Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I did. Read the next sentence after that. They very next sentence. It clearly states there's no documented cases of an individual being fertile as a male.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Left now says there's no such thing as a "woman"
- Thread starter Earthtank
- Start date
Read the underlined text first.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Yes. That doesn't state it was the result of someone producing both gametes. In fact it says it wasn't.
"In 1994 a study on 283 cases found 21 pregnancies
from 10 true hermaphrodites..."
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Yes. It says that. Just as it says there is no documentation of someone functioning as both. Those 21 pregnancies were functioning as female, meaning the female gametes were produced. We can conclude this because there are no documented cases of someone being fertile as a male.
I claim only what the article says.
Nothing technically more ambitious than that.
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
I'm a little lost in the conversation right now. @Twilight Hue - were you saying you accept intersex people but maintain skepticism of transgender identification and hormonal treatments? If so, why is that?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's where the issue is. Using just that snippet excludes other information needed to know. Like the bit of there being no documented cases of an individual being fertile as a male.
And is for that reason (no fertile male) that science and medicine have moved away from using hermaphrodite to describe intersex individuals.
We've been thru this before....an argument about definitions.
I think this poor horse has been beaten enuf.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
The advice to preach teach came about by humans inventing science that destroyed.
To teach causes displaced self identification as advised by biology they had to infer one human is one self. Yet diverse.
So don't thesis against life as multi gods forms the sciences were being converted. Not just one form.
Daily.
Constantly by humans.
Natural light voiding in vacuum is not a science converting mass constant.
To have produced the transgender artificial human expression against their biology.
Science messed with our heads is basic advice.
Yet we are one self first just a human.
Men historic abused the female human life as taking the status of self one importance to just be their human form.
Which you cannot deny.
The memory of abuse is never going to be easily overcome in the female life as you still abuse us. One self is lived naturally as two.
So being a smart Alec claiming hence a man can be considered a female so don't argue is a moot point as I can be offended by how men portray their ideas of a woman and be correct biologically.
Maybe when total biological body mind swapping is completed then it's science inventor can claim now I am a one self a woman and claim victory in science. As a one of anything thesis.
To teach causes displaced self identification as advised by biology they had to infer one human is one self. Yet diverse.
So don't thesis against life as multi gods forms the sciences were being converted. Not just one form.
Daily.
Constantly by humans.
Natural light voiding in vacuum is not a science converting mass constant.
To have produced the transgender artificial human expression against their biology.
Science messed with our heads is basic advice.
Yet we are one self first just a human.
Men historic abused the female human life as taking the status of self one importance to just be their human form.
Which you cannot deny.
The memory of abuse is never going to be easily overcome in the female life as you still abuse us. One self is lived naturally as two.
So being a smart Alec claiming hence a man can be considered a female so don't argue is a moot point as I can be offended by how men portray their ideas of a woman and be correct biologically.
Maybe when total biological body mind swapping is completed then it's science inventor can claim now I am a one self a woman and claim victory in science. As a one of anything thesis.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Good question actually.
I suppose it revolves around what is regarded as the natural and induced changing of the body.
It has much to do with the premise I hold for which I view intersex as being a physical mutation, albeit rare, while transgender is not indicative of that, for which both requires external measures to correct the "malformity" on an otherwise healthy body.
It's a strange conundrum because a malformed condition is determined by way of physicality involving those who are intersex and the other such gender identification is notably internal , by way of how the brain perceives itself to be in an otherwise healthy and normal body.
What the speaker doesn't understand is that what so-called "leftists" are saying is that gendered terms like "woman" are social constructs. That is why womanhood isn't connected to chromosomes.
So what is it? As a social construct, gender is an umbrella concept for a vague collection of norms, behaviors, and roles related to a person's gender identity (and this is why some genders are neither man or woman: because they do not correspond to the norms, behaviors, and roles associated with masculinity or femininity). Defining precisely what a feminine gender identity is to call someone a "woman" is very difficult because of the traits, norms, behaviors, and roles associated with femininity, a particular woman might not express all of them, or only express some of them, or even express very few (but their importance is high to the person): it is like the heap paradox whereby it's asked when adding grains of sand to a pile makes that pile a "heap" of sand.
