Theweakeredge AMA - Reboot

Author: Theweakeredge

Posts

Total: 177
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@coal
Looking into it... this seems to be a book written in 2019? Do you have any peer-reviewed sources?
(Title partially stolen from another work published in 1999 by an author called Charlie Mackay)
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
On which topic?
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
That we should increase the number of immigrants to the USA 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
Oh - hm - in the same regard as that debate my opponent forfeited?
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
-->
@Theweakeredge
Yes,
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
I think privatizing the police would hold the police more accountable than a government run monopoly on the police buisiness.  If a government police officer kills someone, there is rarely recourse.  If a private police officer kills someone, the company risks losing business.  Let’s privatize almost everything.
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
> Do you have any peer-reviewed sources?

As I said,  the sources Douglas Murray cites in Madness of Crowds provide a general overview.    He published Madness of Crowds in consultation with medical experts, if you were curious. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@coal
Um... but-is the paper peer reviewed? Does it have an official methodology? Is the sample biased? No - I'm sorry but an unsourced "consensus" isn't near good enough evidence of anything. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@coal
Did you know that big foot, alien abductions and all sorts of other conspiracy theorists are also in confirmation with medical experts? The lack of A) even listing those experts, and B) any research into their claims is what caused conspiracy theories to go off the rail. THere's a reason that in terms of evidence, a testimony from an expert isn't worth as much as a peer-reviewed paper. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Um... no - that's certainly not what happened to corporations, furthermore, a lot of people are OKAY with police murdering people - see the fallout of millions saying: "George Floyd wasn't murdered" after he was obviously murdered in public, further furthermore - privatizing police in the past (a.k.a lobbying from corporations) has let so many of illegal and corrupt businesses continue. 

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
Privatized cops have financial motive to engineer events in the prison that justify extended sentences.

I'm not saying all do it but I recommend a watch of Orange is the New Black to grasp how corrupt the culture amongst cops is in privatized prisons.

If then, those cops themselves were only hired and fired as per the will of the corporation, it's viable that snitches end up framed for things if they dare to oust the corporation and its cops.

This shit really happened and happens in nations with private cops.


ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 15,162
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
Thoughts on Taco Bell?
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
RMM
Yeeaaah - a big problem with cops in the first place is how privatized they already are - are at least how they are practically speaking. I mean - the lobbying in the US is gross. 
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@ILikePie5
I mean, they're eh - haven't eaten there in a while - I try to avoid fast food if I can help it. From what I remember they had decent tasting food, haven't looked into their produce chain to much though, maybe I should. 
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
I think you misread what I wrote.  I didn't say anything about any "consensus."  I said "in consultation," but that's beside the point.

There are several articles of note, which Murray cites.  Although the reality is that he just scratches the surface.  

1. Olson-Kennedy 2016, which is a JAMA article reviewing comorbidity prevalence among the purportedly gender-dysphoric youth. 

  • "Transgender individuals are known to be a population at risk for multiple mental health challenges, as well as negative and dangerous sequelae of maladaptive coping behaviors." 
    • The point here is that it is medical error to simply assume that the self-reported psychological harms associated with being trans are because you're trans. 
    • There is almost always something else going on, which goes to the conceptual problems in even delineating those who are actually trans from those who just have a fetish.  
  • The article additionally references:
    • Corliss 2008, which describes hormone-seeking behavior of transgender youth who, despite having multiple co-morbidities (depression, anxiety, behavioral health issues and other co-morbidities), conclude by self-diagnosis that they are transgendered without any kind of diagnosis of that sort.
    • Reisner 2015, which notes that, "[c]ompared with cisgender matched controls, transgender youth had a twofold to threefold increased risk of depression, anxiety disorder, suicidal ideation, suicide attempt, self-harm without lethal intent, and both inpatient and outpatient mental health treatment." 
    • Olson 2015, which describes the pre-existing psychological baselines of self-identified transgendered youth from the ages of 12-24 years; finding that "More than half of the youth reported having thought about suicide at least once in their lifetime, and nearly a third had made at least one attempt."
  • Yet, there is no evidence whatsoever that so-called "hormone replacement" therapies, puberty-blocking "therapies," or other such pharmaceutical interventions meaningfully improve anything. 
  • It's not like any of those findings are new, either.  Since the 1980s-1990s, e.g., articles such as Coates 1990, summarize findings as early as 1954 to 1990 identifying that so-called gender dysphoric disorders almost only occur "in the context of significant family psychopathology." 
  • Granted, Coates 1990 was published in the context of the DSM-III, although gender-dysphoric disorders were amply recognized along similar diagnostic criteria then as now.   Little has changed, including the complete lack of clinical evidence supporting that so-called hormone or puberty-blocking therapies yield any sort of identifiable benefit.
2. Even the literature purportedly recommending such  "therapies," such as Hembree 2017 concede that:  "In most children diagnosed with GD/gender incongruence, it did not persist into adolescence. " 

