Social Transgender vs Trans Race the insane hypocrisy

[Sinister]

I never said they are statistically insignificant, i said they are anomalous, which they are, and that many of their conditions manifest within the sex binary, which they do.

Depends on how you define the "sex binary" which conservatives often struggle to do. In fact that binary is "fluid" lol. It moves from what genitals one has, to capability of producing children, to chromosomes, you know, its rigid until they run into something that contradicts their position, then they can change it.

I mean the entire definition of "female" refers to producing eggs so technically anyone who cant do that ceases to be female. By the strict scientific definition of the word. It's just more semantically convenient to include those who cant do that but have other biological traits in common with the female sex as female.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

No one said intersex conditions are genders, in fact my argument was that its NOT a gender, their gender is decided for them. And no, abnormality as not lost its value, you just seem to think you can use its value to undermine the existence of something that is in direct contradiction to an ideology you subscribe to.

Normality - people are born with 2 legs. Does this mean ALL people are born with 2 legs? Nope, some are born with 1, some are born with 0. They're anomalies, yes, but they also directly contradict the statement "humans are born both 2 legs."

Some are not, period. They exist, and that's all there is to it. Not all humans are born with 10 fingers. MGT has like 6 toes. It doesnt make them a different species, it makes them people with different features and different sets of functions. That's what intersex people are.

My ideology is called science. And intersex people have zero different functions. They have different conditions. Stop using words you don't understand.

 

[grimballer]

Sex is NOT binary. Intersexed people do exist, and are forced into a social gender binary without any input of their own most often when they're born. You're both ignoring the existence of them to make your point, and conflating sex and gender.

yes, intersex people do exist, just like people born with six fingers or without legs... its a deformity

humans, like other mammals and overwhelming majority of other animals, are binary. theres are males and females.

but thats not even what transgender movement is about.

with transgenderism you want to pass a biological male as a woman and vice versa so it has nothing to do with intersex.

you try to justify that by claiming that sex and gender are not the same thing, but gender without sex becomes meaningless.

just cause a man enjoys wearing clothes associated with women and tries to act like a woman doesn't make him a woman.

a person is free to do and act however they want, but they can't force others to play along

 

[IamStryker]

Intersexed people are nearly 2% of the world's population. Millions of people. You can try to make it sound like its maybe 20 people and shouldnt be considered a thing, but that's statistically significant.

This is fake news.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

It's much less.

 

[Sinister]

yes, intersex people do exist, just like people born with six fingers or without legs... its a deformity

humans, like other mammals and overwhelming majority of other animals, are binary. theres are males and females.

but thats not even what transgender movement is about.

with transgenderism you want to pass a biological male as a woman and vice versa so it has nothing to do with intersex.

you try to justify that by claiming that sex and gender are not the same thing, but gender without sex becomes meaningless.

just cause a man enjoys wearing clothes associated with women and tries to act like a woman doesn't make him a woman.

a person is free to do and act however they want, but they can't force others to play along

Gender without sex is not "meaningless"...that's you literally making a feelings argument. You just want them to be synonymous because you're more comfortable with that. You dont want the definitions altered to be recognizing or normalizing of the anomalies. I disagree with that because, in this case, the anomalies are people who want to live their lives as they see fit and I'm less comfortable with people like you wanting to force them into definitions that are easier on your feelings than letting them decide live as they are even if it means that means sex and gender arent synonymous.

 

[Err]

Gender without sex is not "meaningless"...that's you literally making a feelings argument. You just want them to be synonymous because you're more comfortable with that. You dont want the definitions altered to be recognizing or normalizing of the anomalies. I disagree with that because, in this case, the anomalies are people who want to live their lives as they see fit and I'm less comfortable with people like you wanting to force them into definitions that are easier on your feelings than letting them decide live as they are even if it means that means sex and gender arent synonymous.

Since you seem interested in arguing the semantics of this topic, you do realize that most definitions of gender still include sex right? People using gender and sex synonymously are technically not wrong. Most dictionary’s have only added to the definition to include the cultural and social aspect, they haven’t removed sex part.

 

[grimballer]

again, you're claiming the nordic person can "claim" to be black based on their biological reality. not because they can "pass" as black under a social construct.

and yes, sex is a biological reality. but gender is not a synonym for sex. but i know that triggers people too..........

but thatsvthe part of the "social construct"

even if you dont look certain way, the fact that you have some african ancestry means you can claim to be black.

thats not science, thats social construct. you will view same person differently based on their ancestry.

also gender is meaningless without sex.

you cant separate the 2.

that would be like saying racially im black, but ethically im white

 

[Sinister]

This is fake news.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/

It's much less.

That's literally a single opinion.

Klinefelster syndrome is a chromosomal disorder that entails the presence of an extra chromosome. So for all the people who say sex is defined by chromosomes, that contradicts it. Turner is the same for females.

Also this was written by a psychologist. Pretty sure the consensus in the thread about Academic science was that psychology is junk.

 

[IamStryker]

Listen to you:

"People who dont biologically fit into the binary MUST fit into the binary."

