Did you hear about the article (Pfeffer, et al, Journal of Qualitative Research in Health, 2023) in which "trans" sociologists and allies claim that women who believe they are "male" and get pregnant should not be discouraged from taking testosterone, because "gendered pregnancy" (their new phrase) is focused too much on "normal babies?" A critique of this advocacy by Christine Lahl, of Center for Bio-Ethics and Culture, this justification off consuming carcinogens while pregnant, was at Colin Wright's blog, Reality's Last Stand, today July 17. The authors in Journal of Qualitative Research in Health prefer to ignore and disrespect a focus on the healthy fetus, imagining, perhaps, that they could birth a "trans" baby, oh joy!
Yes. It is known as both. So does this mean a child born from a mother who took the T will get cervical cancer later, like the DES daughters? Quite a specter.
Female fetuses exposed to exogenous T will be virilized. May also cause HPA axis that never develops, so we’re talking about adrenal insufficiency, salt water dysregulation and possible death from shock, like in CAH. Probably will stop pituitary and hypothalamus from even developing properly. Major brain damage.
I’m sure there are no studies for obvious reasons but congenital adrenal hyperplasia provides a natural, similar example. Of course in CAH is an enzyme defect such that salt water hormones can’t be produced. In the case of exogenous T, you can expect suppression and negative feedback of the whole HPA axis. Maybe there are animal experiments.
Criminal! It beggars belief how deranged this keeps getting. Like, they getting pregnant: the most female thing of all. So they want to double down on T.
Yes, these non-medical "researchers" are worried about the baby-centric attitude of mid-wives and obstetricians. If I can manage, I'm going to read the entire article out on Trans Widow Ute Heggen YT channel tomorrow. We have data on the experiences of 43 women who left a suddenly crossdressing man. It's shocking. Sexual assaults and choking, with only 2 incidents reported to law enforcement. This whole idea of "do what you want as an adult, as long as you don't hurt someone else sweeps their violence under the carpet.
Suppose a new democratic country is formed and the citizens construct a system of justice with theft classified as unjust and illegal. People suspected of theft are prosecuted and convicted if found guilty while the country grows from infancy. Then the citizens of the same country decide that it is unjust to prosecute people who steal because the suspects are assumed to be stealing only to survive. Theft is no longer prosecuted and eventually theft is officially legalized. Is the justice system of this country predicated on truth or values?
Context:
I was recently playing around with Google Books Ngram Viewer which displays a graph showing how often user provided keywords or phrases have occurred in a corpus of books over a user specified search range between 1800-2019. https://books.google.com/ngrams/info I was astonished to see the trends of the words “truth” and “values” on the same graph. I simply didn’t expect them to be inversely proportional. Graph: https://ibb.co/MfcyjLc The words “justice”, “moral”, and “religion” trend on the same scale as “truth” and “values” which I added to the following graph: https://ibb.co/7j6ZVzS So, this had me thinking about the relationship between truth, values, and justice. Thank you again for asking and answering my question!
I also made a YouTube video including graphs I made using the tool with combinations of the following keywords: evolution, God, faith, church, religion, love, mother, father, friend, moral, justice, truth, values, community, propaganda, consensus, hope, happiness, purpose
I include all the keyword combinations and formulas in the description of the video if you want to compare them to additional words.
Vocabulary Matters Because Words of a Feather Flock Together
I listened to your Michael Shellenberger yesterday. There was a part in the conversation where you talked about difference of opinions not affecting your relationship. I do agree with this point. I did have a question about you being an atheist and him being a Christian.
The belief in god does not seem like an issue, but religion often disagrees with same sex marriage. This doesn't seem like an issue that would allow for a full in depth friendship with someone. That does not mean you are rude or mean to that person, but it seems like a hindrance for a deep relationship. I am just wondering if the people who are religious and you are friends with have similar (and what I would consider extreme) views. How do you manage such extreme differences opinions and maintain a friendship?
I do understand being friends with people with different views and believe you absolutely should, but as stated in that talk some views may be so extreme they hinder a deep relationship. I see that view as one. Again, I believe in respect toward all and want to be kind to those who have even extremely different views.
I was listening to the Calmversation podcast today with James Lindsay and Mike Nayna. One of them mentioned a point that one can reach in your realization of how crazy the woke universe is. And then it's like you reach a tipping point and can't "under" or "unthink" (my words) the conclusions you make about people and social structures. An epiphany, of sorts. That happened to me about 2 years ago. It takes the sparkle out of so many aspects of academic life that were previously stimulating and exciting. I feel dumbed down and angry at my department and my faculty. How does one survive these sad epiphanies?.
