SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
When uploaded to Netflix, an episode of the educational children's show "Bill Nye the Science Guy" cut out a segment saying that chromosomes determine one's gender.
[...] While noncontroversial at the time, the 1996 segment appears to contradict Netflix's new series "Bill Nye Saves the World."
The new show endorses a socially liberal understanding of gender, under which gender is defined by self-identification rather than genetics and there are more than just the two traditional genders.
People, people, people... Say it with me: The Internet Never Forgets.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Netflix Edits 'Bill Nye' Episode to Remove Segment Saying Chromosomes Determine Gender
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 250 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Could I have a drug overdose?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @10:36AM (24 children)
If they had edited an old show to remove the part that teaches kids that the Earth is flat, would you be equally up in arms? Unlike certain old books, science is not set in stone, the theories get updated whenever new information is discovered.
Chromosomes determining gender is a simplified view that just happens to be wrong often enough to be considered wrong. Chromosomes only signal what kind of gonads the body needs to build. These then produce hormones, which signal to the rest of the body how to grow. There are a lot of cases where this doesn't happen "as designed" - the gonads fails to produce the correct hormones, the body doesn't react to the hormones, even the chromosomes themselves can be defective (e.g. XXY) or there can be multiple sets (XX and XY). And to make it even more complicated, different body parts are formed at different times, so it can even work "as designed" when one part is forming, but not when a different part is forming. A well known example is that the genitalia form at a different time than the brain, and differences in hormones between these times can result in female genitalia with a male brain or vice versa.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 05 2017, @10:58AM (10 children)
Sorry, Gender Studies professors are not scientists; they are political activists. Biologists still regard sex and gender as the same thing.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by NotSanguine on Friday May 05 2017, @11:36AM (9 children)
Biologists still regard sex and gender as the same thing.
You're conflating your views with science. This is what scientists say:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150213112317.htm [sciencedaily.com]
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/ [scientificamerican.com]
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/biology-gender-identity-children/ [pbs.org]
people.kzoo.edu/ggregg/biolgend.ppt
That was just a quick google search. I'm sure we could find much, much more if we tried.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 05 2017, @01:16PM (6 children)
Sorry, if you're both specifically studying people who misuse the term "gender" and going along with it yourself in scientific papers, you are either an SJW yourself or a very poor scientist. Words have meanings and in science precision is necessary. Think up a new word if you like but you can't have this one.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday May 05 2017, @02:10PM (5 children)
Brain scans are brain scans, Buzzard. They don't have political opinions.
I shared those links (as I mentioned in another post) so that you, if you like, can learn more about the science.
That's it. Carry on.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 05 2017, @02:47PM (4 children)
Brain scans have nothing to do with you lot trying to redefine a word.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday May 05 2017, @02:55PM (2 children)
Brain scans have nothing to do with you lot trying to redefine a word.
You're attempting to argue with the wrong person, Buzzard. I have no skin in this game.
Perhaps you can get a rise out of these guys. [transequality.org]
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday May 05 2017, @02:58PM (1 child)
It's not those with skin in the game trying to redefine a word, for the most part. It's their cheerleaders and wannabes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 06 2017, @04:04PM
I'll bite! Your an ignorant blowhard who likes to pretend he's smart. Your only enjoyment in life seems to be spreading misinformation, bad opinions, and trolling people online. Clearly you need to improve your life, travel more, and maybe finish / goto college and learn something outside your comfort zone. You are a troglodyte trying to wear a wizard's cap and you just look like a fool.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday May 05 2017, @02:55PM
Brain scans have nothing to do with you lot trying to redefine a word.
You're attempting to argue with the wrong person, Buzzard. I have no skin in this game.
Perhaps you can get a rise out of these guys. [transequality.org]
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @02:01PM
And - the faggotry keeps trolling along!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @04:51PM
A lot of the published material in this field is 1 part science to 99 parts correlation != causation. Your brain is not an independent entity. It can and does experience great change through our own actions. A good example here is chess players. Brain scans have shown that masters and amateur chess players invariably use entirely different areas of the brain when looking at a position. However, this phenomena does not exist before training. In other words - the brains of masters were the same as the brains of amateurs prior to becoming masters. So seeing somebody's brain exhibiting a different response to various stimuli does not say much, in and of itself. The next step is the problem. There is no next step for most of these social science studies. They're just in a rush to publish rubbish and look for a vague correlation that can be spun into a hypothetical causality and send it off to anybody who will have them for publishing.
