You must log in or register to comment.
Wait until they learn about XXY, XYY, and XO individuals.
I swear I was learning about extra X and Y in high school 20 years ago and that studies (at the time) were showing correlation between different traits displayed by effected people. Just that alone shows incredible gender fluidity.
So where we are, 20 years later, you’d think we’d have a better understanding within society but instead somehow it’s literally regressed since then.
There hugs AND kisses people?
We prefer “asexual” or “ace”.
Confidently incorrect is the default with these people. I spend most of my time with family aggressively correcting misinformation about my field and related ones. They will die earlier thinking they know more because of Youtube. Getting them to stop taking bad health advice and mystery joint injections from a fucking chiropractor is the latest battle.
Just curious, is this chiro actually injecting something into their joints? Or is it like pretend injections, like with that magic gun thing that makes a click but doesn’t actually do anything?
The impression of legitimacy enjoyed by chiropractic is too damn high. I was well into my 20s before I ever heard a single word about it being pseudoscience. Walking around (usually on people’s fucking spines) calling themselves doctors, I absolutely believed it was just some sub-variety of physiotherapy, which I guess is the point. In the whole universe of alternative medicine, I think that has to be the practice which has most effectively disguised itself as conventional medicine. It’s gross.
The quackness of chiropractors depends on where you are, in many places it’s indeed just a type of physiotherapy, or better put you have to be a physio to be a chiropractor. Similarly, in practically all of the world osteopaths are quacks while in the US they’re doing evidence-based medicine with particular philosophical accents.
In Australia they are able to request some x-rays. As in the entire spine, which ends up irradiating radio-sensitive organs like the thyroid and ovaries, often in young people. As a radiographer this shit drives me up the fucking wall, especially given the already frustrating battles over inappropriate imaging requests from real, actual doctors. Want to know a contributing factor to the increase in cancers? The absolutely absurd radiation doses people are sucking up over years of over-imaging.
I was well into my 20s before I ever heard a single word about it being pseudoscience.
every fucking tv show and film referring to them as some sort of curer of back issues probably doesn’t help
And the regs are really bad in the country making all that TV.
The way chiropractic plays itself as the cure all for any ailment with regular “adjustments” is the real bullshit, it’s straight up a sales pitch to get people in a recurring schedule for that sweet appointment revenue. Don’t get me wrong, when I’ve thrown my back out the best and most immediate relief I’ve found is to have the guy super twist and crack my back loose just so I can get some mobility to stretch and walk. But the way they sell it as you need several appointments a week to stay “regular” is a crock of shit.
They provided me valuable placebo (I think). I still have no idea what my issue really was, but at least it’s gone. Never been back to a chiropractor since though.
I walked in to a chiropractors’ office once to try and see if they’d take me for an appointment, found a brochure proudly proclaiming that chiropractic treatments can help cure autism and cancer, and turned right the fuck around and walked back out.
If you think you need a chiropractor you actually need a physical therapist and anyone trying to tell you otherwise is lying to you.
One of my mates goes to a chiro. The rest of us detail for him how our problems were helped by physios and they were fixed, and stayed fixed, while he needs to see a chiro every 3 months for just exactly the same problems
He describes himself as an idiot, and I believe him. He still goes to a chiro.
Australia has high respect for chiropractic because the King likes them, and when he was a prince he was pretty influential too. No idea why it would be popular outside the Commonwealth
I guess I should count myself lucky for where I grew up: there’s a big/famous chiropractic school in this city, so this creepy motherfucker was on TV commercials all the time:
Never mind quackery; I thought it was legitimately some sort of cult!
I just don’t get how people don’t have the sense to run from someone who looks like that.
Oh you grew up near Atlanta. I, too, am a Sid Williams commercial survivor.
I find irony that they disregard expert opinions on the things they are experts for (climate scientists for example) but will accept an entire worldview of opinions based on someone being “smart” like the opinion of a software engineer has on philosophy or politics.
Reject the expert on the subject they’re an expert on because that makes them “elite” and they were trained to think that was bad, but accept an unfounded opinion of someone who may be smart in an unrelated field because the opinion is “different” so it must be “smart”
I think this is the trap all self assigned internet intellectuals fall into. They parrot opinions and vibes from echo chambers that discredit real science or real reporting and call it enlightenment. This in itself is stupid, but then even more stupid people are drawn in and suddenly we have a big club of geniuses
classism
Countries besides the US exist, y’know? Where getting a master’s degree does not require you to go into debt and you’re usually employed by the university as a TA while pursuing a PhD?
