Gender neutrality and political correctness discussion

[Cain]

Calling a woman "manly" or a man "girly" are different sides of the same coin.

They disrespect both genders. It isn't targeted at only women.

And they should both go away. I'm not personally offended by them overly but I don't see the value in either. I think its really interesting when you take away traditional gender roles...My nephew is the girliest kid (stereotype wise) I know and that is totally fine with me.

It is hardly the end of humor, I don't think we have to be that dramatic. Humor evolves and will never die....there is humor in everything. Truthfully I think the comments in question stopped being funny long ago and are used more as insults instead. Just my view on it.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Dagger

And we can all hold hands, and stare at rainbows on our unicorns. Forget it.

Fallacy of bifurcation.

The internet is full of insults. The diminishment of sexist insults will not result in World Peace.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

In reality, different people are better at different things. People of African descent are better in some areas of physical ability due to tens of thousands of years of evolution. Certain ethnicities are more prone to lactose intolerance for the same reason. Hell, even skin color in an evolutionary trait related to general geographical areas people settled in.

Boy, do I have a political party for you. Of course you'll need to get in your time machine and head back to Germany in the 1930s....

[CliffFletcher]

So I'm watching the game tomorrow night with my young daughter and son.

Me [yelling at TV]: C'mon guys, don't back off. Destroy those Sedin sisters!

Daughter: Why do you call them sisters?

Me: Because girls are weak and they suck [fist-bumps son].


Nah, not cool.

[V]

Annnnnnd...... Godwin'd. Our work here is done.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

Pretending these differences don't exist doesn't help anyone.

You're trying to make a motte and bailey argument.

Spoiler!

[In a] medieval castle…there would be a field of desirable and economically productive land called a bailey, and a big ugly tower in the middle called the motte. If you were a medieval lord, you would do most of your economic activity in the bailey and get rich. If an enemy approached, you would retreat to the motte and rain down arrows on the enemy until they gave up and went away. Then you would go back to the bailey, which is the place you wanted to be all along.

So the motte-and-bailey doctrine is when you make a bold, controversial statement. Then when somebody challenges you, you claim you were just making an obvious, uncontroversial statement, so you are clearly right and they are silly for challenging you. Then when the argument is over you go back to making the bold, controversial statement.

In short, a motte is a boring but defendable position.
A bailey is the position you actually want to hold, but can't defend.

Your motte: "gender differences are a neutral, objective fact, why are you giving me a hard time for this?"

Your bailey: "ha ha it's shameful for men to be like girls."


I don't actually think calling men girly or women manly is necessarily in itself an insult to either gender, but more a statement that it's somehow shameful for men to be anything other than a very narrow stereotype of "manly man". (And probably vice versa.)

Btw, if NHL hockey players are not "manly" enough for you, then dude you need to readjust your definition of "manly"...

PS: If it's not insulting to call men "girly", then why use it as an insult?

[Bmuzyka]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Boy, do I have a political party for you. Of course you'll need to get in your time machine and head back to Germany in the 1930s....

So let me get this straight, you firmly believe that evolution has not had anything to do with physical differences between people from different parts of the world? I also was not saying any one group was "better" than another in a general sense. Just that different people have adapted to certain situations, thus making their aptitudes in different areas not aligned.

I also did not weigh in on the "calling guys a girl is wrong" debate. I am just saying that realistically, yes, everyone is different.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

So let me get this straight, you firmly believe that evolution has not had anything to do with physical differences between people from different parts of the world? I also was not saying any one group was "better" than another in a general sense. Just that different people have adapted to certain situations, thus making their aptitudes in different areas not aligned.

Next you're going to tell us there are only 3 true anthropological races.

What are your opinions on phrenology?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

Women are worse at most sports than men.

That is it.

Shut the internet down.

There will never be a more foolish statement.

[terminator]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So I'm watching the game tomorrow night with my young daughter and son.

Me [yelling at TV]: C'mon guys, don't back off. Destroy those Sedin sisters!

Daughter: Why do you call them sisters?

Me: Because girls are weak and they suck [fist-bumps son].


Nah, not cool.

Now this is a logical argument. Perhaps because I'm expecting the arrival of a baby girl soon, but I would never consider her weaker then any male.

