[–] IrishTheFrenchie say_wut? 93 points

Someone figured out it was Monty (katy montgomery) who pointed Dawkins to the declaration. ROFL


[–] crodish fujoshit 47 points

KM is now crying about how RD wants all trans people eliminated and yadda yadda

They really, really see "women" and go "that's anti-trans". How do people not fucking see this

Hah, he really thought Dawkins would just trust him and not read the declaration for himself...

Load more (2 comments)

The two top rated replies are saying "Nobody is replacing anything with gender identity and it's not an attack on women's rights." I feel like I'm in the upside down world.

And the dude saying "Nobody is replacing anything with gender identity and it's not an attack on women's rights" has a cartoon furry avatar. =-= Like. wtf is with these people and furries...

I’m glad he’s taken a firm stance. Although he won’t get the same level of vitriol a woman would, he will still get lots of pushback. But since he’s read Stock’s book and likely thought deeply about it, I doubt the pushback will sway him (probably quite the opposite). Although he’s not a perfect messenger, this is still significant.

Dawkins is an ass but at least he actually reads and thinks about what he reads. Lmao.

Dawkins is pretty stubborn and usually gives no fucks. I'm going to enjoy watching all of this lmao.

[–] Freshxx 1 points Edited

I was pretty into watching his theology debates in my super edgy youth, Dawkins never balked in front of anyone. I'm confident he won't flip on this.

He's read Shrier and Joyce, too. Or at least he tweeted support for Shrier and provided a blurb for Joyce's book.

Thank you Richard Dawkins! My undergrad was in biology and I've read all his books. I'm so happy that he came out strongly for women (and rationality and science/biology), especially because I think his voice carries a lot of weight.

Honestly, I couldn't imagine a guy that is so dedicated to logic and reason and also to explaining evolution in understandable terms would fall for the gender nonsense. You can't separate sex from evolution for sexually reproducing species of which humans are one (shocking, I know). I'm currently reading his most famous book The Selfish Gene and so much of it is dedicated to sex because you can't really explain evolution without it. He even calls the male sex exploitative and mentions female exploitation on the cellular level. He basically describes the male sex as a kind of a parasitic sex (figuratively of course, we're talking about unavoidable biological reality).

He's just a logic based person and trans ideology is just an abuse on logic and common sense.

He's just a logic based person and trans ideology is just an abuse on logic and common sense.

This is true, but there was a brief moment (to me) where it seemed like he was going to back away after he received TRA abuse. As a man, he could walk away...not his circus, not his monkeys and all that. I'm pleased he didn't.

Yeah, I was really surprised by that. I've watched for years as he brushed off Christians and other religious people who came at him. But his knees nearly buckled to the trans cult? Still baffled by that. It was like he forgot for a second that he was a straight white male who can basically get away with doing and saying anything.

Honestly, I couldn't imagine a guy that is so dedicated to logic and reason and also to explaining evolution in understandable terms would fall for the gender nonsense.

I wouldn't have thought so either but last I checked Aron Ra, atheist youtuber and biology lecturer (I think he is some kind of biologist, I forget what his exact field is) has fallen for TRA crap, I think because there's a kid in his life who went trans or something. Sadly it seems like most of Austin Atheist Community, many of whom were or are in the sciences, life sciences too, fell for this TRA crap. People I used to respect as rational, thoughtful, and who I thought believed in principles of humanism (apparently only when 'human' refers to 'men', I guess). Sadly there are women, even at least one lesbian woman, from that crowd (I'm talking about the public access show) who fell for it. I look at them now and I think "how??? You all seemed so smart!" Just shows they never really let go of their propensity to rely on faith-based reasoning and beliefs.

I'm not familiar with Aron Ra and I don't really know what his arguments are. I wouldn't say that just because someone is an atheist and/or a biologist that they're logical. I think Dawkins is logical because in his books he demonstrates really good reasoning and very successfully debunks claims of other biologists that may sound intuitive but just don't stand to scrutiny - group selection in evolution for example. Also, in his notes he argues with his own statements and even acknowledges mistakes he's made and offers the logical and empirical evidence for why what he said before is wrong. Many biologists are just not as logical and as well reasoned. They rely on intuition and memorization, not on logic. Again, I have no idea what this guy Aron Ra is like but I suspect he's not very good at logical reasoning. Unless he has learned to completely shut it off when it comes to trans nonsense. Or he's just lying.

[–] crodish fujoshit 47 points Edited

Sign! SIGN!!!!


Edit: Remember to confirm the email or it won't register!

Hot damn. Look at all of the supporting organizations in Italy and Spain.

Finally. Glad to not be disappointed by someone who was so influential for me growing up. And glad that he finally took a position. The four horsemen of new atheism would've all held the same position. I think Sam Harris is also on the same page (though less vocal?). I wonder what Hitchens would say if he was alive?

[–] tamingthemind eh/ayyyy 9 points

Re: Sam Harris - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=k5052kQo-TI watch around 34:50. Even mentions JK.

Ah, yes, it's obvious what his position is. Actually Colin Wright (I think) did an interview recently in which he talked about how the atheist spaces were taken over by gender ideology. I haven't checked what's happening in the community lately but I won't be surprised to hear if the community now denounces its original leaders. I'll try to find the link to the interview.

"I'm a woman born without a uterus"... Says an obvious man with an obvious male voice. No, you're not a woman born without a uterus, that's a completely different thing. You're a man born with all the normal male reproductive organs.

Sam Harris seemed very wishy-washy. I honestly had a hard time following what he's trying to say. There's too much "fluff" in his words and not much substance. He's kind of going for the transmed argument but he's tiptoeing around it and not actually saying it. I find this exchange rather frustrating but then I'm not a fan of Sam Harris in general.

He said years ago if he had a choice between eliminating rape and eliminating religion, he’d choose religion. He’s no friend to women.

[–] Disappearanceoftheychromosomer ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 23 points

is he getting death treaths or this is just for women?

[–] crodish fujoshit 42 points

There was a tweet that summed it up. Really fucking sad because it's so blatantly true.

TRAs to Rowling: die terf!

TRAs to Dawkins: Richard I am so dissapointed in you.

"die terf" is a pretty sanitized version of what JKR was actually getting...

He's just getting the typical mild 'disappointed' and 'sad' comments. Of course.

Marvelous! Yes, it absolutely sucks that we have to rely on prominent males to back us up, but that's the reality right now, so this is a very good thing.

You know what, TRAs actually sometimes listen to men, so it doesn't make me feel as bad.

The comments are so ridiculous.

Nobody is trying to replace anything with anything, the matters of sex and gender identity are two separate things

Oh really? Such blatant lies.

Haha then the next comment is that women’s sex based rights is “anti trans”.

Another gem:

Science says sex is a spectrum. Naming "all the sexes" would be like naming all the colors.

Come on now

Load more (12 comments)