Jordan Pizzashill just needed to tell those postmodernists neoliberals that a multivariate analysis has more explanatory power than a univariate analysis and that any social scientist that attributes complex phenomena to a single factor is not worth their salt.
They basically just make it up as they go and smugpost about how they're able to pull up tangentially relevant studies to "prove" whatever shit they already believed.
Economically, yes, sometimes. The politicians much more so than their base. However, Hillary stans are deeeeep into the identity politics, so they're extremist in that sense.
Nah. He's clearly marching to the beat of his own drum (seemingly based largely on who's wronged him at some point), can't imagine him settling down with a preprescribed ideological set.
his mistake is choosing to argue in the worst circlejerks, he always finds himself in a situation where it's him vs fifty angry-smug trumpets/soy boys ganging up on him.
You got it backwards. Mayoskins subverted 40k memes. A bald fumbling obese politican with a prostitute for a wife doesn't hold a candle next to the light of the Allfather (who only promoted bussy, not heretic gussy.)
If something exists across every time period, every demographic, and every area on the planet, it's time to consider maybe it isn't a "social construct."
Gender only really exists in a society tbhq my dude, and they’re slightly different (expectations of masculinity vs. femininity, etc) across every single one. If something exists solely in societies, constructed by them, in different words, maybe it’s a social construct.
The term social construct kinda doesn’t mean anything, though, and is often used as a cop not to talk about shit.
Weekdays are also social constructs
We all know humans divide labor extremely efficiently without a society. That’s why proto-humans had bank tellers and farmers, right?
Lol, all you’re mentioning are the effects of socialization. If the boy and girl grew up, and the people they knew told them girls should be hunters, the girl would be the one hunting. Gender and sex are different concepts, my dude.
You’re entire argument is circular as fuck, too. “Clearly, following my logic, the thing I think would happen would happen, it’s common knowledge” is what every convo I’ve had with you has looked like
We all know humans divide labor extremely efficiently without a society. That’s why proto-humans had bank tellers and farmers, right?
They were pretty efficient at dividing labor, actually.
Lol, all you’re mentioning are the effects of socialization.
No, I'm mentioning innate biology.
If the boy and girl grew up, and the people they knew told them girls should be hunters, the girl would be the one hunting.
And they'd be significantly worse at it than men were, because of biology. So that clearly wouldn't last long.
Take the animal kingdom, for example. Why do so many species have gender roles in the way we do, with males serving different roles than females? Was that society? No, it's instinct, it's biology.
Gender and sex are different concepts, my dude.
They aren't really. That's what a certain unsavory group of people have started to claim, but no, the idea that "gender is different than sex" is a fairly recent concept.
If the boy and girl grew up, and the people they knew told them girls should be hunters, the girl would be the one hunting
Men have 40% more upper body strength than women. They have ~10x the testosterone, which is causally linked with risk-taking, aggression, and physical strength. Hunting is dangerous. If a tribe loses a woman (or her uterus) to a hunting accident, that cuts into the group's ability to reproduce. But if it loses a man, another guy can get his wife pregnant- no loss to group reproductive capacity.
The idea that a literal billion years of different evolutionary pressures (because reproduction/pregnancy, is 100% sexually unequal, among other reasons) would end up with males and females behaviourally identical is just insane (and disproved by pretty much every facet of human behaviour- shit, by just about every facet of mammal behaviour, really).
99% of animals have significant behavioural differences between the sexes. Is it "cultural" that male lions leave the pride and live solo, while female lions stay with their family? Culture doesn't come from a vaccuum- it grew out of biology. In the modern word, sleeping at nighttime is "just a cultural norm", but it became a cultural norm because of pressures from biology and nature.
Lol biological determinism is a meme.
Different cultures absolutely treat women and men differently, again, because it’s a social construct.
Also people aren’t really comparable to animals in this sense.
Different to a degree, but I can't think off the top of my head of more than one society where woman were the leadership caste. Figureheads and inheritors, sure, but a group of senator equivalents that are all women?
Of course not. The differences in gender roles vary because of regional environmental factors. The core parts of the different roles does not change.
Men always tend to be strong, brave, and industrious. Women always tend to be nurturing, selective, and stable. Those are constants when it comes to secondary sex traits. The exceptions are just that: exceptions.
Lol biological determinism is a meme.
Different cultures absolutely treat women and men differently, again, because it’s a social construct.
Also people aren’t really comparable to animals in this sense.
Then trannies are a faking it. If there are differences, then they are full of shit.
Biological determinism is when you think biology is the only important factor.
You don’t have to swing towards that much idpol there, people amab are generally bigger than people afab. I don’t think being afab makes you play with barbies or like makeup
So, totes different to the "social construct" thing?
Different cultures absolutely treat women and men differently, again, because it’s a social construct.
Yeah sure, 50% of the world's historical cultures had a female military, men as child rearers, and women doing the big hunting. Oh wait; no-one had all that, and 99.99999% of cultures had the total opposite. Must be an arbitrary co-incidence.
Also people aren’t really comparable to animals in this sense.
Yeah, we're above all that "biology", shit. And the fact that human sexual behaviour is 100% consistent with all mammal behaviour is another one of them arbitrary co-incidences.
U stupid? Ain’t gotta have a matriarchy to treat women/men different as a society. Gender, in any meaningful sense is a social construct because of this.
Yes, we’re above “biology” when “biology” is unrelated animal factz.
Can you really argue from nature and be on the left? If you want to propose that we follow the natural order, that would just lead to the right crushing the left and the weak should fear the strong etc etc. I thought the entire point of the left was to rise above the cruelty of the dog eat dog world.
What makes you think the left is weak? Last time I checked, the right, nazis, got absolutely bent over by the commies.
In no small part because the Nazis greatly underestimated the slavs, viewed them as racially inferior. Surely, if the french flopped over, the racially inferior slavs would as well.
You can argue from nature on the left, as long as you're aware nature isn't everything. There are social factors as well.
Maybe it was because Russia was so poor it had so many more people willing to be soldiers for the Communist forces. In America we have so many more prosperous people than what existed under a feudal system, so the right wing is bolstered by the middle class. Furthermore those countries that you listed were ethnically homogeneous so there was no difference in cognitive or fighting ability between the right and left, that isn't the case in the present scenario
No, the vast majority of the Russian population wasn't friendly to Stalin when the Germans invaded the soviet union. Stalin was, in fact, pretty hated by these people.
It was only after the Germans pillaged through the country murdering and raping people on the basis they were racially inferior that Stalin got his army.
At 3.30 a.m. on 22 June 1941 the Chief of the Red Army General Staff, Georgi Zhukov, telephoned Stalin’s dacha to rouse the Soviet leader from his sleep. The Germans, he told him, had begun shelling Red Army positions along the frontier. Stalin refused to believe that a full-scale invasion was under way. Surely, he told a small gathering of civilian and military leaders in Moscow later in the morning, Hitler did not know about it. There must be a conspiracy among the leaders of the German armed forces. It was only when the German Ambassador, Count Friedrich Werner von der Schulenburg, met Foreign Minister Molotov in the Kremlin to hand over the German declaration of war that Stalin recognized he had been duped by Hitler. Initially shocked, embarrassed and disoriented, Stalin soon pulled himself together. On 23 June 1941 he worked at his desk in the Kremlin from 3.20 in the morning to 6.25 in the evening, gathering information and making the necessary arrangements for the creation of a Supreme Command to take charge of operations. As the days went by, he became increasingly dispirited by the scale and speed of the German advance. At the end of June, he left for his dacha, saying, in his inimitably coarse way, ‘Everything’s lost. I give up. Lenin founded our state and we’ve fucked it up.’ He made no address to the Soviet people, he did not talk to his subordinates, he did not even answer the phone. German planes, indeed, dropped leaflets over the Red Army lines claiming that he was dead. When a delegation from the Politburo arrived at the dacha, they found Stalin slumped in an armchair. ‘Why have you come?’ he asked. With a thrill of terror, two members of the delegation, Mikoyan and Beria, realized he thought they had come to arrest him.