Good thing I didnt say that at all. Try rereading

Your position is ideological. Medically, biologically, they are something else and you know that. What's that saying about facts and feelings?

Incorrect. Your position is ideological. Your idea that sex is some kind of spectrum is total nonsense. In reality there are two sexes and that's it.

 

[Sinister]

Since you seem interested in arguing the semantics of this topic, you do realize that most definitions of gender still include sex right? People using gender and sex synonymously are technically not wrong. Most dictionary’s have only added to the definition to include the cultural and social aspect, they haven’t removed sex part.

Yes, I'm aware that the definitions of words change as society changes and that those changes take time.

 

[IamStryker]

That's literally a single opinion.

Klinefelster syndrome is a chromosomal disorder that entails the presence of an extra chromosome. So for all the people who say sex is defined by chromosomes, that contradicts it. Turner is the same for females.

Also this was written by a psychologist. Pretty sure the consensus in the thread about Academic science was that psychology is junk.

I'll respond with more later but why don't you post your great sources that it's 2%.

 

[Sinister]

In reality there are two sexes and that's it.

But that's literally not reality, and you have to ignore a significant percent of the population to hold this position. My position, that sex isnt binary, is supported by the reality that people exist who dont fit into that binary.

 

[kflo]

but thatsvthe part of the "social construct"

even if you dont look certain way, the fact that you have some african ancestry means you can claim to be black.

thats not science, thats social construct. you will view same person differently based on their ancestry.

who will view them differently? and why?

also gender is meaningless without sex.

you cant separate the 2.

that would be like saying racially im black, but ethically im white

again, the person who is genetically male, yet looks like a woman, identifies as a woman, and lives daily as a woman and has had medical and hormonal work, is much more "socially" a woman than the 1% black nordic is socially black.

again, you're trying to pretend gender = sex.

 

[PG29 red0 Jr]

 

[grimballer]

Gender without sex is not "meaningless"...that's you literally making a feelings argument. You just want them to be synonymous because you're more comfortable with that. You dont want the definitions altered to be recognizing or normalizing of the anomalies. I disagree with that because, in this case, the anomalies are people who want to live their lives as they see fit and I'm less comfortable with people like you wanting to force them into definitions that are easier on your feelings than letting them decide live as they are even if it means that means sex and gender arent synonymous.

no, its a called a biological reality....

you want me to call a dog a cat cause you "feel" more comfortable that way.

so who's really making a "feelings" argument?

again people can do whatever they want, but you can't force others to play along.

if i see a 6'2 individual with broad shoulders in makeup and leggings and bulge sticking out = thats a man.

you might see that individual as a "woman", but not everybody gonna play along

 

[Fox by the Sea]

But that's literally not reality, and you have to ignore a significant percent of the population to hold this position. My position, that sex isnt binary, is supported by the reality that people exist who dont fit into that binary.

sex is binary. what you see as non-binary (the people that don't fit) are just developments gone wrong, anomalies. anomalies that do not change in any way the male-female binary which is overwhelmingly, incredibly dominant. there isn't a single category of "difference" that isn't an anomaly, not ONE. do you understand? not ONE. all the developmental conditions are carefully catalogued scientifically. but you don't like science. and probably don't even understand much, or even have any idea outside some yelly retarded takes you read online.

 

[BudKing8806]

Yes, I'm aware that the definitions of words change as society changes and that those changes take time.

And they change why? Because "muh feelings". What about the dumb fucks that believe they are animals? I guess we should start changing definitions and praising them as brave rather than actually help them. Sad to see mental illness celebrated rather than addressing the problem.

 

[Morning Star]

If they're both social constructs then there really isn't a difference. But even transrace is a bridge too far for the gender cultists at the present time, so they will twist themselves into a pretzel justifying one while dismissing the other. So glad I'm not religious.

 

[kflo]

no, its a called a biological reality....

you want me to call a dog a cat cause you "feel" more comfortable that way.

so who's really making a "feelings" argument?

again people can do whatever they want, but you can't force others to play along.

if i see a 6'2 individual with broad shoulders in makeup and leggings and bulge sticking out = thats a man.

you might see that individual as a "woman", but not everybody gonna play along

and what if they are 5'5 and you think they are a woman even though they are genetically male?

 

[Sinister]

I'll respond with more later but why don't you post your great sources that it's 2%.

I dont need to, your source is a refutation of that source. I just argued against the refutation. Sax argues that various conditions dont count as intersex

Your source is Leonard Sax, a psychologist whose entire purpose seems about the bolstering and validity and perpetuation of the gender binary. He argues that certain conditions sholdnt be counted, however it seems to me the counting of them is based on biological factors that have real effects on people medically, and with how society interact with them. As an example he also named LOCAH, a condition with causes women to be infertile, grow excess body hair, and lose the hair on their heads as well as other things.

Fausto-Sterling is a biologist, and classed LOCAH as a "mild intersex condition." Sax is a psychologist who got in his feelings about it.