1666
Dunning-Kruger (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

What the person said as an explanation was wrong full stop. There is no argument for it we know that gender isn’t related to genitalia, we know gender isn’t related to behaviour.

Those are just things conservatives say to reinforce gender identity/roles

So you can pick one or the other; is the phd saying that in which case they are wrong. Or is the explanation wrong and the phd is talking about something else

Your insistence that both are correct just puts you in the same crowd as antivaxxers

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

You're the only one here claiming that the PhD is equating gender, sex, genitalia. The PhD says no such thing. The person the PhD is responding to is the one trying to equate gender, sex, genitalia, chromosoms, reducing it to "there are only two sexes, male or female." The PhD is telling that person that they are wrong, and chromosoms do not determine what comes out in the end. The PhD is correct an you are misreading them, and it has already been explained to you that the PhD is saying, verbatim, that chromosoms do not determine gender or even the sex. If you think that contradicts the PhD, you are still misunderstanding and assuming that the one who's wrong must be the PhD and certainly not you. But you really really want to say that the PhD is equating gender and sex, or that the explanation that was given to you is contradicting what the PhD is saying. At this point, you're just trying to obfuscate what the PhD is claiming and what you are defending, and somehow the PhD is the one who's wrong and as bad as anti-vaxxers.

Once again: the PhD is correct, you misunderstand what they said, someone explained to you what the PhD was saying, and that explanation is not contradicting what the PhD said. The PhD and the explanation are both correct and they are saying the same thing. You keep trying to pretend that you know better than the PhD and the PhD must be anti science somehow, instead of wondering if you're not completely missing the entire discussion. The only way you are going is trying to devaluate science.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

Oh i see your problem, you didn’t read the explanation

, some people with XY are born with female genitalia and look female their whole lives.

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

... And you still don't understand it, and you assume that everyone else is wrong even after it was explained to you. That quote is correct and it does not contradict what the PhD said. In fact, it illustrates exactly what they said.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

That there are men (xy) with female parts, do I was correct when I said that parts don’t define gender

I don’t think the phd is saying that though because they talk about xx becoming xy

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

That there are men (xy) with female parts

This is your misunderstanding right there. XY is not automatically a man. You are the one making the claim that chromosoms define if you are a man or a woman, and the PhD and the other guy are telling you that there are people born with XY who are cis women with female genitalia. You are wrong.

they talk about xx becoming xy

No, they are saying no such thing. They are telling you that there are people born with XY but who have female genitalia and grow up to be cis women. No one told you that some XY people changed to XX, or XX to XY. This does not happen. This is not what the PhD said, and this is not what the other guy explained to you. You are wrong. And you keep claiming that everybody else is wrong, without ever questioning your own understanding.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

Now you’re saying it

No matter what conservatives like you or that doctor say

They are telling you that there are people born with XY but who have female genitalia and grow up to be cis women

what’s in your pants doesn’t determine gender

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

??? No one said it determines your gender. We're telling you that it happens. Obviously there are XY people who grow up to be cis men, trans women, but also cis women, and surely trans men as well, or anything inbetween, with any form of gender expression you can think of. You're the only one making this all up for some reason.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

Has y = man

No y = woman

no matter someone’s parts or how they act changes that. Stop being sexist

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Has y = man

No y = woman

No. You are conflating chromosoms, gender, sex. The PhD is telling you that you are wrong. You are claiming that you know better than them. The whole meme is about you, you have Dunning-Kruger, they have a PhD.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 47 minutes ago* (last edited 45 minutes ago)

okay without being sexiest, what is the difference between a man and a woman that isn’t sex?

(Hint: there is none, but feel free to parrot whatever fox news tells you)

[-] Uruanna@lemmy.world 1 points 15 minutes ago

No one has said anything about any of that, you are making up this argument out of nothing, no one has tried to define what a man or a woman is - except you, actually. You are moving the discussion and muddying what is even being argued about, so you can pretend I'm a conservative for some reason and the doctor is as bad as an anti-vaxxer. Even though you're the one who tried to declare what a man or a woman is, when that wasn't the subject at all. You are projecting.

this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
1666 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

13348 readers
2842 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS