap is even further off topic, but calculating a basic average hourly rate for your employees is far, far too coarse a mechanism to have any real meaning. I think it falls down by aiming for equality of outcome (a Communist-style utopia where everyone's the same) rather than equality of opportunity. If you and I have the same opportunities and I achieve more with them and earn more as a result, that's not an inequality. I don't think there's any real evidence that, for example, women are routinely offered 80% of men's pay just because. But people are different, and that will feed into pay rates. Is it really a problem, for example, if more women than men want to take a career break to raise a family, and lose out on pay as a result?

So I think some critical introspection there might be no harm on your part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Gender dysphoria is not a mental illness.

---

It really is hard to see what else it could be in fairness. And given the criticisms of the NHS already discussed (where there's a very serious suggestion of confirmation bias towards identifying gender dysphoria, and bullying of those who don't agree), are they entirely trustworthy in that regard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I also do not like linking Autism to Gender dysphoria either - there is zero hard evidence for this

---

Yet your own quote says "There is some evidence to show a link between gender dysphoria and autism" (my emphasis). Just because you mightn't like a conclusion doesn't mean you can dismiss it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Its as if you don't believe someone could be born a man and believe themselves to be a woman - because sure they could believe themselves to be black as well? That is as good a way to trivialize something as anything I've said.

---

But you're just dismissing my point here with no reason. Can I identify as black? Why/why not? What about the example I linked about people identifying as disabled? Or someone who identifies as Korean? Why should identifying as a different gender be ok while other cases (eg identifying as someone 20 years younger) aren't ok? Where do you draw the line? Or are you just making it up as you go along?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

You've also used Charlize Therons kids to help validate your point of view. Despite probably having never met her or her kids. Its none of your business anyway how anyone looks after their own kids - would you like people telling you how you should live your life?

---

Again, you're just trying to shut down discussion by telling me I'm wrong rather than try engage in the matter. I have no problems in thinking that raising a three-year-old boy as a girl because he once said "I'm not a boy any more" is wrong. Three year olds repeat anything they hear and don't necessarily know what it is they're saying. Social services should be investigating that case before the kid is put on a course of puberty blockers they will in all probability end up regretting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

And given rising mental health issues in modern times, maybe society could do with being told "no" every now and again.

---

Do you think there is more Mental health issues now or is society just more aware of what mental health is? I think its the latter - primarily down to people being told no IMO.
No, society says you can't be gay.
No, society says you can't have children out of marriage.
No, you are a man - society says you can't cry.
No, you are made a boy - society says you can't be a girl?
I very much take issue with the idea that all Trans people are suffering from some form of Gender dysphoria and that in its self is a mental illness. The conversation has to be more nuanced than that.

In the spirt of critical self introspection as you call it , I apologize unreservedly for the snowflake line - there is no need for that and while I fundamentally disagree with virtually everything you say to be fair you are sincere in your posts. I won't delete them but leave them there as a reminder to myself to not to be such a wally.

And we are going around in circles now a bit so won't reply anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Do you think there is more Mental health issues now or is society just more aware of what mental health is? I think its the latter

---

I don't think that stacks up.

What you're trying to argue there is that there's the same actual incidence of mental health issues as always, that numbers are only going up because of increased diagnosis, but that despite improved treatment (let's assume that any care is better than no care), suicide rates in society are increasing. That doesn't make sense.

You are made white - maybe your transphobic e-mail signature is holding people back from being black? "The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command" - George Orwell in 1984. Maybe he was only a couple of decades out?

Also - "I won't delete them [your posts]"? No harm, but you've a real arrogance in your tone. From calling people snowflakes (retraction noted), to being open to forcing people what to put on their e-mails, to telling me that I can't discuss Charlize Theron effectively just "because", to saying that you won't delete my posts (presumably sarcastic given you're not a mod in this forum, but still, it's the thought that counts) - for someone so bought into inclusion, you're not remotely inclusive of any views that don't agree with yours. There's a huge contrast with the very respectful discussion I was able to have with dahamsta, even though he also disagreed with me on certain things.