  • That means that if you think you're a girl born in a boy's body at age 9, by age 14 there's an 85% chance you're not going to feel the same way.
    • Specifically, "the large majority (about 85%) of prepubertal children with a childhood diagnosis did not remain GD/gender incongruent in adolescence."  That means that, for about 85% of the so-called "trans kids" who the "gender affirming" types want to pump full of hormones and neuter/castrate as some kind of "therapy," they'll grow out of it by the time they even hit puberty. 
    • Potentially because, according to Zucker 2012, children conflate the concept of a sexual fetish or paraphyllia with what a gender even is.  Of course, "identity disorder and transvestic fetishism youth [also] had high rates of general behavior problems and poor peer relations." 
    • See also, Steensma 2011, which finds that childhood gender identity disorders of all kinds tend to revert at some point throughout adolescence, even if such children became aware of gender-nonconforming feelings from a very early age.  
  • The clinical literature demonstrates that, for example, according to Steensma 2013, there is no clear underlying biological basis for any onset gender identity disorder, and gender identity development depends at least on a complex interplay between biological, environmental and psychological factors including sex-related experiences in adolescence; specifically "males who discover the association between dressing in female clothing and intensely pleasant sexual sensations in early adolescence." Read: it's a fetish. 
3. There is no evidence of lasting clinical benefits to administration of any sex-reassignment or "hormone replacement" or suppression therapies; and there are ample indications of harm.   

  • One such risk is that any kid that transitions finds themselves in the 85% majority of prepubertal children with a childhood diagnosis of some kind of gender identity disorder, according to Hembree 2017.   Notably, if you decide to transition, you cannot transition back.  Puberty-blocking pharmacological "therapies" and hormone replacement "therapies" are not reversible, as the clinical literature cautions.  
  •  Further, hormone replacement or suppression "therapies," and sex-reassignment surgeries profoundly increase the risk of both suicidal ideation and behavior.  For example, Dhejne 2011, the largest study on this subject, from Sweden, finds that surgically "[s]ex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts," and prevalence of psychiatric inpatient care.  It turns out that, according to the data, 10-15 years after surgical reassignment, the suicide rate of those who had undergone sex-reassignment surgery rose to 20 times that of comparable peers. 




Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@coal
Hormone treatment is not recommended for prepubertal gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons. Those clinicians who recommend gender-affirming endocrine treatments—appropriately trained diagnosing clinicians (required), a mental health provider for adolescents (required) and mental health professional for adults (recommended)—should be knowledgeable about the diagnostic criteria and criteria for gender-affirming treatment, have sufficient training and experience in assessing psychopathology, and be willing to participate in the ongoing care throughout the endocrine transition. We recommend treating gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent adolescents who have entered puberty at Tanner Stage G2/B2 by suppression with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists. Clinicians may add gender-affirming hormones after a multidisciplinary team has confirmed the persistence of gender dysphoria/gender incongruence and sufficient mental capacity to give informed consent to this partially irreversible treatment. Most adolescents have this capacity by age 16 years old. We recognize that there may be compelling reasons to initiate sex hormone treatment prior to age 16 years, although there is minimal published experience treating prior to 13.5 to 14 years of age. For the care of peripubertal youths and older adolescents, we recommend that an expert multidisciplinary team comprised of medical professionals and mental health professionals manage this treatment.
You're bullshit! I'm sorry what?! Excuse me sir, you have completely read this study wrong if that was your takeaway - lemme tell ya' something genius - these are not JUST trans people. I don't have the time right now, but if this is the type of dishonesty I can expect from you on every one of those studies then I might not bother!
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
You missed the point there.  


TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Theweakeredge
If private police took over and one of their cops killed someone unjustly, they risk losing buisiness.  Then wanting police reform doesn’t cause the right wing strawman of , “You hate our boys in blue” and instead can be viewed by the right as, “You hate this company” which would be much less objectionable and as a result, can garner more right wing support as “capitalism being at play”.

Privatizing police would be people paying $600 a year or so (when the government takes $1800 a year to fund the police) and if they get murdered, raped, robbed, or otherwise violated, they can report it to their police company.  I don’t think it would cause curropt buisinesses to exist.
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
@Rm

This shit really happened and happens in nations with private cops.

