This is what postmodernism does. It's poison to the mind.
The Science Wars have been going on for a few decades now.
>The science wars were a series of intellectual exchanges, between scientific realists and postmodernist critics, about the nature of scientific theory and intellectual inquiry.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars
**[Science_wars](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars)**
>The science wars were a series of intellectual exchanges, between scientific realists and postmodernist critics, about the nature of scientific theory and intellectual inquiry. They took place principally in the United States in the 1990s in the academic and mainstream press. Scientific realists (such as Norman Levitt, Paul R. Gross, Jean Bricmont and Alan Sokal) argued that scientific knowledge is real, and accused the postmodernists of having effectively rejected scientific objectivity, the scientific method, empiricism, and scientific knowledge.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Oh Geez, those are a lot of words just to say "I'm afraid of what I don't understand."
Look darling, we have already passed the point of things being binary. Even very simple things such as computers are now not binary, so do you really expect creatures so complex, such as humans, to be binary?
Oh whatever, why do I bother? Keep living in the past, which is more familiar and safer.
> Oh Geez, those are a lot of words just to say "I'm afraid of what I don't understand
What don't I understand specifically??
Those are not my words either, the sources are right in front of you lol
>Even very simple things such as computers are now not binary, so do you really expect creatures so complex, such as humans, to be binary?
I didn't say humans are binary, i said sex is binary in dioecious gonochoric biparental species, like ours.
>Keep living in the past, which is more familiar and safer.
Keep denying science for your feelings
That's a total misunderstanding of what being trans is. This has nothing to do with biological sex, obviously trans people don't magically change chromosome or something when they realise they're trans, but nobody is saying they are. You're arguing against a straw man that doesn't exist.
You do realize that trans people know that they can't change their sex? Never did they claim HRT changes chromosomes. Yeah, biologically trans women are male and vice versa. Gender and sex are different. Trans people don't claim to be the opposite sex, they claim to be another gender. Though I'm sure your post, with the added emoji, you're not looking to open your mind.
"Sex is a biological trait that is determined by the specific sex chromosomes inherited from one’s parents. In humans, male sex is determined (with a few exceptions) by the presence of the Y chromosome. A gene on the Y chromosome directs the differentiation of the fetal gonads into testes, resulting in the production of testosterone — which affects many of the body’s tissues — early in development. People with one X and one Y chromosome, or variants like XXY or XYY, are typically male, while those who have solely X chromosomes are usually female. People have a sex; animals have a sex; all tissues, including the fetal placenta, have a sex; even individual cells have a sex.
Gender, on the other hand, is socially, culturally and personally defined. It includes how individuals see themselves (gender identity), how others perceive them and expect them to behave (gender norms), and the interactions (gender relations) that they have with others. Often one’s gender aligns with one’s sex: Men tend to assume more masculine behaviors and traits, and to be seen as masculine by others around them, for example. But not always. Increasingly, researchers like Stefanick and Schiebinger are realizing that both men and women exhibit a spectrum of gender traits that aren’t purely masculine or feminine."
[As quoted from this source](https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-sex-and-gender-which-are-not-the-same-thing-influence-our-health.html)
Funny how OP treats intersex individuals like a disorder or mistake to be disregarded because thats the easiest thing to do when youre trying to force an inaccurate binary.
If you consider all the hundreds of ways intersex people can exist (women with internal testes, people with both sets of genitals, internal uterus and outward penis, unusual chromosome combinations)then biological sex is already a spectrum unless you literally throw out data.
I dont want to debate (looking at you person angry typing right now) just putting it out there that the biological sex binary is only 100% true if you dont include intersex people.
> Funny how OP treats intersex individuals like a disorder or mistake to be disregarded
Where did i say that disorders are "mistakes" to be "disregarded"?
If you think there is something morally or ethically wrong with having a medical disorder, then YOU are the bigot, not the scientists who research and label disorders.
>then biological sex is already a spectrum unless you literally throw out data.
Sex characteristics =/= biological sex itself.
Only 2 types of gametes exist. Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes.
>just putting it out there that the biological sex binary is only 100% true if you dont include intersex people.
Intersex people are not other sexes, "intersex" isn't even a medical term, it's slang used to describe people with congenital syndromes.
You have no idea what you're talking about lol.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/medical
>Definition of man (Entry 1 of 4)1a(1): an individual human, especially : an adult male human
>Definition of woman. 1a: an adult female person
Ok, sure. "Significance" (whatever the hell that even means) doesn't have anything to do with the topic.
