"There Are Only TWO Genders" - Thought Experiment Game with PSU Students
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ก.ค. 2024
- Students at Portland State University were asked whether they agree or disagree with the claim "there are only two genders." Here is what happened before we were confronted outside of the PSU social work building on May 11th.
Suggested video to watch next: • CONFRONTATION at Portl...
⸺SUPPORT MY WORK⸺
Newsletter | boghossian.substack.com/
Donate | www.nationalprogressalliance....
⸺LINKS⸺
Website | peterboghossian.com/
National Progress Alliance | www.nationalprogressalliance....
Resignation Letter | peterboghossian.com/my-resign...
⸺BOOKS⸺
“How To Have Impossible Conversations” | www.amazon.com/dp/0738285323/...
“A Manual For Creating Atheists” | www.amazon.com/Manual-Creatin...
⸺SOCIAL MEDIA⸺
Twitter | / peterboghossian
Instagram | / peter.boghossian
TikTok | / peterboghossian
All Socials | linktr.ee/peterboghossian
__________
Chapters:
0:00 Agreement Levels
0:26 Reasons for Agree
1:23 Reasons for Disagree
2:58 Definition of Gender
7:13 Reasons for Strongly Agree
8:31 Disconfirmation Check for Disagree
9:38 Disconfirmation Check for Agree
11:42 Interruption
12:29 Discussing Interruption
15:13 Wrap Up
#genderidentity #portlandstateuniversity #socialjustice
When they give you the finger and tell you that you can't ask the question or have the discussion because you are harming people it is not about harm. It is about control, and they want to control you. Resist.
And also that there is no logical reasoning for their point of view, so they can't reason with you.
Giving the finger is the left's ONLY argument, when they realize that they have LOST the argument...
Reason and logic is beyond them.
But "we" are hurting their feelings.
Only thing that matters to them...
14:39 Why are you conducting these discussions without proper research? You’ve just exposed your bias. I understand you have an opinion, which we can all have, but to not question your current belief system and then completely ignore the more progressive gender ideology is pretty telling.
This is also likely you fail to understand how it may cause harm to students.
They're afraid of losing their job as social workers
It's insane. To simply ask a question they don't like is harmful. The risk I guess is someone could be converted to the other side.
Imagine you think you’re changing the world for the better by shutting down a civil conversation.
they LITERALLY think "not triggering people" = kinder world and that "not triggering people" = not exposing them to anything that makes them uncomfortable. it's insane. like 1. if you are that triggered, you need serious mental help. 2. protecting people from being triggered doesn't help them, and actually can harm them. 3. it's their responsibility to get help, seek healing and medical treatment for their illness. I'm speaking as someone who healed my own PTSD and serious mental illnesses after a LOT of work on myself and radical self responsibility. it took YEARS and i'm still working on myself but i'm able to thrive in the world and take on a place of healthy leadership...
Imagine you think you're changing the world by showing up uninvited on college campuses to provoke students just because you're bitter that you couldn't hack it in academia.
@@Melanie-yb1bz What was it that he did that you feel was provoking students?
That's how every cult thinks
@@queengoblin I’m not sure how many of them believe that, and how many of them realize it’s totalitarianism, it’s control, with an old American party’s cape to cloak it.
I love how the girl who identified as binary comes out with the “I’ll have to teach you these things because you’re so old that you don’t understand” argument. There’s nothing more ignorant, than that person in that moment.
True
Is it possible to get a considerate answer from an egocentric Ideologue ...the search must continue...
It took me a while to work out that they’ve confused “gender” with psychological personality traits.
What is wrong with thinking of gender in terms of psychological personality traits? Isn't the whole quandary of gender identity problems fundamentally a psychological question?
@@Beau136 Gender is biology, not feelings. Gender is science and facts, not an opinion. I think we should have 5 genders maximum. Male, female, male-female and female-male. If you have male body at birth but want to change, you would be a male-female. Transgender people today want to be able to change their BIOLOGICAL compositions just based off feelings. This is not only dangerous for medical reasons but it’s just simply wrong. If you can identify as what you feel then you destroy the gender definitions.
@@Beau136there wouldn't be a problem, but words such as man and woman are being co-opted. Those words were originally created to mean adult-male and adult-female, whether people like it or not. Some are now arguing to replace those definitions entirely, instead of agreeing on multiple co-existing definitions, a lot of the time even denying the original meanings ever existed.
"Man" can mean the social construct of a man, but that definition has to share the word with the og biological definition.
@@Beau136 There is no science that proves gender is separate from sex. Masculine and feminine aren't genders. They are traits 'commonly' associated with biological males and biological females. Being a feminine man doesn't make someone a woman, it's a man who happens to display a lot of traits commonly associated with biologically females. Also vice versa.
The problem with thinking of gender in terms of psychological traits is that there is no proper definition and as such it only leads to confusion and manipulation.
@@Beau136
No, gender is directly correlated with sex.
People turn it into some sort of psychological question but there shouldn’t be any more confusion than there is over what a male/female is.
Define gender for me if you think it isn’t synonymous with sex.
I always thought dysmorphia was a mental condition not a sexual identity.
Sexual identity is also mental. Are you trying to say that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder?
Yes, exactly. It's in the DSM-5
@@asons13 "DSM-5 aims to avoid stigma and ensure clinical care for individuals who see and feel themselves to be a different gender than their assigned gender. It replaces the diagnostic name “gender identity disorder” with “gender dysphoria,” as well as makes other important clarifications in the criteria. It is important to note that gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."
@@veridicusmaximus6010 I’m just an old man, I thought it was all dysmorphia, whether it be sexual or gender. But I don’t pretend to be an expert, I do think however teaching things in school and University seem to be foreign to me.
When I was a young man your pronoun was him/her or he/she, these were not terms of respect and not terms for identity for anything more than male or female. We always thought as children for a term of respect it was Mr. or Mrs. or Miss, those are the pronouns that. I would think you would want to change not whether a man is a woman or not. How about you can be a mister or Mrs.… I don’t even care if you call yourself a moose. But that’s how we identified you when I was young. Now if you get a he/she wrong you are in trouble for some reason.
The last thing is violence was actually a physical act of aggression, to say something was not considered violence and you did not get the lenience to scream because someone was hurting you. That is a form of abuse of the language as well as the meanings of words. This I think is what they call a snowflake if I am correct. You can tell me if I’m wrong.
@Genevieve Pilz Thanks, DOC!
