what did he mean by this?

>>8861752
>what did he mean by this?
That arguing about biology in a twitter feed with people who aren't going to change their minds is frustrating and unrewarding.

File: 2017_04_26_042742.png (31KB, 666x174px)

31KB, 666x174px

>I used to like this man

>>8861752
Gender is a spectrum, get over it.

File: google.jpg (31KB, 582x213px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 582x213px

>>8861752

>>8861752
He wants to save the world with Bill Nye, in the best way possible

>>8861752
Fuck drmbdndf and fuck white people.

>>8861752
>>8861783
How do these people with their age not realize they're using copy-paste rheoric that will be replaced in two years.

Hmm... I would go to /x/ to cook up a conspiracy that; influential or popular people are being contracted/urged/payed by an unknown party to take certain stances on subjects to help an agenda. But I need to get some sleep.

Or pills, or maybe both.

File: pepe smug life.jpg (119KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 750x1000px

>>8861752

It all comes tumbling down.

He is right though. Gender is as arbitrary as social stratification. Now if he was talking about quantitative, observable sexual metamorphism, I would be pissed. But he's not, he's talking about some concept humans made up in the first place.

>>8861752
he means that he was paid a large sum of money to be a leftist shill

like most public figures today

>>8861752
sex isn't a spectrum. You're male, female, or you have a severe birth defect. Why care about gender other than to have a constant flavor of homoeroticism in your rhetoric?

>>8861752
science is determined by "muh feels". Thanks "popularizers", you've ushered in a new dark age.

>>8861909
Oh, c'mon.
When people said man and woman, they were talking about male and female.
Perhaps you could claim masculine and feminine are social constructs that differ depending on the society.

>>8861752
He's right. Gender is a social construct so of course of people decide to label it whatever they want to then they can go again. Sex is binary and objective.

inb4 people site examples of non potent herms that literally have no sex because they can't reproduce.

>>8862069
>Everything I like is facts
>Everything I don't like is feelings
>Everyone I disagree with puts feelings before facts.
I feel like Alice in fucking Wonderland.

>>8862084
>When people said man and woman, they were talking about male and female.
Most casual use of language is incredibly sloppy, and people tend to lump related concepts together.

>>8862109
>Gender is a social construct so of course of people decide to label it whatever they want to then they can go again. Sex is binary and objective.
My understanding is that it's a bit more complex then that again, because both both "gender" and "sex" refer to a collection of traits. Some of those traits are social constructions and others map directly to biology. Really, this is a testament to how fucked both language and biology are more than anything.

>>8861784
Male and female, everything else is a mental or hormonal disorders which scientists should be looking for a cure.

>Alma mater: Tisch School of the Arts
>Occupation: Designer/fabricator, actor, educator

leaving aside the gender thing, why are these individuals placed as "scientists"? i really don't understand.

>>8862109
Gay as fuck, kys.

>>8862208

Next time you reply to me try using english, kid.

File: All-aboard-the-rage-train.jpg (56KB, 499x450px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 499x450px

>>8862204
Molecular biologist, geneticist Nobel Prize winner James Watson, famous for discovering the DNA molecular structure, is a senile racist old fool because he said Africans were less intelligent than Europeans based on a century of research and empirical data.

Mediocre entertainer Bill Nye with a BS in Mechanical Engineer is a famous and respected paragon of science for teaching us about "sex junk", the "sexy spectrum of gender" and the "science of feelings" to the hip beats of DJ Seahorse

Welcome to the dystopian Brave New World Hell that is 2017.

>>8862211
Kys

>>8862202
Why?

>>8862109
Actually as I understand it sex is still binary even in herms

Herms are male because they posses Y chromosomes. Anything with a Y chromosome is male and anything without one is female.

File: 1478673820810s.jpg (5KB, 250x191px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 250x191px

These fuckheads can't even get their own convoluted logic right.

Gender is not a spectrum. Is it a discrete distribution. Sexual orientation is a spectrum

>>8862255
This. Even AIS people are male, although socially they're obviously recognized as women because they're born phenotypically that way and usually they don't know until puberty. That's one of the very few exceptions I can think of, and they're still extremely rare

File: #emperorpalpatineswag.png (489KB, 523x699px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 523x699px

>>8862258
ayyy lmao that's actually a pretty fair assessment

>>8862277
>That's one of the very few exceptions I can think of, and they're still extremely rare

Yea, it's so rare that it's not worth discussing in a debate on gender and anyone who tries is more or less stupid or baiting you.

