Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Harm Reduction Notes for the COVID-19 Pandemic


- Wed, 29 Nov 2017 19:54:41 EST f7VKYGuq No.208552
File: 1512003281885.jpg -(157533B / 153.84KB, 780x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Compassion
Rejecting any and all forms of transgenderism is an act of compassion.

If a person announces they are going to kill themselves, the compassionate action is NOT to allow them to continue. The compassionate action is to prevent them and help them no longer humor that idea. The same for trans individuals. Hormones are a direct assault on one's genetics. That is a slow form a suicide.
Mental illness is to be treated and compassionately guided.
Charles Tillingwill - Wed, 29 Nov 2017 20:53:23 EST 1kfT+DW9 No.208553 Reply
You know what usually happens to trans people who they aren't allowed to transition? They kill themselves.

Get fucked.
Alice Pimmledale - Wed, 29 Nov 2017 22:19:49 EST f7VKYGuq No.208554 Reply
1512011989885.jpg -(94399B / 92.19KB, 960x696) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Factually incorrect.

Transgenderism is more often than not a scapegoat for depression. 84% of those that transition end up transitioning back to their birth-gender. Our society is enabling an illness that should be treated and over-come. Saying 'It's who they are' is allowing them to slip deeper down the slope of depression. How much do you know about Transgenderism?
Do you know that Men who transition must twice a day 're-open' their 'vagina' wound so that it does not heal over? In what world is that considered healthy?
George Chanderwell - Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:30:48 EST HpcBEgjP No.208555 Reply
Why should transgenderism be treated in a manner analogous to suicide? Why are hormones an assault on one's genetics? Why do you think it's a slow form of suicide? Why do you think it's a mental illness?

Asserting things don't make them true. You might try making a rational argument and giving evidence for your beliefs.

I was suicidal a long time ago, and humoring the idea was an important step in my recovery. At first, I got through each day by saying "I can kill myself tomorrow". It allowed me to ignore the medium and long term concerns that made me depressed, I could focus on my immediate needs. Then, it became a safety net giving me confidence to try things, thinking "I can kill myself if this turns into a shitfest". I wasn't joking either, I owned a .357 Magnum and carried it with me for that purpose. Fortunately, I found I could cope on a day-to-day basis, then I became confident enough that I could handle the next week, the next month, and so on until I barely even thought about killing myself anymore.

My point is that you're full of shit and know nothing about psychological treatment. You're not helping anyone by shitposting about their problems. I suspect that's all you're here for, though.
Esther Sesslebury - Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:43:15 EST 58/sdkIQ No.208556 Reply

>>Transgenderism is more often than not a scapegoat for depression
Factually incorrect. That's like saying that the fact they are on death row is a scapegoat for the depression death row inmates feel. Everything else you're saying is trolling hogwash with no evidence and can be discarded by simply saying 'wrong.' Maybe people who make declarations about what other people should and shouldn't be allowed to do are the ones who should NOT be allowed to continue, did you ever think of that? It's a slow form of social suicide, and believing you can order people around like that is indeed a mental illness that should be treated with compassion.
So, please, friend, turn away from the bigotry and hate you are embracing. It's the only way you can stop being plagued by negative emotions when you observe other people living their lives, and the way to free yourself from compulsive shitposting behavior. Alternatively, you can get fucked, there's already one worthless trans hate bait thread on the front page, which your drivel isn't even as intelligent as. You aren't even a good moronic troll.
Molly Blerrydark - Fri, 01 Dec 2017 08:24:56 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208557 Reply
What does this have to do with philosophy or social sciences?

This is just some fucking the future circlejerk Cripplechan immigrant standing on a soapbox shouting "I HATE FAGS BECAUSE DICKS MAKE MY PEEPEE HARD!"
Emma Huvingkun - Sun, 03 Dec 2017 16:57:17 EST KVMLOWd9 No.208559 Reply
What makes you think you know what's best for anyone besides yourself, op? Are you them? Have you gone through what they have? Are you a scientist or a doctor who works with transgendered people?

I think you're oversimplifying this as a way to justify your confusion about the subject and then trivialize it.
Simon Blovingbick - Fri, 15 Dec 2017 19:44:39 EST t3P68jOA No.208566 Reply
Being myself rather mistrustful of people and what they do to other people, i have had the same doubts as OP. However I am convinced that people really are born in the wrong body, that there is something which is gendered in the brain. Because everyone knows that if they were forced to behave as the opposite gender, they would kill themselves. It's far more than a question of mere preferences.

However, that is exactly the reason I worry about boys being confused and then mistakenly diagnosed as transgendered. But people for some reason react with hostility towards this fear of mine and so all I can do is take solace in knowing that at least boys in girl bodies have a chance to get corrected. For some reason, when it comes to girls in boy bodies, I can only sympathize via comparing it to a boy in a girl body. It's really quite strange.
Hannah Grimson - Fri, 15 Dec 2017 20:22:32 EST 4+oWREai No.208567 Reply
This thread can end with one simple question.

>Mental illness

Is it a mental illness? What does international psychiatric associations have to say about it. Do the experts define it as a mental illness? What course of action do experts recommend for these ones with transgenderism?