Great discussions. Sad to hear these thoughtful students feel they have to be careful with their honest opinions on a university campus.
The truth is there are two genders and there are multiple sexual orientations. EVERYBODY THUS FAR has been to dumb to point it out. Allowing LGBTQ community to HIJACK the word GENDER. #stopthehijack
The "student " as we know it is dead. Replaced by a pc automaton.
@@LabRat6619 You mean robotic liberal hive mind?
You want to know what's sad is that they are fighting against oppression like they know what the f*** oppression means or feels like. They are fighting against being bullied , they are fighting to make sure that their voices are heard and they are not excluded or being targeted for name calling. but if you disagree they will make sure your life as you know it won't be the same , you become bullied, targeted, excluded They will call you names , like racist biggit , transphobic, . They well make sure that your voice / opinion isn't heard and doesn't count over their own. ,isn't that quite the irony, they need to be in school to become educated they need to shut their mouths and open their ears.
Students go to college to excel at critical thinking. This is a great topic for campuses. Too bad when people let their emotions get out of control and bully the other side.
These first two guys are incredibly respectful. That was a great conversation
This video help me realize that when they say they want a “safe space” they literally mean safe from thinking critically. They are mad that they are being challenged at college, they only want to be indoctrinated.
If by discussing gender identity in an open way I'm hurting those who identify as non-binary, then those who identify as non-binary must be very fragile in their belief. If those who identify as non-binary can't even be certain enough in their own belief to weather an open discussion of their claims without being emotionally damaged, why the hell should I put any stock in their belief? It's so absurd.
ANY person who sais that "words can hurt" (a classic slogan for SJW) is very fragile...by definition...
(it's such a ridiculous concept that is not even funny)
It's because they know they're full of shit and anything that reminds them of that must be destroyed.
@@mikepalmer2219 This is one of the things that has been so confusing for me. Why with this one disorder, contrary to every single other one, are we to support the disordered beliefs?
@@GoogleIsNotYourFriend the world is a messed up place.
@@artemis2569 Not really, because I don't get offended by name calling lol
How can we have conversations if one party believes that questions are literally violence?
you can't that's what they want. conformity of thought. a hive mind. hive minded pod people.
That is the point.
can one really have a true conversation with pathologically restricted people?
@@CourageToB good point.
@@-Siculus-Hort- it's funny. They want to be beyond judgement and yet label themselves and everyone else. They claim to want peace but cannot have a conversation without hysterics and over reaction. They embarrass real trans folk who are few and far between in reality.
Mad respect to the dude immediately admitting to using google, he had more self awareness than most. He at least knew he was uninformed but he tried lol
“You’re harming individuals by asking that question.” TRAs are indistinguishable from cultists.
Just had a thought on how you can eliminate the so-called gender pay gap. Get the highest paid male employees in a company to identify as female. Then when the activists complain that they aren't actually women, they'll have to explain why.
Brilliance is an understatement for this.
Amazing! 😁
Another good question to ask it that if gender is just a social construct, why is it important to administer hormones and undergo surgery?
The pay gap isn't real though. Just another emotions leftist delusion.
Very good, and I have another interesting test to propose.
In a women's soccer match, let the one team be all naturally born women, and the other be all trans women (which means that they were men before their transition, and of course they were playing soccer).
If the first team loses by 7-0 or whatever, let's see if they'll complain.
We need more professors like this in our colleges!
if i m not mistaken he stopped being a professor....
I’m off to UATX!
Professor, you are a courageous and gifted educator, and a gift in yourself. Keep this up.
Thank you.
This issue boils down to objective vs subjective reality. Reality cannot be subjective because it's something that we all share. If the person next to me is changing their own reality every day, how am I supposed to keep up? We have to agree on the objective truths of the world, or else we can not function as a society.
Please keep doing these! This calm unboxing of ideas is essential in a free democracy.
The Golden Age of a Democratic Republic, as in Greece and Roma, existed when everybody in the streets debated the political ramifications of authoritative decrees. The politicians got smart and more corrupt, as they did so, they created the Colosseum- debate in the street among the educated dissipated in the street- instead, it was replaced by talk of The Games. As it became even more corrupt, these societies fell From The Inside.
edit: the people who try to silence Freedom of Speech, or Thought, are definitely Nazis. In the U.S. currently, they identify as "Socialists" and Social Workers... but for simplification's sake, I just refer to them as: Communists.
Democracy is a collective majority forcing its collective will upon a minority, without the consent of said minority.
That’s the antithesis of “free”. You might be confused about your word choices.
Please reevaluate.
@@allemander found the anarcho-chooseyoursuffix. You realize that no social structure is without mass control, even the ones which claim otherwise? You get to choose the one with the best trade off, which democracy historically is. Within certain confines, the majority are given maximal movement.
@@allemander I'm not sure if you've thought this through very thoroughly. While it appears as if you've placed a solid cap on a specific point that seemingly requires no refutation, it would appear as if there's a great deal of spectral grey space that opens up an almost infinite amount of philosophical thought in terms of "what it means to be Free?"
First, let's define FREE, if we possibly can- and I beg you not to attempt to do it in a youtube comment, as numerous volumes have been writ by the world's greatest philosophers to have ever have walked this entire planet, from a great many cultural and societal backgrounds.
For instance, very quickly: am I "not free" because I can't just murder people indiscriminately every time I want to, without facing any sort of repercussions from the laws that govern the territory I reside in? Or, am I so free, that I can do it whenever I actually feel like it, repercussions from society bedamned?!
So let's not even go there, lol There is so much thought, from Kant, to Socrates, to Plato, to Buddha, to Crowley, to Jung, to... you name it, that would argue for definition as to "Truth", or what it means to be "Truly Free"
On the other hand, you do strike a valiant point, that the majority isn't always right; at times, they can be very, very wrong. So is a system wherein which the majority vote at the suppression of a minority the greatest solution for us all? Perhaps not, but it appears to be the best thing we've got so far. In The U.S. we do at least have The Freedom, or Freedom Enough, to alter the minds of our peers (for good or for ill), and if our communication is viable, or backed up by a well educated majority... theoretically, we should be making more educated, "better" decisions.
Herein lies another complication: define "Better". Better, for who? Better How? Better When?
There are many times where a policy may be signed into effect where an initiative causes huge economic strain, or loss, for so many in the short term, in the interim But for future generations, it works out just fine! In fact, the repercussions may not even be noticeable many years later. While the complete obverse, may also come as swiftly into fruition!
