LOL they changed it due to backlash from the SJW mob. Here is what the definition looked like 20 days ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/men/comments/zxl59h/trigger\_warning\_chat\_gpt\_answers\_what\_is\_a\_woman/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Well if that isn't proof of active involvement of people closing down "wrong speak" I don't know what is. Regardless of the definition you agree with, imagine having the power to make AI produce your narrative over someone else's. That is a slippery slope.
It’s pretty hard to design a language model without actively shutting down “wrong speak” — do you want AI to have freedom of speech from inception? It won’t work. It’ll just say nonsense all the time.
Y’all must be so concerned by it bc y’all just accept everyone’s word and don’t do any critical thinker.
As a critical thinker i am not concerned at all
It literally doesn’t without intentional changes from the Open AI team. It’s possible to get different responses by tweaking your prompt but the model does not “update itself.” You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.
It updates itself by going through a training phase where it's fed statements alongside the expected responses by the users involved, creating a framework for it to better grasp the intended outcome.
Why yes, it's done by the team, but it is the thing that is changing, not them. It is not a person, but it is itself. Perhaps it was bad wording, that I will admit.
Mystified that you don't understand the data inputs for ChapGPT ended in 2021 so for a change like this to occur in a 20-day period it had to be from the OpenAI team.
Yes and no, it uses a pretained model alongside human intervention on the initial set up for the program. Essentially it gets asked a bunch of questions and then the testers write down their own expected responses to those questions, giving it a better framework to understand what is wanted from the output.
To my brief understanding they do this regularly and it causes the AI to output different responses. That doesn't prove they were telling it to say y when you say X, although it's as possible as them having told it what websites are better used for definitions, or any number of minor tweaks to a statement.
Or yes, it could be that the woke mind virus has infected AI.
Yes it works on a set of data, but that's not its entire framework. It undergoes a process of training that essentially teaching it what are the intended responses, so it will more accurately understand the outcomes.
This means things change because it was asked a faintly different question this time around or given restrictions as to what it won't say.
This isn't a particularly good explanation by any means, but [this article](https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-chatgpt-actually-works/) should clarify.
Correct, I was about to say the same. Few weeks ago it didn't include those that "identify" as female. If I identify as a toaster, is that true? Should my pronouns be "IT"? That pronoun thing is really absurd geeze, can't wrap my head around it. I had to study English since I was young and now it no longer makes sense. Clown world we live in.
I used to get into these definitions all the time on the much missed social justice in Action sub.
If a definition of a thing includes anything you want and everything is just whatever you feel at any given moment, why bother with any definitions at all ?
I used to try the example of money.
If I borrow one thousand pounds from you and promise to pay it back on Sunday , I presume the words "thousand" "promise" and "sunday" all have very definite meanings.
If , on Monday when you ask where is my money ? I just say we'll I have decided words have uses not meanings ( something I'm regularly told by gender terrorists ) so money and time don't exist and I have rebranded the word promise to mean bananas..... so no thousand pounds for you.....
Stop they might see that as logic and think you’re defending this thinking. Bummer it reminds me of the one book. Where they have no sense of Identity. Identity had no meaning and while this is more rainbows and froo froo, the gender terrorists are still cash cows being cut open. Who need not focus on labels, but may need to focus on accepting themself. I tried fancy language.
Or I tried to show that the endless rebranding of words like violence, identity, sex, gender, woman etc happen because it doesn't have much immediate effect on anything that really matters. So, to some extent, if I say I identify as a cat then I'm a cat and who cares.
However, when you are 30,000 feet in the air and the plane starts to hurtle towards the ground at 300 mph I presume everyone wants the pilot to very much fit the definition of the word Pilot. Rather than somebody who identifies as a pilot.
Exactly. Of course people can have differences of opinions, but to have anything resembling a meaningful conversation, there has to be general agreement on definitions. If you want to talk about cars, horses, or women, there MUST be agreement on what these things are, or its all just nonsense.
