/lit/ - Literature

No way that's true. I am not that hot.

im that hot

I want to wear the strapon.

Here they come/ The Beautiful Ones/ The Beautiful Ones...

I am okay with this

You guys are all faggots.

Hey ladies, can I go to the dance with you? GAEMS HAVE STORIES TOO!

>>2312556
Oh it turns you on, on, on, now he has gone/ Oh what turns you on, on, on, now your animal's gone?

i still don't get why lit is always the girl in these pairings

>>2312586
Gender is socially constructed.

>>2312594

really useful though.

>>2312604
Not really.

>>2312510
those girls don't have style.

>>2312608

Sure it is. How else do I know who to breed with?

>>2312705
Pheromones? Foreplay?

>>2312709
Sniff, sniff, sniff, sniff.

>>2312723
I will not let you smell my finger.

/lit/ is more attractive.

>>2312739

>>2312755
I once burnt my fingerprints off when I put a non-microwaveable cup in the microwave. Kitchen stank of burnt flesh.

>>2312586
Me too. /lit/ is all kerouac and camus, kerouac and camus. I struggle to recall a more masculine genre.

/lit/ is the manliest of men. I haven't heard anyone speak of Jane Austen since I got here.

>>2312594
In what way is gender socially constructed?

>>2312769

Leavis was right. Austen's real good.
But 'the great tradition' ain't so fun.

try Romantics, Rebels and Reactionaries by Marilyn Butler; she does great work on Austen's subtle anti-convention subtext.

>>2312773
Sex is XX XY unchanged fixed biological science. you're stuck with it.

gender is only one facet of our fluid identity. homo hetero bi crossdresser macho masculine feminine. it's the role different sexes play determined in social and historic context.

If gender's the performance sex is the stage?

>>2312776
I don't really know what you're trying to say but Jane Austen's novels are boring.

>>2312773
Gender roles. "Women love pink shit and cute things, while guys like shooting stuff and trucks."

Pic related, obviously.

>>2312773
To some degree it's a case of "man is the measure of all things". We impose the labels of man and woman onto others. However, this may give you greater insight:

How does a trap, who is physically "a man", convince you they're "a woman"? They take advantage of certain signifiers that usually have no inherent meaning but are legitimized through society (women have long hair, wear skirts etc.) that allow them to be viewed, socially as a woman. Whether or not you think they're physically male, for nearly every interaction you'd have with them the physical reality (having a penis) is unimportant. So in many ways the reality of man and woman is not do they or do they not have a penis, it's do they fill a certain space socially.

>>2312789
>>2312794
But gender roles have a biological basis. You can't just disregard them because some people are exceptions.

>>2312798
sex has a biological basis. gender is socially constructed. hth.

>>2312795
That's just a man acting like a woman. He may have hormonal issues that make him think and act feminine, but he is still a male.

>>2312798
>But gender roles have a biological basis. You can't just disregard them because some people are exceptions.
If only all science were as easy as "everything that disagrees with my theory is an exception and doesn't count".

>>2312798
I'd try to explain it, but >>2312795 does a much better job.

>>2312801
So where are all the societies where the women fight wars and men nurture the children into adulthood?

>>2312803
>man
>woman
Those are genders.

>>2312798
>But gender roles have a biological basis.
I accept that but i onder how you think that plays out.
I guess you mean, women are the only ones who bear children and that explains why they do less occupational work, earn less and work in the home.
while biology is a contributing factor in lifestyle, you also have economics and an array of other contributing factors. can you afford a nanny?

then you have various other animal communities where the males bear offspring and the females hunt

this dude is trollin, yall

>>2312811

i'm sorry, you have not read enough to post on this board

perhaps one of 4chan's many fine boards dedicated to japanese culture might interest you?

>>2312803
Let's be scientific and design an experiment. How can you tell the difference between a woman and a man acting as a woman?

>>2312805
Since when are gender studies a "science"? Hormones guide the behavior of the different sexes. Men are aggressive and women are nurturing.

>>2312819
Oh gawd, that reminds me of this retarded short story we had to read at my progressive elementary school all about Baby X and how it was raised as both genders and it made people reconsider their assumptions about gender roles yadda yadda yadda.

>>2312822
So you're a biological determinist? Social pressures and norms exert no influence on peoples' behavior?

>>2312822
So a nurturing male is a woman and an agressive woman is a man?

>>2312798
>biological basis
>>2312822
>gender studies
Take your ritalin first, then decide how you're unable to understand.

>>2312816
Sure, we're able to stray from our biological leanings, but the healthiest way for a society to live is to adhere to gender roles. At least if you intend to start a family.
>>2312819
A woman will have female physical features. A man acting as a woman will have male physical features and the mannerisms of a woman.

>>2312829
What if its a man acting as a woman and he's had reconstructing surgery on his genitals and elsewhere? how do you tell the difference?

>>2312829

i really must insist, "not op," you are exceeding the weight limit of /lit/

i'm sure you have a ddr pad somewhere you could be dripping sweat onto, so please excuse yourself from this board

>>2312829
>>but the healthiest way for a society to live is to adhere to gender roles

but the gender rules are never definitive. they are always changing. hence you go from the 50s style misogyny to 21st century metrosexuality.

>>2312828
Gender studies are inherently sociological. I'm speaking of biology.
>>2312827
A nurturing male is a man acting like a woman. An aggressive woman is a woman acting like a man. Of course those were just examples though, there are many other characteristics necessary for a man to be truly "feminine" and a woman to be truly "masculine".

I don't listen to music.

Actually not OP does have a point; there have been multiple cases where boys have had their penises removed (accidentally) and were attempted to be raised as girls. Long story short, it didn't work, indicating that gender has some biological basis.

He's still an idiot though.

>>2312841
>A nurturing male is a man acting like a woman.

how do you tell the difference between a man acting as a woman and an actual woman, especially after surgery?

>>2312829
You're confusing gender and sex again. Gender = roles in society, sex = XX or XY.
>>2312838
Nice ad hominin. Also, that picture is terribly drawn and argued.

>>2312836
I probably couldn't, assuming it was done convincingly. What's your point?
>>2312840
And what happened between the 50s and the 21st century?
>>2312838
I don't know what you're talking about. Go be a faggot somewhere else.

>>2312853

what i'm talking about in a nutshell is that you are fat and ill read and should be working on shedding some pounds to avoid type 2 diabetes rather than making terrible posts everyone hates

>>2312853
>And what happened between the 50s and the 21st century?
Seriously? You're really asking this question?

...Feminism. Popping out babies or spinsterhood are no longer the only two routes for most women nowadays.

