Dawkins thread continued from >>16813862Rare to see a topic so popular on /sci/ so it'd be a shame to just let it die because it hit the bump limit.
>>16819590Ok here’s how I see it. Dawkins is right. I support trans rights but saying gender isn’t binary is political and not correct. For all of human history. In 99% of all human societies. Gender has been male and female and it’s not a social construct like race. Everyone used to agree there was Male and Female. Maybe intersex but that’s between X and Y chromosomes. Intersex doesn’t come about from a Z chromosome.That doesn’t mean I’m against trans right. Sure be yourself, but don’t change science.
>>16819590I wasn't in the previous thread but>What causes people to think sex isn’t binary?They're anarchists, simple as. First anarchists rebelled against the order of the absolute kings and the pope, when they replaced them with constitutional monarchies and heretical churches then they also rebelled against them and removed religion and monarchy altogether, then they rebelled against belief in God and whatever form of government they had reached, now they're rebelling against nature and reality itself, ultimately to end up rebelling against life by killing themselves.They don't actually believe what they're saying, they're rebelling against reality by telling you that something false is true, because they need it to be true to them, because nature and reality are wrong, so they must be corrected, until they conclude that life itself is wrong and must be corrected by death.
>>16819649I don't support "trans rights" as a distinct category of rights. What's the argument for why they're special?
>>16819649>Gender has been male and female and it’s not a social construct like race.It's a social construct precisely like race, retard.
>>16819682no it isn't
>>16819682Gender is just cultural foreplay—everything leading up to sex that isn't actually sex. It has no value to society beyond making sex easier and more natural. Gender divorced from sex isn't just dumb and pointless, it actually makes sex worse and less natural.
>>16819658define reality, glowie
>>16819879It's the realm where you'll never be a woman.
>>16819893So the same one where you'll never get a woman?
>>16819907almost, however there's a non-zero chance that he will get a woman and a 0% chance that trans people are women
I really, truly believe the transsexual movement is the enemy of science.
>>16819687Yes it is. Stop using words whose meaning you don't understand.
>>16819649>I support trans rightsThere is no right to act like a mentally ill clown in public and be accommodated, troon. You think you're being clever here but keep in mind that everything you post on "anonymous" boards is still being recorded and associated with your real child-raping troon identity. Sooner or later they will prosecute you. :^)
>>16819943So you're saying trans men (FtM) and trans women (MtF) are both men?
>>16820149>leftroon trying to logic
>>16820151I'm just pointing out the direct logical implication of what you yourself said. "Trans people" includes both people born male who want to be women and people born female who want to be men. You said neither are women.
>>16820153>leftroon mistakes me for another poster>leftroon still trying to logic
>>16820160The direct implication of what that other anon said, then.
>>16820170That's not the actual implication of what he wrote, it's just you trying to """logic""".
>>16820153
>>16820184What word did I make up? (And you know all words are made up, right?)
>>16820193>And you know all words are made up, right?Mask slips again.
>>16820149>>16820153>>16820170i obviously meant M>FIf you want to get into logic though, there's clear pragmatic logic linking 'trans people' not being a 'woman', i.e. which type of trans person isn't a woman? M>F. The implied premise is pretty obvious, you'd have to be playing dumb to not pick up on itand the reason I said 'trans people' is because I thought "0% chance that trans women are women" sounded a bit repetitive
>>16820193"trans">inb4 it's a latin root
>>16820195>The implied premise is pretty obvious, you'd have to be playing dumb to not pick up on itSo you're saying it's impossible for me to actually be dumb? Caught you again, chud.
>>16820215'dumb' is a social construct :)
>>16820223If construct construct construct construct, who construct construct construct?
>>16819590I’m the Dick to the Dawk to the D-I-C, I’m smarter than you, I got a science degree!
“Imagine going 200+ posts in about something even cavemen understood”Are we really going to do this again
>>16820254The trannies are the ones refusing to get it.
Dawkins is the JKR of /sci/
>>16820442He's a flaccid amoeba who says whatever the Overton window tells him to say.