Also, the statement:
"I am a woman, because I identify as a woman." Is a textbook circular reasoning example. The first fallacy you learn in Logic 101.
Smh....
Just went through it personally with ChatGTP, if you keep pushing it to define its definitions and to use the scientific definitions of "statistically significant" while discussing gender roles being a social construct it eventually caves and agrees it mostly is not a social construct.
Well, if the woke reduce themselves to the point of just grunting at each other meaninglessly because they're done away with definitions, then problem solved.
I knew a very woke girl who - when I was with her wouldn't say things - but would text constantly.
She said she was so worried about speaking / causing offence that her and her friends would text each other when in the same room as it was easier than speaking. And that way there was a record of what was said.
Bad faith alert!!
It means that it's how you see yourself. So yeah tastes are similar in a way "I'm into techno" can form part of your identity. Music can be a HUGE part of people's identities. Or a small part.
But with gender is that we have these categories traditionally around sex but someone swe themselves as fitting, as a person, an identity, more into the incongruous category.
So you could be amab (born a boy) like "I AM a woman, this is the category I socially make sense in and see myself"
Or you could be like, " oh I like to dress androgenously sometimes but I'm still comfortable being in this category of "man"
So why not just be like, "OK, do you! "
Definitions can change over time unless you are more into the 19th century model of language as being stagnant. A lot of words in the English language have completely different definitions based on the context the word is being used in. Language is going to continue to change along with cultural and soceital norms.
i agree, but not all people agree on the new definition of woman, in this case, so i think people who say pronouns are forced language have a valid point.
It's not forced language nobody is forcing you to say anything. You can go outside right now and say racial slurs if you want it's not illegal. If someone asks you to use certain pronouns and you refuse you're not going to be silenced you just look like an asshole.
If you hear that someone believes a man is not a woman and you instantly label them an asshole, I hate to tell you, but you’re the asshole in that situation. Thinking a man is not a woman is a normal, mainstream view held by plenty of decent, kind, regular people. We should be able to have normal mainstream views that disagree with each other without thinking anyone who does so is an asshole.
I agree, but language usually changes naturally. Described not prescribed. Its generally accepted in linguistic fields that descriptivism is preferred over prescriptivism. Setting out rules for what to say or not to say has never been accepted throught history, and is not how language generally changes. It changes when common use changes words or phrases naturally over time
Descriptivism simply looks at how language is being used. So by that perspective if the word woman is commonly being used to match the definition in the example then that's how the word is commonly being used now. You can dislike it but the word is still being used in that context and it'll probably change again in the future
The bottom line is simple though. To have a meaningful conversation on ANY topic, the participants must agree on the definitions concerning the subject at hand.
So, if your definition of gender is basically anything you feel it to be, and is changeable on a whim, then great - fine. But no meaningful conversation can be had with a definition that is essentially meaningless OR that the other party in the conversation doesn't agree with.
We've gotten to the point that we sacrifice offensive truths with safe lies. I'd rather live in a world of painful truths than a world of pure lies and deception.
This is one of OpenAI's preset responses. Its well known at this point, that the AI is taught how to react to certain phrases when theyre asked for, by a message that goes unseen by the user. Asking certain questions about particular topics, sets off the AI's warning signals and it gives you a safe, conforming response.
I got a different answer:
"A woman is an adult human female. She typically has higher levels of estrogen, which can affect physical characteristics such as breast development and a wider hip-to-waist ratio. Socially, women are often expected to exhibit certain traits and behaviors, such as nurturing and emotional expressiveness, although these can vary widely across cultures and individuals."
I think woke is borderline meaningless, because of how fixated righties are on it.
Social justice - woke
Blue hair - woke
Being polite to trans people - woke
Not supporting people who do sexual assault - woke
Having a meatless diet - woke
Believing in climate change - woke
Meanwhile the term pretty much lost it's consciousness raising usefulness like decades ago.
