3 ms·
Yes. I’ve also read other articles. The stance presented by the memo author does not represent “broad” scientific consensus, it represents a pseudo-scientific b
by halostatue 9y ago
Yes. I’ve also read other articles. The stance presented by the memo author does not represent “broad” scientific consensus, it represents a pseudo-scientific basis for continued discrimination. The same thing was tried back in the 1800s to explain why certain humans should be enslaved to others.
- mvdwoord 9y agoHow interesting, I have read other articles too. I am unqualified to make any authoritative claims on this subject (and many others), but people who seem to be just that appear to disagree with you. Most arguments against the manifesto (sic) I have seen, seem to be either ad hominem or claiming some form of "discrimination" .. as in prejudice. In the light of the current discussion around gender, mostly in the US, I am just not convinced. And it seems that many people who actually are qualified agree (no, a group of self referencing "gender studies" professors does not convince). Anyway, it's coming up 5AM here and I will not bother you further with my slave-owner-descendant misconceptions.
- madez 9y agoNo, you did not read the article. You claim all scientists in the article were male scientists, while in fact one is female.
- snth 9y agoThen please link to some of these articles. You are doing what you are complaining about: merely asserting.