Sorry, but this is important.


Notice how that says "primarily two biological sexes"? That means mostly, mainly, chiefly, and nobody is denying that. But you seem to want to deny that it inevitably also means "there are not always only two biological sexes".

The definition you want to rely on says "... male and female, which are determined by the production of either small or large gametes (sperm or eggs)".

So how does that definition accommodate people who produce no gametes? What sex are they? If all you've got to define male and female is the production of, respectively, small or large gametes you immediately run out of categories in which to place someone who produces neither.

Please read this: https://factually.co/fact-checks/science/human-biological-sexes-male-and-female-explained-0e1013
 
Show us your definition of a woman.

It will be interesting to see if it says "...and any man who self identifies as a woman."
 
Man and woman...male and female.

There isn't any other.

Transgenderism is an illness. Simple.
 
I started out trying to reply to JohnD's posts, but decided it was pointless. He just goes on and on and on, saying the same things over and over and over again, he repeatedly posts offensively false claims about what I have said, or what he thinks I believe, which are based entirely on his fantasies and are not supportable in any way by anything I've posted. He repeatedly posts what he believes are simple definitions and yet they don't seem to be simple enough for him to be able to explain them.

He seems to want to deal with a situation which is complex, and contentious, and full of messy conflicts by simply ridiculing it out of existence.

Why he does that, I don't know. I have some theories, but the Mods will not allow me to voice them.

The message I'd like to give to JohnD, and all the others like him is this:
  • You are not going to be able to ridicule transgender people out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to denigrate them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to legislate them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to ignore them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to deny them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to oppress them out of existence.

We tried all those things with homosexuality, we had the same moral panicking, the same frothing illiberalism from right-wing media, and yet when we let all of those things go society did not implode.

We need to do the same regarding transgender people.
 
I started out trying to reply to JohnD's posts, but decided it was pointless. He just goes on and on and on, saying the same things over and over and over again, he repeatedly posts offensively false claims about what I have said, or what he thinks I believe, which are based entirely on his fantasies and are not supportable in any way by anything I've posted. He repeatedly posts what he believes are simple definitions and yet they don't seem to be simple enough for him to be able to explain them.

He seems to want to deal with a situation which is complex, and contentious, and full of messy conflicts by simply ridiculing it out of existence.

Why he does that, I don't know. I have some theories, but the Mods will not allow me to voice them.

The message I'd like to give to JohnD, and all the others like him is this:
  • You are not going to be able to ridicule transgender people out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to denigrate them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to legislate them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to ignore them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to deny them out of existence.
  • You are not going to be able to oppress them out of existence.

We tried all those things with homosexuality, we had the same moral panicking, the same frothing illiberalism from right-wing media, and yet when we let all of those things go society did not implode.

We need to do the same regarding transgender people.
If someone disagrees with me im not too fussed why do you care so much?
 
If someone disagrees with me im not too fussed why do you care so much?

Because this is important.

Some people care about important things.

Some people don't give a toss about anything, they just want to joke and giggle their way out of ever having to behave in a mature way.
 
Because this is important.

Some people care about important things.

Some people don't give a toss about anything, they just want to joke and giggle their way out of ever having to behave in a mature way.
Do you mean me?
 
Because this is important.

Some people care about important things.

Some people don't give a toss about anything, they just want to joke and giggle their way out of ever having to behave in a mature way.
Nothing important about a man who thinks he is a woman, he may think he is one. Unfortunately for him he isn't and never will be. I can imagine you sat at your computer in a skirt and blouse and thinking we all must see this as important. It is the most insignificant thing in my life. Now man up and get on with yours.
 
I started out trying to reply to JohnD's posts, but decided it was pointless.
Mainly because you don't address what is at issue - i.e. men pretending to be women then insisting they have the right to enter a woman's changing room or enter a woman's sport etc. Rather, you waffle on about stuff completely irrelevant to what he is saying and what everyone else is concerned about.
 
Back
Top