Trans people exist and you can objectively show that their brains are different with CT scans. The problem isn't the existence of trans people the problem is that they can self-affirm their gender. Before it became trendy to transition, the data showed that less than 2 in 50 people who sought help for gender dysphoria were actually trans and the rest had other underlying issue and their dysphoria could be treated more effectively in a different way. Then self-affirmation became the talking point and the 48 out of 50 started mutilating themselves for no reason. As far as what Dawkins said it's true but a bit outdated. Gender truly isn't binary and is a spectrum but it's extremely skewed to either male or female and the ones who fall in the middle are rare. Gametes aren't the only way to determine gender. The problem is that there is no consensus on how gender is supposed to be defined. Trans activists say it's solely based on brain gender. Biologists say there are multiple criteria but the nuance is that 99% of population fits the bill on all of them. But what do you do for the 1%?It is simultaneously true that many fetishists hijacked the trans movement and that conservatives are vilifying trans people for political gain. The most annoying thing is that we had a proper system for this - the Other gender. People understood that this is simply an unfortunate thing that happens and let these people live in peace but that ended where parties from both ends of the political spectrum decided to weaponize it. It's a really complex issue and it's difficult to please everyone and come up with a definition of gender that won't upset anyone. Now that the problem is extremely politicized you can forget about anyone arguing about it in good faith. For most intents and purposes, yeah there are males and females. It's a fact. But there's a reason why we'd want to rigorously define this in accordance with modern biology. Don't dismiss the topic as stupid or solved science.
>>16820446>Gender truly isn't binary and is a spectrumGender has no value to humanity beyond acting as a dimorphic catalyst for reproductive sex. Whether that dimorphism can or can't be bled out on a gradient (it obviously can, as thousands of years of Western art will attest) doesn't matter at all. It's like saying someone is on the eagle spectrum because they have an aquiline nose or on the cat spectrum because they have a feline aloofness and playfulness. Have fun writing esoterica about it but it has no structural importance to society whatsoever.
>>16820442KEK based Dawkins
>>16820446>you can objectively show that their brains are different with CT scansno you can't, any papers that say so only passed peer review because of the reviewers' irrational subjective political biases
>>16820446>Trans people existWe must do everything in our power to fix that problem.
lol…
>>16820446>Trans people existProof?>you can objectively show that their brains are different with CT scansWhose brains are different? Different from what?
>>16820446>Gender truly isn't binary and is a spectrum"Gender" doesn't exist at all. Your post is full of claims about imaginary tranny woo that has never been shown to be real. Prove any of it is real before you start making claims about it.
>>16820134Come and take it. If you are correct, then I am a man, you take me down man to man.
>>16820732
>>16820732>>16820733Didn't take much to get you from regular mask slips all the way to showing your hand. :^) Any directly or indirectly pro-gender-ideology posts ITT can now be automatically attributed to your pic and thus dismissed. Either way, the evil nazifascists will soon be coming for you. What are you gonna do about it? Shoot Charlie Kirk?
>>16820752>Glowie seething because this thread isn't fondling his stupid feelings like the usual Fox news do
>>16820445I'd love to hear what he really thinks but he knows he can only push so far into politically incorrect territory before his shitty totalitarian government would arrest him.
>>16820733holy mother of all tranny incels. imagine posting this unironically
>>16820442complaining about censorship is something that only sissies who lack the power to censor do
>>16819590Why do you or anyone else care about this irrelevant boomer, still?>but muh tranniesOkay the same generation of supercilious atheist which publicly avowed homosexuals and dykes cries about the slippery slope they built, and now have to deal with. Reap what you sow.
>>16819649Race is real. I can show you a picture of a random African and a random Chinese, and you will be able to reliably tell me which is which. It's a 'social construct' in the same way that rocks are a 'social construct'. Humans constructed the definition that defines what materials do and don't count as rocks. This does not mean that rocks are imaginary.
>>16821285>I can show you a picture of a random African and a random Chinese, and you will be able to reliably tell me which is which.And if I show you a picture of a whale and one of zebra I bet you could easily tell me which one is a fish.
>>16820442This shit is hilarious. I pity anyone involved, although Dawkins probably enjoys it.
>>16821294Neither are fish, but an African person is an African person and a Chinese person is a Chinese person, and I'm not talking about geographic location or culture. You're being dishonest if you say you couldn't tell the difference with a high degree of accuracy.
>>16821393Gender is like sex. I don't get it.
>>16821393For some reason "Men are XY, women are XX" is no longer sufficient enough for the special snowflake crowd. We have to resort to the gamete argument because these people are retarded. I don't hate trannies, but "fuck trannies" suffices here.
>>16821694>"fuck trannies"please don't, think of your health
>>16821452Sex is when penis goes in vagina and baby comes out. Gender is the social norms that are supposed to help that happen. Like when a male bird of paradise does a bird dance. That's gender. Sex is after that when the sperm goes in the cloaca and makes an egg. Transing your gender is both antigender and antisex. A really narcissistic, asshole, art-qua-art thing to do, which is why it flourishes again and again throughout history as a coda to periods of discipline, prosperity, and boomering. Hope this helps.