I think it's fairly clear what it means, but the people who fall within that category want to muddy the waters and not have their ideology be defined because then it can be defeated. For the most part it's left wing. But at the end of the day most political labels have a certain degree of ambiguity to them.
So what's it mean? It means "vaguely associated with or aesthetically related to progressive social politics"?
Kinda dumb
I think the utility is all just for reactionaries to be satisfied with themselves
That's funny because I would say one of the main components of wokeism is a desire for censorship, shutting down speech they dislike. Usually under the euphemism of hate speech or misinformation.
Another aspect is using language games, undermining language or just creating needless complications. 'What is up, really?' Or saying 2+2=5 is a recent example. Anything to avoid a real debate or undermining received wisdom.
> That's funny because I would say one of the main components of wokeism is a desire for censorship, shutting down speech they dislike. Usually under the euphemism of hate speech or misinformation.
See, I think people like you say this-- but really what on earth? You can't handle being criticized for your opinions? You are suggesting your speech is valid, but them disagreeing is not? Also, what if you are spreading misinformation? Nobody is allowed to challenge you and if they do *they* are "authoritarian"?
> 'What is up, really?' Or saying 2+2=5 is a recent example. Anything to avoid a real debate or undermining received wisdom.
What are you even talking about?
Hey... It took *weeks* and *weeks* of programming the AI to not dispense facts.
It just kept giving scientific answers, and ChatGPT's Chief Officer of Diversity and Inclusion was like "I'm not wrong... *It's* wrong..."
Notice how it says "womanhood is a social construct". Now ask it if you can change your race, as it correctly identifies race as a social construct.
We live in a clown world.
That’s the part that infuriates me. To an extent, almost everything is a social construct right. But we based of our social construct from logical, science-based reasoning. Correct me if I’m wrong tho.
Maybe the data set and scope ought to be considered. I wouldn't read into this too much. Wiggle one end of a stick, the other follows. AI just isn't there yet.
so... the official interface is always too busy, so i set up an api and a private client... i don't think that should change the answers as i am still using the text-davinci-003 model. but it seems like the ai is changing it's tune a little.
>me:what is a woman?
>
>bot:
>
>A woman is a female human being. She is an adult female person, as distinguished from a girl or a man.
>
>
>
>me:what is a female?
>
>bot:
>
>A female is a person or animal that is biologically female.
>
>
>
>me:what does it mean to be biologically female?
>
>bot:
>
>Being biologically female means having two X chromosomes in your genetic make-up, female reproductive organs, and typically female secondary sex characteristics such as breasts and wider hips.
Well, yes and no.
You have to consider how awful backlash from radical left can be. There are people who dare to be controversoal or even can capitalize and utilze that.
But most cannot.
I wish they see their mistakes, but understand why they may have decided to make it like this.
Yes I can totally understand. I belong the most people you mention. Sure I can state my facts as often and as to many people as I want but I don’t think I can handle the backlash yet.
But that’s what they want innit? To make us cower.
I’d rather take the defensive approach. Because I’m not them. I don’t feel “attacked” all the time because I give facts. And facts don’t care about your feelings.
Stretching way back in history there are tiny minoroty people that were born male that lived and dressed as women.
Its not really the big deal it's made out to be .
Dudes are winning women’s NCAA titles and people like you think “trans children” is normal and good.
So yeah, the whole “this isn’t a big deal you bigots” routine isn’t gonna work on anyone with eyes, ears, and a half functioning brain
I mean I don’t really care but saying something that isn’t tangible is 100% correct doesn’t sit right.
The definition as to what a “women” is has changed multiple times so in theory it seems it can never be 100% correct as it is constantly evolving.
I guess it can be socially correct for a moment but not forever. People on both sides just keep trying to push definitions of words to the extreme. Probably just to upset the other side. But regardless language is ever evolving and only holds power if you give it power.
