Peter Boghossian

[TheCurrywurstPrion]

I found this fascinating video on Twitter. Philosopher Peter Boghossian was carrying out a thought experiment around the statement “There are only two genders” in the street outside the social work department of Portland University.

A group of people come out to challenge him. Watch what happens when it comes to the point that they cannot challenge him further and realise to continue means they will actually have to engage.

What was interesting is that they never asked what his opinion was. They made assumptions (probably accurate tbf) based on his appearance. He could have totally believed in gender woo and be using his scale to persuade others to believe, they don't actually know.

Interesting point. There are many men of a certain age who are fully signed up to gender identity. Top few that come without thinking. Would the people talking to PB have made the same assumptions based on their appearance?

Jon Ronson
PZ Myers
Dave Gorski
Steve Novella
Robin Ince
Craig Murray

Too many to name in the UK's captured institutions.

To be fair to them, their assumption is correct. Because no one who believes it would ever question it, certainly not openly, even if that questioning is of others for a thought experiment. None of those men you list would.

They see open, brazen questioning and they know they have an apostate in their midst. Because a true believer would never ask such a question of themselves or others.

To them, the act of being there with that sign is indication enough he’s not a believer. His appearance and age are the reasons why.

To be honest, I can’t get that worked up about young people saying stupid things. I was certainly guilty of it myself at one time, only to find myself on the receiving end (maybe from some of you even!) in the 90s. What goes around comes around. What I find far more alarming - and this, although I might be wrong - is what feels new, is to see universities endorsing and elevating the nonsense.

FFS twitter.com/Paris2Ivy/status/1525552513595756544?t=tvmboZrAzLnyp-Es7gcZ4g&s=19

Really excellent points, thank you.

The whole being "triggered" stuff reminds me of primary school where if one child swore there would be a "um we're telling teacher you swore".

is what feels new, is to see universities endorsing and elevating the nonsense.

Yes @Floisme you're correct. Those of us who've been disciplined, or complained about over this matter, have felt this. Most of us are anonymous because we're told by our universities that we cannot speak publicly while things are under investigation. So there are the really important public cases, but behind those are probably hundreds of women academics (in a profession where women are in the minority & where there's still a significant sex pay gap of up to 20%) who've been touched in some way by this issue.

Thinking of triggering - I work at a university that is one of many which tends to use 'gender' instead of 'sex' in various equality & diversity matters. So contravening good practice re protected characteristics. THere's a particular issue which I know I should do something about, but after facing a disciplinary re transphobia, I just can't. I'm a total coward - I just don't have the emotional capacity to go through it all again. My brain just goes into panic mode and says "I can't" - and I'm not someone who usually steps away from a challenge. That's a kind of triggering ...

@AuxArmesCitoyens that twitter thread, including this gem:

'We are a space of inclusivity and it is DISGUSTING that this is being allowed not only by campus but YouTube'

Not many of the replies seem to be supportive.

Thanks for your kind words @ExMachinaDeus. I'm sorry to hear you were assaulted - that sounds very frightening.
This thread has been thought provoking. While no-one has the right to dictate to anyone how they heal from distress or trauma, viewing signs at university is not trauma. Now I've thought about it, it's a powerful argument that the experience and language of trauma has been stolen and weaponised- its just like cultural appropriation.

I find his approach fascinating. Not perfect but definitely interesting. 40 mins

Where to start when discussing the two main TRAs in this vid?

HEATED Exchange: Trans Women in Women's Sports

Transphobia is a pastrami sandwich!

I watched the sport one. Two of them were so aggressive and rude and obviously had no idea who Peter was. As soon as anyone questioned the advantages of being male it was name calling and abuse. It was interesting though that the woman who actively participated in sport was well aware of the issues. I’ve seen several older trans people on twitter (who have or still participate in sport) who totally understand the issues.

I watched this last night but didn't get round to posting it. Might be worth its own thread?

It was interesting to watch the TRAs get more and more agitated as their points were questioned. And the name calling etc. And the 'Oh, only top ten, so not a leading gender scholar, then' [you liar]

Also notable that the lacrosse playing girl said she was open to changing her position, but the TRAs said when asked that NOTHING would make them reconsider their position.

Absolutely this. They'll only learn the importance of biology when they discover the limitations it places on their lives.

Also notable that the lacrosse playing girl said she was open to changing her position, but the TRAs said when asked that NOTHING would make them reconsider their position.

Which I think is the whole point of standing on the lines. Anyone standing on any line who says nothing would ever make them change their mind automatically looks foolish.

Add in the words-mean-what-i-want-them-to argument, or accusations of other people not listening and they look hypocritical as well.

