Washington Seattle Times applauds HB 1240 "AWB" for combatting "toxic masculinity"

[monkeybutler]

Thomas Kuhn is rolling on the floor.

When decades old biology runs out, it's pop psychology to the rescue.

Holy fook.

 

[GrayGoose]

we need a roll eyes emoji.... ;P

The 'Ignore' button works nicely to make idiots vanish. Too bad it doesn't work on politicians too.

 

[Knobgoblin]

Thomas Kuhn is rolling on the floor.

When decades old biology runs out, it's pop psychology to the rescue.

Holy fook.

Medieval Barber for the win.

 

[Koda]

The 'Ignore' button works nicely to make idiots vanish. Too bad it doesn't work on politicians too.

I dont use that feature, I dont think anyone here is an idiot and want to hear all sides of a topic. Im simply still not pursuaded by his opinion. Years of estabilished biology and science certainly is seeing a paradigm shift in treatment though, affirmation care is not widely accepted among professionals and academia... and thats troubling.

 

[msgriff]

Ah... Thomas Kuhn. The Anarchist of the scientific community.

"What do we want?"
"Change!!"
"When do we want it?"
"T'=T/√(1–(v²/c²)) NOW!!"

I liked the old ways better

 

[Koda]

Kuhn.... so in short he advocated experimentation over traditional gradual research.
Yeah thats pretty controversial, and prone to political pursuasions.

Thomas S. Kuhn | American Philosopher, Historian of Science

Thomas S. Kuhn, American historian of science noted for The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), one of the most influential works of history and philosophy written in the 20th century. Kuhn earned bachelor’s (1943) and master’s (1946) degrees in physics at Harvard University but obtained

www.britannica.com

 

[monkeybutler]

If I were an enterprising young lad I might Google "epigenetics gender" expecting there might be something interesting there.

Lysenko and Lamarck are not as wrong as we though they were decades ago.

 

[Koda]

If I were an enterprising young lad I might Google "epigenetics gender" expecting there might be something interesting there.

Lysenko and Lamarck are not as wrong as we though they were decades ago.

Theres a lot to unwrap here but thank you for some citations finally.

Lysenko was a pseudo-scientist.... not really off to a good start there citing his work. Apparently millions of people died as a result of his work mandated by his government....

Lamarck, still reading....

Epigenetics: "Epigenetic changes in the nervous system are emerging as a critical component of enduring effects induced by early life experience, hormonal exposure, trauma and injury, or learning and memory."
^my first reaction to that is social influence not biology.

summary and conclusion: "The relative importance of epigenetic modifications to the establishment and maintenance of sex differences in brain and behavior remains an open question, but that there is some role cannot be denied."
source:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2788155/

Still not convinced of anything but thank you for the citations. Interesting stuff.

 

[monkeybutler]

I wasn't "citing" Lysenko as such. LOL.

Someone else had already mentioned him in the thread.

The point is that both Lamarck and Lysenko, the latter being a fan boy of the former, shared ideas about inheritance of acquired characteristics. Do you understand how that plays into this discussion?. The person using 50 year old biological paradigms brough it up as a way to support an ideological viewpoint. Tabula rasa, nature-nurture, blah blah blah.

The most current science suggests there are biologicla factors in play which influ ce how gender is expressed. Some hate that idea because they want to blame trans people for being trans, and say things like "it is just mental illness."

For the thousandth time, IDGAF about really any of this. But I find it extremely interesting how much energy has gone into indicting a very small chunk of the population, which, believe or not, is not going to be the ruin of Western civilization.

It is quite terrifying how easily the horse the horse is led to its water, through bumper sticker level discourse.

 

[Koda]

For the thousandth time, IDGAF about really any of this. But I find it extremely interesting how much energy has gone into indicting a very small chunk of the population, which, believe or not, is not going to be the ruin of Western civilization.

It is quite terrifying how easily the horse the horse is led to its water, through bumper sticker level discourse.

....and yet here you also are participating in a conversation that you dont GAF about?

Its not like this is a small subject in passing... peoples lives are being updended over this, parental rights are being removed by our own government over this subject that currently has no scientific or medical consensus on its treatment. And thats something thats terrifyng to you for people to discuss? Is by saying that some attempt to get us to question our position or concerns, why include that kind of statement?

 

[coreymet]

How the heck did this discussion segue so far from the original post?

 

[OldBroad44]

The terms 'male' and 'female' have biological definitions that work over all two sex species on earth. If we accept people usurping those words to use for something else--such as some imaginary two sex species that could change sexes any day it felt like it, we biologists would have to invent new words to express the universal truths we have been using 'male' and 'female' for.