The conversation rests entirely on this. Everything else is a what if scenario. Either that, or we get into conspiracy theory territory, and no one really takes that seriously.
Ian Gogglechudge - Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:56:25 EST eRDq/7qa No.208569 Reply
you realise that designating something a mental illness is kind of arbitrary?
Clara Drummerbad - Sat, 23 Dec 2017 22:31:57 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208570 Reply
>muh psychiatry doesn't exist
>muh creationism is a viable alternative to evolution
>muh flat earth
Fuck off luddite cancer, kill yourself. End your existence, you pathetic waste of flesh.
David Durryfuck - Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:42:26 EST 4+oWREai No.208573 Reply
Not at all. And if true, it's better than not using the extent of our academic tools to learn about human behavior. What else would you use? Might as well call it magic and call it a day. Some of the greatest minds in human behavior and the study of the human brain get together to tackle exceptionally convoluted problems. You're just being incredulous.
David Durryfuck - Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:47:35 EST 4+oWREai No.208574 Reply
And if it was arbitrary, so are people calling transgenderism a mental disorder. That goes out the window once you deny the existence of the objectivity of mental illness.

ADD is the most studied mental disorder; More than any other mental illness. That's including: Dementia, Schizophrenia, Bipolar disorder, depression, enthusiasm, etc. It's also passed down genetically with a high rate. If your child has ADD, chances are that you have ADD and never known it, and vice versa.
Wesley Congernig - Thu, 28 Dec 2017 01:57:30 EST JL+Vu9Py No.208575 Reply

What constitutes "mental illness" mostly seem to be diseases with primarily psychiatric symptoms, where the only treatment is also symptomatic, usually because of a poor understanding of underlying causes.

"Depression" is a symptom of a shitload of well-documented diseases, none of which are considered mental illnesses, as well as a common language term for very low spirits, and a "disease" in and of itself with unknown cause, which as far as we know could be caused by an undiscovered virus, a protein synthesis abnormality, etc. etc.

It's a bit rich to suggest that a condition with psychological manifestations should not be treated in the only way we know how to treat it, because of... I don't even know what you mean by "assault on ones genetics". Is it assault on ones genetics to treat heritable autoimmune disorders? Where do you draw the line?

I don't personally have a horse in this race, but if you are compassionate and want to help you'd do well to leave your ideas in the oven for a few more hours.
Hannah Suzzleladge - Sat, 30 Dec 2017 22:10:44 EST ieWqoSun No.208578 Reply
Everyone ITT beating their chest about what psychology is and isn't viz. the definition of 'mental illness' clearly knows dick about psychology. If you did, you would know that the most fundamental aspect of the definition of a mental illness is that it is a mental condition that either impairs the individual's functioning in society, or they themselves wish to be different.

So, by definition being transgender isn't a mental illness (it's important to note that even when it was listed as such in the DSM, the criteria for it were in contradiction with the above, which was still the fundamental theory, which was why that idea was thrown out in the latest edition as being inconsistent.) Having gender dysphoria is a mental illness --
because it is a psychological state which the patient wishes were different (and may additionally hamper social functioning.) Thus the recommended treatment is to transition -- this is considered an evidence based therapy because statistically, this decreases both the amount of subjective dysphoria and social impairment.

Thus, by strict psychiatric definitions, being transgender is a treatment, the opposite of a disease. Rekt, people-talking-about-psychology-with-absolutely-no-knowledge-of-it.
Cedric Cruddleham - Sun, 31 Dec 2017 23:53:31 EST 4+oWREai No.208585 Reply
We already knew, but thanks for being more detailed for those that don't get it.

The point raised earlier was that, even if it were a mental disorder, as in the case for gender dysphoria, the mode of treatment still recommends that they transition. By all points of contention made by OP, he is wrong. That was the original point being driven across.

That doesn't take into account that not everyone transgenered suffers dysphoria.
Nicholas Murddale - Fri, 05 Jan 2018 15:50:22 EST 7NjO80n6 No.208586 Reply

But with that logic, if someones wants to be king of the world, wouldn't the recommended treatment be that we make him king of the world? Why is that that in this case we try to dissuade him from what he wants? Is it because it's less logical than wanting to be another gender, or because it's just more inconvenient than giving chemicals and an operation to a single individual? Seems to me like the desired end result is for the patient to just shut up. It's just that they try to achieve that by the most economical/socially acceptable means.
James Sonnershit - Fri, 05 Jan 2018 23:36:46 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208587 Reply
Wanting to be a king isn't a mental illness you fucking retarded cocksucking piece of smegma eating creationist cancer the future immigrant shit. Fuck off. We don't want your fucking kind here.
Ebenezer Dunningmurk - Sat, 06 Jan 2018 03:54:25 EST 7NjO80n6 No.208588 Reply

Convinced to already be king is what I meant. Thanks for pointing it out, irrationally angry flat-earth hating oddball.
John Cremmerville - Sat, 06 Jan 2018 19:19:05 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208589 Reply
It doesn't matter you fucking the future immigrant. Your analogue makes no sense and is a prime example why laymen should stay the fuck away from academic subjects.
Nathaniel Wimmlelat - Tue, 09 Jan 2018 14:07:29 EST ZS66X4xy No.208595 Reply
It's really simple, it's so simple that you can't comprehend it because you're looking for a complex solution.

Being a king is a real thing. It means you have a royal bloodline, subject, lordship over your realms, etc. Because of the depth of involvement with being king, the thought that you are king with none of that other stuff represents a deep gulf between your internal reality, external reality, and the reality of those around you. This is because being king is a distinct thing with lots of very meaningful external features.

However, the very basic definition of what it means to be a gender is 'the way in which people treat you and you wish to be treated.' That's it, that's the most fundamental origin of the term and concept for gender as far back as you want to look historically. If you want to be treated one way, and everyone else treats you another way, then there is no gulf between your reality and an external particular -- there is only people who treat you the way you want to be treated, and those who don't.