>>8862258
>Gender is not a spectrum. Is it a discrete distribution. Sexual orientation is a spectrum
What are you talking about? No-one but you has mentioned orientation, and one of those being a spectrum doesn't exclude the other from being one too.

>The closer we look at anything the blurrier the lines get
>The closer you look at genetic diversity in humans the sooner you realize that we are all are our own race.

>>8862292
>No-one but you has mentioned orientation

I beleive that's the point.

It's literally a measure of masculinity and femininity, which are social constructs anyway. If you are closer to the middle of the scale, I can see why one would not want to necessarily use the typical gender identifiers. What's the issue here?

File: what is a science anyway.png (94KB, 330x154px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 330x154px

>>8862255
>Anything with a Y chromosome is male and anything without one is female.
that's not even a remotely accurate definition of male and female.

male: produces many small gametes
female: produces few large gametes

File: 7_10.gif (230KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 720x540px

>>8862250
The betterment of society as a whole. Sick individuals weigh us down and must be cured of their ailments in order for society to function properly.

>inb4 muh eugenics
Such notions have been present for as long as humanity as a species has existed.

>>8862339
No one has time to remember all of those magical pronouns so they call people what their genitals are.

>>8862342
Except that's not always the case sir

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/05/25/fruit-fly-sperm-is-monstrously-long-and-we-might-finally-know-why/?utm_term=.91ac6f6eeda2

>>8862339
>which are social constructs anyway.
If your testes produce testosterone I can guarantee you will become more aggressive and assertive regardless of how feminine you view yourself.

>>8862248
Kek

>>8862380
Not sure the point you're trying to make...

>>8862109
Language is a social construct.

Therefore the meaning of words are whatever I deem them to be.

You just admitted to being a pedophile murderer in your post.

more like this guys on a spectrum... amirite?

>>8862396
You can play with dolls and dress in dresses all you like but if you have testis your body will produce testosterone and you will have denser bones and more muscle mass, aside from that you will also be more aggressive and risk-taking.

>>8861752
What an idiot. Not that I agree with him but if he was truly witty he would say:
>the proof is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader

>>8862420
>Language is a social construct.
>Therefore the meaning of words are whatever I deem them to be.
Congratulations, you don't understand what the term "social construct" means!

>>8862451
>gender is a social construct <=> people can have a different gender than what society deems them
>language is a social construct <=> people can have different interpretations of what people say

>>8862258
>Sexual orientation is a spectrum

Is there any evidence of that? Not self reports, but actual empirical evidence.

>>8862426
Sure. But there's also low-test males and high-test females. Everyone is on a different level. Sometimes hormonal levels make you fit in more mentally (and/or physically) with the opposite gender constructs. Sometimes you don't really fit into either. It doesn't have to be purely hormonal either, as there are many many factors that affect personality and looks.

>>8862467
That's just common sense at this point.... What's wrong with self reports? I can tell you right now I'm bisexual with a female preference. Am I 100% fag?

How would one go about designing an experiment to show that gender is on a spectrum? Is it a falsifiable theory?

>>8862467
Well, people can be completely straight and never find the same sex attractive, or they can be completely homosexual, and not find the opposite gender attractive, or they can be bisexual, and anywhere in between. What the fuck do you mean "empirical evidence"? Can you find an empirical metric by which to measure "gayness"? The study of sexuality is firmly in the area of social "science"; don't bother asking questions in terms of physical science.

>>8862478
Because self reporting is prone to strong personal bias.

For example you may say you have a female preference but you may have a male preference that you're not acknowledging.

4chan in particular is full of examples of people thinking they're normal but actually being flaming faggots. There's at least one in every single thread posted on this site.

File: 1408159241541.jpg (22KB, 346x381px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 346x381px

>the observer effect collpases the boundaries of gender

whoa dude, are you like telling me that CONSCIOUSNESS warps reality?

>>8861752
I wonder if this is how Alice felt stepping into Wonderland.

>>8862492
I know you're trolling now, but you just acknowledged there can be bisexual with a preference... That means there's in-betweens.

>>8862492
>For example you may say you have a female preference but you may have a male preference that you're not acknowledging.
How does this refute the idea that sexuality is not on a spectrum? The difference between dead-middle bisexual but in denial and female-biased bisexual is just finer gradation if anything.

