SJW Shill Bill Nye Admits He Just Needs The Money

>>172169
what does this have to do with him being an SJW or shill? Nice buzzwords faggot

>>172174
>minor league pop scientist
>television kids show star
>out of spotlight for a decade
>get new show on Netflix: espouse left-wing political bs in place of science
>knock whitey, genetics have nothing to do with all the infinite genders, bizarre alarmist climate change predictions
>show fails
>popularity sinks

>file suit against former employer for millions

>>172174
It's true, though.

Glad this sell out cuck is finally going to be blacklisted and disappear from the media

>>172174
Looks like we got a fan here.

>>172258
...or win close to $40M and be the fuck everywhere

>>172261
Yeah, I enjoy listening to him occasionally on startalk radio. So?

>>172302
So you can be immediately written off from having an opinion on something because you like it.

This is opposed to anon, totally unbiased in all things of course.

can someone fill me in on what he did that's upset so many folks?

i've not seen any episodes of his recent series.

>>172344
The rightwing part of the internet (4chan etc) dislikes him because he talks about things like gay rights and transsexuals and presents all kinds of leftist opinions. The leftists on the internet, like Reddit, dislike him because he's a pedantic asshole in his new series.

>>172367
I'm a gay center-leftie, and I don't like him

because he's devolved into bad science because of socio-political influence, which I think is a fair reason.

>>172303
>nobody should have an opinion on the internet

Go back to /r/news where you're not allowed to editorialize or opine or think.

>>172228
>show fails

It got cancelled?
Btw, Nye should've just kept to what he was good at - being a kids TV show host. He done fucked up when he tried to insert himself into the modern entertainment/political landscape.

>>172404
Yeah, fail.

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/04/bill-nye-saves-the-world-review-netflix-1201806140/

https://www.polygon.com/tv/2017/4/26/15413498/bill-nye-netflix-criticism

http://observer.com/2017/04/bill-nye-saves-the-world-criticism/

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2017/04/why_bill_nye_s_show_won_t_save_the_world.html

>>172344
>Bill Nye The Science Guy
>in his old series talked about how sex is determined by chromosomes and explained the science behind how that worked
>new series: gender is a spectrum see watch this person dancing in a sea horse costume my sex junk is so oh oh
>not a shred of science to be found

>>172415
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150213112317.htm

>>172420
Recently, I have seen a lot of scientific articles about the connection between genetics and transgenderism, and they all seem valid and fair and completely legit and in no way invalidate the function or effect of the XX/XY chromosomal pair. These findings in no way determine somebody's gender to be any infinite gender that person can imagine. At most and best, we can say they might determine how a person perceives their gender...which is different than gender itself.

Bill Nye things there are infinite genders on a broad spectrum, which is an abstraction of science in favor of social engineering. He's now a shill and a sell-out and a propagandist.

MAH ZEX JUNK IZ ZO OHOHOH

>>172420
*thinks

>>172432
are you having a stroke

>>172434
did you just assume my gender?

>>172435
no, by referring to "a stroke" i was sexually harassing you

>>172303
>So you can be immediately written off from having an opinion on something because you like it.
By that logic couldn't you also be written off from having an opinion on something cause you dislike it.

>>172437
Yup. If you dislike Bill Nye because you think he sold out, that's you. If you think he's part of some shareblue jew conspiracy to degenerate the west into nihilism though, you have your own board and you should stay there.

I think he's doing what he's always done, trying to get people to have a personal investment in science.

>>172302
>>172303
Yeah you enable a fraud and a propagandist.

>>172454
Then he should ground his shit in actual science. Who the fuck said anything about any conspiracy? You're batshit crazy.

>>172454
Triggered leftists like you are ok with frauds spewing fake science and nonsense. But then again I'm sure you're an idiot you think there are more than two gender and that you can actually change it.

>>172367
He uses fake science and propaganda to push debunked nonsense.

>>172410
Yeah lefties love this garbage what a shock.

>>172431

>Bill Nye things there are infinite genders on a broad spectrum, which is an abstraction of science in favor of social engineering. He's now a shill and a sell-out and a propagandist.

Sex might be binary with the exceptional of occasional hermaphrodite, but gender to my understanding is whatever someone feels most natural embracing the rolls of. If you think gender is just a synonym for sex then you'll disagree but it'll be an entirely semantic disagreement, which is why I don't understand the outrage against Nye here.

>in favor of social engineering

How exactly? It appears to me that the opposite is true. Bill Nye's position, agree or not, is that someone can identify as feminine or masculine simply because that is what they feel most natural doing, regardless of their sex. Insisting that people have to conform fully to their sex is social engineering. It's making a claim that people have to behave a certain way not per their wish but because we want a particular sort of society. Right or wrong, that is social engineering.

>>172486
>but gender to my understanding is whatever someone feels most natural embracing the rolls of

Even accepting that, you either embrace a feminine or masculine role to greater or lesser degrees. Each one of those degrees does not constitute a separate "gender." That's ridiculous.