>>2312853
>And what happened between the 50s and the 21st century?

gender roles fluctuate. why?

>>2312841
>Gender studies are inherently sociological. I'm speaking of biology.

to explain gender, biology is only 1 part of it. you take biology, in conjunction with the social and political or else you end up with an incomplete (and hilarious - see pic related) explanation

>>2312848
That's fine, I'm not an expert on the terminology, my point is that you can't disregard the biological reasoning BEHIND gender roles. To say they are "socially constructed" is to ignore the biology that leads to those behaviors in the first place. It's dishonest.

>>2312869
no one is ignoring biology by saying its socially constructed. we know where gender comes from. it comes from sex and its influenced further by other things in conjunction with biology.

>>2312868
I don't think you do need to combine the biological with the social or political though. If I go to Eastern Europe, then Mongolia, then Taiwan, then Japan, then Russia, I'll always generally be able to identify the "feminine" males and the "masculine" females. The biology is the basis for the rest of it, and it's generally objective and unchanging.

>>2312876

>If I go to Eastern Europe, then Mongolia, then Taiwan, then Japan, then Russia

you can't though, haven't you read the news stories about airlines refusing to seat morbidly obese passengers?

>>2312874
By only acknowledging social aspects of gender, you're brushing off the biological basis of it. Sure, some things men do in Japan might be seen as feminine from my western perspective(social differences), but the women will still generally be nurturing and obedient(at least in relationships), and the men will generally be aggressive and dominant. It's the same almost everywhere in the world. The only exception I've ever heard of is some weird asian mountain village of like 200 people where the women are in charge.

>>2312869
>That's fine, I'm not an expert on the terminology
You're not an expert. Period. You're following some flimsily put together biosocial model of human brain development, without knowing what is really going on in the field.

i'm just sad noone wants to talk about austen

>>2312882

aggressively devouring flamin hot cheetos doesn't count

>>2312876
social and political != geographical

there are vast difference even within this country (whatever country you're in) between people of the same gender. you get males and females you play different gender roles. some stay at home dads, some masculine gay men. and I think you would find if you actually visited other places, there are different patterns in how these roles are performed and by whom.

>>2312885
Oh behave...

>>2312877
I want to read the rest of this debate without your faggoty responses, please.

>>2312877
>>2312887
And here i was thinking that people adopted trips because they had something interesting to say. Go away, Quinten.

>>2312884
I'm sorry, but convincing me I'm not qualified to discuss this topic isn't going to change my mind.

I don't have to understand Christianity to reject it. Same thing in this case.

>>2312882
No one is brushing off biology. Quite the opposite. Most people are ill-educated like yourself focusing on biology exclusively.

>>2312893
>>2312890

dropped by "not op": name
not dropped by "not op": weight, family size sack of corn chips

>>2312895
>I reject neuroscience, and all its knowledge
Then it's your religion without religion, and you're the only prophet. Have fun with that.

>>2312895
>I don't have to understand something to reject it.

>Sagan
>Richard Feynmann !Hwop/gspA.
>biological determinism

>>>/sci/

>>2312888
Regardless, the countries are different enough to pass as good examples of the biological basis of gender roles.
>you get males and females you play different gender roles. some stay at home dads, some masculine gay men. and I think you would find if you actually visited other places, there are different patterns in how these roles are performed and by whom.
But what's the "norm"? Again, you're trying to reject the rule(the "norm") by pointing to the exceptions. It doesn't work that way.

>>2312905

what's the biological basis of you asking your mom to the prom

>>2312905
I'm not rejecting the norm at all. I'm simply acknowledging the exceptions. Something you fail to do. You mention a tribe where the women are in charge and dismiss it. Clearly within such a settlement, the norm is quite different from the norm we are used to.

>>2312901
Let me rephrase: I don't have to fully understand something, terminology and all, to reject a fundamental aspect of it that is incorrect or irrational. I don't need to be able to quote Bible passages to know that someone's claim that I'll go to hell when I die is unreasonable.
>>2312896
Look at this person:
>>2312594

That's a common trend I see among feminists and LGBT activist types. They entirely ignore the biological basis and place the emphasis on the social aspects of gender, though they're significantly less important.

>>2312913
>They entirely ignore the biological basis and place the emphasis on the social aspects of gender, though they're significantly less important.
>they're significantly less important
On what basis? That gender roles are similar in the societies that you've cherry-picked as examples?

>>2312913
saying it is socially constructed is not ignoring biology at all.it's only saying that it is socially constructed. It's rooted in biology but it's influenced by several factors.

>>2312910
I acknowledge that exceptions exist, of course. I'd be stupid not to. I don't take exceptions as evidence against my belief that biology is the basis of gender roles. A man raised amongst wolves will think he's a wolf. The problem is that one day that man might try to fight a wolf and will be mauled apart.

>>2312919
A vast number of decent neuroscientists et al. would take issue with that
>rooted in biology
Society affects the effects of biology. Biology affects the effects of society. Neither is rooted in the other.

>>2312925
>A man raised amongst wolves will think he's a wolf.
How do you know? Were you raised by wolves?

>>2312919
Okay, take my wolf example. Is, then, human behavior(walking upright, talking, introspection, recreational socializing) entirely a social construct? This wolf man must prove that humans don't naturally tend to talk and walk upright and think about things and hang out with others for enjoyment, right?

>>2312925
>biology is the basis of gender roles

of course this is true. penises and vaginas exist xx and xy chromosomes exist.

the thing is people are coming to realise that these biological constraints aren't as influential as before. with medical advances, Women aren't in labour for as long and can get back to work faster and progress on the career ladder. they have more money and less time. men take paternity leave and the situation is reversed. you get stay at home dads etc.

>>2312936
I was, but since you won't believe me let me just rephrase that he will ACT like a wolf. What he thinks isn't really important.

>>2312938
Well if its anything like tarzan, let's face it he's not going to be talking unless hears others talk. wolfs don't talk. so he won't talk in the absence of humans

the other things would all be done differently than say if he was raised in the suburbs or paris or some other human settlement and they might not even be done at all. we'll never know since it's highly unethical to permit wolves to raise human offspring.

>>2312942
>xx and xy chromosomes exist
You know the concepts of male and female existed before we knew of chromosomes. Also, someone can have a fully functioning penis, but have XX chroms.

>>2312930
Just because they affect each other doesn't mean they're both equally important. It's not a chicken or egg scenario because biology OBJECTIVELY comes first. And I'm arguing that it's the most significant aspect of gender.
>>2312942
Well we agree then. I disagree with your optimism toward a polar reversal of gender roles, but too many times have I argued with people who refuse to acknowledge the importance of biology.
>GENDER ROLES WERE CREATED BY THE PATRIARCHY TO KEEP US WOMYN DOWN. KILL ALL MEN FOR TRUE EQUALITY WOOHOO

Slight exaggeration(although I know there are women who feel that way), but they are reluctant to recognize gender as having anything but a social basis. Posts like this:
>>2312594

tend to perpetuate this idea.

