I sometimes wonder if the sex realist feminists who want to recognize that men are men and women are women are conflicted about the biological realities of teenage girls and puberty. I think it's interesting because biology seems to say one thing regarding say a fifteen-year-old girl but the consensus in polite society and more importantly the law seems to be that that's a child and the child cannot consent, even if her body says different.
Yeah, it's not an easy issue by any stretch and it makes people uncomfortable. There's not really a consensus that I'm aware of on brain development, some people say 25 is when your brain is fully mature but that seems like it rests on pretty shaky ground. And if that is the case then we better hurry up and save all those 24-year-old women out there from themselves!
"The argument against colorblindness focuses on cultural and historical differences but fails to articulate why colorblindness shouldn’t at least be a goal to strive for in a future where such differences are less relevant and also fails to deal with the significant variance within groups."
There's also the Bayesian argument against colorblindness, but in the opposite direction. For instance, in favor of racial profiling, since behavior by a black person (such as arguing with the police, not obeying instructions, and/or reaching for something in their pocket and/or car) could be perceived as being more threatening than identical behavior by a white or Asian person, based on the prior probabilities of the person whom a cop is interacting with being a criminal.
In an extreme case, one can also, as Emil Kirkegaard apparently does, advocate against colorblindness and in favor of requiring less evidence to convict people from high-risk groups (relative to people from low-risk groups) of crimes in a court of law based on Bayesian logic. But I personally think that this is a terrible idea because I think that everyone deserves due process, though I am much more sympathetic to racial profiling by law enforcement.
"The differences between men and women with respect to sex on the other hand can be expected to persist and the difference in physical costs, i.e. potential for pregnancy vary much less among individual men and women."
That's certainly very true, but what if the risk of pregnancy is extremely low, such as if the male in question is already sterilized or (in the future) already gotten a Vasalgel injection done?
This is all so interesting to learn about.
Thanks! I agree, I find it fascinating. Happy to hear someone else enjoys the deep dive!
I sometimes wonder if the sex realist feminists who want to recognize that men are men and women are women are conflicted about the biological realities of teenage girls and puberty. I think it's interesting because biology seems to say one thing regarding say a fifteen-year-old girl but the consensus in polite society and more importantly the law seems to be that that's a child and the child cannot consent, even if her body says different.
Well, Yeah, one can argue that people's bodies are ready for reproduction and sex before their brains sometimes fully are.
Yeah, it's not an easy issue by any stretch and it makes people uncomfortable. There's not really a consensus that I'm aware of on brain development, some people say 25 is when your brain is fully mature but that seems like it rests on pretty shaky ground. And if that is the case then we better hurry up and save all those 24-year-old women out there from themselves!
"The argument against colorblindness focuses on cultural and historical differences but fails to articulate why colorblindness shouldn’t at least be a goal to strive for in a future where such differences are less relevant and also fails to deal with the significant variance within groups."
There's also the Bayesian argument against colorblindness, but in the opposite direction. For instance, in favor of racial profiling, since behavior by a black person (such as arguing with the police, not obeying instructions, and/or reaching for something in their pocket and/or car) could be perceived as being more threatening than identical behavior by a white or Asian person, based on the prior probabilities of the person whom a cop is interacting with being a criminal.
In an extreme case, one can also, as Emil Kirkegaard apparently does, advocate against colorblindness and in favor of requiring less evidence to convict people from high-risk groups (relative to people from low-risk groups) of crimes in a court of law based on Bayesian logic. But I personally think that this is a terrible idea because I think that everyone deserves due process, though I am much more sympathetic to racial profiling by law enforcement.
"The differences between men and women with respect to sex on the other hand can be expected to persist and the difference in physical costs, i.e. potential for pregnancy vary much less among individual men and women."
That's certainly very true, but what if the risk of pregnancy is extremely low, such as if the male in question is already sterilized or (in the future) already gotten a Vasalgel injection done?