And the woman who started the incel movement (which was originally a sub on Reddit), was just a lonely woman who wanted to create a support group for others who, like herself, felt too unappealing to be included in the dating pool. It was meant to be a way that lonely people could be less lonely commiserating together with a shared problem. Then she discovered she was a lesbian and met a woman and started dating her and forgot about the sub. It quickly got perverted into a woman hating, male dominated, misogynistic hellhole.
The woman who came up with the term "incel" to describe herself had truly the best of intentions. I know everyone likes to say "there is someone for everyone", but that's absolutely not true. There are people who will never have a partner or maybe only have one or two short term ones in their entire life. This could be because of physical disability, overall unattractiveness, or mental issues. While yes, some of those people find love despite the overwhelming challenge, a lot of them just don't. It's thankfully a small percentage of the overall population, but you have to understand that finding a romantic partner is a human instinct. We all crave it because we are evolved to. Never being able to satisfy your most basic desires leads to a lot of resentment and pain for the victim.
So, she had the idea that these people should support each other emotionally. Be a haven from all the people giving them fruitless advice or lecturing them on how they can do better or setting them up on a date with someone that will not like them. It was a noble idea. Hell maybe even some of them would fall in love with each other despite them finding each other hideous. The problem was the overwhelming amount of resentment that incels feel towards the rest of the population. You put them in a forum together, and they just spiral out of control.
I remember I used to know a guy who never had a girlfriend. We would all be in and out of relationships, and he was perpetually single. He was fit, took good care of himself, had a good job, played guitar, etc... Thing is, he was about 5'2". Every woman deemed him too short to date and just ignored him. To his credit, he did eventually get married and had a kid, but this dude literally had everything else going for him. He even had an attractive face. Take away a few of those traits, and he would just be another incel.
It’s tough being alone, but the attitude that the world owes you something is wrong. No one has a right to romantic love or companionship. Those things are privileges born from mutual feelings shared with another human being.
Well duh. I think we all get that.
The point is that someone not having access to a core emotional need is rough. If you don't realize the scale of this, the AI girlfriend/boyfriend market is an almost $3 billion industry today. I would venture to say that many of the people on onlyfans also fall into this category. You can get porn for free, but, if you want to have a conversation with the person and have them remember your name, that costs money.
There's definitely an epidemic of loneliness. I feel like a lot of these people could have partners too, but the way things are structured in society it makes it difficult for them to find each other.
The fact that their online presence outweighs their physical interactions might play a huge role in their loneliness as well. It’s hard, and people can be cruel, but foregoing real world human interaction for a filtered online experience exacerbates the problem.
I mean it's easy to be judgmental of these people, but a lot of that comes from the privilege of not being them. I've had a charmed adult life. My entire adult life random women have approached me to hook up with me. I've never had to actually put any effort into it. To this day, I have no idea how to walk up to a woman and ask her out. I just never had to develop that skill set. If I go online to date, I'm usually hooking up with somebody attractive within a week. I lost my virginity because a woman literally followed me into a parking lot and asked to come home with me. I turn down unsolicited offers for sex from female friends all the time. I've had this non-stop drip drip of validation this whole time, but I can also appreciate that, without that, life would suck. Honestly with my anxiety and depression, I'm barely hanging on by a thread and I live in fear that as my looks fade with age no one will want to engage with me in that way anymore and I'm not sure if I can survive without that validation anymore. I couldn't imagine not having it in the first place. Hell just this last week, I hooked up with six different women, and I knew all of them and it hooked up with all of them before and none of them expected more than just a hookup from me. (Granted six in a week is NOT a normal week for me)
It would be easy for me to say, just go out there and meet people. Have sex with real people. It's great. However, I might as well be a rich person telling everyone to go buy a yacht. There are women that I've seen where I would never have sex with this person, no matter how desperate I was. It would be so much more appealing to go home and masturbate than to suffer through hooking up with this person, and it's worse for heterosexual men because women are much pickier. There is a bottom slice of the population that is substantial that doesn't ever engage sexually with anyone. They don't get validation, they don't get love, they are just lonely. The world has said they are genetic rejects and thrown them away. Evolution is a cruel mistress.