>>16821450>Neither are fish, but an African person is an African person and a Chinese person is a Chinese personAnon... I think you got completely filtered by that post.
>>16821694>For some reason "Men are XY, women are XX" is no longer sufficient enough for the special snowflake crowd.Losers who are unwilling to accept that their fate is their own responsibility end up hating reality when things go badly for them. Avoiding blame is key when it comes to being irresponsible.
>>16821694So if someone has XY but is born with a vagina and had no idea they were XY until genetic testing, they're a man?
>>16822207What does this have to do with trans?
>>16822228It calls into question "XY = man, XX = woman".
>>16822237Swyer is a defect, nothing to do with male, female, or "trans."
the tranny meme peaked two years ago and is now on it's way out
>>16822245Okay, but are they men?
>>16822258They're asexual in the only proper usage of that word.
>>16822254Trans people existed before the current social wave and they'll exist after it, there are just fewer non-trans people pretending to be trans.
>>16822259How do you figure? They still belong to a sexually-reproducing species. (And what word would you use for "not experiencing sexual attraction" if not "asexual"?)
>>16822263They literally can't sex. No nads. ("not experiencing sexual attraction"? Frigid, e.g.)
>>16822266So a man who's lost his testes or a woman who's lost her ovaries are asexual?
>>16822268>grue and bleenGoogle this and apply the distinction to your question.
>>16819590Imagine if perfect transitioning was possible. Whenever, wherever. You are a man and you take a pill and turn into a female version of yourself. It is almost like magic. You lose every secondary male characteristic and gain female characteristics including womb and ovaries etc. Similarly a female may do the same and gain functional male genitalia and whatever comes with it.In short, this pill turns you from XY to XX and vice versa.Trans people would become obsolete. Thus yes, there are two sexes. It is very simple.If such a pill existed, these people who call themselves trans would find another word to either victimize themselves or to slap a unique label onto themselves. Like "I have transitioned 100 times, I am a centransitioner." It is all about that. They are just inventing new labels to feel important as they have no skill or anything of value to offer. I am not saying trans people don't have any value. I am saying those who don't are inventing these bullshit terminologies to feel special than the rest.
>>16822207It means their path of development has been compromised. They’re SUPPOSED to be XY with a penis, not a vagina.
>>16822297The fact they have that history would still shape their life experiences even if transition tech was much better.>>16822298Supposed by whom?
>>16822299Supposed by nature. Evolution. Fuck off cunt.
>>16822303Evolution is not a conscious being, it doesn't have intentions.
>>16822305Nature is an overly sophisticated blind idiot. This is true. But it still has a non-conscious goal/“goal” of propagation. Life is meant to continue. It fills in the gaps and makes do in accordance with the environment.
>>16822297>I am not saying trans people don't have any value.What's the value in being trans in and of itself? At best you might be a muse to someone else's artistic gaze but even that's a questionable valuation.
In the end, people (the trans crowd) just don’t like the words you use, and they insist you use the words THEY like/use, because they’re word Nazis. They hate your vocabulary.
>>16822305It doesn't have intentions in a conscious sense, but the environment absolutely does shape the course of evolution.
>>16819649>trans rightsNo such thing. Everyone has the same rights in an ideal society. There are no separate "classes" of rights (especially not for mentally ill men wearing dresses)The gay "rights" and trans "rights" and women's "rights" etc are all new rights they invent because they want new privileges. Such as...Gays have the same rights as everyone else: marry someone of the opposite sex. They don't get to invent a new right to marry someone of the same sex etc. Mentally ill troon men wearing dresses have the same rights as everyone else: use the bathroom that corresponds to your sex/gender (same thing) assigned at conception. They don't get to invent new rights to use whatever bathroom their perverted feelings desire. "Women's rights" gets more complicated because 100 years ago they actually didn't have the same rights as men. But that no longer applies. Anyone screeching "womens rights" today is just trying to invent privileges for women, like having their accusations in a courtroom or an HR mediation have more weight than a man's etc. >a social construct like raceAlso wrong. We can easily classify races with DNA and even bone structure. If a construct correlates with observable scientific phenomena to the point it has strong predictive power then it is not a social construct by definition. To steer my wall of text back to the topic: Dawkins of course acknowledges race is real pic related. He's still a faggot though and pretends it doesn't matter.
