Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

OP posts:
SinnerBoy · 24/12/2023 02:50

Krampussy · 21/12/2023 21:11

Or just by looking at them.

Or, indeed, listening to their gushing, self-aggrandising "victory" speeches, in which they browbeat and harangue the audience with "facts" about how they haven't got any advantages over real women.

DworkinWasRight · 24/12/2023 07:13

catduckgoose · 24/12/2023 02:08

It’s obvious from this article that the researchers knew exactly what they were doing - so good for them.

BlackeyedSusan · 24/12/2023 08:01

MagpiePi · 21/12/2023 13:26

What has it come to when you need a scientific study to prove the bleeding obvious?
Next up, the defecation habits of bears in tree dominant eco systems, and, the religious preferences of popes?
🙄

Excellent use of words there! Thanks.

fabricstash · 24/12/2023 09:28

I know it seems ridiculous but papers need to use data to prove the ridiculous - such as non binary is bullshit

Twizzletoe · 24/12/2023 09:56

@DworkinWasRight i agree they have deliberately set out to demonstrate the obvious. In the paper they detail how they worked out the probability of a competitor being male - using a BINARY system of zero or one! They definitely know.

RoyalWhoDidYouSayNooneOfthatNameHereOfficer · 24/12/2023 13:04

Twizzletoe · 24/12/2023 09:56

@DworkinWasRight i agree they have deliberately set out to demonstrate the obvious. In the paper they detail how they worked out the probability of a competitor being male - using a BINARY system of zero or one! They definitely know.

And I note that one of the authors is Alice Sullivan, so that pretty much nails it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page