What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
What are your thoughts?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI
— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
I don’t know I didn’t watch it.
i dont think
Gatekeeping is sometimes a good thing
>"What is a chair"
Why can't chuds answer this simple question
You can, in fact, give some general characteristics or criteria to fit the definition of a chair.
we're all waiting anon 🙂
A chair is a type of seat, typically designed for one person and consisting of one or more legs, a flat or slightly angled seat and a back-rest. They may be made of wood, metal, or synthetic materials, and may be padded or upholstered in various colors and fabrics.
That's all for today. Go away now.
And yet... you're still wrong. Why can't chuds do it? It's so simple after all. We all know a chair is... and yet they simple cannot define one.
>minor spelling error
Behold, a chair!
That's not a chair, that's a throne.
a throne is also a chair
A woman is a type of person, typically with or or more X chromosomes. They may be born male, female, or somewhere in-between, and may be producing estrogen, on some form of HRT or not on HRT at all.
That's all for today. Go away now.
Since you're gonna just copypaste your definition, I'm gonna copypaste my previous response to it:
>a chair with no legs isn't a chair
>a chair with no back rest isn't a chair
btw you should not use words like "typically" or "may" in a definition, since if it's optional it's not actually intrinsic to the definition or label
And yet there are multiple types of chairs with no legs.
why can't they do it bros
An object that I use to sit.
Nope, that's not quite right either. Hmm...
Yes it is.
Sorry, it's irrelevant what your own personal definition of a chair is. Facts don't care about your feelings or subjective experience of what a chair is.
It's not my personal definition it's just what a chair is.
you're missing the point
mtfs are identifying as women but can't define what a woman is without giving a circular definition
if anything, he is deboonking the whole modern concept of gender
you're missing the point
chuds are claiming that mtfs are identifying as women, when they aren't women, but can't even define what a chair is themselves without giving a definition that is obviously wrong.
okay, what is the correct definition of a chair
There isn't one, just like there isn't one for "woman." That's our point. Keep up chuddy.
then how can someone identify as a woman?
it's easy. you can sound out the words "i identify as a woman" with your vocal chords. try it yourself
>i identify as a woman
how can you identify as something there is no definition for?
can you identify as a woiefjaowejif?
>coping this hard
lmfao
okay, so since words can mean whatever we want please understand when I say awoeifjlawkj oawjief oiaje fl aoweijf lakjsdoifjas dd
that's not even close to what i said.
>me looking for your definition of a woman
i will add again, the role of a woman in society is a cultural concept, what makes a dresses women's clothing? if your concept of woman is fully tied to "uterus haver" then you won't be able to know for sure most women around you are real women, good luck checking
You have to be at least 18 to post here btw
chud mind broken
repeating what you've already said doesn't make you right
if you think you refuted my argument then quote the posts
What is a awoeifjlawkj?
just because there's no single, all-encompassing yet short and quippy definition for something does not mean it doesn't exist
anon why would I a tranny who actually enjoys living and has sex semi regularly sit down and watch a man who looks like a 90s gay candian pornstar make a movie about how much he hates my guts.
>literally cites tribe that mutilates the gentials of girls
>talks about how much he envies them in the book version
hmm
i dont give a shit
i think its kinda stupid that someone that dropped out of college can make a thinkpiece on anything with zero attempt at being charitable or neutral, while blatantly manipulating vague interviews with unprepared interviewees by cutting up the footage in skewed ways
the movie makes no sense to me because the only dipshits that would watch and formulate any sort of thought from it are likely those that already felt this way to begin with
and kids, which ironically proves that republican grifters are worse for kids than any homosexual at drag brunch could ever
Why are you gatekeeping knowledge or interviewing, brainlet? Haven't we collectively decided that anyone can be a woman if they think they are?
Are you retarded? Serious question. There's no way you put your fingers to your phone or keyboard and thought any of that was a good argument, even as a troll.
I understand that an appeal to authority can be a fallacy, but if you think we as a human race should ever take a blatant uneducated idiot's opinion on a subject seriously just because you both hate trannies, I'm not sure what to say.
Okay? And should we disregard the rare academic paper published by someone with no prior qualifications or a degree? You're still appealing to authority. Classist.
Last I checked, women generally have a uterus and have the ability to produce human eggs. But hey, HRT makes the TiMs heccin valid!!
>generally
what did I just say
>what did I just say
>And yet there are multiple types of chairs with no legs.
I accept your concession.
I am literally taking your chud definition of a chair, and doing the exact same thing with a woman. If you don't think it's a good definition, then please try again and define what a chair is. We're waiting anon!
Semantic bullshit, disregarded.
Please provide a more coherent argument.
>Semantic bullshit
THAT IS LITERALLY THE ENTIRE TOPIC OF THE THREAD
If you don't want to discuss semantics, why the fuck are you engaging in a discussion about DEFINITIONS OF WORDS?!
