- Joined
- Oct 19, 2020
- Posts
- 3,011
- Reaction
- 1,293
- Points
- 1,014
If you watch and understand what happened to his research, the results actually suggest that gender is more innate than learned.i would agree to his work that gender is learned rather than innate but i don't agree that learning is involuntary (forced re-assignment of gender), i got units in professional education and learned some principles of learning which includes learning being voluntary and never involuntary, we cannot force anyone to learn but we can only motivate them to learn instead
yes your video suggest that gender has failed from being learned and that caused the failure of his idea about gender being learned instead of being innate, but i have my own interpretation of what happened and it is not the gender that has failed from being learned but it is the learning that never happened, he enforced learning through "nurture over nature" idea and that is very wrong, he was already correct that gender is learned but he did not understand what is learning, he thinks learning can be enforced, the gays are not gays out of the blue but they always have chosen it, there is always a decision coming from the individual and not just become as if they were not aware of it, they choose it and learn it voluntarily, it is always a decision instead of it being unintentionally possessedIf you watch and understand what happened to his research, the results actually suggest that gender is more innate than learned.
it only suggest but not prove it, it rather proved that learning cannot be enforced to any individualPero syempre, people nowadays will go with the idea that gender is learned, or a social construct, because that is the popular opinion, pero walang scientific backing yang idea na yan. And again, the experiment suggests the opposite.
How can you say that he is correct? Is this scientific or just a hunch? Again going back to the result of his research, it suggests that biology still contributes to the gender of a person.he was already correct that gender is learned but he did not understand what is learning,
Any science experiment in psychological matter can only go as far as "suggest", because there is no ethical way, and accurate way to prove this with any experiment. If in case i am wrong, meron bang preceding experiment on this study which actually proves "things"? Meron bang scientific proof that really proves what you believe in..it only suggest but not prove it, it rather proved that learning cannot be enforced to any individual
that's what it suggest to you because you believe that what happened is the correct test procedure to prove that gender is learned, for me it is not the appropriate test since it violates a very well established principle of "learning being always voluntary"How can you say that he is correct? Is this scientific or just a hunch? Again going back to the result of his research, it suggests that biology still contributes to the gender of a person.
same experiment will prove but this time it shouldn't involved forced learning, if only he let the subjects decide or find a subject that is willing to be sexually re-assigned then the subject would learn the mechanics of the newly assigned gender (voluntarily of course)meron bang preceding experiment on this study which actually proves "things"?
the sexual assault is part of his teaching process but it didn't work, teaching will only work if the students are willing to learn (motivated), that is why recently teachers are no longer trained to teach but trained to motivate and elicit new ideas from students instead of purely passing knowledge to themBesides, referring to the full story, we can gather na biased na ang hypothesis ng research ni John Money. Who is to say kung nabuo yang hypothesis nya out of his perverse tendency (he SA'd the subjects fyi) or not?
what do you mean push the idea of sexuality?And even if we refer it today, Tama bang i-push sa mga bata ang ideas on sexuality? Because at the end of the day, LGBTQ+ letters really define what gender role people prefer when it comes to sexual practices..
There is nothing scientific about this. You are only making assumption according to your belief.same experiment will prove but this time it shouldn't involved forced learning, if only he let the subjects decide or find a subject that is willing to be sexually re-assigned then the subject would learn the mechanics of the newly assigned gender (voluntarily of course)
i have neighbors whose sexual re-assignment occurred in the later part of their lives and i have observed it is the environment where they were exposed to that is motivating them to learn the basics of being sexually transformed
Who said that is what I believe in? Im just asking you how you end up believing this... meron ka bang scientific sources or any experiment na ma-cite? Or are you saying this because this is what you feel is right?that's what it suggest to you because you believe that what happened is the correct test procedure to prove that gender is learned
If in case you are not updated, some western countries in support of lgbtq movement introduce the ideologies of lgbtq movement in schools.... they would even allow drag queens to perform explicitly in the name of being accepting.what do you mean push the idea of sexuality?
ehehe i give you an example about de-throning of existing theories, the miasma theory was de-throned by the germ theory, so why are you saying there is nothing scientific?There is nothing scientific about this. You are only making assumption according to your belief.
