Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? 21:14 - Jul 30 with 25374 views | The_Romford_Blue | And the hashtag itself is so wrong.
| |
| | |
on 09:57 - Jul 31 with 3569 views | _ |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 09:56 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | Nope. *Many other people* are doing that. Science does not support more than 2 genders. |
| | | |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:00 - Jul 31 with 3560 views | chicoazul |
I appreciate there are a lot of very vocal people both online and IRL who have a problem with this scientific fact and I think I understand why a significant number of them are wilfully ignoring it. There is no scientific basis for the claim there is more than 2 genders. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:09 - Jul 31 with 3542 views | slump |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:00 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | I appreciate there are a lot of very vocal people both online and IRL who have a problem with this scientific fact and I think I understand why a significant number of them are wilfully ignoring it. There is no scientific basis for the claim there is more than 2 genders. |
Ignoring social science then? | |
| |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:15 - Jul 31 with 3521 views | chicoazul |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:09 - Jul 31 by slump | Ignoring social science then? |
If you have a social scientist telling you one thing about gender and a Biologist telling you the other, do you need to think about who is right? [Post edited 31 Jul 2018 10:15]
| |
| |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:19 - Jul 31 with 3510 views | slump |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:15 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | If you have a social scientist telling you one thing about gender and a Biologist telling you the other, do you need to think about who is right? [Post edited 31 Jul 2018 10:15]
|
You are confused. Do you expect all men to have a heterosexual attraction to females? | |
| |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:20 - Jul 31 with 3505 views | chicoazul |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:19 - Jul 31 by slump | You are confused. Do you expect all men to have a heterosexual attraction to females? |
No. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:25 - Jul 31 with 3496 views | gordon |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:00 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | I appreciate there are a lot of very vocal people both online and IRL who have a problem with this scientific fact and I think I understand why a significant number of them are wilfully ignoring it. There is no scientific basis for the claim there is more than 2 genders. |
It certainly isn't a scientific fact (!), it's a theory, which may or may not be supported by the available evidence/facts. A scientific fact would be that water boils at 100 degrees c, for example. | | | |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:29 - Jul 31 with 3487 views | slump |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:20 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | No. |
So you accept that some people are homosexual, but not that some are transgender? | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:29 - Jul 31 with 3487 views | chicoazul |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:25 - Jul 31 by gordon | It certainly isn't a scientific fact (!), it's a theory, which may or may not be supported by the available evidence/facts. A scientific fact would be that water boils at 100 degrees c, for example. |
It is not a theory that there are only 2 genders. There is no science to support more than 2. | |
| |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:31 - Jul 31 with 3480 views | chicoazul |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:29 - Jul 31 by slump | So you accept that some people are homosexual, but not that some are transgender? |
No. I *accept* both. People are who they are. That does not mean there are more then 2 genders. You are doing that oh-so-common thing on here of arguing about things I havent said and dont believe. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:37 - Jul 31 with 3461 views | gordon |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:29 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | It is not a theory that there are only 2 genders. There is no science to support more than 2. |
It sounds like you don't understand the difference between hypotheses/theories and evidence/facts. I'm not saying there is 'science' to support more than two genders, I'm not making any comment about gender. But if it is the case that there are no facts/evidence to support there being more than two genders, then 'there are only two genders', would be the best current theory to explain the available evidence. | | | |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:39 - Jul 31 with 3454 views | slump |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:31 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | No. I *accept* both. People are who they are. That does not mean there are more then 2 genders. You are doing that oh-so-common thing on here of arguing about things I havent said and dont believe. |
No I haven't it was a question. You are doing that oh- so- common thing on here that is assuming. Science can't prove everything, | |
| |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:42 - Jul 31 with 3442 views | chicoazul |
(No subject) (n/t) on 10:39 - Jul 31 by slump | No I haven't it was a question. You are doing that oh- so- common thing on here that is assuming. Science can't prove everything, |
A question that has no relation to the subject at hand. You're right there but it has comfortably proven there are only 2 genders. Perhaps I am not making myself clear. I have no problem with grown men and women not being in the right bodies or wearing whatever they like or changing their sex as they see fit. That's up to them. That doesnt mean there are more than 2 genders. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:43 - Jul 31 with 3442 views | Superfrans |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:29 - Jul 31 by chicoazul | It is not a theory that there are only 2 genders. There is no science to support more than 2. |
You're confusing "sex" with "gender". Sex relates to biology - so there is currently only two sexes. But gender relates to social and cultural differences, rather than biological ones - so it is fluid, it is a spectrum. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:45 - Jul 31 with 3437 views | chicoazul |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:43 - Jul 31 by Superfrans | You're confusing "sex" with "gender". Sex relates to biology - so there is currently only two sexes. But gender relates to social and cultural differences, rather than biological ones - so it is fluid, it is a spectrum. |
Incorrect, gender is not a social construct, see; https://qz.com/1190996/scientific-research-shows-gender-is-not-just-a-social-con | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:53 - Jul 31 with 3419 views | Superfrans |
I'm sure you will dismiss this because it doesn't match your theory, but the Internet is a big place and we can all pull out links to back up our position. https://othersociologist.com/sociology-of-gender/ | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 10:55 - Jul 31 with 3408 views | chicoazul |
I won't dismiss it, I will read it later. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:00 - Jul 31 with 3402 views | Swansea_Blue |
Largely it is. That's actually why the term was coined in the first place - to specifically distinguish from the discussion of innate biological features. Many experts in the field would also argue that there are more than 2 genders. Even is you strip it down to the bare bones and use gender as a synonym of sex (which would be a wrong, restrictive use of the term), there has to be more than two genders as it is biologically possible to have more than 2 sexes (rare, but certainly possible). | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:31 - Jul 31 with 3358 views | MarinerisGod | Google Dr Richard day 1969 speech, and you will see exactly what this is. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:48 - Jul 31 with 3338 views | gordon |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:00 - Jul 31 by Swansea_Blue | Largely it is. That's actually why the term was coined in the first place - to specifically distinguish from the discussion of innate biological features. Many experts in the field would also argue that there are more than 2 genders. Even is you strip it down to the bare bones and use gender as a synonym of sex (which would be a wrong, restrictive use of the term), there has to be more than two genders as it is biologically possible to have more than 2 sexes (rare, but certainly possible). |
Indeed - if it were to be assumed that gender were simply derived from sex, then there would be a whole spectrum of possible intermediate genders (which could be lumped as a third, intersex, gender for convenience). Of course it isn't as simple as that, but a good example is the Fa'afafine of Samoa (a third gender in Samoan society) who are biologically distinct from males and females, have their own identity and role in society, so it's difficult to see on what basis it could be argued that they don't exist, and it certainly isn't a scientific fact that they don't exist. Also worth saying that lots of societies have had third genders as part of their culture for hundreds of years, so this has nothing to do ' identity politics' or whatever. | | | |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:51 - Jul 31 with 3331 views | Darth_Koont |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:31 - Jul 31 by MarinerisGod | Google Dr Richard day 1969 speech, and you will see exactly what this is. |
A nutjob conspiracy theory? | |
| |
on 12:28 - Jul 31 with 3508 views | _ |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:48 - Jul 31 by gordon | Indeed - if it were to be assumed that gender were simply derived from sex, then there would be a whole spectrum of possible intermediate genders (which could be lumped as a third, intersex, gender for convenience). Of course it isn't as simple as that, but a good example is the Fa'afafine of Samoa (a third gender in Samoan society) who are biologically distinct from males and females, have their own identity and role in society, so it's difficult to see on what basis it could be argued that they don't exist, and it certainly isn't a scientific fact that they don't exist. Also worth saying that lots of societies have had third genders as part of their culture for hundreds of years, so this has nothing to do ' identity politics' or whatever. |
| | | |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 12:45 - Jul 31 with 3513 views | gordon |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 22:55 - Jul 30 by jeera | It's not much of an experiment though is it? I mean, if you'd asked me or Dave across the street, (or any one of 30 million adults), of the potential outcome of this scenario I'd say it's pretty nailed on how it would pan out. No exactly a revelation tbf. |
Presumably, from watching the clip, the scientific hypothesis being investigated is something like 'the dominance of men in STEM roles and of women in 'caring' roles is a consequence of infant brain development which in turn is determined by the way adults encourage children of different sexes to play.' What's shown here is presumably a simplified version of some actual research, presented for TV. While it might be obvious to you and Dave and 30 million others, unfortunately you won't get your results published in Science or Nature if your paper says: 'as every idiot knows, male infants are encouraged to engage in play which develops spatial awareness, and female infants are encouraged to engage in play which develops emotional intelligence.' A surprisingly large amount of time in most scientific disciplines is spent investigating things which we already, sort of 'know', and this is a good example - to test the hypothesis above, you'd need to know an awful lot about the precise mechanisms by which infants end up engaged in different sorts of play. [Post edited 31 Jul 2018 12:46]
| | | |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 13:42 - Jul 31 with 3436 views | chicoazul |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 11:48 - Jul 31 by gordon | Indeed - if it were to be assumed that gender were simply derived from sex, then there would be a whole spectrum of possible intermediate genders (which could be lumped as a third, intersex, gender for convenience). Of course it isn't as simple as that, but a good example is the Fa'afafine of Samoa (a third gender in Samoan society) who are biologically distinct from males and females, have their own identity and role in society, so it's difficult to see on what basis it could be argued that they don't exist, and it certainly isn't a scientific fact that they don't exist. Also worth saying that lots of societies have had third genders as part of their culture for hundreds of years, so this has nothing to do ' identity politics' or whatever. |
The Samoan people you refer to are men. They are born biologically male. Therefore they belong to one of the 2 genders. People can of course choose to be whomever they like and the Samoans you reference choose to be "third gender" and of course, if I met one, I would call them whatever they wish to be called. There are distinct biological and neurological differences between men and women. They are distinct. There are 2 genders. | |
| |
Anybody else find this quite an uncomfortable watch? on 13:44 - Jul 31 with 3420 views | chicoazul |
| |
| |
| |