If we minimally accept the idea that everyone has the right to be treated the way they want, as long as it doesn't violate other's own rights, or at least remove themselves from those who treat them negatively, then the 'problem' is on the people who treat people against the way they wish to be treated. Especially since it is a personal matter, relevant only to that one individual. In order to fulfill their requirement, you just have to treat them the way that feels good for them, which should fall under the basic heading of common human decency and costs you nothing. Fulfilling the requirement of the person believing they are king requires you to hurt whole scads of other people, just for the sake of this one person. Moreover, being king when you're not is not a personal issue, and by definition involves the idea of coercing other people against their will. In short, you're making an unfounded comparison. Believing you are the gender you feel you are is almost necessary under the very concept of what gender means, while being king is a very concrete external reality that has nothing to do with what you feel (unless you're the type who has the capacity to conquer a nation and make yourself king, in which case, more power to you.)

>> the desired end result is for the patient to just shut up
Exactly. When a patient comes into your office and starts talking, it's not about the weather. It's because they have a problem. You do what you can to help them, and usually once you have helped them, they don't have a reason to be talking in your face about that anymore. It's like saying 'all mechanics want to do is do whatever fixes the car fastest and gets the customer out the door' well, what would you expect?:
Emma Chablingnetch - Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:46:07 EST cuUQCBtm No.208608 Reply

You basically repeated my post in more words. Yes, making someone king would inconvenience more people. That was an absurd proposition meant to illustrate the absurd point that you seem to take seriously, that just because someone says they're convinced they're something, then we fulfill their pretense, as long as it doesn't inconvenience anyone other than themselves.

This is a way of dealing with mental illness that completely ignores cases in which the symptoms have apparently nothing to do with the root cause. Maybe the person believing to be another gender is just uneasy with themselves due to some kind of trauma, and they blame it on their genitals to escape from the trauma, because that's what you do when you have trauma, you point the finger at anything but the truth. If you were able to easily face it, it wouldn't be trauma. Hell, some people would cut their dick off if it meant not having to face it, you get what I mean? And who knows, maybe it works, maybe by becoming transgender and pumping yourself full of hormones forever you have such a radical life experience that you've created a permanent chemically induced buffer to trauma.. But what if you don't? What if one day the root of the unease you had disappears because of some experience and all you're left with is a permanent solution to a problem you thought was permanent but wasn't?

Weren't psychology and psychiatry meant to free yourselves from your past, to give you the means to transcend yourself, rather than making you shut up about your problems?

>It's like saying 'all mechanics want to do is do whatever fixes the car fastest and gets the customer out the door' well, what would you expect?:

Say that a customer goes to the mechanic not because the car isn't working but because there's a flashing red light and they don't know what it's for. I don't know about cars, so let's say it's a sign pointing not to a drastic problem, but to something that will eventually get worse, in a couple months, if you keep ignoring it. The mechanic knows it, the customer knows nothing. In such a situation, the mechanic could easily spout some nonsense to the customer, but repair nothing except the warning red light, so that it doesn't flash anymore. For the customer, problem solved, for the mechanic, they billed for a fix while they actually only shut off a warning sign. And in a couple months, when the real problem presents itself again, the mechanic, if faced with an accusation, can just blame it on something else - it's not like the customer would know any better, anyway. Of course where the analogy breaks down is that this kind of trickery is much easier to discover in the world of cars, because all that you're talking about is visible and tangible..

This is my doubt. Are we fixing these people's problems, or are we just shutting off their flashing lights? And in such a drastic way that if they came back and said it didn't work, they'd lose all credibility. Imagine owning to a fuckup that big, and the repercussions to your reputation (the patient's I mean). At that point "the problem was, I was the wrong gender" remains the true story whether it's real or not. Who would trust you again after that? On that subject, you shut their flashing lights off forever through the means of feared social stigma. I don't think that's what a psychiatrist would mean to happen..
Angus Genderforth - Sat, 13 Jan 2018 08:49:41 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208609 Reply
Goddamn it you fucking the future immigrant cunt, if you don't fucking accept you lost the argument fuck off, we don't want your fucking retarded circlejerk cancer here. Fuck off and crawl back to your Trumpian stormfront safespace you fucking cocksucking sissy faggot.
Alice Grimville - Fri, 19 Jan 2018 14:22:12 EST 4+oWREai No.208614 Reply
Be easy on the guy. It seems more likely that he's struggling to understand than being some agitator for the heck of it.
Martha Pocklemat - Fri, 19 Jan 2018 16:02:01 EST Vv1yxGNY No.208615 Reply
No, I think he's arguing in bad faith, since he just told me my post said the exact opposite of what it was trying to say. He keeps hiding inside ontologically unknowable things like 'well when you heal a trauma what if you're only like, *seeming* to fix the trauma, man?' and so I'm incredulous his argument is serious or in good faith, which is why I stopped answering. This whole thread is garbage though, everyone should die.
Shit Blipperfun - Fri, 26 Jan 2018 23:35:01 EST 9zW8Ti/l No.208635 Reply
>Maybe the person believing to be another gender is just uneasy with themselves due to some kind of trauma, and they blame it on their genitals to escape from the trauma

Maybe, but there is distinct clinical difference between the body dysphoria associated with abuse or neglect, and the dysphoria related to a different gender identity, which can and often does occur in people who have no history of being abused.

>And who knows, maybe it works, maybe by becoming transgender and pumping yourself full of hormones forever you have such a radical life experience that you've created a permanent chemically induced buffer to trauma..

Firstly, that makes no sense. Pumping yourself full of hormones is a decidely negative experience. Just as going on anti-psychotics, or undergoing shock therapy, is something a "normal" person would not willingly do, because it's very unpleasant. So logically, the people who DO do that, and see improvement afterwards, must have had a problem that was so intense that a radical procedure was both necessary and favorable to that problem.

Secondly, they were already transgender. That's why they needed the sex reassignment.