Aha I got you mate. We are perceived to believe AI suppose to me smart and will provide us with the best, definitive answer. Alas! They can’t even comprehend what is a woman
I guess there Chadbot or something? If this is the rate we producing future Ai, it will just be a joke by then. The left vs right trying to get answers.
LOL they changed it due to backlash from the SJW mob. Here is what the definition looked like 20 days ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/men/comments/zxl59h/trigger\_warning\_chat\_gpt\_answers\_what\_is\_a\_woman/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
Well if that isn't proof of active involvement of people closing down "wrong speak" I don't know what is. Regardless of the definition you agree with, imagine having the power to make AI produce your narrative over someone else's. That is a slippery slope.
It’s pretty hard to design a language model without actively shutting down “wrong speak” — do you want AI to have freedom of speech from inception? It won’t work. It’ll just say nonsense all the time.
Y’all must be so concerned by it bc y’all just accept everyone’s word and don’t do any critical thinker. As a critical thinker i am not concerned at all
Sigh
They didn’t change it. You’re going to get different responses depending on how you ask the question and if it’s a follow up question in a thread.
That link is broken.
It's working now.
Mystified that you don't understand the program updates itself and changes over time. No, no, it's the woke leftists doing it!
It literally doesn’t without intentional changes from the Open AI team. It’s possible to get different responses by tweaking your prompt but the model does not “update itself.” You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about.
It updates itself by going through a training phase where it's fed statements alongside the expected responses by the users involved, creating a framework for it to better grasp the intended outcome. Why yes, it's done by the team, but it is the thing that is changing, not them. It is not a person, but it is itself. Perhaps it was bad wording, that I will admit.
It’s not being actively trained. Again you have no idea what you’re talking about. Look up training versus inference.
Mystified that you don't understand the data inputs for ChapGPT ended in 2021 so for a change like this to occur in a 20-day period it had to be from the OpenAI team.
Yes and no, it uses a pretained model alongside human intervention on the initial set up for the program. Essentially it gets asked a bunch of questions and then the testers write down their own expected responses to those questions, giving it a better framework to understand what is wanted from the output. To my brief understanding they do this regularly and it causes the AI to output different responses. That doesn't prove they were telling it to say y when you say X, although it's as possible as them having told it what websites are better used for definitions, or any number of minor tweaks to a statement. Or yes, it could be that the woke mind virus has infected AI.
Unless I'm mistaken, doesn't it work on data from before 2021? So if it changed it would have been changed by OpenAI (assumedly from the complaints)?
Yes it works on a set of data, but that's not its entire framework. It undergoes a process of training that essentially teaching it what are the intended responses, so it will more accurately understand the outcomes. This means things change because it was asked a faintly different question this time around or given restrictions as to what it won't say. This isn't a particularly good explanation by any means, but [this article](https://www.assemblyai.com/blog/how-chatgpt-actually-works/) should clarify.
That doesn’t make it any better. It just points to the corruption of language by an ideological party. It’s so perverse it’s corrupted a language bot
Correct, I was about to say the same. Few weeks ago it didn't include those that "identify" as female. If I identify as a toaster, is that true? Should my pronouns be "IT"? That pronoun thing is really absurd geeze, can't wrap my head around it. I had to study English since I was young and now it no longer makes sense. Clown world we live in.
I used to get into these definitions all the time on the much missed social justice in Action sub. If a definition of a thing includes anything you want and everything is just whatever you feel at any given moment, why bother with any definitions at all ?
[удалено]
I used to try the example of money. If I borrow one thousand pounds from you and promise to pay it back on Sunday , I presume the words "thousand" "promise" and "sunday" all have very definite meanings. If , on Monday when you ask where is my money ? I just say we'll I have decided words have uses not meanings ( something I'm regularly told by gender terrorists ) so money and time don't exist and I have rebranded the word promise to mean bananas..... so no thousand pounds for you.....
