What is woman?

[Razard86]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Two can play this game.

If it's wrong to a kill a child, is it not wrong to kill an ant?

What is the principle distinction between a human and ant? What's the difference? Why is it okay in the later cases and not the former cases?

While I agree it is wrong to kill an Ant....ummm Leo....sometimes we don't see them. How about we try a Wasp instead?

[Razard86]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The issue is one of relative definitions. Who gets to define what "man" is? Our definitions are not absolute. That's what you're missing.

That video is an example of Blue & Green talking past each other.

Leo.... collectively we define what "man" is. We need "definitions" to be consistent otherwise we cannot communicate with each other. Also I believe us using genitalia is a pretty good distinction. Is it absolute? No as some are born with both, but it has served us very well. If we start changing the definitions...we would lose the ability to communicate.

Unless you want us humans to go back to being able to communicate through tantra, which is the ancient form of communication that predated language. 

[Yarco]

I swear the progressives have got to be just trolling conservatives with this at this point. Nobody is this pedantic about any other terminology.

There is no disconnect, both sides are just pretending to not understand the other in passive aggressive ways. Progressives, just call out conservatives: "So you don't think trans women are real women" and vice versa. Debate the actual hangup instead of looking like an idiot not being able to define a woman.

For the average person I feel like the people unable to define women seem like they're being dishonest. They can't say what they really mean because it'd be too unpopular with voters today, so they have to be vague and evasive about it.

I dont get how this even became a big issue. FTM trans people are a fringe minority. They are having what, maybe a couple hundred out of the 3 million babies born every year in America? It's a statistical blip.

From a political perspective I dont get how this has become such a big issue, like whose interest is it in? LGBT people make up like 2% of the population so it's hardly worth fighting this hard for their votes. And American politicians never actually do something because they're principled and want what's best. So what's the real agenda here?

Edited May 29, 2022 by Yarco

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Razard86 said:

Leo.... collectively we define what "man" is.

Exactly. And now there is a culture war over how to define it.

[Dryas]

Transmen can get pregnant. Therefore, men can get pregnant unless you believe that a transman != man.

 

[axiom]

6 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

"What is a woman?"

I don't know.

"Is a transwoman a woman?"

Yes.

"Then what is a woman?" 

I don't know.

Good example. Same thing said another way: 

"What is a poiuyt?"

I don't know.

"Is a transwoman a poiuyt?"

Yes, obviously.

"Then what is a poiuyt?" 

I don't know.

[DocWatts]

All definitions and categories whatsoever are constructed, for the purposes of being able to make discernments in an undivided and undifferentiated Reality.

Constructed categories are useful (rather than true) insofar as they allow us to navigate this Reality and to communicate with one another more easily.

All of this hair splitting over the constructed meanings of our categories would all be a bit silly if not for the fact that how these Constructs are arranged have a very real impact on the rights and well being of actual people.

So how these Constructs are arranged does matter, even if at the end of the day we're just arguing over the definitions of words rather than engaging with something ontologically "real".

In social relationships, our Constructs are used to define whether someone is in the In-Group or Out-Group. Being offered the recognition that's necessary to being treated with dignity and respect is typically contingent upon falling within the boundaries of the In-Group.

In America, if we reflect upon how groups eventually come to gain Civil Rights, it's almost always through a protracted battle to widen the boundaries of the In-Group so as to include marginalized people.

Edited May 29, 2022 by DocWatts

[Bobby_2021]

4 hours ago, Yarco said:

Debate the actual hangup instead of looking like an idiot not being able to define a woman.

Good luck debating. All these hippy feminist will get crushed and owned because they don't know what they are talking about.

Conservatives on the other hand are firm in their thinking, atleast.

Debates are a show of effectiveness as opposed to Truth.

[Danioover9000]

   Meanwhile, in a secret silicon valley underground, a mad scientist is designing the next AI that'll one day create the matrix and overtake all of reality, and all culture wars cease to be...

[zurew]

1 hour ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Debates are a show of effectiveness as opposed to Truth.

What do you think would be a better approach to challenge ideas and to find some ground, other than debating and talking about the best possible arguments and also understanding the other side's best arguments as well.

If there are no intelligent debates how could you steelman the other side's arguments? Of course you could contemplate about it yourself, but because of your blindspots you wouldn't be able to collect all the best arguments the other side could offer.

Also you can't really be a good debater without understanding the other side's best arguments because you will be suprised and crushed. 

If there is a deep disagreement, that won't be resolved if we ignore it or if we just mildly talking about it. Of course debating only works, if both sides are open minded enough to change their positions.

Edited May 29, 2022 by zurew

[Bobby_2021]

4 minutes ago, zurew said:

What do you think would be a better approach to challenge ideas and to find some ground, other than debating and talking about the best possible arguments and also understanding the other side's best arguments as well.

If you bias towards Truth, then Leo is showing the best approach. Everyone gets to explain their world view in as detail and nuance as possible taking hours if necessary. Then the other side carefully dissects and invalidates each others arguments. They would speak less and do more thinking.

This is long and boring as fuck which is why least people even care about it. Also it takes a ton of work. This is enough to discourage 99% of the people.

You don't even get enough time to finish your points in debates. It's so short and fast. So deeper point are never touched upon.

10 minutes ago, zurew said:

Also you can't really be a good debater without understanding the other side's best arguments because you will be suprised and crushed. 

True. More importantly instead of actual truth, it's about sounding Better to the audience and making the other look like crazy, like the woman in the video is. 

She has a legit point, but looks like a dumbfuck to the audience. 

Making better points may not look so impressionable to the audience though.

[Arcangelo]

10 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

But if you think you are literally a woman after having a dick, simply because you choose to identify as such is lunacy. 

