Look, if you take the total human population and look at how many are British evolutionary biologists, it’s an infinitesimal percentage, practically nothing. So we can discount the existence of Richard Dawkins.
Fucking finally.
So we can discount the existence of Richard Dawkins.
Way ahead of you there.
Unless you’re talking about gas giants, then a bunch of that hydrogen can be metal too.
The queerest element: bismuth. It has a symbol of “Bi”. It forms beautiful rainbow crystals. It’s also known as a “post-transition” element. It’s used in all sorts of important industrial processes. In particular it’s gaining interest as a replacement for its neighbor lead in a lot of applications (like solder) as it has many similar properties, but has the bonus of being far less toxic.
Bismuth also did nothing wrong.
cant wait for them to find the island of stability where once we start having 140+ genders maybe some of them start having socially prescribed roles again.
🤘🏿HELL YEAH!!!
what i’m hearing is that there are greater genders that we have not yet had the bravery to discover
Developing a never before held gender for a split second before it decays instantly into a still extremely rare but slightly more stable gender
Who here volunteers to be the Victor Ninov of gender
Quick, to the Gentrifuge
Getting fired for faking my studies for refusing to show fellow researchers the nonexistent pronouns in gender 118’s bio
carefully studying the branching fractions of unstable heavy genders to determine the nature of the strong gender force
deleted by creator
This shit is gonna really pop off when we hit the island of stability
gender that lasts 0.00000000001 seconds instead of 0.00000000000000000000000001 seconds
Or when they finally split the gender atom. Radioactive gender everywhere.
They’ll build the gender bomb that makes you trans
“Now we are all
sonsof bitches.”- Kenneth Bainbridge observing the detonation of a prototype estrogen bomb.
The lack of governmemt grants to build us our Large Pronoum Collider is what’s holding us back
As long as they aren’t toxic and extremely short lived.
Biological sex is a fucking mess and the roughly 2% estimate that chuds freak out about is itself a very conservative estimate. The load bearing cope that leads them to denying even this is the belief that conditions like Klinefelter syndrome or Turner syndrome shouldn’t be counted as intersex conditions. Diagnosis rates are also incredibly low, largely because of bigotry.
The reality is that not only is the scope of which conditions are considered intersex far too restrictive (even where the 1.7-2% estimate is reached), but these conditions are massively underdiagnosed. A more realistic and all-encompassing view of intersex conditions with an accurate diagnosis count should result an incidence rate of around 5% of the global population, with rates somewhat higher in some communities.
People cannot handle this reality because it destroys their world view.
yeah but the part i’ve always stumbled on is… how? i grew up in europe for fuck’s sake, what did i miss in brainwashing class that i was never able to see it as a pillar of my entire worldview. like, even if you dont give a fuck at all, all it comes down to is are we gonna make 2-5% of the population deeply unhappy or are we not going to do that? how does this become a core of your identity for fuck’s sake…
Short answer: recognizing intersex validity challenges the status quo, therefore it must be opposed
Personally? Propaganda.
Take flat earth people for an instance. They maintain that the round earth is a concept which invalidates the bible. Such a thing doesn’t even register in the average christian’s brain. It’s simply not a challenge to their beliefs in any way. However, someone can be born into a flat earth cult and be indoctrinated since birth, or fall into such cults and convince themselves that basic astronomy is a war against Christendom itself.
With LGBTQ+ people you have a fertile ground for hateful propaganda. It’s centuries old and public opinion on even the most innoffensive gay white liberal person changed massively in just a few decades. But I maintain that people have to be mobilized to hate trans people - a concept that a lot of older people can some times barely understand - and ALSO to make it a core to their entire personality. Which is why anti-trans politicians are always on the lookout for ways to make it a relatable issue, like with fairness in sports.
It can simply not be a mess for most if people are left to their devices and given every resource to consensually deal with the problems they have!
Like, hey, dawkins, watch me NOT get triggered over a persons gender and secondary sexual characteristics… there! heart-rate is normal, so is blood pressure! all it took was letting people do what they want with something intimate to themselves and really only knowable to themselves.
real getting scared of one’s own shadow energy
It kinda boggles my mind that an evolutionary biologist and atheist has their knickers in a twist due to intersex, trans, and non-binary gender. Bro, if god isn’t real, the world is a fucking chaotic mess that decides what does and doesn’t work for weird and abstract reasons, and the social construction of God, and binaries are what stop us from advancing. Can you please move the fuck on from people’s genitals? You sound like a fucking deacon at a church, you weirdo.
It’s because he’s still into patriarchy, and patriarchy requires clear delineation between men and women, without any room for any other concepts. Look up how Dawkins responded to Elevatorgate. The guy’s a misogynist and that’s probably the root element for most transphobia.
Dawkins is a racist too. Look into anything he says about Arabs.