I was trolling/being facetious. I don’t live in the USA. But I can’t pursue a PhD because it amounts to below minimum wage.
Critically thinking now, how strong is the evidence here?
Those are two real medical diagnoses - Swyer syndrome or XY gonadal dysgenesis for XY women (occurs in about 1:100000 women) and de la Chapelle syndrome or XX male syndrome for XX men (occurs in about 1:20000 to 1:30000 men)
Here is a NORD report on Swyer syndrome, as well as the original article on de la Chapelle syndrome: 1.https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/swyer-syndrome/ 2.https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1762158/
A person’s biological sex usually refers to their status as female or male depending on their chromosomes, reproductive organs, and other characteristics. Chromosomes are tightly packed DNA, or molecules that contain the genetic instructions for the development and functioning of all living things. Humans typically have forty-six chromosomes. Two of those are sex chromosomes that contain instructions for the development and functioning of characteristics related to biological sex, such as reproductive organs. There are two kinds of human sex chromosomes, X and Y. Individuals identified as males tend to have one X and one Y chromosome, while those identified as females tend to have two X chromosomes. However, other people are born with other chromosome combinations, such as XXY, that lead them to develop a mix of characteristics. People who fit that description are often referred to as intersex, a category for people whose bodies do not conform with stereotypical expectations of males or females at birth.
Taken from here
Evidence seems pretty strong to me.
Yeah, and those are malformations and genetical defects that come with a lot of problems.
I don’t know why people glorify them… Also, there is absolutely no way that a man born with XY magically will change it in their lifetime as the posts sugests.
The post suggests that some people with XY chromosomes are assigned female at birth and will live as a woman.
And some people with XX chromosomes are assigned male at birth and will live as a man.
Not that the chromosomes change.This article seems to disagree. But I don’t know much on the subject so I might be misunderstanding.
Also, no matter what the correct answer is, pretending the answer is binary is definitely wrong. Since it’s obviously a lot more complicated.
From the article:
“Girls born with XY chromosomes are genetically boys but for a variety of reasons – mutations in genes that determine sexual development”
And again, they don’t magically become the other sex, that was already determined at birth.
No, not magically, no. You’re right.
Well, to be fair, not magically and not in any other way, it is impossible to change your sex
You’re the only one talking about this. A change can occur without any surgery. Reread the article to understand better, please.
You read the article and you even quoted it. It says how xx people can be men and how xy people can be women. Nobody said anything about any surgery or magic pill that grows a penis or whatever you’re imagining.
I think a lot of these XX XY “only two genders” people aren’t just dunning Kruger, they’re transphobic idiots with an agenda. So even if they had the science and knowledge it wouldn’t matter because they’re pushing their hateful stupid agenda, facts and logic be damned. They don’t care, they just want to rationalize hating us trans people because we make them uncomfy.
Exactly. They just don’t care. They’re not necessarily ignorant and participating in good faith.
They’re guaranteed to not be participating in good faith if they’re angrily debating sex and gender like that.
Tell us what the 3rd gender is please.
~95% of all animals in the world, including humans, are gonochoric, have only 2 sexes.
Turner syndrome and klinfelter syndrome are exatly that, syndromes
Those are classifications made by humans. Nature doesn’t have a concept for sexes and even less so for syndromes. If it became evolutionarily advantageous to have a dick and a vagina, nature would be onto that.
lmao, you’ve had multiple comments deleted for being bigoted
good job bigot
Gender is not sex. Have you ever, in good faith, talked to a trans person? Have you ever, in good faith, talked to an intersex person?
I keep hearing this. If gender is not sex than gender is not real, you can be whatever you want whenever you want, right?
Still, if a dudes is a dude it’s a he, if a woman is a woman it’s a she.
The only time I would actually bother ask someone what they like to be called is if they have an intersex condition. That’s it.
Have you ever, in good faith, talked to a trans person?
Yes, it was the exactly stereotypical “call me mam” hairy dude. Yeah, that’s never gonna happen. First time in my life I told someone to never talk with me and pretend I don’t exist. I don’t want to interact with these kind of lunatics.
Have you ever, in good faith, talked to an intersex person?