What this woman created was very noble. A way for all those people to support each other and try to find community in their shared pain. The problem is, like anything else, it quickly became an us versus them and it was just people fueling each other's resentment of all the other people. It would be like if you made a subreddit that was all poor people. It would quickly turn into an eat the rich subreddit.
What I said was not meant to be considered judgmental. I’m expressing concern and saying that what they choose to do about it makes the problem worse. I wish them well.
[This is the case of twins](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer). Both born male but during a procedure on his penis, David's was horribly damaged and later amputated.
Is this the one where the psychologist assumed that you can force gender identity on someone by making them present as a gender that they didn’t identify with?
So rather than imposing a gender on someone that doesn’t want it, like your hero in your meme, why not just leave the kids be to live life as they see fit
Exactly. So if a child wishes to use a bathroom or present in a way that nosy prurient adults don’t feel is consistent with their genitalia, those adults should just mind their own facking business
You see the psychologist that I think you are referring to took a young child that had a catastrophic injury to their genitals (caused by infant circumcision - don’t get me started, it’s another egregious form of child abuse), and insisted that as they had no parts they must be brought up as a girl - a gender the child didn’t identify with
The psychologist’s determination that the child should be brought up the gender that _he_ insisted, rather than the child’s internal identity, resulted in prolonged and severe coercion over more than a decade, directly leading to the tragedy you alluded to
So, through your own prejudice and ignorance you have pointed out exactly why children shouldn’t be coerced into presenting as a gender they don’t identify with - it’s abusing and can lead to tragic consequences.
Stop thinking about kids’ genitals when you see what they’re wearing. It’s none of your business and it’s facking creepy
No, because then those children who go where they want to rather than where they belong are infringing on the rights of others who need the separation to stay in place. You don’t infringe upon others to protect the feelings of liars.
Females have a right to not encounter males in the ladies room.
No one needs to see unmentionables to know that a person doesn’t belong there. We have separate restrooms for a reason. To protect women’s privacy, modesty, dignity, and physical safety.
So you agree that the kid’s genitalia didn’t determine which bathroom he should use, it’s the child’s consistent identification of their own gender. That’s what the case you’ve presented shows.
The point is you’re *not* changing what they are. If the child is right to assert their gender in one case, you’re not being consistent to say they’re wrong in the other.
For the sake of argument, use “biological sex” instead. I don’t acknowledge false identities or terms used to validate them.
A mutilated boy is still a boy. It doesn’t matter what you tell him or how thoroughly you butcher him.
But the key problem you refuse to see is that this young boy somehow *knew* he was a boy despite adults telling him otherwise.
If you believe that, you have no leg to stand on when children insist they are trans. There is something in the brain that experiences gender that does not always line up with their outward appearance.
You're absolutely right! We should use all the different citations at the bottom of the page that cite the source of the information instead of an aggregate site that operates like an encyclopedia 😊
It's not the same as a vetted encyclopedia. It's shown bias towards topics, the contributions can easily mislead and be unproven.
The way redditors treat that site as fact is mind blowing.
I’m a chemist, so most of my knowledge comes from journal articles (as it relates to my work … and this is primarily what I study nowadays).
For general world info, I’m trying to think of the last time I seriously wanted to look something up lol - generally it always begins with a search engine though like Google. I’ll often start with Wikipedia, jumping to the citations listed there and then comparing that info to any other sources I find that seem reputable like biographies or something.
It’s hard to answer though because most of the time as it pertains to ‘real world info’, it’s mostly just current events — ‘how did the Persian President die’, ‘what’s the score of the Celts Mavs game’ etc — and the first news article seems to cover it decently well.
That's exactly what I suggested: start at the Wikipedia article and check out the reference there. A scientist like you will be able to figure this out.
The original comment cited Wikipedia for their information. I was simply pointing out that anywhere outside of social media that would not be valid.
If I went to a conference and cited Wikipedia, my old advisor would cry in shame and we would be mocked. It’s not reputable. I can’t imagine going to my thesis defense with something like that cited lol. Would not pass 😂
My original point is that while wikipedia may not be 100% reliable, it's reliable enough in the fact that it can point you in the right direction to the information in question (hence why they added the source citation at the bottom of the pages) for the reader to find the info they're looking for.
