Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Technically there's no contradiction, you just disagree with what their words means.

Well remember we aren't talking about humans, we are talking about animals.

One of these days you're gonna learn how to actually fully spell out what you're trying to say, instead of merely using tonnes of innuendo and implying implications, so that there are at least 3 different, completely antithetical ways to take what you mean that it's impossible to actually respond properly.

Until that day comes, I think I'm just gonna have to ignore your posts from now on.

If gender is purely cultural... and most animals have no culture... Then how can they be gay? They would be Bi at best.

Sure they have a sex, but gender trumps sex... and "No Gender" is a type of gender. (which ALSO stems from the "Gender is purely cultural"). Sure Gender doesn't exist, but gender includes recognition of your and other's sex. So animals don't see gender and thusly do not see sex and so who they mate with is purely arbitrary.

That is the contradiction.

[Rose]

Gender and sexual preferences are two different things that are largely unrelated.

[Neonivek]

Gender and sexual preferences are two different things that are largely unrelated.

What the person actually meant was: "Prescribed gender traits do not exist, they are a fabrication created by the culture you live in"

That isn't what they said, though, so I was drawing attention to it. (Crud is this the correct grammar)

Edit: Yeah I think this alone is good enough. Nothing for people to confuse themselves on.

---

I like to point out things I find funny or interesting. A simple misapplication of terms is interesting to me. Though I do not consider this to invalidate the original statement, I just find it funny. I hint to it because it is like a game and otherwise I'd be going "Ha ha, you said this but you actually meant that".

---

Edit: Is this a good enough explanation for what I was doing? All you needed to do to understand was bend your brain over backwards and make it do a loop-de-loop.

[misko27]

implying implications,

Implicatory! Or just implicative. It's like "indicative", with with "implicate" instead of "indicate".

[Neonivek]

implying implications,

Implicatory! Or just implicative. It's like "indicative", with with "implicate" instead of "indicate".

Basically, yeah that was kind of what I was doing right here.

[misko27]

I thought that was the point, Neo. I thought that was the point.

[Neonivek]

I thought that was the point, Neo. I thought that was the point.

Yes? No? Yes, I'll go with yes!

[TD1]

Gender and sexual preferences are two different things that are largely unrelated.

Actually, I'd say they're different (dependent on definition) but extremely related things.

[pisskop]

welllll, functions of sex is the basis of gender, so its definitely one of the primary considerations.

i dont think its possible to seperate them

[Neonivek]

Ok here is something: What is the word for something that is subjectively objective? Or rather for subjective objectivity?

Hmm apparently there isn't. Though... it SEEMS that is because "Objective" =/= True.

So if something subjective is 100% true... it doesn't mean it is objective.

MAN! that is REALLY confusing given how people use those terms... and even though I just carefully combed the definitions I am not sure I got it down packed.

Or maybe there is no word and it can be both objective and subjective at the same time.

[scriver]

implying implications,

Implicatory! Or just implicative. It's like "indicative", with with "implicate" instead of "indicate".

Implicautionary!

[Rolan7]

I'm honestly really glad this family member decided to visit me, but it's also sorta uncomfortable that they did, and *wow* I've essentially got jet lag trying to adjust ~5 hours to their normie sleep schedule.  Particularly sucks because I'm losing sync with my friends.  But also lying in bed trying to sleep early sucks, then I feel dead tired anyway when the alarm goes off.

Lesson learned, don't skip reunions, I guess.  Or move farther.

[Descan]

Objective, in practice, means that something, a conclusion or a fact or a point of view, can be arrived at by an arbitrary or generic person or process.

Subjective, in practice, means that said something can only be arrived at by a specific person or process, generally because of something inherent to that person or process. Their specific point of view, for instance, or mindset.

At least, to my understanding.

Given that, I'm finding it hard to figure how you can have something that is both generically derivable AND specific to a certain orientation...

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Subjective: Information which is subject to human judgement.

Objective: Information which is not subject to human judgement.

If humanity vanished in a puff of logic tomorrow, all subjective information vanishes with us. There is no longer any valuation of what degree of pain is morally acceptable or socially necessary in life. The Sun's mass, however, would remain unchanged by our vanishing.

Something being subjectively objective is, as best I can parse it, advocating full consensus reality. The universe blinks out of existence without an observer like a video game culling unnecessary graphics.

Something being objectively subjective is the assertion that the assessment of something as a subjective issue is an objective fact rather than an opinion, i.e., what I did at the start of this post by defining subjective and objective.

Alternatively, "subjectively objective" and "objectively subjective" are an intersection and the same thing, they're both the fuckery of human beings who are constantly subjectively biased being able to take in objective information. Suffice it to say that this is a good enough explanation as to why you shouldn't actually cross objective and subjective, because it makes no sense.

[Descan]

Well yeah, that's why I put "in practice," because there's the platonic ideal of subjectivity and objectivity and then there's how you actually differentiate them. Which, to me, is based on whether it can be arrived at from an arbitrary person or process, or whether you need a specific person involved to arrive at that information. Like degrees of pain, as you said. You can't measure a persons degree of pain without that actual person being involved, there's no generic process for pain thresholds to use in and of itself.

I mean, I can see how the phrase "objectively subjective" can be used; Something can be shown, using a generic/arbitrary process, to need a specific point of view or person involved. It is objectively proven to be a subjective piece of information. Though I can't for the life of me think of a way the phrase "subjectively objective" can be used...