socialismisok

9 ms·

61.
by socialismisok 4y ago
I think you might be misunderstanding the way language is evolving here. Woman who can't give birth are still women. Women who cannot menstruate are still women. We are not removing anyone from the set of women. What we are saying is t
62.
by socialismisok 4y ago
I would say I strongly believe in the new definitions, have I been unreasonably upset in my responses? I think I've articulated my position and held it firmly, but at no point did I feel upset about people who disagreed. I don't b
63.
by socialismisok 4y ago
I didn't suggest that new was correct, I suggested new exists and we should acknowledge it. I don't use "yeet" as a word, and I find it silly. But nonetheless I'm aware some people do use it, and so it's in my
64.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Depends on your culture. The Diné people have four genders (feminine man, masculine man, feminine woman, masculine woman), hijra and fa'afafine are feminine male genders, in Inuit culture a sipiniq is someone who fulfills a man's
65.
by socialismisok 4y ago
I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can be so prescriptive about language. People use the words in the manner I describe. People use the words in the manner you describe. Both usages exist and are common, albeit in different areas.
66.
by socialismisok 4y ago
I believe your view is not keeping up with the times. I think as long as you acknowledge there are people who use language to disambiguate sex and gender, but you choose not to use that language, then you are just expressing your opinion. I
67.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Or 1.7%, linked from that paper. I don't think there's a consensus number, I picked something in the middle and approximated to a whole integer.
68.
by socialismisok 4y ago
That link says 0.13%, first off, and it only includes people who have visible genital differences. Many, many more people have different genetic configurations that can manifest well after birth. I'll admit I rounded up to one percent
69.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Atoms are binary in your model, every atom is hydrogen or helium, or an exception? I believe that we can be inclusive of those exceptions and treat them as unique things that are within the definition, rather than placing them outside the d
70.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Great question. Compare, say, Brad Pitt to Bill Gates. Or The Rock to Peewee Herman. There are differences between how closely those people fit the archetypal mold of "manly". I'm comfortable saying that Arnold Schwarzenegger
71.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Definitions change. Language isn't static. Science isn't static. Woman (and man) as terms are evolving in their use to mean "the roles we expect people to fill based on their sex". You might disagree with this evolution
72.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Assuming you are asking in good faith: Yes, I'm referring to several groups of people - trans men who were born women, intersex people who may have been assigned man or woman, non-binary/queer/agender people who were born wit
73.
by socialismisok 4y ago
80 million people is not a rounding error.
74.
by socialismisok 4y ago
99% of the universe is hydrogen or helium. I very much believe 1% is super important in the grand scheme of things. You are saying "80 million people is nothing". I disagree, I think 80 million people is a lot of people.
75.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Third gender people and intersex people have existed as long as humans have. Western cultures in the past couple decades have started acknowledging this, but the concept is not foreign to all countries. And the changes proposed are to inclu
76.
by socialismisok 4y ago
That's certainly one opinion. A common use of language these days separates the concept of manliness from the concept of maleness. Bill Gates is, for example, not particularly manly, but he's absolutely male. I find it useful to s
77.
by socialismisok 4y ago
It's designing after the whole, not the minority. If we can make a simple change to include everyone, not just a subset, why wouldn't we do that?
78.
by socialismisok 4y ago
They are people. Even in small numbers, they are important. Hell, nearly every atom in the universe is hydrogen and helium, does that make carbon, oxygen, iron, etc statistical outliers we shouldn't account for? Of course not. Our scie
79.
by socialismisok 4y ago
That covers approximately 99% of cases. But are you willing to write off the 1% of people that doesn't cover? I'd rather make sure that the language I use includes them where possible.
80.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Nobody is saying this woman isn't a woman or isn't allowed to identify as a woman. (Or mother.)
81.
by socialismisok 4y ago
The concept of "biological sex" is not even a binary, and it's treated differently in different parts of the world. So we haven't settled on definitions of biological sex outside as a species yet.
82.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Most folks agree on biological facts, and the science is fairly consistent at this point. There remains a group who refuses to accept that we've improved our understanding of the human condition over the past several decades, unfortuna
83.
by socialismisok 4y ago
It's honestly a bit shocking it's even made it to the front page.
84.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Right? She's a woman, which awesome... Women are cool. Some people who give birth aren't women. Those people are also cool, whether they are men, non binary, agender, or whatever else. Can we not just let people be who they are an
85.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Oysters seem difficult to replicate, and an unusual food to create. I had no idea anyone was working on this, and it's interesting to see such a positive result.
86.
by socialismisok 4y ago
What is a "negative tweet" or a "hate tweet"? Those two concepts sure seem ambiguous. Hate tweet, I suppose, is marginally easier to understand than a hate tweet, I guess... But what does this mean for like, the Babylon
87.
by socialismisok 4y ago
There goes the free speech absolutist. (FWIW, I've always believed that moderation is a good thing on Twitter, and that free speech absolutism is just not tenable on the platform.) It's been fascinating to watch this guy come in a
88.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Is that a lot? That seems like very little data.
89.
by socialismisok 4y ago
Bethesda better have some absolutely damning receipts to go after one dude like this. If it's standard, "we buried a clause in a contract" corporate concerns, Bethesda is going to come out looking like a bully and a villain
90.
by socialismisok 4y ago
This is objectively false. Did you mean to say under Stalinist systems?

More ›