ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 1st August 2020, 02:21 PM   #481
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
To which the obvious objection is that "it" strikes the ears as objectifying/dehumanizing, much like menstruator.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
Like I said, people need to get over it. If they are going to be offended anyway they might as well be offended by a word with no connotations. That way everyone can be offended by the same word. Keeps things simple. Everyone gets objectified/dehumanized in exactly the same way.

Anyway, this whole thread is really about using pronouns differently from their original intent. Change the meaning of it and a single word is sufficient for any situation.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2020, 02:30 PM   #482
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,876
The perfect trans pronouns!

Actually They could appropriate the royal We for Themselves. First person, second person, and third person as well. With towering initial capitals, but otherwise unchanged. The capitals would be enough to set them apart.

They would, in the process :

(a) Help put another nail in the concept of monarchy. An incidental, additional plus. (That odious institution, while no more than a harmless joke and a tourist attraction in Europe and the Anglosphere, still has some teeth left in other parts of the world. Teeth that sometimes do bite, and often glint menacingly in the background. I'm thinking Thailand, but I suppose some other places as well.)

(b) Combine Their cause with a sense of humor. Water down the stridency, without watering down Their cause.

(c) Gain ready/readier acceptibility for Their pronouns, and in the process Their cause. The gimmicky nature of this stunt would draw attention, most of it, I think, in sum, positive.

(d) They'd get easy early traction if They could get the actual royals to fall in. The Queen, although a sweet old lady, is unlikely to give in, IMO. Charles might be more amenable.

Last edited by Chanakya; 1st August 2020 at 02:35 PM.
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2020, 02:37 PM   #483
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.

For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2020, 02:42 PM   #484
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by Chanakya View Post
Actually They could appropriate the royal We for Themselves. First person, second person, and third person as well. With towering initial capitals, but otherwise unchanged. The capitals would be enough to set them apart.

They would, in the process :

(a) Help put another nail in the concept of monarchy. An incidental, additional plus. (That odious institution, while no more than a harmless joke and a tourist attraction in Europe and the Anglosphere, still has some teeth left in other parts of the world. Teeth that sometimes do bite, and often glint menacingly in the background. I'm thinking Thailand, but I suppose some other places as well.)

(b) Combine Their cause with a sense of humor. Water down the stridency, without watering down Their cause.

(c) Gain ready/readier acceptibility for Their pronouns, and in the process Their cause. The gimmicky nature of this stunt would draw attention, most of it, I think, in sum, positive.

(d) They'd get easy early traction if They could get the actual royals to fall in. The Queen, although a sweet old lady, is unlikely to give in, IMO. Charles might be more amenable.
I could go with that. Of course it doesn’t help with pronouns that other people use for them, although I suppose Majesty could work for first, second, and third person.

I sure hope Tragic Monkey isn’t following this thread.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2020, 03:42 PM   #485
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,399
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I sure hope Tragic Monkey isn’t following this thread.
Not any more. Some things get too silly even for me to bother with.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2020, 05:14 AM   #486
JihadJane
not a camel
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 74,414
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.

For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.
Would you be fine with your daughter taking testosterone?
__________________
empty void in space epic wasteland so dark you have no direction and die in sensory deprivation madness all your fault anyway jerk ~ Hlafordlaes
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2020, 06:23 AM   #487
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
Would you be fine with your daughter taking testosterone?
My only concern would be that she takes it safely. If it helps her to be comfortable with her identity and it is physically safe for her then yes, I would be fine with her taking prescribed doses under the supervision of a physician.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2020, 06:28 AM   #488
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Administrator
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 46,170
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post

Secondly, if you'd read even the first paragraph of the link, you'd see that "Mx" is actually used widely in the UK. It's used by the government, the majority of banks, and many other businesses and institutions, especially the biggest.
The Wikipedia page said ‘widely accepted’, which is not the same as ‘widely used’; interesting to learn of it, but I’ve never seen it before as far as I can recall.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2020, 07:00 AM   #489
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 45,465
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
The Wikipedia page said ‘widely accepted’, which is not the same as ‘widely used’; interesting to learn of it, but I’ve never seen it before as far as I can recall.
I'm not even sure "widely accepted" is quite accurate. How many people are involved in such a decision, at a major bank? Six or seven? A dozen or so, if it's something socially contentious? A few PR folks, a few HR folks, a lawyer, an executive or two to sign off on it... I doubt it went to a vote of the shareholders, let alone the 230,000 or so rank and file at the bank.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2020, 10:34 PM   #490
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,841
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Further to the above, different pronouns are used depending on whether the person being referenced is present or absent. When talking to a person who is present I tend to useyou almost exclusively. Nothing remotely offensive there. If I am discussing a person who is not present it makes absolutely no difference to them what pronoun I use as that person (it ) is completely unaware.
Right, they are unaware at that time. But if you misgender someone to another person, they are more likely to misgender that person as well. And sometimes you do refer to someone by their pronoun when they are present.