>>172486
Sex and gender are the same.

>>172486
>whatever someone feels most natural embracing the rolls of

Right, how one perceives one's self in the context of gender. We agree, that's what I said. But that is a matter of cognizance: how one is understanding their self (via gender) to be. It's not gender in and of itself, at least according to my understanding of the articles I've read.

>someone can identify as feminine or masculine simply because that is what they feel most natural doing, regardless of their sex

Yes, but that's not gender, that's one's understanding of gender. It's behavioral and sociological.

You are twisting the point. Nye is not teaching people how to conform or not to their sex. He is teaching them that *how they perceive their sex is in fact what their sex is because genetics*. Which is a load.

Why aren't you more upset about his other nutty professor stuff?

>>172410
Hah! Thanks for the links. I'm glad it failed, all of the clips I saw from it were just horrible, and Nye's attitude is so holier than thou. Hopeilly no one else gives him a show.

>>172174
Cause he promotes communist degeracy with lies about sex and climate.

>>172367
He should stick to space colonization.

>>172530
>Right, how one perceives one's self in the context of gender. We agree, that's what I said. But that is a matter of cognizance: how one is understanding their self (via gender) to be. It's not gender in and of itself, at least according to my understanding of the articles I've read.

wait a second. So here's a dictionary definition of gender:
>the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

This seems to suggest that sex is the equipment you're born with and gender is the "matter of cognizance".

Even if you abide by a different definition of gender, as long as you can accept that it's possible for someone to be a man but feel more natural conforming to the rolls of a woman, your disagreement with Nye appears to be totally semantic (you define gender is just a synonym for sex, he defines it as a person's perception).

>*how they perceive their sex is in fact what their sex is because genetics*.

I'm a little confused right now. If he's saying sex is jut gender then that's not terribly useful because it's probably good to have a word that defines the sexual equipment one's born with. But it can still be a semantic difference.

If he said that one's perception of their sex determines whether they have a penis or a vagina that's obviously wrong.

If he's saying a male can feel more natural conforming to female rolls and that some of that perception might be rooted in genetics (hormones &c.) that sounds reasonable. It's reasonable that some dudes are more feminine because maybe they produce less male hormone and there is probably some genetic foundation to that.

>>172169
>showbiz man files suit vs showbiz company over showbiz money
>
>
>
>SJW! Shill! Cuck and cuck-enabler!
Hard hitting news indeed

>>172555
He may be in showbiz but i think suggesting mercenary motives implies that he doesn't actually hope to achieve some beneficial social impact through his work.
The fact that he also earns a living from his work shouldn't necessarily diminish it since there's no clear conflict of interest that he's hidden. I don't begrudge him the compensation he was promised.

>>172553
poster

OK so I looked up what I think is the episode in question and the most problematic thing I've heard so far is his quote "gender is like sex; it's on a spectrum". If he's implying there are infinite gradations between having a penis and a vagina then obviously that's wrong, there are two sexes in that sense, some more perhaps if one considers hermaphrodites, but not infinite.

However I think you might be missing the nuance that he's defining gender is the psychological experience, whereas sex is physiological and not just defined by reproductive organs but by less apparent physiological differences like hormones and neurology. With respect to those characteristics, in some sense sex can exist along a continuum.

I take it some folks just want sex to refer to the type of junk a person has and as long as you're consistent with your definition I guess that's OK, but in any case that by itself would then just be a semantic difference with Nye's understanding of sex as long as one can accept that it's possible for some men to have higher levels of androgen than others for example.

>>172560
Well that's really the thing isn't it?

I mean sexual characteristics are not limited strictly to pebis and puss

>>172555
trips of truth

>>172174

>Not realizing that professional actors are paid often to push propoganda

If the shoe fits...

>>172560
>whereas sex is physiological and not just defined by reproductive organs but by less apparent physiological differences like hormones and neurology. With respect to those characteristics, in some sense sex can exist along a continuum

This is still gender, as modern science describes it. Consider that sex, as a spectrum, has two equal sides maleness and femaleness. To imply a third sex is going to get into deformities that are statistically insignifigant so lets stay away from that a bit. To illustrate, the furthest right on this spectrum is a man with 8pack abs, adams apple the size of an apple and a big ol penis, where the far left is an hourglass figured mother of 4.
If we start at the far right and move left, the mans shoulders start getting smaller, his hips get wider, his pecs get flabby. He may start to look more female as that marker aproaches the halfway mark, and in the 45-55 range it may be a challenge to tell which is which. The shoulders of a woman being broad may take away from femininity but at what width do her shoulders make her male? Men may have large, primarily fatty breats but is it a c cup or a d cup that makes him female? Sex is binary because the biology of humanity is, in regards to reproduction, binary. Crossing 50.0 into 49.999... only has one major change and its penis ---> vagina. You can define maleness and femaleness as any level of arbitrary definitions but the two factors required to be any amount of "male" is XY, Penis.