>Say that a customer goes to the mechanic not because the car isn't working but because there's a flashing red light and they don't know what it's for. The mechanic knows it, the customer knows nothing. In such a situation, the mechanic could easily spout some nonsense to the customer, but repair nothing except the warning red light, so that it doesn't flash anymore.
>This is my doubt. Are we fixing these people's problems, or are we just shutting off their flashing lights?

But this is directly analogous to what you're saying. "It can't be their gender identity, it must be depression or some other problem". Well guess what, we've tried that. We've tried treating gender dysphoria as a simple mental health issue. We've tried talking it away, we've tried anti-depressants, we've tried all of that. Clinically, sex reassignment is the most effective treatment for gender dysphoria (and yes, that's what the science says) that we have. Otherwise, as you've perceptively noticed, WE WOULDN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S AN EXTREME SOLUTION.
James Hellydale - Thu, 08 Feb 2018 07:10:26 EST tBJp2aGG No.208669 Reply
Redpanels is fash trash and you must bash said fash.
Cornelius Fanspear - Thu, 08 Feb 2018 17:27:15 EST pDpYFcmy No.208679 Reply
Man, that fucking comic. The notion that there's some cabal of scientists keeping evidence of genetic differences in intelligence from reaching the eyes of the public is one of the most ridiculous things the far-right has come up. It shows a complete lack of understanding about the scientific method and human nature in general.

In science, one of the qualifications a good hypothesis is that it needs to be falsifiable, meaning that your methods need to be clear and there needs to be the logical potential that it can be proven wrong. If it doesn't have this quality, it can't lead to a valid theory. Every single peer-reviewed study linking race to intelligence either has strong evidence against or was never truly falsifiable to begin with. I'm completely willing to consider any evidence anyone has in to the contrary, because I'm not bound by a specific pattern of thought or ideology, but I have a strong suspicion that there is no correlation.

Let's think about this from another angle. All humans constantly look for ways to elevate themselves and put down others. In the West, the dominant philosophy is scientific empiricism and the dominant race is Caucasian. If the majority race could actually prove their superiority using the most widely accepted method of reasoning in contemporary thought, there's no way they would try to keep that information secret. One might say that scientists are generally egalitarian and so desperately search for ways to disprove any theory that contradicts their world view, even going so far as to disregard scientific evidence and reason but I think human instinct is a lot more powerful than bleeding hearts.
Shit Worthingcocke - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 06:50:09 EST Q2wCcWf6 No.208813 Reply

>>The notion that there's some cabal of scientists keeping evidence of genetic differences in intelligence from reaching the eyes of the public is one of the most ridiculous things the far-right has come up

thats not the claim, the claim is that the education system and the media are hiding these findings, not scientists, and scientists avoid this topic because they dont want to deal with it, totally reasonable by the way, race is a very unfortunate reality

i cant really imagine how you can think there is no good evidence linking race to intelligence, every major study of IQ and race has shown the unequivocal inferiority of blacks. so you're claim here is tantamount to saying IQ is totally bunk and meaningless, despite every major study of IQ showing that it is a great predictor for all the qualities that we describe as intelligence including competence in problem solving, planning ahead, success in the workplace, etc etc

and the funny thing is that this stuff really doesnt matter that much, the variation within each race is much larger than the variation between the averages of each race, and furthermore nothing is stopping a lower IQ person from taking all kinds of steps to ensure a happy and successful

but leftists are so insecure and so patronizing that they refuse to allow any grounds whatsoever for disagreement with their orthodoxy, regardless of the facts
Hedda Gusslebit - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 13:32:48 EST w8qDl8j3 No.208823 Reply
Stop frogposting man ffs. Your IQ is going to be lower if you have lower opportunities. Speaking English has been shown to be a determinant of IQ because the people who create most IQ tests speak English. You have fucked right up the basic principle that a correlation does not imply a causation. And then you go on to imagine some vast academic conspiracy to explain your own misunderstanding of data. It's lame.
Oliver Sendlecocke - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 13:52:26 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208824 Reply
Nevermind that growing up on formula milk will cut like 20 points of your IQ score and suffering famine will seriously cut your IQ in half. Guess what a lot of kids in African (civil) warzones have to deal with? They're lucky if they even get formula milk. Goes to show that you can only look at racial differences in "laboratory" settings, such as people of different ethnicities in exactly the same social brackets and environments... and guess what... no one ever found a difference.
Shit Worthingcocke - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:38:23 EST Q2wCcWf6 No.208826 Reply

actually no, asians have consistently been shown to have higher average IQs regardless of whether they speak english


i did not necessarily claim that the difference in IQs is caused by genetics. But in point of fact you are absolutely wrong, when we control for poverty and opportunities and all that the same differences between races still appears. do your research

>>no one ever found a difference

that is ludicrous, no one has ever NOT found a difference, instead every one of them has scrambled to find a good explanation for this that wont offend people
Sidney Snodfield - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 21:39:45 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208830 Reply
>hurr durr imma right just check the data over at stormfront

Nice try you cocksucking the future circlejerk jolly african-americantits my penis immigrant chucklefuck, go fucking kill yourself by eating 10 kilos of stallion dick.
Rebecca Pidgebet - Wed, 28 Feb 2018 00:16:51 EST w8qDl8j3 No.208833 Reply
[citation needed]

If you're just going to keep harping on about what the data says, how about showing us some of it, hm?
Oliver Shakewell - Wed, 28 Feb 2018 01:45:54 EST Q2wCcWf6 No.208835 Reply

>>Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference in average IQ between Blacks
and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A
meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed
it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic
Aptitude Test (SAT; N 2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination
(GRE; N 2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings
(N 0.5 million) and in the military (N 0.4 million). Because test scores are
the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter,
1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon,
1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

the point of this is not that blacks are genetically disabled, i didnt get this from stormfront, this is one of the top google searches and you know google is on your side of this argument. i should actually say "our side" because im with you that racism is wrong.