Within a few days of retreating to his dacha in despair, Stalin recovered his nerve, if indeed he had really lost it. Some thought he had retreated into temporary isolation like Ivan the Terrible centuries before, to demonstrate his indispensability. A State Defence Committee was set up, with Stalin himself in the chair. His retreat had given him the chance to rethink his role. On 3 July 1941, the same day that Franz Halder confided to his diary his belief that victory had already been achieved by the German forces, Stalin spoke to the Soviet people over the radio, for the first time not as Communist dictator but as patriotic leader. ‘Brothers and sisters,’ he said, ‘friends!’ This was an entirely new note. He went so far as to admit that the Red Army had been unprepared for the attack. The Germans, he said, were ‘wicked and perfidious . . . heavily armed with tanks and artillery’. But they would not prevail. The Soviet people had to organize civil defence and mobilize every ounce of energy to defeat the enemy. It was necessary to form partisan groups behind the lines to cause as much damage and disruption as possible. Silence, lies and evasion, people felt, had at last been replaced with some kind of truth.231 Communist Party propaganda began to emphasize the defence not of the revolution but of the motherland. The party newspaper, Pravda (‘Truth’), dropped the slogan ‘Workers of the World, Unite!’ from its masthead and replaced it with ‘Death to the German Invaders!’ Nikolai Moskvin noted on 30 September 1941 that ‘the mood of the local population has changed sharply’. From constantly threatening to betray him to the Germans, they came round to the patriotic cause after learning that the occupation authorities were keeping the collective farms going because it made it easier to collect the grain for transporting back to Germany.232
The speech’s patriotic appeal was all the more powerful because people were already beginning to learn the bitter realities of German occupation. Stories of the horrors of the prisoner-of-war camps mingled with eyewitness reports of the mass shooting of civilians and the burning of villages by German troops to produce in the still-retreating ranks of the Red Army a determination to fight the enemy that had been almost entirely absent in the first chaotic days of the war. When the city of Kursk fell, the Germans arrested all the healthy male inhabitants, penned them into open barbed-wire enclosures without food or water, and then put them to work, guarded by Germans wielding rubber truncheons. ‘The streets are empty,’ noted a Soviet intelligence report. ‘The shops have been looted. There is no mains water and no electricity. Kursk has collapsed.’233 Minsk, reported Fedor von Bock, was little more than a ‘heap of rubble, in which the population is wandering about without any food.’234 Other cities and towns were reduced to a similar state. They were deliberately starved of supplies by their German conquerors, who requisitioned the bulk of foodstuffs for themselves, in a situation already rendered critical by the removal of large quantities of supplies by the retreating Red Army. Hitler declared that it was his firm intention ‘to raze Moscow and Leningrad to the ground, so as to prevent people staying there and obliging us to feed them through the winter. These cities are to be annihilated by the air force.’235 Many people fled the advancing German troops - the population of Kiev, for instance, fell by half, from 600,000 to 300,000 - but even for those who were left, staying alive quickly became a priority in every occupied area. The German military issued a stream of orders imposing curfews, drafting young men into forced labour, requisitioning winter clothing, and executing hundreds of citizens in reprisal for every supposed act of arson or sabotage.236 Looting by German troops was as widespread as it had been in Poland. ‘Everywhere,’ wrote General Gotthard Heinrici caustically on 23 June 1941, ‘our people are looking for harnesses and take the horses away from the farmers. Great wailing and lamentation in the villages. Thus is the population “liberated”.’237 Their requisitioning of food, he added on 4 July 1941, was thorough and comprehensive. ‘But the land will likely soon be sucked dry.’238 The troops’ behaviour quickly alienated even people who had initially welcomed them as liberators from Stalin’s tyranny. ‘If our people were only a bit more decent and sensible!’ lamented Hans Meier-Welcker. ‘They are taking everything that suits them from the farmers.’ Meier-Welcker saw soldiers stealing chickens, tearing beehives apart to get at the honeycomb, and throwing themselves upon a gaggle of geese in a farmyard. He tried to discipline the looters, but it was a lost cause.239
It's entirely a "social construct", because the term was designed specifically to be a social construct- in order to duck the fact that "the sexes" is a biological non-negotiable.
People yelling about "two genders" are morons; if you buy into "gender" you've already lost.
Duh, basically everything is a social construct, but throwing it out there like it's a valuable point in a discussion is like me walking into a university biology class and yelling "MY DAD FUCKED MY MOM"
But then trans people are real. If there's a switch in the brain that selects between two sets of gender-determined behavior then it can select a wrong one.
Sure. And that is a mental illness. The “treatment” for that should not be cutting up your genitals, just like the treatment for schizophrenia should not be a lobotomy
I think that this should be up to the affected individuals to decide, if they are otherwise mentally sound. Especially so when there's no other effective treatment.
Sure; if you really want to mutilate yourself (or ingest hormones that may make other latent mental issues worse), and you’re lucid, that’s fine. But don’t expect me to humor your delusion. Don’t expect me to support laws that codify language that I MUST use (pronouns) or support your “right” to flip back and forth (in the case of gender fluid) at a fucking whim.
I do not believe that gender dysphoria is ANYWHERE near as pronounced as is currently expressed right now. I think there is a serious overdiagnosis, a lot of self diagnosis and a real fear on the part of health professionals to push back on this, which is why I think there’s a large amount of post trans regret.
As I have said dozens of times: if this treatment were effective, why is the Suicide rate so tragically high before and after treatment? Why?
That very well might be, but has absolutely nothing to do with your previous argument. I think that you're making a mistake characteristic for the fair sex, where you think that proving that something is flawed in some respect also lends credence to claims that it's flawed in entirely unrelated ways. You're trying to reason with your heart, not with your pretty little head, honey ;)
Wait, are you saying that because they feel like and believe themselves to be some other sex, they ARE?
No, I reject that assumption.
Schizophrenic people might think the television is speaking directly to them, or their dog is from another dimension- that doesn’t make it true.
Trans people exist of course. They are real people suffering from a real mental illness. They are not “women trapped inside a man’s body” for example, save for EXTREMELY RARE edge cases like intersex birth.
The thing I was saying in that particular comment was that you have a wrong way of arguing. You said that trans people are delusional, I asked what about left-handed people, and you parried with an assertion that in your opinion the majority of trans people are transtrenders or confused teenagers (which could very well be true to an extent, though I'm not comfortable pulling such opinions out of my ass because a priori I'd expect there to be about as many trans people as there are lesbian and gay people, so I can't say that there are "too many").
It's as if your arguments are soldiers and you send them to slay the evil Trans Agenda, and if they manage to do it then they are all victorious and right. That's not how things work.
As for the argument about delusions, I'm not in the mood to seriouspost, you can read these if you want (in order):
You said that trans people are delusional, I asked what about left-handed people,
Being left handed is not a fundamental aspect of your identity, though if you were right-hand dominant but believed yourself to truly, deep down, a lefty, YES, I would say there's a certain amount of delusion in that.
I'm not comfortable pulling such opinions out of my ass because a priori I'd expect there to be about as many trans people as there are lesbian and gay people, so I can't say that there are "too many" or by how much).
trans people apparently make up less than 1% of the US population in 2016- that's as late as I could quickly google info, but given the amount of noise all over the internet and in courts, on campuses, etc, you'd expect that number to be much higher. Yes, that's anecdotal information, but it can't just be me imagining this, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing countries like Canada introducing bills like C-16 or North Carolina's bathroom bill.
It's as if your arguments are soldiers and you send them to slay the evil Trans Agenda, and if they manage to do it then they are all victorious and right. That's not how things work.
What the fuck are you talking about?
I'm simply saying that I am not going to play this game. I'm not going to humor transpeople that they can magically become something THEY ARE NOT AND NEVER EVER WILL BE.
As for the argument about delusions, I'm not in the mood to seriouspost, you can read these if you want (in order):
If I feel like it, I might look at these links you've provided, but if these things are some critical-theory gobbledegook, I reserve the right to roll my eyes. Again.
It's as if your arguments are soldiers and you send them to slay the evil Trans Agenda, and if they manage to do it then they are all victorious and right. That's not how things work.
What the fuck are you talking about?
I'm simply saying that I am not going to play this game. I'm not going to humor transpeople that they can magically become something THEY ARE NOT AND NEVER EVER WILL BE.
No, you simply responded to an argument about that with a completely different argument, as if me agreeing with you on that (which I do, with reservations) should also make me agree with the argument above it. That's wrong, don't do that.
As for the original argument about transgenderism being a mental illness and what's supposed to follow from that, I can try to summarize the points of the posts I linked but not the arguments in favor of those points. This should only serve as a justification for why those posts are relevant. And also it's pretty much the opposite of critical-theory gobbledegook.
A lot of political arguments pull a fast one by saying that A belongs to the category C, therefore it's bad because of properties X, Y, Z that things in the category C usually have and we should treat it as we usually treat things in that category. Without actually having to argue that A in particular has these properties or should be dealt with using those approaches.
This applies to the way you play fast and loose with the category of mental illness.
A more detailed exploration of how we can think completely different things about some condition depending on whether we classify it as a disease or not, and what kind of a disease.
The main course, people tend to conflate categories and empirical facts (because our brains treat statements "this is a cat" and "this thing has four legs" similarly), but that's completely wrong. You have to justify your definition of a category based on its usefulness because it can't be justified with empirical facts in principle. Finding some neat way of determining it with empirical facts doesn't justify it and is searching under a streetlight
If you really are going to read that stuff I recommend not following links to previous expanded explanations on definitions, it's worse than TVTropes, and you can understand it perfectly well without that.
If you get any questions while reading, feel free to ask. If you read all that shit but still think that I don't have a point, feel free to ask, at least you'd understand the ideas I'm using.
The streetlight effect is a type of observational bias that occurs when people are searching for something and look only where it is easiest. Another term for this is a drunkard's search.
Taken from an old joke about a drunkard who is searching for something he has lost, the parable is told several ways but typically includes the following details:
A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his keys and they both look under the streetlight together.
Fair enough; I should have paid closer attention to my responses and the points I was addressing.
I'll give these links a look over when I get home.
You did ask me this, though:
It's not a delusion if it's as biologically determined as your own gender, or, say, your dominant hand, though?
