- I just measured my resting heart rate with my phone. The median value after three tries was 52 bpm. I’ve done better.
- I checked the fitness app on my phone, and in the last week I’ve done six hours and forty-eight minutes of jogging, over 50km of distance. Some of that was in 30C heat.
- During my fastest 10k race, my average pace was better than five minutes per kilometre. It wasn’t a chipped race, so my actual pace was better.
- I don’t do nearly as many hikes as I used to, but back in the day I had no problem carrying more than 40 kilograms of weight over 16 km. I don’t know the exact weight, because my backpack broke my hiking partner’s scale.
- I’m not sure of my maximum elevation gain; it was either the time I scrambled Mount Temple solo (1,600m gain over 16km distance) or during a backpack on the Rockwall (about the same gain over 29km, from the Floe Lake to Helmet Falls campgrounds). I can’t find the hiking maps I’d need to confirm the latter.
- I learned that “argumentum ad body shaming” was a logical fallacy back in elementary school.
… Oh right, and I forgot about that solo snowshoe and x-country ski at Lake O’Hara, the one where I ran out of food and water. Some noodling with Google Earth suggests I did 30km that day.
Aha, we have an elaboration!
Peter Boghossian hangs out [with] a large number of 3rd wave intersectional male feminists? Because otherwise, he was generalizing about a group of people based on a small sample size. When I go looking for other such feminists, for instance, I find people like Chris Kluwe and Jackson Katz, so I question how accurate his generalisation is.
Which is all beside the point, because YOUR PHYSICAL APPEARANCE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUALITY OF YOUR IDEAS. Seriously, I can’t believe I’m telling this to a philosophy professor. Most people are smart enough to grasp this (or at least, based on a quick skim, most of the people replying to the original Tweet are), so their feelings aren’t hurt when you call some of them ugly. Feminists in particular aren’t hurt by it, because this trope is at least a hundred years old.
Whaaaaa?! If that Tweet wasn’t meant as a scientific conclusion, why is Boghossian
now citing science to justify his position? All right, all right, fine: let’s take a look at what evolutionary biologists have to say about “sneaky fucker” theory. [HJH 2017-07-10: Whoops, looks like “sneaky fuckers” are a thing, just under a different name. I’m leaving the rest of this post intact, for transparency’s sake.]
… That’s it? We have references from The Lifted Brow, self-described as a “quarterly print attack magazine,” plus a blog post where the author was “told that Geoff Parker coined this phrase, but [has] been unable to find a reference for this,” plus this paper from a pair of psychologists.
For example, male elephant seals, who are physically small and whose chances to become “beach masters” are low, may adopt a so-called “sneaky fucker” strategy, stealing a mating from the dominant male while he is fighting with other ambitious males (Le Boeuf, 1974).
When somebody told me about Sneaky F—er Strategy a few months ago, I passed it off as one of those urban myths, or internet memes that sound a little too plausible to be true.
Then I did a bit of research (umm, Googling) and there’s just enough mentions of the theory, attributed to one of the world’s greatest evolutionary biologists, Professor John Maynard Smith, to convince me of its validity.
Whoops, maybe this is a legit evolutionary biology thing after all. What did John Maynard Smith have say about “sneaky fucker” theory?
Mmmm, nope. It looks like, in this case at least, Peter Boghossian got his understanding of evolutionary biology from the MRA community instead of evolutionary biologists. It’s no wonder he thinks “male feminists are weak” is a winning argument.