Son, I am dissapoint - Libreboot Edition

Gee, I wonder why.

Daily reminder: i.imgur.com/6YnBSgu.png

kek'd

Well to be honest gender dysphoria is a real thing(and quite horrible actually),so i guess this is for the better?
All though i would prefer a more "professional" message like.

I shudder with horrid lovecraftian visions of how the little chink doctors make this happen. Would it be... sweat? Pus? I hope it's an marketing exaggeration on their part, and not something actually unholy going on.

Attached: hehe.jpg (188x246, 5.38K)

Not a Zig Forums thread.
No, the thread is to discuss her vagina which isn't Zig Forums related. Otherwise how solid Bill Gate's shits are would be an acceptable thread.

sage

This isn't a vagina we're talking about; they're wounds you have to FORCE to stay open by inserting a huge glass dildo EVERY day for the rest of your life.

Real my ass. If it were real how come just ten years ago there was none of this shit and now everyone and their dog is a transvestite? Also children adopted by these retards are guaranteed to have the exact same problem, way too big of a coincidence if you ask me.

Attached: fat_vs_trans.png (709x619, 411.78K)

citation?

Attached: 2e781bd0-430c-424b-b352-58debed4f2b4.png (879x618, 211.07K)

When they use a section of colon to make a fake vagina, I believe it's mucus. The colon produces mucus to protect itself and help shit slide out.

I guess the delusion is real enough and I'm sure it's very unpleasant to live with. To answer your question I'd say it's very probable that many people's psyche is susceptible to delusions like these and when they are promoted as normal many will acquire them. That doesn't make it any easier on them, or an ailment any less worthy of sympathy. It just means having chinks chop your balls off isn't really a solution either.

As I feared. That's pretty unholy as far as I'm concerned.

Join the club.
Bullshit. Like it's hard to save 20k, if he cut down on buying shit he doesn't need he could save that easily.

Go back to your containment board luddite. This is a board of science. Anyone born with XY chromosomes is a man. They liking it or not doesn't change the facts.

Attached: serveimage.jpg (420x420, 16.08K)

Aside from the sjw bs ,It's a real medical conditon. Yes there are people who actually want to kill themselves over it.
There are two choices taking drugs and potentially dying after a few years. Or chopping your dick off and live the rest of your life with a crappy low quality "vagina" that grows body hair in the inside sometimes and can bleed because you aint supposed to have that,plus you have to take painkillers regularly because it hurts.

Maybe it's harder to be sensible (both economically and otherwise) when you're suffering from severe mental delusions?

I will be forking Libreboot by the end of the month, as the project itself is bloated anyway. A series of build scripts is an inane pipeline, the number of scripts should be two: deblob, and compile.

[Citation Needed]

I doubt you'd call people with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome men, even though they have XY chromosomes.
If you want to make this argument, you have to put in the work to understand what you actually mean by "man" and "woman". It's not a simple clear-cut distinction based on chromosomes, they're clusters with typical traits and central examples that you sort people into.
Some categorizations are more useful than others, but they're ultimately arbitrary. People typically disagree about where to draw the line, not about any object-level facts. It's not a scientific issue.

Attached: trannychin.png (957x900 408.02 KB, 879.07K)

No, I disagree. People can recover from mental illness. Having supportive but sensible people around them while also being given the time for some introspection. I've seen people recover from craziness. This modern medicine view that everything should be fixed with pills is as unhealthy as the poor fucks they try to help as far as I'm concerned.

I'm sure you know more about this particular subject than the hundreds of psychologists, psychiatrists and actual transsexuals who have been studying this phenomenon for decades.

I'm sure I do. Psychology is a pseudoscience anyways. There's a reason why it has a so abysmal success rate as a system of actually creating mental health. And I don't put much stock in what delusional people think about their delusion either. When they've overcome their problems, then their opinion can be of value.

slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/

That's not the point of psychology. Not to mention the irony because transitioning is the only way to cure gender dysphoria.
You should take your own advice.