No but I would love too, that seems genuinely interesting. I’d have so many questions to ask
If gender is not sex than gender is not real, you can be whatever you want whenever you want, right?
How does “you can chose” make something not real? Also, it doesn’t appear to be a conscious effort to be trans. Do you really think trans people go through all that just for the fun of it?
Still, if a dudes is a dude it’s a he, if a woman is a woman it’s a she.
And if a women is not a woman and starts HRT and everything, he’s a dude. You’re exactly right!
The only time I would actually bother ask someone what they like to be called is if they have an intersex condition. That’s it.
Can you tell that just by looking at people?
Yes, it was the exactly stereotypical “call me mam” hairy dude.
What if it was someone who visually fit in your expectation? Would you treat them with basic respect? Can you tell me the sex of each of those people?
No but I would love too, that seems genuinely interesting. I’d have so many questions to ask
Wouldn’t it be interesting to talk to a trans person, too? Understand their perspective? Maybe you already met someone intersex but called them slurs and walked off because you thought they might be trans.
Your baseless hate for trans people only brings evil into this world. Maybe try giving people a chance. We’re all human.
Do you really think trans people go through all that just for the fun of it? I honestly think they have mental problems that won’t be solved by mutilating themselves. It’s not me to make that decision for them and it’s their body but I try to keep myself as far away as possible.
And if a women is not a woman and starts HRT and everything, he’s a dude.
What do you mean a woman is not a woman?
Can you tell that just by looking at people?
Most likely not, but by interacting with people, yes.
Can you tell me the sex of each of those people?
Only from faces? Most likely not. First pic looks like a woman, second like a man, 3rd pic that dude might be a woman, 4th the dude is a woman and 5th I have no damn idea
called them slurs
I don’t call people slurs mate, I just avoid interaction.
I would honestly be very surprised if any Republican politicians actually care about sex or gender. I think they’re just evil and those are convenient issues to divide the working class. When you don’t have popular policy in real issues, you need to make up some fake ones to get people to still support you.
What really bothers me is that they seem to be winning on the “Trans Sports” issues which sucks, it’s such a blatant distraction that I’d let them just “have that”, but… you know damn well that’s the floor and not the ceiling, and even then their wins are based on lies.
There are less trans athletes in the world then there are kids with measles in Texas, but the Right would have you believe ever Macho Man Randy Savage type is getting into sports and just blowing records clean away. Hence the push to “Ban transwomen and revoke their records”
What records? Even Lia Thomas, the closest they’ve gotten to finding an “Evil Cheating Trans!!1111” only came in 4th place…
The current moral panic about queer people is definitely manufactured, but the hatred that it’s stirred up is still real. All the religious psychos in power (including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson) really believe that stuff and want to enforce their hierarchy.
Is there some third gender that trans people can transition to that I’m unaware of? I’m afraid I don’t follow the whole situation all too well sorry. My partner has some transgender family members, but i’ve never i’ve seen anyone that isn’t male to female or female to male. I guess non binary exists, but doesn’t that mean no gender or both?
I’m afraid I don’t know much on the subject It’s unfortunate.
The current doctrine is that there are unlimited genders, if you can think of one you can call yourself that, they call them “neopronouns” and aren’t simply relegated to xe/xer but include things like wolfkin and dragonfucker. There’s also plurals which to the best of my understanding feel like there’s multiple people usually with multiple neopronouns inside their head simultaneously.
I’m not either of these so maybe someone who is can elaborate better, but that’s what I’ve been told and I hope it helps.
You’re confusing sex with gender. Both are a spectrum but sex is a biological spectrum of sexual organs in a living creature and gender is a quality, projection and performance of a person that also lands on a spectrum.
The confusion is because they both use male and female but sex and gender are different things. Gender can change throughout a person’s life. A person’s sex is consistent throughout life and can’t be changed. A person’s gender can’t change their sex. Sex also isn’t as simple as xx is female and xy is male, there’s a whole bunch of things that can’t put a person in one, both, or none of those categories. Gender is even more complicated.
Fear not I, a still rather confused individual, but with slightly more knowledge on the topic shall answer thy call (I seem to suffer from the curse referred to as “being genderfluid” by the scholars of that gender stuff)!
Somebody who is non-binary is just someone who does not feel like they are entirely male or female. This can mean that they are both, neither or a different gender not connected to either but also not entirely absent or of course any combination of the previous examples.