Lamark thought acquired characteristics could be inherited. They cant. No matter how many generations you chop tails off the mice, their offspring are still born with tails.

However, the environment does have an influence on the regulatory status of some genes, and some of those regulatory states can persist to the next generation or beyond. This can achieve the same effect as if genes themselves could be changed by acquired characteristics. If your mother experienced a horrible famine, for example, some of your genes may have proteins bound to them that regulate expression of those genes so that you process sugar and store fat more like a starving person, even though you never experienced starving. The underlying genes haven't changed. Through how many generations these 'epigenetic' (beyond genetic) changes last we don't know.

I know of no case where epigenetic regulation of genes causes changes in sex determination in humans. However, it may influence things like sexual preferences. How else to explain the fact that if you are male, the more sons your mother has borne before you, the more likely you are to be homosexual? The evolutionary biology reason for this suggests that most of the family's resources are given to earlier, especially firstborn sons. So a fourth son may be more effective at passing on his genes if he concentrates on helping his parents and siblings rather than having kids himself. However that assumes that homosexual men have fewer kids than heterosexuals, and it isn't clear that they do.

Fathers put epigenetic tags on some of the genes in their sperm that cause those genes to be expressed early. The result is the newborn baby more resembles the dad than the mom. This is thought to help the father recognize the baby as his own and be less likely to kill it, more willing to support it.

 

[MTpockets]

How the heck did this discussion segue so far from the original post?

Visualized, the segue would look something like this….

 

[Xaevian]

Visualized, the segue would look something like this….
View attachment 1493089

And as productive as this:

 

[NeoBlackdog]

"Toxic masculinity"... LOL! Suck my nuts ya bunch of weirdos

 

[shibbershabber]

WA assault weapons bill goes after the biggest guns — in more ways than one

A debate about guns in Olympia veered into a confused, though revealing, discussion about "hypermasculinity," columnist Danny Westneat writes.

www.seattletimes.com

If you run into the ST paywall, clear your browser cache. Otherwise, if you can't get past the paywall see the excerpt below which is afforded legal protection via the Fair Use doctrine.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But what got everyone most riled up was the preamble of the bill.

"The legislature finds that the gun industry has specifically marketed these weapons as 'tactical,' 'hyper masculine,' and 'military style' in [a] manner that overtly appeals to troubled young men intent on becoming the next mass shooter," one sentence of the bill reads.

Objected Rep. Peter Abbarno, R-Centralia: "This can be construed as dangerous rhetoric. … I worry about the message we're sending now, using things like 'uber-masculine' when we talk about guns."

"This bill is saying denigrating things about masculinity," echoed Rep. Cyndy Jacobsen, R-Puyallup. "We don't have too much masculinity in this culture. We have not enough."

I challenge any bubblegumlib out there to find me a single school shooter who is even remotely close to being masculine, let alone "Hyper-masculine"

 

[OldBroad44]

And as productive as this:

Well...the pup has got the basic idea right. Instinct can take ya that far. To get all the critical details right--that tends to require experience.

I once taught a biology course for non bio majors at University of Minnesota, in the 1970s, A course officially titled Genetics and Human Society, or informally, Genetics for Poets. Huge class of about 500 in an amphitheator. They mostly all hated science. I was the only prof who had guest lectured in the course and held the audience. That is, held them in the room. For most guest lecturers the entire room was empty in five minutes. So when the guy who usually taught the course needed a break, I volunteered. I figured it would be at least interesting. Maybe even fun. Other background: I was the first female faculty hire in the Genetics department. Nearly all that 500 kids had never had a course with a female lecturer or prof. I was also about 28, not that much older than the students.

When I began covering human sexual development and behavior, I stood up there in front of that audience, and with a straight face and completely spontaneously said "Most people's first sexual experience is nothing to write home about."

 

[OldBroad44]

As for instinct vs experience. True story. A couple had been unable to get pregnant in years of trying. They went to see a doctor. Turned out they had been "using the wrong hole."

 

[monkeybutler]

I challenge any bubblegumlib out there to find me a single school shooter who is even remotely close to being masculine, let alone "Hyper-masculine"

It's more about the aspiration than the reality.

on the flip side there's plenty of people who associate retrictive gun laws with emasculation.

 

[P7M13]

As for instinct vs experience. True story. A couple had been unable to get pregnant in years of trying. They went to see a doctor. Turned out they had been "using the wrong hole."

Yah, is that the one where the gynecologist could easily slip his pinkie up the woman's urethra?