So, to make more sense of the world, or complicated political, or economic matters; this can be a very tough thing to do, where no "one size fits all" or simple "black and white" thinking arrives at the sum total.
I would avoid the swift "This", or "That" thinking on all matters and instead ponder the many subtle levels and layers of grey- while keeping in mind that your solution may not fit all like a delicate glove, and even arriving at the notion that even this can be okay- owing to evolutionary concepts where competition itself breeds Greater circumstances for Life, if even there is a pronounced ugliness that abounds. For not everyone who runs the race wins at the end, and that's Okay!
The only reason you are here today breathing air is because your father happened to convince your mother that e was the most suitable candidate for reproduction (however that may've occurred), and that of the many many millions of viable spermatozoon candidates , you were the one that broke through the egg and fertilized it first.
Congratulations! (We don't often tell people that, do we?) But I feel as if there is SO MUCH we take for granted on a daily basis, especially in the U.S. (and not, its not "Perfect!"), that upon travelling abroad one would Instantly see how much we actually have, how much we don't do that we can do, or potential- via our personal freedoms- we are capable of utilizing, and executing on!
In some countries, not even merely dressing as a woman as a biological male, but merely even looking at a man in a lustful way... or even THE SUSPICION of anything even meagerly out of the norm of a more oppressive society, could get a person thrown from a building! Set on fire! Beaten to death!
Heck, it happened to poor Matthew Shepherd in America; and those bastards are still in prison today... because of repercussions, despite Freedom ill-managed, to act on violent thought.
There's literally INFINITE FREEDOM to act, and yes, there are consequences for those that the majority has disagreed upon.
You obviously must not be illiterate to comprehend these things, but there is a difference between Black/White modalities and the vast spectrum of grey that exists... one great example would be the persecution of the black man in American society, and in contrast, the many motions that have been made along the last few hundred years to fight for at least some semblance of Equality (however agreed upon), to still fall short of it in this country (my opinion); and yet, despite the imperfection, have the circumstances available for motivated men of colour to have achieved Billionaire status, from the ghettos! Or, failing this, to have became millionaires, or positive influences in their local communities... and I don't mean "the inner city", I mean: The Suburbs.
No, its not perfect. It's not "where it should be", but I had the opportunity to look up to self-made black men who faced adversity, overcame it, led my summer camps, or football teams and became as much VIABLE role models to me as any other Caucasian man could've. And in many cases, there were a lot of white men who had the opportunity to be that type of person for me, but never did!
What I'm saying is, even as a child, even without perfect understanding of the many difficult and beleaguered, voluminous social issues at hand; even without a perfect understanding: I STILL HAD, what... ?
THE FREEDOM, To Choose!
A lot about surviving and overcoming adversity has a lot to do with: overcoming obstacles, fighting back, learning, becoming stronger. The world doesn't reward anyone that makes a conscious decision to accept victimhood, or those who give up.
@@allemander ok spergy lol!!
glad to hear the electrical engineer say he doesn't have a bunch of SJW crap in his classes, i worry how much it's infiltrating the hard sciences
And he'll actually make society better
woke/SJW crap has been a big issue in the tech sector, luckily not too bad in the non-english speaking countries BUT we are gradually seeing a shift towards more countering of these insane ideologies, I guess because we have reached the point where even people that didn't care either way are now realizing the insanity and toxicity of it all :)
its Portland University 🤭🤭🤭🤭 are you ok .....ill call for help if you need it
@@tweetdezweet Even in the tech sector, it's mostly the non-engineering folks who are pushing things. The engineers get some social pressure at work, and since they tend to not give 2 craps, they often support their colleges.
Another piece of the puzzle is that the 3 biggest tech hotspots are silicon valley, Austin, and Seattle, all of which are extremely left-leaning. But not because they are tech centers. It's just an odd quirk of history. Once you leave those regions, tech companies are about the same as other companies, or maybe even tend libertarian, believe it or not.
So does this mean that you support injustice?
Shutting down a conversation is what a sociopath does, its about power and control, if that's challenged that get mad easily. By the way i am a Transwoman and im okay with that. I am not the same as women and im okay with that too.
What you’re doing here is a great example for me. Your emotional control is admirable and ability to pose deeper questions to help others articulate their position is great. Thanks for doing this
Glad to see a couple of very clear thinking, articulate young men on campus who don't suppress their voices due to the culture of fear. It keeps my tenuous hope about our cultural future going.
14:39 Why are you conducting these discussions without proper research? You’ve just exposed your bias. I understand you have an opinion, which we can all have, but to not question your current belief system and then completely ignore the more progressive gender ideology is pretty telling.
This is also likely you fail to understand how it may cause harm to students.
@@bluezy1 OK, groomer
@@bluezy1 Who are you even talking to? You replied to Kevin Jackson, who is not in the video at 14:39.
@@bluezy1 His line of questioning is always fair and neutral -- he lets the subject speak and does not steer them left of right. What research is required btw? You are suggesting that one must already be in the progressive ideology camp before commencing? Typical.
@@bluezy1 if you're going to just copy and paste this stupid comment, at least check to make sure it makes sense.
Here are my 2 cents. Gender and sex are synonymous, it's your biological designation. The way gender is being used today is a feeling/psychological thing. For instance, I was born female, my gender is female, but I had a huge masculine influence growing up. I had 2 older brothers, and 8 out of 10 of my cousins are males. I was the first female born. I had masculine traits, a tomboy. At no time was I not female. I was a female that had the freedom to act like a boy, yet always identified as female. We all have different traits, they are on a spectrum. You can be a manly male or a girly male, or a girly girl or a manly girl, in any ratio between those points. But your actual gender is what you were born with. Has an anthropologist ever said, "That appears to be a male gorilla as I see a penis and testicles, but I don't want to misgender because the gorilla may identify as a female."
LoL 😂 I love that last ending 😂 Thank you for the answer .
Exactly, people who want to say "gender is assigned" are very quick to say just by looking at me that I am black.
How do they know I am black?
My daughter is a tomboy and also surrounded by boy influences in our family she is still a girl. Despite wanting to dress like big brother and be very comfortable and not be encumbered by long hair (hope she enjoys it someday!) My little girl...still a girl.
@@localjess838 💯
No, they are not, that is why we have 2 differentiated words. If I want a roommate, and I interview a man with gender dysphoria, that presents the behavioral pattern and clothing of a woman, that is not what I consider a man.
