If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Real Clear Science)   How do feminists explain immunology? Huh? How about it sweetcheeks   (realclearscience.com) divider line 118
    More: Interesting, immunology, social construction, feminists, Lawrence Summers, antiviral drugs  
•       •       •

5993 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Nov 2012 at 1:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



118 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-09 03:47:19 PM
And the winner is... the pharmaceutical industry, which now gets to produce sex-specific (and possibly gender-specific) overpriced drugs for every disease.
 
2012-11-09 03:53:13 PM

JericoPaladin: Here's a novel concept for many people:

"Man" != "male"

"Woman" != "female"


From Wiktionary:

Noun

man (plural men)

An adult male human.

Noun

woman (plural women)

An adult female human.

See, words have meanings. The word "man," when used as a noun, refers to a human male. Similarly, "woman" refers to a human female. Glad we cleared that up.
 
2012-11-09 03:54:09 PM

Damnhippyfreak: On a side note, it's more of a argument from incredulity than an ad hominem ;)


I see this thread has been in good hands while I've been at work. I can't stay, but let me reiterate my core argument:

No one claims that there are no differences between the sexes, since it's patently obvious that there are. However, many people claim that the plasticity of the human brain means that the underlying biological differences do not justify making behavioral assumptions or predictions of future performance based on those biological differences.

To put it statistically: if you were to graph the standard deviation of some attribute of humanity, say height, you would see that the curves for both men and women would not fall along the same mean. However the intersection of those two curves would cover such a large majority of your population that it would be unwise to take the outliers as examples.

//Sorry, I've been doing a lot of statistics lately. I'm a programmer. WHY AM I DOING STATISTICS? Computers should do stats.
 
2012-11-09 04:01:57 PM

phaseolus: JerkyMeat: ...meant to be stuffed full of dick.


But almost certainly not your dick, with a personality like that.


I suddenly envision a Thanksgiving dinner gone horribly, horribly wrong.
 
2012-11-09 04:15:51 PM

Honest Bender: JericoPaladin: Here's a novel concept for many people:

"Man" != "male"

"Woman" != "female"

From Wiktionary:

Noun

man (plural men)

An adult male human.

Noun

woman (plural women)

An adult female human.

See, words have meanings. The word "man," when used as a noun, refers to a human male. Similarly, "woman" refers to a human female. Glad we cleared that up.


Yes, they do. The rigor of language is that they mean different things to different people. The dictionary is not the final authority on the way we use language, and especially not its context.

A biological male who lives life as a woman is a woman. She's not a man dressing up as a woman. She's a woman. The dictionary definition does not change this fact for her. The dictionary is no more a divine authority than the DSM manual is, which only removed homosexuality as a disorder in 1973 (and maintained a more vague form until 1986).

Now, granted, some people disagree with this contention, even if I believe it is sound. Okay, fine. But the point is, this distinction between gender and sex language exists and is used by certain people. You may disagree with their use of said language, BUT, if you want to argue with them, you need to realize the language they are using is different from yours.

When you say the word "man", you're not saying "a human male" any more than I'm not. The word is loaded with all sorts of underlying assumptions. It's important, during a discussion or even an argument, to find the appropriate context for people's words. If you're going to participate in a gender debate, it would behoove you to realize when the term "man" or "woman" doesn't mean exactly what you think it does. It's not a victory to argue successfully about things that were never said using words that mean something entirely different.
 
2012-11-09 04:17:35 PM
Well, looks like someone has a penis-shaped axe to grind.

// maybe he just has a penis-chip on his shoulder?
 
2012-11-09 04:18:09 PM

t3knomanser: Damnhippyfreak: On a side note, it's more of a argument from incredulity than an ad hominem ;)

I see this thread has been in good hands while I've been at work. I can't stay, but let me reiterate my core argument:

No one claims that there are no differences between the sexes, since it's patently obvious that there are. However, many people claim that the plasticity of the human brain means that the underlying biological differences do not justify making behavioral assumptions or predictions of future performance based on those biological differences.

To put it statistically: if you were to graph the standard deviation of some attribute of humanity, say height, you would see that the curves for both men and women would not fall along the same mean. However the intersection of those two curves would cover such a large majority of your population that it would be unwise to take the outliers as examples.

//Sorry, I've been doing a lot of statistics lately. I'm a programmer. WHY AM I DOING STATISTICS? Computers should do stats.


...It's kind of freaky that I had the exact same thought and actually considered doing some plotting in MATLAB to see exactly how many model women were "better" at some random metric than men given two identically distributed curves that differed only in their mean.
 
2012-11-09 04:18:30 PM

Almea Tarrant: Myria: I wonder what this means for us transgender people. Does my body have female immune responses? If so, was that because of having a female brain structure, or because of the hormones I'm taking?

Myria, this is a fascinating question (well for me anyway, I'm an immunologist). It's a known fact that hormones affect the immune system so maybe taking female hormones could result in more reactive "feminine" immune response..but I don't actually know (I'm going to have to do a lit search on this now...damn you! ;)

As for brain structure, years ago when I took I neurobiology class, there was research that in gay men certain (very small) parts of the brain had a structure that was more similar to what was usually seen in women than in heterosexual men. Now this was a long time ago and I don't know if this has been debunked or if there has been any similar research into lesbians or transgender people. This kind of research is often stopped because of protests (gay people are concerned that is gives a medical reason for what's "wrong" with them, homophobes don't like a medical reason for what should be an "immoral lifestyle choice").

Unfortunately sex and gender issues are hot topics and can lead to big drama and bad science, neither of which are of any help to anyone.

/yes I meant to say sex AND gender
//sex = biological form (penis vs vagina)
///gender = sex you identify with (male vs female)


Some of the difference could be attributed to minor histocompability antigens. You see this play out in graft/transplant rejection and in miscarriage, for example.
 
2012-11-09 04:24:55 PM

t3knomanser: Damnhippyfreak: On a side note, it's more of a argument from incredulity than an ad hominem ;)

I see this thread has been in good hands while I've been at work. I can't stay, but let me reiterate my core argument:

No one claims that there are no differences between the sexes, since it's patently obvious that there are. However, many people claim that the plasticity of the human brain means that the underlying biological differences do not justify making behavioral assumptions or predictions of future performance based on those biological differences.

To put it statistically: if you were to graph the standard deviation of some attribute of humanity, say height, you would see that the curves for both men and women would not fall along the same mean. However the intersection of those two curves would cover such a large majority of your population that it would be unwise to take the outliers as examples.

//Sorry, I've been doing a lot of statistics lately. I'm a programmer. WHY AM I DOING STATISTICS? Computers should do stats.


You've summed up the parts of "Pink Brain, Blue Brain" that I've read so far. They present some nice graphs showing the actual degree of overlap in a number of cognitive areas, along with the differences in the means.

/And yet, despite certain people's fears, the author of the book has yet to be sued or harassed by the vast feminist movement that researchers apparently live in fear of. People can and do discuss these things in scientific forums. 

//Statistics is cool . . . join us . . . don't be afraid. It will only hurt a little bit at first . . .
 
2012-11-09 04:25:42 PM

JericoPaladin: The rigor of language is that they mean different things to different people.


Actually, the entire point of language is that words mean the same thing. That's what enables communication... If blooby purple sunday elbow, four alfalfa cold spring. See how that works?
 
2012-11-09 04:29:36 PM

Damnhippyfreak: In order to put forward a No True Scotsman fallacy, you would need to first find examples of someone saying "that there are no differences". This doesn't seem to be the case in the documentary you posted, and you yourself seem to contradict yourself in that you acknowledge that "feminist ideologues" recognize "basic biological differences". You haven't found a Scotsman in the first place, true or not.


All this aside, what you're saying here is internally inconsistent. Might I politely suggest that you accidentally made the same mistake as TFA: Since some "feminist ideologues" posit no biological basis for differences in cognition and behavior, you accidentally overextended a dislike of this viewpoint towards a false impression of them also saying that there is no differences whatsoever between the sexes. TFA made this mistake of overextending this view to go so far as to cover immune response. It's understandable as a knee-jerk response, and we all do it sometimes, but I highly suggest you abandon this line of reasoning.


Well it is certainly true that if we insist that the statement "feminists say there is no difference between the sexes" must mean that feminists say there is no X or Y chromosome or any biological differences whatsoever, that indeed it would be difficult to find anyone on the planet who has said that.

Regardless, we have a rich history of feminists that can recognize biological differences saying those differences don't matter at all. They say that wrt nature vs. nurture. They say that wrt employment (firefighting). They say that wrt the legal system.