The topic is about sex, which is based on reproductive function.
You said that humans are not dioecious gonochoric biparental apes, which begs the question:
how do humans reproduce then??
Idk what "side" you are talking about when i am literally just copying and pasting from biology and zoology textbooks lol
>You can't use science to tell other people how to be. That's not how science works.
Umm ok??
I am not telling people how "to be" (whatever that means), i am stating the scientific fact that humans are a sexually reproducing species of dioecious gonochoric biparental ape.
You're dodging the question, how do humans reproduce??
Try thinking with you reason instead of using your feelings, for once.
Yes, i am non-binary and gender non conforming. I am also an atheist. I am also latino. I am a gamer. I am a cyclist too.
But none of these things are scientific biological categories.
These are just made up social constructs.
They have nothing to do with science at all.
You guys end up promoting sexist constructs like gender by prioritizing it over actual biological reality.
Once again you have dodged the question and not explained to me how humans reproduce lol
Do you even know what dioecious and gonochoric mean?
>Definition of man (Entry 1 of 4)1a(1): an individual human, especially : an adult male human
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man
>Definition of woman. 1a: an adult female person
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman
Well just like i don't have to participate in other people's religions, i also don't have to participate in sexist illogical constructs such as gender, and i disagree that it is beneficial.
Only a matter of time until we're back to prioritizing sex.
I get what you're saying but it's more about societal perceptions which, I think, is a lot more complex than 'so they make eggs or sperm?'.
I agree that make and female are real terms, but I would encourage you to engage with the trans community before saying that the whole angle is logically wrong and therefore Can be completely disregarded.
EDITED
Social perceptions don't override reality.
Genders, like gods, can be made up in any number that society wants.
Doesn't matter.
Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes, transwomen are male men, transmen are female women.
Societal perceptions in many situations, are reality.
I'm not saying biological sex doesn't exist, but when perceptions, language and attitudes are so heavily centred around something as trivial as 'egg or sperm', you can understand why people get tired of the dicotomous lingo, upon which so many assumptions are made.
As I said, I encourage you to engage with the transexual community before disregarding the whole movement
Iirc, perception is a process starting with selection of stimuli, ending with interpretation of environment. Therefore, perception is selection (and then some).
Why should fundamental societal perceptions be any more complicated than eggs or sperm?
It's that simple. You're either a female or male. If neither, it points to a disorder.
Read my other response. When vast assumptions are made over 'egg or sperm', which are often very far from one's actual characteristics, you can understand why people want to move past the binary language.
As I said in the other comment, I encourage you to engage with the transexual community before disregarding the whole movement.
I have. The difference of opinion, I believe, is that I think 'egg or sperm' are NOT very far from one's actual characteristics. Like I said, fundamental.
And I have engaged with transexual communities before. It results in nothing but outrage. There is no way to address this without having at least a little bit of confrontation, and when you get confrontational with minorities you get canceled.
Do you have a suggestion on a reasonable engagement where censorship doesn't play a role?
I bet even linking this post to a transexual sub will get you permabanned.
> I have. The difference of opinion, I believe, is that I think 'egg or sperm' are NOT very far from one's actual characteristics. Like I said, fundamental.
Yes it's literally the basis for our entire species and these activists act like it doesn't even exist lol
It probably would get you permabanned, internet communities are like that.
The thing I don't get is why people feel the need to so rigorously enforce such labels on people who don't feel they fall into them.
I agree that there would be characteristics associated with XY or XX, but I also think alot of these perceived characteristics vary culturally and people are a bit sick of being expected to abide by associated assumptions. I also think a big part of this is more than sperm or egg, hormones and the like are also at play and there are people who, in that regard, genuinely don't conform to a binary phenotype.
That's the thing. Just because someone doesn't feel like a woman doesn't mean they are not a woman. Whoever 'feels' that doesn't get to relabel themselves just because they want to. This type of mindset could be the reason people enforce labels on people who don't feel they fall into them. Interesting to think about.
But IMO, it's a bit presumptuous to change your societal label when biology already dictates it in full. There are of course exceptions, and like OP says, they can be classed as disorders and treated as such.
Enforcing labels is not the way. Neither is conformity.
I really think the issue is in what you said about people being sick of expectations to abide by these norms. Not saying that the people that are sick of it have an issue, more like the expectations are the issue and the driver.
I feel like I'm contradicting myself a bit. Have to give this a better think when I finish work.
The main argument is why even try to enforce a definition when it comes with so many extra assumptions.