In my case (genderfluid) I just flop around on the gender spectrum, mostly not having a gender or feeling a bit feminine but sometimes I do feel male or like some other gender. Though genderfluid just means that the persons gender changes over time, it doesn’t have to be the same genders that I experience.
Hope this helps :)
Reading the discussions and some of the disagreements, a correction is needed to be more precise.
Some XX people will be Assigned Male At Birth. Some XY people will be Assigned Female At Birth.
Some XX people live their entire lives as men without ever knowing otherwise, and the same happens with XY individuals living as women. Even having children won’t reveal the apparent discrepancy, unless they need certain tests done.
That’s the fallacy of authority
I agree. Doctorate in Biology =/= Doctorate in Religion. She’s not right because she’s a doctor, she’s right because she’s right.
To be fair, a Person with a PhD still can have Dunning-Kruger on other subjects.
Ben Carson is a great Neurosurgeon, but dumbass on politics.
Neil deGrasse Tyson and literally anything other than astrophysics
And sometimes also astrophysics
Even Noble Prize winners are surprisingly often affected by this -> wikipedia:Noble disease
They can also on their subject.
Yeah, both sides are wrong here.
Dunning-Kruger is bad, but so is credentialism and appeal to authority.
I guees it needs (relevant) inserted?
Can someone explain to me how some XX people become cis male?
Outward, their genitals might look like those of the oposite sex.
De La Chappell syndrome, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, androgen exposure in utero, ovotesticular disorder of of sex development all result in a person with cis male characteristics and in some cases cis male typical genitalia despite having xx chromosomes
You’ve heard of xy people and xx people, but wait till you hear about X people!
Or xxx people, or xxy people, or… dies
Gene expression is not as straightforward as people think. All sorts of weird shit can happen, and that’s not even including gene mutations.
I can try. The cis part means the person’s naughty bits are aligned with their gender identity. The male is their gender identity. So post-bottom surgery it’s perfectly possible. If you use different definitions for concepts though you will have difficulty making it work.
None of this has anything to do with the claimed PhD in genomics though. These are socio-cultural concepts. So they should stick their PhD where it belongs and address the arguments head on instead of trying to argue from authority.
I think you’re misunderstanding the point the OP is making. Typically, male/female are used when referring to sex, and masculine/feminine and man/woman are used when referring to gender. So this conversation isn’t about gender identity at all, but completely about biological sex.
There are a bunch of factors that go into determining sex. The two main categories are related to the person’s genes (their genotype) and how the person physically presents (phenotype). The biggest genetic marker is whether the person has XX or XY chromosomes (or some other combination). The easiest marker for phenotype is the person’s genitalia, but there are others, such as gonads, gamete production, hormones, etc.
So even just talking about biological sex, a person’s genotype and phenotype might give conflicting determinations of sex. So an “XX male” refers to someone with the genotype of a female, but the phenotype of a male, but says nothing about their gender identity or any surgeries they might’ve undergone.
With that in mind, someone with a PhD in genomics seems to be in the right field to address gene expression and genotypes vs phenotypes. Although you’re right that we shouldn’t rely on authority, but instead on the arguments presented. What we’ve been shown here, though, isn’t a fully fleshed out debate. It’s about 60 words on social media that amounts to “your mental model of sex is wrong; here are cases to rebut it”
I also have a PhD. Not in genomics but in physiology. But we all do genetic work now.
The Dr. says that XX persons can become cis men. “CIS men” is explicitly about gender. I was trying to make the point (not very well as it turns out) that all of this hinges on definitions. So you have to unpack CIS men in this context. Without a sound understanding of the basics, all the rest is supposition.
And the gender identity and expression parts have nothing to do with gene expression, penetrance (giggity), DNA, RNA or epigenetic factors in gene expression.
Also the better example for the counter argument would probably be CAIS.
Oh, sorry if my response was too basic-level for your experience.
I get what you’re saying about “cis men” being explicitly about gender. I took it as meaning phenotypic males, and that they used “cis men” either for simplicity (perhaps to avoid getting into the details of trans people that they thought was irrelevant to the point they were making) or because they were just imprecise with their language. It’s also possible it was based off of something from earlier in the conversation that we can’t see because it’s just a screenshot.