But if we force each of those arguments to include the notion that there is literally no difference whatsoever between the sexes, then certainly my claim fails.

But if we do that, then we are being ahistorical wrt feminist theory.
 
2012-11-09 04:29:59 PM

hstein3:
Some of the difference could be attributed to minor histocompability antigens. You see this play out in graft/transplant rejection and in miscarriage, for example.


That's interesting - I hadn't known that there were systematic antigen differences between men & women. I'd attributed the higher rejection rate among women to the fact that they're exposed to the father's DNA if they bear children, sensitizing them to the fathers' antigens.
 
2012-11-09 04:30:02 PM
[billoreillycantexplainthat.gif]
 
2012-11-09 04:31:45 PM

WhippingBoy: Oh feminists! You were once a much-needed avenue for important social justice reforms. Now you're just a pathetic self-parody who stagger around comically for my amusement!


Thanks for lumping us all together, dick.

PROTIP: If you think it's bullshiat that (for example) women make 74 cents to the man's dollar, you're a feminist. We're not all angry lesbians with armpit hair poking out from the torn-off sleeve of a flannel shirt. Not all of us have vaginas, even.
 
2012-11-09 04:32:50 PM

JericoPaladin: A biological male who lives life as a woman is a woman.


He's a transgendered man. See, we already have a discrete term for that type of person.

When you say the word "man", you're not saying "a human male" any more than I'm not.

Yes. I am. When I say man, I mean a human male. I don't mean a person who identifies with the male gender. If it were a man that identified as male, I'd also call that person a man. If it were a woman that identified as a male, I'd call that woman transgendered.

If you're going to participate in a gender debate, it would behoove you to realize when the term "man" or "woman" doesn't mean exactly what you think it does.

If you're going to communicate with other people, it would behoove you to learn the definitions of words. If you feel like you need to bend the meaning of a word to mean something else, go grab your dictionary. Chances are, there's already a word for what you're trying to describe.
 
2012-11-09 04:37:41 PM

Honest Bender: JericoPaladin: A biological male who lives life as a woman is a woman.

He's She's a transgendered woman. See, we already have a discrete term for that type of person.


Do we?
 
2012-11-09 04:39:34 PM

Dr Dreidel: Do we?


Well, we in the non-ignorant group do... I guess you can be willfully ignorant if you want but it really speaks poorly of you.
 
2012-11-09 04:41:21 PM

RoyBatty: Well it is certainly true that if we insist that the statement "feminists say there is no difference between the sexes" must mean that feminists say there is no X or Y chromosome or any biological differences whatsoever, that indeed it would be difficult to find anyone on the planet who has said that.

Regardless, we have a rich history of feminists that can recognize biological differences saying those differences don't matter at all. They say that wrt nature vs. nurture. They say that wrt employment (firefighting). They say that wrt the legal system.

Quick note: I think your post mentioning firefighting and legal theory is a bit off-topic. The article that started this debate claimed to refute the 'feminists' who didn't recognize differences between the sexes with a reference to an article on immunology. Do you have a reference to feminists who claim that biological differences don't make any difference at all . . . in immunology? In nephrology? In cardiology? In (just about any)ology? Not claims of "I didn't get published because the feminist/evolutionist/whateverist conspiracy is shutting me down". Actual feminists who state that the biological differences between men and women don't make any difference in any particular aspect of medicine?

Feminists have said that men & women should be treated equally before the legal system - I'll give you that. One of the early feminists in the UK claimed that women should have an equal chance to raise children as men (at the time, men had the right to unilaterally prevent the mother of their children from having any contact with them). There have been a number of other examples since then. I don't really see a problem with most of these.


But if we force each of those arguments to include the notion that there is literally no difference whatsoever between the sexes, then certainly my claim fails.

But if we do that, then we are being ahistorical wrt feminist theory.


Reference, please?

I suggest reading about actual feminist history. It's kind of interesting finding out what the feminists in various countries were fighting for over different periods of time.
 
2012-11-09 04:56:57 PM

Honest Bender: Dr Dreidel: Do we?

Well, we in the non-ignorant group do... I guess you can be willfully ignorant if you want but it really speaks poorly of you.


trans = across/beyond/on the opposite side
gender = gender

Someone born a man who now "lives life as a woman" has traveled "across genders". What's the difference in calling her a transgendered woman and calling him a transgendered man?