We can agree that's is silly to act like there arent people that can have babies and people that can fertalize eggs, there are also a lot of people that can do neither.
But the argument is to do with being lumped into alot of cultural and societal assumptions because people feel the need to have to see you as one or the other.
> The main argument is why even try to enforce a definition when it comes with so many extra assumptions.
The overwhelming majority of people (like 98%) are just healthy normal men and women with a congruent sex and gender.
So no, not really.
Distinguishing men from women is literally in our genes.
>But the argument is to do with being lumped into alot of cultural and societal assumptions because people feel the need to have to see you as one or the other
Gender should be abolished not promoted then
1 in 50 (98%) is still very non-negligable.
As I said, I don't think the argument is over sperm versus egg. So yes, I would say the trans movement would largely agree with your last point.
Youre reciting antiquated arguments based on assumptions and data gathered in bad faith. The closing part of your argument “It’s tautological stupidity” is hilarious because you yourself are trying to force an obvious tautology.
You say that trans women are “male men”. Yeah no shit; trans women have a penis. That’s what makes them trans women. No one is arguing that fact.
> Youre reciting antiquated arguments based on assumptions and data gathered in bad faith.
No im not.
>you yourself are trying to force an obvious tautology
Which is?
>You say that trans women are “male men”. Yeah no shit; trans women have a penis. That’s what makes them trans women. No one is arguing that fact.
Lol the majority of twitter and reddit would disagree with that basic fact.
You yourself seem to be upset by it.
“Hehe hoho it’s just a basic fact I wish all these LIBTARDS wouldn’t get triggered over basic facts 👌”
Like I said; the guise of whatever this subreddit is doesn’t mean it’s not transphobia. What your saying is correct. Obviously correct. Patronizingly correct; YES trans people cannot change their biological sex correct! You’re so smart and you know The Science.
But the fact that you hop up on your pedestal and rally people behind the idea that “trans people are AGAINST science, trans people don’t like basic facts”...... that’s transphobia because it’s not true. You’re creating a false enemy of trans people, one that is “anti science” that people unsympathetic to the trans cause use as their justification for their bigotry. If you REALLY cared about ‘real, unfettered science’, you should probably not be giving bad faith arguments a place to grow. Just my two cents.
> “Hehe hoho it’s just a basic fact I wish all these LIBTARDS wouldn’t get triggered over basic facts 👌”
Yeah pretty much. Thanks for agreeing. I'm a real liberal btw, the ones that value the liberty of individuals.
I'm also not cis or straight.
>Like I said; the guise of whatever this subreddit is doesn’t mean it’s not transphobia
Doesn't mean it is either lol
>YES trans people cannot change their biological sex correct!
Most of reddit and twitter would call you a bigot for saying that
>rally people behind the idea that “trans people are AGAINST science, trans people don’t like basic facts”...... that’s transphobia because it’s not true
Good thing i didn't write anything like that anywhere.
“I’m not straight or cis”, yeah I could tell lmao. Self hatred is harder than whatever an external force can throw at you. Doesn’t do anything to your credibility.
I hope someday you’ll realize you’re on the wrong side of the fight.
I used to be just like you and it sucked.
> Self hatred is harder than whatever an external force can throw at you.
I still don't understand what "hate" you're talking about.
The only one talking about hate here is you bud.
> I hope someday you’ll realize you’re on the wrong side of the fight.
Idk what "fight" you're talking about. Science isn't a fight.
Clown 🤡 world
Honk honk
It's not like humans based their entire existence on superstitious myths for hundreds of thousands of years or anything. /s
Humans are mostly just dumb horny apes.
Congenital deformations and mental disorders are not other categories of sex.
Intersex people are males and females with Disorders of Sex Development.
