281

Argentina's president bans gender-affirming care for people under age 18 (apnews.com)

submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

40 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 45 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 52 points 10 months ago

Oh how cute! The fascist North and South America bros are having a genocide contest!

[-] Zero22xx 35 points 10 months ago

Is this guy just a little ass fly hanging around Trump's crappy nappy or something?

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 10 months ago

That seems extremely un libertarian of him. Wonder how his supporters will spin it as a positive for libertarians

[-] bitflag@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

No it isn't. Children are not considered mature enough to make legal decisions on their own, so the whole libertarian issue doesn't apply to them.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 10 months ago

So he's also going to raise the age of consent from 14 to 18?

https://www.unicef.org/lac/media/2806/file

[-] bitflag@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I dunno dude, I am just explaining while this move isn't a contradiction with libertarian ideas.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 10 months ago

I'm just pointing out the fact they don't consider that when it's related to consent.

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Right, so it falls to the parents' discretion, not the government's, in such a worldview.

[-] Walk_blesseD 4 points 10 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillick_competence

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

[removed by mod]

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 33 points 10 months ago

Except that's not what's happening. They pause puberty with pills so the kid can grow up and make an informed decision after years of therapy. Meanwhile they don't have to worry about their body going the wrong way and contributing to serious mental health problems.

These laws are forcing kids to deal with serious mental illness, not saving them.

[-] Walk_blesseD 16 points 10 months ago

Why do the most clueless dickheads (this means you) always feel the need to stick their uninformed opinions into discussions that don't pertain to them anyway???

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

I wasn’t aware you were the leading expert on the subject. Because your opinion is so much more informed than mine.

[-] Walk_blesseD 13 points 10 months ago

I see, your reading comprehension is just generally shit. I did not claim to be "the leading expert on the subject." I was simply pointing out how blatantly obvious it is that you have no fucking idea what you're talking about and wondering why then you felt the need to contribute your opinion which carries negative value.

[-] meowgenau@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago

How about you try to enlighten him then, instead of throwing verbal abuse at him. He stated his opinion and you are free to debate him on that.

The fact that he gets attacked like this for his opinion is why I don't engage in these discussions. Your kind of reaction will lose all support for your cause.

[-] Walk_blesseD 7 points 10 months ago

How about you try to enlighten him then,

Why should I? Other people in this thread have already explained why these misconceptions are just that. There's no shortage of resources available from feminists, trans advocates and medical professionals online that argue the point that restricting bodily autonomy is bad far better than I ever could.

The fact that he gets attacked like this for his opinion is why I don't engage in these discussions.

Good. My intent is to provide a disincentive for people to go online and confidently spread their harmful ignorance in ways that fly in the face of common human decency. Thanks for letting me know that I'm effective.

[-] meowgenau@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago

There's no shortage of resources available from feminists, trans advocates and medical professionals online

If they're so abundant and easy to find, then why not simply share them? You can also link the other posts that explain your position.

confidently spread their harmful ignorance

If he has such an uninformed position, it should be very easy to defend against it instead of wasting everyone's time by making ad hominem attacks? Maybe we can make the internet a better place by not spewing toxic abuse even if one feels attacked by an opinion, no matter how uninformed it is?

You are defending your ideology in the worst way possible, and believe me when I say this, but you will never convince anyone beyond your closed bubble of why we need to move forward as a society this way.

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 10 months ago

In addition to what other commenters have said, the extent of gender affirming care should solely be based on:

the decision of a medical ethics body and
peer-reviewed and repeated studies

By the way, surgeries removing enlarged breast tissue for men with Gynecomastia is gender affirming care. In the article, it says that in the US 25% of patients were 19 or younger at the time of surgery. Should this too be banned for minors? If not, how exactly is it different from a trans teen desiring surgery?

[-] AntonChigurh@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

[removed by mod]

[-] hungryphrog 39 points 10 months ago

"cut their dick off" yeah that's exactly what gender affirming care is. This isn't about surgery, it's about HRT and puberty blockers, and the regret rates for all of those things are super low. Besides, there is already an epidemic of trans suicides. Do I need to repeat that? People are killing themselves because of transphobia, and yes, detransitioners exist, but most people don't regret getting gender reaffirming care, and again, this is about HRT and puberty blockers, not just surgery.