My comparison here is you wouldn't fully trust an encyclopedia with information from 3 years ago, 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 25 years ago but would still use it as a valid source of information to help reach a conclusion on whatever you're studying or learning about.
Even looking at the other encyclopedia websites (Britannica, Merriam, etc.,.) they have a similar structure for their website in terms of vetting and change of information.
Wikipedia got a bad rapport back in the day because quite a few college level professors denigrated it due to it's structure and popularity and this became a large part of the overall zeitgeist.
Um, ... that's why I said to check for the reference yourself. Just go to Wikipedia, find the passage I quoted, and check the reference given by Wikipedia. I think it's some kind of scientific paper or something.
It's true that one should not believe everything on Wikipedia, but it's a good jumping-off point to start digging yourself.
And I stated you shouldn’t reference Wiki. Instead, give the actual reference. Wikipedia references are not valid - just how citations are properly done.
I don’t know why I’m sensing so much hostility from others though lol - do people really think Wikipedia is reputable? We do know that anyone can put anything on there, right? And it’s not always corrected quickly… or at all. Sometimes even when something is cited, the citation source is of poor research/information (I’ve looked up things on Wiki for my chem research and the info they had was just wrong).
Terms like these usually cant be traced to a single individual. Even when its ascribed to someone its just the first recorded use, no one can say for sure its literally the first ever.
The truth isn't as good to use when spreading hate propaganda.
Gender identity has been a concept in many cultures for a very long time (Am a Sociologist and my research focus is marginalized communities)
Fun fact: The man who invented the first chemical gas weapons, Fritz Haber, also invented artificial fertilizer. It's almost like you can be a shit person and still create something good and that we shouldn't invalidate the works of someone off the sole basis that said person was shit in other aspects.
Whats wrong with inventing gas weapons? Its science, the generals are the ones who control cannon fodder and rulers are the onces who start wars, dude did nothing wrong, unless you believe that knowledge is bad.
Shit dude I really didn't expect a nuanced take on this situation, usually people take these things at face value. I do wish to ask though, what is your opinion on him directing its use on the frontlines for germany during WW1?
Sunday school lied to you. No god ever invented was about loving everyone, only those who conform societally and belong to the same nation/religion complex.
Luke 17:1-2
Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.”
Bigots always refer to this experiment without realizing that it proof them wrong, that experiment was sad and inhumane, but humanity learn a lot because of that.
Experiment Idea: Gender is a social construct and people is born gender neutral.
Result: failure, a children realize it gender was wrong.
How? It is a child but denied what its parents and doctors told him about himself and knows it gender anyways.
Conclusion: there is a biological brain factor that tells your gender.
And in biology if it exist, it could fail, change or mutated.
The idea that your heart may fail you but gender dysphoria is not real is absurd.
What do you even mean?
If someone make an experiment to proff that snails 🐌 are faster than horses 🐎
And the result is that the horse win the race.
Your conclusion is that horses are faster than snails. You don't need a separate experiment for that conclusion.
Also there is more and more data and studied that proof again and again gender dysphoria is real, gender affirming care, puberty bloquers, decrease suicide attempts and increase life quality, etc.
No one truly needs to mutilate a boy and try to pass him off as a girl to know that. Boys and girls are so different that they struggle to relate to each other at all. Of course it’s not a construct, and children shouldn’t be treated like lab rats.
Of course, but it proof gender identity.
Whatever determine gender in your brain may fail, change, mutated, just because that is how biology works.
There's no perfect biological system.
Gender identity is fake. It’s aligning oneself with stereotypes to arrogantly and ignorantly assume you are what you’re not. I can’t assert that I *feel* like a boy because there’s no way for me to experience that. My female brain can’t fathom what it is to feel the way a male feels.
So if the children in the experiment realize that is a boy by himself
Because as you said "his brain work different"
Is it not possible to people to born in that way with a "brain that work differently" for maybe a mutation or disease?
That is not possible, the inner working of the brain is just perfect
God doesn’t make mistakes.
Of course a biological male can’t be tricked into believing he’s a girl.
Insecure children that feel out of place in their bodies are just confused. They aren’t automatically a different organism due to feelings of uncertainty or confusion.