Any legislative action or executive action in anyway restricting guns generates a quick response from conservatives, fund raising, law suits, lobbying, advertising. In Oregon, Republicans walked out of the State Senate to block passage of two controversial bills, HB2005 guns, HB2002 sex change surgery on children. Republicans returned to the Senate after gaining concessions principally in HB2005, (guns), allowing the passage of both bills.
For Conservatives which is a higher priority their guns or their children?
Peter. Thank you for addressing my question from June. You said you were not informed sufficiently on the topic to address it, but you know someone who is. Who is that person, and is there a way to reach them? Please tell me. I asked how the people of Germany and Italy may have prevented Fascist Control in the 1930s. Thank you, Chuck
I totally missed the deadline but my question is related to how to help, say one’s spouse, to see the madness as not progressive at all? My husband and I struggle to talk about the woke madness because it seems he even thinks some censorship and misinformation is ok, to “protect people from harm”. How can he not see that maybe the narrative that such misinformation is harmful is itself misinformation 🙈
PS - the funny thing is he’s an atheist and I’m a Christian, but he seems to have made the Democrats his church. He’s not woke woke, but he is better at arguing than me, so this is a perfect defense against seeking what’s really happening. It’s so frustrating!
How would you adapt street epistemology where you should align on value, align on how to measure progress, but can strongly disagree on how to best achieve it?
So it’s an externalized reflection on what the value is and how to measure it, but internal reflection on why you are convinced of a way to solve it
Did you hear about the article (Pfeffer, et al, Journal of Qualitative Research in Health, 2023) in which "trans" sociologists and allies claim that women who believe they are "male" and get pregnant should not be discouraged from taking testosterone, because "gendered pregnancy" (their new phrase) is focused too much on "normal babies?" A critique of this advocacy by Christine Lahl, of Center for Bio-Ethics and Culture, this justification off consuming carcinogens while pregnant, was at Colin Wright's blog, Reality's Last Stand, today July 17. The authors in Journal of Qualitative Research in Health prefer to ignore and disrespect a focus on the healthy fetus, imagining, perhaps, that they could birth a "trans" baby, oh joy!
A minor point. Exogenous T is a teratogen technically, might be a carcinogen too.
Yes. It is known as both. So does this mean a child born from a mother who took the T will get cervical cancer later, like the DES daughters? Quite a specter.
Female fetuses exposed to exogenous T will be virilized. May also cause HPA axis that never develops, so we’re talking about adrenal insufficiency, salt water dysregulation and possible death from shock, like in CAH. Probably will stop pituitary and hypothalamus from even developing properly. Major brain damage.
I wonder if the hypothalamus and pituitary will stop developing too. We’re talking major brain damage and damage to structures that sustain life.
Good to know. I'd love to have links to the studies. Thanks
I’m sure there are no studies for obvious reasons but congenital adrenal hyperplasia provides a natural, similar example. Of course in CAH is an enzyme defect such that salt water hormones can’t be produced. In the case of exogenous T, you can expect suppression and negative feedback of the whole HPA axis. Maybe there are animal experiments.
Not to cavil but I think you meant Jennifer Lahl, not 'Christine' 😏
That is correct, thanks! I've been getting her name wrong on and off for too long!
Criminal! It beggars belief how deranged this keeps getting. Like, they getting pregnant: the most female thing of all. So they want to double down on T.
Who cares about the baby 😡
Yes, these non-medical "researchers" are worried about the baby-centric attitude of mid-wives and obstetricians. If I can manage, I'm going to read the entire article out on Trans Widow Ute Heggen YT channel tomorrow. We have data on the experiences of 43 women who left a suddenly crossdressing man. It's shocking. Sexual assaults and choking, with only 2 incidents reported to law enforcement. This whole idea of "do what you want as an adult, as long as you don't hurt someone else sweeps their violence under the carpet.
Thank you for holding these AMAs!
Suppose a new democratic country is formed and the citizens construct a system of justice with theft classified as unjust and illegal. People suspected of theft are prosecuted and convicted if found guilty while the country grows from infancy. Then the citizens of the same country decide that it is unjust to prosecute people who steal because the suspects are assumed to be stealing only to survive. Theft is no longer prosecuted and eventually theft is officially legalized. Is the justice system of this country predicated on truth or values?