Anyways, I agree, it was poorly worded, but I think the point they were trying to make was pretty straightforward (unless you insist on interpreting what they said to be something about genes affecting gender expression, then it doesn’t make sense).
I don’t have a PhD, but my understanding of the basics is this:
All people start out developing as female in the womb before a certain point where a large dose of testosterone caused (usually) by the Y chromosome activating (basically the only time in life that it does apart from starting puberty AFAIK) causes the proto-labia and vagina to push outwards and form the ball sack and enlarging the clitoris and urethra into what we know of as the penis. This is why you can see that line down the middle of your ball sack; that’s where your labia fused together. It’s also why the tissue that makes up your ball sack is biologically identical to the tissue that makes up the inside of the vagina. It’s an outie vs. an innie.
There are many reasons why this wouldn’t happen “correctly” since biology is more a wonder of things somehow working at all after evolution is done with them rather than a perfectly designed, well-oiled machine. Sometimes the Y chromosome simply doesn’t activate, or it does, but the person has androgen insensitivity and so the testosterone doesn’t do anything, or they develop as female but have testicles where their ovaries should be, rendering them infertile but otherwise a perfectly normal woman. Sometimes a person is XX, but they experienced a higher than normal amount of testosterone during development and developed male instead of female.
And that’s before you get into the issue of intersex people, who are often surgically altered as babies when they’re born by the doctor to match with the genitalia that the doctor thinks should be the “correct” one. In a number of places, the doctors don’t have to ask permission or even tell the parents after.
Also, your definition of cis male is slightly off. “Cis” is the opposite Latin prefix of “trans,” meaning a non-changing/stable state of being, and in this case it’s used to mean that one’s gender identity matches up with the one that you were given at birth. It ultimately has nothing to do with what genitalia you have, and it’s simply an identification saying that your sense of gender matches up with the sex that the doctor declared and that you therefore aren’t trans. It’s an after the fact solution to the question of what to call people who aren’t trans and comes from the use of trans to identify somebody who transitions from one gender to another.
Chemists have moved away from cis and trans partly because of all of this. We use zusammen-together or entgegen-opposite now. I can attest to how politically charged a class about organic molecules can become.
I am not deeply versed on the socio-cultural side of it all, and there is clearly space to learn. I am reluctant to let cis hinge on a doctor’s proclamation but I’ll let it sit there for the moment.
As somebody with a bit of learning on the matter (it’s amazing the hats you have to wear to prove you deserve to live - from anthropologist to biologist to archeologist), it’s interesting to see how the language of the community has evolved as our scientific understanding of sex vs gender has.
The term started as transsexual, and there are older people who refer to themselves by that term, but by the 2000s the term had shifted in favor of transgender, noting the recognition that sex doesn’t equate to gender that happened around that time.
Then came the use of cis as well as AMAB and AFAB (assigned male/female at birth) in order to better describe the complexity involved around the fact that a doctor has to declare you one gender or another when you’re born, and the easiest way to do that with the highest likelihood of being correct is based on sexual characteristics - namely, what genitalia you have. So cis is used to describe people who have no reason to disagree with the doctor’s assessment, and there’s a lot of discussion around where intersex people fall in the community (do they fit in the trans umbrella term?).
People like Dunning-Kruger up there are basically arguing that isotopes don’t exist.
cis just means your current gender identity is the same that was assigned to you at birth. there are cases where someone has XX chromosomes, but the body develops as male.
Maybe she means the exceptions?
Exceptions: While XX and XY are the most common sex chromosome combinations, there are exceptions, such as individuals with variations in their sex chromosomes, such as XXY (Klinefelter syndrome) or XYY.
I googled it for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome
In 90 percent of these individuals, the syndrome is caused by the Y chromosome’s SRY gene, which triggers male reproductive development, being atypically included in the crossing over of genetic information that takes place between the pseudoautosomal regions of the X and Y chromosomes during meiosis in the father.[2][7] When the X with the SRY gene combines with a normal X from the mother during fertilization, the result is an XX genetic male. Less common are SRY-negative individuals, those who are genetically females, which can be caused by a mutation in an autosomal or X chromosomal gene.[2] The masculinization of XX males is variable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome
tldr biology is dice rolls and humans are intersex for no reason sometimes
on a side note one of my friends had this and she only found out when she started transitioning. she is now a trans woman with XX chromosomes. i can only imagine how fucking vindicating it must have felt
tldr biology is dice rolls and humans are intersex for no reason sometimes
To make involuntary non-cis , non-het , infertile aunts and uncles.