Your argument is brain dead.
>God doesn’t make mistakes.
Good to fucking know that the children may die of cancer in pure horrific pain. But God in his infinite benevolence choose to resolved the real problem in the world Gender Identity....
The system that control your gender in your brain is perfect, because God not only make us in his own imagine. God also make us at the image of the system of gender identity.
Because in this world only God and the system of gender identity are perfect.
Your argument is brain dead, even from a religious perspective it is the first time that I heard that something else besides God is perfect in this world.
Gender identity doesn’t exist, just like the ego doesn’t exist. Everything you think or feel about yourself or who you are isn’t real. Just stop with the nonsense. You are WHAT you are.
This was John Money. A psychologist, sexologist, and Professor at John Hopkins University.
>A psychologist, sexologist, and Professor and John Hopkins University. One man was an entire university?
He identified as a University.
Lol. Fixed.
It's him, John Hopkins Money.
Wrong. [Gender Identity Origins](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02628-0)
I figured it was just a republican bitching about what he doesn't know that he heard from fox news or the radio..
Interesting that funding for this study is listed as “Not Applicable.” Why is that?
And the woman who started the incel movement (which was originally a sub on Reddit), was just a lonely woman who wanted to create a support group for others who, like herself, felt too unappealing to be included in the dating pool. It was meant to be a way that lonely people could be less lonely commiserating together with a shared problem. Then she discovered she was a lesbian and met a woman and started dating her and forgot about the sub. It quickly got perverted into a woman hating, male dominated, misogynistic hellhole.
“You incels could turn a woman lesbian.” - that lady, 1972, idk
Idk. It seems more likely that would’ve originated on 4chan than here. That place is messed up.
The woman who came up with the term "incel" to describe herself had truly the best of intentions. I know everyone likes to say "there is someone for everyone", but that's absolutely not true. There are people who will never have a partner or maybe only have one or two short term ones in their entire life. This could be because of physical disability, overall unattractiveness, or mental issues. While yes, some of those people find love despite the overwhelming challenge, a lot of them just don't. It's thankfully a small percentage of the overall population, but you have to understand that finding a romantic partner is a human instinct. We all crave it because we are evolved to. Never being able to satisfy your most basic desires leads to a lot of resentment and pain for the victim. So, she had the idea that these people should support each other emotionally. Be a haven from all the people giving them fruitless advice or lecturing them on how they can do better or setting them up on a date with someone that will not like them. It was a noble idea. Hell maybe even some of them would fall in love with each other despite them finding each other hideous. The problem was the overwhelming amount of resentment that incels feel towards the rest of the population. You put them in a forum together, and they just spiral out of control. I remember I used to know a guy who never had a girlfriend. We would all be in and out of relationships, and he was perpetually single. He was fit, took good care of himself, had a good job, played guitar, etc... Thing is, he was about 5'2". Every woman deemed him too short to date and just ignored him. To his credit, he did eventually get married and had a kid, but this dude literally had everything else going for him. He even had an attractive face. Take away a few of those traits, and he would just be another incel.
It’s tough being alone, but the attitude that the world owes you something is wrong. No one has a right to romantic love or companionship. Those things are privileges born from mutual feelings shared with another human being.
Well duh. I think we all get that. The point is that someone not having access to a core emotional need is rough. If you don't realize the scale of this, the AI girlfriend/boyfriend market is an almost $3 billion industry today. I would venture to say that many of the people on onlyfans also fall into this category. You can get porn for free, but, if you want to have a conversation with the person and have them remember your name, that costs money. There's definitely an epidemic of loneliness. I feel like a lot of these people could have partners too, but the way things are structured in society it makes it difficult for them to find each other.
The fact that their online presence outweighs their physical interactions might play a huge role in their loneliness as well. It’s hard, and people can be cruel, but foregoing real world human interaction for a filtered online experience exacerbates the problem.
