Anti COVID Vaccine and Passport Mandate March

[Fun With Matches]

Climate change, I admit I don't know enough about. Otherwise:

...

My takeout from NB people:

They're ALL UNREASONABLE AND MAKE NO SENSE, AND IT DOES MY HEAD IN.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

....it's not difficult to comprehend.

They're people who simply don't adhere to either gender. Either simply because they don't feel like they're either gender or just don't particularly care.

Makes complete sense when you realise gender is a social construct. If anything, it seems unreasonable to not allow people to identify whatever they want to be.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Simply put, no one is denying that biological sex is a thing. You're still biologically "male" or "female" even if you're trans (which is why the term "trans" is even a thing!), or to be more accurate, XY or XX.

But even then, biology is complex and not always at a binary. Intersex people exist, and lots of people are not 100% male or female.

The difference here is that gender is an arbitrary thing to ascribe to people based on those biological differences, but in reality that can wildly differ between cultures and in history. For example, most things about "womanhood" or "femininity" is not directly linked to having tits and a vagina - how is the colour pink related to your biology? How is makeup or wearing a dress related to your biology? They're not.

Some cultures in the past even had more than 2 genders, or their idea of gender was vastly different to ours, so it's not even a new or particularly controversial thing. Even in Europe, gender has changed massively over the years - have you seen how feminine a lot of renaissance men looked for example? Pink wasn't a "girly" colour until after the 1940s!

Then of course, you have to consider other animals, who literally have no concept of gender at all. Are female dogs naturally prepositioned to dresses and dolls?

[Calandale]

I see gender as akin to caste - an essentially discriminatory set of beliefs enforced by society.

Then of course, you have to consider other animals, who literally have no concept of gender at all. Are female dogs naturally prepositioned to dresses and dolls?

You have something similar in both sex based roles and concepts of alpha supremacy in animals who have something similar to a society (the pack). It's easy to see how a more complex gender structure would develop in human society.

[Pyraxis]

Pink wasn't a "girly" colour until after the 1940s!

Yeah - blue used to be the color for baby girls because of the association with the Virgin Mary. Pink was considered too active a color and better suited for boys.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Pink wasn't a "girly" colour until after the 1940s!

Yeah - blue used to be the color for baby girls because of the association with the Virgin Mary. Pink was considered too active a color and better suited for boys.

 

Even things like "male" hats, like the fedora/trillby, were originally designed for women.

It's almost like these gender things are arbitrary or something.

[Calandale]

It's almost like these gender things are arbitrary or something.

Not the codpiece

[Fun With Matches]

Comparing humans to dogs ... can you come up with a better example? I mean, dogs don't really have a society or language like we do, and they don't dress either.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Comparing humans to dogs ... can you come up with a better example? I mean, dogs don't really have a society or language like we do, and they don't dress either.

That's my point.

[Calandale]

Comparing humans to dogs ... can you come up with a better example? I mean, dogs don't really have a society or language like we do, and they don't dress either.

That's my point.

Depends on how broadly you want to consider 'society'. I'm not so specieist to consider broadly analogous roles
in other species to deserve to be divided off.

If you want closer, look to the other great apes. But even wolves (and I presume feral dogs) take on gender-based roles, although it's less telling than with the apes.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

They take on roles more driven by instinct than anything else. They won't consciously understand things like gender - they just do whatever is expected by instinct.

Humans are much more complex than that. We evolved to get rid of most of our instincts, particularly when it comes to sexes. That's why you don't really see typical alpha/beta dominance hierarchy (despite what incels think) or such in human society, we see much more complex ones based on class, gender, race and other categories, all of which can overlap and are not always a binary. Some cultures vary, like having a caste system on top of that, while others don't.

This complexity of our behaviours and society is also why gender and sex can never be the same for humans. We're just utterly messy bags of meat, too messy to be reduced or understood in basic terms.

[Fun With Matches]

I just want to say here: I don't give a damn about BOJO having a party. Is that all the news can go on about?? Like it's important? Yes, it wasn't the right thing to do, but there's surely far worse things he could have done. Does anyone else think him resigning over those parties is really OTT?