>>2312959
>You know the concepts of male and female existed before we knew of chromosomes.

of course but the difference was still there. gender is socially constructed but it would be naive to disregard biology entirely.

>>2312962

>It's not a chicken or egg scenario

because you ate them both

>>2312962
>biology OBJECTIVELY comes first
How? You wouldn't even have the label of gender without the social framework.

>>2312962
>it's the most significant aspect of gender.

Thats what it disputable, since with science and technology we can actually override biological constraints and alter the physical construction you were born with.

>>optimism toward a polar reversal of gender roles

I didn't say there was going to be reversal. I'm making no predictions . I'm mentioning what I see

>>2312973
The biology creates the behaviors that we(socially) identify as the different genders.

>>2312982
but if you grew up in the right society then aggressiveness and dominance may well be your female.

now i remember why i stopped browsing /lit/

>herp, i knew a guy once with long hair. derp, gender is all relative man...

I heard these were good:

"This Norwegian documentary series about how sociologists, gender studies and queer theory academics have ignored the role of biology in influencing behavior was pretty good. Episode subject matter should be obvious based on the URL:

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-1-gender-equality
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-ii-parental-effect
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-iii-gaystraight
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-iv-violence
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-v-sex
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-vi-race
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/brainwashing-norway-part-vii-nature-vs-nurture"

>>2312991
>>2312991
>>2312991


if if if if if if if; if a frog were pink and had a curly tail it would be a pig.

societies like your "what if" don't exist except in myth. and we are not other animals, we are humans, so other behavior in spiders or turtles or seahorses or whatever teh fuck are equally irrelevant.

lrn2reality

>>2312975
That doesn't change the fact that we naturally lean a certain way. I feel it's for the best to conform with the way we naturally lean. If you, as an individual want to reject your sex's normal behavior, that's fine. I don't think that we should try to make it standard or to encourage it though. A problem I have with feminism.
>>2312991
It's possible, but unlikely. Because at a base level males and females have certain biologically defined characteristics. Testosterone makes men proud and aggressive, estrogen makes women empathetic and social. This is true in pretty much every culture around the world.

>>2313004
The right social conditions evidentially do exist, hence you get people who are physically male and exhibit what you would consider feminine traits. . Extend those social conditions and boom you have a society.

Also, you need to be pretty anthropological literature to be able to say they don't exist.

>>2313001
Then please feel free to continue to stop browsing /lit/

>>2313008
we "naturally lean a certain way" because of the biology AND the social conditions that we are used to.

And I am not a sexual deviant or whatever you implied. I'm heterosexual male. pretty average.

>>2313008
Basically, I agree with this, though people have a tendency to commit the fallacy of division with this kind of information; just because, in general, males are testosterony and women are estrogeny, doesn't mean that specific people and specific behaviors should have this applied to them. There is a sort of person who likes to take this move and set it up as the version of biological basis that us people who believe in it believe in. The fact is, that anybody worth listening to is going to bring up that fact that everyone has both hormones in various balances regardless of gender, and everything doesn't boil down to JUST hormones.

>>2313008
Testosterone and estrogen aren't the only things that influence male and female characteristics. shit! they're not even all the hormones.

>>2313001
That looks amazing, thank you. It's hard to discuss my viewpoints because they're so unpopular amongst young people. I'd be ostracized for expressing my views in real life. At least in California. I really think stuff like this needs to be discussed more. People need to stop with this rejection of standards and norms and obsession with "equality".

How long till I'm considered a "bigot" for making fun of fat people? Someone has to set their foot down.

>>2313008
>A problem I have with feminism.
You don't understand that word.

>Because at a base level males and females have certain biologically defined characteristics.
I bring forth my powers of copy and paste:
>For instance, when I talk to people about the idea that people are born with a male brain or a female brain, I almost always end up hearing about their experiences with children. A few people relate tales of unexpected flexibility or gender-bending, but most relay their experiences with boys who practically radiate “boyness” from some deep space within (interestingly, I hear many fewer stories of girls who are sugar and spice and everything nice). Recently, my mother happened to be present for one of these conversations, and she very matter-of-factly presented what is considered these days to be a radical idea. Before relaying her idea, let me explain that my mother is a lovely southern lady who has raised an impressive number of children: four boys and four girls of her own, in addition to playing a major role in raising some half dozen of her more than two score grandchildren and great-grandchildren (I think she’s drawing the line at the great-great-grandchildren). When my friend talked about her girl being so different from her younger brother, who is “all boy,” my mother literally snorted. “That’s because you only have two,” she said. Mama went on to explain that with just a couple of children, gender looms large—it’s the most obvious explanation for every difference you see between them, and unless your children are really unusual, it’s going to be easiest to see their personalities as “boy” versus “girl.” But when you have a lot of children, you begin to notice that they all come with personalities of their own, and they are all quite different from one another. Gender recedes in importance.
-Brain Storm, Jordan-Young

>>2313011
>>2313011

there is a gender continuum that interpolates between two forms, male and female.

the most masculine elements among us are obviously male, and vice versa, and the sexes are defined by their predominant traits, inscribed by our biology

there are outliers who deviate from the norms, but they don't disprove them, just as other biological and social deviations don't disprove other norms from which they deviate

>>2313025
mate, you're not being radical by defying the liberal convention. this thread has shown you're simply uninformed.

>testosterone and estrogen testosterone and estrogen testosterone and estrogen testosterone and estrogen

gender is not reducible down to these.

>>2313047
If you grew up in a different family, neighbourhood, city, country, culture you're 'masculine' would be very different from another person's masculine

>>2313047
Male and female are arbitrary labels of arbitrary things.

>>2313025
>>2313025

well, if you're in california i think you overestimate the extent of the influence of liberal/pc bullshit. people have a lot more common sense than some would have you believe :D

plus, at the end of the day biology makes the argument for us. one can only deny reality for so long...

>>2313049
>>2313023
The reductionists can't even respond to these. I am the clear winner.

>>2313066
what exactly do the liberals say that you think biology disagrees with?

>>2313049
I mentioned those once or twice. Of course I'm not fully informed, but my reasoning is sound. The best you guys have done is spew politically correct "everything is subjective" concepts you learned from your gender studies classes.
>>2313059
But you would still be able to identify the masculine from the feminine. A society with girly(by our standards) men would probably have even more submissive females. The roles remain consistent throughout most cultures.