I’m familiar with Elevatorgate, that shit is/was beyond stupid. Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris carried so much water for tolerance of the Iraq War on anti-religious grounds, which is ironic because so many people were grossed out by George W. Bush’s declaring this a holy war against terrorism and using crusader language.
at least hitchens tried out waterboarding, dawkins hasn’t contributed anything of value to society in 40 or 50 years and harris might never have.
He should try getting droned
Unfortunately there are scientists who will ignore the parts of science they don’t like when it suits them.
Also there are ones who are just plain self serving assholes. Like the ones that pretended that lead or teflon was safe because it gave them a paycheck.
Didn’t he call himself a “cultural christian?”
Yeah he shoulda raised flags in the Atheist community when he was like “I still like religious music and religious inventions”.
He did and he didn’t even mean it right because he’s a fucking idiot. 99% of western atheists are “culturally Christian” because we grew up in a Christian society and still celebrate Christmas
deleted by creator
“A third sex has struck the twin towers”Elements kinda do look like pronouns 🤔
He
The problem your point here has is hydrogen can’t be helium
That doesn’t even have anything to do with the point, the point was that you can’t just say something doesn’t exist because you arbitrarily decided there’s not enough of it. If there was one unicorn in the world, would you say unicorns don’t exist?
By that logic, we should just eradicate the rich because they’re statistically insignificant and don’t really exist if you cut off your axis.
These people are constantly preoccupied with the thought of people cutting things off and yet they’ll lop off an axis without one moment’s hesitation. Curious!
how about, and here me out, we just eradicate the Capitalits class anyway, we do not need a reason
Hydrogen can become helium too. Regardless, talk about stretching the metaphor
Always fun when an evolutionary biologist is like “No we actually can fit everything into neat human categories with no outliers or anything. Because statistics.”
Especially one as supposedly rational and scientific as Richard Dawkins, completely unaware that he’s in his feelings and afraid of having to acknowledge that something he takes for granted is complicated, actually.
Can’t believe South Park predicted his future.
YEAH! POUND MY MONKEY HOLE, RICHARD!!!
Anyone have anything on dawkins talking about species? I’d love to hear his take, and see which school of thought in the philosophy of science he leans towards.
Obviously it’s NOT the one where it’s argued that the species designation is best understood through parsimony, it has to be that there is a viable offspring (and all this only words for sexually reproducing organisms, which is… hmm a rather small minority!) wait no, ok the offspring needs to be able to have offspring, wait no that doesn’t work OK at least second generation progeny need to be able to reproduce!!
Ask him to point to a species, he operates as a rationalist and leans on empiricism. He’ll point to a member of a population, or a subpopulation, and never a species. His rationalism is a vulgar rationalism which operates on rudimentary syllogistic logic (ask 'em to solve a paradox or contradiction without dialectics, and with his true false cartesian logic) which really is idealism. Comrades will probably know this, but for further reading Lenin gives a thorough rebuke in his Materialism and Empirio-criticism, really get to see Lenin the philosopher in full force.
He, Pinker, Dennett, and Harris are sophists. Peddling their ‘knowledge’ to the highest bidder. Whatever respectable scientific work they did was during a different era. Without the opulence afforded to members of the imperial core they would have nothing.
“Hydrogen can’t be helium”
WHERE THE FUCK DO YOU THINK HELIUM CAME FROM, THE DEPTHS OF MY ASSHOLE?
no, that’s where the methane came from
Most of the helium was sort of there from the get-go at about the same time hydrogen showed up. But he’s a real ding dong because every element in his body (except the hydrogen) was another element once
Metals are just transhydrogen
One of the first thing you learn about chemistry is that elements are literally all the same shit that can completely change their element by exchanging electrons.
Motherfucker how do you think rust is formed.
This implies that to be trans is to be a gender alchemist and that therefore trans people are golden.
Choke on that one, Cissies.
My vial of estradiol is the philosopher’s stone.
Commiting war crimes and putting everyone’s soul into the vial so I can transition
Huh? Can you explain this to me?
Full metal alchemist joke
Oh. Thanks.
assigned lead at birth
Elements change by proton count, iirc, and they’re generally not very happy about it. Much less concerned about tossing their electrons around
Chemistry is not my field it seems
Still, elements can change, is my point.
Radioactive decay occurs spontaneously
It’s cool how checks notes Richard Dawkins singled out intersex as the only legitimate non binary/trans identity in order to minimize the existence of trans people just because it makes it look smaller on the graph.
Wow hes so fuckin objective, I’m sure because he’s so rational there’s no way there’s an ulterior motive for making this point.
what’s the ulterior motive? also, isn’t the triumph of atheism over religion more important to the overall well being of mankind than trans rights? doesn’t freeing people from the chains of spirituality make us all more rational? also, does acknowledging that a small portion of the population are trans/intersexual really defeat the trans rights cause?
reddit ass take
Dollars to donuts says masterblaster420 becomes the next Yeonmi Nayirah on .world or .works
I don’t know what the ass take was, but I’m updooting you because I trust you
they went
about atheism and dropped some transphobiaSo full reddit
Removed by mod
Why have so many of these outspoken atheist figures started aligning themselves with some kind of de-facto chud shit?