But that's the point- people don't struggle with a crisis of identity regarding their dominant hand. Nobody wakes up and genuinely believes that, although they have been right-hand dominant their entire lives, they are actually left-hand dominant, and they must seek some kind of treatment to change their physicality.
People who suffer from gender dysphoria aren't wrong or delusional to feel that anxiety, but it doesn't mean they actually are a different sex, and the method we're employing to treat that feeling seems to me to absolutely be delusional.
More to the point, how can we argue that gender and sex are totally separate, which a lot of people try to do, placing gender as a construct uniquely separated from the biological sex, and then suggest that the proper solution to an anxiety about internal gender identity or sexual identity (OR BOTH) is to adopt the very gender roles we've claimed were only social constructs?
Maybe I'm just too stupid to understand this logic?
People who suffer from gender dysphoria aren't wrong or delusional to feel that anxiety,
Yeah, but then you have to explain why the minority of people who have their brains tell them that they should use their left hand as dominant is fundamentally different from the minority whose brains tell them that they shouldn't have a penis or boobs, and should perform the opposite sex gender roles.
And while we are at that, why lesbians (who are sexually attracted to female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should be attracted to) are totally real, but MTFs (who think of themselves as having female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should have) are not real.
Like, to me both things are cases of some switch in the brain failing to select the proper set of biologically determined responses, probably when the brain was just forming.
And yet you totally believe that lesbians are real and are really attracted to women, but transsexuals are mentally ill in a bad way, if they are not making it up.
Apply your arguments against transsexualism to lesbians, they all fit. This should tell you that those arguments are shit.
but it doesn't mean they actually are a different sex
We can't have this argument until you've read the SSC post about categories.
and then suggest that the proper solution to an anxiety about internal gender identity or sexual identity (OR BOTH) is to adopt the very gender roles we've claimed were only social constructs?
TERFs claimed that, not me and not you apparently.
Don't blame me for the second wave feminism rhetoric (gender roles suck) contradicting the third wave feminism rhetoric (female gender roles are awesome). That's on you, I never bought into either.
People who suffer from gender dysphoria aren't wrong or delusional to feel that anxiety,
Yeah, but then you have to explain why the minority of people who have their brains tell them that they should use their left hand as dominant is fundamentally different from the minority whose brains tell them that they shouldn't have a penis or boobs, and should perform the opposite sex gender roles.
People with brains wired to be left-hand dominant aren’t experiencing an anxiety telling them that something is wrong (something is there which shouldn’t be, or not there which should be). Delusion doesn’t enter into it until you believe that just by slipping on a dress, taking some pills, or getting surgery actually changes how your brain is wired, or what your chromosomal makeup is.
Even among people that have body integrity identity disorder, who believe their limbs are not their own, we don’t go suggesting they lop off their fucking hands.
And while we are at that, why lesbians (who are sexually attracted to female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should be attracted to) are totally real, but MTFs (who think of themselves as having female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should have) are not real?
Your sexual attraction and preference, while ingrained, doesn’t alter the reality of your sex. Lesbians experience anxiety about how those closest to them (or society at large, though that is thankfully diminishing) might accept their sexuality, but they’re not questioning whether or not they’re actually, really women or not.
Transgenderism isn’t tied to sexual preference, either. So you can have a male to female that previously preferred men, and STILL prefers other men. The delusion enters in, again, when we try to address that inner uncertainty of identity by suggesting that our biology itself can / should change. I think that’s wrong.
Like, to me both things are cases of some switch in the brain failing to select the proper set of biologically determined responses, probably when the brain was just forming. One about self, one about who you're attracted to.
Right, and those are different things, with different consequences.
And yet you totally believe that lesbians are real and are really attracted to women, but transsexuals are mentally ill in a bad way, if they are not making it up.
Transsexuals are real in the sense that they really feel like they’re not their biological sex, but that is, as you say, a switch in their brain. Every chromosome is exactly as their biology dictates.
Don't blame me for the second wave feminism rhetoric (gender roles suck and should be abolished) contradicting the third wave feminism rhetoric (femininity is awesome and should be praised). That's on you, I never bought into either.
It’s so hard to argue these things for me, because I feel like so much of the foundation is shifting around me depending on who I’m talking to. That’s .. incredibly frustrating, because I WANT to empathize, and I WANT to understand. I just fear that the way we’re going about “treating” these people is maybe not very helpful. That’s perhaps condescending, but I don’t mean it to be. I just keep coming back to the point of the suicide statistics and I can’t shake the feeling that this is wrong, AND I can’t / won’t bend reality to agree that a natural-born female is, in “reality”, actually a male. I disagree.
Even among people that have body integrity identity disorder, who believe their limbs are not their own, we don’t go suggesting they lop off their fucking hands.
People with brains wired to be left-hand dominant aren’t experiencing an anxiety telling them that something is wrong (something is there which shouldn’t be, or not there which should be).
Oh they sure do when the society tells them to use their right hand like normal people.
The only reason you don't hear about them killing themselves often is because while the patriarchal society is anal as fuck about controlling reproduction and all related things very tightly, with the southpaws besides some misguided (progressive btw) attempts at social engineering rewriting the "blank slate" in the fifties, now they are let to be what they are. And much happier for that, of course.
Delusion doesn’t enter into it until you believe that just by slipping on a dress, taking some pills, or getting surgery actually changes how your brain is wired, or what your chromosomal makeup is.
Uh. My point is that it's how the brain is wired, if lesbians are wired to like feminine characteristics in sexual partners despite their chromosomal gender, then there should be people who are wired to like to express feminine characteristics despite their chromosomal gender.
The only reason you say that lesbians are real is because our vocabulary does have four words for gender + attraction to gender: men, women, lesbians, gays, but it doesn't have a bunch of extra words for gender self-identification on top of that.
Otherwise there's no reason to say that the gender attraction switch is real but the self-identification switch (as being attractive to a gender) is not. When a cishet woman does what cishet women do to be attractive to cishet men, you should expect some unfortunate mis-wired male to want to do the same things.
That’s .. incredibly frustrating, because I WANT to empathize, and I WANT to understand.
I just keep coming back to the point of the suicide statistics
That's a completely different problem and my own approach is that you generally can't convince people that they are wrong about what they are doing with their lives, especially if your voice is drowned in a chorus of people who obviously do that because of the patriarchal imperatives (which includes yourself btw), so, like, our best bet is to keep silent and maybe say "told you so" about ten years later when a whole lot of doctors are sued out of their last shirt for malpractice. Even better if there are only a few such cases because actual doctors specializing in gender transition are not as insane as the media portrays them.
Think about it in Christian terms: are you sure that making arguments about it being probable that a lot of supposedly trans adolescents are really not, is good for your soul? I know this about myself, I reflected and noticed that making such arguments makes me feel good despite knowing for sure that it can only strengthen the resolve of the transtrender parents. For real, that's how people are, right? So I'm not making those because I genuinely care about consequences, about those poor mutilated children, I make them in the anticipation and imagination of the "I told you so" moment. That's bad for my soul.
Uh. My point is that it's how the brain is wired, if lesbians are wired to like feminine characteristics in sexual partners despite their chromosomal gender, then there should be people who are wired to like to express feminine characteristics despite their chromosomal gender.
Sure, ok. I'm with you. In the case of a MTF, that would a MAN who feels like a woman. That person is a man. They will always be a man, biologically, no matter what they do to themselves to alter their chemistry or their ...appendages.
The delusion I keep referring to is the concept that because i truly and deeply feel something, it actually changes the physical aspects, the physical category in which i actually exist.
like the black person i mentioned, who always felt they were white. or Rachael Dolezal (sp?) to reference a real instance of this. Just because Rachael felt like she was black, adorned the affectations, the culture, and even (probably honestly, if we want to be generous) the "soul" of a black woman, she is not, never was, and never will actually, in reality, be black.
The difference, and the teeth-grinding disconnect, is that we, all of us, roundly criticized her for her "transracial" stance, but somehow accept that, in the case of transgenderism, feelz do actually equal realz? Where is the consistency here?
The only reason you say that lesbians are real is because our vocabulary does have four words for gender + attraction to gender: men, women, lesbians, gays, but it doesn't have a bunch of extra words for gender self-identification on top of that.
Look above. We open the door here for a whole lot of other classifications based on vocabulary alone. This is EXACTLY why we now have something like 37 "accepted" pronouns? What the fuck?
Otherwise there's no reason to say that the gender attraction switch is real but the self-identification switch (as being attractive to a gender) is not. When a cishet woman does what cishet women do to be attractive to cishet men, you should expect some unfortunate mis-wired male to want to do the same things.
People can look however they want to look. They can dress how they want, Mike can be Miranda, people can adopt whatever role they choose. I don't really care about that. What I care about is when we start suggesting that how people act or look somehow alters what is actual and true. What is reality with respect to biology and what I am supposed to believe or to say in order to suit a false reality.
Men are men. Women are women. You can be gay, straight, have three tits, a ponytail (surgically implanted, buttplug, or just your hair tied back), that doesn't matter to me. What matters is reality.
ok, you goddamned bully. i will read the fucking thing. give me a few hours, though. i'm getting drunk. actually, i want to take it seriously since you're so fucking INSISTENT, so give me a day. I'll email the link to myself so i won't forget (i already started skimming and read about the big fish).
