A Victory for Sororities: Education Department Rules Sororities Are for Women Only

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

Wtf are you talking about? So let me get this straight. You’re out here comparing black women to “exceptions” in biology? For real? You act like being black is some medical anomaly that complicates the blueprint. Black people aren’t biological curveballs, we’re normal human beings with normal chromosomes and normal reproductive parts with more melanin. Race never made anyone’s sex ambiguous. So using blackness as a stand in for rare intersex conditions is not only ignorant as f*ck, it’s borderline offensive. Do you even hear yourself?

I knew race was going to come out. I just knew somebody was going to pull it out of their ass as a comparison. If anybody is the bigot, you are. For real.

People throwing around “ignorant” or even worse… “bigoted” when they themselves are cherry picking feel-good snippets off the internet instead of real biology is peak irony. You can’t throw those words around while comparing chromosomes to skin pigment like they’re the same thing. That’s not science, that’s confusion with a certificate, lol. And then, having links doesn’t make her argument valid if the logic is rotten. Her post is so transparently shaky that it’s funny she thinks it’s a checkmate.

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands

CG, I forgot to ask you what you mean by “marketing”. What’s that got to do with anything?

So, if your belief system can’t stand on its own facts, logic, or biology, and instead needs guilt trips, hashtags, or race comparisons to make people agree, then you’re not defending a fact. People will wrap a weak biological argument in guilt or fear like, “If you disagree, you’re a bigot” kind of thing. And because no one wants to be labeled a “bigot” they comply. Now you’re scared to say 2 + 2 = 4 because you’ll be called hateful.

So, basically you’re packaging confusion in emotional wrapping paper so people will “buy” it, not because it’s real, but because it feels too costly to reject.

Selling an idea with flashy slogans, pity stories, or fear of being labeled. Using buzzwords like “cis” or “gender spectrum” to make the idea sound scientific, when it’s really social branding. So “terms” like “cis” weren’t invented by biologists to describe reproductive function. They were coined to make “trans” sound normal and to reframe the conversation. If that makes sense.

And for the record? Talking about whether black women deserved bids in sororities was really dumb to begin with. They’re women — same chromosomes, same biology. And more melanin is because of basic geography. Real science. Race differences like skin tone are just evolutionary adaptations to sun exposure, not different species or different biological sexes. So comparing that to crossing sex categories is nonsense. Honestly? It should’ve never been an “agenda item.” Ever. It was ignorance then, and using it to prop up gender confusion now is still ignorance, just repackaged.

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

People throwing around “ignorant” or even worse… “bigoted” when they themselves are cherry picking feel-good snippets off the internet instead of real biology is peak irony. You can’t throw those words around while comparing chromosomes to skin pigment like they’re the same thing. That’s not science, that’s confusion with a certificate, lol. And then, having links doesn’t make her argument valid if the logic is rotten. Her post is so transparently shaky that it’s funny she thinks it’s a checkmate.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

So, if your belief system can’t stand on its own facts, logic, or biology, and instead needs guilt trips, hashtags, or race comparisons to make people agree, then you’re not defending a fact. People will wrap a weak biological argument in guilt or fear like, “If you disagree, you’re a bigot” kind of thing. And because no one wants to be labeled a “bigot” they comply. Now you’re scared to say 2 + 2 = 4 because you’ll be called hateful.

So, basically you’re packaging confusion in emotional wrapping paper so people will “buy” it, not because it’s real, but because it feels too costly to reject.

Selling an idea with flashy slogans, pity stories, or fear of being labeled. Using buzzwords like “cis” or “gender spectrum” to make the idea sound scientific, when it’s really social branding. So “terms” like “cis” weren’t invented by biologists to describe reproductive function. They were coined to make “trans” sound normal and to reframe the conversation. If that makes sense.

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

And for the record? Talking about whether black women deserved bids in sororities was really dumb to begin with. They’re women — same chromosomes, same biology. And more melanin is because of basic geography. Real science. Race differences like skin tone are just evolutionary adaptations to sun exposure, not different species or different biological sexes. So comparing that to crossing sex categories is nonsense. Honestly? It should’ve never been an “agenda item.” Ever. It was ignorance then, and using it to prop up gender confusion now is still ignorance, just repackaged.

THANK YOU! Finally somebody over here with some common sense.

Rejected REAL women and then turn around and make that one of the reasons to not reject a 6’ 2” 275 lb weirdo. Makes ZERO sense!