hehe i am already stating a scientific theory by Horne and Pine (1990) that one principle of learning is that it is always activated by the learner and not by the teacherWho said that is what I believe in? Im just asking you how you end up believing this... meron ka bang scientific sources or any experiment na ma-cite? Or are you saying this because this is what you feel is right?
the fact that you said "their choice" is very well supporting my argument that gender can be learned by choosing to learn a particular genderAt best, hear say ng kapitbahay ang "proof" mo? Of course transitioned people will have beliefs to validate their choice... wether it is scientific or not.
how exactly they teach LGBTQ+ in class? did it require the students to be LGBTQ+? or still voluntary pa din naman yung pagiging LGBTQ+ nilaIf in case you are not updated, some western countries in support of lgbtq movement introduce the ideologies of lgbtq movement in schools.... they would even allow drag queens to perform explicitly in the name of being accepting.
yes of course, being aware is different from being forced to, just like se̾x education where we are made aware about se̾xBut yet again, LGBTQ+ is a definition of a peraons preference to whom they want to perform their bodily functions. Is it really the best interest of children to be introduced to these ideas?
Ok, whatever, kahit hindi kita magets. You are citing a study on learning, and that is a totally different topic - unless you already assumed unscientifically that being lgbtq+ is a learned trait.the fact that you said "their choice" is very well supporting my argument that gender can be learned by choosing to learn a particular gender
how exactly they teach LGBTQ+ in class? did it require the students to be LGBTQ+? or still voluntary pa din naman yung pagiging LGBTQ+ nila
the study i am citing is not even concerned about LGBTQ+ but money's experiment is very well under the scope of that study since the experiment involves teaching-learning process and not just LGBTQ+Ok, whatever, kahit hindi kita magets. You are citing a study on learning, and that is a totally different topic - unless you already assumed unscientifically that being lgbtq+ is a learned trait.
yes it is always a decision and you against it means you didn't decide to be boy? heheWhy do you keep saying "voluntary" as if this is a discussion of voluntary or involuntary ang pagiging lgbtq+?
in biology there is only male and female assigned at birth but gender is not biology, it is how we prefer to be identified in a given societyThis is a duscussion of if heterosexuality (normal 2 gender) is a social construct, or a function of biology.
they are talking about male and female as genders instead of the se̾xes at birthLbgtq+ movement claims that ther is no such thing as male and female genders because it is a "social construct".
if he tries to disprove that there is no such thing as preference to be identified as male or female then i would disagree and of course the experiment should fail thenJohn Money also believed that and the one who started the idea: but was failed by his experiment. If you dont get it yet, the goal was to prove that "normal" gender behaviors do not exist.
if it's about preference to be identified as male or female being non-existent then i would disagree since LGBTQ+ gender is not the only gender that can be chosen to learn, we also choose to be male or female, otherwise we all prefer to identify ourselves as LGBTQ+But despite failed experiments, lgbtq+ still uses the idea. Sana gets mo na.
It is not even about teaching and learning process.. and it is not about lgbtq+ even.involves teaching-learning process
in biology there is only male and female assigned at birth but gender is not biology, it is how we prefer to be identified in a given society
yes it is not about teaching-learning but it involves teaching-learning insteadIt is not even about teaching and learning process.. and it is not about lgbtq+ even.
yes you can interpret like it's the boy thing that dictates it but i can also interpret it as failure of enforcement/teaching of new genderPero his experiment actually pointed the other way, that gender has connections to biological sêx. The child did not know of the mishap on his *******. He was raised knowing he was a girl, pero his body still somehow want to behave like a boy.
that assignment is not random, it is based on the anatomy, but it doesn't mean that i cannot choose/prefer another gender when i come of ageYet, kahit meron tayong ganitong experiment in history, you still believe that gender "assigned at birth" is different from gender identity (note how the wordings already pressumes that gender is "assigned")
it is because the experiment you presented is conducted using another idea which is "nurture over nature" and the nurture part is obviously a teaching processIf you still dont get it by now, i am done. This is a discussion of the ideology of the movement. And not the nature of learning or teaching how to be lgbtq+.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?