Trap discussion - Page 2
Register

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 76 of 76

Thread: Trap discussion

  1. ISO #51

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    And how do you separate "gender" from other forms of social behaviour?
    "The World Health Organization defines gender as the result of socially constructed ideas about the behavior, actions, and roles a particular sex performs." All this shit is described on Wikipedia under "Gender".

    There's plenty of information people can look up themselves, but it's usually pointless discussing it with certain groups of individuals because they just don't care.

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    Look what you have caused. Seems like everyone who posted is now confused about their own gender and are venting their frustration into opinions.

  2. ISO #52

  3. ISO #53
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocist View Post
    "The World Health Organization defines gender as the result of socially constructed ideas about the behavior, actions, and roles a particular sex performs." All this shit is described on Wikipedia under "Gender".

    There's plenty of information people can look up themselves, but it's usually pointless discussing it with certain groups of individuals because they just don't care.
    That's not a good definition, then. It literally says gender arises from sex? How does that help your case.

  4. ISO #54

  5. ISO #55

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    That's not a good definition, then. It literally says gender arises from sex? How does that help your case.
    I'm really confused about what you're taking issue with in that definition. Yes we're acknowledging gender is inextricably linked to sex and probably wouldn't exist without sex. Noone's disputing that (probably).

  6. ISO #56
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    I'm really confused about what you're taking issue with in that definition. Yes we're acknowledging gender is inextricably linked to sex and probably wouldn't exist without sex. Noone's disputing that (probably).
    My point is that then you cannot divorce the idea of gender from sex. Which runs in direct contradiction with the idea that gender is a social construct.

  7. ISO #57

  8. ISO #58

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    My point is that then you cannot divorce the idea of gender from sex. Which runs in direct contradiction with the idea that gender is a social construct.
    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    What do you mean by divorce? You've been talking in very vague terms for a while now.
    "separate"

    You cannot separate the idea of gender from sex.

    Hope I helped.

    *NINJA VANISH*


    Your friendly neighbourhood Asian.

  9. ISO #59

  10. ISO #60

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by yzb25 View Post
    haha thanks I think I got that. I wanna know what exactly he means by that tho. Just because they're connected, doesn't mean one must determine the other.
    I don't think you can debate an opinion which is exactly what both sides of that coin are.
    Intellectual growth comes from discussions, not arguments. If you are unwilling to change your position and hear the other persons side you are closed minded and wasting your time.
    If you can not clearly explain what the other sides reasoning is you can not disagree with their position because you do not understand it.

  11. ISO #61

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Helz View Post
    I don't think you can debate an opinion which is exactly what both sides of that coin are.
    And that is exactly your own opinion

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJack View Post
    Look what you have caused. Seems like everyone who posted is now confused about their own gender and are venting their frustration into opinions.

  12. ISO #62

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    Simply because he has an agenda and "alternative medicine" bullshit, it does not discount what he is saying as invalid. It's valid enough for people to recognize its validity (c.f., the white-grey matter distinction between females). It's a FACT that women are better at multi-tasking than men are - and that men are more predisposed to conditions the likes of autism or ADHD. And you can't argue those differences are cultural, because Autism is not a cultural development by any means. And then - you'd have to explain why those cultural differences between "men" and "women" even exist in the first place. And no, they weren't invented in the evil patriarchal west; similar sexual traits are found in all societies on the planet. So then clearly, any cultural differences must have originated before or around the time Homo sapiens migrated out of Africa, correct? And you'd have to argue WHY they existed - what, are women "weaker" than men? That doesn't mean they have to be more caring and compassionate, at all. Besides they only need to be more "caring" and compassionate towards their own child, and sometimes not even so. Does the fact that you have a pussy force you to realize that you need to be caring and compassionate in the 42,000 BC world? lol
    https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spr...different.html
    Men, on average, can more easily juggle items in working memory. They have superior visuospatial skills: They’re better at visualizing what happens when a complicated two- or three-dimensional shape is rotated in space, at correctly determining angles from the horizontal, at tracking moving objects and at aiming projectiles.

