Little Greta comes clean

[Starlight]

I wasn't agreeing with Rogue's statement, if that's what's got you confused.

As a scientist, I like it when scientists doing public outreach, and I like it when people who aren't scientists or who used to be scientists make it a full-time career of doing science popularizing. I support that. It's great.

In the case where someone is in a full-time career of doing science-popularizing, they indeed aren't scientists, in the same way a person working as a fire-fighter isn't a police officer. Rogue foolishly implied that amounted to "sneer[ing] contemptuously". It isn't. it's just stating a fact, and accurately labeling what it is they are doing in their job. It's not making any kind of negative value judgement about what they do: I think what they do is excellent and worthwhile and needs doing more.

It also occasionally annoys me when people who do next to no science call themselves scientists to try and boost their marketing. Sam Harris is the commonest example of this. He doesn't do science popularizing, he just writes books about his own views, and he very rarely if ever does any science, so he's neither a scientist nor a science popularizer. I would say I do sneer contemptuously at him, and if asked I would indeed say he's not a real scientist.

[seer]

It also occasionally annoys me when people who do next to no science call themselves scientists to try and boost their marketing. Sam Harris is the commonest example of this. He doesn't do science popularizing, he just writes books about his own views, and he very rarely if ever does any science, so he's neither a scientist nor a science popularizer. I would say I do sneer contemptuously at him, and if asked I would indeed say he's not a real scientist.

I like Harris, though his determinism seems incoherent, he is on the right side of the PC trans issue.

[rogue06]

I wasn't agreeing with Rogue's statement, if that's what's got you confused.

As a scientist, I like it when scientists doing public outreach, and I like it when people who aren't scientists or who used to be scientists make it a full-time career of doing science popularizing. I support that. It's great.

In the case where someone is in a full-time career of doing science-popularizing, they indeed aren't scientists, in the same way a person working as a fire-fighter isn't a police officer. Rogue foolishly implied that amounted to "sneer[ing] contemptuously". It isn't. it's just stating a fact, and accurately labeling what it is they are doing in their job. It's not making any kind of negative value judgement about what they do: I think what they do is excellent and worthwhile and needs doing more.

It also occasionally annoys me when people who do next to no science call themselves scientists to try and boost their marketing. Sam Harris is the commonest example of this. He doesn't do science popularizing, he just writes books about his own views, and he very rarely if ever does any science, so he's neither a scientist nor a science popularizer. I would say I do sneer contemptuously at him, and if asked I would indeed say he's not a real scientist.

This may surprise you but it is indeed possible to be a scientist and engage the public in a meaningful way.

[oxmixmudd]

This may surprise you but it is indeed possible to be a scientist and engage the public in a meaningful way.

Possible, but not common. They are really both full time jobs. One will encroach on the other. Most of the public outreach sorts have their best science research behind them.

[Starlight]

I like Harris

Ok. I don't.

he is on the right side of the PC trans issue.

I googled to see what his views are and wasn't able to find a whole lot.

Here's one instance I found. It doesn't exactly seem to agree with your views seer, but it's possible Harris has changed his views since.

Sam Harris, Ask Me Anything #7 @44:53

"I think there is no question that there is a biological basis for [transgenderism].

Do i think people choose to be transgender? I think the answer to that is pretty clearly no...

I know at least one transgender child and its absolutely clear from watching her grow up that this is not a matter of a child being culturally indoctrinated into transgenderism. There are biological processes giving rise to this.

Clearly we want a society that makes all the appropriate ethical and political concessions to that reality...

[But the solution is not] to memorize 30 different pronouns, and consider speech about this issue akin to physical violence..."

[Starlight]

This may surprise you but it is indeed possible to be a scientist and engage the public in a meaningful way.

Of course it is possible, and I support it. Did you not read anything I wrote?

[seer]

Ok. I don't.

I googled to see what his views are and wasn't able to find a whole lot.

Here's one instance I found. It doesn't exactly seem to agree with your views seer, but it's possible Harris has changed his views since.

Sam Harris, Ask Me Anything #7 @44:53

"I think there is no question that there is a biological basis for [transgenderism].

Do i think people choose to be transgender? I think the answer to that is pretty clearly no...

I know at least one transgender child and its absolutely clear from watching her grow up that this is not a matter of a child being culturally indoctrinated into transgenderism. There are biological processes giving rise to this.

Clearly we want a society that makes all the appropriate ethical and political concessions to that reality...

[But the solution is not] to memorize 30 different pronouns, and consider speech about this issue akin to physical violence..."

I'm speaking about the underlined part, that is why I said PC. He is a strong supporter of free speech.

[Starlight]

I'm speaking about the underlined part, that is why I said PC. He is a strong supporter of free speech.

So... you agree with one sentence of his out of 6 on the subject? But disagree with the other 5?

That sentence itself is an instance where I view Sam Harris's as insane / just making things up.