This is why identity is important. Rather than navigating this labyrinth of trying to decide on the fly whether the grains of sand are a heap, we let the person who's had their entire lifetime to think about it just tell us their identity. This is the great arrogance of people that reject peoples' self-reported identity: what is their five seconds of absorption compared to that person's lifetime of experiences and introspection?
Uh oh...phrasing.
At first glance, that could easily be read as "men &
women are physically the same, differing only by how
they fit into society". Jargon can mislead that way.
I propose an alternative....
"Gender is both physical & mental, with physical & social
complexities regarding those who fall outside what's
considered normal."
Awkward?
Yes.
But it wouldn't give ammunition to those who'd trumpet....
"Leftists say gender doesn't exist! You're not a female
because you have hooters & a hoohah. It's just a social
construct! Men can be women too."
You know that they're just itching to misquote you.
Last edited:
That wouldn't be a misquote. Some people with a vagina and breasts are men (such as if they haven't transitioned yet, or even if they don't transition. Some people wear breast tape for instance to wear men's button ups and things like this). This is because their identity involves the traits, norms, expectations, and so on of masculinity despite the genitals they were born with. We should not expect trans people to physically transition to be able to wear the gender identity they feel or the pronouns they identify with. Some people can't afford it, there are about a billion reasons why pre-transitioned trans people still get to use their preferred gender identity.
Gender isn't about genitalia. Sex is more associated with genitalia, but even that is complex due to intersex issues.
Please be careful though. I don't want to turn on OAN,
only to see your pic, & some talking head misquoting you.
"Gender" has multiple meanings. What you intend might
not be what's inferred.
Gender - Wikipedia
Last edited:
PoetPhilosopher
Veteran Member
I understood @Revoltingest 's post a bit differently, but agreed with it. It should be easy to identify as what you want. But not to the point of silliness. For example, if I live my life as a male, but just happen to say, call me female online for this site, I don't feel that makes me female. But if on the other hand I lived my life more that way, it would, I feel, make me female, even if to use an analogy / hypothetical scenario, I hid it from most of my family to best I could.
Otherwise, we have people providing the counterargument they're suddenly women, or boats, or whatever.
I get it, but at a certain point if someone's that hell-bent on misquoting someone, they're going to do it anyway. My first post said "what leftists are saying is..." meaning "this is all from this perspective, which I'm arguing is the most useful and least harmful." Of course other people have other ideas of what gender means. Good communicators know to phrase this as a battle of perspective rather than a battle of definition.
We're saying "check it out, this is a way to think about this and how to use these terms, and it's often what people are meaning when they use these terms because this perspective has shifted the Overton Window significantly."
It's useless to say to someone, "you're using the term gender wrong, this is how you should use it" (though I admit I've done this, I'm human); it's more useful to say "actually there's another way to think about this and a way that's arguably better to use the terms. Not only that, but you'll understand what these people you have questions about are actually saying if you understand the paradigm from which they're speaking."
Oh, do I ever know that. But treading carefully
can still thwart them to some extent.
Agreed. We do have to consider people that are trans but have to be in the closet for one reason or another, they still deserve to have their pronouns and identity respected.
Also agreed that if someone isn't actually doing things to match their internal identity to some kind of gendered traits, expectations, roles, and so on (and boy is there a lot of vagueness and room for argument in there but I hope we all know what is being said), then there's some kind of disconnect in asking to be identified as a gender. I don't feel comfortable getting into that as I'm cis and have no idea what nuances may be there for trans people though.
I think we all know that people that use dumb arguments like "I identify as a helicopter" and crap like that are bad faith arguers that know nothing about what they're talking about.
That is true. In my estimate I did tread carefully though in this instance though. Maybe I'd feel differently on a reread tomorrow, like we might with any kind of writing where it's hard to see things when it's fresh.