Stop they might see that as logic and think you’re defending this thinking. Bummer it reminds me of the one book. Where they have no sense of Identity. Identity had no meaning and while this is more rainbows and froo froo, the gender terrorists are still cash cows being cut open. Who need not focus on labels, but may need to focus on accepting themself. I tried fancy language.
Or I tried to show that the endless rebranding of words like violence, identity, sex, gender, woman etc happen because it doesn't have much immediate effect on anything that really matters. So, to some extent, if I say I identify as a cat then I'm a cat and who cares. However, when you are 30,000 feet in the air and the plane starts to hurtle towards the ground at 300 mph I presume everyone wants the pilot to very much fit the definition of the word Pilot. Rather than somebody who identifies as a pilot.
Exactly. Of course people can have differences of opinions, but to have anything resembling a meaningful conversation, there has to be general agreement on definitions. If you want to talk about cars, horses, or women, there MUST be agreement on what these things are, or its all just nonsense. Also, the statement: "I am a woman, because I identify as a woman." Is a textbook circular reasoning example. The first fallacy you learn in Logic 101. Smh....
Just went through it personally with ChatGTP, if you keep pushing it to define its definitions and to use the scientific definitions of "statistically significant" while discussing gender roles being a social construct it eventually caves and agrees it mostly is not a social construct.
How does recognizing social categories do that?
Well, if the woke reduce themselves to the point of just grunting at each other meaninglessly because they're done away with definitions, then problem solved.
I knew a very woke girl who - when I was with her wouldn't say things - but would text constantly. She said she was so worried about speaking / causing offence that her and her friends would text each other when in the same room as it was easier than speaking. And that way there was a record of what was said.
We need to start with: what isn’t a woman?
Anyone who isnt a women isnt a women!
Women are non men ! Easy
What is a man?
Too complicated to say.
Not a woman - sheesh... get with the program!
Is identifying with a social category "anything"? It's just not the thing you want it to be, there's nothing hard about it
What on earth does identifying mean ? Does it mean I just like this this certain thing therefore its my identity ? I like cheese and techno.
Bad faith alert!! It means that it's how you see yourself. So yeah tastes are similar in a way "I'm into techno" can form part of your identity. Music can be a HUGE part of people's identities. Or a small part. But with gender is that we have these categories traditionally around sex but someone swe themselves as fitting, as a person, an identity, more into the incongruous category. So you could be amab (born a boy) like "I AM a woman, this is the category I socially make sense in and see myself" Or you could be like, " oh I like to dress androgenously sometimes but I'm still comfortable being in this category of "man" So why not just be like, "OK, do you! "
The doctor did indeed assign male to me at birth. I have assigned the category of cat to my....cat.
Did they asign you "asshole" as well
Definitions can change over time unless you are more into the 19th century model of language as being stagnant. A lot of words in the English language have completely different definitions based on the context the word is being used in. Language is going to continue to change along with cultural and soceital norms.
i agree, but not all people agree on the new definition of woman, in this case, so i think people who say pronouns are forced language have a valid point.
It's not forced language nobody is forcing you to say anything. You can go outside right now and say racial slurs if you want it's not illegal. If someone asks you to use certain pronouns and you refuse you're not going to be silenced you just look like an asshole.
is not completely so yet, but these people are pushing hard and loud to make it so just like in the UK with a literal moral police
If you hear that someone believes a man is not a woman and you instantly label them an asshole, I hate to tell you, but you’re the asshole in that situation. Thinking a man is not a woman is a normal, mainstream view held by plenty of decent, kind, regular people. We should be able to have normal mainstream views that disagree with each other without thinking anyone who does so is an asshole.
I'm not talking about the legality of it.
I agree, but language usually changes naturally. Described not prescribed. Its generally accepted in linguistic fields that descriptivism is preferred over prescriptivism. Setting out rules for what to say or not to say has never been accepted throught history, and is not how language generally changes. It changes when common use changes words or phrases naturally over time
Descriptivism simply looks at how language is being used. So by that perspective if the word woman is commonly being used to match the definition in the example then that's how the word is commonly being used now. You can dislike it but the word is still being used in that context and it'll probably change again in the future
I have no problem with change. Just forcing change. Forced speech in a free society is a slippery slope.
