It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionRichard Dawkins is an idiot(139 posts)(139 posts)
(139 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Posted November 22, 2015
I have no idea who Richard Dawkins is?
Let me google it first.
Posted November 22, 2015
high rated
avatar
dtgreene: Transphobia:
http://planettransgender.com/richard-dawkins-insults-transgender-community/
(Basically, he supports hate speech and denies the womanhood of trans women.)
He's a biologist, not a sociologist. What position do you expect a biologist to take on the "womanhood" of men?
Posted November 22, 2015
low rated
avatar
Ghostbreed:
Hey OP, I have never read any Richard Dawkins myself. Still, I mentally categorized him as the large group of Atheists who solely define themselves as being in opposition to religion. Without religion as a scapegoat, they don't have much; their identity is solely tied to being something other than those religious folks. When they talk about religion, I feel it has some of the same vibe as stereotypical hate speak.
Posted November 22, 2015
low rated
avatar
KasperHviid: Hey OP, I have never read any Richard Dawkins myself. Still, I mentally categorized him as the large group of Atheists who solely define themselves as being in opposition to religion. Without religion as a scapegoat, they don't have much; their identity is solely tied to being something other than those religious folks. When they talk about religion, I feel it has some of the same vibe as stereotypical hate speak.
Sounds legit
Posted November 22, 2015
high rated
avatar
yogsloth: He's a biologist, not a sociologist. What position do you expect a biologist to take on the "womanhood" of men?
Agreed. A trans woman is simply not a woman by biological standard. If that creates butthurt, then so be it. If a person believes they're a fish hard enough, they'll still never be able to breathe water. You can identify as what ever you like. I will take the common courtesy to honor your wishes. But don't get upset when the laws of nature don't bend for you.
Posted November 22, 2015
low rated
avatar
dtgreene: Transphobia:
http://planettransgender.com/richard-dawkins-insults-transgender-community/
(Basically, he supports hate speech and denies the womanhood of trans women.)
avatar
yogsloth: He's a biologist, not a sociologist. What position do you expect a biologist to take on the "womanhood" of men?
i giggled like a little cis-girl except i'm not. i wished i was half as idiotic as dawkins.
Posted November 22, 2015
avatar
KasperHviid: ...
Reminds me of those pesky Abolitionists.
Posted November 22, 2015
low rated
avatar
dtgreene: Transphobia:
http://planettransgender.com/richard-dawkins-insults-transgender-community/
(Basically, he supports hate speech and denies the womanhood of trans women.)
avatar
yogsloth: He's a biologist, not a sociologist. What position do you expect a biologist to take on the "womanhood" of men?
What sort of men are you referring to? (Remember, trans women are not men.)
avatar
yogsloth: He's a biologist, not a sociologist. What position do you expect a biologist to take on the "womanhood" of men?
avatar
paladin181: Agreed. A trans woman is simply not a woman by biological standard. If that creates butthurt, then so be it. If a person believes they're a fish hard enough, they'll still never be able to breathe water. You can identify as what ever you like. I will take the common courtesy to honor your wishes. But don't get upset when the laws of nature don't bend for you.
Actually, trans women are women by biological standards. There are documented ways in which the brain of a trans woman is more like a cis woman than that of a cis man. Furthermore, trans women who go on hormones are in fact biologically women in terms of hormones.

I think it is you who do not fully understand the laws of nature. (Then again, nobody truly does.)
Post edited November 22, 2015 by dtgreene
Posted November 22, 2015
avatar
KasperHviid: Hey OP, I have never read any Richard Dawkins myself. Still, I mentally categorized him as the large group of Atheists who solely define themselves as being in opposition to religion. Without religion as a scapegoat, they don't have much; their identity is solely tied to being something other than those religious folks. When they talk about religion, I feel it has some of the same vibe as stereotypical hate speak.
Yeah, I know, ad-hominem attacks are the way to go when you can't find a way to win an argument using logic.
Posted November 22, 2015
avatar
Strijkbout: Maybe his father was a reverend or something.

In my country there are some serious biblebelt regions and often children of the more orthodox parents become the greatest atheists because they have some axe to grind, it's mostly caused by human nature though, comes free with life.
I think it has more to do with his expertise, not his parents or upbringing. He's an evolutionary biologist and used to be a professor at Oxford for public understanding of science. That naturally conflicts with any beliefs that don't accept (certain) proven scientific hypotheses, including evolution. At some point he must have become really frustrated about this.
Posted November 22, 2015
avatar
Ghostbreed: Before I begin, let me point out that I am in no way, shape or form a religious person. I was raised by atheist parents and they decided to let us children chose what we wanted when we were old enough to understand.
The thing is, most religious parents are not like this. They know, deep down (even if they don't consciously admit it) that the best chance they have for making their children religious is to get to them when they're young and impressionable, before they've gone through school and are mature enough to decide what they think on their own.
Posted November 22, 2015
low rated
Oooh, that guy! Never heard of him.
Posted November 22, 2015
Well, he's a popular target of ridicule at the mash. This is one of my favourites: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/richard-dawkins-to-star-in-70s-style-sitcom-about-god-2013050167300

though there are many others: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/?s=dawkins
Posted November 22, 2015
Tuomas Holopainen loves him, so I love him.

With all my cis-he-man heart.
Posted November 22, 2015
high rated
avatar
dtgreene: There are a few things to note about Richard Dawkins:


Sexism:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/richard-dawkins-sexist-atheists-bad-name
(In particular, I see some mention of victim blaming in this article.)
What a load of horseshit! Dawkins didn't speak out against trans-people and he doesn't even like feminists that much but all he said was that everyone is entitled to free speech and if you think someone is "transphobic" then argue with that person rather than try to ban or censor that person. Dawkins only defended free speech - nothing more and nothing less.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionRichard Dawkins is an idiot(139 posts)(139 posts)
(139 posts)