TL;DR Meta itself funds the conservative argument that the internet turns kids trans, and stands to gain power and money from this verdict.

This is a very good but lesser known YouTube channel, and I decided to post here and not in a tech-specific forum, because as you will see this is pretty much about trans people as well.

Taylor Lorenz (with Kat Tenbarge) make a coherent argument that the verdict consolidates Meta's business model and established power, for a minimal fine that is just an operational cost compared to what they stand to make out of it.

Moreover, they point out the verdict relates to:

• Ultra-conservative think-tanks, including The Heritage Foundation, which targets abortion and trans healthcare
• Censorship of abortion, feminism, queer, lgbtq+ and particularly trans topics, by online platforms including Meta
• Social contagion - Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria conspiracy theory - pseudoscience
• Age verification laws, KOSA, and similar approaches which are themselves funded by Meta, directly or indirectly

If you are not aware, recently a Reddit user published data showing that Meta's money is behind the "protect the children" age verification laws, probably in order to match devices to idenitities. They also bankroll some of the very same conservative outlets promoting censorship and roll-back of rights. As the creators say, Meta "does not profit from free-speech or abortion information", it profits from targeted advertisement.

A related video by the same creator is this one about the "new moral panic" that is build around this, and many more videos of hers. Deserves way more views.

We actually aren't constrained into atrocious premises by thought exercises. Obstacles are a reason to fight, not an excuse to quit. Our friends and neighbors aren't distractions..

Instant classic. It is highly relevant, because transgender rights are also framed as an extra bonus that can easily be sacrificed for more acceptable causes, like climate change or even ...other minorities, somehow.

The author re-defines what the trolley problem is supposed to be, and shows that the popular centrist reading of it is in fact a misrepresentation. There is a second step in the thought experiment, which introduces compassion. Taking just the first step of the exercise to justify selective suspension of human rights for strategic and political reasons is unacceptable.

For context, I am referring to the fact that the "Licc'em Low Lisa" track picks on the officer's (quite deep) voice, which leads to the suggestions she harbors a massive D, and the call for "someone to verify her vagina", in a related Tweet. The suggestion that she is a lesbian is also used as an insult in both places.

I enjoyed the whole thing as much as the next person. But calling to verify genitals in this climate of gender policing is (at least) a grey zone, even given the context. And given the "implied transness", then showing women running away scared from her, again, is not great in the current climate. (I mean the relentless narratives denigrating trans women as a threat to cis women and girls.)

Unless Ohio is the kind of place where the mere suggestion that a female LE officer working with children is trans is so hilarious, that the suggestion is unintentionally wholesome. But I can't know that, since I'm not from there.

I won't go into the DSM-V Gender Dysphoria criteria. The involvement of Kenneth Zucker was enough to keep Gender Dysphoria under mental conditions, and people keep weaponizing that decision. They keep doing so even though a lesser known statement by the American Psychiatric Association that clears up that transgender identity is not per se the mental illness, BUT xyz. They screwed us over on purpose and then it was revealed Zucker had vested interest in continuing his own thing.

I am talking about the WHO's ICD-11 Gender Incongruence which is outside mental illnesses but it is still under Sexual Health related conditions. I find this odd, because I don't think being transgender is a sexual thing, despite overlapping with sexual health a lot, but I still think is a misclassification and our enemies gleefully take the chance to weaponize this as well. In fact, reducing transness to a "sex thing" is a main line of attack for right-wing strategies, for instance saying "trans stripper" for drag queen story hour, or Project 2025 equating LGBTQ people with "pornography", especially trans people. Using this argument for book bans etc.

So I got myself thinking, it is not the mind that is wrong it is the endocrine system. After all the gonads are operators for the endocrine system. The intervention is at the endocrine system. So why not start thinking of transness as an endocrine condition primarily?

Now, I start thinking I might be on the asexual spectrum, so I put the fact on the table. But this is not to undermine my proposal, I just think many people might not be seeing that because for most people sex is an important part of life and the overlap between "who you are", "who are you going to bet with", and "who you are going to bed as" is bigger. But of the three, I only see "Who you are" relating to gender identity, "Who you are going to bed" as sexual orientation, I don't see much theory in the latter "going to bed as sth".