Shiet, now I'm back tracking.

[Bmuzyka]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Next you're going to tell us there are only 3 true anthropological races.

What are your opinions on phrenology?

I am not saying that at all. In fact, I am saying quite the opposite. There are literally hundreds of groups who have evolved with different traits. Is any one group "better than another?" Perhaps at a certain activity that was aided by conditions of their environments. But no one group is "The best group"

And as for phrenology, I have made no reference that physical difference has anything to do with cognitive ability.

[PsYcNeT]

The point is, things like anthropological race designations and phrenology are old, outmoded and (frankly) awful.

"Race group" arguments are more or less borderline anthropological race arguments, as if you can lump all "Asians" into the same pile, or all "Africans" in the same pile. There are massive genetic variations between groups even a few kilometres apart, and lumping them all together (as in a comment such as "People of African descent are better in some areas of physical ability") is so horribly incorrect and presumptuous it's offensive.

This doesn't even begin to touch on fluid breeding practices, and the mutable genetics brought about by globalization, let alone nomadic groups from previous centuries.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

Wow. Reading these posts makes my head hurt.
In reality, different people are better at different things. People of African descent are better in some areas of physical ability due to tens of thousands of years of evolution. Certain ethnicities are more prone to lactose intolerance for the same reason. Hell, even skin color in an evolutionary trait related to general geographical areas people settled in.

Pretending these differences don't exist doesn't help anyone.

Good lord.

[polak]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

That is it.

Shut the internet down.

There will never be a more foolish statement.

At the top level, best on best, please tell me which sports women are better at than men? I'm sure there are a handful you could think of, but they are few and far between. I'm sure if I said remove judged sports and that'd drop to zero.

[Bmuzyka]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

The point is, things like anthropological race designations and phrenology are old, outmoded and (frankly) awful.

"Race group" arguments are more or less borderline anthropological race arguments, as if you can lump all "Asians" into the same pile, or all "Africans" in the same pile. There are massive genetic variations between groups even a few kilometres apart, and lumping them all together (as in a comment such as "People of African descent are better in some areas of physical ability") is so horribly incorrect and presumptuous it's offensive.

This doesn't even begin to touch on fluid breeding practices, and the mutable genetics brought about by globalization, let alone nomadic groups from previous centuries.

My god, I made a generic statement, it is has grown out of proportion to the point of me being a "racist". Even the Smithsonian agrees that environmental conditions have had a huge impact on the evolution of different races. Does this make them racist?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

At the top level, best on best, please tell me which sports women are better at than men? I'm sure there are a handful you could think of, but they are few and far between. I'm sure if I said remove judged sports and that'd drop to zero.

Women are worse at most sports than men

Read that again.


You don't see anything wrong with the statement?

Actually, let me help you. Your statement means that women lack the ability to play sports, or learn sport related skill sets.


Let us try this statement:


Men are worse at being nurses than men.

Women are worse at most sciences than men.

I know a number of nationally ranked female athletes. Are they "better" than their male counter parts, actually in some manner they are, some can execute skills better than their male counter parts.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Bmuzyka

My god, I made a generic statement, it is has grown out of proportion to the point of me being a "racist". Even the Smithsonian agrees that environmental conditions have had a huge impact on the evolution of different races. Does this make them racist?

I didn't say you were racist, I said you were thinking like a dude from 1904.

Really, race doesn't exist any more, it never really did. We're all mutts, and we're all better for realizing it.

The idea of race however still persists, because people love to categorize.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I didn't say you were racist, I said you were thinking like a dude from 1904.

Really, race doesn't exist any more, it never really did. We're all mutts, and we're all better for realizing it.

The idea of race however still persists, because people love to categorize.

Perhaps before this discussion move any further we should have people provide the "manliness" resume.

Because if it doesn't match or exceed mine I can ignore your comments.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Perhaps before this discussion move any further we should have people provide the "manliness" resume.

Because if it doesn't match or exceed mine I can ignore your comments.

This morning I ate a raw steak nude while dipping my balls in boiling water on the edge of a mountain in 70 km winds with snakes on my nipples.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

This morning I ate a raw steak nude while dipping my balls in boiling water on the edge of a mountain in 70 km winds with snakes on my nipples.

See that's the spirit.