3 ms·
I think what the poster is getting at is it's indistinguishable from discussion around gender. It's uncharitable to call that delusion or mental illness, but t
by aaron-lebo 8y ago
I think what the poster is getting at is it's indistinguishable from discussion around gender.
It's uncharitable to call that delusion or mental illness, but they're not really that different. That's what the "you are what you say you are" movement in society is building towards. (Though it's interesting how quickly Dolezal got shut down for saying they were a race they weren't).
Who is to say they aren't a robot?
- jordigh 8y agoIt's very distinguishable. We have a long history of transgender people, their medical support, and their role in society. We do not have a long history of artificial life claiming sentience. The two things are not the same, there is no slippery slope here, nobody is going to take us to prison or publicly shame us if we vehemently question that any person currently living is in a purely inorganic body.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- aaron-lebo 8y agoI had a more drawn out response but I realized that I was discussing things that I may not understand. Honest question: if this person was claiming they were of the robot gender and that they wanted inclusion, would you deny that they were of that gender? How do you define it? To those with less exposure, much of it seems subjective, the same way saying you're a "robot" (what does that mean to that person?) or you're a kin might. Replace "robot" with "gender*" and it's indistinguishable in that sense. People will just as vehemently argue with you about people's assertions of gender, but that doesn't seem useful anymore.
- bobwaycott 8y agoHow exactly is robot a gender? What exactly comprises the robot gender? What social and/or cultural differences distinguish the robot gender from other socially constructed and performative genders? Are we just making stuff up here now?