Attached: source.webm (640x360, 275.3K)

As the name says, that's a medical problem. And it only happens once every 100k births, so you're expecting people to set aside reason because of 0.001% of defects. That's like someone saying "people have two eyes" and you going "nu-uh, I met a guy and, and he had only one eye, and a hook instead of a hand, don't generalize". It is that simple, people have two eyes, two hands, two sexes.

Given the number of dickless faggots who kill themselves after cutting their dick off because, big surprise, their dick wasn't the real problem, yeah he probably does. Psychiatrists aren't even allowed to treat faggots, even if the faggot asks, so don't pretend they care.

Nigger if they still kill themselves after being 'cured' your 'cure' is shit.

Attached: 60more.png (589x323, 14.02K)

I know full well that's not the point of psychology. But that it's derived systems doesn't work should tell you something. It's like physics. Engineering is derived from physics, at least enlightenment age physics. It works, because the underlying system works. Therapy and psychiatry are derivations of psychology. And generally, they don't work. If anything they usually make things worse. That should tell you something about it.

Pretending is not a cure. If someone believes they're the emperor Napoleon then yes, you can surgically alter him to look like Napoleon, and have everyone around him pretend he's Napoleon. Perhaps he will be happy, if he's delusional and stupid enough. But probably not.

Sadly, we just have to admit that we don't know the way to cure gender dysphoria yet. That's sad and painful, and I have empathy with the poor people who suffer from it, but that's how it is.

Attached: abacus.jpg (320x240, 23.91K)

Does removing the dick lower the chance of suicide?
A cure doesn't have to be 100% effective to be better than nothing.

Removing the dick drastically increases the chance of suicide.
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

This journal article still gives trans avocates massive butthurt.

...

That's not what I was asking about. Do they have a higher risk than transsexuals who didn't undergo sex reassignment?
People who undergo chemotherapy have a higher chance of dying of cancer than the general population. That's because most people who undergo chemotherapy have cancer, and most people in the general population don't.

We were actually allowed to do tests on chemotherapy with control groups to determine effectiveness. Not so with the trans "science". Cut the dick off, ask questions later.

You could easily arrange a better control group. Use people who seriously considered sex reassignment but didn't go through with it, for example.
Taking your control group from the general population is inane and doesn't tell you anything new.

There is no such thing. These people are mentally ill and SRS is like a test cut. It's a cry for help. Instead, doctors, friends, and family push them off the edge.

Read that again.

*Intended for

So you want to deprive a large number of trans people of life saving transition surgery in order to determine medical validity?

ffs this quote system is fucking up for me
*intended for

I click on the correct post and it puts in the ID of the wrong one

How many people have bordered on falling into the gender dysphoria mental delusion, but have been averted from that path in some way, reconciled with their nature and found happiness later in life? There are many such stories too.

Trying to measure such things by statistics and graphs is pretty insane. That's much of the problem with psychology. It tries to apply statistics to a system we don't properly know the parameters of yet. Statistics is fine for a predictable system. You can apply it to physics when you've declared the parameters you're measuring for. When you don't know the parameters, then you're bound to be way off. That's just basic logic. But sadly this cancer have crept into modern science, and particularly into the newfangled human sciences.

Statistics is not the fucking problem. The problem is we are not allowed to actually record statistics. If we could actually do a trans study with a decent control group and size then the result would be very clear (that they are mentally ill and surgery makes it worse).

There's no such thing. Find one medical paper showing cutting a dick off saved anyone's life every (except if they have dick cancer). Plus how come this epidemic didn't exist in the previous century? Back then some men liked dick, some liked to wear wigs and that was it. They weren't told they were real women and nothing indicates they were killing themselves like these things do now.

>To estimate mortality, morbidity, and criminal rate after surgical sex reassignment of transsexual persons.

Is this not what you asked for?

it was a facetious comment user

I agree, but not. What you're talking about is a serious additional problem. But the misuse of statistics is a bit older, and also a problem.

Sorry, I went through a brain removal surgery because I self-identify as liberal.

misuse of statistics is usually trivial things like small N#, small p value, that you can detect reading the abstract

For "transsexual" substitute "someone with the mental illness that makes them want to get sex reassignment", if you wish.

