Really well argued and explained, I hope people read and don't just reflexively downvote.
I definitely recommend it! Have to be very careful about staying safe, though. People don't take injuries seriously enough. But it's great exercise and very rewarding
Guitar: as a kid I just thought it'd be awesome to shred. Now I mostly play acoustic fingerstyle, but shred some. Interest has ebbed and flowed over the years, but been playing forever.
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu: I wanted a challenge and to get good at something new. It's hard, but I like it and just keep coming back. Been doing it for a couple years and am a blue belt.
Hiking: did it as a kid, now I do it with my wife who pushes me to hike more than I would otherwise which is good
Tech stuff: coding, piracy, stuff like that. Dad was in IT and taught me to look for solutions with tech. Never stopped. I'm not a fantastic coder, but use it for work and also to solve personal challenges, enter piracy.
That would be a fantastic political ad campaign. Picture of republican politician, "your body my choice", and maybe a bad quote or bill they sponsored. Dems need to step it up with impactful ads
It's genuinely crazy to me that people don't use the OC. Not using it creates such a huge amount of needless ambiguity
First you have to ask what gender is. Gender is a set of behaviors expected of people of a given sex.
Then, you have to ask what it means to belong to a given gender. You don't have to, and can't, meet all the behavioral expectations of a given gender. Those expected behaviors change over time. People of all sexes have interests that cross gendered lines because gender is not perfectly correlated to specific behaviors - instead it is a broad notion of behaviors that are considered to correlate with a given sex.
Additionally, there exist people who are not really male or female due to genetic differences. But, society typically treats them as the gender typically assigned to the sex they most resemble. So, since they do not have the "correct" sex and may not participate in the "correct" behaviors to belong to a given gender, their assigned gender is arbitrarily determined.
Those 3 things establish that gender is: not biological, not behaviorally determined, and somewhat arbitrary.
Since gender isn't biological, woman =/= female person
Since gender isn't behaviorally determined, woman =/= someone who engages in typically feminine behaviors
Since gender is at least partially arbitrary, woman =/= a factual category that can be determined by material features of a person
If women don't have to be female or engage in typically feminine activities and can't be defined by physical or genetic characteristics, then what is left? Someone who identifies as a woman - who wants to be treated as a woman by others.
"But that's circular!!!" It actually isn't. "Woman" as a category confers societal roles and expected behaviors onto a person, "woman" as a person just means someone who belongs to the category "Woman". The only determining factor is being a member of the category. It'd be like asking "what is a boy scout?", getting "a member of the boy scouts" as an answer, and then being upset that there isn't some fundamental universal law being appealed to when classifying people as boy scouts.
Nah. Obviously, you'd talk beforehand, and no one would be forced to use it. It's no different than arranged dates through a matchmaker. Now, there'd be valid privacy and ethics concerns - especially if your ML model is racist. But that's a whole different thing. People are often quite bad at picking good matches for themselves, and computers are great at pattern ID and so potentially good at finding matches.
@ALoafOfBread
@lemmy.ml