← Back to context

Comment by listenallyall

1 day ago

It's somewhat ironic to claim someone (who spoke every day for an hour about his thoughts) went "off the rails" on the same exact day an attorney representing the country's most prestigious civil-rights organization argued gender discrimination to the Supreme Court and yet was unable to provide a way to distinguish men from women.

You say the end of his life was sad, meanwhile he wrote of an "amazing life" in his final note and expressed immense joy in positively impacting thousands of people.

It's so strange how people like you classify other people's experiences that you actually know nothing about.

https://x.com/EithanHaim/status/2011221178535338244

Asking someone to give a sharp dividing line in a multi-dimensional bimodal but not discontinuous distribution is just nonsense.

In particular, being unable to give that strict difference (that does not exist) is not proof of not believing that the general bimodal groups exist, nor acknowledging that existence, nor saying that there is not general differences between the groups. It is not the gotcha that elementary school biology suggests it would be.

  • And you're essentially demonstrating my point. Your long, complicated, meaningless comment here - which boils down to sex being impossible to define - is now widely accepted (and is the basis of a Supreme Court case), while someone like Scott Adams who would claim that chromosomes or sex organs (at birth) are indeed sufficient in defining one's sex, is perceived to be "off the rails". It's absurd.