Is there a reason to believe sex reassignment increases the chance of suicide? The linked study doesn't show anything pointing in either direction.

No, my proposal is to use as a control group people who meet the clinical definition of gender dysphoria but nevertheless chose not to transition. It's not a perfect control group, but it's good enough to be useful, unlike a control group taken from the general population.

I'm interested in knowing whether removing the dick is a good move for the kind of people who get their dick removed.
To do that you need to look at transsexuals who got their dick removed and transsexuals who didn't, not at transsexuals who got their dick removed and average people who didn't.

Kys degenerate fuck. To stop soyboys porn must be banned and there must be a war on xenoestrogens.

No, that's not what I'm talking about at all. Let me try to explain. Let's say you've got a ball you're bouncing around and you're applying statistics to it's trajectory. That's perfectly fine, you've got some parameters you're checking for, like trajectories, densities, the sort of things that's known and measurable. Fine, you're going to get proper statistics.

Now try applying statistics to a system you don't know the parameters of, like the human mind. You might come out with some proper conclusions if you're lucky. Most likely you won't. Or even something simpler like nutrition. There's a reason why some big study finds that carrots are dangerous this year, and then they find it's super healthy the next year. It's because it's very unlikely you're going to be able to frame the right parameters around something as nebulous as human behavior and the mind (which we don't understand very well yet.) Did you account for the fact that carrot eaters, or smokers or whatever perhaps have things in common that you didn't think of that's not related to your particular myopic study? Probably not.

This is why all these new statistics based sciences, contrary to the old enlightenment sciences that were based in proper experiment and workable results, so often just give some halfassed conclusions that's proven wrong at the next turn.

Now that's a problem. Another problem is what you're talking about, that we can't even attempt our best at this shoddy, pseudoscientific statistical method because of political correctness. And I agree, that's a ludicrous problem. But also something of another ballgame.

Attached: 157287719.jpg (612x459, 42.59K)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This is the dumbest shit, I swear to god. Let's break it down:

Attached: 2018-04-14-184010_632x441_scrot.png (632x441, 57.11K)

The problem is that those systems are too complicated to apply statistics with anywhere near the confidence they're currently applied. Unfortunately, those systems are important. I don't think not using statistics on them at all is optimal.
You need to be extremely cautious with biases, and the difference between correlation and causation, and so on, but it is possible to extract useful results.

Until you have particular evidence otherwise correlation is causation

I do agree with you. That's a healthy approach to vague statistics with high probability of bias. Now the problem is more with the attitude towards this. If you can keep in mind that what you've got is at best perhaps a weak indicator, then fine, it's a tool of sorts. When you start believing that it's some sort of truth and proclaiming it as such, now you've consolidated your bias and hampered scientific progress.

And that's really the problem. The lax attitude of medium-iq academia and also the media (who loves to give people answers to things, no matter if they're correct or not,) that cements strange and probably wrong things as fact in their minds. That academia is lax in these things I'm sure you'll agree with me when the mainstream view of trans-delusions is what the tranny in this thread is espousing.

I think we're more in agreement than not. I too am a man of science, and tries to hold it's tenets high. But we must also accept the fact that the academies have let some serious cancer creep in, with all the unpleasantness this entails.

it doesn't cure it you faggot, From the stats of the John Hopkins hospital sex sugary section there's still as much as suicide after transitioning, meaning that it isn't a cure and only therapy can be done.

Surgery

Often what they say is it indicates x is (not) healthy, then journos, wanting clicks, go ahead and say "x proven to cause y, but does it cure cancer?". Also stats are really easy to fuck up. Say you learn the basics and apply them to check whether some optimization is good or shit. That works. Now you repeat the same method for 1000 optimizations. It doesn't work, because you'll, for damn sure, find something speeds it up even if it doesn't (since you have an error margin). Stats can cover for it, but the only people who really understand stats are statisticians, people who use stats often only know a thing or two. Also there are cases where people intentionally cheat it like p-value gaming.

There are statistical methods for that, and in many cases it's clear which is which (e.g. in eating plutonium and dying, could dying cause one to eat plutonium?).