>You don't understand that word.
>Implying deepness in feminism that would make it hard to understand

>>2313049
>>2313049

not totally reducible, but they are certainly active parts of the equation; other hormonal and anatomical influences play roles in what should be obvious gender forms;

for example, a woman is uniquely suited to nurturing children, as she lactates. carrying and giving birth is another. the fact that men do not bear children and their obligations in raising them are less immediate has other implications.

there are few things more basic than giving birth, going to war; and nature/history's instruction is clear thru time. only recently have some of us become clouded in what should be a fairly simple understanding

then again, it also coincides with what appears to be a fairly serious social crisis. the decline of morality, or the morality of decline?

>>2313084
>A society with girly(by our standards) men would probably have even more submissive females.

No because its already been shown that women can be masculine while still being attracted to men and not being attracted to feminine men.

>"everything is subjective"
> gender studies classes.

Fucking straw men everywhere!!

>>2313059
>>2313059

on the margins, maybe, but what i've seen of masculinity is fairly consistent across cultures. the retreat into obfuscation and "it's all relative" may be comforting in order to avoid the consequences of admitting reality, but ultimately they are just fantasies

>>2313095
>a woman is uniquely suited to nurturing children, as she lactates. carrying and giving birth is another

and from this you deduce that women should be the carers for children? that was true at one time but society changes, technology economics and politics affect things.

>>2313093
>implying you not understanding it means it's hard to understand
Hurr Durr.

>>2313081
see
>>2313095
>>2313095

>>2313104
you're idea that it's consistent is a fantasy. there are exceptions everywhere. you say you acknowledge them but you don't really.

>>2313063
>>2313063

everythings, like, uhm, arbitrary man, amirite?

nope.jpg

that's just intellectual laziness

>>2313115

you're on the wrong board, dude

>>2313099
>No because its already been shown that women can be masculine while still being attracted to men and not being attracted to feminine men.
>can be
See? Stop pointing to exceptions in an attempt to disprove the rule. My point was that women are almost always submissive to men in any society(better to say any "traditional" society that hasn't been influenced by feminism). If the women are masculine in a culture, the men are probably even more manly.
>>2313063
Arbitrary? Are you going to back up your insane claim?

>>2313115
Tell that to Protagoras.

Intellectual laziness is where you can't even counter a simple point (i.e. NO U).

>>2313115
Justify something. Go ahead try it. I guarantee, you'll be reduced to circular reasoning, infinite regress or random axiom. it's all arbitrary.

>>2313107
>>2313107

if you want to replace biology with robots, then the discussion is moot to begin with.

otherwise, yes, it isn't a question of should, anymore than a bird being giving wings "shouldn't" fly. it simply does.

a woman with a womb and the hormones to become pregnant and raise children does exactly that.

>>2313114
>>2313114

some people are blind; does that disprove everybody who can see?

is a turtle a turtle? or can a turtle be misconstrued as a fish? is it all arbitrary? is a cow a tree? how far are you going to take this madness?

>>2313122
I'm not even trying to disprove the rule, but you are not even adding them into your rule.

>>2313122

>Stop pointing to exceptions in an attempt to disprove the rule.

if anybody swallows this bait i swear to fucking god

>>2313126
>and raise children

not necesarily

>>2313114
>Humans generally have 2 arms
>well my cousin Harold only has one arm
>okay yes, but that's just an exception to the rule. generally humans are going to develop 2 arms unless some sort of defect occurs
>you're just ignoring the exceptions

That's what this conversation looks like to me. I don't see why exceptions should disprove a rule we've agreed upon.

>>2313118
>>2313118

yes, i believe so. somebody sent me a link to the liberal, hippie bullshit board and somehow i'm still here; it won't be long, don't worry

>>2313126
>anymore than a bird being giving wings "shouldn't" fly. it simply does.
When did we get creationists here?

>>2313132
They're all labels. Like chair. Try and define what a chair is.

>>2313124
He doesn't have a "point" at this point in the conversation. He simply made an absurd claim without backing it up. That person's response was appropriate and yours is no better than his.

>>2313136
they dont disprove it because im not even trying to disprove it. I'm expanding the rule to incorporate and explain why the exceptions are observed. You aren't. you simply say they are exceptions, but the rule is inexplicably sound regardless of exceptions.

>>2313125
>>2313124

you all were born a generation too late; what a pity.

justify your dick. is that circular? no

hiding in plain sight...lulz, y'all are a trip

>>2313130
>>2313130

i've already said there is a continuum, with deviations on the margins. they do not supercede or overwrite, the dominant forms. because a masculine woman is still not as masculine as masculine men, and a feminine man is not as feminine as feminine women.

>>2313149
> a masculine woman is still not as masculine as masculine men, and a feminine man is not as feminine as feminine women.

This statement is just plain wrong.

>>2313149
>>2313149

there's a reason why women aren't allowed into combat roles in the military, and historically never have been. they have less aggression, and they are less strong

>>2313149
>because a masculine woman is still not as masculine as masculine men, and a feminine man is not as feminine as feminine women.
Why?

>>2313145
>I'm expanding the rule to incorporate and explain why the exceptions are observed.
There are exceptions to everything. By trying to discredit the truth of the rule, you're helping feminists convince everyone that gender roles don't/shouldn't exist. This is going to(already has) have a strong negative impact on the western family.

>>2313135
>>2313135

how many men gave birth to children last year?

>>2313136
>>2313136

right

>a one armed man means number of arms in nature in humans is relative, arbitrary man. like, uhm, shiva had a fuckload of arms. disprove that shit science,

of all the boards and my shitty connection

>>2313154
It's quicker to repopulate if you have a surplus of wombs and a shortage of testicles than vice versa. That is the sole reason, and even then there have been prominent female soldiers throughout history.

>>2313138
>>2313138

right, liberal logic; an emu or an ostrich disproves all birds that fly.

got it.

>mfw

>>2313141
>>2313141

right, and in your retarded world i'm sure you find it easy to misconstrue a chair as say, a turtle.

cause like, they're just labels, man, and it's all arbitrary and you can sit on a turtle amirite?

>>2313164
so much naivety here. fucking hell.

your idea that "western family" is to be preserved is simply a culturally constructed value judgement.

>>There are exceptions to everything
they need to be explained just like everything else. unless you want to be lazy..

> feminists convince everyone that gender roles don't/shouldn't exist.

feminists dont say this.. they accept that roles exist but they dont agree that they are oriented the right way. this is all just opinion as to which one you agree with

>>2313165

raise children raise raise raise. not birth. fucking hell.