(Score: 2) by marcello_dl on Friday May 05 2017, @12:09PM (4 children)
Nobody among who argues the earth is flat has been able to disprove all objections. Why does the sun wobble according to seasons and in complete geometrical consistency with a spherical earth? where is the map of the spherical earth that accounts for real world observations? Here we have a different situation. First you explain beyond all doubts why guevedoce kids behave as males, when they are raised as females and possess female genitalia, then you can make your objection. And No, you should not edit out the segment anyway.
DAMMIT, people. YOUR BRAIN must be the fake news detector, not THE SYSTEM. Anybody who argues the truth must come from the ones in power is worse than the punks raising their left or right arm to the dictatorial ideology of choice. At least they are explicitly sheep.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @01:57PM (1 child)
Nobody among who argues the earth is flat has been able to disprove all objections.
And nobody who argues "chromosomes" has been able to disprove the existence of intersex and transgender people. In fact, they don't even try, they just label anyone presenting arguments "SJW" and ignores any claims brought by any person they just labeled SJW.
(Score: 2) by marcello_dl on Tuesday May 09 2017, @05:33PM
> And nobody who argues "chromosomes" has been able to disprove the existence of intersex and transgender people.
which would be a non sequitur, so?
Chromosomes affect the mind. Ergo gender identification is not entirely, nor mainly, cultural. Nothing of this denies LGBT people.
Now if you consider sex for what it is, a differentiation useful for mating purposes, LGBT plus priests, incels, and whatever, are all abnormal. Does it mean I hate priesthood?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @02:14PM (1 child)
Indeed. Even in 2017, the flat earth society has members from all around the globe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @03:13PM
THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH
(Score: 2, Insightful) by mystik on Friday May 05 2017, @01:20PM (2 children)
This is the same type of action as editing or making unavailable old offensive cartoons. Keeping them available, in their original form, is an important historical artifact that speaks to social issues at the time. Having the original to compare to modern social positions is an important tool to observe the change of people over time.
Removing the record, or pretending something never happened is a dangerous action to take.
The advent of modern media gives us the ability to have an indelible record that is not corrupted by our fallible memories. How much of history has been forgotten, or re-painted in a positive light relative to the point in time it was recorded or retold?
The push for stronger copyright + DRM only worsens this problem :(
Why aren't you encrypting your mail?
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday May 05 2017, @06:17PM (1 child)
Removing the record, or pretending something never happened is a dangerous action to take.
While I agree with you on that point, is that really analogous to what's happening here? One service -- Netflix -- is no longer offering a streamed version that contains a specific passage. Is Netflix or anyone else arguing that all copies of the original should be summarily deleted or burned? Has there been an organized "burn the VCR tapes!!" action to eliminate all traces of the original Bill Nye version?
Since I see no such evidence of widespread destruction, I take this action as what it obviously is: EDITING. Books come out with new editions all the time. Words are changed. Elements are edited and updated. Passages are added or removed. Nobody views this as "censorship" or "pretending that something never happened" or whatever.
I'm not sure exactly why a filmed documentary show should be viewed differently from a book in this regard. This is a different edited version. Call it "director's cut" or "2017 edition" or whatever. We can argue (and obviously many are here arguing) about the necessity of or reasoning behind the change, but claiming this is some sort of destruction or rewriting of history is just BS. I'm sure when they taped the original series, they likely made all sorts of cuts of information too -- footage that ended up, as they say, "on the cutting room floor." Is it some sort of crime against history that those weren't included too? Why do we insist that there must be one "final edition" of a video program when we obviously don't insist for the same standard with other media, e.g., books?
Or... maybe is this really just about people miffed about Lucas and Star Wars cuts??
(Score: 1) by charon on Saturday May 06 2017, @01:09AM
Well, sometimes we do view this sort of thing in print as censorship: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/books/07huck.html [nytimes.com].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @01:59PM (1 child)
Failed faggotry. However many "genders" there are today, NONE OF THEM are "scientific". Queer, bent, twisted bitches decided that they aren't queer, bent, or twisted, so they must be something different. They make up a word, and that's a new gender.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday May 05 2017, @02:38PM
Failed faggotry. However many "genders" there are today, NONE OF THEM are "scientific". Queer, bent, twisted bitches decided that they aren't queer, bent, or twisted, so they must be something different. They make up a word, and that's a new gender.
Lighten up, Francis [youtube.com].
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @02:10PM (2 children)
> If they had edited an old show to remove the part that teaches kids that the Earth is flat, would you be equally up in arms?
Yes.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Friday May 05 2017, @06:09PM (1 child)
Liar.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 05 2017, @06:29PM
The Flat Earth Society FAQ [theflatearthsociety.org]