I think it's a bit of a bigger problem than that. Otherwise mainstream academies wouldn't go along with these delusions as if they were true, now would they? I will concede it's a multifaceted problem, as much bias related as particlarly a problem with statistics, as I expound upon here

But still. The fact is that weird things are being determined in this fashion at the present time, in the highest of academic circles. I think this needs to be acknowledged and pointed out, to save science.

I want to go full ISIS mode and throw them off buildings. Can't have mental illness problems when there are no more mentally ill people.

Attached: 2B5C28E200000578-0-image-a-2_1439555792851.jpg (634x354, 48.5K)

My laughter can't be conveyed with words so I'll just attach an appropriate picture to this post

Attached: IMG_20170417_144116.jpg (510x95, 16.74K)

If A and B are correlated, there are at least these possibilities:
- A causes B
- B causes A
- C causes both A and B
- It's just a coincidence because if you have enough data you necessarily get spurious correlations
- Any combination of the above
Assuming causation from correlation makes you a shitty statistician.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.
That's me, actually. All I'm trying to espouse is that transitioning is for many (not all) people better than not transitioning. They're often suicidal before transitioning, so suicidality after transitioning isn't surprising. I'm not very confident about it, but the information I've seen against it is very lacking. It's either irrelevant or anecdotal, and I don't doubt that transitioning is the wrong choice for some people. I just don't know how many.
I disagree with a lot of mainstream ideas about transgenderism.

That sounds more promising. Do you have a link? Has it been replicated?

Big if true.

Sure. As I said with my somewhat flippant Napoleon example, it might work for some. I'm not the judge of that. The thing is, I'm talking about transgenderism in general and societal terms, not relating to you personally. I can't be the arbitrator in your life.

But there's a lot of shit going on both in the sciences and society that's much bigger than your personal plight. There are kids railroaded into these tracks these days, and in accord with every argument I've made in this thread: it's way too soon for that! For me it's insanity. Because many people are confused about gender issues for a period in especially their teens and then get over it. It's much more common than full blown transgender gender dysphoria.

If you agree that gender dysphoria is a mental illness then you should agree that society can't cater to them either. That's not saying we shouldn't allow people who really, really wants to castrate themselves to do so. I don't mind that. As I say, this is about attitudes and how we handle things in a general way.

I suspect feeding their delusions isn't going to make them better, because practicing faggots don't get better.

Attached: a1dea764a7c43e0e773166c1388890139a8b575f300d26005d3b88178519bfff.jpg (3016x8992, 5.23M)

True if big.

And that is because their is little correctly done research done on these.
And it's going to be very difficult to have any good research since zealots are convincing politics to shut down anyone who goes against their words, it's looking like another Great Leap Forward but without famine and more fascists.
This

Noice if true.

you may have gotten trolled

just sayin', but i'm aware that the 'TPTB' actually want people to believe it, but how many people are actually this incapable of logic ? Probably a lot less than there are, but it's pushed anyway and if it's pushed anyway you're better off just mocking it and dismissing it rather than getting trolled by it.

GET THE FUCK BACK TO REDDIT YOU STUPID FUCKING NIGGER

I'm not (currently) a tranny, I just assumed you meant me because I've been the most vocally pro-tranny in this thread.
I should amend what I said - I think transitioning is better than not transitioning for most people who currently transition, not just many. There are false positives and false negatives but I think we've gone in the right direction overall.
Kids typically get puberty blockers. Surgery isn't done that early. It can be reversed, so I don't think it's that much of a danger.
This is something I do disagree with. I don't think mental illnesses should categorically not be catered to, I think the important thing is to do something that works. If catering to a mental illness doesn't work, then don't do it, but if it does work, then that's a different matter.
This passage convinced me:
slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/

in a world where people might get blackmailed for piss tapes

is a loyal tranny a safe bet ?

the safest bet is not recording piss tapes

You're unable to understand nuance and should not express opinions on any subject that you don't have perfect command over, because your intuition is underdeveloped.

Can you elaborate? It's not convincing unless you back it up.

What if he was a tor user ?