Incidentally, on the Kauffman/Friends thing, I think there's an irony that people are piling on Kauffman's transgender character without bothering to ask their pronouns. As Eddie Izzard has said "If I am in boy mode, then 'he', or girl mode, 'she'". But the internet, as it so often does, has seen an easy pile on and gone for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

I don't think that stacks up.

What you're trying to argue there is that there's the same actual incidence of mental health issues as always, that numbers are only going up because of increased diagnosis, but that despite improved treatment (let's assume that any care is better than no care), suicide rates in society are increasing. That doesn't make sense.

---

Are they? I'd equate increase in suicide rates to people living longer in general - but the suicide rates worldwide are varied.
https://ourworldindata.org/suicide#:~:text=The%20World%20Health%20Organizatio n%20(WHO,die%20from%20suicide%20every%20year.&text =That's%20one%20person%20every%2040,interventions% 2C%20suicides%20can%20be%20prevented.

Quote:

---

Most countries in Europe have seen a decline in suicide rates; Asia too has seen impressive declines. Across other regions, the trend has been more varied.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

but you've a real arrogance in your tone.

---

Ha! From the person who thinks " Maybe Society should be told No every once in a while" - I'll take that as a compliment. A real everyone else is wrong and I'm right vibe about that line. You come across as fairly arrogant yourself at times Stu, so much so that I could almost mistake you for a Corkman! (That's a joke btw - maybe just a Kerryman)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

to saying that you won't delete my posts (presumably sarcastic given you're not a mod in this forum, but still, it's the thought that counts)
.

---

You've picked me up wrong there (probably my wording) but I meant that I would delete my own references to snowflakes - not your posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

There's a huge contrast with the very respectful discussion I was able to have with dahamsta, even though he also disagreed with me on certain things.
.

---

Respect is a two way street. Of the things you accuse me of here I could easily say the same for you - you routinely disregard points you disagree with not just on this topic but on other issues where we've clashed. I've expressed regret over the snowflake line that was a poor start which probably contributed more than anything to be fair. Mea culpa again on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Incidentally, on the Kauffman/Friends thing, I think there's an irony that people are piling on Kauffman's transgender character without bothering to ask their pronouns. As Eddie Izzard has said "If I am in boy mode, then 'he', or girl mode, 'she'". But the internet, as it so often does, has seen an easy pile on and gone for it.

---

Where is the internet pile on? I had to look up the Friends thing - the only decent article I could find on it was via the Daily Mail - same for the the Charlize Theron stuff. I mean who the hell cares anyway what some random on twitter thinks about, well anything tbh. I'm not on SM much - don't do Fb or Insta or Tiktok - I have a twitter but I've anything popular culture related muted. Love Island? - forget it. Doesn't certain SM skew your perspective - I'd accuse myself of the same thing probably.

Quote:

---

to telling me that I can't discuss Charlize Theron effectively

---

I never said that - I said you shouldn't comment, without knowing about other people's family life. Theron's children could have displayed persistent Gender Dysmoria over a sustained period of time and maybe she only threw out a soundbite for the media Maybe she's a complete loon who wants to have a daughter no matter what the means - Its probably the latter, but we really know nothing of the situation so I'm not sure what the value is referencing celebrity culture in debates like this. Its not "shutting down debate" to point this out - you are completely free to refer to anything you wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Do you think there is more Mental health issues now or is society just more aware of what mental health is? I think its the latter - primarily down to people being told no IMO.
No, society says you can't be gay.
No, society says you can't have children out of marriage.
No, you are a man - society says you can't cry.
No, you are made a boy - society says you can't be a girl?
I very much take issue with the idea that all Trans people are suffering from some form of Gender dysphoria and that in its self is a mental illness. The conversation has to be more nuanced than that.

