Why did Trump only attack the woman?

Yes, it is. Re-read his posts #42 and #58...

Re-read his posts #42 and #58. He is claiming that gender is a subset of race, that gender is a race. This is true because misogyny is a specific form of "a compositional error involving people as the class and a genetic trait as the property", aka 'racism'. Gender happens to be a part of one's genetic makeup. Race does not exclusively refer to skin color.

A whole cannot be a part of the whole; it already IS the whole. Gender is a subset of race. Skin color is a subset of race. Race includes all of one's genetic makeup (not just skin color).

I'm still waiting for a citation "that gender is a race." If you can't provide one, there's no point in continuing this.
A citation is not a proof.

Race includes all of one's genetic makeup (in other words, race is the "whole"). Gender is but a single part of one's genetic makeup (in other words, gender is the "part"). Thus, gender is a subset of (a part of) race (the whole). Thus, gender is a race.

It might also help if you were to define your terms... Define "race". Define "gender".
 
You're straying far from the point.
No, he is right on point.

I'm challenging this assertion: "He is claiming that gender is a subset of race, that gender is a race."
...and he already adequately responded to you. So have I.

Maybe you're misreading the assertion being made?? The assertion is not that gender is race. The assertion is that gender is a race.

If you don't have anything, just say so.
It's been provided to you already.
 
A citation is not a proof.

Race includes all of one's genetic makeup (in other words, race is the "whole"). Gender is but a single part of one's genetic makeup (in other words, gender is the "part"). Thus, gender is a subset of (a part of) race (the whole). Thus, gender is a race.

It might also help if you were to define your terms... Define "race". Define "gender".

A citation may not be proof but it's a starting point for investigation. Your words aren't proof and it's clear you have nothing.
 
Gender, not race.
No, "male" and "female" are also races.

How about posting the book, paper, treatise, peer-reviewed article or whatever you got this from.
False Authority Fallacy. A "holy" book, paper, treatise, peer-reviewed article, etc. is not a proof.

You seem to think that race can only be referencing one's skin color. That is incorrect, as skin color is but one single subset of race. Eye color and gender are other subsets of race. They are all determined by genetics (for humans, anyway).
 
Last edited:
What investigation? You need in investigation to figure out what gender you are?

Try pulling down your pants and looking.

Maybe she should do so at the doctor's office... That way, it can be "peer-reviewed" :laugh: :laugh:

But that should've already been done at birth, and should be a part of her medical records... Wonder if she'll accept her medical records as a "citation"?? :laugh: :laugh:
 
Three public witnesses to far. He only bullied by derogatory tweetstorm the female.
They all laid bricks for his cell. Seems odd. I'm confounded.

Any good explanations for this disparity?:thinking:

There it is again, blame them fort what you are doing, have you watched how Schiff treats the Republican Congress Woman Elise Stefanik? I hope someday we meet, so I know who to look for when the lynchings from this shiite show start!
 
I see you as weak. You prove it regularly. Whether that's because you're a female is only for you to determine.

We see you as an ignorant hillbilly that cornholes unsuspecting innocent canoers at every chance!

maxresdefault.jpg
 
Just quit while you're only this far behind. You made up this "theory" and you think people are going to take you at your word. Think again.

What theory? I never mentioned any theory. I think you have lost context completely. Go search for that while you check inside your pants.
 
Back
Top