Like all idiots, you think they're the same. 30 years ago they knew how to do it properly, not forced. Same with Birdcage etc etc.
They weren't making ESG movies back then dummy
There's some troon on twitter complaining about this film being transphobic 100%. The film is a comedy with them cross-dressing as the source of comedy, and it holds that they are still MEN despite cross-dressing.
The key idea of Queer Theory is that Gender is a social construction.
We know it's not as
1. Infants (pre-socialization) gravitate to different toys.
2. The Scandinavian data about gender differences maximizing the more egalitarian the society is (the opposite should be happening if the Queer Theorists were right)
We know it's not as
1. Infants (pre-socialization) gravitate to different toys.
2. The Scandinavian data about gender differences maximizing the more egalitarian the society is (the opposite should be happening if the Queer Theorists were right)
Queer Theory is a science denial movement, and you can debate them for hours and hours and hours and they won't budge. They're the Creationists of the left and use many of the same arguments.
Point being that "sex/gender" was seen as a fact, an objective truth. modern queer and feminist works operate that it's subjective.
Mostly, yes. They are considered a joke in the academy. They're not in on that joke.
Neither of those are gender-related inherently. Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct, i.e. gravitating towards X toy is Y. The toy and action, itself, are not meaningful.
[...]
Nope. Sex and gender are different. Sex being material and gender being metaphysical. This distinction clears up a lot of idiocy that even trans dumbasses fall for.
No they are extremely gender correlated. You misunderstood the post. They've been trying to memory-hole settled science for years. Social constructivist won't accept that they lost the debate decades ago. Sex is the strongest correlant for gender, the opposite of what the social constructivists argue
>2. The Scandinavian data about gender differences maximizing the more egalitarian the society is (the opposite should be happening if the Queer Theorists were right)
What's this?
> the more egalitarian the society is
They don't want that. They have their own definition of "equity" and "equality". You see how some people are seen as more beautiful than others? THAT is unequal discrimination because beauty is a social construction. They want everyone to be seen as perfectly equal in all ways - beauty, status, respect, etc. It's an inhuman unworkable ideology, and it just stems from their insecurities. They need robust therapy (incels too now that we're at it).
Neither of those are gender-related inherently. Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct, i.e. gravitating towards X toy is Y. The toy and action, itself, are not meaningful.
Sorry I misspoke there. I meant "sex differences maximizing". This, of course, means gender is grounded is sex, not socially
Nope. Sex and gender are different. Sex being material and gender being metaphysical. This distinction clears up a lot of idiocy that even trans dumbasses fall for.
Queer theory is 100% unfalsifiable. Come back when you have a testable hypothesis. You can sit back like a creationist and move goal-posts, play word games with definitions.
You know why Creationism was banned from high school science classes?
>but it's philosophy not science!
Which si what Christians say. They say that science can't deal with questions of "origins" and that these should be faith based.
Congraduations. Leftists deconstructed their ways into a dogmatic religion. At least the Christians had better food.
Why in the hell is sex, gender, and sexuality these big mystery questions you can never scientifically analyze?
>Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct,
Do you think minds are physical? If they are physical, they can be affected by the physical world, and our biology. And that affects our actions. It's just playing semantics and word games to sound smart.
This would only work if our minds were weird little engines connected to some magical external world and didn't connect to the world around us.
And you can scientifically define men and women as real things. This post-modernist philosophy as a start rejects that words can have meaning or definitions can be real. ie words point to other words, not reality. It's a complete rejection of sceince.
They will say it's a social construction, and given that nothing can ever be known for sure, it's up to individuals. It's part of a philosophy moving from objective to subjective.
>Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct,
Do you think minds are physical? If they are physical, they can be affected by the physical world, and our biology. And that affects our actions. It's just playing semantics and word games to sound smart.
This would only work if our minds were weird little engines connected to some magical external world and didn't connect to the world around us.
And you can scientifically define men and women as real things. This post-modernist philosophy as a start rejects that words can have meaning or definitions can be real. ie words point to other words, not reality. It's a complete rejection of sceince.
Nice. Now we're in agreement this is spooky mystical mumbo-jumbo.
Queer theory is 100% unfalsifiable. Come back when you have a testable hypothesis. You can sit back like a creationist and move goal-posts, play word games with definitions.
You know why Creationism was banned from high school science classes?
>but it's philosophy not science!
Which si what Christians say. They say that science can't deal with questions of "origins" and that these should be faith based.
Congraduations. Leftists deconstructed their ways into a dogmatic religion. At least the Christians had better food.
