Warbler

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Is a boy more into sports because he has a penis or because his Dad liked sports and the other boys liked sports and they all looked down on him until he liked sports?

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

What about transgendered people? When they are young, aren’t they given the clothes and the toys of the gender everyone things they are and they sometimes reject them and prefer the toys and cloths of the other gender?

Often, yes.

Not sure what your point is, unless you’re just agreeing with me.

My point is that maybe there is something about what gender your brain is that affects what you like that don’t like. You said that maybe the only reason a boy likes sports is because his Dad did and how other boys would look down on him for not liking sports. If what you said is true, then a person born with the mind of girl but the body of a boy would still end up liking sports and the same would true of toys and clothes, yet we know it doesn’t work like that.

Newsflash: Some girls like football and Star Wars, some boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic. A person with the mind of a girl but the body of a boy absolutely can end up liking sports and “boy” toys and clothes. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

Newsflash: More boys than girls like football and Star Wars, more girls than boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic.

But that doesn’t give someone license to outright tell girls that they aren’t employed in certain jobs because get-over-it.

Is that what I was doing?

People can like what they do or dislike what they don’t. But that doesn’t excuse general meanness and bad attitude.

I agree.

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Is a boy more into sports because he has a penis or because his Dad liked sports and the other boys liked sports and they all looked down on him until he liked sports?

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

What about transgendered people? When they are young, aren’t they given the clothes and the toys of the gender everyone things they are and they sometimes reject them and prefer the toys and cloths of the other gender?

Often, yes.

Not sure what your point is, unless you’re just agreeing with me.

My point is that maybe there is something about what gender your brain is that affects what you like that don’t like. You said that maybe the only reason a boy likes sports is because his Dad did and how other boys would look down on him for not liking sports. If what you said is true, then a person born with the mind of girl but the body of a boy would still end up liking sports and the same would true of toys and clothes, yet we know it doesn’t work like that.

Newsflash: Some girls like football and Star Wars, some boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic. A person with the mind of a girl but the body of a boy absolutely can end up liking sports and “boy” toys and clothes. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

Newsflash: More boys than girls like football and Star Wars, more girls than boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic. A person with mind of girl but the body of a boy tends to reject the boy clothes and toys the person is given and instead favors the girl cloths and toys the same is also true of sports. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

Newsflash: Parents want their kids to conform to their preconceived stereotypes. If their kid is a boy, they’re more likely to try to get them to act like a boy. Kids see stereotypes of gender in media. They carry these throughout their life. Kids can also be bullied if they don’t like the “right” thing. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

I agree, but it doesn’t explain what someone with the body of a boy but the mind of a girl still ends up like girl clothes and toys despite the parents attempts to get them to conform to “preconceived stereotypes” and the stereotypes of gender in the media and the bullying.

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

some boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic.

as my avatar may indicate

I agree that there are some boys that like “My Little Pony Friendship is Magic”, but my point is the overwhelming majority of people that like “My Little Pony Friendship is Magic” are going to be girls.

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Is a boy more into sports because he has a penis or because his Dad liked sports and the other boys liked sports and they all looked down on him until he liked sports?

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

What about transgendered people? When they are young, aren’t they given the clothes and the toys of the gender everyone things they are and they sometimes reject them and prefer the toys and cloths of the other gender?

Often, yes.

Not sure what your point is, unless you’re just agreeing with me.

My point is that maybe there is something about what gender your brain is that affects what you like that don’t like. You said that maybe the only reason a boy likes sports is because his Dad did and how other boys would look down on him for not liking sports. If what you said is true, then a person born with the mind of girl but the body of a boy would still end up liking sports and the same would true of toys and clothes, yet we know it doesn’t work like that.

Newsflash: Some girls like football and Star Wars, some boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic. A person with the mind of a girl but the body of a boy absolutely can end up liking sports and “boy” toys and clothes. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

Newsflash: More boys than girls like football and Star Wars, more girls than boys like My Little Pony Friendship is Magic. A person with mind of girl but the body of a boy tends to reject the boy clothes and toys the person is given and instead favors the girl cloths and toys the same is also true of sports. You may think it doesn’t work like that but I guarantee you are wrong.

SilverWook said:

chyron8472 said:

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

Do you include me in your list of “self-righteous jerks”? You did say “I can’t engage with any of you.”.