the problem is that leftists are trying to foster a dialogue where uncomfortable facts are discredited on ad hominem grounds, see the post above for an example.
Ian Cenningfuck - Wed, 28 Feb 2018 14:09:05 EST WFGKCTJE No.208864 Reply
How about not a study where one of the co-authors is widely recognized as receiving most of his funding from the Pioneer Fund, a group that the SPLC has classified as a hate group, and both have been derided in social science circles for decades as pushing an overtly racist interpretation of findings? This is a literature review. It goes over past studies and expresses why the authors think they were good or bad studies, but such reviews are inherently biased toward a particular theoretical stance even under the best circumstances. Yes, there is a lot of very wordy articulations of the same kind of weak defenses you're offering here offered by these guys, but it doesn't mean they actually hold any more scientific or philosophical water. If you're going to appeal to authority by citing studies, how about selecting an actual authority?
Fanny Clummlesadge - Wed, 28 Feb 2018 20:02:20 EST 8gq7GAVV No.208874 Reply
Fuck off you fucking the future jolly african-americantits stormfront my penis circlejerk immigrant we don't fucking want your faggot kind here.
Isabella Hecklefag - Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:54:20 EST Q2wCcWf6 No.208877 Reply

im actually having trouble remembering all these cat planets, haven't been on 420chan in a while
David Billingwell - Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:51:54 EST WFGKCTJE No.208879 Reply
Dude you really have to stop grabbing the first article you find off of google without reading it first. This is a takedown of a guy's book championing the genetic hypothesis, the author explaining how he uses misinformation to support that hypothesis. It includes such unambiguous statements as " We now have much stronger evidence and a deeper understanding of population genetics, and it seems clear that the hereditarian interpretation
is not supported by the data"

No one is disputing the culture hypothesis, it's what everyone has said back to you when you have brought up such differences. By 'culture' moreover it is not meant, like, rap music causes the difference, it's all factors of society and culture that impinge on IQ outcomes, including opportunities and cultural barriers, not genetics.
Shitting Brimmercocke - Tue, 03 Apr 2018 04:22:45 EST yE9yxW1k No.209008 Reply
The SPLC exaggerates the threat of neo-fascism but that's because that's how it gets donations to fight neo-fascism. The police work the same way, and of course the SPLC are part of the legal system. For what it's worth, they also identify black extremists as hate mongers, including the Nation of Islam and its offshoots.

>the racial differences in IQ are not in dispute by any serious academic

Yes, they are. It was conclusively refuted by Jim Flynn by the late 80s. The only people banging on today about "racial differences in IQ" are people who still subscribe to some notion of "biological race", which is not mainstream science as molecular biology dispensed with the concept by the 60s. In fact, it's not "serious academics" peddling this racist pseudo-science. It's people with fake journals, or people - like Charles Murray, Richard Lynn, and J. Phillipe Rushton - who make up data and distort the facts to advance a political agenda that's reactionary at worst and archconservative at best.

The genetics of intelligence are not well understood, despite whatever correlation coefficients we get for certain genes at certain standard deviations of IQ. We do not have a coherent theory of how intelligence works biologically. We do not know to what extent the genes responsible for intelligence, however many there are which we also don't know, vary between populations. But we do know that intelligence is remarkably sensitive to changes in nutrition and social stability, and that countries which are unstable, or which are plagued by malnutrition, are the ones that tend to produce populations with lower IQ scores. The rise in IQ scores over the 20th century, especially in East Asia, is part of what casts serious doubt on the conclusions of racists derived from the "studies" of the above mentioned authors. The hereditarian position fails to acknowledge the role of the environment, which can override genetic potential if it doesn't provide the right conditions for gene expression (e.g., the non-presence of coenzymes because of vitamin deficiency during childhood).

By the way, the people pushing this shit don't even tend to be biologists. They are usually - gasp - social scientists! And they make the lamest statistical analyses of falsified data to come to the conclusions they were searching for from the outset. Imagine that. These are the same cunts who bitch about the "standard social science model" while participating in social science's worst sins against scientific rigor, and while committing the worst abuses of scientific concepts.
Phineas Blanningspear - Tue, 03 Apr 2018 04:25:08 EST h+rYNibW No.209009 Reply
When you're thinking about the credibility of the SPLC, remember that Sunday they were trawling Twitter and warning the people about the evils of the hashtags #HappyEaster and #Jesus.
Cyril Dimmlewat - Tue, 03 Apr 2018 14:55:43 EST 4+oWREai No.209015 Reply
Race is an entirely meaningless term for humans. Genetics are far too complex to quantify differences in peoples in such black and white definitions.

The Anthropology Association America on Race:

"In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species."


https://youtu.be/teyvcs2S4mI Concordance on Race

Race realists btfo
Martin Bemblewill - Tue, 03 Apr 2018 21:42:23 EST 8gq7GAVV No.209017 Reply
What's wrong with that? Fuck Christians.