>>2313145
>>2313145

yes, the rule is there are definite, dominant forms, and also deviant exceptions on the margins. one does not disprove the other.

inb4

>>2313152
>>2313152

in your fantasy world; in reality it's as clear as night and day

>>2313165

maybe nobody with a penis did but a person with a vagina who identifies as a man could have

you want everybody's identity to boil down to what genitals they have and it maybe scares you a little that other people disagree on that

but it's not your business to tell otehr people how to construct their identity -- you're a man and you define that how you want, so just go do it and don't yammer on about how other people should act

fuck, fuckin hate this thread

from hell's heart i sage at thee

>>2313171
why

>>2313163
>>2313163

because. why is a bird given wings?

nature doesn't need to be justified; it works well enough already

>>2313189
Biology can to explain sex and gender to an extent, however when you discover exceptions. you dont just say oh well they are exceptions, they're bound to crop up. our theory is sound. dont worry.

No you say, hmmm I wonder how we can explain that. exceptions dont disprove the norm but they arent explained din the same way

>>2313179
>turtles cannot be chairs, chairs cannot be turtles
Now I've heard everything.

>>2313174
>>2313174

not the only reasons; you cherry picked from a perspective or two. hormone levels and natural aggression/overt nature also play a huge part. you forgot about those.

and the need for women to be at home, not just to bear children but also to raise them (nipples bitches)

>>2313195
>a person with a vagina who identifies as a man could have
>a person with a vagina
That's called a woman.

Sage is not an insult.

>>2313180
>>2313180

how many men breastfed their children last year?

>>2313200
Birds aren't given wings bruh. They're born with them.

>>2313194
feminine men can be just as feminine as feminine women, maybe more so. masculine women can be just as masculine as masculine men.

qualities like aggressiveness and strength vary WITHIN women not solely BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN

>>2313213
>>2313213

semantics

>>2313180
>they need to be explained just like everything else. unless you want to be lazy..
They don't need to be explained actually. The rule of exceptions goes without saying. I'm sure it's easily explained by their hormone levels though. Read this:

http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/does-game-work-less-well-on-masculine-women/

>feminists dont say this.. they accept that roles exist but they dont agree that they are oriented the right way. this is all just opinion as to which one you agree with
Feminists only have one opinion now? Look at Mr Politically correct making such broad assumptions. I've already mentioned that I worry about feminists' desire to reverse gender roles. I think it's even more frightening than rejecting them altogether.

>>2313212
breast feeding is not the sole mechanism of child rearing. nor is it the epitome of the process. kids can survive on breast pumped milk or nonhuman milk.

>>2313195
>>2313195

dominant forms with deviations on the margins

welcome to life; please take a class on statistics while you're at it.

>from heaven's heart

>>2313210

i call people what they choose to be called

again, it's not your job to be the gender police

>>2313204
>>2313204

image file says stool

try again :D

>>2313214
>feminine men can be just as feminine as feminine women
Nope, even the most effete male still probably has a crazy sex drive and is in fact probably driven to act as feminine as possible because it turns him on. Compare this to the coyness and shyness of a completely feminine well mannered asian conservative girl.
>masculine women can be just as masculine as masculine men
Not without hormone injections.

Even if you were right, these are just more exceptions that do nothing to discredit the biological truths of my argument.

>>2313225
>i call people what they choose to be called
Can I be a cyborg war tiger please.

OH AND MAKE ME NOT A VIRGIN WHILE YOU'RE AT IT.

>>2313218
you worry? thats only because of you CULTURALLY CONSTRUCTED VALUE JUDGEMENTS not because of biology. fucking hell.


you're the one that made the claim of what feminists argue. i told you that its not predominantly what they argue at all. i dont deny that there are stupid feminists.


exception that 'proves' the rule? seriously are you using that one? because thats not what the phrase means. the exception TESTS the rule.

hormone levels differ within and between men and women. yes well done.

>>2313214
>>2313214

>feminine men can be just as feminine as feminine women, maybe more so. masculine women can be just as masculine as masculine men.

you probably spent too much time reading lit and philosophy to study history; things like war. had you done so you would know better

>>2313208
>hormone levels
I have yet to hear of a war being lost on "hormone levels"
>and natural aggression/overt nature
Soldiers have to be compliant, not aggressive i.e. Follow orders and not attack comrades or shoot during ceasefire.
>also play a huge part. you forgot about those.
They play no part, so yeah.

>and the need for women to be at home, not just to bear children but also to raise them (nipples bitches)
Even forgetting modern tech, one woman can raise several children.

Oh, wait, I forgot, Boudica was a man, Lyudamila Pavlichenko was a man, Joan of Arc was a man...

Yep. No women in any of those manly wars.

>>2313220
>>2313220

breast pumped milk from a......woman? milk from a non human.....female?

do male cows lactate?

>>2313235
>Nope, even the most effete male still probably has a crazy sex drive and is in fact probably driven to act as feminine as possible because it turns him on. Compare this to the coyness and shyness of a completely feminine well mannered asian conservative girl.

conjecture


hormones differ within and between males and females.

>>2313223

big deal if it's deviant, dude

it's not hurting you or i to let people construct their own identity -- best to err on the side of treating other people the way you'd want to be treated, right?

>>2313244
thats politics not femininity and masculinity

>>2313235
>Nope, even the most effete male still probably has a crazy sex drive and is in fact probably driven to act as feminine as possible because it turns him on.
That's bullshit and your claims are retarded.

>>2313250
CHILD RAISING CAN ANDIS DONE BY MEN. fucking hell.

>>2313243
>CULTURALLY CONSTRUCTED VALUE JUDGEMENTS

LOL, first gays want to change the definition of marriage. Now trannies want to change the definitions of sex and gender.

Turtle stool all up in this

>>2313225
>>2313225

the "gender police" and the "chair police" and the "turtle police" too, right?

having words and ideas with meaning attached to them is not the work of police; it's the work of normal people. inb4 define normal, again, take a class on statistics and common sense

>>2313250
Not sure if trolling...

>>2313238
>>2313238

exactly, lmao

>>2313243
Yes, I made it clear that these worries are just my own views. The important thing is that people stop bullshitting about gender. It is NOT fucking arbitrary. It is NOT something you can just ignore. It is NOT just a social construct. You try to undermine the importance of it so that the outliers feel more accepted, but in doing so you are blinding yourself to the things I worry about. I feel if you weren't so inclined toward political correctness you'd worry too.

And no, I'm not referring to that phrase. I'm saying that there are exceptions to almost every rule.
>>2313246
>more exceptions
Jesus Christ superstar. What's with you people?

inb4 "what do you mean 'you people'?"