Are there any nations with private cops?
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@TheUnderdog
In african capitalist nations the core government's cops are largely a very basic and corrupt bunch of bribe-hungry, blackmail-happy guys.

This is not racism, it of course happened everywhere and still happens in nations that aren't properly developed against blatant corruption (as opposed to subtle corruption which no nation is fully immune to).

The reason I want to focus on nations like Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia etc is because what you need to then know is these nations basically are your utopia gone wrong, since you're a severe right-wing Lib-sided individual (notice I stated Kenya, not its neighbouring Uganda or Tanzania which aren't Liberal in comparison).

What happens when your core cops are like that and you embrace, rather thab resist it, is over time everyone that can afford it hires private security workers as their personal cops. You may ask 'but what about arrests and court cases'... You're just getting shot or scared off most of the time by the private cops, however the sheer irony is that the public cops work based on greed. You literally will be treated worse even in the car itself on the way to the jail solely depending on the money you can give them (but if you're local, black and look dirt poor they tend to realise you can't afford to bribe them and are a local so they tend to have sympathy only in those cases).

You need to grasp that in these nations and even the more conservative ones around them, you have a situation where a door can be unlocked and you're let free if you grease the right palms whereas you can be arrested for doing nothing wrong if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time if you refuse to pay them off. This isn't some joke, this is the natural resukt of being wilfully lax on cop culture in a nation and underfunding the department paying them shitty wages, they literally NEED BRIBES to feed their families and afford a roof over their heads.



TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
@RM

I think the African countries you mentioned have gangs, not private police.  The difference is private police have to abide by the laws of the United States, or whatever country they are in (French cops have to abide by French law, British cops have to abide by British law, etc). 

If you try to hire a gang and tell them to kill someone because your angry at them, they would do it. 

If you try to hire a private police force to kill someone because your angry at them, they wouldn't do it because it would be against the law.  Private police have to operate within the law, otherwise they are gang members.  If police kill someone because their payer told them to, they aren't police, they are gang members.  At that point, the friend of the person whom they murdered would use their private police to bring the gang to justice and face penalties for the murder.

Gangs are illegal under my model, but private police is not because it would save money, it would in the long term catch more criminals (as under our current police system, 40% of murderers get away with it, and this proportion is higher with other crimes)(https://www.vox.com/2018/9/24/17896034/murder-crime-clearance-fbi-report) and the private police have incentive to improve so customers trust them more to catch criminals.  The government does not improve, otherwise many more criminals would be caught.

Thoughts?
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
what is something you have become more conservative about in the past year?

what is something you have become more liberal about in the past year?
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@thett3
If you consider more regulation liberal than that-  I'm not sure if I've become more conservative on anything this year. 
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
what does your ideal economic system look like?
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Soft-Utilitarianism
  What does this mean? And how does it differ from egoism?
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Sum1hugme
What the hell is that question? Egoism and Utilitarianism are as about as distinct as two moral frameworks can be. Furthermore, its interesting that you never took my opportunity - I asked you to explore one issue at a time, and you never got back to me. Yet here you are with this pedantic joke of a question
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Your arrogance is astounding, seeing as you make a consistent habit of not answering simple, direct questions.
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
Also, as of now, it's you who didn't respond to my criticism of your egregious misuse of the word ought. It's difficult to select a single point to contend with about your "ethics" because everything you said was fractally wrong to the foundation.
Theweakeredge
Theweakeredge's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 3,457
4
7
10
Theweakeredge's avatar
Theweakeredge
4
7
10
-->
@Sum1hugme
Um - no - they're just really different. It'd be like if someone said they were a cat lover, then you responded: "How does that conflate with loving dogs?" they are completely separate. Unless you're saying that all utilitarianism is egoistic? Then that would be an interesting claim, not one I think you could justify, but one you could make I s'ppose. And also - I've made myself clear - I do not have the patience nor the time to respond to that massive wall of text. So I gave you that option so you could continue the conversation, if you want to be a dick, be a dick. 
Sum1hugme
Sum1hugme's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 1,014
4
4
9
Sum1hugme's avatar
Sum1hugme
4
4
9
-->
@Theweakeredge
"massive wall of text." - Have you seen my response? It's as concise as the point can possibly be. You're acting like the long form response was our last interaction.

  As to the question, when you look up soft Utilitarianism it says, "A soft rule-utilitarian might refrain from donating to help the people suffering in a distant country. A hard utilitarian would make the donation. A soft rule-utilitarian says, “Even if a lot of people donate to the distant sufferers, that will not benefit me, so I will not do it.”"

  I understand that hard Utilitarianism and egoism are fundamentally different, but this description of soft Utilitarianism is defined indistinguishably from egoism.