CONTENT NOTICE: This article contains graphic mention of child sexual abuse and child physical abuse. Reader discretion is appreciated. Reduxx has learned that a Professor Emeritus at California State University and a top consultant to the world’s leading transgender health authority directly contributed to an erotic story featuring themes of the graphic mutilation and sexual […]
Here’s my assumption of this article: A professor engages in deviant and illegal behaviors, participating in graphic contents that exploit children sexually using transgederism as a Catalyst.
If you could just tell me what the main point is about this article I’d appreciate it. Genuinely I would. Because I’m not sure what the exact point is supposed to be after reading it.
Anyway
Going off of my assumption as I stated, I think it’s important NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC IS OK GUYS ? That when it ultimately comes to children there needs to be safeguards. I don’t care what the topics are. It could be sex, violence, guns, and the trans topic.
anything that could be used to manipulate a growing mind, needs to be handled with zero bias and influence.
do not influence children instead, teach them provide them BOTH sides of an argument no matter what. Let them come to their own conclusions. That is how shit should be anyway.
The issue in my opinion is people personalize things. Making it about them and how their own personal experiences stand as ultimate fact.
I think there’s articles that better make the point OP was trying to make besides this one. This one confused me. As to why I felt compelled to make an assumption on it.
The only problem I see with OP finding a source to better articulate and illustrate the point he’s trying to make, is that the media and the internet are heavily biased now.
This may have been the only article he could find that was somewhere along the lines of the point he was trying to make.
Your assumption doesn’t really capture the article. It’s not about a single pedophile, it’s about rot within WPATH, which might turn back the clock on trans rights.
To summarize, WPATH published a new standard of care that removed lower age limits. It did this while consulting with at least one child castration fetishist, which is a huge and disgusting conflict of interest. WPATH should clean house and purge all pedophiles, retract SOC 8, publish an apology, and write a new version that doesn’t have input from known pedophiles.
Aside from the pedophilia angle, the eunuch chapter was done while consulting with said eunuch fetishists. If WPATH is just publishing fetish material, maybe Ray Blanchard is right and trans people are just AGPs, trans women are just men in dresses, etc, etc. It’s a bad look.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to ignore this. This is the sort of thing that can strongly influence public opinion.
Here’s my assumption of this article: A professor engages in deviant and illegal behaviors, participating in graphic contents that exploit children sexually using transgederism as a Catalyst.
If you could just tell me what the main point is about this article I’d appreciate it. Genuinely I would. Because I’m not sure what the exact point is supposed to be after reading it.
Anyway
Going off of my assumption as I stated, I think it’s important NO MATTER WHAT THE TOPIC IS OK GUYS ? That when it ultimately comes to children there needs to be safeguards. I don’t care what the topics are. It could be sex, violence, guns, and the trans topic.
anything that could be used to manipulate a growing mind, needs to be handled with zero bias and influence.
do not influence children instead, teach them provide them BOTH sides of an argument no matter what. Let them come to their own conclusions. That is how shit should be anyway.
The issue in my opinion is people personalize things. Making it about them and how their own personal experiences stand as ultimate fact.
That is not genuine and it is harmful to others
deleted by creator
It’s all the right has, their party has done literally nothing but piss people off. These are the posts of a dying political party
I think there’s articles that better make the point OP was trying to make besides this one. This one confused me. As to why I felt compelled to make an assumption on it.
The only problem I see with OP finding a source to better articulate and illustrate the point he’s trying to make, is that the media and the internet are heavily biased now.
This may have been the only article he could find that was somewhere along the lines of the point he was trying to make.
Just a guess.
I think its because of all the posts about pedo priests and the like. Reminding everyone that pedos are everywhere
Your assumption doesn’t really capture the article. It’s not about a single pedophile, it’s about rot within WPATH, which might turn back the clock on trans rights.
To summarize, WPATH published a new standard of care that removed lower age limits. It did this while consulting with at least one child castration fetishist, which is a huge and disgusting conflict of interest. WPATH should clean house and purge all pedophiles, retract SOC 8, publish an apology, and write a new version that doesn’t have input from known pedophiles.
Aside from the pedophilia angle, the eunuch chapter was done while consulting with said eunuch fetishists. If WPATH is just publishing fetish material, maybe Ray Blanchard is right and trans people are just AGPs, trans women are just men in dresses, etc, etc. It’s a bad look.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to ignore this. This is the sort of thing that can strongly influence public opinion.