Dirty Big Yoke, I don't think a human can just get rid of their instincts. You still get hierarchies in the categories you mentioned, as you said. So the more complex forms are still based on our innate need/instincts to form hierarchies, it's just using a different method (thinking) to achieve it instead of physical fights.

Just because we seemingly think more in detail than other animals, it doesn't get rid of our instincts. Maybe it can dampen them, though.

[odeon]

I just want to say here: I don't give a damn about BOJO having a party. Is that all the news can go on about?? Like it's important? Yes, it wasn't the right thing to do, but there's surely far worse things he could have done. Does anyone else think him resigning over those parties is really OTT?

It's all about what a human life is worth and in which context. If you're a leader and have been explaining how everyone should consider health care workers and how people can die unless you are careful, then you should absolutely resign because otherwise you are making everything conditional and you're saying that the rules don't apply to you because you were *working*. How is your garden party different from the others? How is it different from you meeting your elderly parents half the country away or celebrating your birthday with 20 of your closest friends?

I guess what I'm asking is what lies are acceptable to you and what aren't?

Different leaders kill in different ways, but if someone is this careless during a pandemic when literally what you have to do is follow your own rules, what do you suppose will happen if that person ever finds himself benefitting from going to a war half a globe away?

[Dirty Big Yoke]

I just want to say here: I don't give a damn about BOJO having a party. Is that all the news can go on about?? Like it's important? Yes, it wasn't the right thing to do, but there's surely far worse things he could have done. Does anyone else think him resigning over those parties is really OTT?

Dirty Big Yoke, I don't think a human can just get rid of their instincts. You still get hierarchies in the categories you mentioned, as you said. So the more complex forms are still based on our innate need/instincts to form hierarchies, it's just using a different method (thinking) to achieve it instead of physical fights.

Just because we seemingly think more in detail than other animals, it doesn't get rid of our instincts. Maybe it can dampen them, though.

I think you should care about Bonji and his twat minions - plenty of vulnerable people died so they can party around like the cunts they are. One set of rules for them, another set for us! It's inexcusable when a civilian doing the same thing at the time meant being fined or worse, arrested.

Also: Humans are not instinct driven to a large degree, we literally have evolved most of them away. Only few remain, like fight/flight etc. If we were more instinctual, we simply would not be as complex or intelligent. Also, the hierarchies are not instinctual - if it were, how come we see vastly different and arbitrary hierarchies in different cultures? Wouldn't stronger instincts lead us to all same the same hierarchy? It doesn't line up to what is seen in reality.

[Calandale]

They take on roles more driven by instinct than anything else. They won't consciously understand things like gender - they just do whatever is expected by instinct.

Ah...yes. There is that. Although....

Humans are much more complex than that. We evolved to get rid of most of our instincts, particularly when it comes to sexes. That's why you don't really see typical alpha/beta dominance hierarchy (despite what incels think) or such in human society, we see much more complex ones based on class, gender, race and other categories, all of which can overlap and are not always a binary. Some cultures vary, like having a caste system on top of that, while others don't.

Sort of a yes...but here.

My view of societal patterns is that they are a form of cultural 'evolution' (the word isn't quite right); very much cultural behaviorist. What this means is that I see the behavior patterns that cultures acquire are essentially tested by the same fitness tests that genetics have. And that the 'instinct' level of behavior is less pre-programmed (this depends on the critter of course) than you're probably seeing it.

Still, human society (and especially modern human society - an argument against this being anything hard-wired alone) is far more malleable than even that exhibited by the great apes. My point though is that this is essentially a natural progression - and that, like tool use, this is an adaption feature simply allowing for more rapid search over the possible formulations.

And don't imagine that there's not a great deal of complexity in what I'm tagging as gender roles in the animal kingdom. That's the point of the alpha/beta distinguishment. It essentially creates more than a simple two-gendered solution. It's just that these solutions are less adaptable (in general - exceptions can be found still due to environmental pressures).