Don't shoot! I'm a nazi too! "Prove it"

submitted by Chipit from pbs.twimg.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

There's not even only 2 sexes, much less 2 genders.

Is the joke that nazis try to put everything into a small number of categories, or that they stick to what they're told ignoring reality?

[–]BISH 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

You should try pitching these jokes to that non-binary SNL creature.

[–]ActuallyNot 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

What's a non-binary SNL creature?

[–]Megatron95 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Megatron95 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Keep on sucking dicks Socks; it's the only thing you do well.

    [–]BISH 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Your mom.

    [–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

    Believing in gender is ignoring reality. So is thinking intersex mutations are normal, but especially believing in gender.

    [–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    Believing in gender is ignoring reality.

    You don't even think there's two genders? Or even one?

    So is thinking intersex mutations are normal.

    Thinking they don't exist is ignoring reality. No one is saying it's particularly normal. As you well know, if you know anything. (Which isn't clear because you can't follow a conversation.)

    [–]jet199 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    No one is saying they don't exist either.

    [–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    There are two sexes. Gender is a completely unnecessary social construct, and all it accomplishes is sexism.

    [–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    There are two sexes.

    There are also intersex people. The point is that there aren't only two sexes.

    Gender is a completely unnecessary social construct

    Doesn't it allow you to isolate, study and discuss the individual aspects of sex in society and culture?

    and all it accomplishes is sexism.

    Doesn't it allow you to study that sexism, and also to talk about people who don't fit into one of your sexes either physcally or how they present in society?

    [–]Vulptex 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

    Your sex shouldn't matter to anyone else outside of sexual relationships. Which, unfortunately, are based on observable sexual characteristics and not gender identity. So gender identity does nothing but put people in boxes. If we're not going to be sexist we don't need to distinguish sexes or genders outside of medical contexts, much less study them like they're the core of our being. This is why TERFs are afraid of the trans movement. Everyone on both sides of the isle wants to go back to 1950s gender roles, and co-opting trans people was just a tactic to make the left look like the good guys while doing it.

    [–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Your sex shouldn't matter to anyone else outside of sexual relationships.

    Shouldn't it also matter to sociologists and policy makers?

    If we're not going to be sexist we don't need to distinguish sexes or genders outside of medical contexts, much less study them like they're the core of our being.

    About 89.5% of murderers are male. So if you're going to spend taxpayers money on ameliorating murder, you're wasting that money if you don't target your programs based on sex.

    Everyone on both sides of the isle wants to go back to 1950s gender roles

    What?

    [–]Vulptex 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

    Oh I see how it is. You don't dare discriminate against women or black people, but discriminating against white men is perfectly valid. Is that right?

    When it comes to the 13% comitting 50% of violent crimes you'll investigate the circumstances which make it harder for them to avoid. But when it's men you say don't help them, don't care about them, be prejudiced against them, no differently than what racists think of blacks! Or imagine if it were the other way around, I guarantee that you guys would be slamming this as misogyny.

    Just admit that the libs are every bit as sexist and racist as the cons. And in fact the only reason cons have been for the past 3 years is because they feel the need to push back against extreme leftist discrimination.

    So if we aren't going to be sexist or racist, no it shouldn't matter at all to policy makers. But it seems 99% of the human race is incapable of even entertaining the thought, so everyone is just going to attack me.

    [–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Spending tax dollars effectively is perfectly valid.

    Conversely, wasting tax dollars is not.

    When it comes to the 13% comitting 50% of violent crimes you'll investigate the circumstances which make it harder for them to avoid.

    What?

    From before:

    Everyone on both sides of the isle wants to go back to 1950s gender roles

    What?

    [–]milkmender11 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Aside from grammatical gender, gender as a concept is not even 100 years old. Let's not pretend it is this obvious fact of reality that humanity acknowledges as a given. Most societies throughout history had ideas about men and women (usually if there is an 'other,' it is always only 1 other, and it is always males taking a female role) often with slightly different criteria for what constitutes a 'sex' (biological or otherwise, often moral/religious) and we tend to whitewash that by imagining our modern Western ideas of 'gender' are a reference to those ideas. Actually, 'gender' is inherently suffused with modern Western principles about how to conceptualize sex categories. It is for this reason that 'third-gender' fell out of use in cultural anthropology. By saying that the Hijra in India/Pakistan or the Two-Spirits of various Native tribes had notions of 'gender,' we place modern Western constructs on their practices as if those practices are safely subsumed by 'gender.' In practice, it doesn't work. If you are a Westerner talking to other Westerners, though, and you don't need to actually speak to people from other cultures or have your ideas make any sense to them, then you probably won't run into many problems using 'gender,' but that jars with the notion that any particular amount of genders, or the existence of gender at all, is self-evident.

    [–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Aside from grammatical gender, gender as a concept is not even 100 years old.

    The concept "smartphone" is younger than that. Is thinking that smartphones exist ignoring reality too?

    It is for this reason that 'third-gender' fell out of use in cultural anthropology.

    Did it?

    When Comparative Law Walks the Path of Anthropology: The Third Gender in Europe - Cambridge University Press: 27 September 2022

    Discrimination and social exclusion of third-gender population (Hijra) in Bangladesh: A brief review - Heliyon: October 2022

    Failure to recognise a third gender option: unfair discrimination or justified limitation? Law, Democracy & Development: 2022