Her preference. Don't be a jerk and hide behind semantics.
 
2012-11-09 04:56:59 PM

Honest Bender: JericoPaladin: The rigor of language is that they mean different things to different people.

Actually, the entire point of language is that words mean the same thing. That's what enables communication... If blooby purple sunday elbow, four alfalfa cold spring. See how that works?


You have a very myopic view of the means by which we communicate. A dictionary is a useful tool in enummerating the words we use in our language, but only through context do we actually acquire the ability to communicate, and dealing with the nuances of the way we use language only comes through time but, more importantly, through awareness. We can't ignore the setting in which we use language. Surely you don't believe that people really communicate primarily on their understanding of what's going on in the dictionary? Just recently, some dictionary (can't remember which, sorry) updated its meaning of the word "literally" to mean "figuratively". Now, I hate that usage to hell and back, but people do it, it's the exaggeration that is key, so what once meant "exactly what happened" now means "not actually what happened". I surrender to the evolution of language. It was added to the dictionary because people were using it in that context; people didn't start using it because a new edition of Websters came out.

You declare that a male living as a woman is a "transgendered man" by fiat, not by any logical means. You continue to use the male pronoun because you don't have any exposure to the concept of genderqueerness, where the accepted form is to use the pronoun for the declared gender of the person, not their sex. What you believe is the absolutely right way to speak is actually just provincial. The people who deal with being genderqueer every single day have their usage; why do you believe that an arbitary person completely removed from that universe would be unequivocally correct about it?

Language is alive. It evolves, it changes, it takes on different forms among different people, in different places, in different times and in different contexts. The dictionary will not save you.

The overall point, lest we forget, is that the author of this article was not able to correctly communicate his views because he didn't have the ability to understand the language used by his opponents. We're all both perpetrators and victims of this on a regular basis; words are, despite Webster, incredibly easy to misunderstand. We do a lot better at it when we realize this is true instead of pandering to absolutist notions.
 
2012-11-09 05:15:21 PM

draypresct: Quick note: I think your post mentioning firefighting and legal theory is a bit off-topic. The article that started this debate claimed to refute the 'feminists' who didn't recognize differences between the sexes with a reference to an article on immunology. Do you have a reference to feminists who claim that biological differences don't make any difference at all . . . in immunology? In nephrology? In cardiology? In (just about any)ology? Not claims of "I didn't get published because the feminist/evolutionist/whateverist conspiracy is shutting me down". Actual feminists who state that the biological differences between men and women don't make any difference in any particular aspect of medicine?


Yeah, there's been a lot of pushback against me for venturing outside of immunology.

And if that's what Chiad was claiming:

No one on the planet thinks that there are no differences between men and women. The entire point of the equal rights movement is that it isn't okay to treat half the population as less because of those differences. I'm getting real tired of people deliberately misunderstanding things.

Which is what I responded to, then absolutely, I have no idea if anyone ever said men and women have no differences wrt immunology.

But I don't think that is what Chiad was claiming, which is what I responded to.

And the article really wasn't about immunology either. It was about it being politically incorrect in certain circles to suggest men and women are different.

So do feminists say that there is no difference between men and women in a ology?

The author uses an Amazon description of Cordelia Fine's book, "Delusions of Gender" which

Passionately argued and unfailingly astute, Delusions of Gender provides us with a much-needed corrective to the belief that men's and women's brains are intrinsically different-a belief that, as Fine shows with insight and humor, all too often works to the detriment of ourselves and our society.

Would it be accurate to paraphrase Cordelia Fine as saying, "wrt the brainz, there is no difference between men's and women's brainz?"

Here she is again:

i.imgur.com

So yes, there are certainly contemporary, highly respected feminists that say that the biological differences between men and women don't make any difference in a aspect of medicine.
 
2012-11-09 05:20:37 PM
This is satire, right?
 
2012-11-09 05:21:22 PM

RoyBatty: Would it be accurate to paraphrase Cordelia Fine as saying, "wrt the brainz, there is no difference between men's and women's brainz?"


Nope.
 
2012-11-09 05:24:43 PM
The stupid in that article is so strong it hurts.

Nobody has ever claimed that medical treatment should be identical between men and women if their physiological differences merit different treatment. Nobody thinks men need pap smears or that women should check for testicular cancer.

The question rather is "can men and women be equally good in the field of immunology?" and the answer is yes.
 
