andros_rex

Are you a creationist? What are your views on natural selection?

Using two creationist sources and then finally resorting to science.org is pretty sus

No one has denied that Darwin held racist or sexist views.

Yes - great progress in learning how to critically evaluate your sources! Science.org is a great source compared to “Evolution News” (creationist blog) or “World: Sound journalism, grounded in facts and biblical truth.”

No one has denied that Darwin held racist or sexist views. Everyone is aware that he was a 19th century Englishman who held many of the problematic views that 19th century Englishmen had.

Darwin offered refutation of natural selection as the process differentiating races, noting that traits used to characterize them appeared nonfunctional relative to capacity for success. As a scientist this should have given him pause, yet he still, baselessly, asserted evolutionary differences between races.

You might notice here, that Darwin noticed the science was not favoring his racist views. That’s way that maliciously quoted passage from Descent is so muddied - he is trying to reconcile his understanding (and the predominant understanding) with what the science says.

For sexism - Descent heavily emphasized the fact that female sexual selection is a major drive of natural selection. This is profoundly less sexist than contemporary natural philosophers understanding of reproduction.

I’m not even sure what argument you are trying to make any more. You seem to be a crypto creationist parroting bad faith arguments that were worn out on Usenet back when our worst fears were the Y2K bug.

Yes, when you read cherry picked quotes from creationist websites, you are going to get a very warped view of evolution and Darwin. I would suggest in the future reading primary sources directly (both Origin of Species and The Descent of Man are freely available in the public domain - Origin is going to be way easier for you to read). You always want to critically evaluate your secondary sources for bias and accuracy.

Another thing to be aware of us that language use changes over time. “THE PRESERVATION OF FAVOURED RACES IN THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE” is basically a summary of natural selection - “favored”/selected for species survive, other species die.

I am curious where your claim that Darwin “had a passion for misoginy[sic]” originates from as well. That would imply some unusually intense or abnormal sexist thoughts compared to Darwin’s contemporaries?

And yes - evolution has been used to justify the pseudo science of Social Darwinism and scientific racism, just as quantum physics has been used to justify the pseudo science of reiki and energy healing. But Schrödinger is not responsible for Deepak Chopra.

Civilized is the word which was used for White. Savage is the word which was used for non white. >There is no real way to spin this.

I know this is a tough passage to read, but no. That’s not what these words mean here. And again - “exterminate” is not referring to conquest.

You are a crypto creationist aren’t you?

I’m genuinely surprised to see creationist apologia on Lemmy. Here’s another article from the same website:

“When Christians Embrace Scientific Materialism”

West explains that “Stockholm syndrome” refers to the tendency of a victim to bond with or sympathize with his or her captor. West uses this phenomenon to describe the damage some influential Christians do when they decide to reject historical biblical teaching in favor of scientific materialism. One symptom of Stockholm Syndrome Christianity in science is a diminished role for God in Creation. As Exhibit A for this symptom, West chooses Francis Collins, arguably the most celebrated evangelical Christian scientist in America. Collins, who rose to fame through his work on the Human Genome Project and his bestselling book The Language of God, is admired by Christian leaders and laypeople alike as an exemplary model of a faithful Christian in science. But West contends that Collins’s model for integrating faith and science is deeply flawed. From failing to challenge the secular establishment in the areas of abortion and sexuality as head of the National Institutes of Health to a years-long quest to marginalize and attack Christian scientists and scholars skeptical of Darwinian evolution, West explains how Collins has fallen prey to Stockholm Syndrome Christianity. West also describes modern theistic evolution, the flawed theological perspective that has inspired many of Collins’s scientific positions.

It might not surprise you then that that Darwin quote is taken dishonestly out of context:

But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked (18. 'Anthropological Review,' April 1867, p. 236.), will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

With respect to the absence of fossil remains, serving to connect man with his ape-like progenitors, no one will lay much stress on this fact who reads Sir C. Lyell's discussion (19. 'Elements of Geology,' 1865, pp. 583- 585. 'Antiquity of Man,' 1863, p. 145.), where he shews that in all the vertebrate classes the discovery of fossil remains has been a very slow and fortuitous process. Nor should it be forgotten that those regions which are the most likely to afford remains connecting man with some extinct ape- like creature, have not as yet been searched by geologists.

Eg, he’s talking about the elimination of a taxonomic distinction not violence or subjugation.

At this point, I’m not sure if you are being intellectually honest or if this is a weird crypto creationist propaganda thing.

“Favored Races” does not mean “white people.” “Favored races” = “selected species.”

This reminds me of weird creationist canards. Darwin is not responsible for social Darwinism, and distanced himself from it. He was talking about finches and tortoises.

That’s not talking about Darwin’s views though, that’s talking about how scientific racism adapted and distorted Darwinism.

Darwin was against slavery and connected to several abolitionists. Darwin never really promoted social Darwinism, and his writings point out how human society does take care of its weak/those who would not otherwise survive.

Slavery, although in some ways beneficial during ancient times, is a great crime; yet it was not so regarded until quite recently, even by the most civilized nations. And this was especially the case, because the slaves belonged in general to a race different from that of their masters. As barbarians do not regard the opinion of their women, wives are commonly treated like slaves.

Like these are not the words of an evil sexist pro slavery eugenicist. I would not argue that Darwin wasn’t sexist or racist at all - it’s the 1800s, they all are - but Darwin is not responsible for eugenics/social Darwinism.

This is a huge problem, the stats are way worse for nurses as I recall. Even some textbooks still claim that black people have higher pain tolerance and need less medication. Black people are denied opioids and treated as “drug seeking” far more than white patients. They can have problems accessing treatment for opioid use disorders too.

In 2021, maternal mortality rates for black women were about 2.6 that of non Hispanic white women. Its not hard to see why.

Salmiak licorice. It’s not a treat for everyday, but sometimes that weird bitter salty combo slaps.

Belgian ales, and German beers that follow the purity laws.

A couple months out. They put me on a female ward (I’m trans, but legally changed my sex to male more than ten years ago). I was physically assaulted by staff and aggressively misgendered. I also got fired from my job, so now have no insurance to pay for outpatient care if it even exists. (Already forced to pay cash for my LPC anyway - none of them take insurance here)

When I was in college, I attempted because I was broke and about to be homeless. That invol hold I paid for with sex work afterwards. I didn’t get assaulted or misgendered then, I just got to watch the staff and other clients bully an elderly man with dementia. His screams don’t go away.

When I was a teenager, my mom would Google up different obscure mental health conditions in WebMD and read the symptoms lists to whatever inpatient/partial inpatient/therapist would listen. I got medicated for obscure genetic disorders and even paranoid schizophrenia (as a pre teen!)

Nothing I have seen of this field seems to work.

There are like less than a dozen trans athletes in the NCAA. Probably not even a hundred trans high school athletes.

It has nothing to do with enjoying women’s sports. You don’t see these people posting things celebrating women’s sports - just outrage bait over Lia Thomas. (I would have no idea who she was if Facebook didn’t regularly spam me with photoshopped pictures of her and horrific 1000+ comment threads)

And if he’s dismantling DOE, I bet Title 9 becomes a thing of the past. We have to force schools to support girls athletics. There are regulations such that you have to have equity - eg, you either have to have a boys and a girls football team, or offer some sort of alternative sport. Even as things are, your mediocre boys football team is going to have so much more cash and love pumped into it (cough small town southern states have a quiet epidemic of pedophile coaches, diddling is a-ok if you bring back championships - like this is a geniune Q-anon tier conspiracy involving superintendents and was being investigated by the federal government)

“Women’s sports” solely exist as a cudgel for these people.