Fight club doesn't demonstrate anything, because it didn't happen (on account of being a story).

Why would anyone think that the only way to show you're not the father is to declare you're a woman?

Or maybe it's a matter of existential risk? If there's a 1/10 chance of him being horribly wrong, then I don't particularly blame him for not testing it. I might believe quite thoroughly, but not want to test it when the explosive is directly in front of me.

I'd happily test it from behind a blast wall, though.

Are you asserting that there is no controversy among credentialed nutritionists about what kind of food is best to eat?

Nutritionist here. The protected word is "dietician", literally anyone can legitimately call themselves "nutritionists", whereas you actually have to have some relevant credentials before you're a credited dietician.

As a nutritionist, my professional opinion is that bricks are quite healthy, due to their high iron content.

Internet points are constantly ruining my subreddits.

I think that perhaps it would be interesting if you assumed the above was referring to being unconsciously influenced by aesthetic concerns. If it doesn't go through your mind that you're subconsciously passing judgement on someone, how are you supposed to evaluate its validity, and mitigate it (if necessary)?

I think that I'm quite possibly taking a hypothetical way too far, but in an ideal world, everyone would only be able to be consciously influenced by aesthetic concerns, and not subconsciously. Hypothetically.

Which is entirely perpendicular to your point, but see the first line in the above paragraph, so whatever.