Not Jesus and Easter.
But Black Metal and satanic horror movies.
Cornelius Chedgestut - Sun, 08 Apr 2018 14:04:53 EST Gz0HylVJ No.209039 Reply
tbf that was an automatic system that fucked up, but that doesn't excuse it since it's their overzealous bot in the first place that deems everything that comes from accounts it considers "right wing" as hate speech
Samuel Pisslebudge - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 13:36:16 EST hbTtukSa No.209089 Reply

That quote you posted is literally misleading propaganda that does not in any way refute the existence of statistical variation between races. Like I'm supposed to forget the retard-tier average IQs and test scores of jolly african-americans because their genes don't tell the whole story? Wow so deep

You guys are obsessed with the strawman that racial differences must be 100% genetic, as if that's the only reason one could have reason to care about racial differences. Again, as I said, no serious academic questions the STATISTICAL FACT that IQ differences can be observed between races, this is an undeniable fact, and the fact that you are the leftist cultural hegemony are so adamant at denying this is why you have no credibility and why nobody respects leftist social science dogma.
Nigel Feffinghan - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 14:46:22 EST V8N/5kWg No.209091 Reply
1523817982488.gif -(265785B / 259.56KB, 97x131) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>if a scientific or academic body says something I don't agree with then it's "literally misleading propaganda"
>if a handful of social scientists and political writers sell a book for profit that happens to say something I agree with then it's ALL CAPS STATISTICAL FACT
>also here's some angry use of racial slurs and fringe political buzzwords to prove how totally not emotionally compromised I am when it comes to this subject
You're doing a fantastic job keep it up
George Bunhall - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:02:02 EST Q2wCcWf6 No.209094 Reply

m8 you can look up the stats yourself. just because a group of politically compromised scientists sign a statement making excuses for black people doesn't change the actual stats. black people score worse on iq tests, this is not up for debate. there is not a single large scale study done of iq tests for which this result does not hold

the debate is about why this is. the leftist is still wrong in that debate but the question of why their scores are so low is much more nuanced and unclear
Clara Wuddleway - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:55:55 EST 8gq7GAVV No.209095 Reply
>hurr durr im a retarded the future immigrant and ur a dum cuz hitlur said so

Yeah, you can just fuck off and die. nb, ignored.
Hugh Crocklechedging - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 23:56:55 EST ogjfl7YN No.209096 Reply
>the debate is about why this is

So you do understand why saying "the stats say blacks are inferior" is shallow and comes across as empty racist trash, but you're dead set on making this terrible argument again and again because you imagine you're triggering leftists?
Henry Blorringway - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:46:14 EST KdSY7mf7 No.209101 Reply
If you actually gave a shit about being statistically accurate you would spend your time wondering actually why and how this difference exists. Caring about cause and effects, details and specifics.

But you only care because it supports your pre-conceived notions. You don't care about the intellectual integrity of science. You care about how fit propaganda is for you agenda.
Jack Nattingsutch - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 21:31:12 EST VhdWon+z No.209104 Reply
1523928672264.gif -(1050618B / 1.00MB, 275x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I've been reading this thread for couple days.

Quick thoughts.

  1. IQ is representative of basically nothing. People who believe in the Intelligence Quotient have already demonstrated theirs.

2. Poverty/Culture is a better predictor than race for intelligence.

3. There are a great deal of studies within the United States from 100 fucking years ago that show that IQ, when it is used, is higher, without regard to race, in areas with higher incomes and higher rates of schooling etc.

4. Fuck off back to tardy-chan. Your type of 19 year-old "just getting into politics from sad-chan" is just about as pathetic as one can get.
Hedda Gobbledock - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 06:01:39 EST Nwy2IF3I No.209106 Reply
1523959299627.gif -(2728233B / 2.60MB, 256x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
no the guy you're responding to but I have some thoughts on this.

>IQ is representative of basically nothing. People who believe in the Intelligence Quotient have already demonstrated theirs.
Elaborate. I was under the impression that IQ's were an accurate way of figuring out how smart someone is. Just because racists use things like IQ to feel superior to others, doesn't make IQ meaningless.

>Poverty/Culture is a better predictor than race for intelligence.
I agree. but what metric are you using for intelligence since you rejected IQ?

>There are a great deal of studies within the United States from 100 fucking years ago that show that IQ, when it is used, is higher, without regard to race, in areas with higher incomes and higher rates of schooling etc.
Which proves that nurture and not nature is a determinant of IQ, which settles an old question about whether intelligence is genetic or learned.
Charlotte Cinnerlock - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:14:22 EST fqkrV/cz No.209107 Reply
not the guy you are responding to either but have some info for you:

>>I was under the impression that IQ's were an accurate way of figuring out how smart someone is
No. IQ has been widely discredited for decades. It's almost a laughing stock as far as a scientific and reliable indicator, which is why you see very few researchers working with it -- only those who are looking for headline grabbing, pop-sci grants do.

>>what metric are you using for intelligence since you rejected IQ?
This is an open question in the social sciences. My money is on 'success of outcome' since that is closest to nature's definition of evolutionary fitness; what is best fit for the environment. So that would entail a broad based measure of adaptive, interpersonal, physiokinesthetic, crystalline, and fluid intelligences in an individual not only in a testing environment but also considering real world factors, weight adjusted for socio-cultural considerations.

>>Which proves that nurture and not nature is a determinant of IQ
Not necessarily. There is a correlation, not necessarily causation. For example, there could be a genetic factor which influences which areas have higher incomes and rates of schooling, in which case we wouldn't be able to rule out genetics from that information alone. Moreover, if the very factor we are trying to measure, 'IQ' is itself a flawed construct, the information we get from our analyses will actually be meaningless.
Wesley Muvinglodge - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 15:35:02 EST 8gq7GAVV No.209108 Reply
The only thing IQ measures is how good you are at the kind of things a low-level manager in 1920 should be good at.

The fact that every decade the average IQ grade in just about every part of the world gets bumped up a few points, so people have to readjust it back to 100 (retroactively making older people dumber and dumber as the years pass) indicate as much.
Lillian Cebberkone - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 17:53:15 EST gA/rgKNJ No.209111 Reply

What I "give a shit" about is leftists destroying the truth with their wishful thinking and their intolerance of facts that make them uncomfortable

As far as IQ tests go, they are a great predictor of all the sorts of things that we care about like success in careers, ability to solve logical and mathematical problems, the ability to clearly explain one's self verbally, etc.