So I think that the classification is in error, and it is motivated by erroneous constructs we tried to shake away by replacing "Transexual" with "Transgender" to focus more on identity and biosocial aspects of gender identity. So I don't think that gender incongruence belongs in Sexual Health organically, I believe it is primarily and inherently an endocrine condition (your system does not produce the right hormones for you) treated with endocrine interventions (suppress the production of, or remove the organs that are the producers of the wrong hormones, or correct the results of exposure to wrong hormones). Sex hormones for sure, but hormones. The important thing here is the Self. We agreed against conversion; we preserve the Self, fix the hormones, not the other way round. It is an endocrine condition.

I have read similar complaints about some other types of situations. I think it is informative because with trans people there is the Before/After factor. So have you noticed a drop in customer service that you can attribute to being perceived as transgender?

I came across this Guardian post in feddit dot uk original "shit just works" post through local blahaj post and I looked it up. It is mostly circulated by transphobic websites.

It is about one Jacob George being recused from a clinical trial for puberty blockers. The KCL trial was paused in February, with George's involvement, as potentially harmful for the participants. This news item was also mostly circulated by TERF media.

The trial was originally conceived as a follow-up on the infamous Cass Review, and a response to the backlash. It seems the Guardian article makes no reference to the numerous criticisms of the review, instead it quotes her untrue statement that there is insufficient evidence base for blockers, and recommends a recent misleading headline by Cass herself.

Dr Hilary Cass, who led that review, has previously said her report “uncovered a very weak evidence base” for the benefits of puberty blockers for children and young people with gender dysphoria, but “given that there are clinicians, children and families who believe passionately in the beneficial effects, a trial was the only way forward to make sense of this”.

The Recommended article was "Social Media misleads yound on gender transitioning, says England review leader." https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/feb/15/social-media-misleading-young-people-gender-transitioning-hilary-cass

Dr Max Davie, a consultant paediatrician who previously worked at the NHS Children and Young People’s Gender Service, said there was no compelling scientific reason to pause the trial.

He added: “To be clear, there is no compelling scientific reason to halt the Pathways trial. While Prof George’s personal convictions are not the only possible explanation for the MHRA’s abrupt volte-face, it is the only one for which we have evidence.”

The recusal is on impartiality grounds because George had make TERFy posts in the past. I am not sure what to make of this, other than that the TERF propaganda networks are dressing this as censorship of a fellow TERF "Professor" so I will just leave it here.

So, I don't know why I am doing this, but I was reading "Log Off" by Katherine Cross more carefully, after a short discussion here, and here. It seemed to me a good idea to have a post dedicated to this, and possibly in the future if this works out, about other books. The book is dense, and highly relevant to Lemmy and broadly Fediverse culture, and it spells out nicely some things I had thought before, but in much more packed and well thought-out way. I found myself highlighting something on virtually every page. So I guess I would like to post my thoughts on these highlights and see what other folks think about those as well. So here goes. I am posting the quotes as separate comments to this post, to facilitate them being discussed more thoroughly.

Original Title: Is It 'Anti-Christian Extremism' To Note How Often Conservative Christian Leaders Abuse Kids?

That’s right, this update has 50 new stories in it, just from the past almost three months.

Now, if you are tracking drag queens or trans people or just LGBTQ+ people abusing children, you can take sabbaticals to Europe as often as you fuckin’ want, because those stories just don’t happen much, despite the lies vile MAGA Christians tell.

Can't agree more on the following:

Independent reporter Ken Klippenstein quotes the main points of the NSPM-7, the things it claims > are precursors to the imaginary “wave” of “Antifa” violence they all have agreed to pull out of their > buttholes and wave around and pretend is a real thing.

anti-Americanism,

anti-capitalism,

anti-Christianity,

support for the overthrow of the United States Government,

extremism on migration,

extremism on race,

extremism on gender

hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family,

hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on religion, and

hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on morality.

Holy fuckin’ Handmaid’s Tale, look at all that poor-me victimization of white supremacist fascist Nazi Christianity, or as they like to call it, “traditional values.”

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/34161281

The most organized group that I've seen in the United States which is dedicated to transgender rights is the Trans Unity Coalition.

They have setup non-profit organizations in three states and have held rallies in most states.

