|
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. |
3rd August 2017, 02:37 AM | #321 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
If you want me to call you 'he' or 'she' or Dave or Boris or them or whatever, I'll do it. Really, it's no effort and it might be something you go home and cry about, I don't know.
I call people by their preferred title because I'm not a ****. I don't really worry about the penalty because anyone deliberately, repeatedly using a moniker that they have been asked not to is clearly a **** and a bully. Stuff them. There may be other issues but simply using someones preferred form of address costs, literally, nothing. Not using it might cause them a world of emotional hurt you just don't know about. Be nice. How difficult is that? |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
3rd August 2017, 02:39 AM | #322 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 03:22 AM | #324 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 03:25 AM | #325 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
I skipped the long, boring middle bit. Given that my comment was fairly well related to the OP and that I didn't quote any particular post so I wasn't actually responding to you or anyone else, I@m still sort of failing to see your point. I genuinely would like to know to which question you are referring. Ho hum. |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
3rd August 2017, 03:37 AM | #326 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Ugh. The question is whether a person is of the gender they claim to be by the simple fact of the claim itself. It is _not_ whether it's rude or preferable to go around on the street, pointing to random stragers while shouting their gender and, once one objects that you got it wrong, insist that they're insane and hope they kill themselves to get your gold star.
|
3rd August 2017, 03:38 AM | #327 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,983
|
|
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:18 AM | #328 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:20 AM | #329 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 04:31 AM | #330 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
The article about the OP clearly shows that men do have babies.
Quote:
Quote:
Then there is my favorite little girls who grow up to be men. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2...o-boys-aged-1/ Thank god they don't actually exist. |
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:32 AM | #331 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:33 AM | #332 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:40 AM | #334 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
You can't even explain your rigid perfect definition. It is all based on "those people are too small a group to matter in my definition". But in science small groups still matter to taxonomy. Which shows your contempt for actual science on these issues.
Able to fill the reproductive role of male or female is a great biological definition. It is clear and concise and everyone fits into it in some way as male, female or other. You don't need qualifications of "female but sterile because of X Y and Z" or any of that. If you are female it all fits then. |
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:43 AM | #335 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
|
|
3rd August 2017, 04:44 AM | #336 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 04:44 AM | #337 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
So then we have "A woman would then be any adult human who exhibits the gender attributes (especially gender identity) traditionally associated with the sex that produces egg cells"
To me, I don't see any difference between that and "A woman is someone who has gender attributes of a woman". To my way of thinking, a better definition would be "A woman is someone capable of creating egg cells, or of the same sex as someone who can." Now, we would have to define how we determine that someone is "of the same sex", but that's left as an exercise for the reader. Of course, my definition doesn't include transwomen or exclude transmen. Then we also have the "gender attributes" clause. So, one of the most common attributes of the sex that produces egg cells is that they produce egg cells. Apparently, that particular attribute isn't all that significant. So, someone can have a whole lot of attributes associated with men, or associated with women, but really, none of them matter except for the identity. And that is where we are today. Some might say, "Well, language doesn't work that way..." If we have fuzzy, indistinct, concepts of something, we can't expect our language to correct that for us. Our language will be fuzzy and indistinct. So, the concept of "woman" is pretty fuzzy and indistinct. It didn't use to be fuzzy and indistinct, and I'm not confident that its current fuzziness is a sign of progress. |
3rd August 2017, 04:46 AM | #338 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:47 AM | #339 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 04:48 AM | #340 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 04:49 AM | #341 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
You either have very little ability to understand concepts, or you are deliberately obtuse. Marriage is not a fuzzy word. You either define it as the union between a man and a woman, or between two consenting adults, or whatever. But whatever definition you use, it's pretty simple and easy to understand.
Not so simple with the definition of gender, or so we're told. Your analogy fails. |
3rd August 2017, 05:06 AM | #342 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
Personally, I feel that there are robust frameworks from the fields of psychology, sociology or philosophy we could use to define whether someone is a man.
But Argumemnon has stated a lack of need for those sources and identified the dictionary as the authoritative source of definition. Since the dictionary definition was broad, without any further source for clarification we're left with a pretty broad definition. I'm mostly arguing the logical consistency of Argumemnon's definitions. |
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:10 AM | #343 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
|
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:16 AM | #344 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 05:20 AM | #345 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,983
|
|
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:28 AM | #346 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
|
What a silly thread. Believing you are something does not make it true. A man is not biologically equipped to have a baby. Women have babies, duh.
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:31 AM | #347 |
... and your little dog too.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16,361
|
|
3rd August 2017, 05:37 AM | #348 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
I'm again sorry if I was unclear, but I'm afraid I'm not sure how to make it any clearer to you. Let me give it one more go
I do not subscribe personally to a belief that a single trait from those three categories is sufficient to define someone as a man. In a conversation with a specific poster I have presented that definition as the logical conclusion from his assertions about how gender ought to be defined. That thread, addressed to that poster is an attempt to show why I don't believe that poster's argument to be valid or sound. |
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:40 AM | #349 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
It also doesn't say that "Gender is the social expression of biological sex." So why do you insist on that meaning? You must be using some source outside of the dictionary for your definition, and since you have eschewed academic sources, where do you get your definition from?
|
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:41 AM | #350 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:45 AM | #351 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
And the article in the beginning clearly shows this is wrong. A man had a baby.
Lets take a simple gender test, Beards. If you grow a beard you are a man if you don't you are a woman. So a Sikh "woman" with a beard is a man. And a Native American who never needs to shave to keep a clean face is a woman no matter what their genitals same. Makes gender simple. |
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 05:45 AM | #352 |
... and your little dog too.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16,361
|
Transgender people in total are less than 1% of the adult population. Are you able to put a number on how many of them actually use any of those terms? As a function of population percentage, does that number round to something higher than zero?
I just want to know if I should join in sir drinks-a-lot's concern and start preparing flashcards to learn the list. |
3rd August 2017, 05:56 AM | #353 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 05:57 AM | #354 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,983
|
|
__________________
"The cure for everything is salt water - tears, sweat or the sea." Isak Dinesen |
|
3rd August 2017, 06:02 AM | #356 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,701
|
|
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON |
|
3rd August 2017, 06:04 AM | #357 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
3rd August 2017, 06:06 AM | #358 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
|
|
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
3rd August 2017, 06:07 AM | #359 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
3rd August 2017, 06:08 AM | #360 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|