In the spirt of critical self introspection as you call it , I apologize unreservedly for the snowflake line - there is no need for that and while I fundamentally disagree with virtually everything you say to be fair you are sincere in your posts. I won't delete them but leave them there as a reminder to myself to not to be such a wally.

And we are going around in circles now a bit so won't reply anymore.

---

Literally every second advert on TV , every programme with more than a few characters and every corporate entity buying into Pride Month (used to be a day) says you can be Gay, this is a non event in society anymore

Children outside Marridge????? Maybe 20 years ago it was an issue , it is now the norm

You cant cry? The entire world spends its time now telling people to embrace their feelings and share etc etc.

There is more mental health "problems" in society now IMO simply because people who don't have genuine mental health problems are encouraged to classify themselves as having mental health problems where before they would have been told to cop on. Its probably a price worth paying to make sure those with actual real problems are encouraged to deal with them but their are an awful lot of attention seekers out there.
Footballers who get abused on social media claim their mental health is being affected, nonsense in most cases but a good deflection tactic if you have done something wrong

Real ale Madrid, you seem to be raising your need / want to use personal pronouns because of your gender-neutral name above all else. I wouldn't dispute that want or need and I don't think anyone else here has. And if people have to cite their pronouns because of a company policy - which they shouldn't IMO, unless it's to be inclusive in an organisation that's directly affected by these issues - that's perfectly fine too, they can't help it. All people here are saying, I think, is that in their personal experience, the majority of non-trans people that cite their personal pronouns are doing it for karma. That's my experience anyway, and that's clearly pstu's experience.

You're allowed to cite your pronouns. We're allowed to think that people that cite their pronouns without a need, to be "with-it", are muppets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahamsta

You're allowed to cite your pronouns. We're allowed to think that people that cite their pronouns without a need, to be "with-it", are muppets.

---

But I don't need to cite my pronouns ( I've never done it anyway ) - if I choose to (for the various reasons discussed here) - does that make me a Muppet? I think the conversation has to be more nuanced than that tbh, notwithstanding that there are plenty Muppets around. But not everyone is a virtue signaler either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

Literally every second advert on TV , every programme with more than a few characters and every corporate entity buying into Pride Month (used to be a day) says you can be Gay, this is a non event in society anymore

Children outside Marridge????? Maybe 20 years ago it was an issue , it is now the norm

You cant cry? The entire world spends its time now telling people to embrace their feelings and share etc etc.

There is more mental health "problems" in society now IMO simply because people who don't have genuine mental health problems are encouraged to classify themselves as having mental health problems where before they would have been told to cop on. Its probably a price worth paying to make sure those with actual real problems are encouraged to deal with them but their are an awful lot of attention seekers out there.
Footballers who get abused on social media claim their mental health is being affected, nonsense in most cases but a good deflection tactic if you have done something wrong

---

What I was getting at there sbgawa is that our understanding of major societal issues is getting better and things that were once frowned upon / deemed unacceptable are now not.

Although I'm not sure why you are categorizing Mental Health issues as "problems", and I take absolute exception to people with potential Mental Health problems being told to "Cop On" as you put it. That's a backwards step.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

What I was getting at there sbgawa is that our understanding of major societal issues is getting better and things that were once frowned upon / deemed unacceptable are now not.

Although I'm not sure why you are categorizing Mental Health issues as "problems", and I take absolute exception to people with potential Mental Health problems being told to "Cop On" as you put it. That's a backwards step.

---

I think if you read my post objectively its clear i meant real "Mental health" problems but skipped typing the Mental health bit.

