Maybe everyone else is on holiday
I’m wondering who runs the Richard Dawkins Foundation Twitter, because it’s someone surprisingly crude and ignorant and dogmatic. A very young intern? But I’m wondering why no adults are supervising.
The science is clear and overwhelmingly one-sided. Transgender people exist & are valid. Their existence poses no threat to you or society.
Take time to learn about things. Stay skeptical, always, but learn when to admit you’re wrong should the evidence be sufficient.
— Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science (@rdfrs) July 6, 2018
What? The science is real that transgender people are valid?? What kind of bonkers claim is that? What does it even mean? That’s not something Dawkins would ever say so we know it’s someone else, and I’d be floored if Robyn Blumner said anything that absurd, so who is it?
And then the equally rude and stupid “learn about things” – what things? It sounds like Trump.
And it’s not a one-off.
Tldr; The question is settled and we are moving on to tackle *actual* problems.
Like the encroaching theocracy.
Watch this space.
— Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science (@rdfrs) July 6, 2018
“The question is settled” is not a good look, especially when it most emphatically is not.
The scientific literature. Go read. You’ve got a lot to do.
Run along now.
— Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science (@rdfrs) July 6, 2018
Not even close. “The scientific literature” has nothing to say about whether particular people “are valid” because that’s not any kind of scientific claim to begin with. I’m not clear on what kind of claim it is, but I know it ain’t empirical. And these brisk insulting little commands are just rude-Twitter…they’re not the kind of thing you expect to see a foundation for science and reason pumping out.
Your ignorance is noticed.
— Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason & Science (@rdfrs) July 6, 2018
https://twitter.com/rdfrs/status/1015397305883811840
https://twitter.com/rdfrs/status/1015502198833340416
It’s weird, I tells ya.
Maybe they can get Josh Timonen back…
Ha!
I’d guess just poor and redundant writing, where “exist & are valid” means they exist (obviously) and they really do suffer from gender dysphoria, which is an accepted diagnosis, as opposed to it being a ploy for attention or whatever.
But, yeah, a lot of counterproductive snottiness.
No that’s not good enough. When people are being very emphatic and police-like in their claims the least they can do is make clear and rational claims. I don’t want to guess what I’m being ordered to say, I want to know. I want clarity.
I’m not that stupid; I can come up with an interpretation too; but that’s not what I’m asking. I want to know exactly what the people making the claims and the aggressive demands mean.
In any case “really do suffer from gender dysphoria” isn’t all that helpful either, because it too has different meanings. It’s not like a virus that can be detected with tests. It’s basically just a catch-all label for a diffuse feeling, and it does nothing to explain why we should agree that men literally are women as long as they have it.
Plus, the fact that we can come up with an interpretation is totally irrelevant to the subject of the post, which is that the RDF seems to have a very young very inept intern running its social media.
Yikes.
I didn’t say you were stupid.
You did ask what “valid” even meant, so I proposed an answer. I didn’t realize it was rhetorical and I’d get scolded.
I agreed with the main point of your post in my last sentence, so I’m not sure how I also got scolded for ignoring the subject of the post.
Sorry. I thought it was obvious that the question was more or less rhetorical – that is, that I wasn’t asking for an interpretation but underlining how meaningless the claim is.
Another point about gender dysphoria–plenty of people who have it don’t identify as trans. And transactivists will tell anyone who will listen that not everybody who is transgender has gender dysphoria.
So being “trans” just comes down to “anyone who says they are.” The same definitions they offer for the words “woman” and “man.”
Speaking of the science–it doesn’t at all say what transactivists and their cheerleaders think it does. I’ve been sharing this interesting article a lot lately:
https://lascapigliata8.wordpress.com/2018/06/30/transactivists-war-on-reality-what-they-think-studies-show-vs-what-studies-actually-show/
Interesting, isn’t it, that the RDFRS went from anti-feminist to pro-trans with hardly a pause for breath in between. She said. No interrogation point.
#8
Additionally, there are those that decidedly don’t identify as trans, but are declared trans by others simply because they happen to prefer ‘male’ clothing for its practicality.
That doesn’t seem a terribly long jump to me, since there is so much anti-feminism in trans activism. Maybe they simply embraced the misogynistic arm of the trans movement.
iknklast, I know–I was being ironic. :)