In the first video, the number of pejoratives they made out of his identity.
They accused him of being
White
Male
Old

Used 'Boomer!' For goodness sake.

How is it acceptable to judge people for being white, male and over 60?

Don't get me wrong, I understand that a room full of white grey haired men has no business controlling decision making about diversity.

You can't use someone's identity as an insult though, and expect them to respect your identity.

He has more patience with people regurgitating spurious nonsense than I would have, which is to his credit.

Michael Phelps has webbed toes now?!

And a black woman with XXXY was banned from track and field?! Do they mean Semenya?!

Standard playbook: lie and abuse when confronted with truth.

thanks for posting the sports video. That is another good vid by him.

He doesn’t need to say anything apart from facilitating the discussion, does he?

And even then the aggression in those two towards dismissing him personally is very clear. Because they don’t want anyone to have the conversation because it is clear they are immovable in their opinion. So they will continue to twist it to ‘you are not the right person’ even though he has been incredibly patient and respectful.

They understand they are the intolerant ones. I perceive their aggression as discomfort. One even got close to the truth, they would not move lines because then they would be considered transphobic.

I mean, they couldn’t calm the dissonance loophole they created by stating that words have definition and transphobia could never be a pastrami sandwich when he mentioned the words ‘woman’ and ‘man’.

Enlightening as it is, I believe that attempts will go back to full force to uphold ‘no debate’ again.

I'm not sure if I'm glad to have seen either of those videos. I'm experiencing some rather anti-feminist feelings about some of those young women but it's quite difficult to channel the spirit of Andrea Dworkin in the face of such maddening, illogical, self defeating unpleasantness.

I am consoled by the fact the internet is forever.

This is a really interesting thread, and yes that was painful to watch.

I find myself, probably like others, going from scorn, to frustration, to real concern.

What the hell are they so frightened of?

And who is responsible for making them so?

Trying to shut him down every pass. And being aware enough to be be fearful of how they are coming across. Twice, at least, he told them they were being filmed, because he wanted to warn them.

He invited them, over and over, to participate, and they refused. Asking if he had a support person there for the hypothetical individual who was to be triggered, was another way of trying to make him stop talking. "Look what will happen if you continue. Are you prepared for these consequences?"

And when a non-binary person did actually show up, they didn't show how much concern, did they? Perhaps because she all but told them she wasn't like them, those silly stereotypical girly girls. I didn't see them rushing to hug her, or cover her ears lest she hear something triggering. In fact they went ahead and misgendered her, whilst they were actually telling him not to!

It's all performative.

And it's a tangled mess of fear.

Everything in the book they could throw to shut him down. It's triggering, he's white, he's male, he's old, he doesn't understand, there will be consequences, he's in the wrong place.

And he hadn't actually said a single damn thing. He'd written a sentence on a board, which he offered to change into a question.

He didn't come anywhere near to saying anything they could actually level at him. And they all fucked off pretty sharpish, before he could even start.

I'm sure he knew exactly what he was doing, when he decided to plant himself outside that building.

It was definitely an experiment. I'm sure it couldn't have gone better for him. But I hope he understands that it's coming from a place of fear.

Those young people looked like nice, decent students. Nothing remarkable about them, whatsoever.

I hope he's as concerned as I am.

What he's doing is simply philosophical enquiry, thinking about what makes a statement true, what could disprove it and why. With such basic things as defining your terms to begin with so everyone can understand what everyone else is talking about. It's not, or shouldn't be, controversial. Even for very strong statements that the near majority would support/reject, because if you are confident in your position (either on the Strongly Agree/Strongly Disagree lines in his set up), you should be able to be very clear what reasoning and evidence has put you there.

But these young students... wow. They are enraged by the concept of the discussion itself, and then even more upset when their lack of reasoning and evidence is questioned. I bet they would have been less upset if his statement was "women should not be entitled to vote" or similar.

In both videos, they cannot possibly entertain the idea that he is doing it as part of philosophical enquiry. To both sets of students, the only reason he could even ask the questions is if he’s transphobic and stirring up hate. It’s like they’ve never heard of even playing Devil’s advocate to challenge the opinion, and he doesn’t even do that. To them, enquiry is transphobic. I’m glad he blurred their faces out. I’m embarrassed on their behalf.

Isn't that something of a meme for them? They'll say that someone is saying "I'm just asking questions" - the assertion being that it's all in bad faith. Similar to the "won't someone think of the children!?" meme.

The only functional purpose of those is to basically suggest that "asking questions" or "thinking of the children" is inherently bad.

And who benefits from that, exactly?