• BananaSpike@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    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.