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 24 points 10 months ago

gender reassignment surgery is not done on minors with the exception of intersex babies(which itself is questionable ethics). Minors can and often do get a tattoos with parental approval.
They can also get psychological counciling and be referred to as a preferred name. These count as gender affirming care.
How is this affecting you? Why do you care what someone else does to their body?

[-] Jaderick@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

“As someone with no horse in this race, this seems fair to me”

[-] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 17 points 10 months ago

Nobody is doing that. "Gender-affirming care" also includes giving hormone blockers to a kid who started puberty way too early.

[-] BastingChemina@slrpnk.net 4 points 10 months ago

I'm sure this is an important step to get the inflation under control, it will really improve the people's life !

Great use of their time and power.

[-] thisguy1092@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

[removed by mod]

[-] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 31 points 10 months ago

Gender affirming care for minors doesn't mean surgery. I'm not sure if you're under the impression that's what this is banning but if it is, it's wrong.

What this is banning, and what every similar ban is banning is things like puberty blockers which are reversible and are only effective before puberty (obviously). Preventing or delaying puberty is REALLY important because it makes fully transitioning infinitely easier later on as adults.

All bans like this are doing is making the lives of trans people much harder under the guise of "preventing unreversible operations" when that's not even what they're banning.

[-] thisguy1092@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Thank you! That’s very informative! Maintaining my opinion

[-] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 0 points 10 months ago

Can I ask why?

[-] thisguy1092@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

I do not agree with prepping children for a sex change and puberty blockers

[-] IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Article: Gender-affirming care

Commenter:Gender-affirming care

You: Sex change

You seem to still be misinformed.

[-] thisguy1092@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Dude literally talked about teansitioning

[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 0 points 10 months ago

No, he talked about letting the person decide for themselves when they are actually mature enough to make the decision, and not making it harder on them physically and mentally if they do decide to transition later. If they don't want to transition, they can just stop taking the blockers.

[-] thisguy1092@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Letting a child who hasn’t even hit puberty yet to make that kind of decision doesn’t seem like very good parenting

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

Sorry, Greg, you're gonna just have to have breasts until you offically turn 18, because people think the goverment need to control children thet hate with no understanding of any detail.

But seriously, I had a cousin who had breast removal surgery when he was like 10-12, because he was a boy and didn't want to grow breasts, and he had the surgery so early in the process he was never in a position to be made fun of or bullied over it.

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

1 anecdotal story does not mean we should allow something carte Blanche. For every story of someone that needs it there’s another where they regret it.

Yes some people need it but it can always be done later. We need to prevent the abuse of these types of surgeries first and foremost.

[-] Supervivens@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

Actually for every 99 stories of someone that needs it there is only one who regrets it. I don’t know about you but I think a 99% chance (the actual stat for regretting gender affirming care) is good enough for me to potentially save hundreds to thousands of kids from potentially suicidally bad depression and dysphoria.

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

So 1% suicide rate in children is acceptable you you I guess. I don’t care what the stats are and the problem with liberal extremists is they don’t care about people. They want to virtue signal that they are progressive and everyone else is a maga whack job that needs to kill themself. I don’t want ANYONE to resort to suicide and people should be able to access the care that is medically necessary for them.

Do not confuse me with someone that doesn’t want to give options to families. “Gender affirming care” is an EXTREMELY broad term. I am all for leaving medical decisions to medical professionals and we need to be clear about what exactly is “gender affirming care”. My comment is geared specifically toward irreversible surgeries.

[-] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 10 points 10 months ago

The remaining 1% doesn't commit suicide. Suicide rates are significantly lower in groups that did do the surgery than in the groups that didn't. And even for the very, very few that do, the stated reason is almost always the transphobia they still encounter from society.

Blanket banning will increase the suicide risk.

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I think you completely misunderstand what is being said to you. Good job, I guess.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

You're insufferable. How about DOCTORS take care of medicine and RELIGIONS pumped up on moral panic can NOT do whatever they personally choose not to do, and leave everyone else alone.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah that's why eliminating all ''gender affirming'' care for children is INSANE. That's the exact thing I'm communicating.

[-] neons@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago

I really hope this is just to appease Trump and get on his good side and he doesn't actually go and attack trans rights

this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025

281 points (100.0% liked)

World News

51245 readers

2077 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
- Blogsites are treated in the same manner as social media sites. Medium, Blogger, Substack, etc. are not valid news links regardless of who is posting them. Yes, legitimate news sites use Blogging platforms, they also use Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube and we don't allow those links either.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world