Transphobes gunning hard for 'paedophilia' angle all of a sudden

[belboid]

Really? What, uterus and ovary transplants? Fallopian tubes? Testes?

You know you are using very vague terms to describe very specific things. Do you genuinely not recognise this, or is it deliberate?

 

[Raheem]

Should cleft lips be repaired, or does that mean turning people into walking biological lies?

 

[The Gnome]

What about chromosones? You mentioned hormone profiles which can be changed so that aspect of our biology is not fixed at conception. Genitals can also be changed as can secondary sexual characteristics so that aspect of biology is not fixed at conception either. Internal reproductive orgams can't be changed yet but it might be possible in the future. It's already been done in mice. So that aspect of biology may also be possible to change.

So the question of whether and when these changes amount to a change of sex category is very much debatable. It is a matter of opinion and it is you that is trying to shut down debate by enforcing your view of what constitutes sex categories on everyone else and refusing to acknowledge others may have a different and equally valid view. And we're still only on biology. We haven't even discussed whether womanhood and manhood are social, legal and political categories as well as biological ones. You won't even let us get there because you are so intent on shutting down debate by insisting (wrongly) that biology is fixed at birth and nothing else matters. Why are you so frightened of other people's points of view?

Yes, chromosomes. XX and XY. They are fundamental to our biological make up. Can you switch them by surgery or by taking a pill? No. Genitals are a non starter -- they are sexual organs and are physical. You can surgically alter them but a P turned in to a V? The fluid produced, if anything, will still be semen not eggs. Same with turning V into a P. The fluid produced will be eggs, not semen.

Biology or at least our chromosomal structure (sex ) is determined at conception, not at birth. And it is indeed fixed. That is something that nobody can argue against or rebut. It's just the way it is. I'm sorry.

What constitutes sex categories is not a view. It is a universal fact. Nobody can take a view on whether an XX is female and XY is male. XX IS female and XY IS male -- that's it. There's no debating it.

You're placing yourself in conjecture territory when you say internal reproductive organs can be changed possibly in the future. And this is where any debate about gender starts. And I'm not scared of other people's views. I do challenge them.

 

[Epona]

You do know that not everyone has your perfect set of XX or XY chromosomes, or easily determined set of genitalia, right?

 

[NoXion]

I'm not particularly religious, if you must know. So what about chromosomes? Can medicine change XX to XY or vice versa? No. Can medicine or surgery change our reproductive organs? No. I would love, on behalf of my trans childhood friend, for medical science to be able to do that but the reality is, it can't. Our biology is established, set, fixed at conception. And norhing can change it once it is determined.

Chromosomes are even less relevant to the question of one's gender than one's sex is. It's entirely possible to have the XX karyotype while otherwise presenting physically as male. Even to the point where testing is required to detect it.

Yes, in the overwhelming majority of cases, one's gender aligns with the corresponding sex and karyotype. But because human biology that you so love to bang on about is a bit messy and isn't 100% black and white, exceptions thus exist and are no less valid, and no less human, for being so.

 

[The Gnome]

You know you are using very vague terms to describe very specific things. Do you genuinely not recognise this, or is it deliberate?

I don't understand this ^. You were so emphatic in stating that surgery can change our reproductive organs and that it is an everyday occurrence. So I asked about ovary transplants or testes transplants. Now you say that I'm being vague. What are you not clear about fallopian tubes or ovaries? -- they are basic part of the female reproductive organ. And testes is the main male reproductive organ.

Were you, by any chance, thinking of sexual organs instead of reproductive organs?

 

[The Gnome]

You do know that not everyone has your perfect set of XX or XY chromosomes, or easily determined set of genitalia, right?

Yes, I do. I also know that that is an exception rather than the rule.

 

[smokedout]

Biology or at least our chromosomal structure (sex ) is determined at conception, not at birth. And it is indeed fixed. That is something that nobody can argue against or rebut. It's just the way it is. I'm sorry.

So biology isn't fixed at conception only chromosomes are. That's quite a climbdown, there's a lot more to biology than just chromosomes.

How did people categorise sex for the thousands of years prior to the discovery of chromosomes?

What constitutes sex categories is not a view. It is a universal fact. Nobody can take a view on whether an XX is female and XY is male. XX IS female and XY IS male -- that's it. There's no debating.

It's very debatable when chromosomes don't match up to the usual sex phenotype as sometimes happens.

 

[The Gnome]

Chromosomes are even less relevant to the question of one's gender than one's sex is. It's entirely possible to have the XX karyotype while otherwise presenting physically as male. Even to the point where testing is required to detect it.

Yes, in the overwhelming majority of cases, one's gender aligns with the corresponding sex and karyotype. But because human biology that you so love to bang on about is a bit messy and isn't 100% black and white, exceptions thus exist and are no less valid, and no less human, for being so.

But you are arguing the exception. Why? As you yourself claim, in the overwhelming majoriy of cases, gender correlates with sex and vice versa. The exception does not disprove the rule.

Please let me reiterate: In the overwhelmingly majority of cases, adult human male corresponds with man and adult human female corresponds with woman.

 

[krtek a houby]

Not quite. I draw the line at people denying biological truth when taking the moral high ground in order to pander to one's sense of inclusivity. But, yeah, IMO, we musn't ignore the importance of gender binary since that is how every society on the planet is organised and how they all function. Doesn't necessarily mean that, legally, there can't be room for a gender that sits between the two.

I am neither transphobic nor homophobic. What I subscribe to is the notion that transgender is an a gender in and of itself. And that it should be legally recognised as such. Something that a transgender should firght for.

