quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
My PhD thesis was on gender and how it's constructed in the West. I teach gender at a tertiary level. Sorry but I do know what I am talking about.

quote:

Unlike you ...who clearly doesn't know much about gender

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
There's a causal relationship between pre-natal testosterone levels, the speed of speech development and choices involving male and female toys.

Gender theorists have zero evidence supporting their case. Probably because they're ideological zealots, not scientists.

quote:

A child's choices of gendered toys are biologically determined????

quote:

Do you have any idea how stupid you sound? Or how impossible to either establish or prove this inane claim is? It is utterly moronic.

quote:


You are not worth wasting any further time on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Awareness

It commences its inquiry through the simple observation that despite Norway being considered the most egalitarian society in the world with the highest level of gender equality,


What is your bassis for this opinion?

Google it, fuckwad.

Yes, that's how a typical discussion amongst scientists would go. Bravo, Awareness! Who could now doubt your adherence to the value of dispassionate scientific enquiry?

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
It's not true that "feminists" deny the role of nature in people's behaviour

quote:

- there is ample evidence to support the fact that our genes have a significant impact on things like intelligence, and that our gender (and the hormonal balance that a given gender creates) has a significant impact on our behaviours,

quote:


and just as you'd have to be a stupid and ill-informed little stain of a person to argue that genes and gender are only determinants it would also be absurd to deny the role that genes and gender play, alongside the powerful influences of parenting, peer groups and social norms.

quote:

But, it's important to look at the wider picture; for example some rather ill-informed halfwits will assert that men are better drivers than women.

quote:

They're ignorant and full of shit of course. But, there's always an ignorant little stain out there who will pick up on a couple of facts and make up all sorts of shit about them. But while it does seem that men have a tendency to exhibit greater spatial awareness, they let themselves down by having way more accidents.

quote:

That said, it's interesting to understand what traits make women better and safer drivers, and whether - on balance - these are traits that us blokes should at least consider.

quote:


There are always different ways to spin a debate, and no doubt, had your "comedian cum scientist" wanted to, he could have found a bevvy of drooling mad-eyed evolutionary psychology loons to mock.

quote:

Nobody here is a scientist and while neither you nor tweakabelle possess the requisite honesty or intellectual firepower to engage in a discussion, thompsonx is just a troll. He gets the response he merits.

Harden up, Nancy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
It's not true that "feminists" deny the role of nature in people's behaviour

Yes it is. Tweakabelle just had a frothing fit about it and were you to engage her in conversation, I'd bet real money she'd babble about cultural imprinting, social construction and any other cheap rationalisation she could come up with to support her view that the mens stole the world from the womyn.

Perhaps you're just not paying attention to the loony advocacy of this whacky ideology you're so obsessed with.

quote:

quote:

- there is ample evidence to support the fact that our genes have a significant impact on things like intelligence, and that our gender (and the hormonal balance that a given gender creates) has a significant impact on our behaviours,

Oh really? Ya think? I'd say the significance of fucking DNA has been well and truly settled - it sure as shit doesn't need validating with the feminist seal of approval.

quote:


and just as you'd have to be a stupid and ill-informed little stain of a person to argue that genes and gender are only determinants it would also be absurd to deny the role that genes and gender play, alongside the powerful influences of parenting, peer groups and social norms.

Nobody argues that biological gender is the only determinant, but trying to pretend it's not is a game only an obsessive plays.

quote:

quote:

But, it's important to look at the wider picture; for example some rather ill-informed halfwits will assert that men are better drivers than women.

Well, they are. Better doesn't necessarily mean safer, but Formula 1 being a man's club has as much to do with men's better spatial ability as it does with being a traditionally male sport.

quote:

They're ignorant and full of shit of course. But, there's always an ignorant little stain out there who will pick up on a couple of facts and make up all sorts of shit about them. But while it does seem that men have a tendency to exhibit greater spatial awareness, they let themselves down by having way more accidents.

Men have more accidents because they spend more time on the road. Under 25, their impulsiveness and risk-taking is a major contributor to road accidents, but this tails off as they age.

quote:

That said, it's interesting to understand what traits make women better and safer drivers, and whether - on balance - these are traits that us blokes should at least consider.

Women are less territorial in regard to the "space" around their car and they're less focused on competing with the cars around them. Those are traits which make them safer.

Their lesser degree of spatial ability plus their tendency toward hesitation make them less safe.

quote:

quote:


There are always different ways to spin a debate, and no doubt, had your "comedian cum scientist" wanted to, he could have found a bevvy of drooling mad-eyed evolutionary psychology loons to mock.

"Evolutionary psychology loons" don't have institutes erected which are heavily involved in indoctrinating the public and setting government policy. I don't give a flying fuck if someone has a gender theory - what I do care about is when their unproven, unverified and unscientific theory is used to set public policy and divert government resources toward fantasy projects.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Nobody here is a scientist and while neither you nor tweakabelle possess the requisite honesty or intellectual firepower to engage in a discussion, thompsonx is just a troll. He gets the response he merits.

Harden up, Nancy.