>>16822767>Everyone has the same rights in an ideal society.This is why you will always lose.
>>16822767>Gays have the same rights as everyone else: marry someone of the opposite sex. They don't get to invent a new right to marry someone of the same sex etc.Niggers have the same rights as everyone else: picking the cotton if you are black. They don't get to invent a new right, like not picking the cotton if you are black.
>>16822774Just because you can make an analogy doesn't mean you should.
>>16822776What's wrong with the analogy? The same rules apply to everyone. That's equality according to the tard's premise.
>>16822777There's more wrong than there is right. At least brainstorm until you think of one that doesn't confuse choice with force lol.
>>16822779>There's more wrong than thereName something wrong with it (besides your having eaten breakfast).
>>16822780Finish the first sentence and dive into the second.
>>16822783You mean the one that says you did eat breakfast? You haven't determined the relevance if this.
>>16822786How would you feel if you were wearing your reading glasses?
>>16822788I accept your concession. "The right to marry the opposite sex" in the context of faggots is just the lack of a right to marry the person you actually want to marry.
>>16822789>I accept your concession.Indian debate syntax.
>thread bumped>no new repliesA retard caught by the filter.
>>16822791>Indian reply syntax
>>16822767>Also wrong. We can easily classify races with DNA and even bone structureThey’re insane anon. They think because you can deconstruct the human body into its base parts its constructed form doesn’t exist. They will say phenotype or ethnicity (even the woke crowd doesn’t know what to use anymore) instead of race as though it makes any difference. It’s still a biological cluster of noticeable differences. They’re playing word games for all the reasons >>16822730 said. They don’t like the words you use. They demand everyone see gender as totally different and distinct from sex, and it’s the same with race and shit.
>>16822817If you start looking at the actual "biological clusters", you see they don't really map into muh races because what looks like a bunch of niggers to you can be quite distinct populations genetically.
Dawkins has been based his entire career.
>>16822822>If you start looking at the actual "biological clusters", you see they don't really map into muh racesI’m white. He’s black. Simple as.
>>16822822>what looks like a bunch of niggers to you can be quite distinct populations genetically.Are they all from Africa?
>>16822943That’s literally a noticeable biological cluster thobeit
>>16822946You looped and outed yourself as a nonsentient spambot. Moving on.
>>16822947It’s not a loop tho
>>16822822Your blending together argument is like saying “there are 10 year olds whose biological age is 15 and vice verse. There’s so much overlap that age is a social construct.” Yeah but is there any doubt about the average traits of different age groups? Imagine going around saying age is a social construct. It wouldn’t be taken seriously.Your own post is almost an admission that “race is a social construct” is at best a meaningless phrase and more realistically, a term of propaganda.The standard American racial categories give you biological information. If I say “a black guy walked by” you know something that translates to biological information.
>>16822952>blending together argumentNever happened. Obvious hallucination. Another spambot exposes itself.
>>16822957>a black person is like so radically different from another black person!Okay.
>>16823003>broken bot can't figure out if it's arguing against "X" or "not X"
>>16822822African populations have a lot of genetic diversity, yes, however the evolutionary pathway between black people has similarities because it's in Africa. Each race emerged due to time spent genetically drifting + location. You are right to point out this with Africans though on the same token, but it doesn't fully capture how races arose and hence why they exist
>>16823042I really don't care about your talking points. Given a large database of unclassified DNA samples from nominally distinct populations around the world (including all kinds of inbred nigger tribes), explain what data analysis you'd use to categorize them, so that only 4 (or however many races you think there are) distinct clusters would naturally emerge.Hard mode: without appealing to correlates whose choice is justified by pre-scientific racial theory to begin with.
>>16823063If you mean specifically a snapshot from right now: each distinct African group would be their own race, europeans their own, etc. There would be FAR more distinct clusters than 4That's a rough way to do it though, because a snapshot necessarily removes history from the analysis. If you went through a phylogenetic approach then you'd like separate black people (africans) from the group which split apart and became the rest of the races. So you'd have the geographically black race, geographically european race, etc. With the black race itself representing substantially more diversity than the rest of them
“It’s not race it’s ethnicity!”“It’s not ethnicity it’s phenotype!”“It’s not phenotype it’s.. it’s…”Liberals are so retarded lol
>>16823101>There would be FAR more distinct clusters than 4Ok, then.>a snapshot necessarily removes history from the analysisBut you don't need "history" to account for inborn differences; you just need the relevant genetic data. To claim otherwise, ironically, would be a genetic fallacy. "History" is relevant if you want to explain how humanity branched out into the existing clusters. What you're trying to do here is trace distinct lineages backwards in time until they (presumably) converge into a smaller number of branches, so that you could map your racial ideology onto that and claim it's science.In reality, all you need to justify the common man's plight against "racial genocide" is the common-sense, data-driven heuristic that masses of foreigners (especially from other continents) are a net negative for society. But that's just not good enough for crypto-globalists and their useful golems. They need to drive home the point that a Swede and a Frenchman are "racial brothers" who belong in the same pan-European society. i.e. unify all the operative branches of the global oligarchy on the given continent, to make it easier and more efficient for them to lord it over their goycattle.
