this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
38 points (82.8% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35922 readers
1048 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I am not asking this to be transphobic or anything but I had this debate with myself at 2 o'clock in the morning and every time I remember it I can't focus.

On one hand, it is what they want. Let's assume it causes no harm to them or any unforeseen circumstances.

On another hand, it would erase their identity as trans people. At the extreme you could consider it a genocide, since turning them into what they want would mean there is no more trans people and their unique identity is erased.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Out of curiosity, would you feel the same if the question was, "If I could snap my fingers and cure everybody on earth who has a terminal illness, would it be unethical to do so?"

Like, you would be modifying their body without their consent. On the other hand, you're literally curing people with terminal illnesses. Seems churlish of them to complain.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The difference would be the phrasing and specifics. "Magically switch trans people to the assigned sex at birth that they desire to be?" Works for some. "Magically make trans people's bodies align with their specific and nuanced gender identity" is less of an issue. The problem you run into with the first is some are not interested in surgeries or are non binary so a full surprise sex swap would not be what some trans people want.

I still think consent is important though, even if the way the magic works is basically "they get what they want". As much as it is hard to imagine, there are also trans people who do not want to transition at all due to having family or friends who would cut them off (I think that's a pretty awful and tragic situation to be in, but imagine the trans woman who magically changes to the shock and anger of her deeply religious family or SO, who then ostracize or reject her, or even react violently). You aren't likely to be murdered for recovering from cancer, but in some places magically shifting assigned sex might come with some pretty awful, bigoted strings attached

[–] Justas 2 points 10 months ago

Some excellent points, thank you.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I’d be mad if you cured Trump’s syphilis or Putin’s Parkinson’s.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

To be fair, we don't know for sure it's syphilis. It could also be leprosy, for example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Putin’s Parkinson’s

Honestly the the worst character to've appeared in Across The Spiderverse.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Some people are at peace with dying, and probably most terminally ill people have lived long full lives. If they already know they're dying they're likely to have made their final arrangements and said everything they needed to say and are accepting of death, a completely natural thing.

You personally assuming that you would want to be magically "saved" without any prior knowledge or consent doesn't mean everyone else feels the same.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So you tell them, preferably ask them, first. That's why surgeons make you sign consent forms.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Surgery has risks, magic in this case does not.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If you modify the thought experiment slightly, it becomes an interesting trolley problem.

Let's assume the spell you're using is all or nothing - either it cures everyone, or no one. What if some subset of people explicitly do not consent? How many people would it have to be, or what percentage, before you would consider not doing it? Obviously if only 1 person doesn't want it, who cares, greater good, but what if it was 99% of people? Where's the line?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

For me if even 1 person wants it everyone gets it. People who prefer to die can just kill themselves, people who prefer to live can't choose to survive.

[–] Justas 4 points 10 months ago

A utilitarian, in that case, would always choose to cure everyone. Greatest good for the greatest number.

If your morality is a bit more nuanced, things get very muddy very quickly.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

The line is clearly at 50%.

Half live in harmony, half die.

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

But its still not your decision to make. Would 100% of people use it? Probably. What do you lose by asking them first?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Because not 100% of people would agree, it's that simple.

People are talking about this magic they literally just invented in their minds as if it can't be made to also confirm consent before happening (E: or just be fucking optional! It exists, you take it if you want it 🤯).. 🤦‍♀️😂

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

What if you only have 5 minutes to make your decision?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Surgery has risks, magic in this case does not.

Risks running afoul of someone's deeply held religious beliefs.