>>8862511
It doesn't.

I'm not saying that it disproves it, but I'm saying for a lot of people self reporting isn't a sufficient proof. The problem is that you can make observations and infer things but there isn't any real direct evidence.

Also theoretically it wouldn't matter if your in denial or not unless you're implying that not only is sexual preference on a pure spectrum but that it's also fluid, and you really don't want to make that argument. Trust me.

>>8862506
Not really trolling, just playing devil's advocate.

>>8862295
INDIVIDUAL RACE WAR NOW

>>8862467
>empirical evidence
>of a personal feeling

U wot

>>8862228
intelligence aint a spectrum dude

Sex: M or F only (minor exceptions)

Gender: subjective sexual orientation you view yourself as

Sexual orientation: determined by who you are attracted to

Back to the definition of gender, assuming that what I've said is the 100% truth.. If you were to view yourself as a female whilst male, then you are being dishonest with yourself. If gender is a spectrum like Mr Savage suggested, then everywhere on that spectrum, given that the point does not correspond to the actual sex and orientation of a person in question, is fantasy. Sorry guys, but if you identify as something you are not, then you have a psychological problem.

>>8861782
Yep. Cheers for not being cheap & Your common-Sense |

My assigned genetics don't reflect the fact that I was really meant to be a goldfish.

#speciesdysphoria

>>8861752
>public figure of any fame whatsoever
>not following the popular opinion in hollywood and getting your career ruined
pick one

File: 3Yf499Y.jpg (147KB, 1117x630px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1117x630px

>>8862668
That is called otherkin and it already exists.

>>8862119
Well you wouldn't disagree with something if it was a fact would you.

Gender is nothing but a grammatical feature

>>8861752
except for the case of quantum mechanics where you look so close the lines become distinct. we live in a quantum gender world there is no spectrum

TFW when all celebs you watch are now leftist cucks.

Feelsbadman.jpg

Jamie is better anyways.

I was under the impression that gender existed as an easy way to identify biological sex. I can understand transsexuals identifying as the sex that they're transitioning to, but it doesn't make logical sense to call gender a spectrum; it defeats the purpose.

>>8863950
That's generally how it plays out. It's really a small percentage of people who feel like they don't belong to either. I'll refrain from calling an ambiguous person a she or a he until I find out what they prefer.

he's a professional toy model maker. why are we taking about him?

>>8863261
hollywood is bribing them to control the populace, we saw this in full march during the election
who knows what they actually think, most of them probably don't care

File: 1493244900717.gif (365KB, 500x275px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 500x275px

>>8863261
It sucks, dude.

Popsci has become "A lie told often enough becomes the truth"

>>8863209
Fucking this. It's so obvious how they are changing the meaning to words, but unfortunately it's been successful so far

>>8862342
Congratulations on passing Gen Bio II

>>8862487
Everything you said is true, which is why they're clinging to social science as a tool with which to misinform people and spread their agenda.

File: 2015-03-29_21.14.38.jpg (68KB, 1280x665px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1280x665px

>>8861752
I mean, he's actually not wrong. I'm trying to find one example that counters that statement. I dont like that they're trying to turn gender into something calculable though. Its a social construct used to shift one's sexual identity to either "more feminine" or "more masculine" by using the cultural schema of what it means to either be feminine or masculine. Studying anything culture based is useless because culture varies too much in regards to geography as well as time. Science is meant to be more concrete in that it is supposed to withstand situatonal tests and apply to everything in its categorical presence.

Alright, I know sex and gender are not the same. So what fucking relevance does gender have then? If someone feels like he is a gender called super-male-unicorn, then that is what I call PERSONALITY
So again, if it's just personal perception, which is not based on objectivity, why do people care about it so much that we have to create gender neutral pro-nouns and everything else that comes with it?!
Why can't the word "male" and "female" simply be based on biological SEX?

>>8861782
Fpbp

>>8864606
Its all about virtue signaling, enforcing your "progressiveness" and forcing other people to do what you want in the name of social justice!

>>8864606
Gender is basically just fashion at this point. A different clothing stile is now a gender. It's meaningless horseshit.

>>8861752
Gender isn't a spectrum. Most people congregate around one of two points on a linear graph. The outliers in between are insignificant.

>>8862228
>a century of research and empirical data.

No.

And he's also famous for being fucking nuts

>>8861752
One day, they'll aaall be rounded up. And then they'll be shot.