But if you don't like IQ, that's fine. There's not a single standardized test for which racial differences do not appear. Again the point is not to try and prove unequivocally that blacks are genetically inferior, the point is that you and your disgusting leftist ilk are unwilling to accept the facts and actively engaged in propaganda to discredit anybody who IS willing to accept facts. Leftists are destroying society.
Ebenezer Fovingchatch - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 04:21:13 EST ogjfl7YN No.209116 Reply
1524039673108.jpg -(36764B / 35.90KB, 500x522) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>What I "give a shit" about is leftists destroying the truth with their wishful thinking and their intolerance of facts that make them uncomfortable

If by that you mean the statistical difference between races, no one said that such a difference is not statistically observable. All the argument in this thread has been about you wanting to be able to make a big point about "jolly african-americans" being dumb and leftists "making excuses" for them. That you actually believe the only reason people disagree with your unfounded and blatantly racist use of the stats is that they're triggered leftists and not that you're, you know, just plain talking garbage, should make it clear where your biases lie.

>actively engaged in propaganda to discredit
>discredited on ad hominem grounds

>your disgusting leftist ilk
>Leftists are destroying society.
>a group of politically compromised scientists
>the leftist is still wrong
>the problem is that leftists
>leftists are so insecure and so patronizing

Yep, it's the leftists who have engaged in ad hominem propaganda. You are indeed a victim.
Hamilton Turveyridge - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 08:53:44 EST oeDjsG+O No.209118 Reply
1524056024767.gif -(881361B / 860.70KB, 2970x2483) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Don't mind me, just pouring some gasoline on this dumpster fire of a thread

Pissing in an ocean of /pss/ etc.
Jenny Fazzlechore - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 09:27:33 EST Nwy2IF3I No.209119 Reply
1524058053108.jpg -(14074B / 13.74KB, 502x294) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
The point of /pss/ is to discuss an idea yourself. Posting links or pic and saying "this says what I wanna say" isn't the same as saying it yourself. In fact it demonstrates on your part a complete failure to articulate an idea. If this idea of yours to dump "info you never articulated" on threads like this was valid, I could dump a whole google and dump a whole Wikipedia on your ass and tell you to read every single fucking word. So which is it?
Hamilton Turveyridge - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:16:03 EST oeDjsG+O No.209124 Reply
The only way you'd know that image is from that place is if you are from there yourself, you fucking the future immigrant cis-het normative bigoted shitlord

nb, ignored
Emma Goggleville - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 11:23:33 EST fqkrV/cz No.209125 Reply
As usual with infographics, there's some accurate information in their out of context or inappropriately framed, and some information which flat out doesn't say what it is claimed to say.
All of this, for the most part, is irrelevant. We have readily acknowledged that there are physiological differences between different human groups. What we reject is your leap from that fact to the idea that human society or thought should in any way entertain the notion of a social hierarchy based on this 'geneticist' worldview. Quite simply, even if it were a more severe situation (like if actual homo sapiens, neanderthals and denisovians were trying to live and interact in the modern world as distinct species) the nature of modern globalized society means we are dependent upon principles of egalitarianism and legal equality for our very survival.
Phoebe Turveyhall - Sat, 28 Apr 2018 11:21:52 EST SGCbMw+u No.209150 Reply
>OP here.
>I have no credentials but trans therapy is the same as suicide.
Good fucking job. You’re a real philosopher now. You also clearly lack sympathy for the mental patients who may need trans therapy.
Nell Gesslegold - Sun, 29 Apr 2018 19:11:54 EST xc7CY0zb No.209152 Reply
1525043514728.png -(44698B / 43.65KB, 707x632) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Do Cecilia Dhejne, Paul Lichtenstein, Marcus Boman, Anna L. V. Johansson, Niklas Långström, and Mikael Landén have suffience credentials?
Cornelius Subblepet - Sun, 29 Apr 2018 22:09:34 EST brei4qhw No.209154 Reply
Can you not even read the images you post to defend your own arguments? These people are only making a claim about the effectiveness of SRS as a treatment for transsexuals. It makes no claim of any kind about the validity of transsexuality as a whole, which you would understand if you read the part of the conclusion that wasn't highlighted.
Clara Fanwill - Sun, 29 Apr 2018 23:07:53 EST 4+oWREai No.209156 Reply
Sorry for double-post. To make it more clear. The study isn't showing that SRS doesn't help to alleviate GID; It actually suggests that it does in the study. It also doesn't suggest that transexualism isn't valid. You are reading into the study. From one of the studies researchers:

From Cecilia Dhekne (in the linked article above):

"It is therefore important to note that the current study is only informative with respect to transsexual persons health after sex reassignment; no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism. In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit."

"Of course trans medical and psychological care is efficacious. A 2010 meta-analysis confirmed by studies thereafter show that medical gender confirming interventions reduces gender dysphoria." This is even clearly stated in the study you posted.
Archie Wingersore - Mon, 30 Apr 2018 02:42:00 EST ogjfl7YN No.209157 Reply

Yes, and they display their credentials throughout that study by offering nuanced explanations of the phenomena of trans suicide that people like you conveniently ignore.

>For the purpose of evaluating the safety of sex reassignment in terms of morbidity and mortality, however, it is reasonable to compare sex reassigned persons with matched population controls. The caveat with this design is that transsexual persons before sex reassignment might differ from healthy controls (although this bias can be statistically corrected for by adjusting for baseline differences). It is therefore important to note that the current study is only informative with respect to transsexuals persons health after sex reassignment; no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism.