Another thought, and I didn't want it to get lost in an EDIT in my massive wall of text, but feel free to address it in one common response, if you wish:
A better comparison between MTF wouldn't be to compare to lesbians, but rather to a person born black that always felt they were white. Is transracialism "real"? Should we suggest they bleach their skin?
Wait, what? where did you get the fucking schematic for the human brain? We're speaking theoretically and then all of the sudden, you pull the rug and suggest there IS NO SWITCH for race?
Sure there is. Race is real. It doesn't add or detract value from a person (notwithstanding the valuation society has at one time or another placed upon it, which is where we get racism from), just like being left or right handed doesn't add or detract value, again notwithstanding the valuation society has at one time or another... etc etc.
So if we can have a switch for something as meaningless (intrinsically) as left or right handed, can't we have the same thing for race?
Nope. Really, it just doesn't make any sense. No human has ever been naturally selected based on the ability to dynamically switch between behaving as this or that race depending on which parents it was born to.
Lissn, have a good night full of tasty drinks, then read that thing about whales tomorrow, then we discuss it, OK?
Here's something I'm going to warn you about, however: if this article is suggesting, as I suspect it is, that philosophically, there are no first principles, no fundamental truths, and that everything is created by man, I reject that notion. I reject it.
If we're going to suggest that there's a right and wrong choice while also discussing issues that have a lot to do with both intrinsic characteristics AND roles that are defined by society (and, with societal definition comes a hierarchy and valuation), why WOULDN'T "transracialism" be an actual thing, given that it would behoove certain races to choose others based on a value decision, or deeply felt empathy?
wait, what the fuck is "lesswrong"? it sounds extremely "progressive" (that is to say, I WANT TO HELP YOU BE LESS WRONG, SO LISTEN TO AND ADOPT EXACTLY THE PRESCRIBED GROUPTHINK)
by nature they have a deep and unfortunate psychological issue in which they feel out of place in their own body; their own identity. That's a shame. That's not a reason to re-define reality.
If that's the case then why do all the best female video game players have penises? Perhaps it's because they still have brains that are functionally male due to testosterone exposure during childhood.
There's a HUGE correlation between MTF transgenderism and autism (but also apparently that distribution is bimodal, that is, it has two humps, with only late-transitioning people also much likelier to be autistic). I don't want to speculate on why that it is so, but it explains your observation at least on the surface level.
Testosterone does drive the urge to compete, which seems to be a necessary part of winning competitions. Testosterone leading to the urge to compete isn't even controversial you could see it animals, ramming dominance behavior in goats, etc.
Probably not, but that didn't stop her when she started using them. Look also at the speedrun community, which has lots of transsexuals, but look at the people who are not transsexuals, do you think that they compete for getting those world records because they are particularly high-T? LOL, they are not, so whatever effect testosterone has on competitiveness it's not the major factor in video game competitiveness, other factors are more important.
A woman recounts her successful financial takeover of a ~1000 weekly average player Minecraft server (twice actually). Hilarious and informative. Highlight:
My warehouse, in the basement of the palace. The view from the opposite corner is much the same. Some of the ladders descend to more stacks of doublechests underneath. Organizing and labeling all of this is probably one of the most autistic things I've ever done. Though I'm pretty sure everything in this post qualifies.
When statisticians say that we shouldn't judge human sub-populations by their statistical averages because intra-population spread dwarfs those differences, that's what they mean. Shine on you crazy diamonds of any gender, race, or whatever!
(but also apparently that distribution is bimodal, that is, it has two humps, with only late-transitioning people also much likelier to be autistic).
and you spent over an hour arguing that this was in any way comparable to lesbians?
did you really argue the edge case and try to apply it broadly? I mean, I know that some people "discover" they're gay, but ... really? you deign to conflate the two because it's convenient?
He's right though, people like you scare people away from voting democrat. I'm not saying they aren't retarded for refusing to vote for the obviously most viable candidate due to the annoyance of your ilk's infantile pet causes (like banning meat, changing the word "mankind" to "peoplekind", and forcing all this gender narcissism into discourse 24/7), but I can see why it's doing the world harm by pushing people who just want to go about their day and not worry about fucking deadnaming somebody and having their lives ruined into the opposite pole.
Discourse is dead and it's the fault of three extremes: rightists, leftists, and cultural progressivists.
If you have anything to do with "Obama is a Muslim socialist whose wife is a man"-level discourse, or "butter emails", or anything like that, you're part of the problem. If that's not you, fair enough.
Ascktually the emails are still in play its its becoming clear there was a movement in the FBI to cover it up. Anyone else doing what she did would be in jail for many years right now. Its not a "butter emails" its "endangering US security" and "illegal destruction". So if wanting to debate that makes me part of the problem so be it.
Given the incredibly woke opinions your average Hillary Stan has on social issues, I'm more of the mind that they don't care and not that they actually understand economics any more than identity politics.
Oh all the issues HRC brought up last cycle the pay gap truly was the stupidest. So it makes sense /r/neoliberal thinks that we need to install a mind control machine to make sure we can stop it from happening in the future.
The irony here is that you think the discussion hasn't long shifted from "is the wage gape real" to "what are the main factors that cause the wage gap". Get with the times, grandpa.
Tony Blair governed the UK during probably thegreatest period of economic growth in the post-war period, while working to create reasonable worker protections including the creation of a national minimum wage and an expansion of the National Health Service. He was pretty dang left on economic issues while still fostering competitive growth.
How do people reconcile that fact that most men(soyboys obviously an exception) are pumped full of testosterone and most women are pumped full of estrogen? These hormones are pretty influential on behavior. It would be like having half the population on amphetamines and half the population on pot and then claiming that the two populations are exactly the same and the only difference is that we need to better acomodate pot smokers.
Of course women have all the capability men have in general but you'd have to be insane to think the hormone that makes you want to dominate and behave aggressively isn't going to have some effect on work.
This is why the best response to people who believe all differences between gender are socially constructed is to ask how they square that with their (often-held) belief that hormone therapy is the best treatment for transpeople.
The fact that women bear children and can breastfeed obviously influence certain behaviors. Everything else? is social conditioning.
/u/Bernies_Lakehouse I thought neoliberalism was supposed to be scientific politics that put evidence and truth above ideology. Why are you just declaring something to be true based on your own baseless intuition?
Maybe you should consider reading some real scientific literature before you pretend to know what you're talking about.
227 comments
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
u/Pizzashill why are you such nerd? Stop seriousposting lol
1 CultOfCuck 2018-02-07
Jordan Pizzashill just needed to tell those
postmodernistsneoliberals that a multivariate analysis has more explanatory power than a univariate analysis and that any social scientist that attributes complex phenomena to a single factor is not worth their salt.1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
Instead, use my univariate analysis about biology.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
We have two choices: total sj idpol or biological determinism
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
Pick one or suffer my wrath, REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
1 CultOfCuck 2018-02-07
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Wow how the fuck am I agreeing with you?
1 CultOfCuck 2018-02-07
I'm not that bad once you get to know me, Mr. Anderson.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
No, I know you because I lurk which is why I’m surprised
1 CultOfCuck 2018-02-07
Most of my posts are 200% ironic.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
At a certain point the meaningful distinguish between acting like an idiot and being one dissapears
1 CultOfCuck 2018-02-07
This is a safe space for idiocy.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
I know, they keep letting pizza_cuck back in
1 Ultrashitpost 2018-02-07
/u/Pizzashill is actually the voice of reason in that thread. I predict he's only one bad day away from turning into a fascist.
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-02-07
Has our little autist /u/Pizzashill grown up and left the nest in an attempt to bring radical centrism to others? I'm so proud.
1 worthlessworthl 2018-02-07
Wait, I thought neoliberals were the radical centrists?
1 aqouta 2018-02-07
They basically just make it up as they go and smugpost about how they're able to pull up tangentially relevant studies to "prove" whatever shit they already believed.
1 -absolutego- 2018-02-07
Economically, yes, sometimes. The politicians much more so than their base. However, Hillary stans are deeeeep into the identity politics, so they're extremist in that sense.
1 snallygaster 2018-02-07
Nah. He's clearly marching to the beat of his own drum (seemingly based largely on who's wronged him at some point), can't imagine him settling down with a preprescribed ideological set.
1 Strictlybutters 2018-02-07
Proving once again that the only thing pizza hates more than “conservative SJW’s” is women.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
First principles? The fuck are those?
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-02-07
/u/pizzashill is regularly the voice of reason.
his mistake is choosing to argue in the worst circlejerks, he always finds himself in a situation where it's him vs fifty angry-smug trumpets/soy boys ganging up on him.
1 NardDogAndy 2018-02-07
/u/pizzashill how does your dick feel after sticking it in that hornet's nest of retardation?
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
I can tell you right now I completely understand why people support Donald Trump on the basis of pissing off SJWs now.
I will never vote democrat again. I had no idea SJWism had taken over the "neoliberal" wing of the party.
One of the people there, that is also a mod of /r/science unironically used the term "straw feminism."