>>2313243
>>2313243

biology informs culture

>>2313234
Stools are chairs. Unless you want to try and give a definition...?

>>2313260
gender roles have and always do change routinely. the fact that you worry about it now is because its not what you're used and you've been taught one thing over this new scary thing.

I told you, im heterosexual male white i couldnt be more conformist

>>2313246
>>2313246

again, you have a few women exceptions; of course exceptions exist.

now, please do the math for me. humor me, i come from /sci/ (and soon i will return - this place is a shithole). do the math, how many male solders in ww2 vs female soldiers. you can round up on the female part if you like.

kthx

>>2313269
>You try to undermine the importance of it so that the outliers feel more accepted, but in doing so you are blinding yourself to the things I worry about.
Like what? People feeling accepted?

The sun will still rise tomorrow if there's a woman with a penis or a turtle that's a stool (which is a kind of chair) or if there isn't. Crisis averted.

>>2313271
Chairs have a back.

>>2313251
>>2313251

differ, sure, but again, there are predominances. some women are taller than some men and some women are stronger. nevertheless it is a scientific fact, on average men are statistically significantly taller with significantly greater muscle mass

>>2313269
>these worries are just my own views.

ah thank you. im glad you accept that its social and biological.

gender is cultural, sex isn't. this is not a hard concept.

there is no reason for you to feel threatened by the outliers.

i dont give a shit about pol correctness. i care about being RIGHT.

>>2313252
>>2313252

hey, i'm all about grace, but we don't let people define their own reality; imagine the harm that would cause; we have cultural standards and objective knowledge for a reason

when we lose hold of such things, social fabric unravels, as it is now

>>2313280
But come also has a back. Do you consider come a chair? Would you sit on come?

>>2313274
>returning to /sci/
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

>>2313253
>>2313253

wat. war is between human beings. femininity and masculinity concerns human beings. the subject (humanity) is the same

>>2313272
I don't have problems with changing some gender roles, but the big no no is changing the definition of sex from being biological to social.

>>2313286
this isnt about people define their own reality. its about realising that cultural perceptions of roles of men and women matter.

>>2313258
>>2313258

does not disprove the norm

>>2313288
>>2313288

funny, using well worn cliches in a lit forum.

btw, it's not a door, it's a turtle

>>2313272
>the fact that you worry about it now is because its not what you're used and you've been taught one thing over this new scary thing.
On the contrary. I was raised in California. Liberal as can be. Friends of all races. I still think of myself as somewhat liberal. I've just grown SICK of political correctness. You can't just reject every rule and law as tyrannical and oppressive. Without strong values and consistent definitions of things, you can't have a strong society. "Everything is subjective and I can do what I want because I don't like your rules. "

I'm a basement dweller. I live off the welfare of my parents. I live a mostly feminine life. I recognize that it's bad for me to live this way and want to change. I'd say it's actually YOU that has a problem confronting what you've been raised by. You've been raised to believe "everyone is equal", "accept everyone", "you are beautiful no matter what they say", "girls rule boys drool", "we are all one". I was too. I'm just able to see the objective reality of things now.

If you're into philosophy you should be comfortable confronting the liberal beliefs that pervade our modern culture. I challenge you to do so.

>>2313304
its not fucking trying to.

>>2313292

masc and fem people fought in wars. its not a significant factor. what is significant is whether people at the time determined who could fight in war.

>>2313264
>>2313264

so formula means male cows lactate? and women suddenly aren't born with functional breasts?

also natural milk is better for babies than formula, but you probably don't have kids so i don't expect you to know this

>>2313286

i literally can't "imagine the harm"

help me out here, worst case scenario: what happens if people can define their gender instead of it h aving to be tied to what hardware they've got between their legs

>>2313303
>"Everything is subjective and I can do what I want because I don't like your rules. "

is not liberal, is not pol correctness, is not anything. you worry about nothing. no one says this seriously. when they do they are angsty teens. everyone is constrained by social rules and biology.

>>2313271
>>2313271

that one looked like a foot stool. foot stools are not chairs

even so, the point is retarded if you're being serious. a turtle stool or chair does not disprove a turtle or a chair

>>2313274
>you can round up
Then there were clearly 10 Billion women soldiers.

Some people don't understand what it means to round up.

>>2313311
child raising is done by men and women. the fact that women has tits allows you to say that women can breast feed, it doesnt not allow you to inherently justify an ought like women ought to be the ones who raise children. you cant get an is from ought. this elementary.

>>2313272
>>2313272

>have and always do change


nope.jpg

history does not support your assertion

saying it does not make it so

in the era of hunter gatherers, men were warriors and hunters. in civilised society, men went to war, still went hunting.

>>2313277
>>2313277

if it has a penis it's not a woman; the same way if a chair is shaped like a turtle it's not a turtle; it's a turtle chair. see the difference?

>>2313319
>in the era of hunter gatherers, men were warriors and hunters. in civilised society, men went to war, still went hunting.


is that still the case? no because gender roles change with society. thank you i rest my case, you're all retarded, goodnight.

>>2313313
You're right that no one says it, but it demonstrates a way of thinking common to liberals.

>>2313284
>>2313284

biology is primary; society/culture is a reflection of it, an extension of sorts

you say "gender is cultural"; there is no such thing as something being just cultural and not biological

>>2313334
no it demonstrates your straw man fear.

>>2313272
>gender roles
Gender roles can change however fucking much they want to,that's not the issue. Gender itself is something you're just born with. That's a fact of the universe

>>2313314
>implying you can't turn a turtle into a chair
It'd be easy. Pic sorta related, tortoise shell (though tortoise vs turtle is a trick of English more than anything)

>>2313326
Gender roles =/= gender.

>>2313300
>>2313300

they matter, but biology matters more

and when you try to overwrite biology and the sensible alignment of culture with biology into something else, you're just asking for disaster

>>2313335
Biology is cultural. Culture is not biological.

>>2313335
is say gender is is the cultural part cultural, sex is the biological part.

>>2313345

sex != gender, you mean.

>>2313340

sex is what we're born with you fucktard.

>>2313343
That's not a turtle though is it. It's a chair made from parts of a turtles carcass.

>>2313346
there is no ought or should that inherently stems from observations of nature.

>>2313310
>>2313310

so it's just the arbitrary rule (the law) that decides something, and if not for the law, then all of nature/biology/reality changes?

consider for a second that the law itself has its source in biology/nature, as does culture

>>2313354
So you're saying there is more to the tortoise than it's physicality?