2012-11-09 05:32:00 PM

cefm: The stupid in that article is so strong it hurts.

Nobody has ever claimed that medical treatment should be identical between men and women if their physiological differences merit different treatment. Nobody thinks men need pap smears or that women should check for testicular cancer.

The question rather is "can men and women be equally good in the field of immunology?" and the answer is yes.


Not even - the argument is literally fighting the strawman of "feminists claim men and women are identical" with a study showing that men and women may respond differently to viruses and treatments. He could likewise have argued "if men and women are identical like feminists say, then how come men have penises and women don't, smarty-pants feminists?"
 
2012-11-09 05:54:15 PM
All(?) animals have behaviors that define roles within their species. Some are confined to a single sex and other are shared by both sexes. In human we blur this with our complex societies and penchant for utilizing learned behavior over instinct. But, that does not mean that the vestiges of our old animal roles do not lie just under the surface of our rational minds.
 
2012-11-09 06:01:22 PM

nmemkha: of our old animal roles


Great... here comes the part where men are supposedly angry warmongering rapemonsters who can only gain control of themselves by becoming feminists...
 
2012-11-09 06:36:59 PM

JohnnyC: nmemkha: of our old animal roles

Great... here comes the part where men are supposedly angry warmongering rapemonsters who can only gain control of themselves by becoming feminists...


Personally, I feel we should be understanding of our animal natures (young men will masturbate - at lot), but at the same time ensure they do not cause harm or infringe on the rights of others (rape, sexual harassment, etc.)

It not a black/white issue, but rather a vigil of ensuring the inalienable rights of both sexes are not infringed by the other.
 
2012-11-09 07:14:18 PM
There are many people out there who have brains that don't conform to what the supposed standard brain for their sex is. There are men out there who are great at picking out gifts and can't navigate their way out of a paper bag and women who terrible at the whole emotionally sensitive thing and prefer to deal with information rather than people.
 
2012-11-09 07:19:53 PM

Chiad: No one on the planet thinks that there are no differences between men and women. The entire point of the equal rights movement is that it isn't okay to treat half the population as less because of those differences. I'm getting real tired of people deliberately misunderstanding things.


The article is strawman for sure, but don't try to suggest there aren't feminists who are anti-science. There are "equality" feminists-which everyone of sound mind should be-and there are political feminists who have a whole philosophical worldview that borders on the insane and has no real evidence to back it up. If science doesn't agree with their worldview then the science HAS to be wrong, including the entire field of evolutionary psychology and much of evolutionary biology.

The political feminists have much in common with the religion right when it comes to sex. Basically, that men looking at Playboy is evil, causes rape, etc. And as to evolution, while fundamentalists deny it happened, feminists will say they believe it happened but it can't possibly have caused any differences between men and women other than a small subset of physical ones.
 
2012-11-09 08:02:47 PM

JerkyMeat: I submit the quote from TFA Ignoring the entire field of biology in dedication to the farkette who scoffed at my biology argument a few weeks ago in some thread, when I reminded the women of fark, no matter how well you do in business or how much education you have, that little pussy of yours was meant to be stuffed full of dick.

Happy Friday!


Your elegant social brain is meant to stop you from actually saying obnoxious drivel like this by reminding you that expressing such obvious disdain for your fellow humans will only ever be met with rage and hostility. Yet here you are; making an ass of yourself in public -in a completely different thread you submitted for that sole purpose even(!)- because you're too nebbish to let go of having your ass handed to you in an internet argument, and too much of a coward to actually confront your vanquisher with a retort. Seems like there's a lot of things we humans of all genders and identities do with our physical inheritance that doesn't jive with bland biological determinism, doesn't it?

Oh, and Passive-Aggressive Friday to you!
 
2012-11-09 08:40:04 PM
I'm going to remove gender from the following post and only focus on sex (genitalia havingness) of people.

From this thread we've had people (almost universally) state that there are differences between men and women (once again sex, not gender). How come it also is that things should be equal, but not when it doesn't favor females? I'm all for equal rights, etc., but there is one very specific example that really bothers me, because it puts lives at risk.

Any guesses? Firemen (or firepeople I guess). Women want to be able to be firemen (and cops I would guess, and the army probably), but there are different physical fitness tests for each sex (once again, not gender). If I'm passed out in my apartment and there's a fire, I don't give a crap about equality in the workforce. I care about someone being able to carry my 200+ pound ass out of said burning apartment.

