Left's squishy fealty to 'science' boggles the mind
By: Ben Shapiro
The hyper progressive lunatic fringe has gone off the deep end on this issue and are showing their intolerance of those of us who don’t buy into their anti science crap here.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The left's gender theories are anti-scientific nonsense – but they're gaining ground.
On Nov. 22, 2020, New York Times columnist Charles Blow unleashed one of the most bizarre tweets in recent memory:
"Stop doing gender reveals," he stated. "They're not cute; they're violent. All we know before a child is born is their anatomy. They will reveal their gender. It may match your expectations of that anatomy, and it may not. If you love the child you will be patience, attentive and open."
This is patently insane for a variety of reasons.
First, the characterization of gender reveal parties – parties during which parents celebrate finding out whether their unborn children are boys or girls – as "violent" is, in and of itself, radically nuts. Parents are excited to learn whether their children will be boys or girls. That is absolutely unobjectionable. But for an ardent fan of abortion on demand such as Blow to characterize a gender reveal party celebrating the sex of an unborn baby as "violent" while characterizing the in uterodismemberment of that same unborn baby as "choice" is so morally benighted as to boggle the mind.
Blow's tweet goes further. The implication that parents are doing violence against their own children if they connect sex and gender is utterly anti-evidentiary. Sex and gender are interconnected. For nearly every human being born, biological sex will correspond with genital development in the womb. And gender – contrary to the idiotic, pseudoscientific paganism of the gender theory set – is not some free-floating set of biases we bring to the table. Males and females have different qualities in a variety of functions, attitudes, desires and capabilities. In every human culture – indeed, in every mammalian species – meaningful distinctions between male and female remain. To reduce children to genderless unicorns simply awaiting hormonal guidance from within piles absurdity upon absurdity.
And, of course, Blow's take on "patience" is not limitless. Presumably, should your daughter announce that she is a boy at the tender age of 5, all measures will immediately be taken to ensure that she is treated as a boy by those such as Blow. There will be no call for watchful waiting; to do so would be yet another act of "violence."
Why does any of this matter? Because Blow's perspective has become mainstream on the left. In October, Healthline, a supposed medical resource, ran an article reviewed by a licensed marriage and family therapist titled "'Do Vulva Owners Like Sex?' Is the Wrong Question – Here's What You Should Ask Instead." Whether "vulva owners" like sex is indeed the wrong question. The right question, to begin, might be what makes "vulva owners" distinct from women; as a follow-up, we might ask how one would go about leasing or renting a vulva if ownership seems like too much of a burden.
But the madness gains ground. CNN reported in July that the American Cancer Society had changed its recommendations on the proper age for cervical cancer screenings for women, only CNN termed women "individuals with a cervix." Which seems rather degrading to women, come to think of it.
Lest we believe that this is merely some lunatic fringe, it is worth noting that Blow, Healthline and CNN are merely saying out loud what those who place gender pronouns in their Twitter bios, such as Kamala Harris, imply: that gender and sex are completely severable, and that biology has nothing to do with the former. Joe Biden has openly stated that an 8-year-old can decide on his transgenderism; Sen. Elizabeth Warren infamously stated that she would have a 9-year-old transgender child screen her secretary of education nominee. Male and female are arbitrary categories to which anyone can claim membership.
Unless, of course, the left wishes to treat sex as an important characteristic. Then the logic changes. Thus, it is historic that Biden has nominated an all-female communications team, and it is deeply moving that Harris is a woman.
It's almost as though the definitions of words have no meaning, according to the left. All that matters is fealty to whatever narrative the chosen moral caste dictates on a daily basis. And if you cross it, you're doing violence.
COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM
Tags
Who is online
92 visitors
Why does any of this matter? Because Blow's perspective has become mainstream on the left. In October, Healthline, a supposed medical resource, ran an article reviewed by a licensed marriage and family therapist titled "'Do Vulva Owners Like Sex?' Is the Wrong Question – Here's What You Should Ask Instead." Whether "vulva owners" like sex is indeed the wrong question. The right question, to begin, might be what makes "vulva owners" distinct from women; as a follow-up, we might ask how one would go about leasing or renting a vulva if ownership seems like too much of a burden.