I’m tired and irritable and not in the mood to put up with how liberals describe my views on abortion. You’re not part of that crowd. This thread is just not fun anymore, and this is why hardly post in it anymore.

Oh, shut up. We weren’t describing your views on abortion. We were discussing what labels regarding stance on abortion may (or may not) be more (or less) accurate in general, and our individual opinions of why they might or might not be accurate.

Now, instead of using liberal as an epithet and putting everyone of apparently opposing view in a box while complaining about how they put you in a box, why don’t you be an adult and actually try having an intelligent rational conversation.

Okay, let’s keep it civil in here. Last time we had an abortion debate, it didn’t end well for some.

Are you referring to the time when someone posted gross pics of aborted fetuses?

I think it would also help to remind people that there is a thread devoted solely to the abortion issue.

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

Instead of just guessing, how about we turn to science to answer the question? I think that was more or less the point of that 10 page letter that guy from Google wrote.

He didn’t cite any scientific studies in his letter.

true. But I still say instead of guessing we should turn to science to answer the question.

darth_ender said:

I’ll be back when I can discuss this topic without feeling too irritable.

I think that is a good idea. Believe me, you don’t want to say things due your irritableness that you’ll regret later, like I’ve been known to do.

Do you include me in your list of “self-righteous jerks”? You did say “I can’t engage with any of you.”.

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

Instead of just guessing, how about we turn to science to answer the question? I think that was more or less the point of that 10 page letter that guy from Google wrote.

TV’s Frink said:

I don’t know anyone who was aware of being the wrong gender at a young age, but I assume so.

I have seen news stories where it has happened. I think I remember seeing a story about it on 20/20 years ago.

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Is a boy more into sports because he has a penis or because his Dad liked sports and the other boys liked sports and they all looked down on him until he liked sports?

I’m guessing it’s the latter.

What about transgendered people? When they are young, aren’t they given the clothes and the toys of the gender everyone things they are and they sometimes reject them and prefer the toys and cloths of the other gender?

Often, yes.

Not sure what your point is, unless you’re just agreeing with me.

My point is that maybe there is something about what gender your brain is that affects what you like that don’t like. You said that maybe the only reason a boy likes sports is because his Dad did and how other boys would look down on him for not liking sports. If what you said is true, then a person born with the mind of girl but the body of a boy would still end up liking sports and the same would true of toys and clothes, yet we know it doesn’t work like that.

TV’s Frink said:

Is a boy more into sports because he has a penis or because his Dad liked sports and the other boys liked sports and they all looked down on him until he liked sports?

What about transgendered people? When they are young, aren’t they given the clothes and the toys of the gender everyone things they are and they sometimes reject them and prefer the toys and cloths of the other gender?

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

Any guy who writes a ten page misogynist manifesto is probably an all around cad. Doubt this was the only reason they fired him.

But yeah of course Google is dumb, they should be hiring more people with regressive ideas about gender, that definitely makes sense.

It is only your opinion that it was a misogynist manifesto and it is only your opinion that the he has regressive ideas about gender.

Imo, it makes sense that gender could affect one’s personality, and that could have an affect on career choices. Gender has an affect on what movies people like(there is a reason the term “chick-flick” exists) and whether or not they are sports fans, doesn’t it? Lets say you were at an American football stadium while a game was going on, if you had bet whether there were more men or women there, which way would you bet?

It is only your opinion that it is not a misogynist manifesto.

You do realize that “Imo” stands for In My Opinion, right?

And whether someone is a sports fan or not is not limited to nor primarily influenced by their gender.

But it can have an affect. Where do you think you’ll find more women, at a showing of Die Hard or a showing of the Sex in the City movie?

Yes, different people are predisposed to certain hobbies, jobs, and preferences based on things like gender, culture, upbringing, attitude, ambition, et al.

exactly.

But to pigeon-hole a subgroup of the culture and label them as what amounts to inferior is all kinds of weak sauce.

Is it labeling them inferior or merely saying they are different?

DominicCobb said:

Any guy who writes a ten page misogynist manifesto is probably an all around cad. Doubt this was the only reason they fired him.

But yeah of course Google is dumb, they should be hiring more people with regressive ideas about gender, that definitely makes sense.