I think this is a very myopic worldview, and one I often meet from people defending their delusions. Because we must ask ourselves, is it healthy for the surrounding people to play along in other peoples delusions too? Not everything is about the tranny, either.

...

Yes, Adolf, in CY+3 people either stay user or go to jail for their illegal opinions.

Attached: illegal-opinions.png (500x397, 110.02K)

I don't think it's a delusion. I think it's a disagreement about which categories are best.
I consider a MtF transsexual a woman. You (presumably) don't. But there are no relevant factual claims we disagree about. We only disagree about whether to call them a woman. Just like you can have a coherent definition in which they're a man, you can have a coherent definition in which they're a woman. We disagree about the map, not the territory.
I don't think there's a major negative impact on surrounding people. There's a slight negative impact, possibly, but there's also a slight negative impact caused by having to accomodate people in wheelchairs. I don't think it outweighs the benefit.

Letting the woman take the hair dryer with her was neither the only possible alternative to the canonical treatment course, nor the end of it. A surgical transition isn't even in the same postal code as satisfying an autist for a while.

You need to learn how to think in three plus one dimensions, otherwise your intuition and understanding will always be of hindrance to you, rather than assets.

It's the people who think like you who allow this bullshit to thrive. Never give in to crooks, whatever uniform they may wear.

Attached: 27fd6f8e823073007fa850f9f1e42a61ae10cc43056ed0c2730247f798ec5909.jpg (767x188, 28.54K)

Well, that's a level of argument I'm not willing to stoop to. A man isn't a woman, that's pretty obvious. Anyone who thinks they are is delusional. That's just basic logic.

I can imagine I'm a plumber. But my vision of how it's like to be a plumber isn't going to be what it's like to be a plumber. Because I haven't had the experiences a plumber have. Now, I can actually become a plumber, and then I will realize how my imaginings differed from the real thing. But a man can never become a woman. He will never have the experience of how it's like to menstruate, how it's like to grow up as a girl, how it's like to have a real female hormonal system with it's particular nuances it's just hubris to assume we can replicate with brute-force steeping the organism with crude hormonal replicants.

I'm a polite man, and if a guy wants to pretend he's a woman, I don't mind that. I'll even call him muh lady in polite company if he prefers that. But if he asks me I'm going to tell him he's a man. Because he is a man. If we're talking about him and his kind in societal and general terms I'm going to say he's a man. So yes, we disagree on the map, because the map is something that isn't really up to debate outside of delusional minds. Nature is nature. Live with it.

You don't think there's a major negative impact, but obviously many disagree with you on this. I am one. Do I not have a right to my opinion on this? But that's the problem. You can't play-act your delusion fully before I'm not here. In the end society will go one of two ways. Remove me and go back to a religious attitude of viewing the world, where fantasy takes precedence over reality, or persist in trying to keep reality as a value. So the problems are irreconcilable. Sorry.

Attached: 8594e5ca9131a23c377d8bec9f3080da495577b849fee1e3e50ced3b274a5ea6.gif (324x216, 544.86K)

There's being polite, and then there's telling lies.

You're not half as smart as you proclaim you are

Well, what can I say, I've got a soft spot for crazy people.

Of course, it's only meant to refute the idea that catering to mental illness in any way is always wrong.
It doesn't prove that catering to this particular mental illness is right. I just used it to counter a single argument.

You mean slightly different things by "man" and "woman" than I do. It's a difference in definition, not in fact. It would be delusional if there were some sort of underlying fact we disagreed about, but there isn't.
I'm arguing that this map should be up to debate. You can start using a differently labeled map without changing your mind about any facts about reality. Words are not reality, they're an arbitrary representation of reality.

I don't know that I've proclaimed I'm very smart. I don't think you need to be very smart to see basic logic.

What basic logic are you talking about?

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Good luck with that and all. But you'll just have to live with that I, and many others, won't follow you down that path.

That a rock isn't a tree.

Attached: Strawberry fields.mp4 (640x360, 11.24M)

Do you at least understand that it's a disagreement about categories rather than a delusion? You can accept that and still think that altered map is a worse map that shouldn't be adopted.
Trans people generally don't think they'll change their chromosomes or grow wombs or whatever.