Regarding telling people to cop on my point is that not telling people to cop on results in scenarios like Footballers who miss a penalty and get abuse on social media to claim it is "affecting their mental health" ............i'm calling BS on that they should be told to cop on, its in most cases a pure deflection and a cry for sympathy "poor me" rather than taking criticism for missing a penalty.
I did also make the point that not telling the attention seakers and deflectors to Cop on resulting in many more people claiming mental health problems MIGHT be a price worth paying if it means those with real mental health problems come forward.
The problem is you literally cant call BS on someone claiming mental health problems no matter how obvious it is they are BS or you get slammed. Its part of the cancel culture

Without getting too much into the debate, I'd tend to be fairly liberal leaning in my views on most matters. There's some good points raised from the perspective of social media bubbles and how divisive they can become. I agree that there's no benefit to cancel culture and not allowing concerns to be raised or issues to be discussed. I think we should probably be a little bit self aware in that foot.ie itself is somewhat of a bubble, we can self congratulate on the ability to have and open conversation, but at the same time, even though views may differ, we're in a sphere of predominantly straight white males in their 30s and 40s.

The key to most cultural change and the voice that tends to be most important is the persons directly impacted. In the abortion debate that's women, in the trans debate that's trans people. I've noticed more people stating their preferred pronouns in our work emails, and it's being led by members of the LGBTQ+ group, if they see a benefit and have a preference for stating pronouns then I'd have no real problem with seeing it rolled out as standard. As Real ale has pointed out, the ideas of what's acceptable and not have changed significantly and rapidly and that's mainly due to listening to the groups that felt marginalised, it's not so long ago that homosexuality was still illegal in Ireland. We have to trust that as a society we can self regulate enough to realise that it's completely counter productive to let everyone and anyone self identify as whatever they like, there's always going to be extremes on both sides, but it certainly feels like in Ireland over the last few decades we've managed to liberalise in many ways without causing the deep societal divisions we've seen elsewhere.

Sometimes moving to quickly can be part of the issue, and that's why the lack of political extremes here is a good thing, but we do need to be wary of and aware of those that become increasingly diesnfranchised and resort to the extremes. I've got some "friends" on facebook that have gone mad on conspiracy thoeries and the like, but I don't block them, I find it useful and informative to see what's happening in those circles and I think if we didn't move so quickly to shut down those views we might spot issues coming a bit more quickly. Certainly in the US those bubbles made a huge cohort blind to the rise of Turmpian politics and we saw something similar with the certainty in more liberal circles that Brexit couldn't happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

I think if you read my post objectively its clear i meant real "Mental health" problems but skipped typing the Mental health bit.

Regarding telling people to cop on my point is that not telling people to cop on results in scenarios like Footballers who miss a penalty and get abuse on social media to claim it is "affecting their mental health" ............i'm calling BS on that they should be told to cop on, its in most cases a pure deflection and a cry for sympathy "poor me" rather than taking criticism for missing a penalty.
I did also make the point that not telling the attention seakers and deflectors to Cop on resulting in many more people claiming mental health problems MIGHT be a price worth paying if it means those with real mental health problems come forward.
The problem is you literally cant call BS on someone claiming mental health problems no matter how obvious it is they are BS or you get slammed. Its part of the cancel culture

---

I'm always fascinated by who's doing the slamming in instances like this? I must be oblivious to this stuff. What do you mean? If some randomer on Fb / Twitter or foot.ie for that matter "Slams" your opinion - why the hell would you give a cr@p?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I'm always fascinated by who's doing the slamming in instances like this? I must be oblivious to this stuff. What do you mean? If some randomer on Fb / Twitter or foot.ie for that matter "Slams" your opinion - why the hell would you give a cr@p?

---

Exactly my point when it comes to the footballers complaining about their mental health being affected by people on social media calling them crap etc for missing penos or whatever.
But when was the last time you saw a media outlet actually call out this BS.

The slamming i'm talking about is mainstream media jumping on people who dare go against the consensus as they endeavour to be populist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

Exactly my point when it comes to the footballers complaining about their mental health being affected by people on social media calling them crap etc for missing penos or whatever.
.

---

Why would it be ok for SM to pile onto a footballer over anything let alone a penalty miss? I can't imagine that being ideal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Are they? I'd equate increase in suicide rates to people living longer in general - but the suicide rates worldwide are varied.
https://ourworldindata.org/suicide#:~:text=The%20World%20Health%20Organizatio n%20(WHO,die%20from%20suicide%20every%20year.&text =That's%20one%20person%20every%2040,interventions% 2C%20suicides%20can%20be%20prevented.