It is only your opinion that it was a misogynist manifesto and it is only your opinion that the he has regressive ideas about gender.

Imo, it makes sense that gender could affect one’s personality, and that could have an affect on career choices. Gender has an affect on what movies people like(there is a reason the term “chick-flick” exists) and whether or not they are sports fans, doesn’t it? Lets say you were at an American football stadium while a game was going on, if you had bet whether there were more men or women there, which way would you bet?

Ryan McAvoy said:

yhwx said:

everybody likes choice

Not everybody. That’s the point isn’t it?

moviefreakedmind said:

I tend to say pro- and anti-abortion.

That doesn’t work. Being pro-choice doesn’t mean you are pro-abortion. “anti-abortion” or “anti-choice” are reasonably accurate though.

If only Pro-abortion-being-legal and anti-abortion-being-legal(or perhaps Pro-abortion-being-illegal and anti-abortion-being-illegal) were more catchy. Oh well.

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

the majority of hardcore Democrats will give it all a blanket, “abortion on demand without apology,” response.

I think this is a misconception. There are very few people at all that want to see a constant stream of abortions.

Maybe link to some stories of people demanding it?

Abortion on demand, meaning readily available, for anyone that wants it regardless of their reason.

I think that’s a tomayto/tomahto difference, though. If your goal is to reduce the number of abortions without reducing the availability of abortions, that position is effectively abortion on demand, although nobody who held that position would describe it as such. “Abortion on demand” only (badly) describes the desired legal landscape, it doesn’t describe the policy goal. Abortion on demand can lead to a significant reduction in the number of abortions, if coupled with increased access to other reproductive healthcare or related services, as the Obama administration more or less proved.

How does it badly describe the desired legal landscape? It sounds accurate to me.

Also, the majority of Americans are against the legalization of late term abortions according to Gallup polling and others. I’ve never once heard anyone provide a defense of late term abortion, excluding for health reasons, but pro-choicers still treat it like it’s a violation of human rights.

Well, speaking as someone who knows someone who had a late-term abortion, let me spell it out. Her fetuses had already died, the miscarriage was not happening for whatever reason, and she was in serious danger of getting blood poisoning from the dead bodies inside her. Had there been a late-term abortion ban in our state, she’d be dead along with her fetuses. Yes, aborting pregnancies where the fetus has already died is still abortion. The procedure is the same. As it was, even though we’re in a “liberal” state, she had to drive several hours to get this life-saving procedure, and nobody was allowed in the room with her while she had it (she was grieving AND in danger of death, and she had to go in alone) because once you’ve whittled down the options to the few who provide the service at all (considering how incredibly rare late-term abortions are, how the state can regulate them especially stringently, and how this increases the chances of getting firebombed/assassinated, you can see why this may be the case), you pretty much have to go with whatever bizarre rules they choose to have.

Regarding the earlier point, it’s much like drug legalization. Legalizing drugs doesn’t mean everyone gets drugs with no repercussions. Kids don’t. You can still get DUIs, etc. Similarly, the liberal position on abortions doesn’t mean a regulatory free-for-all. Reasonable controls can still exist, viability for example.

I think the laws should be different when comes aborting fetuses at are already dead, as opposed to fetuses that are still alive. I don’t think there needs to be any restrictions put on aborting dead fetuses.

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.

?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0aNxzF7MAk

oh.

TV’s Frink said:

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.

?

yhwx said:

This, however, is not reasonably debatable. Sexual harassment and regressive attitudes are big problems. There’s no reasonable debate to be had with me, and I never make a mistake on what is and is not debatable.

fixed.

DominicCobb said:

CatBus said:

DominicCobb said:

This isn’t a great way to put it, but I agree in some ways. Certain debates don’t deserve a common ground - somewhere in between isn’t always the best place to be. But I do believe it is important to engage with the other side so as to at least reach a point of understanding.

Well, opinions and debates have different qualities. Opinions are informed by facts, colored by your basic values/morality/outlook/etc. There’s a common modern refrain that everyone has a different opinion, and nobody needs to bother with facts because facts are opinions too. Which leads to bullshit debates and pointless yelling and name-calling because what else could it lead to.