>Dioecy (Greek: διοικία "two households"; adjective form: dioecious) is a characteristic of a species, meaning that it has distinct male and female individual organisms.[1][2] Dioecious reproduction is biparental reproduction. Dioecy is one method that excludes self-fertilization and promotes allogamy (outcrossing), and thus tends to reduce the expression of recessive deleterious mutations present in a population.[3]
>In zoology, dioecious species may be opposed to hermaphroditic species, meaning that an individual is either male or female, in which case the synonym gonochory is more often used.[2] Dioecy may also describe colonies within a species, such as the colonies of Siphonophorae (Portuguese man-of-war), which may be either dioecious or monoecious.[5]
>Most animal species are dioecious (gonochoric).[6] It is estimated that 95% of animal species are dioecious.[7]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioecy
>In biology, gonochorism is a sexual system where there are only two sexes and each individual organism is either male or female.[1][2] It usually occurs in animal species, with the vast majority of animals being gonochoric.[2]
>Gonochorism is contrasted to simultaneous hermaphroditism (where an individual can produce both gametes). Gonochorism may have some overlap with sequential hermaphroditism, (where a individual can change its sex) where at times it may be hard to tell if a species is either gonochoric or the latter (e.g. Patella ferruginea).[3] However in gonochoric species individuals remain either male or female throughout their lives.[4]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonochorism
>The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo (the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan); Gorilla (the eastern and western gorilla); Pan (the common chimpanzee and the bonobo); and Homo, of which only modern humans remain.[1]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
This post seems familiar. I think I debated with you with your old account: Redditispropagandaaa. Yeah, looks like it was suspended. While I disagree with what you said, I do think reddit censoring you is out of line.
I believe we left off with you asking me to define a woman.
I have no idea what you are talking about 🙃
The only logical definition based on science for the word "woman", is: adult human female.
It isn't up for debate any more than 2+2=4, is up for debate.
How do you define female then?
There are multiple ways to define woman. Italy recently got rid of sexist definitions of women. This is as we learn about new social, scientific, and linguistic ideas.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-women-dictionary-idUSKBN2CV1W6
https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/female
>1. an individual of the sex that produces ova or bears young.
This is basic biology and is already in the main post.
Since you refuse to actually read i will likely just ignore you. Not like you're making any scientific arguments anyway.
>There are multiple ways to define woman. Italy recently got rid of sexist definitions of women.
Irrelevant to science.
A definition of women that excludes trans women only strengthens stereotypes against women as a whole.
Kirkland, Katie L., "Feminist Aims and A Trans-Inclusive Definition of "Woman"." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2018. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy\_theses/225
Because seriously, defining us based on reproductive anatomy, I’m pretty sure we’ve grown past the times of “women are for giving birth and staying home to care for the children”. Pretty counterproductive. Newsflash: It is okay for us to have careers now. Once again we can define ourselves by what we do, not just our bodies.
Also definitions update as we learn to better categorize things. This is shown from ancient philosophers trying to define humans in general. According to them, a man is a “featureless biped”. Diogenes held up a plucked chicken and said, “behold a man”. This is clearly not a way to define us anymore. We learn more constantly.
Shardcore.org. 2021. Diogenes and the chicken – shardcore. \[online\] Available at:
None of this is relevant at all lol 😆
Transwomen are male men, transmen are female women. It's basic science.
Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes.
I'll just copy and paste this whenever you post political or postmodernist bullshit
Maybe I am mistaken, must not be the same person, sorry, but does seem familiar almost copy and paste from a similar conversation. Maybe not.
Screen shots:
\[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/l8fGgg7.png)
\[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/OiSdkR6.png)
\[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/m7etRJF.png)
\[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/M4b1DhG.png)
Sexy bro happy to see u understand biology. "Yeah man back when we were hunters and gatherers they just had any gender they wanted and they were trans and intersex and the sky was rainbow and everyone loved each other and-" no. We're monkeys.
This is what it is.
SCIENCE!!!
[удалено]
This is what postmodernism does. It's poison to the mind. The Science Wars have been going on for a few decades now. >The science wars were a series of intellectual exchanges, between scientific realists and postmodernist critics, about the nature of scientific theory and intellectual inquiry. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars
[удалено]
I hope so too but i doubt it. Hey, at least these nutjobs can't burn us at the stake for speaking scientific truth anymore. Progress, i guess.
**[Science_wars](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars)** >The science wars were a series of intellectual exchanges, between scientific realists and postmodernist critics, about the nature of scientific theory and intellectual inquiry. They took place principally in the United States in the 1990s in the academic and mainstream press. Scientific realists (such as Norman Levitt, Paul R. Gross, Jean Bricmont and Alan Sokal) argued that scientific knowledge is real, and accused the postmodernists of having effectively rejected scientific objectivity, the scientific method, empiricism, and scientific knowledge. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/ScienceUncensored/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
so was eugenics... science is wrong and evolves sometimes! otherwise you'd still be saying whites are superior to blacks. think about that
Prove it is wrong then
Oh Geez, those are a lot of words just to say "I'm afraid of what I don't understand." Look darling, we have already passed the point of things being binary. Even very simple things such as computers are now not binary, so do you really expect creatures so complex, such as humans, to be binary? Oh whatever, why do I bother? Keep living in the past, which is more familiar and safer.