Being trans is good enough. Why are trans women activists, for example, fighting to be recognised as women to the extent of denying biological truth and redefining the term "woman" to include them? It's counter intuitive. It's cakeism. A greek tragedy. I don't get it. Don't trans activists realise that the second a trans woman "becomes" a woman is the moment her transgender identity ceases to exist? Erased. Eliminated. Terminated.

Why don't you ask them, you fucking bin lid?

 

[The Gnome]

So biology isn't fixed at conception only chromosomes are. That's quite a climbdown, there's a lot more to biology than just chromosomes.

How did people categorise sex for the thousands of years prior to the discovery of chromosomes?



It's very debatable when chromosomes don't match up to the usual sex phenotype as sometimes happens.

I qualified it because we're talking about sex.

People prior to the discovery of chromosomes categorised sex at birth, by observation. But it doesn't negate the fact that sex is determined at conception. I don't understand why it even occurred to you to ask that.

"Sometimes it happens." You are arguing the exception rather than the rule. The tiny minority rather than the majority.

 

[The Gnome]

Why don't you ask them, you fucking bin lid?

^ Really?

 

[Orang Utan]

I don't understand this

You certainly don’t

 

[krtek a houby]

^ Really?

Yeah, really.

You do realise some of the people you are denigrating, are members of this community?

Haven't they suffered enough abuse without pricks like you rocking up here and abusing them even more?

You're not here to "debate". You're here to troll and spread your hate and prejudices.

 

[The Gnome]

Should cleft lips be repaired, or does that mean turning people into walking biological lies?

What do cleft lips have to do with changing our biological sex?

 

[Serge Forward]

Is the tedious twat still here?

 

[krtek a houby]

Is the tedious twat still here?

It's mystifying but suppose it provides a comedy option for a day or two.

Meanwhile, the target of his ignorance and stupidity will just have to suffer it. As ever.

 

[NoXion]

But you are arguing the exception. Why?

Because the exceptions are still people, just as worthy of respect and validation as anyone else. Furthermore, their minority status means that they are the favoured targets of reactionaries and other scum who would seek to leverage their differences as a means of imposing their vile political and social ambitions.

 

[Epona]

Yes, I do. I also know that that is an exception rather than the rule.

I believe it is actually more common than it is to be trans or non-binary or experience gender dysphoria (which is also "the exception rather than the rule"), so what is your question caller?

 

[tonysingh]

What do cleft lips have to do with changing our biological sex?

Why not answer the question that was posed instead of being obtuse?

 

[The Gnome]

Yeah, really.

You do realise some of the people you are denigrating, are members of this community?

Haven't they suffered enough abuse without pricks like you rocking up here and abusing them even more?

You're not here to "debate". You're here to troll and spread your hate and prejudices.

You seem to forget, I'm the one on the receving end of your and other posters' personal abuse for expressing an opposing view. But denigrating transgender people? You mean, I am expressing the view that transgender people should retain and be proud of their transgender identity and fight for it instead of fighting for what their activists advocating on their behalf?

If that's not it then maybe you could give me a list of how I have denigrated anyone.

 

[smokedout]

I qualified it because we're talking about sex.

But previously you claimed that hormone profiles were fixed at conception (which is wrong even on your terms, they can change in utero). Are you now saying hormones are not pertinent to sex categorisation?

People prior to the discovery of chromosomes categorised sex at birth, by observation. But it doesn't negate the fact that sex is determined at conception. I don't understand why it even occurred to you to ask that.

So how humans categorise sex has changed. It is fluid and therefore debatable.

"Sometimes it happens." You are arguing the exception rather than the rule. The tiny minority rather than the majority.

But the fact it happens sometimes means it is also debatable whether chromosomes are always the best way to categorise sex. But you claim there is no debate, that your opinion is correct and no other opinion has worth. That's staggeringly arrogant, especially seen as you keep getting things wrong and don't seem to actually know much about this.

 

[Epona]

You seem to forget, I'm the one on the receving end of your and other posters' personal abuse for expressing an opposing view. But denigrating transgender people? You mean, I am expressing the view that transgender people should retain and be proud of their transgender identity and fight for it instead of fighting for what their activists advocating on their behalf?

If that's not it then maybe you could give me a list of how I have denigrated anyone.

No the thing we are not forgetting is that you've barged into a trans thread with your bigotry. FUCK OFF.

 

[The Gnome]

Because the exceptions are still people, just as worthy of respect and validation as anyone else. Furthermore, their minority status means that they are the favoured targets of reactionaries and other scum who would seek to leverage their differences as a means of imposing their vile political and social ambitions.

Fair enough.

 

[krtek a houby]

You seem to forget, I'm the one on the receving end of your and other posters' personal abuse for expressing an opposing view. But denigrating transgender people? You mean, I am expressing the view that transgender people should retain and be proud of their transgender identity and fight for it instead of fighting for what their activists advocating on their behalf?

If that's not it then maybe you could give me a list of how I have denigrated anyone.

Of course you're the victim in all this.

 

[The Gnome]

I believe it is actually more common than it is to be trans or non-binary or experience gender dysphoria (which is also "the exception rather than the rule"), so what is your question caller?

You asked me a question. Not the other way around.

 

[The Gnome]

No the thing we are not forgetting is that you've barged into a trans thread with your bigotry. FUCK OFF.

I questioned the sincerity of another poster's statement about tolerance of trans activists.

 

[The Gnome]

Why not answer the question that was posed instead of being obtuse?

Because the question is irrelevant.

 

[The Gnome]

Of course you're the victim in all this.

Nope. I never play the victim. I just reminded you that you and your chums have been hurling personal abuse at me.

 

[krtek a houby]

Nope. I never play the victim. I just reminded you that you and your chums have been hurling personal abuse at me.

You got what you came for.

Now fuck off transphobic scum.