But if you can agree to the same set of facts, and have an argument about how those facts can be interpreted based on personal values, that’s a debate worth having. But an opinion that throws facts out the window as step 1? Yeah, it really is trash not worth bothering with. For example, we shouldn’t really be debating whether or not there’s a global warming trend anymore – the only purpose that serves is to misinform people who might not have known the facts on that matter are long-settled. Engaging in trash debates spreads trash opinions, no matter which side you’re on.

Exactly. I was just think about how political debates should be about what the right solutions are for different problems, not about whether the problems exist in the first place.

sometimes it is not a matter of whether a problem exists, but what kind of problem it is.

yhwx said:

I’d like to see an actual scientific paper on the biological differences between men and women affect their interests. So far, I have seen none.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=scientific+paper+on+biological+differences+between+males+and+females.

https://search.yahoo.com/search?q=scientific+paper+on+biological+differences+between+males+and+females.

It has been awhile. But still I think this thread is worth having.

TV’s Frink said:

darthrush said:

yhwx said:

darthrush said:

NeverarGreat said:

yhwx said:

Yikes.

https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320

Sidenote: This is not to be anti-Google or pro-Apple or pro-/anti-anything. These sorts of ideas exist in many many companies in this country and I’m sure just as many abroad. I am 100% sure that Apple might have these problems in the same amount or maybe even worse. This happens to all corporations. It’s a systemic issue.

I found myself agreeing with one of the guy’s main arguments, which is that there is a specific difference in gender regarding whether a person has an interest in people as opposed to things. See this for why that is, and a fascinating look at just the sort of problem this guy has encountered at Google. In short, there is a huge difference in genders in this specific area, and the cause for this single difference may be more biological than cultural. This in turn could force a company to resort to ever more aggressive policing of microagressions and perceived sexism in an attempt to attract more women to an area of a company that realistically will never reach complete employment equality.

Now, the 10 page ‘screed’ has many other issues and I’m not defending them, but it seems like the response to the essay is as problematic as the essay itself. I’ve found that a good rule of thumb for anyone interested in a serious discussion online is to always assume the best of the person you’re debating, and always seek to de-escalate the conversation in order to avoid ad homninems and other petty attacks. I find it concerning that the comments for this airing of grievances do not attempt this sort of thing, but are exactly the type of virtue-signaling that conservatives hate about liberals.

And yes, I get the issue that a member of a privileged group is complaining that his privilege is under attack, and I have no interest in defending his privileged status. But he clearly thinks there’s a problem, and a whole lot of people who elected our current government feel the same way. At some point it becomes counterproductive to antagonize conservatives for losing the culture wars, and it becomes important to find some common ground. This isn’t a zero sum game.

I always appreciate efforts to find common ground with conservatives like myself and think that you eloquently explained why it is so important to try to promote fruitful discussion and civil discourse.

No need in finding common ground with people whose opinions are trash.

sigh

And this is why I don’t particularly like coming to the politics thread as much any more.

I don’t think liberal opinions are trash. I genuinely believe that you want to make the world a better place just the same as I do, and that we disagree on the best way to do that.

I used to feel that way, but the far right has hijacked the Republican party. If you want to discuss how much people should be taxed, ok. If you want to call gay people sinners who are going to hell so of course they shouldn’t be allowed to get married, no thanks.

please do remember there are a few people that while they would call homosexual acts sins, they don’t believe homosexuals automatically go to hell and they do believe homosexuals should be legally allowed to marry.

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

NeverarGreat said:
At some point it becomes counterproductive to antagonize conservatives for losing the culture wars, and it becomes important to find some common ground. This isn’t a zero sum game.

The so-called culture war is fought almost entirely online by the most despicable people on both sides.

Tell that to all the gay people who can now get married.

Or to the women who can now vote.

Or to the black people who can now go to white schools.

While I realize the first one only happened recently, the other two happened many years ago, way be online discussions were a a thing

I think you missed the point.

maybe.

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

NeverarGreat said:
At some point it becomes counterproductive to antagonize conservatives for losing the culture wars, and it becomes important to find some common ground. This isn’t a zero sum game.

The so-called culture war is fought almost entirely online by the most despicable people on both sides.

Tell that to all the gay people who can now get married.

Or to the women who can now vote.

Or to the black people who can now go to white schools.

While I realize the first one only happened recently, the other two happened many years ago, way before online discussions were a thing