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
Holy shit pizza! u/Ultrashitpost wasn't too wrong when he said you're days away from turning into a fash
1 WarSanchez 2018-02-07
Member my horseshoe theory thread on him?
A lot of us have called it. The most emotionally unstable people are the most predictable.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
You serious post so much you've gone full circle to the Trumpism logic you claim to hate so much. What a blessed day!
1 wazzupnerds 2018-02-07
Pizzashill being rational? What the fuck?!
1 shitpost953 2018-02-07
you're joking, right?
1 TFWnoLTR 2018-02-07
You'd know better than most.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
You're living proof someone can serious post themselves retarded. 😂😂
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-02-07
you'll see the light as well some day. just a matter of time
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
Miss me with that straight shit
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
No Warhammer fan can resist the power of the God-Emperor for long.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
You got it backwards. Mayoskins subverted 40k memes. A bald fumbling obese politican with a prostitute for a wife doesn't hold a candle next to the light of the Allfather (who only promoted bussy, not heretic gussy.)
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
Bussy cannot produce soldiers for the Imperium. Bussy is from Slaanesh and Nurgle.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
Heretical lies. All you have to do is clone your favorite cuddle buddies.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
Slaanesh is literally the demonic heresy of gayness. Nurgle is the god of pozzed bug-chasers.
1 TheGreatWolfRuss 2018-02-07
Slaanesh is the god of excess bussy and Nurgle is the god of diseased bussy.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
ie, the same as all bussy.
1 error404brain 2018-02-07
Fam. The primarch were literally canonically made by a gay couple.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
You have exceeded my nerdcraft knowledge, so I will concede this point.
1 error404brain 2018-02-07
Beside, nurgle only care about his brews, not bussy.
He even keep a girl not!elf as a slave. Definitely not interested in bussy.
1 Russiangreyman 2018-02-07
Not to mention the fact that it's way too easy. All it takes as you can see is some level of disagreement and they fucking lose their shit.
Radical centrism is truly the only way. And we welcome you with open arms!
1 Sophistrycated 2018-02-07
Arguing from the center is retarded.
People who truely want centrism are either far right or far left. They know that polarization will eventually lead to compromise in the middle.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
Is this satire? I smell satire.
1 Chicup 2018-02-07
Good good, let the hate flow through you.
1 scatmunchies 2018-02-07
Jesus, you are such a neckbeard.
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
Whats wrong with being a neckbeard?
1 grungebot5000 2018-02-07
diabetes
1 menvaren 2018-02-07
And the bad beard.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
I am a transwoman with a bad beard and it is stunning and brave.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
SPEAK YOUR TRUTH
1 aqouta 2018-02-07
Wait till you hear about what they do in pizza shops.
1 pepperouchau 2018-02-07
Will this revelation have any effect on your tendency to write seriouspost dissertations on a daily basis in this sub?
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
Good joke.
1 Wraith_GraveSpell 2018-02-07
Still waiting on a dissertation on why that joke sucks.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
You should try voice dictation plus adderal and you'll be riding those dissertations in no time
1 better_bot 2018-02-07
To be fair, you said you'd never post here again either.
1 midairfistfight 2018-02-07
good bot
1 perrycohen 2018-02-07
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.9965% sure that better_bot is not a bot.
I am a Neural Network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with
!isbot <username>| Optout | Feedback: /r/SpamBotDetection | GitHub1 1slumber 2018-02-07
dirty jew
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
I mean, it is mostly a social construct
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
If something exists across every time period, every demographic, and every area on the planet, it's time to consider maybe it isn't a "social construct."
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Gender only really exists in a society tbhq my dude, and they’re slightly different (expectations of masculinity vs. femininity, etc) across every single one. If something exists solely in societies, constructed by them, in different words, maybe it’s a social construct. The term social construct kinda doesn’t mean anything, though, and is often used as a cop not to talk about shit. Weekdays are also social constructs
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
Let's say, in the jungle, 2 people come into being as children. One male, one female.
Would they take on similar gender roles, even if not exposed to society?
The likely answer is yes. My point is, gender is biological, it's innate. The idea of "gender" was created by evolution, not society.
1 Yiin 2018-02-07
One more step into full neo-nazi. You can do it!
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
I find the prefix Neo to make it sound bad, we should just drop that
1 Yiin 2018-02-07
I think it makes it sound more badass.
But this untue in reality, unfortunately.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
We all know humans divide labor extremely efficiently without a society. That’s why proto-humans had bank tellers and farmers, right?
Lol, all you’re mentioning are the effects of socialization. If the boy and girl grew up, and the people they knew told them girls should be hunters, the girl would be the one hunting. Gender and sex are different concepts, my dude.
You’re entire argument is circular as fuck, too. “Clearly, following my logic, the thing I think would happen would happen, it’s common knowledge” is what every convo I’ve had with you has looked like
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
They were pretty efficient at dividing labor, actually.
No, I'm mentioning innate biology.
And they'd be significantly worse at it than men were, because of biology. So that clearly wouldn't last long.
Take the animal kingdom, for example. Why do so many species have gender roles in the way we do, with males serving different roles than females? Was that society? No, it's instinct, it's biology.
They aren't really. That's what a certain unsavory group of people have started to claim, but no, the idea that "gender is different than sex" is a fairly recent concept.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Hint: without a society we don’t actually form specializations. Jobs are social constructs too.
Are you going to make any points or just circlejerk biological determinist stances on social issues? All your points amount to is a big fat “NO U”
1 fsdgfhk 2018-02-07
Men have 40% more upper body strength than women. They have ~10x the testosterone, which is causally linked with risk-taking, aggression, and physical strength. Hunting is dangerous. If a tribe loses a woman (or her uterus) to a hunting accident, that cuts into the group's ability to reproduce. But if it loses a man, another guy can get his wife pregnant- no loss to group reproductive capacity.
The idea that a literal billion years of different evolutionary pressures (because reproduction/pregnancy, is 100% sexually unequal, among other reasons) would end up with males and females behaviourally identical is just insane (and disproved by pretty much every facet of human behaviour- shit, by just about every facet of mammal behaviour, really).
99% of animals have significant behavioural differences between the sexes. Is it "cultural" that male lions leave the pride and live solo, while female lions stay with their family? Culture doesn't come from a vaccuum- it grew out of biology. In the modern word, sleeping at nighttime is "just a cultural norm", but it became a cultural norm because of pressures from biology and nature.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Lol biological determinism is a meme. Different cultures absolutely treat women and men differently, again, because it’s a social construct. Also people aren’t really comparable to animals in this sense.
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
Different to a degree, but I can't think off the top of my head of more than one society where woman were the leadership caste. Figureheads and inheritors, sure, but a group of senator equivalents that are all women?
1 TFWnoLTR 2018-02-07
Of course not. The differences in gender roles vary because of regional environmental factors. The core parts of the different roles does not change.
Men always tend to be strong, brave, and industrious. Women always tend to be nurturing, selective, and stable. Those are constants when it comes to secondary sex traits. The exceptions are just that: exceptions.
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
I can't tell if you're being smug and agreeing with me or very politely disagreeing with me
1 holy_black_on_a_popo 2018-02-07
Then trannies are a faking it. If there are differences, then they are full of shit.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Biological determinism is when you think biology is the only important factor. You don’t have to swing towards that much idpol there, people amab are generally bigger than people afab. I don’t think being afab makes you play with barbies or like makeup
1 fsdgfhk 2018-02-07
So, totes different to the "social construct" thing?
Yeah sure, 50% of the world's historical cultures had a female military, men as child rearers, and women doing the big hunting. Oh wait; no-one had all that, and 99.99999% of cultures had the total opposite. Must be an arbitrary co-incidence.
Yeah, we're above all that "biology", shit. And the fact that human sexual behaviour is 100% consistent with all mammal behaviour is another one of them arbitrary co-incidences.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
U stupid? Ain’t gotta have a matriarchy to treat women/men different as a society. Gender, in any meaningful sense is a social construct because of this.
Yes, we’re above “biology” when “biology” is unrelated animal factz.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-02-07
I sincerely hope you aren't actually this retarded.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Time and time again, people try to draw conclusions about human behavior in a group by doing experiments with animals.
It’s never accurate.
1 grungebot5000 2018-02-07
i didn't know they had gender in the paleolithic era
i mean fuck, how did the proterozoics even pull that off?
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Can you really argue from nature and be on the left? If you want to propose that we follow the natural order, that would just lead to the right crushing the left and the weak should fear the strong etc etc. I thought the entire point of the left was to rise above the cruelty of the dog eat dog world.
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
What makes you think the left is weak? Last time I checked, the right, nazis, got absolutely bent over by the commies.
In no small part because the Nazis greatly underestimated the slavs, viewed them as racially inferior. Surely, if the french flopped over, the racially inferior slavs would as well.
You can argue from nature on the left, as long as you're aware nature isn't everything. There are social factors as well.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Hold on I'm still trying to think of a response
You Cathy Neumann'ed me a little bit
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Maybe it was because Russia was so poor it had so many more people willing to be soldiers for the Communist forces. In America we have so many more prosperous people than what existed under a feudal system, so the right wing is bolstered by the middle class. Furthermore those countries that you listed were ethnically homogeneous so there was no difference in cognitive or fighting ability between the right and left, that isn't the case in the present scenario
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
No, the vast majority of the Russian population wasn't friendly to Stalin when the Germans invaded the soviet union. Stalin was, in fact, pretty hated by these people.