Why in the hell is sex, gender, and sexuality these big mystery questions you can never scientifically analyze?
You guys are dumb, this poster
Neither of those are gender-related inherently. Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct, i.e. gravitating towards X toy is Y. The toy and action, itself, are not meaningful.
[...]
Nope. Sex and gender are different. Sex being material and gender being metaphysical. This distinction clears up a lot of idiocy that even trans dumbasses fall for.
is using TERF logic, not troony logic. troonys believe gender is 100% real and that they have the same brains as girls which is why they believe what’s happening to them is the same thing that happens to intersex people. They’re wrong and mentally ill of course.
No, they jump between the two whenever it's convenient and are inconsistent. When they talk about gender in general it's a vague subjective thing that can never be defined. When they talk about themselves, it's 100% a fact.
The external world = subjective
The internal world = objective
It's flipping the objective/subjective dynamic society has had forever.
5 months ago
Anonymous
But that poster isn’t a troony and they aren’t defending trannies, you and everyone else are just being defensive. Gender is fake btw, just use your toy logic. If a boy child started playing with girl toys, that doesn’t make him a girl. The only thing that’s real is biological sex.
5 months ago
Anonymous
SCIENCE YOU GOOF
You know you can scientifically analyze things and counter just such a possibility? Studies aren't saying that a boy will never touch a girl's toy. Rather that it's showing that there's a very very strong long established and cross-cultural link to play styles and boys and grils. They then responded to critiques that it was just socializing, and then did studies on infants finding the same trend.
The parsimonious explanation is that this is based on biology. You are free to come up with a counter explanation. Not a rationalization, or a dismissal, but something that explains ALL the data in the most parsimonous way possible.
Leftist use either or binary thinking constantly. It's either 0% or 100%. They seem to have a mental block that can't accept something being overwhelmingly true, but there being exceptions to the true. In fact, scientists love to learn of the exceptions, so they try to study them. That's how scientists found out about hormone and gender disorders.
These intersex disorders are based on OBJECTIVE information, not subjective feelings.
I’m not disagreeing with you, so there’s no reason to come up with a counter argument. That’s the point I am making. You’re arguing with people who agree with you. I would say those are Sex-based differences and that gender is not real. Only trannies believe gender is objective and not subjective, that it’s separate from biological sex etc. They’re two different things.
5 months ago
Anonymous
In normal society "gender" was used to discuss biological "sex", and "sex" to refer to the act of procreation, likely because of squeamishness over sex. It's loopy Queer theorists who made a big deal that these are two completely different words - that gender refers to socially constructed culture around sex, and sex is the mere biology. That way they can play word games, and say "Sex is not gender".
Their goal is to minimize the role biology plays, but we KNOW that biology plays a huge huge role in our actions.
Playing into their games, and letting them define "gender" and "sex" this way is playing into their games.
5 months ago
Anonymous
lol you’re so uneducated there’s no point in continuing to talk with you. Drivers licenses have always had Sex: Male or Female on them. No one is squeamish about the word sex. You’ve outed yourself as 15 years old with this comment btw.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I'm talking when people like Judith Butler made this shit up in the 70's. They made a big deal about defining "Gender" and "sex" as these completely different things, when society typically used gender for men versus women, and "sex" was the act of sex. It's just how society and languages evolved.
5 months ago
Anonymous
NTA but sex and gender were synonymous up until about a decade ago, the only difference being that gender could sometime be used to describe inanimate objects. At no point in the past did it ever refer to your inward identity as defined by vague stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. That's why people say gender theory is post-modern insanity
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, and I agree with you, but to think that people didn’t use the word sex as in relation to Male and Female vs gender being Man and Woman is dumb. Animals aren’t men or women, they’re things like Stags and Does but their sex is still male or female. That’s what I’m talking about.
>gender is 100% real and that they have the same brains as girls
Trannies don't even believe in "gender dysphoria" anymore. There's a subset of trannies who attack those who claim to have it as "truscum". Basically they think anyone can transition for any reason
5 months ago
Anonymous
That's more logically consistent with Queer theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory
5 months ago
Anonymous
See
Queer theory is 100% unfalsifiable. Come back when you have a testable hypothesis. You can sit back like a creationist and move goal-posts, play word games with definitions.
You know why Creationism was banned from high school science classes?
>but it's philosophy not science!
Which si what Christians say. They say that science can't deal with questions of "origins" and that these should be faith based.
Congraduations. Leftists deconstructed their ways into a dogmatic religion. At least the Christians had better food.