Listen. Black people are clearly different from white people. That’s a race. I don’t care if you call it something else. You’re just unhappy with the word.
>>16823203>sociopolitical concept A is clearly different from sociopolitical concept BOk. But why lie about "biological clusters" etc.?
>i'm a woman trapped in a man's bodyhow could someone possibly know that? they've never been female and have no idea what it means or what its like to be female, so how could they possible know they're "a woman trapped in a man's body"?
>>16823220>biological clusters That’s a funny -or more accurate- way of saying race.
>>16823136Yeah you don't need history in a perfect scientific world where everything is solved for you, we don't have that. We have no idea how the genetics works at the level we're trying to parse here, and the relationship these genes have with speciation-style effects which races appear through. It's why white/black is strangely useful because (1) it is a visual indicator of geographic genetic lineage and (2) these indicators arose in the same environment - i.e. European genetic clusters didn't produce the African genetic markersIf you want to dance around with Africa having more genetic diversity, then ok that's a fair stance and you've picked a strong position, but without real knowledge of how genetics works at this level AND if you are ignoring other ways to obtain this information (phylogenetics) then your argument is stuck in an alleyway>In reality, all you need to justify the common man's plight against "racial genocide" is the common-sense, data-driven heuristic that masses of foreigners (especially from other continents) are a net negative for society. But that's just not good enough for crypto-globalists and their useful golems. They need to drive home the point that a Swede and a Frenchman are "racial brothers" who belong in the same pan-European society. i.e. unify all the operative branches of the global oligarchy on the given continent, to make it easier and more efficient for them to lord it over their goycattle.I agree with the subtext here that 'race' as a category is not useful in that particular topic, yes. Race science itself is quite crude and low resolution. It's frustrating however that people just deny it exists. Not only does it show up in data but it's in front of everyones eyes and people pretend its not true
Are they black? Are they white? Are they slanty eyed? They’re different races.
>>16822314You don't think the experience of suffering from transsexualism (which is, in at least some cases, a medical condition) could inspire art?
>>16822767>Mentally ill troon men wearing dresses have the same rights as everyone else: use the bathroom that corresponds to your sex/gender (same thing) assigned at conception.What exactly is your working definition of sex/gender for who gets to use which bathroom?
>>16822952In the American context it translates to biological information because most black people in America are part of a specific ethnic group formed out of the descendants of freedmen, most of whose ancestors are from West Africa. In a global context it translates to much less information.
>>16823254Because they have a strong and inalterable desire to be female, the suffering associated with which cannot be alleviated except by altering their body to be more like a female one so far as current medical technology allows. (And the tech is only going to get better.)
>>16823525There's no question that it can and has for thousands of years. It's the best (only) counterexample to my own blanket statement that being trans has no value per se. Presuming a value can be assigned to decadent art.
>>16823544Why must such art be decadent? A person can't help suffering from a medical condition.
>>16823549"Falling." It's the part of the cycle that breaks down social and moral conformity. You don't have to take it as a pejorative.
>>16822305>>16822309>>16822742All three of you are wrong and arrogant. To suppose you know more than nature is cope.
>>16823534someone who isn't female can't possibly know what its like to be female. women aren't just "a man with tits and a vagina"
>>16823623I didn't say they know what it's like to be female, I said they desperately want to be female and are incapable by nature of not doing so.
>>16823629they don't want to be female, how could they want something if they don't even know what it is?they want to be men with tits and a vagina, which is not what a woman is
>>16823532It still translates to “this person is from Africa”. The African race. I don’t care how many subgroups there are.
>>16823679But there's massive genetic diversity within Africa.
>>16823683And?
>>16823673Why do you assume they don't want to have a body that's as female as possible? They generally do, if you ask them.