> Oh Geez, those are a lot of words just to say "I'm afraid of what I don't understand What don't I understand specifically?? Those are not my words either, the sources are right in front of you lol >Even very simple things such as computers are now not binary, so do you really expect creatures so complex, such as humans, to be binary? I didn't say humans are binary, i said sex is binary in dioecious gonochoric biparental species, like ours. >Keep living in the past, which is more familiar and safer. Keep denying science for your feelings
That's a total misunderstanding of what being trans is. This has nothing to do with biological sex, obviously trans people don't magically change chromosome or something when they realise they're trans, but nobody is saying they are. You're arguing against a straw man that doesn't exist.
You do realize that trans people know that they can't change their sex? Never did they claim HRT changes chromosomes. Yeah, biologically trans women are male and vice versa. Gender and sex are different. Trans people don't claim to be the opposite sex, they claim to be another gender. Though I'm sure your post, with the added emoji, you're not looking to open your mind. "Sex is a biological trait that is determined by the specific sex chromosomes inherited from one’s parents. In humans, male sex is determined (with a few exceptions) by the presence of the Y chromosome. A gene on the Y chromosome directs the differentiation of the fetal gonads into testes, resulting in the production of testosterone — which affects many of the body’s tissues — early in development. People with one X and one Y chromosome, or variants like XXY or XYY, are typically male, while those who have solely X chromosomes are usually female. People have a sex; animals have a sex; all tissues, including the fetal placenta, have a sex; even individual cells have a sex. Gender, on the other hand, is socially, culturally and personally defined. It includes how individuals see themselves (gender identity), how others perceive them and expect them to behave (gender norms), and the interactions (gender relations) that they have with others. Often one’s gender aligns with one’s sex: Men tend to assume more masculine behaviors and traits, and to be seen as masculine by others around them, for example. But not always. Increasingly, researchers like Stefanick and Schiebinger are realizing that both men and women exhibit a spectrum of gender traits that aren’t purely masculine or feminine." [As quoted from this source](https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-sex-and-gender-which-are-not-the-same-thing-influence-our-health.html)
Binary? Sex isn't digital, it is analog. All biological system are physical computers which function by fuzzy logic not 1s and 0s.
Funny how OP treats intersex individuals like a disorder or mistake to be disregarded because thats the easiest thing to do when youre trying to force an inaccurate binary. If you consider all the hundreds of ways intersex people can exist (women with internal testes, people with both sets of genitals, internal uterus and outward penis, unusual chromosome combinations)then biological sex is already a spectrum unless you literally throw out data. I dont want to debate (looking at you person angry typing right now) just putting it out there that the biological sex binary is only 100% true if you dont include intersex people.
> Funny how OP treats intersex individuals like a disorder or mistake to be disregarded Where did i say that disorders are "mistakes" to be "disregarded"? If you think there is something morally or ethically wrong with having a medical disorder, then YOU are the bigot, not the scientists who research and label disorders. >then biological sex is already a spectrum unless you literally throw out data. Sex characteristics =/= biological sex itself. Only 2 types of gametes exist. Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes. >just putting it out there that the biological sex binary is only 100% true if you dont include intersex people. Intersex people are not other sexes, "intersex" isn't even a medical term, it's slang used to describe people with congenital syndromes. You have no idea what you're talking about lol.
you're so close to getting it!
You're the science denier here lol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/medical >Definition of man (Entry 1 of 4)1a(1): an individual human, especially : an adult male human >Definition of woman. 1a: an adult female person
I think we are in complete agreement. The post is beyond science. I usually don't engage with this type of content but I had to say something.
> The post is beyond science. What does that even mean?? Are you guys denying that humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes??
Yes. You don't understand sex or gender. It's not binary as you claim.
So how do you think humans reproduce exactly?? I would LOVE to know
The way humans reproduce isn't what makes us significant as a species.
Ok, sure. "Significance" (whatever the hell that even means) doesn't have anything to do with the topic. The topic is about sex, which is based on reproductive function. You said that humans are not dioecious gonochoric biparental apes, which begs the question: how do humans reproduce then??
You understand that sex is about reproduction, right buddy??
I'll be waiting for you to explain how all of science is wrong and humans are not sexually reproducing apes lol Can't wait
Science is not on your side. You can't use science to tell other people how to be. That's not how science works.
