Philosophy Now Forum

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:58 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:55 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:50 pm

I learned what nihilism and relativism are and was taught that they are untenable positions. Is that not correct?

I thnk it's a bit flat to suggest that they are automatically untenable. What are the arguments for gender nihilism and why are they untenable?

By "gender nihilism" are you suggesting that anyone can be any gender?

You raised the matter of nhilism not me. If you had some plan for that, make whatever your play is, but don't put words into my mouth.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:57 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:47 pm I don't define a woman as "a person who can give birth" so I'm okay on that front.

Good for you, but this isn’t about you, it’s about Trump’s definition which was answered correctly. Anatomically so.

He didn't say anything about anatomy. You're just smashing words together to hope something sticks.

If a woman is someone who can give birth, then 90 year old women aren't women and should pee standing up with the men.

On the other hand, if 90 year old women are women, then clearly that means there are women who can't give birth. That seems painfully clear. And given that, it stands to reason that "a woman is a person who can give birth" doesn't cut it as a definition.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:03 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:57 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:47 pm I don't define a woman as "a person who can give birth" so I'm okay on that front.

Good for you, but this isn’t about you, it’s about Trump’s definition which was answered correctly. Anatomically so.

He didn't say anything about anatomy. You're just smashing words together to hope something sticks.

If a woman is someone who can give birth, then 90 year old women aren't women and should pee standing up with the men.

Sorry I don’t understand your potato mashed up head logic.

Age doesn’t matter, a woman is anatomically born that way, they give life to newborn babies.

There’s nothing more to say on the matter.

Women who don't or can't give life to babies are not women, you heard it here first. Thanks fairy.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:07 pm On the other hand, if 90 year old women are women, then clearly that means there are women who can't give birth. That seems painfully clear. And given that, it stands to reason that "a woman is a person who can give birth" doesn't cut it as a definition.

It’s a great definition. It’s good enough.

If you don’t like it, if it’s not good enough, then boo boo for you, no one cares, no one is forcing you to accept someone else’s opinion against your will.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:20 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:07 pm On the other hand, if 90 year old women are women, then clearly that means there are women who can't give birth. That seems painfully clear. And given that, it stands to reason that "a woman is a person who can give birth" doesn't cut it as a definition.

It’s a great definition. It’s good enough.

If you don’t like it, if it’s not good enough, then boo boo for you, no one cares, no one is forcing you to accept someone else’s opinion against your will.

To be clear here - you're disavowing any claim that your definition could be used to say that somebody else is mistaken or wrong in any way if they use some competing definition?

Why did you bother typing it out?

This is a philosophy forum honey. Expect people to investigate your claims. If you give a definition of a woman, and people aren't trying to dissect whether or not it holds... you're not on a philosophy forum.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:18 pm Women who don't or can't give life to babies are not women, you heard it here first. Thanks fairy.

You’re not listening, you’re just flapping your lips.

Everyone who is a woman knows what Trump meant.

Trump is not the idiot asking idiotic questions. Trump just replies with honest straight firing common sense, to dumb nonsensical press questions. He’s hardly going to just stand there as though someone has cut out his tongue.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:22 pm This is a philosophy forum honey. Expect people to investigate your claims. If you give a definition of a woman, and people aren't trying to dissect whether or not it holds... you're not on a philosophy forum.

Then philosophy is for retards.

I’m here to remind everyone of this.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:02 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:58 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 2:55 pm
I thnk it's a bit flat to suggest that they are automatically untenable. What are the arguments for gender nihilism and why are they untenable?

By "gender nihilism" are you suggesting that anyone can be any gender?

You raised the matter of nhilism not me. If you had some plan for that, make whatever your play is, but don't put words into my mouth.

Fair enough. You seemed to have some issue with Trump's answer to what a "woman" is. If you don't have an issue with it, then I don't either.

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:28 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:22 pm This is a philosophy forum honey. Expect people to investigate your claims. If you give a definition of a woman, and people aren't trying to dissect whether or not it holds... you're not on a philosophy forum.

Then philosophy is for retards.

I’m here to remind everyone of this.

If that's so, could you kindly fuck off somewhere else and let us have Harbal back? You were always the shit end of that stick.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:22 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:20 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:07 pm On the other hand, if 90 year old women are women, then clearly that means there are women who can't give birth. That seems painfully clear. And given that, it stands to reason that "a woman is a person who can give birth" doesn't cut it as a definition.

It’s a great definition. It’s good enough.

If you don’t like it, if it’s not good enough, then boo boo for you, no one cares, no one is forcing you to accept someone else’s opinion against your will.

To be clear here - you're disavowing any claim that your definition could be used to say that somebody else is mistaken or wrong in any way if they use some competing definition?

Why did you bother typing it out?

Okay, fine, it’s just my opinion, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I think the definition was enough and very accurately answered.

No one on this forum has to agree with me.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:29 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:28 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:22 pm This is a philosophy forum honey. Expect people to investigate your claims. If you give a definition of a woman, and people aren't trying to dissect whether or not it holds... you're not on a philosophy forum.

Then philosophy is for retards.

I’m here to remind everyone of this.

If that's so, could you kindly fuck off somewhere else and let us have Harbal back? You were always the shit end of that stick.

Well it was only a matter of time before I was able to draw that venom from you. You are so predictable.

FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:29 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:28 pm

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Wed Apr 02, 2025 3:22 pm This is a philosophy forum honey. Expect people to investigate your claims. If you give a definition of a woman, and people aren't trying to dissect whether or not it holds... you're not on a philosophy forum.

Then philosophy is for retards.

I’m here to remind everyone of this.

If that's so, could you kindly fuck off somewhere else and let us have Harbal back? You were always the shit end of that stick.

Harbal must have something to hide. If I’m the only reason he’s not posting here then he’s giving me an awful lot of power.

As if I could have that sort of power to make him want to leave a forum he told me he enjoyed so much.

Take your pathetic fight to Harbal, you disgusting piece of garbage. Why don’t you send him a PM if you are so fucking concerned about him.