Why in the hell is sex, gender, and sexuality these big mystery questions you can never scientifically analyze?
Gender is a grammatical category. The current gender hysteria could only develop in a degenerate, genderless culture such as the one fostered by English language. Literally a troon language
This was something you were meant to laugh at. >LOL it's Wesley Snipes and Patrick Swayze in drag. Hilarious.
Not even close to woke or what happens now.
>Two transvestite movies over a two year period vs cramming trannies into everything from kids shows to space adventure flicks
Yeah, k. Totally the same thing.
ah
is Zendaya in the back
kek
yes, on the left
P to the R to the incest
Like all idiots, you think they're the same. 30 years ago they knew how to do it properly, not forced. Same with Birdcage etc etc.
They weren't making ESG movies back then dummy
There's some troon on twitter complaining about this film being transphobic 100%. The film is a comedy with them cross-dressing as the source of comedy, and it holds that they are still MEN despite cross-dressing.
The key idea of Queer Theory is that Gender is a social construction.
We know it's not as
1. Infants (pre-socialization) gravitate to different toys.
2. The Scandinavian data about gender differences maximizing the more egalitarian the society is (the opposite should be happening if the Queer Theorists were right)
Sorry I misspoke there. I meant "sex differences maximizing". This, of course, means gender is grounded is sex, not socially
Queer Theory is a science denial movement, and you can debate them for hours and hours and hours and they won't budge. They're the Creationists of the left and use many of the same arguments.
Point being that "sex/gender" was seen as a fact, an objective truth. modern queer and feminist works operate that it's subjective.
>Queer Theory is a science denial movement,
Mostly, yes. They are considered a joke in the academy. They're not in on that joke.
No they are extremely gender correlated. You misunderstood the post. They've been trying to memory-hole settled science for years. Social constructivist won't accept that they lost the debate decades ago. Sex is the strongest correlant for gender, the opposite of what the social constructivists argue
>Mostly, yes. They are considered a joke in the academy. They're not in on that joke.
Correct, but the difference now is that they organized and became activists, and instituted their ideas in public policy and anti-harassment policies.
>2. The Scandinavian data about gender differences maximizing the more egalitarian the society is (the opposite should be happening if the Queer Theorists were right)
What's this?
> the more egalitarian the society is
They don't want that. They have their own definition of "equity" and "equality". You see how some people are seen as more beautiful than others? THAT is unequal discrimination because beauty is a social construction. They want everyone to be seen as perfectly equal in all ways - beauty, status, respect, etc. It's an inhuman unworkable ideology, and it just stems from their insecurities. They need robust therapy (incels too now that we're at it).
Neither of those are gender-related inherently. Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct, i.e. gravitating towards X toy is Y. The toy and action, itself, are not meaningful.
Nope. Sex and gender are different. Sex being material and gender being metaphysical. This distinction clears up a lot of idiocy that even trans dumbasses fall for.
Queer theory is 100% unfalsifiable. Come back when you have a testable hypothesis. You can sit back like a creationist and move goal-posts, play word games with definitions.
You know why Creationism was banned from high school science classes?
>but it's philosophy not science!
Which si what Christians say. They say that science can't deal with questions of "origins" and that these should be faith based.
Congraduations. Leftists deconstructed their ways into a dogmatic religion. At least the Christians had better food.
Why in the hell is sex, gender, and sexuality these big mystery questions you can never scientifically analyze?
>At least the Christians had better food.
?
>metaphysical
Nice. Now we're in agreement this is spooky mystical mumbo-jumbo.
>Attributing activities to a gender is the social construct,
Do you think minds are physical? If they are physical, they can be affected by the physical world, and our biology. And that affects our actions. It's just playing semantics and word games to sound smart.
This would only work if our minds were weird little engines connected to some magical external world and didn't connect to the world around us.
And you can scientifically define men and women as real things. This post-modernist philosophy as a start rejects that words can have meaning or definitions can be real. ie words point to other words, not reality. It's a complete rejection of sceince.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4330791/
What is a woman?
>What is a woman?
They will say it's a social construction, and given that nothing can ever be known for sure, it's up to individuals. It's part of a philosophy moving from objective to subjective.
You guys are dumb, this poster
is using TERF logic, not troony logic. troonys believe gender is 100% real and that they have the same brains as girls which is why they believe what’s happening to them is the same thing that happens to intersex people. They’re wrong and mentally ill of course.