>In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.[39], [40] This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit.

>The poorer outcome in the present study might also be explained by longer follow-up period (median >10 years) compared to previous studies. In support of this notion, the survival curve (Figure 1) suggests increased mortality from ten years after sex reassignment and onwards. In accordance, the overall mortality rate was only significantly increased for the group operated before 1989. However, the latter might also be explained by improved health care for transsexual persons during 1990s, along with altered societal attitudes towards persons with different gender expressions.

>There might be other explanations to increased cardiovascular death and malignancies. Smoking was in one study reported in almost 50% by the male-to females and almost 20% by female-to-males.[9] It is also possible that transsexual persons avoid the health care system due to a presumed risk of being discriminated.

>Mortality from suicide was strikingly high among sex-reassigned persons, also after adjustment for prior psychiatric morbidity. In line with this, sex-reassigned persons were at increased risk for suicide attempts. Previous reports [6], [8], [10], [11] suggest that transsexualism is a strong risk factor for suicide, also after sex reassignment, and our long-term findings support the need for continued psychiatric follow-up for persons at risk to prevent this.
Archie Wingersore - Mon, 30 Apr 2018 02:49:10 EST ogjfl7YN No.209158 Reply

I mean, the only thing you prove when you cite that study as evidence against SRS is that you have no idea how to read a psychological study.
Dr. Katz !KqgSR25gAQ - Mon, 30 Apr 2018 03:58:46 EST I3P3lRo5 No.209159 Reply
>Trans... still have high rates of suicide compared to the *general population*.

This is true. Trans individuals lack many of the support systems that cisgender individuals readily have. Support is imperative for quality of life for any human being. I recently read a study regarding aging and the LGB (trans was not included) community. Older LGB adults have lower rates of mental illness, substance abuse, etc. when they have greater support systems in place.
Cornelius Subblepet - Mon, 30 Apr 2018 14:41:45 EST brei4qhw No.209161 Reply
>>Trans individuals lack many of the support systems that cisgender individuals readily have.
I'm gonna eschew being clinical and distant like I've tried to be throughout this thread and be real for a second, even though we all should know how little to weigh anecdotal evidence. As a young transperson who has many trans* friends (*gasp* 'a trans, on my 420chan?') I can confirm this to be very true to my life experience. Whenever you meet a transgirl (or transman for that matter) and they are introducing themselves, their life story has at least three quarters of the time ime included some version of, 'so when I came out x% of my friends and family abandoned me, I had such and such a suddenly harder time finding a job, had such and such increased hassles dealing with government/healthcare organizations, etc.'
If (especially as a cishet white male, the pinnacle of human evolution) anyone claims that the voluminous support of their friends and family, ability to be easily employed, and smooth processing through governmental interactions, aren't key factors in influencing their quality of life, they are either deliberately lying to themselves or deeply ignorant of life outside a bubble, imho.
Clara Numblehurk - Thu, 03 May 2018 00:19:27 EST ogjfl7YN No.209168 Reply

What's the point in being the pinnacle of human evolution if you don't get to look down from on high and decree who does or doesn't have real problems?
Samuel Sassleville - Thu, 10 May 2018 22:56:11 EST 9k2Lr/yb No.209201 Reply
So much fucking cope in this thread.

Esther Lightwater - Fri, 11 May 2018 00:33:16 EST ogjfl7YN No.209202 Reply

I don't think anyone's said that statistics don't correlate.
Hedda Choffingdale - Thu, 17 May 2018 17:23:17 EST pLi6jhVd No.209214 Reply
>nazi retard who posts redpanels
Nobody believes you give a shit about transgender people. If your logic was correct trans people in the most transphobic nations would have better outcomes, but they don't, they suffer violence and discrimination at increased rates because it's fucking obvious that's what your attitude leads to OP. It takes absolutely no empathy to call someone mentally ill as a way of writing off their experiences.
Doris Gissleman - Thu, 17 May 2018 21:45:44 EST 8gq7GAVV No.209215 Reply
Everytime the mods remove or lock the current /pol/ shit thread on /b/, these cocksucking faggot the future immigrants revive this thread again.

Really makes you think, doesn't it? Fucking closet fags. The whole lotta those alt-right neonazi wankers.
Molly Drusslechare - Fri, 18 May 2018 11:27:35 EST V8N/5kWg No.209216 Reply
>Fucking closet fags. The whole lotta those alt-right neonazi wankers.
Yeah it's no secret anymore just how much of the far right mindset is motivated by sexual pathology.

cuties, gays, stallionoldry, interracial sex, BBC, pimps, MGTOW, PUAs, alpha/beta mentality, obsessing over testosterone levels, fear that soybeans will steal your masculinity, arguing about the age of consent, obsessing over little anime girls, pedo pizza party conspiracies...

It sure is ""suspicious"" how so much of the political animus of these people seems to always come back to weird sexual hangups.
William Donderkidge - Sat, 26 May 2018 01:33:52 EST ogjfl7YN No.209222 Reply
Well, how else would you be able to recruit horny teenage retards who can't get laid?
Eliza Mirringshit - Mon, 04 Jun 2018 18:27:06 EST 2LwLwSlz No.209280 Reply
Hey man, as if it weren't obvious enough that you are trying to troll every thread in this board like the immigrant 4skin scum you are, did you really have to post a variation of the same pic in every one?

It's low energy and depressingly pathetic. Are you low t? I assume so because otherwise your smooth brain would realize that saying "X Ys are Xs now" (femi nazis are nazis now) is so circular it's tautological. Maybe if you weren't such a beta you could see how weak your reasoning is. Plz stay out of the way of the chads actually running the world k thnx bye.

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.