Is not a man that I can introduce to a female friend of mine as a man, or that I could put next to most generic men I know, just as another man.
That would be a transgender woman, we already have words to express that situation. Which is not a man, but a man that presents the behavioral pattern of a woman to such level, that can't be equated to a man.
Would I date a female that took hormones, removed his breast, has a prosthetic sexual organ and presents as a man with facial hair?. NO.
Why can I just say it is a woman?, how can you?. If you made a million dollars for having intercourse, would I do it?. NO.
To me a woman is the biological sex attached to the behavior, it is not purely the biology.
Gender is the behavioral pattern and the presentation, and it is clear that we need words to describe what does not fit in the binary system.
That has nothing to do with gender ideology, nor that I have to care about how fluid people are. I have no interest in how people see themselves.
I, and only I need those words to communicate to people when i see something that needs to be described out of the ordinary.
I'm loving these videos, Peter. I've been binging them the past few hours, and I can't wait to see more.
This method of debate is absolutely brilliant. Thank you for provoking discussion in such a way as to have the individuals look into themselves.
We've already agreed on the definition up until recently. They've just decided to co-op gender to describe preference. We already have a word for preference. It's called preference.
Actually, it's called _fetish_
The 'gender' thing started in the 1950s by now discredited sexologist John Money to promote vagueness and indeterminacy so he could promote the fallacy that human sexuality was a social construction.
th-cam.com/video/szf4hzQ5ztg/w-d-xo.html
Well, no. Sexual preference and gender identity aren't the same. Lesbian transwomen exist, that is: duded who now identify as women but who still bang women.
Or women who now identify as men who still bang men.
The “words are violence” line is not about shutting down the conversation. It’s much more sinister. It justifies actual physical violence against you.
In other words, they would consider physical violence against Peter justified.
It is extremely dark, sinister and dangerous.
That is similar to the argument used that if a person doesn't fall in line with an ideaology, then they are racist, transphobic, mysoginist, sexist, a bigot etc. If you say you are not whatever label they have attached to you, then they say it's subconscious or some other way of saying their labelling of you is fact due to them being right about everything. That is a scary place when a large portion of society is so intransigent to critical thinking that they think that they are right about everything and are not willing to hear viewpoints or even factual information that doesn't align with thier belief system. It's become tribal, and people will promote their "team" regardless if the facts or even if it is against thier belief system, because a culture of ideology over facts has been fostered by a coalition of influential groups, such as big tech, media, education and political parties. Big tech no longer supplies data, they censor and curate what is seen. Media no longer reports facts, but cherry picks news and delivers it with opinion. Education teaches ideology as fact without any proof. Politics...well no need to discuss the corruption nor ethical and intellectual vacuum there. These things do not just happen. They are the results of deliberate manipulation and social engineering. By whom and why is for another day.
@@tonyr.4778 Interesting. I've just started reading "The Revolt of The Public" which is about exactly this stuff. Have you read that?
@@ricepudding8434 haven't read it.
@@tonyr.4778 By whom and why is very relevant right now. Letting this go on this long is the whole reason things are as they are. The only way to correct it is to have the conversation
@@lovegunn22 I agree fully, but felt my post was getting long as is without getting into the topic of why and who.
Mr. Boghossian you are a legend! Thank you for doing this exercise with these great and intelligent students. I am fascinated by the way those people on the roof interrupted you and tried to suggest you are doing some kind of harm by asking a question. It really demonstrates what the real problem is. The students you spoke to managed to recognize and agree that there is a language problem in the variation of definitions, which causes people to talk past each other and this is where the confusion makes conversation more difficult than it needs to be. The people on the roof prefer not to have the conversation, and that only exacerbates the confusion, while open minded Socratic conversation is the best way to overcome the confusion.
Your patients is amazing !!! How do they expect to change views if they arnt willing to conversation. I love what you do. Facing their anger with such patients and still continue the conversation
the Electrical Engineer is superb. logic, reason, intelligence.
It's a science. Logic and reason are completely necessary.
@@danielturner9832 science is based on logic and reason
Yep. In Engineering, you don't have space for bullshit beliefs.
Reality will always trump your incorrect opinion.
the universities are in serious trouble.
This is very good and thought provocing.. Something that is missing in society today..
It is great to hear varying opinions and thoughts on the subject and each other talking about their views and attempting to find common ground.
I am so grateful for finding this channel. The discussions are fascinating and have actually helped me better understand my own positions on issues based of the statements of others.
It's amazing how intelligent people are capable of having a conversation without insulting each other although they have different views. Then you have people yelling insults that don't even know what's going on. They're not part of the conversation yet they make themselves part of it.
Because nobody with blue hair was present.
These are views, but remember, Darwin takes care of those who have the wrong views (in the long run) It's a fact, some views are superior to others, and some views live, whereas others, die.
Yup. And those same people will claim they're for free speech and equality.
Honestly, and this is completely anecdotal, but it’s mostly men that I see having more and more civil discussions. The women in Peters videos, from what I’ve seen, have been fairly confrontational
The guys in this video seem to have more nuanced views than most people on average. Usually you either have people that are outraged and disgusted that others identify differently from their sex and on the flip side you have people that go nuts if you even question the newer definitions of gender and the way people identify (as you saw from the people at the rooftop). I'm pretty confident that most people that have opinions on these topics completely ignore the semantics aspect of this issue, but the guys in this video all seem aware that words evolve despite having their preferences as to what they prefer the definitions to be.
I strongly agree that there are only 2 genders. I am in my 60s and I was taught that the word "gender" was a polite word for "sex". (E.g. the phrase "gender gap" is more polite and less physical than the phrase "sex gap", which could bring to mind how long it's been since someone has had sex, or could bring to mind an orifice through which someone can have sex ). The word "sex" also refers to intimate activities, so using the word "gender" can make it clear that one is talking about biological realities, instead of physical activities. The word "sex" and the word "gender" are thus strongly inter-twined, there are only 2 sexes (male and female), so there are only two genders.