WTF is going on on that article’s Talk page? Are teachers now assigning students to edit Wikipedia articles and have others “peer review” them?
It seems like it’s a cooperation between Wikipedia and some schools?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Western/Bio_3595_AdGen_Wikipedia_Project_(Fall)
https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/assets/File/Pitch_sketch_final.png?w=2000
This is the best resource I’ve seen to show things relatively simply.
The TL;DR is that a whole “Y” chromosome isn’t exactly responsible for “maleness”, the SRY gene is. It’s normally on the Y chromosome, but mutations can occur placing that gene onto the X chromosome. Inversely, someone could inherit a Y chromosome without that gene, in which case they would develop with female traits.
It’s not considered trans because someone with 46XX plus the SRY gene would develop male genitalia, be identified as male at birth, and likely identify themselves as male. For some types of these conditions, there are plenty of people walking around with no clue that their chromosomes don’t match their gender.
Disclaimer: I’m not a geneticist, so i could have explained something a little off.
I’m also not a geneticist but I did study genetics for a while and that’s pretty much what I remember learning, so you’re good.
The books Mutants: On Genetic Variety and the Human Body by Armand Marie Leroi explains it all very well and touches on many other related genetic conditions like the Klinefelter syndrome (XXY). It’s an incredible read all around that really opened my eyes to how malleable biology is.
Can I get a T shirt that says “I have Dunning-Krueger and your Phd looks cute”? I just have a lot of BS to share and I don’t want to be sorry about it.
Dunning-Krueger effect is the delusion that you are smarter than a serial killer who stalks teenagers in their nightmares.
Actually, the science says you will feel regret and will grow to resent that shirt over time. /s
That’s because today’s t-shirts are made of such poor materials.
But the economics says I should print them and make a fortune selling them to idiots. Hmm decisions, decisions.
The phrase is funny but you wouldn’t catch me dead wearing a logical fallacy
Can I interest you in a logical phallus?
Wouldn’t that be a logic probe?
While this is very funny, and definitely representative of a sort of ignorance/arrogance commonly found in ideologues - I recently learned that most people talking about the effect have, in fact, been Dunning-Krugering themselves.
Insightful video on the topic.
What most people expect the effect to look like:
What the actual results were:
While I know of the proper dunning-kruger effect chart, that still doesn’t help me out of the imposter syndrome valley of despair
Fig 1 is a modified emotional change curve applied in learning and business settings. The term “Valley of Despair” is used in both concepts, and it’s cool, memorable verbiage, but it shouldn’t imply relation between Dunning-Kreuger and the change curve
Image description: A modified emotional change curve from Evocon with Y-Axis being “attitude during change process” and X-Axis is time. There are 6 emotional phases described on this chart: 1. Neutral attitude, no knowledge; 2. Initial excitement, motivated; 3. Denial, indifferent, passive, apathy; 4. Resistance, frustration, doubt, anxiety (this phase falls below neutral and is described as “The Valley of Despair”); 5. Exploration, energized, small wins, creative; 6. Commitment, enthusiasm, problem solving, focus, team work.
Yeah, it’s really frustrating and quite ironic that pop culture keeps using this obscure scientific reference, that they don’t really understand in its intended context, to describe something that really ought be plainly said: that we all have a tendency to overinflate our competence. if anything Dunning-Krueger showed that only the most seasoned experts judge themselves modestly. (and even then we’d likely only find their modesty in that particular area of expertise). it’s a commentary on all of us!
But no, people name-drop this research just to dunk on people and feel smugly superior. (and I am glad I agree with the politics of the intellectual in the OP, that means it’s okay and I’m a bit more competent too!) ugh. I cringe every time i read someone say Dunning-Krueger.
PS on your first image, whoever failed to put “phd student” at the trough of that curve fucked up
Dunning-Kruger reminds me of this one president and his cabinet.
you just know that 75% of people who would wear this don’t really have a PhD and 90% of those don’t have a PhD in the right field
I mean look at the brainrot in this very thread
What brain rot do you mean?
grammar is not science
But linguistics is
Art has weight that influences the human psyche. Let the man work.
It be an art.
grammer be dat
Whoa, look, an artist!
they don’t think it is, but it do.
It may as well be astrophysics for some people.
