cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/29640152
On July 29, 2025, LinkedIn removed “misgendering or deadnaming” from examples of prohibited content in its policy on hateful and derogatory content.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/29640152
On July 29, 2025, LinkedIn removed “misgendering or deadnaming” from examples of prohibited content in its policy on hateful and derogatory content.
Misgendering, deadnaming, and broadly “it’s just bullying get over it” type speech leads to suicides particularly by younger people. The problem has multiple fronts: people need support to get them through the toughest times, thick skin to keep the day to day manageable, and social spaces need some degree of checks to keep from going full toxic
Personally I don’t mind being deadname or misgendered I think it’s funny. I’m a survivor bias though I’ve made it to my thirties being unphased. Other people who used to be around me who couldn’t handle the aggressions did not make it to their thirties. One of my oldest friends attempted suicide four times that I know of over this type of speech being directed at them. They’re only alive right now because they were lucky enough to keep being pulled back from death until they could grow that thicker skin you’re talking about
How do you reconcile this assertion with the fact that bullying was inarguably more widespread before 2008 than it has been since then, and yet:
Also, trans men are generally much more likely to convincingly ‘pass’ than trans women (and trans people who ‘pass’ are bullied less, by simple virtue of the fact that fewer people are able to even identify them as trans), and yet:
Something isn’t adding up here, no?
Unfortunately I can’t find it again, because it was such an interesting and surprising bit of data, but I read a study some years ago that split trans people up into three categories, and compared the rate of suicide among them:
If you had to guess which of the three categories had the lowest suicide rate, I bet it’d be #2, right? So did I, but actually, the group with the least suicidality was #1! The implication that never coming out at all makes a trans person less likely to take their life than coming out to people who accept and support them was stunning, but there it was, in black and white. So what does that mean, exactly?
I don’t know, but this is definitely a more complex issue than it appears on the surface, to most people.
Sources, or are you just pulling all of that out of your ass?
You may want to try pulling your glasses out of your ass and actually reading what I wrote.
I cited the source I used for the first part (the two quoted bits), and prefaced the thing I didn’t have a source for (forgive me for not meticulously recording the source of every single interesting thing I read forevermore) by saying straight-up that I didn’t, before even saying what it said.
I’m referring to this horseshit, you deceptive transphobic dumbass.
Lets look at what I can find:
So you’re referring to the bit that I explicitly stated right at the top, that I didn’t readily have a source link for?
You’re doubling down on looking foolish by angrily calling me deceptive while showing proof that I wasn’t.
Also, what you linked doesn’t contradict the particular data point I emphasized in what I read, as it doesn’t compare suicidality between closeted and out trans people; it only compares the second and third groups I mentioned in my comment.
When it comes to the topics where there is overlap, my remembered source agrees with what you linked: that for trans people who are out, support is, obviously, going to reduce suicidality more than than lack of support.
The interesting/unexpected data point was that the rate was lower among trans people who never come out, than for either subset of trans people who have come out.
Calling me transphobic for mentioning that I read something that contradicts a commonly-held assumption, is toxic and anti-intellectual. If you want to disregard it because I can’t back it up, that’s perfectly understandable (hence my prefaced disclaimer, in the first place!), but there’s no call for the hostility, at all. Relax.
As for me, I know what I read, and I’m confident I’m remembering it properly too because, guess what, it surprised me too, like I said! That’s what made it stick with me for years, despite not having immediately meticulously recorded where I read it.
EDIT: You may also note that I drew literally ZERO conclusions based on said data point, only remarking on the apparent complexity it introduces to the topic.
You have a profound lack of critical thinking skills.
Here’s what you wrote:
What this means is that you’re misremembering some study, are quoting a right wing hit piece, or are just pulling shit out of your ass. And it means you have a profound lack of critical thinking skills.
Just think about for a second. Actually THINK about it man!
How in the world are you going to have a study with any kind of statistical reliability, when you are polling trans people WHO ARE IN THE FUCKING CLOSET??!!
You do understand what those words mean, do you not? You’re talking about people who are not out. You’re talking about people who are not publicly out as trans. So obviously you can’t poll these people when trying to survey the trans population. At best you can just randomly poll the population and ask random people if they’re trans. But that method never works for small minority groups, as if even 1% of cis people lie on the survey and claim to be trans just to fuck with the results, the fake trans people will out number the real trans people in the survey.
Actually THINK about what drivel you are writing. How the hell can you make any claim about trans people that are in the closet? By definition, such people are indistinguishable from the larger cis population.
This is why I know that you’re pulling this stuff right out of your ass. You’re making a claim that is completely nonsensical.
You have failed at basic fundamental critical thinking.
Whatever fantasy lets you feel like you’re the superior being, I guess. But actual good faith discussion, you clearly have no interest in, so I’ll leave you to your fuming.
Hope you improve.
By the way, re
Did it ever occur to you that trans people who are now out can share their experiences from before they were out? This is like saying you can’t learn anything about childhood experiences by talking to adults.
“Just think about for a second. Actually THINK about it man!”
No study on Earth would be published using such a flawed methodology. You can’t just retrospectively study people’s past opinions like that, compared them to current trans people, and expect any kind of reliability. No one would approve a study design like that. You’re full of it.
So you’ve used the word ‘inarguably’ there, which I take as a challenge.
Bullying is not less widespread than it was before 2008. Anecdotally, I have two kids in high school and bullying is rife, it seems the environment in school is exactly as it was 30 years ago. This is the general consensus between myself, other parents and education/healthcare professionals that I’ve spoken to.
Less anecdotally, cyber bullying is now a thing. Kids can no longer escape their bullies by leaving school. This means that bullying is now immeasurably worse than pre-2008, which is exactly converse to your assertion, and may also be part of the cause of rising suicide rates. Social media’s insipid ability to reach into the same “safe” spaces with advertising-driven beauty and masculinity standards has a lot to answer for there as well, which also explains the diverging figures along gender lines.
Well, here is some data I found that contradicts that, and supports my assertion, after doing a quick search:
The years don’t line up absolutely perfectly, but 28% to 19% in a post-2008 ~10 year period is a 32% drop, if I did my math correctly.
Here in the UK, it’s up to 35% according to the latest data. And that’s just in person. Online bullying has risen from zero in 2008 to 19%