Is this sexist?

//If it is, I can still live with that, because not everyone is equal, the world isn't always fair, and it's ridiculous that a rock band has to provide an interpreter for their show because of AWD.
 
2012-11-09 09:01:14 PM

Myria: I wonder what this means for us transgender people. Does my body have female immune responses? If so, was that because of having a female brain structure, or because of the hormones I'm taking?


Biologically speaking:

Penis = male
Vagina = female

Just because youve loaded your system with unnaturral hormones doesnt mean anything. Your a man or woman loaded up on hormones/testosteron. Which fundementally differs from a man or woman in there natural biologic state. The good news, science doesnt care whom you identfy as, so can we all stop pretending just because a boy puts on dresses it means there is no such thing as sex or gender
 
2012-11-09 09:44:22 PM

mjjt: A lot of pointless huffing and puffing in the fark comments, all completely ignoring this vital piece of scientific research

The intensity and prevalence of viral infections are typically higher in males, whereas disease outcome can be worse for females. Females mount higher innate and adaptive immune responses than males, which can result in faster clearance of viruses, but also contributes to increased development of immunopathology. In response to viral vaccines, females mount higher antibody responses and experience more adverse reactions than males. The efficacy of antiviral drugs at reducing viral load differs between the sexes, and the adverse reactions to antiviral drugs are typically greater in females than males. Several variables should be considered when evaluating male/female differences in responses to viral infection and treatment: these include hormones, genes, and gender-specific factors related to access to, and compliance with, treatment. Knowledge that the sexes differ in their responses to viruses and to treatments for viral diseases should influence the recommended course of action differently for males and females.

which I intend to print out and laminate for next time l suffer the dread affliction of man flu and have to take to the couch with a generous application of medicinal fluids.


You realize that this will only benefit you in the short term. A woman flu appears to require longer term care.
 
2012-11-09 09:46:12 PM

JericoPaladin: Here's a novel concept for many people:

"Man" != "male"

"Woman" != "female"


Look, I love having some overly politically correct terminology to make fun of as much as the next guy, but you're not going to make the gender =/= sex thing happen. While technically true in other languages, in English the correlation is 1:1, you can't take things that are de facto synonyms and make them not just by the sheer power of wishful thinking. That's not how languages work.

The distinction between a man and a boy is cultural, yes, but the distinction between a man and a woman isn't, it's physical/biological. Deal with it, stupid man world or no. Maybe grab some cheesecake to calm you down.
 
2012-11-09 10:04:40 PM

Heron: JerkyMeat: I submit the quote from TFA Ignoring the entire field of biology in dedication to the farkette who scoffed at my biology argument a few weeks ago in some thread, when I reminded the women of fark, no matter how well you do in business or how much education you have, that little pussy of yours was meant to be stuffed full of dick.

Happy Friday!

Your elegant social brain is meant to stop you from actually saying obnoxious drivel like this by reminding you that expressing such obvious disdain for your fellow humans will only ever be met with rage and hostility. Yet here you are; making an ass of yourself in public -in a completely different thread you submitted for that sole purpose even(!)- because you're too nebbish to let go of having your ass handed to you in an internet argument, and too much of a coward to actually confront your vanquisher with a retort. Seems like there's a lot of things we humans of all genders and identities do with our physical inheritance that doesn't jive with bland biological determinism, doesn't it?

Oh, and Passive-Aggressive Friday to you!


+1 for you working in the word nebbish!

Hey, I only said what it was meant for, not how it was currently being used.
 
2012-11-09 10:05:48 PM
How does a feminist explain immunology?

I'll go with, knocking boots with everyone except the author of this article boosts a womans' immune system.
 
2012-11-09 10:07:09 PM

t3knomanser: In certain circles, it is politically incorrect to suggest that men and women are different.

Oh, christ, you're really breaking out this strawman? And then bringing up the guy who basically tried to extend the much derided The Bell Curve to gender bias in engineering professions?

Hey, buddy, I know you've never seen a vagina nor touched a breast, but everybody else is quite aware that women are different than men in several important ways.


Well said, go forth and boost immune systems. ;)
 
2012-11-09 10:28:23 PM
Ah, I see the derpers have created a "sciencey" site. I couldn't get past the second paragraph of derp.
 