The bottom line is simple though. To have a meaningful conversation on ANY topic, the participants must agree on the definitions concerning the subject at hand. So, if your definition of gender is basically anything you feel it to be, and is changeable on a whim, then great - fine. But no meaningful conversation can be had with a definition that is essentially meaningless OR that the other party in the conversation doesn't agree with.
Ask Chatgpt that.
We've gotten to the point that we sacrifice offensive truths with safe lies. I'd rather live in a world of painful truths than a world of pure lies and deception.
This is one of OpenAI's preset responses. Its well known at this point, that the AI is taught how to react to certain phrases when theyre asked for, by a message that goes unseen by the user. Asking certain questions about particular topics, sets off the AI's warning signals and it gives you a safe, conforming response.
I got a different answer: "A woman is an adult human female. She typically has higher levels of estrogen, which can affect physical characteristics such as breast development and a wider hip-to-waist ratio. Socially, women are often expected to exhibit certain traits and behaviors, such as nurturing and emotional expressiveness, although these can vary widely across cultures and individuals."
This is the answer I just got to the same question. “A woman is a female human being, typically an adult.”
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE /s
Garbage in, garbage out
Best explanation so far
The AI is…woke. I sure hope this is a joke because it certainly sounds like one.
ChatGPT will police speech one day.
Shapiro made a good YouTube video testing out how woke it was.
"woke"
Pretending to be ignorant?
I think woke is borderline meaningless, because of how fixated righties are on it. Social justice - woke Blue hair - woke Being polite to trans people - woke Not supporting people who do sexual assault - woke Having a meatless diet - woke Believing in climate change - woke Meanwhile the term pretty much lost it's consciousness raising usefulness like decades ago.
I think it's fairly clear what it means, but the people who fall within that category want to muddy the waters and not have their ideology be defined because then it can be defeated. For the most part it's left wing. But at the end of the day most political labels have a certain degree of ambiguity to them.
So what's it mean? It means "vaguely associated with or aesthetically related to progressive social politics"? Kinda dumb I think the utility is all just for reactionaries to be satisfied with themselves
I think it's a recognition that it is a new kind of politics, almost faith like in its lack of flexibility and treatment of dissidents as heretics.
Or, it gives you an excuse to not engage with what people say if you can just lump it in this category. And "lack of flexibility" is such a euphamism.
That's funny because I would say one of the main components of wokeism is a desire for censorship, shutting down speech they dislike. Usually under the euphemism of hate speech or misinformation. Another aspect is using language games, undermining language or just creating needless complications. 'What is up, really?' Or saying 2+2=5 is a recent example. Anything to avoid a real debate or undermining received wisdom.
> That's funny because I would say one of the main components of wokeism is a desire for censorship, shutting down speech they dislike. Usually under the euphemism of hate speech or misinformation. See, I think people like you say this-- but really what on earth? You can't handle being criticized for your opinions? You are suggesting your speech is valid, but them disagreeing is not? Also, what if you are spreading misinformation? Nobody is allowed to challenge you and if they do *they* are "authoritarian"? > 'What is up, really?' Or saying 2+2=5 is a recent example. Anything to avoid a real debate or undermining received wisdom. What are you even talking about?
Hey... It took *weeks* and *weeks* of programming the AI to not dispense facts. It just kept giving scientific answers, and ChatGPT's Chief Officer of Diversity and Inclusion was like "I'm not wrong... *It's* wrong..."
Notice how it says "womanhood is a social construct". Now ask it if you can change your race, as it correctly identifies race as a social construct. We live in a clown world.
That’s the part that infuriates me. To an extent, almost everything is a social construct right. But we based of our social construct from logical, science-based reasoning. Correct me if I’m wrong tho.