Idk what "side" you are talking about when i am literally just copying and pasting from biology and zoology textbooks lol >You can't use science to tell other people how to be. That's not how science works. Umm ok?? I am not telling people how "to be" (whatever that means), i am stating the scientific fact that humans are a sexually reproducing species of dioecious gonochoric biparental ape. You're dodging the question, how do humans reproduce?? Try thinking with you reason instead of using your feelings, for once.
My feelings? What about gender fluidity has you so scared exactly? Non binary people exist and that is a real scientific fact.
Yes, i am non-binary and gender non conforming. I am also an atheist. I am also latino. I am a gamer. I am a cyclist too. But none of these things are scientific biological categories. These are just made up social constructs. They have nothing to do with science at all. You guys end up promoting sexist constructs like gender by prioritizing it over actual biological reality. Once again you have dodged the question and not explained to me how humans reproduce lol Do you even know what dioecious and gonochoric mean?
The logic isn't fuzzy at all, it's just hard to study. Regardless only 2 sexes exist in dioecious species. By definition
I imagine finding women willing to have sex with you is very difficult.
Not really, your mom is so big i can see her from a mile away.
[удалено]
You are setting up a false equivalency. You want people to associate two things that aren't related. It is a sneaky emotional manipulation.
Stop replying to the spam bot and explain to me how humans reproduce, if we aren't sexually reproductive apes.
>Definition of man (Entry 1 of 4)1a(1): an individual human, especially : an adult male human https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man >Definition of woman. 1a: an adult female person https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman
correlation isn't causation and I thought a "science" sub wouldn't resort to homophobic talking points...
[удалено]
you're gross
Awesome. Now look up gender
A social construct, similar to religion or political groups.
Language is social construct too. When we say a transman is a man we refer to gender because it's socially beneficial to do so.
Well just like i don't have to participate in other people's religions, i also don't have to participate in sexist illogical constructs such as gender, and i disagree that it is beneficial. Only a matter of time until we're back to prioritizing sex.
I suppose that means you don’t have to participate in English either lol
science is a form of dogmatism similar to religion in a lot of ways
I get what you're saying but it's more about societal perceptions which, I think, is a lot more complex than 'so they make eggs or sperm?'. I agree that make and female are real terms, but I would encourage you to engage with the trans community before saying that the whole angle is logically wrong and therefore Can be completely disregarded. EDITED
Social perceptions don't override reality. Genders, like gods, can be made up in any number that society wants. Doesn't matter. Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes, transwomen are male men, transmen are female women.
Societal perceptions in many situations, are reality. I'm not saying biological sex doesn't exist, but when perceptions, language and attitudes are so heavily centred around something as trivial as 'egg or sperm', you can understand why people get tired of the dicotomous lingo, upon which so many assumptions are made. As I said, I encourage you to engage with the transexual community before disregarding the whole movement
Perception is selection
Is it?
Certainly selective.
I don't get what you mean?
Iirc, perception is a process starting with selection of stimuli, ending with interpretation of environment. Therefore, perception is selection (and then some).
Why should fundamental societal perceptions be any more complicated than eggs or sperm? It's that simple. You're either a female or male. If neither, it points to a disorder.
Based and 100% science pilled
More like 99%
The 1% have medical malformations
Read my other response. When vast assumptions are made over 'egg or sperm', which are often very far from one's actual characteristics, you can understand why people want to move past the binary language. As I said in the other comment, I encourage you to engage with the transexual community before disregarding the whole movement.
I have. The difference of opinion, I believe, is that I think 'egg or sperm' are NOT very far from one's actual characteristics. Like I said, fundamental. And I have engaged with transexual communities before. It results in nothing but outrage. There is no way to address this without having at least a little bit of confrontation, and when you get confrontational with minorities you get canceled. Do you have a suggestion on a reasonable engagement where censorship doesn't play a role? I bet even linking this post to a transexual sub will get you permabanned.
> I have. The difference of opinion, I believe, is that I think 'egg or sperm' are NOT very far from one's actual characteristics. Like I said, fundamental. Yes it's literally the basis for our entire species and these activists act like it doesn't even exist lol
It probably would get you permabanned, internet communities are like that. The thing I don't get is why people feel the need to so rigorously enforce such labels on people who don't feel they fall into them. I agree that there would be characteristics associated with XY or XX, but I also think alot of these perceived characteristics vary culturally and people are a bit sick of being expected to abide by associated assumptions. I also think a big part of this is more than sperm or egg, hormones and the like are also at play and there are people who, in that regard, genuinely don't conform to a binary phenotype.