>>8861794
>I'm not insulting you
>insults him
What did he mean by this

>>8862122
The problem is that everyone is conflating gender with gender expression. There are two genders, man and woman. The expression of those genders lies on the spectrum between masculinity and femininity. That's where i think the argument is fucked because everyone's arguing about different things without even realizing it, which shows how fucked the language behind it is.

On a side note, the definitions of pronouns he or she refers to the person's sex, not gender. Idk why this is, but i have no problem using the opposite one on a trans person who passes.

File: feels90sman.jpg (49KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x376px

>all these people who used to be cool are now spouting pseudoscience
Why /sci/?

>>8865944
Because they tag ideology onto it

>>8862228
It was actually discovered by Har Gobind Khorana years before Watson.

File: Just+reading+the+g+factor+when+http+emilkirkegaarddk+en+wp+content+uploads+the+g+factor+the+science+of+mental+ability+arthur+r+jensenpdf_ee50e6_5778981.jpg (86KB, 599x709px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 599x709px

>>8864869
>No.
Yes.

Blacks have in average a lower IQ and lower amount of cortical neurons than Whites: "Race, Evolution and Intelligence, a Life History in Perspective" (JP Rushton 1995)

Blacks have a lower average cranial capacity than Whites as well as a lower IQ: "The g Factor, the Science of Mental Ability" (Jensen 1998)

46% of geneticists and evolutionary biologists polled in 1984 agreed that racial Black-White IQ gap was at least partly genetic. Only 15% said it was entirely caused by environmental factors, with the remainer 39% refusing to answer the question. 98% of psychologists agreed on the heritability of intelligence. 55% of all the experts consulted agreed "socioeconomic differences in IQ" could be explained by genetic reasons: The IQ Controversy, the Media and Public Policy (Snyderman and Rothman, 1984)

>>8864869
I said DNA molecular structure, not the concept of DNA itself.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson
>In mid-March 1953, using, in part, experimental data collected mainly by Rosalind Franklin and also by Maurice Wilkins, Watson and Crick deduced the double helix structure of DNA. Sir Lawrence Bragg, the director of the Cavendish Laboratory (where Watson and Crick worked), made the original announcement of the discovery at a Solvay conference on proteins in Belgium on April 8, 1953; it went unreported by the press. Watson and Crick submitted a paper to the scientific journal Nature, which was published on April 25, 1953. This has been described by some other biologists and Nobel laureates as the most important scientific discovery of the 20th century.

And he is not "nuts". Who the fuck are you to tarnish the image of this man? He was perfectly lucid when he said that Africans were not as smart as Europeans (which is a FACT proven by a century of IQ research and testing), go look for the interview, it was just one sentence out of many topics he talked about, but the mejor newspapers literally destroyed his life.

>>8866430
Meant to quote (You) the second time >>8866081

>>8865944

Because he was never "cool." He just liked to blow shit up on TV and you liked to watch. You shouldn't be surprised that someone who catered to plebes before caters to them now.

>>8866430
>Linear plot with THREE FUCKING POINTS
NOT SCIENCES WHEN WILL THEY LEARN

>>8861752
>d-dont expect me to prove it !!!
haha

>>8861794
>>8861783
Is this satire? He sounds like a pink haired queer feminist major.

File: scatter-plot-iq-polygenic-score.png (81KB, 871x684px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 871x684px

>>8866441
It's three medians not three samples fucktard.

>>8861960
>identity politics is leftism
Liberals are not left wing my friend.

>>8862343
pic is brazilian>turk>anglo>italian>german

>>8866447
Three medians equals exactly to 3 fucking points. Guess what, you can have 100 samples then make two medians out of them and guess how good the r will be.

>>8866435
sjws never watched anything on Discovery even before they turned to reality tv. SJWs have no interest in nature or science docs.Hell, most would probably call for a boycott of any channel that showed a lion killing a wildabeast.

File: Chart_07.jpg (24KB, 335x464px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 335x464px

>>8866450
I don't see your point.
But well... is this better?
Information from autopsies.
No psychology and no linear plots.

>>8866453
The problem isn't whether the brain size evaluation was correct.

The problem is that instead of actually evaluating brain size versus IQ based on all samples or at least grouping them by median brain size and evaluating the median IQ it just put 3 points there. I don't see why you need to group things by race when trying to prove brain size - IQ correlation.