>>2313312
>>2313312

well, i heard this recently; in massachusetts, catholic charities (who were responsible for half of all orphan/adoption placements) were barred from dealing with adoptions after mass passed its law on same sex marriage, because they refused to place children with gays. imagine the harm that does to children, who would have been placed in normal families, all so politically correct bullshit culture can humor itself and experiment with the welfare of children at the same time

>>2313359
No, it is physically not a tortoise anymore.

>>2313357
masc people and fem people fought in wars. you cannot dismiss one and say oh well it was mainly one of them there is it is that one that SHOULD fight in wars.

should doesn't arise in this way.

>>2313312
>>2313312

there's more to it than that, but at the core it's fairly simple. when you have the wrong idea about reality, the world doesn't change to accommodate your misconception. if you think it's sunny when in fact it's raining and you fail to bring an umbrella when you walk outside you will get wet

>>2313357
It doesn't. As pointed out in Plato's Laws, even things like geographical terrain have an impact on laws. As has been concluded several times since, there is no architecton, and so no "objective" laws, so derivation from something constant is meaningless.

>>2313317
>>2313317

well, if the only way to argue is by being insincere then you've already lost the argument

>>2313318
>>2313318

i don't need an aught; human biology is instructive in this. women have raised children primarily for pretty much as long as we've been around

it works like this for a reason

>224 posts and 30 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.
>mfw /lit/ and /mu/ have had a better run then /lit/ and /sci/

>>2313364
What the hell do you call it? It's tortoise shell, ergo it's a tortoise.

>>2313371
altering gender isn't something like changing the weather at will. its something we actually can do. hormone injections. surgery etc fucking elocution lessons.

>>2313375
By that logic I could cut off my finger and call it a human being.

>>2313326
>>2313326

>is that still the case?


well, yes, you moron. men are still the ones going to war. they're still the ones fighting. take a look at crime stats. women are still primary caregivers

>>2313376
it has been done like this therefore it should always be done like this. nop sorry doesnt work. and anyway it hasnt been done like that all the time. and you cant determine just because something is one way that it should be that way

>>2313340
>>2313340

however much they want to, constrained by the limits of biology and other humans (ie. reality)

>>2313385
women go to war, gays go to war. dogs are used in battle. things change.

>>2313374
How's that insincere? They were called World Wars because everyone fought. As has been stated before, it is tactical to keep women in the home country in general to ensure ease of repopulation if needed. You need to understand not all fighting is one the front lines.

>>2313350
>>2313350

where do you think culture comes from?

>>2313388
enabled by science (biology), technology and other people (reality)

>>2313355
>>2313355

well, yes and no. we observe what works. that translates into what we should do if we're interested in carrying in a way that works.

common sense

>>2313359
>>2313359

a live turtle is not the same as dead turtle parts

you understand the difference between something that's alive and something that's not, right?

>>2313368
>>2313368

war is a masculine activity

stop bullshitting

>>2313372
>>2313372

there are intrinsic tendencies, natural laws, tho the system is in motion

otherwise einstein and newton would have gone into lit :D

>>2313392
Culture is an abstract term either referring to the tendency of some group to form with similar characteristics, e.g. cell culture, or to enhance a certain set of attributes within something e.g. I have become cultured. Neither definition strictly requires something biological.

>>2313379
>>2313379

all marginal at best

gender is formed at the point of conception and our fundamental tendencies are formed in utero and early on

anything done after the fact would be something like window dressing

>>2313397
haha respond to david hume with "well yes and no". classic. you honestly believe you have it all figured out right? centuries of science and philosophy but no some 20 something on 4chan worked it all out.


we observe what happens. we are part of what happens. if something changes its still part of what happens so if a guy decides he feels like a a woman the fact that its not dominant form of behaviour makes fuck all difference. majorty/minority number isn;'t justification for right and wrong. thats not how you reach statements of right and wrong.

>>2313402

thats your perception

>>2313401
An alive turtle or a dead turtle is still a turtle.

>>2313386
>>2313386

experience is instructive; how you learn anything is by cultural and personal observation inscribed in memory; without learning from our past we would know nothing

and yes, something that usually works, continues to work. the tendencies we express are naturally selected for; they are natural tendencies. as nature changes, we change too, but fundamentals tend to stay the same.

now, you take time back far enough, we find a singularity, and the big bang. gender was probably less dichotomatic back then, tho the natural seeds for it remain, if you will.

yin/yang
energy/gravity
night and day, etc.

>>2313419
Not if it's been disassembled and had parts of it attached to other parts to make it a chair.

>>2313390
>>2313390

women still are not allowed to fight in combat roles. and what is the % of women in the military, all roles? and some gays join the military, sure, just as some women do.

does not change the fact that those most apt to be soldiers are straight men.

>>2313391
>>2313391
>>2313391

it was not called the world war because everybody, both men and women, faught. that is completely nonsense. and you rounded up to 10 billion women - insincere.

it was called world war because nations thruout the world fought; of those nations, those who fought were men. lrn2history

>>2313413
thats sex that formed than with your genetics. gender is formed your hormone production pre and post natal as well as social and cultural influences. on sexuality. what is expected of you as the sex that you are. sex cant be altered easily. at least not that original sex you were genetically born with, but gender your sexuality, who you are attracted to, and what role you play whether you're a homemaker or a worker, is gendered behaviour and much more flexible. even heterosexual men can be convinced to to be aroused by men with anything exposure. just like pedos of /b/ probably started out as ephebophiles

>>2313396
>>2313396

constrained/enabled - two sides to the same coin.

women are enabled to have children

men are enabled to go to war

>>2313429
thats because of arbitrary cultural laws.

>>2313412
>>2313412

culture only exists among biologically inscribed humans. biology is life, is the world. culture is a subset

>>2313440
culture is also used scientifically for a group of cells or organisms that develop the same characteristics. it has the scientific and colloquial meaning both. it just so happens that both can also be alternately applied to one another

>>2313433
>of those nations, those who fought were men
Nations can't be men and women. I think you're confused.

>>2313437
women can go to war.

granted men can't give birth (yet) but they can raise kids. this is gender. his sex is male. his gender is whether he is hetero.homo,bi, whether he is child rearer, homemaker or worker.

>>2313438
>hurr
>doesn't know that men are generally more physically capable than women

>>2313416
>>2313416

we do observe what works; history itself is something like a very long process of trial and error, and evolution the same, on a longer time line.

therefore we are what we are because it works in this current arrangement.

a man can feel like a woman; it's not a matter of right and wrong necessarily, beyond the point of a man makes most sense feeling like a man. and sometimes we find those conclusions unavoidable in how we relate to one another, therefore our deviation inscribes its own kind of judgement.

there's likely more to it than that. it is what it is

>>2313419
>>2313419

but there is a difference and you know what it is

>>2313449
you get strong women, you get weak men. you get weak women, you get strong men. proportions are irrelevant at this juncture. fact is. the law has been that influence gendered expectations of the sexes. this social construction of gender. it's not a difficult concept.