Originally Posted by Steve View Post
For clarity, in my world anybody can identify however they want. Makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to me. I have no reason to criticize or object to anyone’s self identity. My 18yo daughter is “testing the water” a little right now. I am fine with whatever she settles on. Regardless of what she settles on her particular pronoun(s) are very unlikely to be used by me in reference to her during any conversations with her, other than discussions specifically about her self-identity.
To be clear - that you have no problem with other people referring to you however they want has no effect on other people, who may well have a problem with that. And if your daughter does choose a pronoun, you would (in my opinion) be a bad dad not to use it.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:04 AM   #491
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Right, they are unaware at that time. But if you misgender someone to another person, they are more likely to misgender that person as well. And sometimes you do refer to someone by their pronoun when they are present.

To be clear - that you have no problem with other people referring to you however they want has no effect on other people, who may well have a problem with that. And if your daughter does choose a pronoun, you would (in my opinion) be a bad dad not to use it.
I really do not give two ***** about all the little things that may trigger the delicate sensibilities of the vast number of strangers on this planet. I do try to be respectful to all but there are limits beyond which it becomes impractical. I doubt that gender ID is much of an issue for over 99% of people. If A says something to B who repeats it to C and D happens to overhear it and becomes offended, that is D’s problem and no one else’s.

As I said upthread, it is a very usable third-person pronoun. The word applies equally to every person and shows no bias whatsoever. Saves the trouble of memorizing a long list of pronouns to apply to people you will never know. My concern for the gender ID of complete strangers ends at trying to find a neutral term that encompasses all equally. It fits the bill nicely.

Now, in the real, everyday trivial world I do not really use the word it to refer to a person. For example, if I am out with my wife and l happen to say “I like the hat he (or she) is wearing” the gender ID word that I use is actually the least important word in my statement. It saves me from the totally impractical action of approaching the person to determine their actual gender ID, and is trivially based on their general presentation/appearance that they have chosen for public display.
There are a certain very, very small number of people in my life who actually matter to me. You may be able to understand that my daughter is one of them. I have a tendency to treat those very few people with a lot more care and concern than I apply to the unwashed masses. Consider and try to understand this before you bring up your suggestion of “bad dad”.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:59 PM   #492
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 11,159
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Indeed, and even if you succeed in getting a neologism out there into the world and used by people, once it is out you are no longer an authority on how it gets used. Ask that guy who thinks his invention is pronounced "Jiff". Sorry, everyone else calls it "Gif".
Yeah, he's not going to win that one. It stands for "Graphical user interface" (IIRC?) That first G is a hard G. Obviously it's "Gif"
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:43 PM   #493
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 46,497
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Yeah, he's not going to win that one. It stands for "Graphical user interface" (IIRC?) That first G is a hard G. Obviously it's "Gif"
Ummm... that's GUI, not GIF. GIF is Graphical Interchange Format.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:14 PM   #494
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,841
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I really do not give two ***** about all the little things that may trigger the delicate sensibilities of the vast number of strangers on this planet. I do try to be respectful to all but there are limits beyond which it becomes impractical. I doubt that gender ID is much of an issue for over 99% of people. If A says something to B who repeats it to C and D happens to overhear it and becomes offended, that is D’s problem and no one else’s.
Appeal to unpopularity?

If I call you an ass and you get offended by that, it's not your problem for being offended, it's my problem for calling you an ass in the first place.

Originally Posted by Steve View Post
As I said upthread, it is a very usable third-person pronoun. The word applies equally to every person and shows no bias whatsoever. Saves the trouble of memorizing a long list of pronouns to apply to people you will never know. My concern for the gender ID of complete strangers ends at trying to find a neutral term that encompasses all equally. It fits the bill nicely.
"It" is dehumanising. "It" is what you call an inanimate object. That said, I'm sure that there'll be someone somewhere who will choose it as their pronoun, because humans be humans.

Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Now, in the real, everyday trivial world I do not really use the word it to refer to a person. For example, if I am out with my wife and l happen to say “I like the hat he (or she) is wearing” the gender ID word that I use is actually the least important word in my statement. It saves me from the totally impractical action of approaching the person to determine their actual gender ID, and is trivially based on their general presentation/appearance that they have chosen for public display.
And if that gender presentation is ambiguous? Why not say "I like the hat they are wearing."? The great thing about "they" is that it is universal. You don't have to establish who they are before using it. See? I just used it without establishing who I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Steve View Post
There are a certain very, very small number of people in my life who actually matter to me. You may be able to understand that my daughter is one of them. I have a tendency to treat those very few people with a lot more care and concern than I apply to the unwashed masses. Consider and try to understand this before you bring up your suggestion of “bad dad”.
What I'm reading here is "I don't care about people, only about me and mine". It strikes me as rather selfish. I mean look at your language here. Literally everybody on the planet apart from a "very, very small number of people" is unwashed masses. Your contempt is showing.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:15 PM   #495
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,841
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Ummm... that's GUI, not GIF. GIF is Graphical Interchange Format.
The argument is the same.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:21 PM   #496
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Appeal to unpopularity?