>coming here to pick a fight "semantic bullshit"
>losing it
>seething like this
lmfao
I think Walsh belongs in an unmarked ditch
>Rocking chairs aren't chairs
>Airplane chairs aren't chairs
some chairs are supported by only 2 legs, a handful even use an odd number of 3! therefore chairs are a social construct
>Matt walsh should be shot
Why? He's a hero fighting Marxism, communism, and all the evils of the modern world it has created.
defining woman is easy af, walsh is just dense and dishonest
Woman. Adult human being pertaining to the female gender
i like the watermelon sour patch kids more. but for real even the idea of defining things with vocals or written text is socially constructed and this extends to the idea of man and woman. but social construct doesnt mean fake or useless
the sweet part of a warhead is good though wtf
yall really are the weird booger eating kids from school with weird moms and stupid haircuts
i cant believe after all of this we grew up and once you come out as a chaser i have to ride YOUR nasty ass cock as a woman
there seriously cannot be a god this is so messed up
I love that like 98% of trans discourse just comes down to literally semantics lol
Everybody knows what people mean they're just being deliberately obtuse.
Did these kind of retarded internet argument tactics become the default political discourse of choice at some point, or was it always this way?
From Middle English chayer, chaire, chaiere, chaere, chayre, chayere, from Old French chaiere, chaere, from Latin cathedra (“seat”), from Ancient Greek καθέδρα (kathédra), from κατά (katá, “down”) + ἕδρα (hédra, “seat”)
An item of furniture used to sit on or in, comprising a seat, legs or wheels, back, and sometimes arm rests, for use by one person.
>An item of furniture used to sit on or in, comprising a seat, legs or wheels, back, and sometimes arm rests, for use by one person.
why can't we do it chudbros
Furniture, furniture consists of large objects that are used in a ROOM for sitting or lying on or for putting things on or in
a car has the main objective of being a vehicle, it's not furniture
What is furniture? What is a room? What about outdoor furniture, is it still "true" furniture??
We're gonna need more definitions.
EVERYTHING relies on definitions, intelligence and sentience relies on logic and references, no object or being can be understood without semantics and references, ontologically, it requires to be placed in a context to exist
>no object or being can be understood without semantics and references
huh? why not?
tell me one, word that can be understood without references, this is not how language works, it describes things based on references, 100% of the time
this shit is more philosophical than anything but walsh is not a philosopher specialized in metaphysics or a linguistics scholar
>it stops being a chair when you move it outside
uhoh...
no because it's main objective is to sit down, the difference is that a car is an object created to be a vehicle to move people, a chair is an object created for sitting, the dumb dictionary also forgot an important part which is that chairs are always made out of rigid materials
furniture item made for sitting made out of rigid materials, with a back, a chair
But that isn't right? There are countless examples that contradict these things.
You don't make definitions based on ridiculous contrived nothingburger exceptions retard
In what sense are "countless examples" ridiculous, contrived, nothingburgers, or exceptions?
exactly, that's why the definition of woman ("adult human female") has a few, rare, nothingburger exceptions
then why isn't question "what is a female" oh, because that also defies the common definition of what a woman is
female, human gender that was developed around the naturally occurring secondary sexual characteristics of humans whose chromosomes were XX
>gender
>weasel wording "developed around"
So trans women are women, got it.
yes, my defintion requires you to also know the definition of gender which is a cultural learned thing, based on biology but not a biological category itself
Okay woman is a cultural learned thing.
yes, it is cultural, it has a biological background but the concept if fully made up
huh? i don't know why that isn't the question. i didn't ask it. and how does "female" defy the definition of what a woman is...?
you sound kinda stupid tbh
>retard
>stupid
why are you so insecure?
>can't think of an argument
Nah you can have a foam chair or a beanbag chair. Rigidity not required.
if it's not rigid that would be a seat, if it has no back it is a stool, that's why i insist that part was needed in the dictionary
Would you say that chair is a subcategory of seat? Because I can kinda vibe with that.
yes, i also wanted to mention that, a chair is a kind of seat, categorization also admits hyerachies and such, a trans woman and a ciswoman are both women
>As some of the earliest forms of seat, stools are sometimes called backless chairs[...]
oh no...
this has more to do with historical linguistics and how backwards and primitive germanic tribes were before being civilized by romans, middle english borrowed the word chair because it had no such object, stools were simpler seats,
we're talking about modern english and its modern semantics
I see the inclusion of the word "earliest" confused you into thinking that stools are not now sometimes called backless chairs
what about a couch, is a couch a chair?
A woman is someone who is broadly perceived as an adult human female, and is therefore expected to fulfill the female social role of "woman". It is based on female biology but not wholly defined by it.
i like yours, similar to my own
So if a society doesn't perceive you as a woman then you aren't one? Also what are "female social roles"?