>>8862292
His claim is that gender is not a spectrum. He never implied they where mutually exclusive.

Point is that you either have xx or xy chrmosomes. Any genetic defect will specifically target one set or another. So even ppeople with xyyyyy chrmosomes are still male or xxy are still female.

>>8865944
pure ideology

>>8861752
>He ends up supporting the biggest myth of them all

Like pottery

>>8866461

You need to remember where you are Anon, most anons who shit post these IQ graphs and comments have very little going on for themselves.

I know this because if you ever go to boards like /pol/, /v/ and /b/ where the majority of these /sci/ cross posters are coming from bring up these very same pieces of information. And there's been times where off topic job threads have been on the same page and outside a couple of STEM or trade braggers most are in less than satisfying positions in their life.

Most people especially those making more than the average American family by themselves aren't wasting their time on this shit unless they are specifically in the field of psychology or genetics.

I thought Savage had some type of STEM background (mostly engineering) but checking his bio he went to an arts school for special effects and design. How do these people end up with science/engineering shows? Hell, Hyneman got a degree in fucking Russian linguistics only. He got an honorary Doctor of Engineering but that doesn't count because it's honorary.

File: 1451294205694.gif (408KB, 500x345px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 500x345px

>>8866772
I'm pretty sure Jamie Hyneman was a trained spy for the US government. Look at his skill set: certified dive master, boat captain, wilderness survival expert, linguist. Also he left home when he was still young.
>Describing his early life, Hyneman said "I was a problematic kid, to be sure. I left home when I was 14 and hitchhiked all over the country."
We're looking at a guy that has a wide knowledge of technical skills, survival skills and also speaks Russian. He probably also has little contact with his family. He's like a perfect candidate to be a spy. I'm not memeing btw. I legit believe this.

>>8862228
The guy was old and senile. His pseudo research was nothing more than his old age mixing up memories from past times and the present.

>>8866740
Ad hominem is the typical last resort of someone that has ran out of arguments.

You may think we are all losers if you want to - I'm not. But it has no relevance to the discussion.

>>8866825
Another form of ad hominem. He doesn't strike me as senile at all from his interviews; you are gonna have to back up that statement

That he doesn't know about vector spaces.

By popular liberal models of gender, wherein individuals can have multiple genders, less than 1 gender, varying degrees of each gender, etc., a spectrum is clearly not satisfactory for representing their model. It's a vector space.

>>8861909
"gender" was a synonym for "sex" until about ten-fifteen years ago.

File: 1493113343052.png (513KB, 496x369px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 496x369px

>>8864590
educate yourself.

But people are discrete objects.

>>8862119
Post a paper we can't pull to shreds and I'll believe you.

>>8862182
Does he know what an annecdote is?
He's as bad as Trump and his vaccines cause autism
Many such cases

File: 15 str 15 int.png (2MB, 1907x1438px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1907x1438px

>>8866956
That image is fake

This one isn't

>>8864869

>he's also famous for being fucking nuts

you say that as if assesments of sanity werent generally just poorly disguised emotional arguments, its the typical mental gymnastic of believing everyone who doesnt aligns with your moral values must be fucked in the head

>>8866967
And the people who believe in the "gender spectrum" still insist on assigning genders discrete pronouns with no logical connection to any linear spectrum.

They simply do not know what they're talking about.

>>8861752
This isn't rocket surgery, people.

A small percentage of people perceive gender as a spectrum.

A large percentage of people perceive gender as binary.

He is falsely implying that it's a universal experience to perceive gender as a spectrum. That's a classic, amateurish logic error. ("Generalizing from a specific case.")

It's also an extremely common logic error, and is often used as a rhetorical trick to push a political agenda -- although I have no specific knowledge that he is attempting to push a political agenda with that statement.

His usage of "Also, listen up" is revealing, though. It shows an arrogance and sense of superiority. It's a marker that indicates that he made the post to satisfy some kind of emotional need.

Now, as far as what that emotional need might be -- I'm going to guess that he needs to oversimplify and overgeneralize things, to help him make sense of a confusing and complicated world. Declaring by fiat that "gender is always a spectrum" would be a very simple and satisfying way for him to make sense of the complex landscape of gender.

>>8866956
>reposts image that was proven to be fake as an argument
Sounds like you need to educate yourself.

>>8861822
Bathing in degeneracy while the nukes fall from the heavens?