I thought this was really fucking funny, looking at it on my phone at work.

  • imogen_underscore [it/its, she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    24 days ago

    for what it's worth, the brain thing is not backed up by science and doesn't need to be the crux of this argument. it's about power dynamics due to qualitatively and quantitatively differing social experiences/life exposure. a first year undergrad isn't a real adult the same way a 25 year old is, but that's not primarily because of brain development.

    • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      24 days ago

      I actually just edited my comment to adjust that part, haha, based on seeing your comments elsewhere. I admit, that was a misconception I had, but I stand by the social development and power dynamics at play making it fundamentally coercive.

      • imogen_underscore [it/its, she/her]
        ·
        24 days ago

        we're in total agreement! just think the argument stands on its own and doesn't need that pseudoscientific angle, though I realise it's still a very common belief so I get it.

        • Cowbee [he/him, they/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          24 days ago

          Appreciate it, always love to learn something new, even if an argument is made with good intentions, shaky foundations are just holes bad actors can (in this case, correctly) point out to weaken the actual argument that as you say, stands on its own foundations without the shaky argument added. For that reason I am appreciative that you pointed it out to me!