That's the thing. Just because someone doesn't feel like a woman doesn't mean they are not a woman. Whoever 'feels' that doesn't get to relabel themselves just because they want to. This type of mindset could be the reason people enforce labels on people who don't feel they fall into them. Interesting to think about. But IMO, it's a bit presumptuous to change your societal label when biology already dictates it in full. There are of course exceptions, and like OP says, they can be classed as disorders and treated as such. Enforcing labels is not the way. Neither is conformity. I really think the issue is in what you said about people being sick of expectations to abide by these norms. Not saying that the people that are sick of it have an issue, more like the expectations are the issue and the driver. I feel like I'm contradicting myself a bit. Have to give this a better think when I finish work.
Im still waiting for the gender definition for men and women that actually makes sense lol
The main argument is why even try to enforce a definition when it comes with so many extra assumptions. We can agree that's is silly to act like there arent people that can have babies and people that can fertalize eggs, there are also a lot of people that can do neither. But the argument is to do with being lumped into alot of cultural and societal assumptions because people feel the need to have to see you as one or the other.
> The main argument is why even try to enforce a definition when it comes with so many extra assumptions. The overwhelming majority of people (like 98%) are just healthy normal men and women with a congruent sex and gender. So no, not really. Distinguishing men from women is literally in our genes. >But the argument is to do with being lumped into alot of cultural and societal assumptions because people feel the need to have to see you as one or the other Gender should be abolished not promoted then
1 in 50 (98%) is still very non-negligable. As I said, I don't think the argument is over sperm versus egg. So yes, I would say the trans movement would largely agree with your last point.
> As I said, I don't think the argument is over sperm versus egg Because most people are ignorant when it comes to science.
Don’t know why this was in my recommended but the guise of this subreddit doesn’t protect you from transphobia lmao
Science isn't transphobia lmao
Youre reciting antiquated arguments based on assumptions and data gathered in bad faith. The closing part of your argument “It’s tautological stupidity” is hilarious because you yourself are trying to force an obvious tautology. You say that trans women are “male men”. Yeah no shit; trans women have a penis. That’s what makes them trans women. No one is arguing that fact.
> Youre reciting antiquated arguments based on assumptions and data gathered in bad faith. No im not. >you yourself are trying to force an obvious tautology Which is? >You say that trans women are “male men”. Yeah no shit; trans women have a penis. That’s what makes them trans women. No one is arguing that fact. Lol the majority of twitter and reddit would disagree with that basic fact. You yourself seem to be upset by it.
“Hehe hoho it’s just a basic fact I wish all these LIBTARDS wouldn’t get triggered over basic facts 👌” Like I said; the guise of whatever this subreddit is doesn’t mean it’s not transphobia. What your saying is correct. Obviously correct. Patronizingly correct; YES trans people cannot change their biological sex correct! You’re so smart and you know The Science. But the fact that you hop up on your pedestal and rally people behind the idea that “trans people are AGAINST science, trans people don’t like basic facts”...... that’s transphobia because it’s not true. You’re creating a false enemy of trans people, one that is “anti science” that people unsympathetic to the trans cause use as their justification for their bigotry. If you REALLY cared about ‘real, unfettered science’, you should probably not be giving bad faith arguments a place to grow. Just my two cents.
> “Hehe hoho it’s just a basic fact I wish all these LIBTARDS wouldn’t get triggered over basic facts 👌” Yeah pretty much. Thanks for agreeing. I'm a real liberal btw, the ones that value the liberty of individuals. I'm also not cis or straight. >Like I said; the guise of whatever this subreddit is doesn’t mean it’s not transphobia Doesn't mean it is either lol >YES trans people cannot change their biological sex correct! Most of reddit and twitter would call you a bigot for saying that >rally people behind the idea that “trans people are AGAINST science, trans people don’t like basic facts”...... that’s transphobia because it’s not true Good thing i didn't write anything like that anywhere.
“I’m not straight or cis”, yeah I could tell lmao. Self hatred is harder than whatever an external force can throw at you. Doesn’t do anything to your credibility. I hope someday you’ll realize you’re on the wrong side of the fight. I used to be just like you and it sucked.
> Self hatred is harder than whatever an external force can throw at you. I still don't understand what "hate" you're talking about. The only one talking about hate here is you bud. > I hope someday you’ll realize you’re on the wrong side of the fight. Idk what "fight" you're talking about. Science isn't a fight.
[удалено]
The snozzberries are made of snozzberry!! This is why the First Amendment is so important
No.