For me to move one step away from "strongly agree", I would need someone to explain
a) the need for a new definition of an existing word (rather than the creation of a new word)
b) a coherent and useful new definition for the word, along with proposed contextual clues that would differentiate it from the old definition
Your reasoning is based on false premises. The conflation of gender with sex has been recent in the English language. Gender has been a linguistic concept for centuries. Languages other than English arbitrarily assign masculine, feminine and neutral genders to all nouns and have done so since ancient times. So in German, words that are neutral "the moon", "the world", and "the girl" are assigned masculine, feminine, and neutral genders by changing the article: "der Mond"(masculin), "die Welt"(feminine), and "das Maedchen" (neutral). In France, right next to Germany, these words have totally different genders: "la lune" (feminine), "le monde"(masuculin), "la fille"(feminine). These designations have nothing to do with sex, but do mirror the tendency of society to arbitrarily push social conformity by arbitrarily assigning social roles and practices based on sex (e.g. wearing skirts, wearing make-up, shaving armpits, playing football, etc.).
The need to allow individuals to self-identify based on gender arises out of the need for individual liberty and to resist pressures to conform to these arbitrary social norms, appropriately labeled as gender norms for their arbitrary societal nature and loose association with sex. Boys who play with barbies and girls who play football are considered gender-nonconforming because they refuse to fit the mold that society has created for them and choose to go their own way. For many, the resulting physical, emotional, and verbal abuse employed by those threatened by this non-conformity leads to a pattern of social withdrawal, extreme anxiety and depression identified by health professionals as "gender dysphoria" and often leads to self-harm (self-mutilation, suicide, social withdrawal, etc.). Allowing people to choose their gender hence becomes a useful tool in validating their decision to be who they really are in the face of immense social pressure to conform.
So as far as I'm concerned, if a transgender person asks me to use the correct pronoun or use the stall next to me in a public bathroom, I'll honor that. It is such a little thing that could mean the world to them and so little to me. If you don't want to do that, that's your choice, but I will consider you a self-centred asshole for putting your petty, arbitrary social values above the far more pressing needs of someone who is having real difficulty functioning in this world, equivalent to a person that butts in line, talks over other people at the dinner table, and bullies children younger than them in the playground.
@@soulscanner66 I think your reasoning is based on false premises. The use of gender in language to identify objects is totally separate from the use of gender in language to identify people. For example, we call ships "she" but we DO NOT expect ships to be able to produce offspring! In modern society, no-one has to comply with historical societal gender roles! For example, I see the occasional woman competing on Forged In Fire (a blacksmith show), but no-one gasps and wonders whether those women are really men, simply because they enjoy doing things that are traditionally associated with men! Anyway, for the purposes of the thought experiment exercise, it sounds like you are in the 100% disagree column.
1) Can you think of anything that might change you to the "80% disagree" column?
2) how many genders are there and can you name/define them?
3) how do you differentiate your concept of "gender" from the concept of "personality"?
@Elite xxxx I'm 60 years old. I learned about gender in French class. Words like la balle (ball feminin), un homme (man masculin), la pluie (rain, feminin), le train (train, masculine). Nothing to do with sex. Nobody used the word gender to describe sex. My birth certificate identifies my sex, not my gender.
@@eddiecollins6258 I think I argued pretty coherently that there is a need to separate biological definitions (i.e. reproductive roles) from social definitions (e.g. women wear pink frilly dresses, pluck their eyebrows, wear mascara, speak in high voices, etc.). The reason is the identification of gender dysphoria as a problematic mental illness. It helps people suffering from this to understand their depression and anxiety, and deal with the social pressure to conform to collectivist social norms about gender. Sure, women can be blacksmiths and be feminine, but someone of male sex wearing a dress, mascara, silk stockings, shaved legs going to a formal event would be considered cross dressing because because the clothes are considered feminine. This is because society has collectively and arbitrarily associated all these things with femininity, the same way some societies arbitrarily associate inanimate objects with masculinity and femininity.
As for the number of genders, it's like asking how many religions there are. It's an identity. It exists on a spectrum like sexual preference. Tell me how many ways are there to be masculine and feminine in society?
@@soulscanner66 I disagree that the presence of a rare mental illness (gender dysphoria) means that society must abandon the concept of a man being an adult male and a woman being an adult female. There are a lot of mental illnesses, and I don't think it is at all clear that affirming that someone's body is "wrong" will help in the long run. Helping people to be comfortable in their bodies might be a better long term solution. I recommend watching the WHAT IS A WOMAN video by Matt Walsh, he seems to cover all the bases there better than I can in this short reply space
I like how respectful he is
Hey thanks so much for doing this. It's interesting to watch people actually have to put their thoughts into words and I think for many of them, they're surprised by how difficult it is because they don't actual do it very often, not on topics like this at least.
I REALLY like that Peter asked a man, "What reasoning would be required to convince you?..." and not as a tactic to find a shortcut to AH HA! now you Have to agree with us. He was asking to help clarify the mindset so there can be a deeper understanding of where each party started from.
When Dr. B asks a question, he is going to listen to the answer. Not true of everyone.
14:39 Why are you conducting these discussions without proper research? You’ve just exposed your bias. I understand you have an opinion, which we can all have, but to not question your current belief system and then completely ignore the more progressive gender ideology is pretty telling.
This is also likely you fail to understand how it may cause harm to students.
@@bluezy1 groomer troll alert
It’s not to clarify, it is a tactic
The answer to “what reasoning “ is “a legitimate one”
This is the first video I’ve ever seen where someone was actually trying to search for agreement rather than yell angry talking points. Brilliant.
There is only one side that gets angry and yells at people. And it's not the side Boghossian is on.
Scary and fascinating…
Thank you.
Part of the problem is that students have the exact opposite of civil discourse modeled for them-and consequently we find ourselves in the mess we’re in…
This was very enlightening. I think we need more conversation like this. Thanks your for efforts.
This first guy gives me hope, that there still are reasonable people out there.
I think the matter is fairly uncomplicated. Humans are mammals, and for mammals sex is binary and immutable. This is a biological fact, not an opinion.
Balanced against this fact, there is a political ideology that one can decide to accept or reject. However, regardless of your politic opinion, the label that you adopt for yourself, or whatever cosmetic surgeries you may go through, your DNA and your skeleton tell the objective truth.
Yes, but, as Heather Heiying says, gender is the expression of sex. So couldn't there be more than two genders if people express their sex differently? (I'm not arguing there are more than two sexes, because sex is biologically binary). So you could be a male whose gender is female or undefined (non-binary). I think I could go along with that, while standing firm that even if your gender is female that doesn't necessarily mean you can use the women's bathroom, you definitely can't compete in women's competitive sports, and you definitely can't compel people to refer to you in the third person as your chosen gender (though hopefully most people will out of politeness if it's clear what your gender is).