    In a study of 34 rhesus monkeys, for example, males strongly preferred toys with wheels over plush toys, whereas females found plush toys likable. It would be tough to argue that the monkeys’ parents bought them sex-typed toys or that simian society encourages its male offspring to play more with trucks. A much more recent study established that boys and girls 9 to 17 months old — an age when children show few if any signs of recognizing either their own or other children’s sex — nonetheless show marked differences in their preference for stereotypically male versus stereotypically female toys.

    I found something else online, on a site called "Stanford medicine"
    It looks like you just read the article until you found a part that agreed with what you were saying. Can you try reading the part that says "Why our brains differ". I feel like everything from that point on weighs pretty heavily against whatever you were trying to originally argue regarding transgender people.
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  13. ISO #63

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    Racial identity is not abstract.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispan..._United_States

    Because of the technical distinctions involved in defining "race" vs. "ethnicity," there is confusion among the general population about the designation of Hispanic identity. Currently, the United States Census Bureau defines six race categories:[39]

    • White or Caucasian
    • Black or African American
    • American Indian or Alaska Native
    • Asian
    • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
    • Some Other Race
    lolol come on man - https://www.census.gov/topics/popula...ace/about.html
    read the part "What is race?"
    Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?

  14. ISO #64

  15. ISO #65
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by aamirus View Post
    lolol come on man - https://www.census.gov/topics/popula...ace/about.html
    read the part "What is race?"
    Okay then - what do you mean by "Racial identity is abstract"? explain.

  16. ISO #66
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    It fails to conclusively separate gender from other forms of "categorization" behaviour can be divided into. It defines gender as "socially constructed ideas about the (stereotypical) behaviour of a certain sex"; if so then there can not be more than two genders, because there are only two sexes (yes there are also intersex people, but they typically present in a very identifiable way). It becomes difficult to "socially construct" another gender, because according to the definition gender refers strictly to the behaviour of a certain sex. And nobody's arguing that there are more than two sexes.

    If anything, it seems to me that the natural conclusion of that line of thought is that not all people have the same view of what it means to be a man or a woman. Which is true, and it's also extremely difficult to define either of them as a concrete class. But, this doesn't mean that there are more than two genders. It simply means some people have different views of what it means to be a man, or a woman, in a social context. Which looks sounds, but if you investigate it more closely you'll find that most people present themselves as very clearly male, in social context, or as very clearly female.

    When the sexes interact, the distinction tends to become a little blurrier; for instance, I read a story about a female sailor on some navy boat; she acted very masculine (cussed, talked about literally taking a shit, pissing, etc) and the guy who narrated that story said that it was impossible for them to act "masculine" with her, even with her doing that.

    FYI, I don't care for passive aggressive behaviour. I don't respond to that.
    Last edited by ; November 9th, 2018 at 03:19 AM.

  17. ISO #67

  18. ISO #68

  19. ISO #69
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Magoroth View Post
    Okay then - what do you mean by "Racial identity is abstract"? explain.
    The only thing abstract about that is that a person can identify as any race. That's just doublethink. There's nothing abstract about race.

    The site you linked mentions that within the general populace, the distinction between race and ethnicity is blurry and ill-defined. They don't use the same definition, even in spite of that disclaimer: it is strictly biological, as it establishes that "Hispanic" is not a race, but an ethnicity. There's absolutely nothing abstract in that statement.

    Merriam-Webster defines race as:
    : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species
    and this applies to humans as thus:
    : a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits
    -OR -
    : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock


    The second definition is more or less the old term for ethnicity. Which isn't the definition the site you linked used. I mean, sure, that's what they said race is, but that's not how they grouped it. The first definition is pretty much what they use.

    Racial affiliation is oftentimes a component of ethnic identity, not the other way around. Identifying as "Black" (whatever that means) simply means you consider yourself to be part of the Black American culture (if that even exists?), which I guess is possible, if such a thing as an overarching Black identity even exists.

    This honestly feels like an issue of semantics more than anything.

    I'm not disputing that culture and cultural affiliation is highly complex, but race is not abstract at all. Race is biologically/physiologically determined.
    Last edited by ; November 10th, 2018 at 02:47 AM.

  20. ISO #70

  21. ISO #71

  22. ISO #72

  23. ISO #73

  24. ISO #74

  25. ISO #75
    Ganelon
    Guest

    Re: Trap discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny View Post
    Someone's gonna eat you soon
    +1

  26. ISO #76

 

 

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •