Walk_blesseD
@Walk_blesseD@piefed.blahaj.zone
- a very silly girlie in her toxic femininity era (but like, in a I-support-women’s-wrongs kinda way)
- Butlerian jihadist (machines should not think!!;! BAD!!) (techbros plz face the wall 🥺)
- I do a little fedposting, as a treat
- anarchist (I need to believe a better world is possible)
- Comment on New Zealand bans puberty blockers for young transgender people 1 day ago:
You also are stupid, but I’d still let you have some decision-making authority on matters of your own medical care.
- Comment on Police detonated a ‘stinger’ grenade at a Melbourne protest. Now two activists may sue over their injuries 4 days ago:
The function of the police is to enact the violence of the state and thus by proxy, capital. Hence, police are by definition always at least some degree of fascist.
- Comment on A lamb amongst wolves 6 days ago:
giwtwm
- Comment on Steam Hardware [new Steam Controller, Steam Machine, and VR headset Steam Frame, coming in 2026] 1 week ago:
Yikes
- Comment on Valve Announces New Steam Machine, Steam Controller & Steam Frame 1 week ago:
Yeah, this is what I’m most looking forward to in the immediate sense tbh. It’ll be nice to play HLA without crashing every time it loads a new level as it currrently does for me in SteamVR (Monado doesn’t have this issue, but I can’t use my left-handed controls without Steam input :-|)
- Comment on Steam Hardware [new Steam Controller, Steam Machine, and VR headset Steam Frame, coming in 2026] 1 week ago:
Yeah sure I love their hardware and contributions to software, but I’d say profiteering off of children gambling for over 10 years is pretty ghoulish.
- Comment on Steam Hardware [new Steam Controller, Steam Machine, and VR headset Steam Frame, coming in 2026] 1 week ago:
Oh shit he’s homophobic?
- Comment on Are bots on lemmy? 2 weeks ago:
Bots? Nah all our psyops are 100% certified organic.
- Comment on Just up the production quality and they'll love it, Trust me bro 👍 3 weeks ago:
C’mon, at least draw on a smile, stick on some googly eyes, trim off a bit of your pubes and paste them on styled as muttonchops…
- Comment on Just up the production quality and they'll love it, Trust me bro 👍 3 weeks ago:
and why are women better at determining what men want, anyway?
Because we live in a patriarchal society in which men are raised knowing what men are ’supposed to’ want and women are also raised knowing what men are ’supposed to’ want because it reinforces existing social hierarchy.
- Comment on It's a sad state of affairs... 3 weeks ago:
hes just like me frfr
- Comment on Australia's baby recession deepens, new ABS data says 4 weeks ago:
…with a resource intensive lifestyle.
Idk bud, maybe that’s what should change instead of imposing arbitrary pop caps 🤦♀️ Besides, who tf is this EO Wilson, anyway? Let’s see…
Oh, here we go…
Sociobiology: The New Synthesis was initially met with praise by most biologists. After substantial criticism of the book was launched by the Sociobiology Study Group, associated with the organization Science for the People, a major controversy known as the “sociobiology debate” ensued, and Wilson was accused of racism, misogyny, and support for eugenics. Several of Wilson’s colleagues at Harvard, such as Richard Lewontin and Stephen Jay Gould, both members of the Group, were strongly opposed. Both focused their criticism mostly on Wilson’s sociobiological writings. Gould, Lewontin, and other members, wrote “Against ‘Sociobiology’” in an open letter criticizing Wilson’s “deterministic view of human society and human action”. Other public lectures, reading groups, and press releases were organized criticizing Wilson’s work. In response, Wilson produced a discussion article entitled “Academic Vigilantism and the Political Significance of Sociobiology” in BioScience.
Lol. Lmao. Please tell me you’re joking
Wilson said in reference to ants that “Karl Marx was right, socialism works, it is just that he had the wrong species”. He asserted that individual ants and other eusocial species were able to reach higher Darwinian fitness putting the needs of the colony above their own needs as individuals because they lack reproductive independence: individual ants cannot reproduce without a queen, so they can only increase their fitness by working to enhance the fitness of the colony as a whole. Humans, however, do possess reproductive independence, and so individual humans enjoy their maximum level of Darwinian fitness by looking after their own survival and having their own offspring.
Now I’m really curious as to how he came up with 250M number (if you can point me to where he said it). This should be be a laugh.
- Comment on 4 weeks ago:
Midwit take. AI doesn’t produce anything but homogenous slop. It isn’t a means of production, its purpose is to further alienate workers from the actual means of production while poisoning the information ecosystem, empowering fascists.
- Comment on I'm not paying $8 for a pack of Skittles 4 weeks ago:
Who tf is “they”??? I don’t think cinema owners were the ones pushing for mass adoption of home theatres.
- Comment on Australia's baby recession deepens, new ABS data says 5 weeks ago:
Malthusians fuck off
- Comment on Marketing Doesn't Work on Nerds 2 months ago:
Hermits united. We get together every few years, swap stories about caves… it's good fun! For a hermit, that is…
- Comment on Trump's video on the shooting of Kirk appears to be AI 2 months ago:
Nah that just doesn't make sense. He doesn't need any pretexts because he's already getting everything he demands and more handed to him on a silver platter at every opportunity, and if he wanted one anyway he'd just make it up and bullshit everyone like his lot always does
- Comment on Foolproof advice 2 months ago:
I am once again asking lemmy users to check what community they're in before commenting
- Comment on Teen girls are being used as hitwomen in Sweden's organized crime wars: "Young kids are thirsty for blood" 2 months ago:
Rampant immigration good, morally correct and has no consequences ever
Yes, actually, I unironically agree with your strawman of someone else's position: people have a fundamental right to freedom of movement.
- Comment on 2 months ago:
Yeah, I like it. It's definitely an unfinished product and lacking a lot of content and polish atm, but it's got the bones of a good game. Absolutely not worth the current asking price tho
- Comment on Has a woman ever orgasmed by subwoofer? 2 months ago:
No. Subwoofers don't have fingers.
- Comment on Argentina wants to monitor social media with AI to ‘predict future crimes’ 2 months ago:
COVID-19 can cause brain damage
- Comment on Milliamp-hours per hour 2 months ago:
I'm particularly fond of kWh per year tbh: E/t•t/t
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
Because I say so
Mate, you're cooked in the head. Your brain is the completely smooth, frictionless surface used in test questions in high school physics classes.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
Observable characteristics don't determine sex, but this one chromosome that nobody even knew existed seventy years ago and that doesn't actually do a whole lot does
Bro really ate the L on that one 🤣🤣🤣
Cope, seethe, mald ya drongo
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
Lol back up your refutation with some facts, bozo
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
First, everybody should take note of the fact that you still haven't provided a source showing that trans women have any sort of across-the-board competitive advantage over cis women in sport. I can only presume that's because you don't have any. Pathetic. Moving on.
Claiming that the fact you're arguing from a "basic" understanding is somehow a point in your favour is some pigeon-shitting-on-the-chessboard-and-claiming-victory type shit, and you should feel embarrassed.
Sure, you personally are allowed to use a model of sex as determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, but such a model is overly simplistic, and to act as though that's the only correct model that either society or science broadly operates on is completely disconnected from reality.
This should be painfully obvious to everybody, given that people have been determining sex since long before the discovery of DNA, nevermind sex chromosomes. Likewise, medical staff determine the sex of babies not by running DNA tests, but by visually examining the genitals, ie a primary sex characteristic.But furthermore, a Y-chromosome-as-sole-determinant-of-sex model is flawed for other reasons, too. For one thing, it's not the Y chromosome itself that causes male sex development, it's a specific gene that just usually happens to exist on it: the SRY gene. Someone can have a Y chromosome, but lacking the SRY gene will develop a female phenotype. Conversely, it's also possible for the SRY gene to attach itself to an X chromosome and cause someone lacking a Y chromosome to nevertheless follow a male pattern of sex development.
Now get this through your skull: the SRY gene doesn't actually do a whole lot, either—it mostly just instructs the gonads to develop into testes rather than ovaries, and it's the—you're not gonna believe this—sex hormones which the gonads go on to produce that cause the body to develop pretty much every primary and secondary sex characteristic down the line—barring insensitivities to them, of course, and it is in the actual materially observable sex characteristics, primary and secondary alike, that people are most likely to realise differences in sex, rather than in some chromosome we don't know is there or not until it's specifically tested for….
And gonads can be removed. Primary sex characteristics can be surgically altered. Exogenous sex hormones can become dominant in a person's endocrine system and can cause the development of new secondary sex characteristics.So relying on just the Y chromosome as a measure of sex comes across as really arbitrary and not functionally useful, given that it doesn't really do a whole lot. In fact, the only reason I can come up with as to why one might hyperfocus on the Y chromosome would be to be shitty to trans and intersex peolpe 🤷♀️
Also, given that not all red blood cells contain DNA, you're wrong again—it's also not written into every cell of a person's body 🤓👆
And finally, it's a blatant example of hypocrisy for you to say I'm equating tits and vocal tone to the essence of human sex (which is itself a wild misrepresentation of my argument) when you yourself did the exact same thing earlier with height, wingspan and lung capacity, which are all also secondary sex characteristics 🤣 make it make sense 🤣🤣You're clearly being intellectually dishonest here, because you know you haven't got a leg to stand on. Dickhead.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
Yeah righto, you haven't got a clue what you're on about but because you're an entitled fuck with an opinion, you're just putting it out there as confidently as you can because you're hoping people will uncritically agree with it since it reaffirms their priors.
But you're wrong. Biological sex is malleable. The whole fucking point of sex hormones is to guide the development of sex characteristics. It's kinda in the name. Or did you think people's bodies somehow magically just do that by themselves during puberty and that sex hormones have nothing to do with it??? Are you stupid????
If what you're saying were true and trans women were, as you say, "biOlogiKalLy maLe," and had all the many advantages over cis women in sports that come with that, surely you'd feel confident in providing research that supports your conclusion specifically as regarding trans women instead of having to equivocate them with a completely different demographic—because tbh doing the latter and calling it a day just screams of intellectual cowardice.
And no, I'm not getting anything mixed up, you smug arsehole. Trans people do (broadly speaking—some don't but those aren't relevant to this discussion) change sex by undergoing various processes that alter their bodies' sex characteristics on a biological level, and you living in denial isn't gonna change that. I'm really curious as to what, specifically, you think determines sex.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
But they're placed exactly where they should be? If they should be placed higher, that's where they'd be… seems like you're the one getting mad over a skill issue on other people's behalf tbh. It's weird.
You're acting as though Lia Thomas didn't have every right to compete as she did, despite fulfilling all the eligibility criteria that were in place at the time, so your argument at this stage seems equally applicable to all the cis women who outperformed her, too, but you're not whining for the benefit of all the poor womanses that were denied the opportunity to place higher than they did by them, are you?
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 2 months ago:
Oi mate, you might wanna read the post again. You do understand that it's about trans women competing in women's sports, not about cis men competing in women's sports, right…? Because those aren't the same.
There's far more overlap between the physiolgical characteristics of transsexual females and cissexual females than there is between transsexual females and cissexual males, so by categorically conflating trans females with males you're really just showing off that you know sweet fuck all about this issue.