But the madness gains ground. CNN reported in July that the American Cancer Society had changed its recommendations on the proper age for cervical cancer screenings for women, only CNN termed women "individuals with a cervix." Which seems rather degrading to women, come to think of it.
Lest we believe that this is merely some lunatic fringe, it is worth noting that Blow, Healthline and CNN are merely saying out loud what those who place gender pronouns in their Twitter bios, such as Kamala Harris, imply: that gender and sex are completely severable, and that biology has nothing to do with the former. Joe Biden has openly stated that an 8-year-old can decide on his transgenderism; Sen. Elizabeth Warren infamously stated that she would have a 9-year-old transgender child screen her secretary of education nominee. Male and female are arbitrary categories to which anyone can claim membership.
Unless, of course, the left wishes to treat sex as an important characteristic. Then the logic changes.
https://thenewstalkers.com/vic-eldred/group_discuss/11358/lefts-squishy-fealty-to-science-boggles-the-mind
Fealty to science? Thank you for providing the dumbest expression of the day. We can always count on you.
Some idiots in this country bow down before the alter of “pro science” and do all in their power to suppress and repress the expression of opposing ideas on the matter in question pretending that those who dare to disagree are engaged in so called pseudoscience and attack on that basis rather than critically defend their own biased ideas.
If you want an "opposing idea" to be taken seriously, then back it up with empirical evidence. Otherwise, it's worthless and easily dismissed. Don't expect any "opposing ideas" to be taken seriously or not challenged if you can't produce evidence to support it. Science goes by the evidence. Not what one wants to believe!
Fealty to science is like fealty to reality. Some people have neither.
This is true. Science deals with aND seeks to understand reality. Anything else deals in fantasy & wishful thinking.
Fantasy like more than two genders?
You seem to confuse gender and sex.
Can you explain why your god created intersex humans? Scientific studies indicate that as many as 1% to 2% of those born in the US may exhibit intersex traits.
God? Now there's a fantasy. As well as a fallacy as I explained in my article. At least, until there is empirical evidence to demonstrate otherwise.
God is more of a cudgel to thunk religionists over the head with when they can’t see their own hypocrisy.
Or maybe when they can't see their own stubborn ignorance?
hmmmm
Says the guy who likes to cite Young Earth Creationist 'science' and has repeatedly claimed that evolution (the foundation of modern biology) is a worldwide conspiracy of pseudoscience pushed by godless scientists.
What you think is 'bowing before an alter' is always well-founded arguments based on quality evidence and reasoning which counter your claims parroting what other people have merely claimed (sans evidence) as truth.
Until you can offer a credible rebuttal, your claims which fly in the face of well-founded science are nothing more than speculation and wishful thinking.
Some people seem to think their "opposing ideas" should be accepted at face value sans evidence no questions asked. Or accepted as equally valid as established ideas backed by evidence. They don't seem to understand that's not how actual, credible science works. For any idea to have credibility, empirical evidence is required. Apparently, those with "opposing ideas" seem to think the requirement for evidence doesn't apply to them. They spew nonsense and offer nothing to support their "opposing idea," much less legitimitely challenge or refute established ideas that are backed by evidence. Such ignorance and intellectual dishonesty they display is equal parts laughable and pathetic.
... and deem those who deliver well-evidenced, reasoned conclusions that actually work to be idiots.
Probably because it doesn't conform to their own narratives and biases. Their "reasoning" (I use the term loosely here) is probably based more on personal belief or emotion that actual logical reasoning or evidence.
There is male and female. All other is fantasy and wishful thinking.
He didn’t create that. He created one man and one woman.
You wrote an article?
God is real. He created us as equals in His sight. He gave us all our inalienable human rights.
That's nice. Prove it!
See previous statement!
Still confusing sex and gender I see.
Did you forget already? You even posted (more like copied and pasted) on it . Perhaps you should try paying attention to what people say.
In Congress, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
That doesn't prove anything. It's just parroting what others have said.
It’s the founding document of our great and exceptional nation.
So? You're still just parroting something that doesn't actually answer the challenge or prove anything. At best, it's an appeal to authority and a smokescreen. Now, how about you actually make an attempt and original thought and prove your assertions!
Here's some science.