>>16823528>What exactly is [the] working definition of sex/gender for who gets to use which bathroom?body utilizing the Y chromosome for the phenotype = use men's bathroom>>16823534>Because they have a strong and inalterable desire to be femaleWhich is a delusion by definition because a male cannot be a female. They should be locked up in a mental institution if they can't accept this. No different than a lunatic thinking he's a spaceship. >the suffering associated with which cannot be alleviated except by altering their body to be more like a female That is a lie. Trooning out doesn't fix their mental illness. The alleged "improvements" are not scientifically proven because there has never been a control group in any study, ever. It's snake oil. Show us a study where 100 men who want to wear dresses are chosen to have their dicks cut off via coin toss and show us which group does betterYou can't because it's pseudoscience and conducting a test like that would prove it thus it's never been done.
>>16823728>body utilizing the Y chromosome for the phenotypeWhat do you mean by "utilizing for the phenotype"?>Which is a delusion by definition because a male cannot be a female.We do not have the technology to change sexes perfectly, but what interventions we have are often able to significantly alleviate distress.>The alleged "improvements" are not scientifically proven because there has never been a control group in any study, ever. How exactly is that supposed to work? If you divided up a group of gender dysphoric natal males and gave half of them estrogen and half of them sugar pills, the latter half would notice within a few months that they weren't growing breasts.
>>16823683So fucking what?
>>16823741that one would be funnier if anyone under 50 years old had ever even looked in a real paper dictionary once in their entire lives
>>16823732>What do you mean by "utilizing for the phenotype"?Not gonna teach you a basic biology lessonIf you're too clueless to understand how the body utilizes the Y chromosome then don't pretend biology does not define gender>How exactly is that supposed to work? Not gonna teach you a basic science lessonIf you're too clueless to understand the most basic ideas of the scientific method then don't pretend you "understand" if some "treatment" is not a placebo>If you divided up a group of gender dysphoric natal males and gave half of them estrogen and half of them sugar pills, the latter half would notice within a few months that they weren't growing breastsIt obviously would not be a double blind study you idiot (I couldn't have made that more clear), and that's perfectly acceptable when proving something does NOT work, yet they still refuse to perform that kind of study. The fact you think it has to be a blind study proves you fundamentally don't understand this stuff.>Show us a study where 100 men who want to wear dresses are chosen to have their dicks cut off via coin toss and show us which group does better>You can't because it's pseudoscience and conducting a test like that would prove it thus it's never been doneAnd of course you FAILED to provide one as I said.Thanks for proving my point. No actual scientific study has ever been done to validate your delusional claims that troon lunatic men growing breasts or chopping off their dicks helps themhence your claim...>what interventions we have are often able to significantly alleviate distress....is unfounded snake oil pseudoscience. It's a lie. There is no evidence it helps them alleviate anything. It's a short term placebo effect at best.
>>16823108/thread
Shut. Up. Dawkins. You old man.
>>16819590There are all kind of gauges in the head. They tell you whether you're alive or dead, and whether you have 4 limbs or none, whether you're male or female. Like in a car, sometimes these gauges get stuck and you think you are dead when you are really alive:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotard%27s_syndromeSimilarly, people with gender dysphoria likely have a gauge in their head that tells them they are one sex when their body is the other:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6677266/So Gender Dysphoria is likely neurological not psychological.So I guess what (((they've))) done is create a new axis by separating gender from sex and saying that there are male women and female men. The sex (male/female) is based on the body and the gender (man/woman) is based on how a person neurologically perceives their gender. I'm not making a judgement on any of the above but I think we should treat people that have gender dysphoria with kindness as it must be absolutely horrible. I also don't believe arguments like "it doesn't happen anywhere else in the animal kingdom" are fair arguments because the human mind is far more complex.
>>16824623a woman you will never be
>>16824623>>16824719lol
>>16823594How can an unthinking process know anything?
There are only two sexes and to anyone who isn’t insane this extends to gender — and I don’t care if some exotic bing bong culture in the east invented a third or fourth one
>How science works in the west: establishment wants to prove an ideological point so they>issue a research grant for research that proves said point, 'scientist' provides study that>proves the point in exchange for money, and the establishment has a 'scientific study' that>proves they are right.How accurate is this assertion made in picrel thread that I found on a different imageboard?
Dawkins is right and faggots can only seethe
>>1682574641% of them can do more than that
>>16825437pretty accurateIt neglects to mention that most scientists know this scheme and work on their own material while 'proving' the government their narrative is correct.>when I say most scientists, i mean all that get funded.Those that don't understand fail to secure funding and are forced to move into industry where they become wage slaves