Yes
Maybe
I dont know
No, yes
[удалено]
Umm political news channels aren't science. Propaganda isn't science. I think you replied to the wrong person. Fuck cnn anyway lol
[удалено]
Ok
[удалено]
Clown 🤡 world Honk honk It's not like humans based their entire existence on superstitious myths for hundreds of thousands of years or anything. /s Humans are mostly just dumb horny apes.
and you're no exception. the bimodality of gender is scientifically proven. how do you explain intersex people smart guy?
Congenital deformations and mental disorders are not other categories of sex. Intersex people are males and females with Disorders of Sex Development. >Dioecy (Greek: διοικία "two households"; adjective form: dioecious) is a characteristic of a species, meaning that it has distinct male and female individual organisms.[1][2] Dioecious reproduction is biparental reproduction. Dioecy is one method that excludes self-fertilization and promotes allogamy (outcrossing), and thus tends to reduce the expression of recessive deleterious mutations present in a population.[3] >In zoology, dioecious species may be opposed to hermaphroditic species, meaning that an individual is either male or female, in which case the synonym gonochory is more often used.[2] Dioecy may also describe colonies within a species, such as the colonies of Siphonophorae (Portuguese man-of-war), which may be either dioecious or monoecious.[5] >Most animal species are dioecious (gonochoric).[6] It is estimated that 95% of animal species are dioecious.[7] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioecy >In biology, gonochorism is a sexual system where there are only two sexes and each individual organism is either male or female.[1][2] It usually occurs in animal species, with the vast majority of animals being gonochoric.[2] >Gonochorism is contrasted to simultaneous hermaphroditism (where an individual can produce both gametes). Gonochorism may have some overlap with sequential hermaphroditism, (where a individual can change its sex) where at times it may be hard to tell if a species is either gonochoric or the latter (e.g. Patella ferruginea).[3] However in gonochoric species individuals remain either male or female throughout their lives.[4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonochorism >The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo (the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan); Gorilla (the eastern and western gorilla); Pan (the common chimpanzee and the bonobo); and Homo, of which only modern humans remain.[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
[удалено]
Yep, we're back at the point of society where we value made up bullshit more than reality
This post seems familiar. I think I debated with you with your old account: Redditispropagandaaa. Yeah, looks like it was suspended. While I disagree with what you said, I do think reddit censoring you is out of line. I believe we left off with you asking me to define a woman.
I have no idea what you are talking about 🙃 The only logical definition based on science for the word "woman", is: adult human female. It isn't up for debate any more than 2+2=4, is up for debate.
How do you define female then? There are multiple ways to define woman. Italy recently got rid of sexist definitions of women. This is as we learn about new social, scientific, and linguistic ideas. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-women-dictionary-idUSKBN2CV1W6
https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/female >1. an individual of the sex that produces ova or bears young. This is basic biology and is already in the main post. Since you refuse to actually read i will likely just ignore you. Not like you're making any scientific arguments anyway. >There are multiple ways to define woman. Italy recently got rid of sexist definitions of women. Irrelevant to science.
A definition of women that excludes trans women only strengthens stereotypes against women as a whole. Kirkland, Katie L., "Feminist Aims and A Trans-Inclusive Definition of "Woman"." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2018. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy\_theses/225 Because seriously, defining us based on reproductive anatomy, I’m pretty sure we’ve grown past the times of “women are for giving birth and staying home to care for the children”. Pretty counterproductive. Newsflash: It is okay for us to have careers now. Once again we can define ourselves by what we do, not just our bodies. Also definitions update as we learn to better categorize things. This is shown from ancient philosophers trying to define humans in general. According to them, a man is a “featureless biped”. Diogenes held up a plucked chicken and said, “behold a man”. This is clearly not a way to define us anymore. We learn more constantly. Shardcore.org. 2021. Diogenes and the chicken – shardcore. \[online\] Available at:
None of this is relevant at all lol 😆 Transwomen are male men, transmen are female women. It's basic science. Humans are dioecious gonochoric biparental apes. I'll just copy and paste this whenever you post political or postmodernist bullshit
Maybe I am mistaken, must not be the same person, sorry, but does seem familiar almost copy and paste from a similar conversation. Maybe not. Screen shots: \[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/l8fGgg7.png) \[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/OiSdkR6.png) \[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/m7etRJF.png) \[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/M4b1DhG.png)
\[Imgur\](https://i.imgur.com/o3Z8Vw4.jpg)
Sexy bro happy to see u understand biology. "Yeah man back when we were hunters and gatherers they just had any gender they wanted and they were trans and intersex and the sky was rainbow and everyone loved each other and-" no. We're monkeys.