If something is rare, you don’t have to account for it in your theory. For instance, 98% of baryonic matter in the visible universe is hydrogen or helium. Therefore we can say that there are only two elements, and that “carbon-based lifeforms” are simply confused.
Socially enforced boundaries are and well adhered to therefore they aren't in part socially constructed but rather rigid, and unambiguous.
-Guy who really likes the socially constructed boundaries and feels uncomfortable when they aren't strictly followed
(I know he's talking about "sex not gender" and probably also thinks those concepts are a kind of binary, but they aren't. Sex isn't binary, gender, a social construction related to sex even less so.)
@babadookspinoza intersex people are common enough that you don't get bio undergraduates to do karyotypes on themselves because you will have to provide counselling when some discover they aren't as simple as they thought. So if it's affecting bio lab design it must be reasonably important
@babadookspinoza nobody is denying that sex is bimodal and most people are cis men or women. That was never the debate. It was about acceptance of those few who are not and that they deserve not to be discriminated against, shut out, ridiculed, etc. Why do transphobes care so much?
@babadookspinoza Dawkins makes the crucial rhetorical flaw of not following the principle the charity; Instead of assuming the argument should first be considered regardless who it is who says it, he goes off the bat that the opponent can’t possibly know what he knows.
@babadookspinoza@korenchkin
There are >8.03 billion people, and only one Richard Dawkins.
That's about 0.000000012% - no idea how it compares to the twin towers (before or after 9/11?), but I think he can safely be ignored.
@babadookspinoza@korenchkin
Gonna tell my mom that she's imagining the molehills on her lawn, because the twin towers were (are?) way bigger so in comparison the molehills don't exist.. or something.
Add comment