If I call you an ass and you get offended by that, it's not your problem for being offended, it's my problem for calling you an ass in the first place.

"It" is dehumanising. "It" is what you call an inanimate object. That said, I'm sure that there'll be someone somewhere who will choose it as their pronoun, because humans be humans.

And if that gender presentation is ambiguous? Why not say "I like the hat they are wearing."? The great thing about "they" is that it is universal. You don't have to establish who they are before using it. See? I just used it without establishing who I'm talking about.

What I'm reading here is "I don't care about people, only about me and mine". It strikes me as rather selfish. I mean look at your language here. Literally everybody on the planet apart from a "very, very small number of people" is unwashed masses. Your contempt is showing.
Well your reading is accurate and you have me pegged. Seriously. It is a fact that I am quite selfish. Most people in this world mean very little to me. I wish them no ill but I am very unlikely to go very far out of my way to accommodate them either. I have no contempt. I just plain don’t care. I also don’t care that some people may dislike that I am selfish. My selfishness, to a very large degree, is also irrelevant to most people because it is not apparent during my dealings with them. I have no trouble being pleasant and civil with strangers. It eases my dealings with them in the everyday world and I have no reason to make our encounters unpleasant. I seldom socialize because I find it boring. I have a very small number of friends and I like it that way.

Shrinks, both pro and amateur, would probably say I have some kind of personality disorder and may even hang a name on it. Makes no difference to me. I have survived 66 pleasant years on this planet. I have no enemies (that I am aware of) in spite of my outlook. Some few people, such as yourself, may come away from an encounter with me thinking I am an ass, or other similar disparaging descriptor. They are probably right and I would not waste my time arguing about it. If, on occasion, I happen to unwittingly offend some stranger because I have not wasted my life learning the intricacies of language peculiar to all the myriad small communities of people who think they deserve special treatment that is much more their problem, not mine. There is no reason my ignorance should matter to them. They have no more reason to care what I say than I have to care what they say.

I hope I am quite clear. People are just not as special as they like to think they are.

Now, addressing a couple of other points in your post;

In my experience, ambiguous gender presentation in my everyday world is so uncommon as to not exist. Yes, it exists in abundance in certain communities. Those communities and I never seem to encounter each other. I know from discussions with my daughter that if she ultimately chooses to identify as male she will present as male to the world at large by choosing to dress in clothing that is commonly identified as male clothing, which she does to a large degree already, and by choosing a “male” name. Nothing ambiguous there.

It is in no way restricted to inanimate objects. There is only one specific object (well actually 7 billion+) for which that pronoun is frowned upon by convention. That object is the human being. And the reason is that humans mistakenly think they are too special to be lumped in with everything else that exists.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:41 PM   #497
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Thinking after I posted the above, there is a much simpler way to explain my “selfish” approach to life.

Golden Rule.

I do not expect or require any strangers to make any special accommodations for me, and in return I do not see a need to make special accommodations for others. Being civil and fair in dealing with others is all that is really necessary.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:44 PM   #498
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,841
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Thinking after I posted the above, there is a much simpler way to explain my “selfish” approach to life.

Golden Rule.

I do not expect or require any strangers to make any special accommodations for me, and in return I do not see a need to make special accommodations for others. Being civil and fair in dealing with others is all that is really necessary.
But there are people who do require special accommodations from you. Do you park in the disabled parking spaces?
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:48 PM   #499
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,292
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
But there are people who do require special accommodations from you. Do you park in the disabled parking spaces?
Clever. You sure got me there. I suppose your point is that because you can find one exception that I have to agree that all exceptions are equally valid. I reject that.

And now it is midnight here and I am going to bed. I will see what else you come up with in the morning.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:59 PM   #500
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,841
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Clever. You sure got me there. I suppose your point is that because you can find one exception that I have to agree that all exceptions are equally valid. I reject that.

And now it is midnight here and I am going to bed. I will see what else you come up with in the morning.
Good night. Sleep well.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:58 PM   #501
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 27,592
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
It is in no way restricted to inanimate objects. There is only one specific object (well actually 7 billion+) for which that pronoun is frowned upon by convention. That object is the human being. And the reason is that humans mistakenly think they are too special to be lumped in with everything else that exists.
It is not a mistake, after all who or what is doing the lumping? Humans! The fact that society conventionally separates humans from rocks is all that you need to know that humans get special treatment.

Humans get to eat in fancy restaurants, go to the gym, make and watch movies, vote, get admitted to hospitals and argue with each other on internet forums. Of course these are "fictions" of a kind as objectively you have no more value than a rock, but you would be a fool to declare that you wanted to be treated like one. That's the Golden Rule.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.