Ok, if you want to look at this thread on this forum, let's do it.
Below are edited highlights of this thread. I have concentrated on exchanges between you (GagaJo) and me, although there are numerous examples of attempts at silencing coming from other TRAs on the thread. Had I included all of them the post would have exceeded the attention span of 'some people', so I kept it (relatively) short.
First, the OP - a summary of a research project carried out by Jack Turban as the study’s lead author, and Alex Keuroghlian as the senior author. Keuroghlian is an MD, associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and director of the National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center at the Fenway Institute.
My first comment is to question the validity of the research, based on the obvious flaws in the information provided, even though it is a summary.
Your response (GagaJo)
'But of course, naysayers will be negative.'
I ask how you can make sweeping statements about 'the students you've had who could talk about their feelings, compared to the ones who could not', and the numbers you are talking about, and it turns out that it is 4. Three at one school, although you only taught one, and one at another. So, two you've known well?
Your reply was accompanied by a dig suggesting (erroneously, as you have zero knowledge of my career) that I prefer 'paperwork' to helping the students. When you were pulled on this by another poster, you persisted in this accusation.
You then pick up on comments about this being a complex matter best left to those who know what they are doing, with 'leave this to the experts' (your quote marks).
I comment that dismissing experts is populist, and you twist this to say that I said that support for the trans movement is populist, and dragged in feminism and gay rights, to suggest that I would not support those causes . When I pointed out your attempt at spin you ignored me and did not retract.
You claim (based on Googled statistics, of which you say there are many) that 1 in 4 transpeople have attempted suicide, and more than 80% have considered it.
When questioned on the validity of this (complete with figures given by posters and concerns about the baseline for measuring these numbers) you attempt to shut us up with 'oh, I don't want to argue' with the implication that those picking up on the huge errors in what you are saying are doing so for sport. You also suggest that I withdraw from the discussion (cancellation?)
When I refuse to withdraw, you draw up rules of engagement. No 'arguing, unpleasantness or demands' - all defined by you (eg a 'demand' can be any request for clarification, or a reminder that a post has been ignored).
Then more accusations of 'silencing, hostility and attempts to shut up TRAs'. Oh, and anyone speaking out against you is bullying.
When people (several) ask not to be referred to as 'cis' your response is to silence our requests with 'don't read the posts if they upset you', as though that were possible when they don't come in sealed envelopes with 'Offensive Content' warnings.
After attempting to control speech all the way through the thread, you say (of posts that simply question what you are saying) 'this attempt to control the speech of others is cancel culture', and 'The gender critical shut debate down time and time again.' Ironic in the extreme, particularly when you accuse Rosie of diversionary tactics ?. This, from someone who writes incendiary posts to which people take time to respond, then calls any requests for clarification of what has been said 'demands', and refuses to engage.
Finally (at the time of writing) you suggest that anyone disagreeing with you is not behaving like an adult, but is guilty of 'Cancel culture. Shut(ting) it down. Causing arguments and unpleasantness.'
Phew! Can you honestly say, in the face of that, that it is so-called 'gender critical' posters who are trying to shut down debate?