No, they jump between the two whenever it's convenient and are inconsistent. When they talk about gender in general it's a vague subjective thing that can never be defined. When they talk about themselves, it's 100% a fact.
The external world = subjective
The internal world = objective
It's flipping the objective/subjective dynamic society has had forever.
But that poster isn’t a troony and they aren’t defending trannies, you and everyone else are just being defensive. Gender is fake btw, just use your toy logic. If a boy child started playing with girl toys, that doesn’t make him a girl. The only thing that’s real is biological sex.
SCIENCE YOU GOOF
You know you can scientifically analyze things and counter just such a possibility? Studies aren't saying that a boy will never touch a girl's toy. Rather that it's showing that there's a very very strong long established and cross-cultural link to play styles and boys and grils. They then responded to critiques that it was just socializing, and then did studies on infants finding the same trend.
The parsimonious explanation is that this is based on biology. You are free to come up with a counter explanation. Not a rationalization, or a dismissal, but something that explains ALL the data in the most parsimonous way possible.
Leftist use either or binary thinking constantly. It's either 0% or 100%. They seem to have a mental block that can't accept something being overwhelmingly true, but there being exceptions to the true. In fact, scientists love to learn of the exceptions, so they try to study them. That's how scientists found out about hormone and gender disorders.
These intersex disorders are based on OBJECTIVE information, not subjective feelings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome
I’m not disagreeing with you, so there’s no reason to come up with a counter argument. That’s the point I am making. You’re arguing with people who agree with you. I would say those are Sex-based differences and that gender is not real. Only trannies believe gender is objective and not subjective, that it’s separate from biological sex etc. They’re two different things.
In normal society "gender" was used to discuss biological "sex", and "sex" to refer to the act of procreation, likely because of squeamishness over sex. It's loopy Queer theorists who made a big deal that these are two completely different words - that gender refers to socially constructed culture around sex, and sex is the mere biology. That way they can play word games, and say "Sex is not gender".
Their goal is to minimize the role biology plays, but we KNOW that biology plays a huge huge role in our actions.
Playing into their games, and letting them define "gender" and "sex" this way is playing into their games.
lol you’re so uneducated there’s no point in continuing to talk with you. Drivers licenses have always had Sex: Male or Female on them. No one is squeamish about the word sex. You’ve outed yourself as 15 years old with this comment btw.
I'm talking when people like Judith Butler made this shit up in the 70's. They made a big deal about defining "Gender" and "sex" as these completely different things, when society typically used gender for men versus women, and "sex" was the act of sex. It's just how society and languages evolved.
NTA but sex and gender were synonymous up until about a decade ago, the only difference being that gender could sometime be used to describe inanimate objects. At no point in the past did it ever refer to your inward identity as defined by vague stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. That's why people say gender theory is post-modern insanity
Yes, and I agree with you, but to think that people didn’t use the word sex as in relation to Male and Female vs gender being Man and Woman is dumb. Animals aren’t men or women, they’re things like Stags and Does but their sex is still male or female. That’s what I’m talking about.
>gender is 100% real and that they have the same brains as girls
Trannies don't even believe in "gender dysphoria" anymore. There's a subset of trannies who attack those who claim to have it as "truscum". Basically they think anyone can transition for any reason
That's more logically consistent with Queer theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory
See
Gender is a grammatical category. The current gender hysteria could only develop in a degenerate, genderless culture such as the one fostered by English language. Literally a troon language
>couldn't be done tod- ACK
I like how morons think this shit just started in the last ten years and hasn't slowly been growing since the 60s
troonyface as comedy?
They weren't shoving it down your throat back then, so to speak.
I like how we were supposed to be shocked that swayze's face is on top of that.
That's Kurt Russel.
i always got them confused. only one being dead helped.
You can count the number of woke movies in the 80's and 90's on one hand.
This was something you were meant to laugh at.
>LOL it's Wesley Snipes and Patrick Swayze in drag. Hilarious.
Not even close to woke or what happens now.
hollywood humiliation ritual
you ever watch to wong fu?
they're clearly broken people and the crossdressing is played for laughs, not to be taken seriously by the audience
-ng fu, thanks for everything
>me when swayze looks passable
In the 90's movies like this weren't shoved in society face and only made for comedic purposes
Now it would watched by every child in elementary school
>cross dressing scene played for laughs
>troony earnestly posts it
0 self awareness
>Two transvestite movies over a two year period vs cramming trannies into everything from kids shows to space adventure flicks
Yeah, k. Totally the same thing.
Oh look, another dumb Zoomer that thinks "woke" existed in the 90s.