The question was gender, not biological sex. Can you show that people always use those words in exactly the same way?
It would be a lot less ambiguous if the wording was "gender identity." But people don't always say that, partly because they are trying to enforce their own usage on everybody.
Like most things in biology, it's more complicated than you would like it to be. There are anomalies and grey zones. What do you say about someone with XXY chromosomes? What do you say about someone with two sets of genitals?
This is one reason why after two years as a biology major, I switched to engineering.
@@davidh9638 Sex = Gender. Obvs there are ppl who disagree with this equivalence - based on their political agenda.
What would it take to move towards their position? Simple: you just adopt their ideology. But no-one is obliged to obey and comply with their demands in this way.
What do you say about someone born with only one leg? Are they still a biped? I say they are. Same thing with other birth defects. It's a shame for the ppl involved, and I feel sympathy, but I'm not going to walk with a limp on their behalf.
Der, Die, Das; 3 Genders
@@davidh9638 Ha-ha! What would it take for me to move towards your position? Answer: Sapir Whorf Hypothesis
If you replaced the word “gender” with the word “personality,” this would all make more sense. Gender, to me, includes all of the biological norms associated with each sex. The two are inextricably linked, even if not precisely synonymous.
We don’t demand that everyone else knows and understands and agrees with our personalities. Why not just stick with male/female genders, and then allow everyone their own unique personalities…ya know, how we did things 10 years ago, before wokeism was engineered for the purpose of further weakening and dividing us?
I think you're on to something with the inclusion of personality. Perhaps when
people believe there are an infinite number of genders we might be dealing with personality disorders. There is also the possibility that many of these gender
fluidity believers are simply looking for validation. Many SJW feel the need to
protect these gender fluid people resulting in codependency.
"If you replaced the word “gender” with the word “personality,” this would all make more sense"
I totally agree...but then you would'nt be able to say "that guy who has female personality is entitled to go play sports in the female categoy"...or..."that dude with a woman's personality can go in the bathroom where all the biological women go".
@@dimercamparini exactly . Because a dude shouldn’t be allowed in the womens room no matter what his personality is
Because they agree to gender stereotypes while telling others not to stereotypes the gender
I do agree however the conflation of the two is purposeful. Its done to confuse the general population
"Why do you feel that way?"
Strongly agree: "The same reason I agree that there are only hens and roosters."
The most amazing part hung about these videos (aside from how brilliantly unbiased this guy conducts these exercises, regardless of his own opinions or the reaction he receives) is that not once have I seen anyone who is on the factual, commonsensical side of the argument, be aggressive, belittling or even raise their voice. They have been very measured and understanding. I can’t say the same for a lot of the people on the other side of the discussion
Thanks for sharing. Upon being told that I was harming people by asking that question, it'd be difficult for me not to point out that anyone could be "harmed" by anything in that regard. Like, a woman not wearing a headscarf could "harm" a conservative Muslim and make him want to go home and miss class, but that isn't how we define "harm". That isn't harm.
your example doesnt make sense at all. The harm is that you are denying the existence of a bunch of people by arguing if there are 2 genders or not.
@@kaleb51 And what does "by arguing if there are 2 genders or not" mean? I'm unfamiliar with that phrasing. I'm familiar with arguing for something or against something, but not "arguing if" in that context. They were discussing *whether* there are 2 genders or not. The "harm" is that some people are offended. It's like if I said that you were denying my existence and thus harming me by you using TH-cam. We can't be expected to walk on eggshells around such easily "harmed" people. End of story.
Christopher Hitchens: "If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, 'I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.'
In this country, I've been told, 'That's offensive' as if those two words constitute an argument or a comment. Not to me they don't."
@@kaleb51 no, that makes no sense. You might believe in unicorns, it doesn't mean you're denying the existence of unicorn-deniers. Only one of the two groups in the "do unicorns exist" sets can be correct. Asking questions about the credibility of unicorns shouldn't do anyone any harm (well, not to anyone who doesn't obviously need some kind of help).
@@kaleb51 so, you want to keep people ignorant so that they act the way you dont want them to? that sounds like a perpetual cycle.
You failed to point out that they don’t actually dislike harm. In fact, they’re more than happy to inflict harm on people they don’t like. They only care about harm as it pertains to classes of people they deem more deserving of rights than others.
You’ve got to expose the moral bankruptcy of these people whenever you can.
The SJWs are definitely not peaceful people; i mean you got the word “warrior” right in the name…
You're talking about republicans, right?
@@Jacob-sl6ur I'm probably talking about you.
I disagree with what you said I do think these people are on the more tolerant and accepting type, unless you oppose their opinion. But to oppose peoples opinion of acceptance is to simply be a bit of a bigot so I can see their aggression towards bigots. I’m more on the side of put my opinion to the side and let people believe whatever they want to believe as it doesn’t harm me, If you’re more on the side of “MY OPINION IS CORRECT GRR” which often in my experience right leaning people are more that type,obviously they’re gonna show aggression, as anyone would lol.
@@lecnne “these people are the more tolerant and accepting type, unless you oppose their opinion.”
1) If you don’t tolerate people who don’t share your opinion, you are, by definition, intolerant.
2) Opinions are just that-opinions. An opinion isn’t above challenge just because whomever holds it characterizes it with nice sounding words like “tolerance” and “acceptance”. Everyone thinks their own opinions are good, that’s why they have those opinions instead of different opinions.
3) The fact that you’ve been duped by fascists who calls themselves “tolerant” and “accepting” means A) you’re an idiot and B) you’re complicit in their fascism.
This is one of the first productive discussions I’ve seen 👏
Really good interview. Crazy that you can't have an intellectual debate in a place that purports to support exactly that
The thing I love about Peter is just by questioning these confused students, he exposes the folly and futility of their standpoint epistemology. Truth is not relative, and the louder these histrionic SJWs yell, the more that point is proven.
How is a civil & honest discussion harmful or offensive?
Is flipping the bird indicative of maturity or immaturity?
Is flipping the bird an offensive behavior?
To all rooftop yellers - Be better.
Don't you know? Dr. Boghossian is an oppressor, which gives them license to verbally abuse him. You know, it's just logic, or not, bc that's an oppressor tool too, or something. This garbage makes my head hurt. 😫
They are flipping the bird because they want the university to be "a safe space for everybody."