Context:
I was recently playing around with Google Books Ngram Viewer which displays a graph showing how often user provided keywords or phrases have occurred in a corpus of books over a user specified search range between 1800-2019. https://books.google.com/ngrams/info I was astonished to see the trends of the words “truth” and “values” on the same graph. I simply didn’t expect them to be inversely proportional. Graph: https://ibb.co/MfcyjLc The words “justice”, “moral”, and “religion” trend on the same scale as “truth” and “values” which I added to the following graph: https://ibb.co/7j6ZVzS So, this had me thinking about the relationship between truth, values, and justice. Thank you again for asking and answering my question!
If anyone is interested in playing with the Ngram Viewer tool, you can use it here:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/
I also made a YouTube video including graphs I made using the tool with combinations of the following keywords: evolution, God, faith, church, religion, love, mother, father, friend, moral, justice, truth, values, community, propaganda, consensus, hope, happiness, purpose
I include all the keyword combinations and formulas in the description of the video if you want to compare them to additional words.
Vocabulary Matters Because Words of a Feather Flock Together
https://youtu.be/gf1LltXOlZI
This is fascinating, Abraham!! Thank you for sharing with all of us!
It is my pleasure, thank you Gina!
Hey Peter,
I listened to your Michael Shellenberger yesterday. There was a part in the conversation where you talked about difference of opinions not affecting your relationship. I do agree with this point. I did have a question about you being an atheist and him being a Christian.
The belief in god does not seem like an issue, but religion often disagrees with same sex marriage. This doesn't seem like an issue that would allow for a full in depth friendship with someone. That does not mean you are rude or mean to that person, but it seems like a hindrance for a deep relationship. I am just wondering if the people who are religious and you are friends with have similar (and what I would consider extreme) views. How do you manage such extreme differences opinions and maintain a friendship?
I do understand being friends with people with different views and believe you absolutely should, but as stated in that talk some views may be so extreme they hinder a deep relationship. I see that view as one. Again, I believe in respect toward all and want to be kind to those who have even extremely different views.
I was listening to the Calmversation podcast today with James Lindsay and Mike Nayna. One of them mentioned a point that one can reach in your realization of how crazy the woke universe is. And then it's like you reach a tipping point and can't "under" or "unthink" (my words) the conclusions you make about people and social structures. An epiphany, of sorts. That happened to me about 2 years ago. It takes the sparkle out of so many aspects of academic life that were previously stimulating and exciting. I feel dumbed down and angry at my department and my faculty. How does one survive these sad epiphanies?.
I meant to say can't "unsee" or unthink...
What’s the ‘real deal’ between you and Reid? You know what I mean <wink>.
All joking aside, can you tell us the story of your professional relationship and friendship?
Any legislative action or executive action in anyway restricting guns generates a quick response from conservatives, fund raising, law suits, lobbying, advertising. In Oregon, Republicans walked out of the State Senate to block passage of two controversial bills, HB2005 guns, HB2002 sex change surgery on children. Republicans returned to the Senate after gaining concessions principally in HB2005, (guns), allowing the passage of both bills.
For Conservatives which is a higher priority their guns or their children?
Does your Armenian heritage influence who you are intellectually and philosophically?
Peter. Thank you for addressing my question from June. You said you were not informed sufficiently on the topic to address it, but you know someone who is. Who is that person, and is there a way to reach them? Please tell me. I asked how the people of Germany and Italy may have prevented Fascist Control in the 1930s. Thank you, Chuck
I totally missed the deadline but my question is related to how to help, say one’s spouse, to see the madness as not progressive at all? My husband and I struggle to talk about the woke madness because it seems he even thinks some censorship and misinformation is ok, to “protect people from harm”. How can he not see that maybe the narrative that such misinformation is harmful is itself misinformation 🙈
PS - the funny thing is he’s an atheist and I’m a Christian, but he seems to have made the Democrats his church. He’s not woke woke, but he is better at arguing than me, so this is a perfect defense against seeking what’s really happening. It’s so frustrating!
How would you adapt street epistemology where you should align on value, align on how to measure progress, but can strongly disagree on how to best achieve it?
So it’s an externalized reflection on what the value is and how to measure it, but internal reflection on why you are convinced of a way to solve it