They have mistaken “religious conservatives have bad arguments” for “I am very smart and good at logic” so now everything they don’t intuitively understand must be wrong.
Because the New Atheist people were always reactionary.
Because the core of their beliefs was basically “fundamentalists are silly cringe dummies who think silly cringe things that are dumb, how cringe, and what’s worse they’re saying I can’t have my funtime treats because of their silly cringe dumb-dumb stuff! Telling me no is a real mortal sin!” rather than any sort of actual principled opposition to the ontological evil of theocrats. When push came to shove they turned that same outrage at ever being limited in their desires towards women and minorities: they want to own and use women, they want to hurt and subjugate people they hate.
In short, a comfortable white cishet male atheist in the heart of empire has functionally the same material interests and worldview as a comfortable white cishet male evangelical: their ontological evil comes from their status and their desire to maintain and increase that status, instead of how firm a formal-logic framework they’re building their worldview on. Both will eagerly lie and twist reality around themselves to justify their cruelty, greed, and lust.
In short, white cishet male atheists are still white cishet males
Easy way to put it lmao
fundamentalists are silly cringe dummies who think silly cringe things that are dumb, how cringe
But how do you not take as part of it “And misogyny and racism are some of the cringiest things they do” because I followed that new atheist path so exactly and that’s the conclusion I landed on at 12 fucking years old. “Christianity is cringe but all of its beliefs are cool and good actually” is the most insane atheist take I’ve ever heard and idk how that’s where they ended up
Because they’re taking issue with the things like magic, subservience to a church, historical scriptural fraud, conflict with science, and most importantly the religious condemnation of “vice” in general: they want their funtime treats like drugs and free access to women’s bodies, and they think theocrats are ruining their good time in the name of something silly, irrational, and cringe. They don’t have a principled opposition to the cruelty and bigotry of theocrats, because they come from the same chauvinist cultural background and have much the same material interests as their fundamentalist counterparts. You generally need an actual ethical framework and political education to shake free of the chauvinist brainworms American society tries to infect everyone with.
Like if you look at countercultural media depictions of evangelicals, it’s usually like “oh they’re too goody goody, they’re too pure, they don’t know how to have fun, they’re silly and cringe, and the worst they can do is get in the way of my good time!” instead of “they are ontologically evil demons of hatred disguised in human skin and enacting horrors upon the world,” and that’s because the take is radically different depending on who’s making it. Like a comfortable white cishet male atheist is going to have wildly different conflicts with evangelical theocracy than a queer woman is, and the former is platformed way more and has way more cultural power than the latter.
And that’s why so many of the New Atheists went on to become secular fascists or tradcath fascists, because those promised them their funtime treats and they realized that the cynical hypocrisy of the system was a feature in their favor and not a glitch.
It was the Evangelical literalist generation of Christian fanatics being replaced by cultural/nationalist Christian fanatics who didn’t care about arguing that God literally stopped the Earth’s rotation for a bit once, they just make “the Christian cultural practices make us the supreme culture” arguments. And there was always an undercurrent of “the undeveloped savages lack our rational way of doing things, that’s why they’re savages” to portions of the new atheist movement, which dovetails with that attitude.
Plus, the right started picking up the “logic facts and reason” schtick so it made for an attractive grift to new atheists already with that branding.
I have the seed of an idea for a thesis paper on how new atheists are the hippies of the millennial generation. But I’m too busy being poor to do any research, so…
Unironically yes. I think one could show a consistent chauvinist libertine pattern with American counter-culture movements like that, where despite being in conflict with the mainstream their opposition is way more in the vein of “I want more, I want to be personally liberated to do as I wish unto others” than genuine opposition to the horrifying cruelty and depravity of the American mainstream.
I’ve been talking about this concept for years now, but have yet to sit down and write a formal history of the subject with referencible examples.
new atheists are the hippies of the millennial generation
cursed take lmao. like it’s spot on, but jesus christ
I think the good ones retired when the Bush-era anti-religious revival stopped, and the ones who were just in it to have an audience listening to their angry takes followed the audiences that wanted angry takes.
I don’t really know though; despite being a lifelong atheist and about the right age, none of these people have ever really appealed to me.
I don’t get it either. I was a fan of these dudes when I was young, and the path they led me down was the conclusion of “Christianity is the root of most evil in the western world, and all of its positions must be destroyed, including patriarchy, racism, hierarchy, and belief in magic”
I really don’t know how you go “Christianity is the root of most evil, but all of its positions are good actually.” It makes more sense to me to be an intense misandrist than a misogynist, simply because it’s the opposite position of Christianity.
deleted by creator
Indeed, hydrogen can’t be helium (except in the case of bigender comrades): that’s why trans women are women, not men; and trans men are men, not women. Glad everything is understood.