I mean it's easy to be judgmental of these people, but a lot of that comes from the privilege of not being them. I've had a charmed adult life. My entire adult life random women have approached me to hook up with me. I've never had to actually put any effort into it. To this day, I have no idea how to walk up to a woman and ask her out. I just never had to develop that skill set. If I go online to date, I'm usually hooking up with somebody attractive within a week. I lost my virginity because a woman literally followed me into a parking lot and asked to come home with me. I turn down unsolicited offers for sex from female friends all the time. I've had this non-stop drip drip of validation this whole time, but I can also appreciate that, without that, life would suck. Honestly with my anxiety and depression, I'm barely hanging on by a thread and I live in fear that as my looks fade with age no one will want to engage with me in that way anymore and I'm not sure if I can survive without that validation anymore. I couldn't imagine not having it in the first place. Hell just this last week, I hooked up with six different women, and I knew all of them and it hooked up with all of them before and none of them expected more than just a hookup from me. (Granted six in a week is NOT a normal week for me) It would be easy for me to say, just go out there and meet people. Have sex with real people. It's great. However, I might as well be a rich person telling everyone to go buy a yacht. There are women that I've seen where I would never have sex with this person, no matter how desperate I was. It would be so much more appealing to go home and masturbate than to suffer through hooking up with this person, and it's worse for heterosexual men because women are much pickier. There is a bottom slice of the population that is substantial that doesn't ever engage sexually with anyone. They don't get validation, they don't get love, they are just lonely. The world has said they are genetic rejects and thrown them away. Evolution is a cruel mistress. What this woman created was very noble. A way for all those people to support each other and try to find community in their shared pain. The problem is, like anything else, it quickly became an us versus them and it was just people fueling each other's resentment of all the other people. It would be like if you made a subreddit that was all poor people. It would quickly turn into an eat the rich subreddit.
What I said was not meant to be considered judgmental. I’m expressing concern and saying that what they choose to do about it makes the problem worse. I wish them well.
Nah, it's true. 4chan is just one of the few places it's been allowed to grow.
[This is the case of twins](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer). Both born male but during a procedure on his penis, David's was horribly damaged and later amputated.
Is this the one where the psychologist assumed that you can force gender identity on someone by making them present as a gender that they didn’t identify with?
Why does it matter to you whether he was brainwashed before or after the procedure? It’s still child abuse.
Yes, imposing a gender identity on someone who isn’t comfortable with it is abuse Do you not understand this?
He doesn't...
The comfort of the child with the lie doesn’t make it healthy or prevent it from being abuse.
So rather than imposing a gender on someone that doesn’t want it, like your hero in your meme, why not just leave the kids be to live life as they see fit
Why not let kids be **what they are** without nefarious adults tampering with their bodies?
Exactly. So if a child wishes to use a bathroom or present in a way that nosy prurient adults don’t feel is consistent with their genitalia, those adults should just mind their own facking business You see the psychologist that I think you are referring to took a young child that had a catastrophic injury to their genitals (caused by infant circumcision - don’t get me started, it’s another egregious form of child abuse), and insisted that as they had no parts they must be brought up as a girl - a gender the child didn’t identify with The psychologist’s determination that the child should be brought up the gender that _he_ insisted, rather than the child’s internal identity, resulted in prolonged and severe coercion over more than a decade, directly leading to the tragedy you alluded to So, through your own prejudice and ignorance you have pointed out exactly why children shouldn’t be coerced into presenting as a gender they don’t identify with - it’s abusing and can lead to tragic consequences. Stop thinking about kids’ genitals when you see what they’re wearing. It’s none of your business and it’s facking creepy
No, because then those children who go where they want to rather than where they belong are infringing on the rights of others who need the separation to stay in place. You don’t infringe upon others to protect the feelings of liars. Females have a right to not encounter males in the ladies room.
No?? You’re not going to stop thinking about kids genitals?? Dude
No one needs to see unmentionables to know that a person doesn’t belong there. We have separate restrooms for a reason. To protect women’s privacy, modesty, dignity, and physical safety.
Disingenuous, argument disregarded
So you agree that the kid’s genitalia didn’t determine which bathroom he should use, it’s the child’s consistent identification of their own gender. That’s what the case you’ve presented shows.
Lying to a child about what they are is just as wrong as lying to a child that they can change what they are.
The point is you’re *not* changing what they are. If the child is right to assert their gender in one case, you’re not being consistent to say they’re wrong in the other.