Hard agree.

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

If you bias towards Truth, then Leo is showing the best approach. Everyone gets to explain their world view in as detail and nuance as possible taking hours if necessary. Then the other side carefully dissects and invalidates each others arguments. They would speak less and do more thinking.

This is long and boring as fuck which is why least people even care about it. Also it takes a ton of work. This is enough to discourage 99% of the people.

When i say having a debate, i am not talking about hardcore debate bro conversations but debates where you ask geniuine questions to the other side to understand it better and then you counter back why you don't agree with the other side's points (we could say having a good faith convo).

2 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

You don't even get enough time to finish your points in debates. It's so short and fast. So deeper point are never touched upon.

I agree with this. Depending on the topic it requires having multiple debates/convos to get to the root and to get a real understanding of the other side. I also agree that nowadays most debates about showing off rather than actually arriving at a deeper truth or getting a better understanding about a certain topic.  

But i would also like to add, that when we are talking about a sensitive or a highly polarized topic,then there will be a lot of friction between the two sides no matter what. Having some level of friction is not necessarily bad but it can destroy the productivity of the conversation.

2 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

True. More importantly instead of actual truth, it's about sounding Better to the audience and making the other look like crazy, like the woman in the video is. 

She has a legit point, but looks like a dumbfuck to the audience. 

Yeah i get that it is a problem, but if you want to make a change nowadays you have to be articulate. Especially, when we are talking about sensitive and highly polarized topics where the other side is almost completely closed to your side and waiting for any opportunity to point out that you are dumb.

You can't really make a good strong position without understanding both side's best arguments. If you can't counter back to certain points it shows that you haven't really thought it through from the other side's lense -- So you position is weak and that is a feedback that you should study the other side more ---> doing that you automatically get a better understanding of the other side.

I think no matter what side we are talking about, there are always some set of people (of course this is a minority) who are indecisive enough to be able to be open to change their positions if they get good enough points.

Edited May 29, 2022 by zurew

[Razard86]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Exactly. And now there is a culture war over how to define it.

Lol Leo there is a culture war over everything....literally everything. The United States is the most divided Country on the planet. We complain about ageism, racism, discrimination over height, sex/gender, education, wage, culture discrimination, political discrimination, freedom of speech, access to fair opportunities, animal rights, so picking this one issue as an example....its a small example. We cannot agree on anything outside of taking money out of politics. That's like the only issue I heard of that there is widespread agreement on (and absolutely no progress being made ironically) by the public. Everything else is a free for all. I'm starting to think disagreement itself has become the point.

[Johnny Galt]

"Leo.... collectively we define what "man" is."

@Leo Gura 

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Exactly. And now there is a culture war over how to define it.

No.

As a culture we designate and agree upon the word. The word, man, it speaks to that which is all through out nature; a universally perceived reality.

Maybe we should be making the distinction between being a man, and being that which is "culturally" thought of as what a man should be???

 

 

Edited May 30, 2022 by Johnny Galt

[BuddhistLover]

@Leo Gura And to add on top of this. My Leo, you were right, everyone really is fundamentally alone. And we both know that woman, is nothing other than an idea that we feel. Gender roles are free to whoever chooses what role to be. The reason is because, human is the only race, there is no black or white. Man or woman. It is about the fact that we are all humans living with eachother. 

[Razard86]

Everyone on here is missing the point. If you are looking at this from a spirituality perspective... none of this really matters its just a dream. If we are looking at this from the confines of the dream, whenever you want to change something you have to replace it with something else. So if you choose to change some things....what are you replacing it with? 

As we know there are different levels of people based on different levels of consciousness making that change...could cause more harm than good. Now if it were to cause the collapse of our nation, from egoic perspective I wouldn't like it, from God's perspective....who cares lol. 

Anyway you argue over everything, and question everything because at the end of the day....its just all concepts anyway.

[Bobby_2021]

1 hour ago, Razard86 said:

Everyone on here is missing the point. If you are looking at this from a spirituality perspective... none of this really matters its just a dream. If we are looking at this from the confines of the dream, whenever you want to change something you have to replace it with something else. So if you choose to change some things....what are you replacing it with? 

As we know there are different levels of people based on different levels of consciousness making that change...could cause more harm than good. Now if it were to cause the collapse of our nation, from egoic perspective I wouldn't like it, from God's perspective....who cares lol. 

Anyway you argue over everything, and question everything because at the end of the day....its just all concepts anyway.

You are also dreaming this wanting to change the dream like everyone else. I don't get how you are adding to the conversation.

 

"But but the conversation is a dream."

Yeah you dreamt it up, and by involving in it, you want the dream to change it to your liking, all of which are your dreams.

[Razard86]

16 hours ago, Bobby_2021 said:

You are also dreaming this wanting to change the dream like everyone else. I don't get how you are adding to the conversation.

 

"But but the conversation is a dream."

Yeah you dreamt it up, and by involving in it, you want the dream to change it to your liking, all of which are your dreams.

You don't know how I am adding because you didn't read to understand you read to respond. I mentioned how if you take something away you have to replace it with something else. You didn't notice that part.....because you weren't paying attention. If you noticed I argued both the regular perspective and the God level perspective. The truth is the concepts we have work well, if people want to replace it...they will need something that works better than what we have. Good luck finding that. But the point of the dream reference is....reality is constantly changing. So of course something like this was inevitable from that perspective. From the Meta level since it is a dream anyway....is it really that important? Nawww....this is just a game we are playing.

[Max_V]

On 29-5-2022 at 2:05 AM, Leo Gura said:

What is the principle distinction between a human and ant? What's the difference? Why is it okay in the later cases and not the former cases?

An ant doesn't have the potential that a human baby has