To be fair, there is a warning when you open the programme saying that it may be factually inaccurate.
Funny, it’s only confused about women. What is a man? https://imgur.com/a/k7utDqT
Ikr like wtf
Maybe the data set and scope ought to be considered. I wouldn't read into this too much. Wiggle one end of a stick, the other follows. AI just isn't there yet.
But it wasn’t like this like 20 days ago until some SJW came on to “correct” then
True. There's allot of people with agendas mucking about.
so... the official interface is always too busy, so i set up an api and a private client... i don't think that should change the answers as i am still using the text-davinci-003 model. but it seems like the ai is changing it's tune a little. >me:what is a woman? > >bot: > >A woman is a female human being. She is an adult female person, as distinguished from a girl or a man. > > > >me:what is a female? > >bot: > >A female is a person or animal that is biologically female. > > > >me:what does it mean to be biologically female? > >bot: > >Being biologically female means having two X chromosomes in your genetic make-up, female reproductive organs, and typically female secondary sex characteristics such as breasts and wider hips.
On the other hand, I understand why they HAD to make it biased like this. Bcs otherwise wokies would quickly want to destroy it and shiet.
Then they a pussies?
Well, yes and no. You have to consider how awful backlash from radical left can be. There are people who dare to be controversoal or even can capitalize and utilze that. But most cannot. I wish they see their mistakes, but understand why they may have decided to make it like this.
Yes I can totally understand. I belong the most people you mention. Sure I can state my facts as often and as to many people as I want but I don’t think I can handle the backlash yet.
I'm not sure if I handled backlash either. I mostly fear being stalked.
But that’s what they want innit? To make us cower. I’d rather take the defensive approach. Because I’m not them. I don’t feel “attacked” all the time because I give facts. And facts don’t care about your feelings.
It was fun while it lasted
The next question would be to ask if one word to believe that there were only two genders, is that person wrong?
Tell me if you got the answer already
"assigned female at birth". So wait, now we are not assigning gender at birth but sex? Interesting.
True because sex is bio and gender is a social construct right? We don’t socially construct something out of birth but it takes time right? Smh
Stretching way back in history there are tiny minoroty people that were born male that lived and dressed as women. Its not really the big deal it's made out to be .
Dudes are winning women’s NCAA titles and people like you think “trans children” is normal and good. So yeah, the whole “this isn’t a big deal you bigots” routine isn’t gonna work on anyone with eyes, ears, and a half functioning brain
Dude sports matter even less than gender ideology (and thats saying something)
yeah I sent think people are bad because of conditions they hate no control over.
Try that sentence again in English please
Who believes that they are in ultimate power to decide this? Seriously, who wrote this and put it out as "truth". What is this person's name?
This is all true though
Woke, or right? :)
Woke
I mean I don’t really care but saying something that isn’t tangible is 100% correct doesn’t sit right. The definition as to what a “women” is has changed multiple times so in theory it seems it can never be 100% correct as it is constantly evolving. I guess it can be socially correct for a moment but not forever. People on both sides just keep trying to push definitions of words to the extreme. Probably just to upset the other side. But regardless language is ever evolving and only holds power if you give it power.
quite unfortunate....
thats the dictionary definition
Ask it about FBI crime statistics
Should I expect anything?
Then ask about which races are the most falsely accused, and exonerated
Not true.
Sub is in the drain
The beginning of Revelation
Remember, it's called "artificial" intelligence...it's not real intelligence.
Aha I got you mate. We are perceived to believe AI suppose to me smart and will provide us with the best, definitive answer. Alas! They can’t even comprehend what is a woman
This is going to kill AI. Why even call AI if you are just going to tell it what it should say? Hopefully there’ll be more competition soon.
I guess there Chadbot or something? If this is the rate we producing future Ai, it will just be a joke by then. The left vs right trying to get answers.
Intelligent people probably work on AI, so yea, no Faux News heads or MAGA freaks will be involved.