>>2313426
>tortoise
>disassembled
They come from eggs, not Ikea flatpacks.

Anyway, so you're saying you think it's a chair shell and not a tortoise shell? It's categorically a tortoise shell chair, not a chair shell chair (which is a tautology).

>>2313455
>history itself is something like a very long process of trial and error, and evolution the same, on a longer time line.
That's not what Darwin said.

>>2313436
>>2313436

that's a tremendous amount of speculation and conjecture; a lot of it sounds bogus to me.

i know a pedophile and i can tell you it is nothing anywhere near ephebophilia, which is basically the biological norm (nubile young women)

there is more deviation in gender than sex, but there are direct connections to sex and gender, and the causes are not completely known. there are associations with neonatal environment, birth order, etc. etc. hard to say exactly but biology obviously has a role. for example, the fact that a gay man is born with a female gender identity means that the expression is going to be way different than if it were a biological female born with a female gender identity. in both cases the gender identity is the same. but the biology and hence the expression will be different

>>2313438
>>2313438

you libs love the word "arbitrary" don't you?

where do laws come from? they are emanations of our biological self-organisation

>>2313459
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting

Even the strongest women still can't lift as much as men.

>>2313446
>>2313446

yes, good point. in both cases culture is obviously biological

hence, there is no separation between biology and what some would like to consider "arbitrary cultural" inscription

>>2313447
>>2313447

i think you're pretending to be confused, using semantics

i think you know better but you're resorting to bullshit because you have nothing better

>>2313448
>>2313448

>yet

lold. what a fantasy world you live in. only you don't, you live in the real world, and some day it will make itself known, jesus wake up

women generally don't go to war. why don't you go look up the % stats on female enlistment in us army and get back with me. and those are all non combat roles

here, i'll do it for you:

Currently, women serve in 91 percent of all Army occupations and make up about 14 percent of the Active Army.

http://www.army.mil/women/

14 vs 86%

>>2313459
>>2313459

the strongest men are stronger (in the overt sense it is meant) than the strongest women.

it's not a social construction. society is not a thing in itself. society is a reflection of humans self-organised according to natural/biological principles

>>2313462
>>2313462

when you think of a turtle do you think of an alive turtle (as most sane, normal people do) or do you think of a turtle chair?

>>2313467
>>2313467

well actually, it is. natural selection is a process of trial and error; some, most mutations (deviations) are unsuccessful most of the time. sometimes they work, and a species evolves

>>2313446
That's where we get the idea of growing a group from. It's a metaphor. In turn, the culture of cell cultures is a metaphor borrowed from the earlier meaning of refinement and improvement, that seemed to appear around the 18th century. Which in turn is a metaphor based on cultivation in the agricultural sense, that of cultivating (improving) land.

None of the above are colloquial meanings though. You might want to learn what that word means.

>>2313498
>a species evolves
Too much pokeymans. Evolution is as much about the environment as it is about the species, and as Darwin knew that environment changes. Trial and error would a constant environment.

>>2313504
>>2313504

regardless, a culture is an extension of biology; simple

lib hippies try to separate them and say, sex is biology but gender is culture; there is no such separation

>>2313513
>>2313513

of course, we are both cause and effect; our environment the same; of course trial and error is a constant process; if our environment never changed we wouldn't either :D

>>2313493
When you think of a chair do you think of this?

Well I guess if it doesn't conform to your simulacrum of a chair then it isn't a chair.

>>2313517
But biology is a subject within culture and society, therefore biology is a subset of sociology.

>>2313520

you're trying too hard

everybody knows what a chair is, and everybody knows what a turtle is, and they are not often confused for one another.

chairs and walruses, the same.

now a hipster faggot like you, i can't speak for obviously

>>2313525
>>2313525

you mean a subject like in university? that's clearly not what i'm talking about.

i'm talking about biology as in life/nature itself, of which human culture is a subset

>>2313526
>everybody knows what a chair is, and everybody knows what a turtle is, and they are not often confused for one another.
I find these false dichotomies of chairs and turtles disturbing.

This thread was painful to read.
NATURE VS. NURTURE:
-Hormones/biology explains about 50% of variance in individual traits (look up Dr Money and the Boy with No Penis)
AND
-Society/culture also explains about 50% of variance (read a sociology textbook, i don't know)

There is a complex interaction between these two factors, and trying to reduce the argument to "this one iz more important" is just stupid and wrong and stupid.

>>2313528
Then say life or nature. Biology is a natural science, an academic subject. And no, human culture is necessarily separate from nature. Humans have the social contract, but there is no natural contract.

>>2313530
>>2313530

derrida confuses himself way too easily

>>2313538
>>2313538

the "Social Contract" you mean? lulz. it's a contract with God to separate humanity from nature?

don't think so.jpg


as for the definition of biology, i was using it in a pretty obviously broader sense

bi·ol·o·gy   [bahy-ol-uh-jee] Show IPA
noun
1.
the science of life or living matter in all its forms and phenomena, especially with reference to origin, growth, reproduction, structure, and behavior.
2.
the living organisms of a region: the biology of Pennsylvania.
3.
the biological phenomena characteristic of an organism or a group of organisms: the biology of a worm.

>>2313536
>implying we can boil down the whole of an individual to statistical variances
Fucking reductionists.

>>2313538

nature self-regulates, much as humans do, our self-consciousness (personal and cultural) notwithstanding

>>2313541
>implying that the subject does not deconstruct itself whether I am confused or not

>>2313551
>>2313551

it doesn't actually. it's okay, you're french. if i were french i would probably be confused too.

>>2313549
The natural contract is between humanity and nature, not nature and nature. Google contrat naturel.

>>2313559
>>2313559

humans are natural expressions

again, there is no fundamental separation

>>2313544
Science=reductionism

>>2313574

science is a tool

so is common sense :D

>>2313596
yes. yes it is.

what exactly are you trying to say?

>>2313622
>>2313622

the previous post equated science with reductionism, thereby criticising it. i pointed out it is not the be all end all, just as reductionism itself is a tool, and not the only source of knowledge and understanding

>>2313643
stating that science=reductionism is not a criticism, it is a fact. reductionism, in the context >>2313574 used, is not a bad thing.

>>2313667
>>2313667

science is not just reductionism, and even if it were, there is more to life and awareness than even science

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

dam b dis thread turned into sum deep shit word is bond yo

>>2314017

inorite

I'm starting to like this board