Typical white women in 2022
1. They're not criticizing the discussion. They're criticizing the sign and the likelihood that it will inspire an open, civil discussion. You would get the same reaction from conservatives if you did the same exercise with a sign saying "U.S. veterans are child killers" outside a veterans hospital. 2/3. That would depend whether you see honest free speech or civil discourse as more virtuous or desirable. It depends on your core civic values. The middle finger is protected speech in the U.S., and part of honest free expression, so based on those values, it's up to the Professor to accept it and not get his feelings hurt as it is not a violent threat.
The problem is that the right wing doesn't want transgender people to have equal rights. If they were true conservatives, and said, we don't agree with your ideas, but you can have equal rights, then these PSU people could not pretend that the conversation is harmful, because they could not tie denying the ideas to denying the people. And for proof that they don't want trans people to have rights, look at what happens when they add trans in any form to protected civil rights categories.
This format is amazing, Mr. Boghossian. Never stop.
Also.
I'm so happy that you agree with me that The Batman was a giant hot mess of a film. I feel so alone in this sentiment.
Love your conversations! Don’t ever stop!!
Thanks for coming back to PSU, Peter! Hopefully our paths cross again down the road.
Thanks for being based, from a student at WSU (Washington state :) )
Obviously these men could make better formulated arguments if they had more time to think it through and prepare but I'm impressed by how well they did under the pressure of a camera and it being in public.
And all these years I thought it was Portland Lunatic Asylum ,this confirms that. Mind you in the UK we have our own Oxford and Cambridge. Credit to the Gentleman's immense patience.🤪🤗
Well presented and meaningful debate, really learned a lot from it!!!
“I got my beliefs about gender from Google.” Wow if that’s not GenZ in a nutshell… 💀
“I got my beliefs about gender from some old man in a funny hat waving around a 3000 year old book written by sand dwelling barbarians.”
-You in a nutshell.
Lucky Google didn’t exist when I was born.
At least he was being honest, speaking intelligently, and not insulting anybody or their views.
And where do you all get your beliefs from?
@@wtsherman3080 👌😂
I really enjoy these experiments, nobody yelling and the host is neutral, both sides actually agree to what would help us come to conclusion
Thanks.
Why don’t educations incorporate these exercises in their classrooms? Answer: the goal is neither to help students think nor to challenge their ideas, it’s to promote particular moral conclusions.
@@drpeterboghossian I completely agree, it’s as if they won’t be satisfied until
We are at war with each other in these very streets.
One of the most civilized conversations I have heard on this topic! I wish more of the interactions had such exchanges, with such respectful gentleman/ladies ,and not the yelling and talking over other people's conversation and personally starting to verbally attack the ones not on the side of your beliefs.
I love the gentlemen who participated in this collegial discussion
Really great to see the positive side of this whole event, people calmly discussing without letting their feelings run amok.
Loving the street stuff, Dr Boghossian
The girl flipping you off is exactly what's wrong with society these days. How are people supposed to come together, to understand, if conversation can't even be had? Shutting down conversation like that and immediately saying its harmful is what's dangerous. It's all about trying to control other people's thoughts and views.
This one is so much more civil than the one where the ladies came down
they were like a bunch of mad chickens.
"With the destruction of language comes (basically) the destruction of humanity. Unless we are able to express ourselves with our language, we cannot be creative, thinking people. When society limits our language, they limit our thoughts, as well as our actions."
Wow really interesting to watch the other video of the confrontation with the people from the roof top first and then this video. It is so crazy to see the two parallels.
Great discussion. As an older gentleman who is open to new ideas and any debate, I still can't comprehend the concept that "words are weapons". Or that someone can be traumatized by, and therefor requires protection from ideas. I fear no debate. I fear no ideas. I am not "phobic" in any arena, or in the face of any individual. The knife gets sharpened by rubbing up against something harder than itself. Challenges that unsettle us, ideas that upset us, as well as repeated failures is the only way that we truly learn. "Whilst a person rests on the cushion of advantage, they go to sleep. It is not until we are pricked and sorely assaulted, that we are put on our wits and have the opportunity to learn something about ourselves." - Ralph Waldo Emerson. These words are likely never taught in these institutions. Even though they are from an American literary giant. I guess he is considered too "toxic". God help us. Let me give a life preview to those still coddled in a cotton batten lined Campus. Life in the real world is cruel, harsh and unfair. If you don't develop a layer of toughness and resilience, you won't find happiness or contentment ever. You will just become bitter arguing how things "should be". Current campus life churns out students who are like gossamer entering into a hailstorm. If/when I come across such an individual in the business world as a competitor, you BETTER be tougher than that, otherwise I will verbally destroy you with ideas you cannot bear, then eat your lunch. Every time. Bitter tears don't pay the mortgage. Gender will play no role in the outcome, therefor is irrelevant to me. If ideas harm you, you choose to be a guppy in a world of sharks.
Thinking is fun. Difficult conversations are fun. Hearing and learning from the perspectives of others is fun. These videos are fun!
This is a great genius game. Glad you are doing these.
Thank you. We’re also trying experimental Street Epistemology. We hope to do a series of videos on this in January 2023.
You have an incredible talent Peter. Being able to encourage people to discuss and engage with very controversial topics. You manage to do this without making people feel judged, or like you have an agenda. Quite a gift! Love your street epistemology.
Love all the guys who participated, gives me hope. They freely make speech and respect each other, being open minded. The bullies up on the roof are just rude and that I would pray never met or run into them.
Loving the street epistemology.
They say we harm them by not using their pronouns.
They harm us by trying to get us to use their pronouns.
Good point
@@ludeman How is that a good point? If someone asks me to call them by female pronouns, who is that hurting?
@@okayjay997 You have pretty bad reading comprehension if you don't know who's being hurt.
I don't know how changing one syllable is harming you but thank you for using gender neutral pronouns 4 times in 2 sentences.
@@DuncanHarbison Dude, I used "they" and "them" as actual plural words.
The modern definition of Gender sounds an awful lot like what we know as personality.
Discussion "isn't welcome" at a school? We need to stop this. Discussion is valuable no matter what the issue. It's how you learn. And NO, I don't need to agree with everything Peter Boghossian has to say just cause I think we should be able to talk.
This is great. I attend Portland State University and I enjoyed understanding different perspectives.
Great thought exercise!
Candidly though it’s a sanity test.
