It's weird that everyone's pretending Mark Joseph Stern got piled on because people decided to attribute the LGBTQ-phobia of a law he was describing to him personally, rather than the actual reason: because he appeared to have editorialised that "talk" conversion therapy wasn't "really abuse"

March 31, 2026 - 19:18 UTC

6
4
170
"Appeared" is load-bearing here. I don't think he actually did that. I think the sentence in question is intended to say that what are described as "physical interventions" are actually abuse
2
0
98
I'm still not sure if it was him saying that or if it was meant to be the opinion of the SCOTUS stated in the ruling, which probably speaks to how ambiguous it is.
0
0
0
However, it's grammatically ambiguous in such a way that it can also be read as saying "physical interventions, now *those* are abuse, as opposed to talk therapy, which obviously isn't". He phrased his post poorly and I think that's on him
1
1
99
Wishing you a good day :3
0
0
1
I didn't even see the "pile on", but as a news person or whatever he does he should realize the importance of care when discussing issues like this, especially today.. wish more of them would
0
0
18
we all know they're gonna just declare everything they do talk therapy while continuing all the other shit too
0
0
9
And posting four people's @s without redaction, essentially calling for his own pile-on

Then leaving it up for hours despite folks asking him to delete it
0
0
8