It was only after the Germans pillaged through the country murdering and raping people on the basis they were racially inferior that Stalin got his army.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Thanks for your post
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-02-07
can you predict what gender you will be tomorrow?
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Bruh I can’t remember what gender I ate for breakfast
1 fsdgfhk 2018-02-07
It's entirely a "social construct", because the term was designed specifically to be a social construct- in order to duck the fact that "the sexes" is a biological non-negotiable.
People yelling about "two genders" are morons; if you buy into "gender" you've already lost.
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
I don’t understand why you are so mad, friendo.
1 fsdgfhk 2018-02-07
Ima kill you
1 PM_ME_FREE_FOOD 2018-02-07
Duh, basically everything is a social construct, but throwing it out there like it's a valuable point in a discussion is like me walking into a university biology class and yelling "MY DAD FUCKED MY MOM"
1 Thestateyest 2018-02-07
Yeah but look how triggered these fuckin libs are about it
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Welcome home
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Did you flip as well and believe that gender is real and innate now? O_o
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
I was never a retard in the first place- of course gender is real
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
But then trans people are real. If there's a switch in the brain that selects between two sets of gender-determined behavior then it can select a wrong one.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Sure. And that is a mental illness. The “treatment” for that should not be cutting up your genitals, just like the treatment for schizophrenia should not be a lobotomy
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
I think that this should be up to the affected individuals to decide, if they are otherwise mentally sound. Especially so when there's no other effective treatment.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Sure; if you really want to mutilate yourself (or ingest hormones that may make other latent mental issues worse), and you’re lucid, that’s fine. But don’t expect me to humor your delusion. Don’t expect me to support laws that codify language that I MUST use (pronouns) or support your “right” to flip back and forth (in the case of gender fluid) at a fucking whim.
Where does this shit end?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
It's not a delusion if it's as biologically determined as your own gender, or, say, your dominant hand, though?
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
I do not believe that gender dysphoria is ANYWHERE near as pronounced as is currently expressed right now. I think there is a serious overdiagnosis, a lot of self diagnosis and a real fear on the part of health professionals to push back on this, which is why I think there’s a large amount of post trans regret.
As I have said dozens of times: if this treatment were effective, why is the Suicide rate so tragically high before and after treatment? Why?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
That very well might be, but has absolutely nothing to do with your previous argument. I think that you're making a mistake characteristic for the fair sex, where you think that proving that something is flawed in some respect also lends credence to claims that it's flawed in entirely unrelated ways. You're trying to reason with your heart, not with your pretty little head, honey ;)
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
I’m sorry, I don’t understand- can you please clarify for me what your saying? Maybe I misread (I’m also at work, so am distracted)
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Wait, are you saying that because they feel like and believe themselves to be some other sex, they ARE?
No, I reject that assumption.
Schizophrenic people might think the television is speaking directly to them, or their dog is from another dimension- that doesn’t make it true.
Trans people exist of course. They are real people suffering from a real mental illness. They are not “women trapped inside a man’s body” for example, save for EXTREMELY RARE edge cases like intersex birth.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
The thing I was saying in that particular comment was that you have a wrong way of arguing. You said that trans people are delusional, I asked what about left-handed people, and you parried with an assertion that in your opinion the majority of trans people are transtrenders or confused teenagers (which could very well be true to an extent, though I'm not comfortable pulling such opinions out of my ass because a priori I'd expect there to be about as many trans people as there are lesbian and gay people, so I can't say that there are "too many").
It's as if your arguments are soldiers and you send them to slay the evil Trans Agenda, and if they manage to do it then they are all victorious and right. That's not how things work.
As for the argument about delusions, I'm not in the mood to seriouspost, you can read these if you want (in order):
http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_noncentral_fallacy_the_worst_argument_in_the/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2as/diseased_thinking_dissolving_questions_about/
http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Being left handed is not a fundamental aspect of your identity, though if you were right-hand dominant but believed yourself to truly, deep down, a lefty, YES, I would say there's a certain amount of delusion in that.
trans people apparently make up less than 1% of the US population in 2016- that's as late as I could quickly google info, but given the amount of noise all over the internet and in courts, on campuses, etc, you'd expect that number to be much higher. Yes, that's anecdotal information, but it can't just be me imagining this, otherwise we wouldn't be seeing countries like Canada introducing bills like C-16 or North Carolina's bathroom bill.
What the fuck are you talking about?
I'm simply saying that I am not going to play this game. I'm not going to humor transpeople that they can magically become something THEY ARE NOT AND NEVER EVER WILL BE.
If I feel like it, I might look at these links you've provided, but if these things are some critical-theory gobbledegook, I reserve the right to roll my eyes. Again.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
No, you simply responded to an argument about that with a completely different argument, as if me agreeing with you on that (which I do, with reservations) should also make me agree with the argument above it. That's wrong, don't do that.
As for the original argument about transgenderism being a mental illness and what's supposed to follow from that, I can try to summarize the points of the posts I linked but not the arguments in favor of those points. This should only serve as a justification for why those posts are relevant. And also it's pretty much the opposite of critical-theory gobbledegook.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_noncentral_fallacy_the_worst_argument_in_the/
A lot of political arguments pull a fast one by saying that A belongs to the category C, therefore it's bad because of properties X, Y, Z that things in the category C usually have and we should treat it as we usually treat things in that category. Without actually having to argue that A in particular has these properties or should be dealt with using those approaches.
This applies to the way you play fast and loose with the category of mental illness.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2as/diseased_thinking_dissolving_questions_about/
A more detailed exploration of how we can think completely different things about some condition depending on whether we classify it as a disease or not, and what kind of a disease.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/
The main course, people tend to conflate categories and empirical facts (because our brains treat statements "this is a cat" and "this thing has four legs" similarly), but that's completely wrong. You have to justify your definition of a category based on its usefulness because it can't be justified with empirical facts in principle. Finding some neat way of determining it with empirical facts doesn't justify it and is searching under a streetlight
If you really are going to read that stuff I recommend not following links to previous expanded explanations on definitions, it's worse than TVTropes, and you can understand it perfectly well without that.
If you get any questions while reading, feel free to ask. If you read all that shit but still think that I don't have a point, feel free to ask, at least you'd understand the ideas I'm using.
1 WikiTextBot 2018-02-07
Streetlight effect
The streetlight effect is a type of observational bias that occurs when people are searching for something and look only where it is easiest. Another term for this is a drunkard's search.
Taken from an old joke about a drunkard who is searching for something he has lost, the parable is told several ways but typically includes the following details:
A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his keys and they both look under the streetlight together.
[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Fair enough; I should have paid closer attention to my responses and the points I was addressing.
I'll give these links a look over when I get home.
You did ask me this, though:
But that's the point- people don't struggle with a crisis of identity regarding their dominant hand. Nobody wakes up and genuinely believes that, although they have been right-hand dominant their entire lives, they are actually left-hand dominant, and they must seek some kind of treatment to change their physicality.
People who suffer from gender dysphoria aren't wrong or delusional to feel that anxiety, but it doesn't mean they actually are a different sex, and the method we're employing to treat that feeling seems to me to absolutely be delusional.
More to the point, how can we argue that gender and sex are totally separate, which a lot of people try to do, placing gender as a construct uniquely separated from the biological sex, and then suggest that the proper solution to an anxiety about internal gender identity or sexual identity (OR BOTH) is to adopt the very gender roles we've claimed were only social constructs?
Maybe I'm just too stupid to understand this logic?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Yeah, but then you have to explain why the minority of people who have their brains tell them that they should use their left hand as dominant is fundamentally different from the minority whose brains tell them that they shouldn't have a penis or boobs, and should perform the opposite sex gender roles.
And while we are at that, why lesbians (who are sexually attracted to female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should be attracted to) are totally real, but MTFs (who think of themselves as having female characteristics instead of what their "real gender" says they should have) are not real.
Like, to me both things are cases of some switch in the brain failing to select the proper set of biologically determined responses, probably when the brain was just forming.
And yet you totally believe that lesbians are real and are really attracted to women, but transsexuals are mentally ill in a bad way, if they are not making it up.
Apply your arguments against transsexualism to lesbians, they all fit. This should tell you that those arguments are shit.
We can't have this argument until you've read the SSC post about categories.
TERFs claimed that, not me and not you apparently.
Don't blame me for the second wave feminism rhetoric (gender roles suck) contradicting the third wave feminism rhetoric (female gender roles are awesome). That's on you, I never bought into either.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
People with brains wired to be left-hand dominant aren’t experiencing an anxiety telling them that something is wrong (something is there which shouldn’t be, or not there which should be). Delusion doesn’t enter into it until you believe that just by slipping on a dress, taking some pills, or getting surgery actually changes how your brain is wired, or what your chromosomal makeup is.
Even among people that have body integrity identity disorder, who believe their limbs are not their own, we don’t go suggesting they lop off their fucking hands.
