Wokeness: — is to behave AS IF only white males ever did anything bad.

Is that right, chaps?
And from that place, — unenlightened

I think the rational response to that would be it's about ANY given "majority." Any given majority needs to be kept in check. Period. Doesn't matter if that majority is white, black, or a race of hyper-intelligent gerbils. If you're a majority, that means you have power, and power is should be fair game to be scrutinized. Any society where power cannot be scrutinized is totalitarian. It's always been that way, since the beginning of time, to right now in 2025. "Heavy hangs the head... (that wears the crown)."

It's literally what the whole Declaration of Independence was about, separation of powers to prevent abuse of power. It acknowledges that men are not strong enough to remain moral and faithful to the ideals that made life worth living and that have given us every invention and human work we use and hold dear—given enough time, opportunity, and/or lack of supervision. That's why I like it. It not only acknowledges but codifies a hard truth without blurting it out brashly and turning people off from it.

That said, this isn't a popular definition because the fringe of the majority (who actually wish to do harm to minorities—or otherwise treat them less than equally because "what are they gonna do"—simply for not being like they are) don't like being told the reality that they're nothing special without their numbers. Similarly, those that have legitimate grievances derived from their state of being a minority also don't like that definition because it's dismissive of the legitimacy of their personal sufferings and grievances (i.e. basically, it's easy to interpret that message incorrectly as: "well, if the situation was reversed, you would be no different so your plight really isn't all that big of a deal.")

The irony of this kind of statement, when the whole tangent about transgender is recreational outrage. A tiny number of people are transgender, and are disproportionately victims of crime rather than perpetrators. As I say, it's a drummed up boogieman, the moral panic of our time. — Mijin

Well yes, that is the argument. I reject it. Respectfully. I think that's okay, too.

Which one of the experts here has said that SRY is the singular, and strictly binary, determinator of sex? — Mijin

You can read the quote you quoted. But you are literally incapable of taking in information which is counter to your emotional position. Fortunately for my attitude, I have demonstrated that you are wrong. Several times. With absolutely no retort other than repeating a claim which is incorrect.

So once again your response is "nuh-uh!". — Mijin

This is so abysmally disingenuous. I have repeatedly specifically addressed this in detail. You are now lying, directly, about what has occurred in this exchange.

Good bye.

He thinks this is, or rather, is used to, social media. DM stands for Direct Message, so the kids today say "DM me" which means "send me a private message."

This offer is likely so as to avoid claims or accusations of being "off topic" or "spamming."

He feels you are wrong and also feels he can easily prove it. — Outlander

Correct. @praxis Outlander is right. You are wrong. There is no version of this where you can present non-chopped-up, manipulated excerpts to support some point you're making. You also seem to be stuck on a single word (which has been explained to you as not illustrating Charlie's emotional/moral position personally). That is disingenuous. So come to the DMs if you want a discussion. If not, we can drop it.

Pretty much everyone else on the planet — praxis

Your view of hte world seems to be derived from your personal wishes and not reality. The majority of the world agrees with Kirk. The majority of the world is both religious, and not predisposed to hate people based on their opinions.

Your view of hte world seems to be derived from your personal wishes and not reality. — AmadeusD

I didn't want Kirk to be a culture warrior. I wish he were not a culture warrior. I wish there were no culture warriors on either side of the war, simply because you can't have a war without warriors.

Well, that's a good position. Makes it hard to understand why you're vying to keep him in that position then throughout hte exchange

You might ask yourself why his supporters saw him in that position.

The US Department of Labor has been running a campaign for some time, American taxpayer money at work. Below are some live examples (they're from 2025).

White men, few women, no other ethnicities, inconspicuous blue collar recognition, stereotypical, roles, clean(-shaven), interchangeable, uniform, non-inclusive, anti-woke, Christian, nationalism, ...

Aug 11, 16, 19, 21, 23, 28, 30, Sep 2, 4, 6, 15

23, 27, 29, Oct 18, 21

23

Similar campaigns have been seen before (e.g. Italy and the USSR came to mind). Personally, I don't find blue collar recognition particularly suspicious, more that they determine "the good" and "the enemies". You won't find anything feminist in there, for example. What is included and what is excluded is telling. As government campaigns go, I (personally) find it beneath a top-tier democracy, but, much more importantly, what do you think?

Private company brands a trans on cans and the anti-woke freak.

Department of labor brands white dudes on social media and it's :up:

You can read the quote you quoted. But you are literally incapable of taking in information which is counter to your emotional position. Fortunately for my attitude, I have demonstrated that you are wrong. Several times. With absolutely no retort other than repeating a claim which is incorrect. — AmadeusD

You think that a quote that says that there are hundreds of observed genotypes for the SRY gene, supports your claim that it's strictly binary? WTF level of gaslighting is this?

Anyway, I asked you directly for which biologist has stated your position of SRY being the singular and binary determinator of sex. Say a name or admit that none do.

Lol.

Somebody in the US Department of Labor has noticed just what kind of messaging the White House and Trump approves of. At least they won't be fired by Trump. :)

Welcome to Trump's America.

You might ask yourself why his supporters saw him in that position. — praxis

The majority did not, but to the extend that they did it's because the saw themselves constantly attacked for having reasonable opinions and he spoke to that. Respectfully, and without insult. In fact, a democrat did a dive into his videos and found that his only examples of personal name-calling were about himself.

Again, DM me if you care to understand what you're talking about a bit better. If not, let's leave it.

You think that a quote that says that there are hundreds of observed genotypes for the SRY gene, supports your claim that it's strictly binary? WTF level of gaslighting is this?

Anyway, I asked you directly for which biologist has stated your position of SRY being the singular and binary determinator of sex. Say a name or admit that none do. — Mijin

They literally do not. They discuss translocation and mutation. They do not discuss several allele variations. I presume you can quote the passages you are referring to, as I was able to do?

You can read the names of the authors. I assume. But am getting less certain of your capabilities in this regard. Luckily, you've simply whittered. So no worries mate.

You might ask yourself why his supporters saw him in that position.
— praxis

The majority did not, … — AmadeusD

You took a poll?

but to the extend that they did it's because the saw themselves constantly attacked for having reasonable opinions and he spoke to that. — AmadeusD

So he was their champion (cultural warrior).

In fact, a democrat did a dive into his videos and found that his only examples of personal name-calling were about himself. — AmadeusD

A culture warrior isn’t defined by being insulting.

They literally do not. They discuss translocation and mutation. They do not discuss several allele variations. I presume you can quote the passages you are referring to, as I was able to do? — AmadeusD

All genotypes originate as mutations.

Look, let's even take a step back. I'll give you credit for the fact that you tacitly accept that the standard arguments for sex determination to be binary and trivial (on the basis of internal or external genitalia, sexual dimorphism, chromsomes etc) don't work. Because these things can sometimes be equivocal and even when, say, chromosomes fit cleanly in one bracket, another thing like external genitalia might fit in a different bracket.

The problem is that you seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge exactly the same issues with the SRY gene. There are hundreds of different observed genotypes for this gene, and it also may not align with other markers of sex.

You can read the names of the authors. I assume. But am getting less certain of your capabilities in this regard. Luckily, you've simply whittered. So no worries mate. — AmadeusD

Yeah an ad hominem, that totally works as a cite of even one biologist that agrees with your position.

I know this is the Lounge but I don't see why TPF should be hosting disputes like this. It's effectively a platform for culture warriors. I'm closing it.