---

Well here's a study on suicide rates in Ireland from 1864 to 1921 - average is 2.5 per 100,000. Here's the same for recent years - average is 10.8 per 100,000. You can for sure make the argument that people living longer gives you more chance to commit suicide (but then 15-24 is the biggest age bracket for suicide), or that a stigma in the olden days led to under-reporting, or what have you, but it's still a long way to go to make up that difference (and more, in fact, if you allow for better treatment today)

I think one other thing I would add on this rush to put your pronouns everywhere is that it reinforces the idea that if you question yourself, gender dysphoria is the most likely cause and changing your pronouns may even make things all right again. But as the HSE report showed, it's far from clear as to whether people presenting at the HSE aren't in fact gay or have autism (or, from elsewhere, if they haven't just been reading too much one-dimensional social media). In that case, reinforcing this idea could be actively dangerous as it leads people down one road only, and away from other possible routes that could help. You say that people do it because it could help - but does it? Really? I don't buy it. It's more likely, as a general trend (e-mails/social media) to lead to social media group think and do more harm than good. But I don't see any balanced discussion around the topic when it arises - it's just, as damahsta suggests, "This is good, yay".

This is a complicated area, and yes, it needs a nuanced discussion, in a number of directions. That discussion isn't going to happen on an e-mail signature though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

I'm always fascinated by who's doing the slamming in instances like this? I must be oblivious to this stuff. What do you mean? If some randomer on Fb / Twitter or foot.ie for that matter "Slams" your opinion - why the hell would you give a cr@p?

---

Bit confused here - you seem to be suggesting that social media bullying doesn't exist? Or are you querying the real level of its impact? I think to reduce it to "some randomer" is to miss the point a bit. I don't think sbgawa is talking about one person disagreeing with you.

John Oliver has a good interview with Monica Lewinsky on the very real impact of public shaming on social media. It's a pity that 20+ years later, you can see JK Rowling going through something similar. Yes, Lewinski and Rowling are two very very high-profile people, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist at a lower profile level too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Bit confused here - you seem to be suggesting that social media bullying doesn't exist? Or are you querying the real level of its impact? I think to reduce it to "some randomer" is to miss the point a bit. I don't think sbgawa is talking about one person disagreeing with you.

John Oliver has a good interview with Monica Lewinsky on the very real impact of public shaming on social media. It's a pity that 20+ years later, you can see JK Rowling going through something similar. Yes, Lewinski and Rowling are two very very high-profile people, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist at a lower profile level too.

---

If you maybe read what I was referring to :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbgawa

The problem is you literally cant call BS on someone claiming mental health problems no matter how obvious it is they are BS or you get slammed. Its part of the cancel culture

---

Slamming someone on social media calling BS on Mental Health? who does that? You are not the only one confused.

My literal next post makes reference to SM pile ons being bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid

Why would it be ok for SM to pile onto a footballer over anything let alone a penalty miss? I can't imagine that being ideal.

---

I didn't say it was ok to pile onto a footballer over anything , people who do that on social media are sad losers.
My point was that when it happens (and it does) and the footballers start complaining that it is affecting their mental health it is in my opinion simply BS and an attempt to change the narrative from whatever mistake they made to a new narrative which is "Poor me look at my anguish"

I think they get sent some pretty vile stuff. I think "it's affecting my mental health" is kind of a shortcut for "I've received death threats with nasty racial overtones because I kicked a football slightly wrong and it's freaking me out". I'm sure you get the odd PR consultant sticking their oar in, but I'd rather err on the side of the victim in these situations. To summarize the summary: nuke twitter from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

The genie is long out of the bottle where twitter (and social media in general) is concerned. If twitter was discontinued in the morning, something else would take its place.