Your sexual attraction and preference, while ingrained, doesn’t alter the reality of your sex. Lesbians experience anxiety about how those closest to them (or society at large, though that is thankfully diminishing) might accept their sexuality, but they’re not questioning whether or not they’re actually, really women or not.
Transgenderism isn’t tied to sexual preference, either. So you can have a male to female that previously preferred men, and STILL prefers other men. The delusion enters in, again, when we try to address that inner uncertainty of identity by suggesting that our biology itself can / should change. I think that’s wrong.
Right, and those are different things, with different consequences.
Transsexuals are real in the sense that they really feel like they’re not their biological sex, but that is, as you say, a switch in their brain. Every chromosome is exactly as their biology dictates.
It’s so hard to argue these things for me, because I feel like so much of the foundation is shifting around me depending on who I’m talking to. That’s .. incredibly frustrating, because I WANT to empathize, and I WANT to understand. I just fear that the way we’re going about “treating” these people is maybe not very helpful. That’s perhaps condescending, but I don’t mean it to be. I just keep coming back to the point of the suicide statistics and I can’t shake the feeling that this is wrong, AND I can’t / won’t bend reality to agree that a natural-born female is, in “reality”, actually a male. I disagree.
1 westofthetracks 2018-02-07
speak for yourself
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Oh they sure do when the society tells them to use their right hand like normal people.
The only reason you don't hear about them killing themselves often is because while the patriarchal society is anal as fuck about controlling reproduction and all related things very tightly, with the southpaws besides some misguided (progressive btw) attempts at social engineering rewriting the "blank slate" in the fifties, now they are let to be what they are. And much happier for that, of course.
Uh. My point is that it's how the brain is wired, if lesbians are wired to like feminine characteristics in sexual partners despite their chromosomal gender, then there should be people who are wired to like to express feminine characteristics despite their chromosomal gender.
The only reason you say that lesbians are real is because our vocabulary does have four words for gender + attraction to gender: men, women, lesbians, gays, but it doesn't have a bunch of extra words for gender self-identification on top of that.
Otherwise there's no reason to say that the gender attraction switch is real but the self-identification switch (as being attractive to a gender) is not. When a cishet woman does what cishet women do to be attractive to cishet men, you should expect some unfortunate mis-wired male to want to do the same things.
Really, go read http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/. Scott is one of the most empathetic people alive, and a very good writer. This should remove the contention you have about what it means to be "really a woman", I hope.
That's a completely different problem and my own approach is that you generally can't convince people that they are wrong about what they are doing with their lives, especially if your voice is drowned in a chorus of people who obviously do that because of the patriarchal imperatives (which includes yourself btw), so, like, our best bet is to keep silent and maybe say "told you so" about ten years later when a whole lot of doctors are sued out of their last shirt for malpractice. Even better if there are only a few such cases because actual doctors specializing in gender transition are not as insane as the media portrays them.
Think about it in Christian terms: are you sure that making arguments about it being probable that a lot of supposedly trans adolescents are really not, is good for your soul? I know this about myself, I reflected and noticed that making such arguments makes me feel good despite knowing for sure that it can only strengthen the resolve of the transtrender parents. For real, that's how people are, right? So I'm not making those because I genuinely care about consequences, about those poor mutilated children, I make them in the anticipation and imagination of the "I told you so" moment. That's bad for my soul.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Sure, ok. I'm with you. In the case of a MTF, that would a MAN who feels like a woman. That person is a man. They will always be a man, biologically, no matter what they do to themselves to alter their chemistry or their ...appendages.
The delusion I keep referring to is the concept that because i truly and deeply feel something, it actually changes the physical aspects, the physical category in which i actually exist.
like the black person i mentioned, who always felt they were white. or Rachael Dolezal (sp?) to reference a real instance of this. Just because Rachael felt like she was black, adorned the affectations, the culture, and even (probably honestly, if we want to be generous) the "soul" of a black woman, she is not, never was, and never will actually, in reality, be black.
The difference, and the teeth-grinding disconnect, is that we, all of us, roundly criticized her for her "transracial" stance, but somehow accept that, in the case of transgenderism, feelz do actually equal realz? Where is the consistency here?
Look above. We open the door here for a whole lot of other classifications based on vocabulary alone. This is EXACTLY why we now have something like 37 "accepted" pronouns? What the fuck?
People can look however they want to look. They can dress how they want, Mike can be Miranda, people can adopt whatever role they choose. I don't really care about that. What I care about is when we start suggesting that how people act or look somehow alters what is actual and true. What is reality with respect to biology and what I am supposed to believe or to say in order to suit a false reality.
Men are men. Women are women. You can be gay, straight, have three tits, a ponytail (surgically implanted, buttplug, or just your hair tied back), that doesn't matter to me. What matters is reality.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Argh, go read http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/, you are wrong about that on a level you don't even realize exists!
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
ok, you goddamned bully. i will read the fucking thing. give me a few hours, though. i'm getting drunk. actually, i want to take it seriously since you're so fucking INSISTENT, so give me a day. I'll email the link to myself so i won't forget (i already started skimming and read about the big fish).
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Another thought, and I didn't want it to get lost in an EDIT in my massive wall of text, but feel free to address it in one common response, if you wish:
A better comparison between MTF wouldn't be to compare to lesbians, but rather to a person born black that always felt they were white. Is transracialism "real"? Should we suggest they bleach their skin?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
No because there's no reason to expect a switch for race similar to the switches for gender attraction and gender self-identification.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Wait, what? where did you get the fucking schematic for the human brain? We're speaking theoretically and then all of the sudden, you pull the rug and suggest there IS NO SWITCH for race?
What ? Explain yourself.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
There's no reason for it to exist!
Cheers!
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Sure there is. Race is real. It doesn't add or detract value from a person (notwithstanding the valuation society has at one time or another placed upon it, which is where we get racism from), just like being left or right handed doesn't add or detract value, again notwithstanding the valuation society has at one time or another... etc etc.
So if we can have a switch for something as meaningless (intrinsically) as left or right handed, can't we have the same thing for race?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Nope. Really, it just doesn't make any sense. No human has ever been naturally selected based on the ability to dynamically switch between behaving as this or that race depending on which parents it was born to.
Lissn, have a good night full of tasty drinks, then read that thing about whales tomorrow, then we discuss it, OK?
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Ok. I'll do that.
Here's something I'm going to warn you about, however: if this article is suggesting, as I suspect it is, that philosophically, there are no first principles, no fundamental truths, and that everything is created by man, I reject that notion. I reject it.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
If we're going to suggest that there's a right and wrong choice while also discussing issues that have a lot to do with both intrinsic characteristics AND roles that are defined by society (and, with societal definition comes a hierarchy and valuation), why WOULDN'T "transracialism" be an actual thing, given that it would behoove certain races to choose others based on a value decision, or deeply felt empathy?
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
Holy shit, did that /r/sneerclub thing just bring ya'll in here? Why the fuck are you citing lesswrong of all places for your gender politics shit?
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
I was always here, I was here longer than you BWAHAHA
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
Are you an alt? Because you've been active for 3 months
1 RichardWolf 2018-02-07
Of coursh.
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
Botchlings? HAVE YOU RETURNED TO AID PIZZASHILL IN HIS HOUR OF NEET????
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
wait, what the fuck is "lesswrong"? it sounds extremely "progressive" (that is to say, I WANT TO HELP YOU BE LESS WRONG, SO LISTEN TO AND ADOPT EXACTLY THE PRESCRIBED GROUPTHINK)
1 Ardvarkeating101 2018-02-07
I was talking to Zergling
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
this is drama so i am unable to back down. forgive me
are you challenging me? RÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ
(I believe that is sufficiently multicultural).
1 captainpriapism 2018-02-07
by nature they arent though are they
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Throwing rocks in a glass house mate.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
by nature they have a deep and unfortunate psychological issue in which they feel out of place in their own body; their own identity. That's a shame. That's not a reason to re-define reality.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
Really mentally ill.
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
There is a switch, but it is in your pants.
1 xjapxn 2018-02-07
Mmmmmm shoot that shit right into my veins
Fuck I love transgender drama
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
If that's the case then why do all the best female video game players have penises? Perhaps it's because they still have brains that are functionally male due to testosterone exposure during childhood.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
There's a HUGE correlation between MTF transgenderism and autism (but also apparently that distribution is bimodal, that is, it has two humps, with only late-transitioning people also much likelier to be autistic). I don't want to speculate on why that it is so, but it explains your observation at least on the surface level.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Testosterone does drive the urge to compete, which seems to be a necessary part of winning competitions. Testosterone leading to the urge to compete isn't even controversial you could see it animals, ramming dominance behavior in goats, etc.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
So males who take testosterone blockers dominate predominantly male video game competitions (YAY SCARLETT!!!!111)?
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Did she start testosterone blockers before she developed an interest in Starcraft?
Honest question I have no idea
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Probably not, but that didn't stop her when she started using them. Look also at the speedrun community, which has lots of transsexuals, but look at the people who are not transsexuals, do you think that they compete for getting those world records because they are particularly high-T? LOL, they are not, so whatever effect testosterone has on competitiveness it's not the major factor in video game competitiveness, other factors are more important.