A, firstly, actually, both Tweakabelle and I are social scientists. She and I are both qualified as such.

quote:

You, however, have never even been to university. We know this, because you've always side-stepped discussing the matter.

quote:

Now, there are some brilliant and wise people around who've never been to university ... but you're not one of them. You're just somebody who googles a lot. It's not the same thing.

quote:


Secondly, *please* stop with the 'Nancy', and all other little digs that I'm somehow 'effeminate'. In the first place, I'm *way* too certain of my masculinity for it to have any effect. Secondly, you are a somewhat short, morbidly obese man, likely with a chronic ailment that's itself obesity-related.

quote:

(If that man in your forum pic ever existed, you probably ate him as a mid-afternoon snack long ago.) Christ, old boy, it's embarrassing. I mean, if you and I were put in a line along with most of the males using this forum - sub males absolutely included - it would still only be you who'd be mistaken for a (albeit sadly rather homely-looking) woman who's eight months pregnant with triplets, now wouldn't it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
I've no idea what makes you think I'm the one who is obsessed. Let's workshop this... who constantly whines about feminism?

quote:

Who can be relied upon to make absurd and outlandish generalisations about feminism?

quote:

Have an adult work it through with you. Let me give you a clue... It's you!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
Nobody argues that biological gender is the only determinant, but trying to pretend it's not is a game only an obsessive plays.

quote:


I'd say constantly making shit up is a game only an obsessive plays.

quote:


Why are you so obsessed?

quote:

You're babbling and wriggling. Women are better drivers than men. It's a general truth, supported by ample evidence.

quote:


The reason that Evolutionary Pscy doesn't have institutes erected, is because a great deal of it is a total crock of shit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Mr K, as a courtesy, I looked at the first link... I didn't bother looking at the other two links

I don't need to look through your stupid telescope ~Cesare Cremonini

K.

quote:

To perform science, it is imperative to adopt an objective approach to the question under consideration. If no objective approach is possible, no science is possible. No exceptions. It seems to me that the only way any researcher could have an objective approach to gender is to be without a gender themselves. This strikes me as impossible. Perhaps you can suggest a way around this roadblock because I know of no way any human can overcome this obstacle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Many times I have seen you assert that all 'scientific' knowledge requires an act of faith to believe in it.

I don't recall having advanced the position that "all scientific knowledge requires an act of faith in order to believe it." But since you claim that I've asserted this "many times," it should be easy enough to come up with an example. The only thing I can remember that might come close is my observation that the history of science comprises a laundry list of theories that turned out to be wrong, and that we would be foolish to regard our current level of understanding as carved in stone, which isn't quite the same thing, and I don't see how it helps your argument.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

I note that you made no attempt whatsoever to resolve the problem of the impossibility of human objectivity in relation to gender...

Then why should anyone be expected (for example) to treat a male as if he was objectively a woman?

K.
[/font]

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Mr K, you are old and well read enough to know that any attempt to peddle a "science of human behaviour" is a fraud and a con.

quote:

Attempts to peddle theories of biological gender determination are rarely more than (some would say can never be anything but) superstition pretending to be science. Even the very best, most erudite attempt will never be more than pseudo-science.

quote:

Such superstitions are enough to fool the Awarenesses of this world but I am sure you wouldn't want to find yourself condemned to the same category of ignorant deluded fool as that imbecile.

quote:


Sorry but in this instance I am the person with the "stupid telescope"!

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Yep, yep. Actually, firstly, it's historically involved a double-mistake of colossal proportions: we've looked at nature and projected human society onto it ('e.g. 'Look, there's the silverback gorilla, he's the king, just like our king!) and we've 'read back' from nature all sorts of comparisons and even 'lessons' ('That King Gorilla does this and that with 'his subjects' - we do it somewhat the same - and should do it *entirely* the same!').

quote:

We can see this most clearly at the level of non-human nature as a whole - Nature, with a capital 'N'. It's when we humans have read into and back from this entity that we've made the worst balls-ups, of course - thus, Nature as 'red in tooth and claw' (cf Nazism)

quote:

, versus Nature as the Garden of Eden (from the Bible right up to a certain flavour of modern-day Green).

quote:

Secondly, people don't seem to grasp that scientists will focus on their own fields; thus they'll be talking within the confines of their own field. If your field is focused on those things about humans that are inherent and biological, you will (hopefully) find some of those things and *highlight* them. You would not, as a scientist worthy of the name, generalise them to a grand theory that 'human society is biologically determined'. Journalists might do that and so might amateurs eager to beef up their preconceived and much-beloved beliefs and fantasies - but as a scientist with his rep at stake, you won't do that.

quote:

Thirdly, amongst the public at large, some sciences are just a lot of fashionable and fun at any given time than others. Everybody likes a bit of cod biology and cod psychology to brighten up their day. I do myself. Not quite the same with sociology, though. Most people I've met can't name a single leading figure in sociology, never mind gender studies.

quote:

Many will say, with due modesty, 'Ah, OK - I get that I'm missing a vantage point, here' and move on. A few, though, will brush away the entire discipline as unworthy of their attention. They have contempt for it - but one notices it's invariably that sort of contempt that's not bred by familiarity.