As far as I can tell they are a bunch of volunteer trans people who are doing what they can to push back in this difficult environment.

If you're looking for additional ways to get involved, they may be worth a look.

For all the centrist consultants urging Democrats to “moderate” or sacrifice transgender people for political gain, the results suggest the opposite: conviction, not capitulation, is what wins.

And despite the pleas of centrist consultants urging Democrats to abandon transgender people, it was those who targeted them who saw their electoral fortunes collapse on Tuesday night. For the first time in years, transgender Americans can take a breath and see evidence that the wave of anti-transgender panic aimed at them may finally be receding.

In fact, liberals do not even substantially disagree with the core of Trump’s policies. After all, both right-wing and liberal elites are loyal servants of empire, the latter just give it a veneer of humanitarianism. Source: https://lemmy.ml/post/36896947

Authenticity does not have to be subversive. Source: A Sophie Labele's cartoon, showing a girl with a very plain outfit doing embroidery.

And this is why the cultural normalization of Transness is important.

Being trans is something to be normalized as part of a deep cultural change. How deep? As deep as traditional third-genders or other genders are part of the tradition and religion of other cultures such as Africa and India. Trans politics in the Western world right now are strictly informed by the idea that being trans is subversive. Or it should be subversive and it ought to be subversive in order to be worthy of solidarity. The element of subversion is present in the contrary belief also: that Transness genuinely is so subversive as to endanger Western civilization as a whole.

To understand how political groups focus on Transness and understand Transness, Transness should be studied beyond its personal, legal, and medical meanings. It should be studied as an icon and as a symbol, just like advertisers and marketers are extremely aware of the meanings and connotations symbols have. So what are the meanings that Transness, the cultural symbol, carries? What would an advertiser who would use Transness as a symbol would want to convey? Youthfulness? Self-care? Strength?

As a symbol of eccentricity, it is the exemplar of personal freedom of expression, for liberals. But this does not account for cultural systems where being trans is traditional. As a symbol of christian defiance, most celebrated by atheists, it does not account for cultures where Transness has religious connotations.

As a rhetorical device, trans acceptance is tooted as the absolutism of authenticity, acceptance and secularity. It is on this account that it is exploitable as a veneer of humanitarianism. Should transness be part of our normal, conservative, religious life, it would have not these meanings. By not bearing these connotations it would be useless to Democrats, to signal acceptance and inclusion. It would be equally useless to Fascists, who decry excess, and fearmonger about Transness being the bearer of civilizational collapse. It would be useless to Left-wing intellectuals as well, who make careers out of pointing out that the "veneer of humanitarianism" is not true revolution, and thus legitimize alt-right trolls in left-wing spaces, who try to scapegoat trans people as unworthy of solidarity.

Being trans is a normal variation of human ~~sex~~ development. This is the core idea that makes christian nationalists, TERFs, racists, and nazis seethe. It is an idea they are willing to extinguish. They are ready to kill in order to suppress this idea. It is therefore an idea worth having. But what it really means is not that it is eccentric, outlandish, secular, excessive and modern (which can be very good things in and of themselves under certain circumstances). But boring, commonplace, transcedental, modest, and old-fashioned.

This is the true shift we owe to make culturally with regard to Transness. And one that is to be pursued particularly by the Left, whose occasional tendency to certify subversion in order to release solidarity, can be the seed of its eventual moral default.

They misrepresent facts to push the belief that Trump's crackdown on transgender rights was effective in eradicating the "social contagion" that to them is being transgender.

Very dangerous ideas, circulated by very dangerous people.

On Tuesday, Kaufman posted a Twitter thread declaring that “trans identification is in free fall among the young.” The graph he used to prove it, however, was fundamentally flawed—it showed students who identified as “neither male nor female,” a category that excludes most transgender men and women. In other words, Kaufmann’s supposed evidence of a collapse in “trans identification” was actually a selective chart of nonbinary students, not transgender people as a whole. The distinction didn’t matter to the far-right echo chamber. Matt Walsh seized on the claim, boasting, “Transgenderism is effectively over. We destroyed it,” while Elon Musk reposted the graph to his hundreds of millions of followers, personally thanking Walsh for “playing a major role” in the so-called victory.