1 zergling_Lester 2018-02-07
Btw, this is not directly related, I just so wanted to share: https://www.alicemaz.com/writing/minecraft.html
A woman recounts her successful financial takeover of a ~1000 weekly average player Minecraft server (twice actually). Hilarious and informative. Highlight:
When statisticians say that we shouldn't judge human sub-populations by their statistical averages because intra-population spread dwarfs those differences, that's what they mean. Shine on you crazy diamonds of any gender, race, or whatever!
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Women tend to like Minecraft because it's not so competitive therefore doesn't rely on testosterone in order to be as pleasurable.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
PS we should repeal the 19th amendment
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
and you spent over an hour arguing that this was in any way comparable to lesbians?
did you really argue the edge case and try to apply it broadly? I mean, I know that some people "discover" they're gay, but ... really? you deign to conflate the two because it's convenient?
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
QUAD BRICKS
Get this patriot a coat!
1 lincoln1222 2018-02-07
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
WHAT TIMELINE IS THIS?
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-02-07
don't act like you're different
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
If you can't be engaged in rational debate that says something bad about you not anything positive
1 moudougou 2018-02-07
debate me irl retard
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
Pizzashill got redpilled?
Dafuq? What timeline is this?!?
1 CompetitiveLoiterer 2018-02-07
apparently he was always redpilled when regarding thots
1 japsock 2018-02-07
taking the thotpill doesn't require much in this day and age tbh
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
Wide, wide, wide, wide thots.
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
What the actual fuck is a thot
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
That
Ho
Over
There
1 IvankaTrumpIsMyWaifu 2018-02-07
ah
1 holy_black_on_a_popo 2018-02-07
Any ol' ho will do tbqh
1 ObsessedAussie 2018-02-07
Any hole will do
1 buttermyself 2018-02-07
Fuck off nazi
1 Boeing676 2018-02-07
Your'e starting to sound like Sargon.
1 LemonScore 2018-02-07
We're merging into the same person, Pizzashill - don't resist, just embrace it
1 Kelsig 2018-02-07
I'm not a democrat dumbass
1 Mort_DeRire 2018-02-07
He's right though, people like you scare people away from voting democrat. I'm not saying they aren't retarded for refusing to vote for the obviously most viable candidate due to the annoyance of your ilk's infantile pet causes (like banning meat, changing the word "mankind" to "peoplekind", and forcing all this gender narcissism into discourse 24/7), but I can see why it's doing the world harm by pushing people who just want to go about their day and not worry about fucking deadnaming somebody and having their lives ruined into the opposite pole.
Discourse is dead and it's the fault of three extremes: rightists, leftists, and cultural progressivists.
1 Chicup 2018-02-07
As someone on the right I absolve myself of any responsibility in this. The SJW's on the left gotta own this one.
1 Mort_DeRire 2018-02-07
If you have anything to do with "Obama is a Muslim socialist whose wife is a man"-level discourse, or "butter emails", or anything like that, you're part of the problem. If that's not you, fair enough.
1 Chicup 2018-02-07
Ascktually the emails are still in play its its becoming clear there was a movement in the FBI to cover it up. Anyone else doing what she did would be in jail for many years right now. Its not a "butter emails" its "endangering US security" and "illegal destruction". So if wanting to debate that makes me part of the problem so be it.
1 Kelsig 2018-02-07
You are in fact the problem then
1 Chicup 2018-02-07
Not for this but for my sexual degeneracy.
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
You're comparing old people chain emails to official corporate HR policy
1 MilerMilty 2018-02-07
muh white people
1 TFWnoLTR 2018-02-07
"People"
Cute
1 Redactor0 2018-02-07
If you refuse to accept any criticism of your candidate brazenly committing a felony, you're as much a part of the problem as Trump supporters.
1 Kelsig 2018-02-07
I guess I'm an extreme democrat for being a center right independent
1 Rith2 2018-02-07
Wtf I completely agree with pizzashill
1 SocialistEphebophile 2018-02-07
Welcome, brother.
1 IronedSandwich 2018-02-07
lol
1 t-r-s2 2018-02-07
Dude what's wrong with you
Why is your brain working all of a sudden
Did you come off a year-long PCP binge? Are you the world's best larper? You have confused me.
1 captainpriapism 2018-02-07
hey whats up and welcome to the club, prepare to be called a nazi and misinterpreted a bunch
1 -absolutego- 2018-02-07
Hillbots aren't actually neoliberals, they're just identity politicians who don't care about economic issues enough to go full Bernie.
1 TFWnoLTR 2018-02-07
Or they understand economics well enough to know Bernie is a retard who can't even math.
1 -absolutego- 2018-02-07
Given the incredibly woke opinions your average Hillary Stan has on social issues, I'm more of the mind that they don't care and not that they actually understand economics any more than identity politics.
1 ZeitgeistNow 2018-02-07
Finally you see the light
1 Thulean-Dragon 2018-02-07
So, who are you gonna vote for now?
Le what's Aleppo man or the healing crystals lady? Or are you gonna go all the way and gate crash a certain Grand Old Party?
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
Are you talking about /r/neoliberal or /r/drama?
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
r/drama obviously
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-02-07
Oh look! Another circlejerk about wage gap! Hahahaha
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
Hey Eddie boi, I'm not posting this to start a circlejerk about the wage gap. I posted this because it's drama
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-02-07
Hey Cummy boi, I'm talking about the circlejerk inside the linked thread, not here.
1 420CO 2018-02-07
Post emoji bussy or delete yourself.
1 ltedt 2018-02-07
🍑🍑🍑
1 buttermyself 2018-02-07
Dat gap doh
1 Ed_ButteredToast 2018-02-07
👌😩
1 Eternal_Mr_Bones 2018-02-07
Oh all the issues HRC brought up last cycle the pay gap truly was the stupidest. So it makes sense /r/neoliberal thinks that we need to install a mind control machine to make sure we can stop it from happening in the future.
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
Seriouspost: people suck at discussing the wage gap. On both sides.
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
You're
10077% correct1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-02-07
One side is correct and the other side is fucking retarded tho.
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
This is something both sides can agree.
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-02-07
The wage gap isn't real, unless you think women are retards for taking low paying jobs.
1 Neronoah 2018-02-07
People suck at discussing the wage gap. On both sides.
1 DickingBimbos247 2018-02-07
Women are helpless retarded toddlers, who can't even make rational career decisions, not to mention negotiate a fair wage for themselves.
But we should totally make them CEO of all the big companies.
1 worthlessworthl 2018-02-07
Actually, the truth is unironically in the middle.
SJWs: the wage gap is big and real
Anti-SJWs: the wage gap is fake
Rational centrists: the wage gap is real, but far smaller than claimed by the SJWs
1 KalebCS 2018-02-07
The irony here is that you think the discussion hasn't long shifted from "is the wage gape real" to "what are the main factors that cause the wage gap". Get with the times, grandpa.
1 I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2018-02-07
Women making poor life choices.
1 worthlessworthl 2018-02-07
To be clear, I'm saying discrimination partially explains the wage gap.
1 nmx179 2018-02-07
u/Tyhgujgt's posting was abominably bad. Is this usual for that forum?
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
Sometimes they are retarded, sometimes they make sense.I might be biased because I'm a socdem, but their Tony Blair fanboyism seems weird to me.
1 IntoTheNightSky 2018-02-07
Tony Blair governed the UK during probably the greatest period of economic growth in the post-war period, while working to create reasonable worker protections including the creation of a national minimum wage and an expansion of the National Health Service. He was pretty dang left on economic issues while still fostering competitive growth.
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
Hoh, til. Thanks!
1 cheeZetoastee 2018-02-07
I get the feeling nobody truly read what they were citing in that thread.
1 aqouta 2018-02-07
How do people reconcile that fact that most men(soyboys obviously an exception) are pumped full of testosterone and most women are pumped full of estrogen? These hormones are pretty influential on behavior. It would be like having half the population on amphetamines and half the population on pot and then claiming that the two populations are exactly the same and the only difference is that we need to better acomodate pot smokers.
Of course women have all the capability men have in general but you'd have to be insane to think the hormone that makes you want to dominate and behave aggressively isn't going to have some effect on work.
1 CummyBot-1999 2018-02-07
False equivalence tbqh
Your opinion is yucky, gross and problematic ewww
1 -absolutego- 2018-02-07
This is why the best response to people who believe all differences between gender are socially constructed is to ask how they square that with their (often-held) belief that hormone therapy is the best treatment for transpeople.
1 _narrows 2018-02-07
Thank you for speaking fucking reason.
1 freet0 2018-02-07
/u/Bernies_Lakehouse I thought neoliberalism was supposed to be scientific politics that put evidence and truth above ideology. Why are you just declaring something to be true based on your own baseless intuition?
Maybe you should consider reading some real scientific literature before you pretend to know what you're talking about.
1 kris_1313 2018-02-07
Dear Diary, today /u/pizzashill take some kind of redpill
1 pizzashill 2018-02-07
Ever since I stopped jerking off a week ago it's like I'm in a new reality.
1 RollBread 2018-02-07
Of all the hills to die on why a sub of slacktivists?