Posted on 11/15/2016 2:26:06 PM PST by Morgana
This is the first time I have seen this issue raised as impacting the election.
I can’t say that the “bathroom wars” were the only reason for my vote for Trump, but it certainly was a factor in my decision.
Maybe it was more like true last straw...
If the NYT is serious about their new-found dedication to telling the truth, their “gender editor” will soon be out of a job.
Bahaha! That sums up the blather quite nicely, thanks!
“...On the one hand the White Female (WF) is supposed to value her femaleness, the result of a early random selection in the embryo, over her whiteness, which was created by 100 generations of the breeding choices of all her ancestors....”
Wrong twice.
The sex of a human is determined by the chromosomes in the father’s sperm: X makes female, Y makes male. Possessing only X chromosomes, the mother can only contribute X chromosomes with her ovum. Precedes the embryo.
“whiteness created by 100 generations of breeding choices” is also a mistaken formulation. Humans don’t “create” life (neither does any other species on this planet): we merely pass it on. And “whiteness” is no more than a contingent adaptation, a response to selective pressure from the local environment. Major contributors are sun angle and climate. There is no moral component.
Some time back - 200 to 400 generations or so - culture started making a greater impact than genetics (”blood”, in lay parlance). And culture is not transmitted by genetic means. Physical racial traits matter less than culture.
“The New York Times’ gender editor, “
I see the problem.
L
Both male or female you were more likely to vote for Trump if you were married.
Trump was elected by couples.
FIRST POINT:
ok to me more precise I should have said "a random event in the ovary".. happy?
SECOND POINT:
Extremely pedantic. It's common usage to credit a mother and father with "creating a new life" when they make a baby. I guess if you view humans as only possessing life as a species, and not individually your claim makes sense, otherwise it's does not.
As for your other comments, they are ridiculous. I suspect even you know it. Of course whiteness, which I agree was the result of some hundreds of generations of adaptation changed a lot of things besides skin, hair and eye colors. And many of these tings are measurable, like IQ, or quantifiable, like time preference, impulse control.
The difference between the hundred or so African cultures and the 100 or so European ones are obvious, to anyone not pitching a discredited "nurture not nature" narrative, as you appear to be.
You claim culture has a great impact than blood. Take a look at the FBI crime statistics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.