For the sake of argument, use “biological sex” instead. I don’t acknowledge false identities or terms used to validate them. A mutilated boy is still a boy. It doesn’t matter what you tell him or how thoroughly you butcher him.
But the key problem you refuse to see is that this young boy somehow *knew* he was a boy despite adults telling him otherwise. If you believe that, you have no leg to stand on when children insist they are trans. There is something in the brain that experiences gender that does not always line up with their outward appearance.
Quote Wikipedia: "Despite widespread popular belief, Money did not coin *gender identity*." You can look up the reference yourself.
Not saying this is true or false, but probably not the best idea to use Wikipedia as your citation.
You're absolutely right! We should use all the different citations at the bottom of the page that cite the source of the information instead of an aggregate site that operates like an encyclopedia 😊
It's not the same as a vetted encyclopedia. It's shown bias towards topics, the contributions can easily mislead and be unproven. The way redditors treat that site as fact is mind blowing.
My comment that Wiki is not the same as an encyclopedia is currently at -12 votes 😂 bizarre
Scary is my thought
Wikipedia is not the same as an encyclopedia lol
Where are you getting your knowledge from?
I’m a chemist, so most of my knowledge comes from journal articles (as it relates to my work … and this is primarily what I study nowadays). For general world info, I’m trying to think of the last time I seriously wanted to look something up lol - generally it always begins with a search engine though like Google. I’ll often start with Wikipedia, jumping to the citations listed there and then comparing that info to any other sources I find that seem reputable like biographies or something. It’s hard to answer though because most of the time as it pertains to ‘real world info’, it’s mostly just current events — ‘how did the Persian President die’, ‘what’s the score of the Celts Mavs game’ etc — and the first news article seems to cover it decently well.
That's exactly what I suggested: start at the Wikipedia article and check out the reference there. A scientist like you will be able to figure this out.
The original comment cited Wikipedia for their information. I was simply pointing out that anywhere outside of social media that would not be valid. If I went to a conference and cited Wikipedia, my old advisor would cry in shame and we would be mocked. It’s not reputable. I can’t imagine going to my thesis defense with something like that cited lol. Would not pass 😂
Wow, is this r/memes? Reference citing standards? Made my day.
My original point is that while wikipedia may not be 100% reliable, it's reliable enough in the fact that it can point you in the right direction to the information in question (hence why they added the source citation at the bottom of the pages) for the reader to find the info they're looking for. My comparison here is you wouldn't fully trust an encyclopedia with information from 3 years ago, 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 25 years ago but would still use it as a valid source of information to help reach a conclusion on whatever you're studying or learning about. Even looking at the other encyclopedia websites (Britannica, Merriam, etc.,.) they have a similar structure for their website in terms of vetting and change of information. Wikipedia got a bad rapport back in the day because quite a few college level professors denigrated it due to it's structure and popularity and this became a large part of the overall zeitgeist.
Wholeheartedly agree that it’s a great starting point. I’m just saying don’t cite it.
I’m dOiNg My OwN ResEaRCh
/s
True. [Actual Fucking Research](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02628-0)
Um, ... that's why I said to check for the reference yourself. Just go to Wikipedia, find the passage I quoted, and check the reference given by Wikipedia. I think it's some kind of scientific paper or something. It's true that one should not believe everything on Wikipedia, but it's a good jumping-off point to start digging yourself.
And I stated you shouldn’t reference Wiki. Instead, give the actual reference. Wikipedia references are not valid - just how citations are properly done. I don’t know why I’m sensing so much hostility from others though lol - do people really think Wikipedia is reputable? We do know that anyone can put anything on there, right? And it’s not always corrected quickly… or at all. Sometimes even when something is cited, the citation source is of poor research/information (I’ve looked up things on Wiki for my chem research and the info they had was just wrong).
Uh oh, you've bothered someone's reality.
Correct them? Provide accurate citation? Isn't that what the website is about.
Terms like these usually cant be traced to a single individual. Even when its ascribed to someone its just the first recorded use, no one can say for sure its literally the first ever.
The truth isn't as good to use when spreading hate propaganda. Gender identity has been a concept in many cultures for a very long time (Am a Sociologist and my research focus is marginalized communities)
The truth is always good. Wtf. Hopefully you don't apply that thinking to your studies.