Nta but honestly, yeah kinda. You may identify as a woman, but if you are treated as a man and experience the world that way, are you really a woman? If people understand you to be a woman or if you present femininely they'll probably get that you're a woman and treat you as such nd that's honestly usually good enough. But, imo, in their daily lives, boymoders aren't really women---at least not socially. They don't have the experiences, shared culture, etc that women all have. On the internet they may be women, and I truly mean that they ARE women on the internet and I'm their persona lives, but at work or at the grocery store they are mostly just men, as possibly rude as that is.
>if you are treated as a man and experience the world that way, are you really a woman
If you are biologically female then yes you are.
Yes, I think that if you are not perceived to be a woman then you aren't one exactly. If gender is a social construct, outside of sex, which I believe it to be, then it must be socially defined. This is also true of men, like how in a society with a large class of eunuchs a eunuch would often be thought of as something not quite a man, but this would change in a society with no such conception. The a society's female role is primarily based on the assumption of one a) being weaker than the male, and b) giving birth, two biological facts that nevertheless still color the treatment of those perceived to be women who don't follow these. Historically this can be seen in a wife taking her husband's last name and her property becoming his without the reverse happening. A woman who does not fulfill these expectations would be punished on some level for acting outside the female social role. I know I am talking to someone with no interest in what I am saying, but I don't think that you can seriously tell me there isn't a clear female social role you see around you.
>I don't think you can seriously tell me there isn't a clear female social role you see around you
There is but people in the west are trying to subvert it in the name of progress and it's in the same name of progress that people are expected to accept transgenderism.
If you have to ask what a woman is you're a fucking idiot. We all know what a woman is.
If someone in good faith says they are a woman, then they are one (this is not a definition of "woman," rather a means of identifying who is one). And if they aren't in good faith, they're a dick. Easy.
This. "I know it when I see it" is the only definition you'll ever need
There's something deeply funny about how people are responding to an obvious rhetorical question with a sincere attempt to answer
The point is that you can't give an acceptable answer, dunces
its a good tutorial in misuse of statistics
This is a chair, only this. If it looks exactly like this it is a chair (up to wood type, individual grain of wood, size but not scale, etc). Nothing else is a chair. I don't care if it mostly looks like this but has some extra back panels. Not a chair.
Can you describe what part of the image you're referring to?
No no anon you got it wrong.
This isn't a chair. It's a picture of a chair.
Or uh like.. some photons or some shit.
the worst part about this documentary isn't even that it's transphobic, but that it's so fucking boring. i barely sat through the whole thing.
>the title: what is a woman?
>the graphic design: matt walsh is a woman
The fact that people find this shit compelling was a real black pill. I just don’t give a shit about what anyone thinks anymore because I know most of them genuinely can’t think no good. Also have overheard guys speak positively of this “documentary” only to later hit on me. Sucks but I guess good overall cuz I’ve learned not to try to convince anyone of my beliefs, I just keep my mouth shut.
also it's funny because walsh basicallty explores how language is shaped by, culture if a different culture had a third gender that's a conceot that needs to be translated or borrowed since modern western civ doesn't which means it's cultural relativism, which in a way would be disproving the way he wants to approach things that being is "western and christian worldview is universal therefore right"
philosophy has always just been word games
right wingers referring back to language itself as a justification for their ideas fail to remember that language was invented over a long history, and continues to be invented, and will always be invented, to suit our needs.
yes, like every single rightoid, he is a pseud and his 15 minutes are up
A WOMAN IS A FEATHERLESS BIPED
CHECKMATE CHUDS
Diogenes would be pro-self iding but against mones
Diogenes would run a diy lab and he would ejaculate inside of each vial.
idk why you're doing this with your free time
>can't define women
>sill sperg out if you don't accept them as a woman
why are mtfs like this. if you're going to play cute semantic games to avoid having to define woman, why does it even matter if you're a woman or not? it's all meaningless at that point.
>thread gives many detailed explanations of what the concept of "meaning" is
>why can't you just give me the true meaning of a single word
I'm not asking for a meaning. I'm asking why does being a woman matter so much to mtfs if they themselves can't define it in any meaningful way.
many definitions were mentioned here several times before, now most actual transgenders believe there are 2 main genders, some believe in different things but most trans people want to change from one category to the other
Matt Walsh is an autistic tranny repper.
i still think it could have been a good doc if he didnt obviously scramble the interviews around and cut shit out and make everyone against him look retarded on purpose through footage manipulation
like if youre in the right you wouldnt even need tactics like this to prove your point, much less to your target audience of people that already agree with you
>dat cover
literally her. there, answered.
>36 posters
>134 replies
My thoughts are that I can't wait till somebody else is the football.
What color is the sky
κυανός
sometimes I wonder if matt walsh is a woman
Anyone that thinks they're female and their dreams in their sleep is probably female. It's a state of mind and it's very difficult to change it
they always ask what is a woman
but they never ask how is a woman
curious