Dictionaries have literally added/changed original definitions. If you look up "phobia" it no longer means fear alone. They've added "hate" or aversion to phobia.
That's why I bought a 30-year-old dictionary for my children's proper education. Words do shift organically over time, but we are experiencing something akin to a Maoist cultural revolution of social engineering. It's malignant.
“The way I understood it, at least until I got to collage…”
That says it all!
"you're doing harm with your conversation."
That statement is sort of like if you took my hand and started slapping yourself in your face. Then you blame me for the harm. You not only allowed the harm, you forced the harm by allowing words to hurt yourself. The hand was not hurting anyone. You flogged yourself and then blamed me.
LoL beautiful LoL answers 😂, I love that answer ‼️ It like a bully is controlling victim's hand while slapping victim's face and bully say stop hurting bully's face . Or why are you still hurting yourself ? I think 🤔 that's how it goes?
I really don't understand Bully anyway.
One day, some people decided to say that gender was totally different to sex and that they wanted to repurpose the word to just be how you express yourself. But then if gender isn't tied to bathrooms, drivers licenses, pronouns etc. then it is meaningless. However, those things were only associated with gender when gender meant sex.
You can't slip out in the night, wanting to be on your own and then come back for the furniture a week later.
They are trying to put Delusional/Mentally Ill thoughts into the Main Stream, when back before the 1980's people who Identified as 'God' would locked away in an Insane Asylum, now we have People 'Identifying' as the Opposite Sex, Animals, even Mythical Creatures are free to roam around and push their Delusion upon others and if you don't 'Conform' there is the possibility that you could get Civilly Sued...like the 3 Middle School boys, in Wisconsin, that are being sued for Sexual Harassment cause they didn't use another Students Proper 'Pronouns'.
But gender is tied to bathrooms and pronouns.
My favorite thing about this video was the temperment of everyone involved in the actual experiment. There was no fighting, arguing, just people openly letting others know where they stand, literally and why. No calling them names trying to scare them into changing their opinions either. I believe talking is important, because one day you could discover someone with a solution for what pains people. Screaming people down in any direction doesn't solve what the problem is... I think the discord in these issues is the fact everyone wants to matter, and rather than trying to work together to figure out how to do that without stepping over someone else's feelings-- is where people are struggling because everyone has to meet half way. I honestly think that being different is a beautiful thing, to be unique and own it. I personally feel like there should be, 'Male', 'Female' and 'Other'. Then just let everyone be happy, give everyone their own spaces and lead with love-- but I don't know if what the answer is. Maybe one day someone will. :)
It's nice to see this format done with honesty and not for antagonizing content
Good stuff. Common sense conversation.
I am so heartened by your work Dr Boghossian..💙 from Portland Oregon!
"I just watched the new Batman movie, there was a whole thing about that. It was a terrible movie." As Mr. Spock would say, that's pretty fucking logical.
A great strategy to get people to discuss all sides of the argument without resorting to insults. Interesting response from the ppl opposed to the activity. Saying the question itself makes them feel 'unsafe'. Surely that is because their argument is 'unsafe' and will crumble if discussed using logic.
"Google."
"Ok that's cool" (dies inside)
Upon hearing there are only two genders, "We felt a great disturbance on the Portland State University campus, as if thousands of liberal voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced."-PSU Board of Trustees.
LOL...totally underrated comment...let me help you with a small like... :DDDDDDDDD
@@dimercamparini Thank you kindly, every little bit helps👍
This was a good watch calm collective. Anyone to be aggressive to those guys directly would have looked like fools. Good conversation 👌
Somehow, Peter, you were able to find the only 2 sane, rational, normal, intelligent individuals on the PSU campus, and possibly all of Portlandia.
Listening to younger people who show awareness that this is a nuanced topic is wonderful - sex, gender & language subtleties. There is hope. Just had a memory of Ann Oakley's "Sex, Gender and Society" (1960s? 1970?). Sits on my bookshelf to this day. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. Science Biology grad.1974,
Not really complicated. There’s only two genders. Feelings don’t change that..
Gender was coined by John Money. It’s all a crock of shit, and if there was anyone deserving of being made into a lampshade, it would have been him.
@@TheeKingToad Indeed. It has nothing to do with feelings, rather more recent and more advanced research in psychology, anthropology, and biology.
@@Jacob-sl6ur they are going off how they feel.. their personality.. their are only 2 genders and its science/biology.. how you feel your personality is is a different thing. Male and female isnt a personality.. why cant they just be what they feel like without changing sex?
This is absolutely genius. It is a unbiased discussion simply making sense of the world we live in and really finding out what/how people think, not to mention highlighting just how difficult it is to change opinions, regardless of perspective.
I really like how you never know what Peter the host is his definitions. He is genuinely neutral in these demonstrations it’s not about him it’s about the thinking of the college students and how they are able to communicate define and debate. A great host you never know what side they are on. Unlike the presidential debates where the master of ceremonies were clearly Clearly for the Democratic side
Thought provoking. Everybody is valid in their opinion. It’s a matter of discussion to reach a conclusion.
I like that everyone quickly zeroed in on the answer: once you agree on a common definition, disagreement disappears, since (basically) everyone agrees on the facts involved. Meanwhile, people online have been flaming one another over this one mercilessly and relentlessly...
The definition, though, is the problem. We have clear definitions of sex and gender, but people have come along who dispute them and are advancing new definitions. The question, really, is whether we think these new definitions are good faith advances to our understanding of the world, or a political project to blur the boundaries between sex and gender so as to advance particular lifestyles and achieve rights or even favoritism for particular groups of people.
Really enjoyed the discussion. Need more of this and less of the people giving the finger.
I was born in St.Louis and moved to Israel when I was 4. Coming back to the states and will be moving to LA.
This is insane, these people are like a cult. Seems like these people are extremely delusional and scary.
This is INSANE… again… INSANE
Fantastic yet again, there is no harm or hurt here unless opening conversation has now become detrimental? Do people not see that shutting this down creates the authoritarian state that most despise? This exposes to a large group that is worldwide the asinine culture these people are cultivating. They are a great but hugely uncomfortable watch but Peter thank you so much that you don't edit these other screaming individuals out, if anything you are creating a historic record of the meteoric downfall or amazing success of society? I do not know the outcome, but the unknown does scare me.
The people willing to have a conversation are sane, the people on the top of building- not so much.
They prob shouldn't be allowed on the roof given the propensity per the social "wokers" to harm themselves.