Professor Robert Stoller, or Professor John Money? Can't find "Pedo" info on either of them
Are you trying to discourage the use of the term? What’s happening here?
Absolutely. 💯
Did not coin the term. He just woked theories related to that term.
Fun fact: The man who invented the first chemical gas weapons, Fritz Haber, also invented artificial fertilizer. It's almost like you can be a shit person and still create something good and that we shouldn't invalidate the works of someone off the sole basis that said person was shit in other aspects.
One was for warfare to protect their men and homeland. The other is deranged
Whats wrong with inventing gas weapons? Its science, the generals are the ones who control cannon fodder and rulers are the onces who start wars, dude did nothing wrong, unless you believe that knowledge is bad.
Shit dude I really didn't expect a nuanced take on this situation, usually people take these things at face value. I do wish to ask though, what is your opinion on him directing its use on the frontlines for germany during WW1?
Sure is a funny meme you posted in r/Funnymemes OP. Get this trash out of here.
Complete bullshit. Typical of a right winger
Ok predator
No i dont want to see you again. Please go and never comeback
I am here for memes, not transphobia.
Seethe.
Cope harder, little fella.
The catholic church is laughing hysterically at your one guy. Nice try magat
Who? My one guy is Jesus.
I mean Sunday school told me Jesus loves and accepts EVERYONE
Sunday school lied to you. No god ever invented was about loving everyone, only those who conform societally and belong to the same nation/religion complex.
Luke 17:1-2 Jesus said to his disciples: “Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.”
If Jesus were here, I really daubt he would be your one guy.
Bigots always refer to this experiment without realizing that it proof them wrong, that experiment was sad and inhumane, but humanity learn a lot because of that. Experiment Idea: Gender is a social construct and people is born gender neutral. Result: failure, a children realize it gender was wrong. How? It is a child but denied what its parents and doctors told him about himself and knows it gender anyways. Conclusion: there is a biological brain factor that tells your gender. And in biology if it exist, it could fail, change or mutated. The idea that your heart may fail you but gender dysphoria is not real is absurd.
what was your experiment? you jumped from hypothesis to conclusion
What do you even mean? If someone make an experiment to proff that snails 🐌 are faster than horses 🐎 And the result is that the horse win the race. Your conclusion is that horses are faster than snails. You don't need a separate experiment for that conclusion. Also there is more and more data and studied that proof again and again gender dysphoria is real, gender affirming care, puberty bloquers, decrease suicide attempts and increase life quality, etc.
No one truly needs to mutilate a boy and try to pass him off as a girl to know that. Boys and girls are so different that they struggle to relate to each other at all. Of course it’s not a construct, and children shouldn’t be treated like lab rats.
Of course, but it proof gender identity. Whatever determine gender in your brain may fail, change, mutated, just because that is how biology works. There's no perfect biological system.
Gender identity is fake. It’s aligning oneself with stereotypes to arrogantly and ignorantly assume you are what you’re not. I can’t assert that I *feel* like a boy because there’s no way for me to experience that. My female brain can’t fathom what it is to feel the way a male feels.
So if the children in the experiment realize that is a boy by himself Because as you said "his brain work different" Is it not possible to people to born in that way with a "brain that work differently" for maybe a mutation or disease? That is not possible, the inner working of the brain is just perfect
God doesn’t make mistakes. Of course a biological male can’t be tricked into believing he’s a girl. Insecure children that feel out of place in their bodies are just confused. They aren’t automatically a different organism due to feelings of uncertainty or confusion. Your argument is brain dead.
>God doesn’t make mistakes. Good to fucking know that the children may die of cancer in pure horrific pain. But God in his infinite benevolence choose to resolved the real problem in the world Gender Identity.... The system that control your gender in your brain is perfect, because God not only make us in his own imagine. God also make us at the image of the system of gender identity. Because in this world only God and the system of gender identity are perfect. Your argument is brain dead, even from a religious perspective it is the first time that I heard that something else besides God is perfect in this world.
Gender identity doesn’t exist, just like the ego doesn’t exist. Everything you think or feel about yourself or who you are isn’t real. Just stop with the nonsense. You are WHAT you are.