2012-11-10 12:09:50 AM

draypresct: strawman feminist


Chauvinist!!
 
2012-11-10 01:55:51 AM
Ah yes, it's that one thread where that one guy, who tries to claim that everyone on the other side holds a certain ridiculous view, is arguing with that other guy, who tries to claim that no one on that holds that ridiculous view.
 
2012-11-10 03:00:27 AM

JericoPaladin: A biological male who lives life as a woman is a woman.


No, he's not. He's a man in a dress. Or a man with his dick cut off. He dose not have ovaries, a uterus, or female hormones coursing through those hairy veins (at least not without needles).
He may think like a woman, and act like a woman, but that's the extent of it.
 
2012-11-10 03:04:46 AM

Honest Bender: If blooby purple sunday elbow, four alfalfa cold spring.


How dare you insult my mother!
 
2012-11-10 04:03:50 AM

ReverendJasen: JericoPaladin: A biological male who lives life as a woman is a woman.

No, he's not. He's a man in a dress. Or a man with his dick cut off. He dose not have ovaries, a uterus, or female hormones coursing through those hairy veins (at least not without needles).
He may think like a woman, and act like a woman, but that's the extent of it.


If it walks like a duck, and swins like a duck, and flies like a duck, and quacks like a duck, even if it was born a swan, do we call it a duck or a swan?
 
2012-11-10 04:18:56 AM
As outwardly duck-like it may be, it still can't lay duck eggs. We can change the way we look or act, but we still can't change our genes.
 
2012-11-10 04:46:12 AM

JericoPaladin: Here's a novel concept for many people:

"Man" != "male"

"Woman" != "female"

This is the central problem with this debate. The words are not interchangeable. A biological male is not necessarily a man. A biological female is not necessarily a woman.

It is willful myopia to say that differing genetics do not account for biological differences. I'm not sure anyone can argue that. What the argument typically entails is that we easily ascribe to unfounded biological differences what can often be ascribed to social or environmental factors... or at the very least, we don't know certain causes but like to posit that "it's just the difference between men and women!" and not "it's the difference we force between men and women".

When a feminist commenter uses the word "woman", it generally does refer to a female person, just statistically, but the concept she invokes is that of gender, not sex. When an opponent of that position is speaking, they use "woman" and "female" interchangeably, and confound the ideas of gender and sex. Obviously if you're not speaking the same language, you're going to argue nonsensically. The article makes no distinction between gender and sex, so it's arguing with a straw feminist that also makes no such distinction, despite the fact that the distinction is central to the debate.

Please, please, PLEASE create medical solutions based on my Y chromosome. I'm all for it. Male and female brains may have the tendency to have particular innate differences... but just like it may once have been stated, with no twing of humor, that housekeeping is "in a woman's blood", more subtly sexist commentary may be made today about neurological differences between sexes that don't actually exist. The contention is not that you can't tell the difference between males and females; it's that you should hold your horses before generalizing behaviors based on those differences.

We used to talk about behavioral differences between races, even going so far as to cal ...


The problem is that, in reality, they are what they are. Modern technology has made it possible to change it, but that is only a result of technological advancement and not an natural development of transgendered people, who don't really offer the species anything obvious.
 
2012-11-10 06:17:11 AM
What a bunch of bullshiat. Defensive, paranoid man-child sets up a straw-feminist and knocks it down. Whoopee.
What a snotty little asshole.
 
2012-11-10 06:19:12 AM

aerojockey: Ah yes, it's that one thread where that one guy, who tries to claim that everyone on the other side holds a certain ridiculous view, is arguing with that other guy, who tries to claim that no one on that holds that ridiculous view.


Thank you. That sums up the article and thread perfectly.
 
2012-11-10 08:04:31 AM

t3knomanser: Hey, buddy, I know you've never seen a vagina nor touched a breast, but everybody else is quite aware that women are different than men in several important ways


You might want to look up the definition of "everybody."

There are many out there is seem to think than any statement that women are different than men means not equal to men.

It is the same as not voting for Obama or being opposed to his policies is considered racism by some.
 
2012-11-10 08:07:20 AM
An article in Slate describes how this timidity has outraged female scientists, two of whom "called the aversion to studying innate differences anti-scientific and an impediment to understanding mental illness in women."

There is no impediment as we understand women's mental illness easily-if you are woman you are mentally ill.
 
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report