Sign into an existing account

The naked reality is that Marxist dogma is like Christianity and all other ideologies or religions in that it is based on "might makes right".

The reason that leftist dogma exists in it's current form is that there are negative consequences for not agreeing and positive incentives for not dissenting.

All philosophies, ideologies, and religions exist this way.

Your beliefs aren't supposed to make sense, humans didn't evolve with believing the truth as a priority, we evolved to increase the number of genes like our own that exist among organisms as much as possible.

So our beliefs are chosen based on what benefits the spread of our genes the most, and often that criteria doesn't even include the truthfulness of them - in fact, truth can often get in the way of our ability to complete the evolutionary mission of natural selection, so we are programmed to actively avoid the truth where it is not convenient to this goal.

If he says that a woman or man is defined by their chromosomes, then he faces severe negative repercussions for this statement, especially if he says it on TV, his mind therefore has engaged the ultimate safeguard against this by making him genuinely believe that words alone make one male or female.

From there it then uses his cognitive ability to come up with reasons why this belief is justifiable, in order to hide the true reasons for the acceptance of this ridiculous belief from him, thus preserving his self-image, which is another quirk of the mind that exists because of the Darwinian utility of fooling itself.

We don't exist to be knowledgeable, we exist to be fruitful.

Matt Walsh could be like the professor here, all it takes is for him to be in a situation where believing that sex is determined by magic words is the most beneficial for his genes, at the very least, he can become like one of the silent majority who knows how insane such an idea is, but who also know enough not to openly reveal that this is their opinion.

Fear and desire, these are what drive humanity and all life, offer us something we want to happen, or threaten us with something we want not to, and our brains will do the work of orienting us appropriately, we don't even get a say in what we like or dislike, as that all comes from what has benefitted our genes in the past, and the ancestors who passed them down to produce us.

Most influential dogmas are made by these forces, dogmas which aren't influential, such as libertarianism or national socialism, are less subject to alteration based on these forces, they are often thought up by some philosophers who are not affected one way or another by the things that personally affect them in the immediate, and thus they were free to think of other factors when coming up with their ideas.

If people were being shunned or attacked for not taking a white man's word that he's black, then the same rules that apply to sex and gender would be applied to race - but they are not, and that is why we have the double standard seen here.

UT?

Raptor jesus fuck

Id expect something like him from nyu or Berkley...

"Sex refers to a set of biological characteristics. And gender is a social construct or category."

Ok. So if that is true, then society determines your gender. Gender is how society treats you based on your sex if we take the bait. That still doesn't mean you get to determine your gender or break those societal norms.

Sex is biological. Gender is the norms that surround sex. That says nothing about the norms being wrong.

But the second half of that video gets into an incompatibility I think we have with others about the utility of language. Is language a means of social negotiation (as they assume) or is it a way of understanding and communicating our understanding of reality (our assumption). To us words have no use if they don't describe a physical reality or something akin to it like describing someone's actual feelings. But for them they don't mind redefining words to appease those around them because that is the entire purpose of words in general. But if you want a rational society that can think about the reality that surrounds them that kind of model of what language is isn't going to help you.

This is at a really big school, surrounded by miles and miles of forest and hills. Outside the college center Knoxville is pretty dumpy. I doubt this queermo ever goes more than five miles outside campus. The school is also big enough that bullshit like this goes under the radar and as long as football pays for everything, this faggotoid can keep on living in his imaginary little world.

Why do these faggots have to convolute and muddy basic terms?

If you see a female on the streets you indicate to associates by saying her. Bam we have identified a biological sex of an individual and expressed gender based on that sex in language because we talk casually and dont use clinical terms in daily life.

These people are too stupid for English. Maybe they should be deported to learn a primitive language like Ethiopian Ongota with a tiny vocabulary and few rules, just clicks, sniffs, crotch grabbing and foot shuffling?

He's making shit up

Movie is available torrent. What is a Woman?

"a woman is whoever identifies as a woman"

"so if I were to identify as a black man, would that make me black?"

"you don't look black, and I don't think that speaks to your experience"

"so you can identify as something and be wrong?"

"yes, people can lie"

"well, it's not just lying that could make you say wrong things, it's also possible to be mistaken"

I would've asked

"why is it that someone who claims to be black is able to be a liar or mistaken about themselves, but someone who claims to be a woman is automatically defined as being a woman?"

If a woman is defined by their identification only, requiring only that to be accepted as being a woman, then being black should be defined by identification also, and if any of us identify as black, we should be accepted as being black.

That was exhausting. And that "social scientist" is insane.

deleted