You guys seem to regard me as an extreme liberal leftist. Have you ever seen me advocate 30 different gender pronouns? Of course not. Because that would be idiotic. I, as someone who consumes a lot of liberal leftist media have never seen anyone advocate 30 different gender pronouns. Sam Harris is doing his usual insanity of making up imaginary opponents.

[seer]

So... you agree with one sentence of his out of 6 on the subject? But disagree with the other 5?

That sentence itself is an instance where I view Sam Harris's as insane / just making things up.

You guys seem to regard me as an extreme liberal leftist. Have you ever seen me advocate 30 different gender pronouns? Of course not. Because that would be idiotic. I, as someone who consumes a lot of liberal leftist media have never seen anyone advocate 30 different gender pronouns. Sam Harris is doing his usual insanity of making up imaginary opponents.

That is nonsense Star, non-gender pronouns are certainly gaining favor whether 30 or less. And if you don't use them you can be in trouble. Law suits, loss of job, etc...

[Starlight]

That is nonsense Star, non-gender pronouns are certainly gaining favor whether 30 or less. And if you don't use them you can be in trouble. Law suits, loss of job, etc...

I am open to the idea of adding one additional gender pronoun to the English language (note for those who are math disabled: 1 is not 30), because English unlike many other European languages doesn't have a gender-neutral pronoun currently. I have personally never heard anyone using any proposed gender neutral pronouns in my life - not in any of the liberal / progressive media sources I have ever consumed. Reading TWeb I think I have seen conservatives mention / complain about "Ze" as an option. It doesn't strike me as a very sensible combination of letters, but neither do many other words in English I guess.

But I'll let you and Sam Harris get back to burning your hilarious straw men of 30 pronouns and punishments for not memorizing them.

[seer]

I am open to the idea of adding one additional gender pronoun to the English language (note for those who are math disabled: 1 is not 30), because English unlike many other European languages doesn't have a gender-neutral pronoun currently. I have personally never heard anyone using any proposed gender neutral pronouns in my life - not in any of the liberal / progressive media sources I have ever consumed. Reading TWeb I think I have seen conservatives mention / complain about "Ze" as an option. It doesn't strike me as a very sensible combination of letters, but neither do many other words in English I guess.

But I'll let you and Sam Harris get back to burning your hilarious straw men of 30 pronouns and punishments for not memorizing them.

Again Star, you can use what ever pronoun you like, but when you attempt to force others to use them by force of law or legal sanction, like this, then there is a problem...

Transgender plaintiff files $1.1 million lawsuit against former employer Nike for exposure to incorrect gender pronouns...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nike-tr...inkId=79427774

Why does it matter what pronouns you use to refer to someone?

Using the pronouns that a person goes by is a way of respecting that person's gender identity -- or a person's emotional and psychological sense of their own gender.
If someone tells you that they go by the pronouns "they/them," for example, and you continue to refer to them using "he/him/his" pronouns, it can imply that you believe that transgender, non-binary or intersex people are unimportant, or shouldn't exist.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/16/us/pr...rnd/index.html

[Starlight]

Transgender plaintiff files $1.1 million lawsuit against former employer Nike for exposure to incorrect gender pronouns...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nike-tr...inkId=79427774

People filing absurd lawsuits with no chance of success seems to be a common occurrence in the US. You're kidding yourself if you think this is evidence of anything.

Why does it matter what pronouns you use to refer to someone?

Using the pronouns that a person goes by is a way of respecting that person's gender identity -- or a person's emotional and psychological sense of their own gender.
If someone tells you that they go by the pronouns "they/them," for example, and you continue to refer to them using "he/him/his" pronouns, it can imply that you believe that transgender, non-binary or intersex people are unimportant, or shouldn't exist.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/16/us/pr...rnd/index.html

If you want to be polite, you call people what they ask you to call them. I don't think that's controversial nor difficult.

[seer]

People filing absurd lawsuits with no chance of success seems to be a common occurrence in the US. You're kidding yourself if you think this is evidence of anything.

If you want to be polite, you call people what they ask you to call them. I don't think that's controversial nor difficult.

New California Law Allows Jail Time for Using Wrong Gender Pronoun

https://www.sandiegocriminallawyersb...ender-pronoun/

Anti-gay activist ordered to pay $55,000 to B.C. trans candidate in fight over hateful flyer

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-...-hateful-flyer

Surrey Police investigation over 'misgendering' tweets

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-47638527

Teacher accused of 'misgendering' child was told by police that she committed a hate crime

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...ommitted-hate/

Mother, 38, is arrested in front of her children and locked in a cell for seven HOURS after calling a transgender woman a man on Twitter

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...woman-man.html

[Starlight]

They're totally out to get you seer. All your nutty paranoia is totally justified.

[lilpixieofterror]

They're totally out to get you seer. All your nutty paranoia is totally justified.