Comments by "Vic 2.0" (@Vic2point0) on "Neil DeGrasse Tyson's Fascinating Interview With Piers Morgan" video.

  1. As usual, Neil is both non-scientific and nonsensical on gender. He likens the fact that there are tomboys and tomgirls to the incoherent worldview of transgenderism to make it look more coherent, but most "tomboys" grow up to be more feminine women who accept the fact that they're women. He also chalks the incoherence of transgenderism up to humans being collectively prone to categorizing, but at the end of the day trans people themselves are making categorical claims by saying "I'm a man" or "I'm a woman". So subscribing to modern gender theory is in no way some sort of improvement in that regard. "A person who's expressing their freedom of self" = word salad, but the translation is that we're to conclude that whatever a person says about their gender is true and accurate. Funny how this only works for gender though, eh? I as a white 40-year old man could not obligate these same people to call me a black 10-year old or a giraffe. Neil also claims to be in favor of some absolute freedom regarding language and gender. But I wonder if he'd be okay with legislation saying that no one shall be compelled by government to call biological females men or run their businesses, etc. in accordance with this incoherent worldview? Moreover, if we're obligated to call men women solely because they identify as such, why couldn't a 200-pound man identify as 100 pounds and therefore still compete in sports against the other 100-pound athletes?
    2