Accepting trans women isn't about denying science, but having the intellectual honesty to recognize that human biology is far more complex and mutable than what we learned in middle school. True realists align with the full, nuanced medical picture rather than clinging to oversimplified assumptions.
>>43506786> OP thinks too muchfactory reset to silly girl in 3 2 1
>>43506786>muh complexityIntersexoids can troon out. Normal amabs shouldn't.
>>43506786Intellectualism is lost cause. You're never going to prove transwomen are real women with logic. People will want to accommodate tranners if they like them as people.
>>43506934>
>>43506960Wait, are you saying we should require karyotype testing before allowing transition, or is it more of a vibe-based check? Just trying to picture the policy here.
>>43506786Intellectual honesty is recognizing that the science doesn't say that trans women are women. With all the nuance and advanced research in the world we still haven't proven that trans women are equivalent to natal women and likely never will.
>>43506979>>43506996Why not? Just because you said so? I have objective facts and logic on my side. You could pose a counter-argument to my claims instead of merely relying on your baseless assertions. See below.Hormone replacement changes a trans person's sex through gene expression, making cells/tissue act more like if they had XX or XY dependent on hormone being added.https://www.the-scientist.com/hormone-therapy-triggers-male-gene-patterns-in-transgender-mens-cells-71014https://www.news-medical.net/news/20220228/Study-shows-the-impact-of-gender-affirming-hormone-therapy-on-epigenetic-signature-of-genes.aspxHomologous structures: men and women's sex organs are already alike beginning in the womb, and hormone changes pull a trans person's sex organs more towards the desired sex organ.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_related_male_and_female_reproductive_organshttps://www.meddean.luc.edu/lumen/meded/grossanatomy/pelvis/homology.htmlhttps://www.maudmedical.com/news/happy-november-from-maudViable eggs can come from male people, viable sperm from female people.https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/05/27/1177191913/sperm-or-egg-in-lab-breakthrough-in-reproduction-designer-babies-ivghttps://theconversation.com/eggs-from-men-sperm-from-women-how-stem-cell-science-may-change-how-we-reproduce-219005Most cis women have Y chromosomes in some cells:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32065627/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16084184/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3458919/
>>43506786"Trans" isn't scientific, it's a social construct.
>>43507002Because none of the data you cite ever says what you want it to say. You want the data to say "trans women are literally female, no distinction" but what the data actually says is "trans women are feminized males" do you see the difference?
>>43507016Try to pose a counter-argument to my claims instead of merely relying on your baseless assertions. I've provided my case in this thread. You have not.
>>43507002>I have objective facts and logic on my side. You could pose a counter-argument to my claims instead of merely relying on your baseless assertions.I don't want to disprove you. I'm just saying you're not going to convince people with logic and science, that's not the underlying issue.
>>43507021It says exactly what I told you it does. Prove otherwise or you have nothing to stand on.The diversity of nature does not agree with your rigid, Christian extremist ideology.>>43507028If logic and facts don't convince someone, then that's proof they are a silly irrational person who others should not listen to.
>>43506934Sex is very easy to define, and is binary. >do you produce large gametes? female>do you produce small gametes? maleB-B-BUT WHAT ABOUT->intersex? they all align with either the male or female paradigm neatly once you simplify it to gamete production >sterile? their body still has or had the configuration to produce male or female gametes >SRS? you just sterilized yourself, you're still male or female
>>43507002Trans women are not women, definitionally. If a person *transitions* then there MUST be a friction point somewhere, yeah? And it will always be possible to point to this friction point and say "here's the difference." Very strange to try to say they are the same thing, I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment.
>>43507035>If logic and facts don't convince someone, then that's proof they are a silly irrational person who others should not listen to.Not necessarily. In any case you aren't in a position to force people to accept your viewpoint, that has been tried and resulted in a massive backlash against trans-people.If trans-people are viewed as loony radicals they won't be listened to, if they are viewed as kind people worthy of compassion of they will be.
my opinion, trannies are only afforded higher social statuses and privileges based on how pretty/passing/stealth they areeverything else is inconsequential you should have figured out by now that the only way for you to be valid is to be a pretty tranny 7/10 minimum
>>43507035You are as much of a fundamentalist as the most devout Christian. You are unable to stay neutral when interpreting data and distort it with wishful thinking
>>43507059For people who have never produced gametes and whose anatomy never arranged itself toward either gamete type, how would you know which label fits without first deciding what counts as “having the configuration”?
>>43507183The anatomy always arranges itself in such a way that it favors male or female gametes. Even if it's only 51% male and 49% female, it's still male.
>>43507196Your explanation makes no sense. If no gametes are produced, then the anatomy is not arranged in a way that favors any gametes.
>>43507224Quick question for you.Does the existence of people born missing one or both arms mean human limb number is a spectrum?
>>43507109You have made no counterarguments to my statements other than mere assertions. Simply asserting that my claims are "wishful thinking" is not an argument. You have to explain how it is incorrect, or else you're blowing hot air.
>>43507230Are you going to tell a person born with no limbs that they are lying about having no limbs? What a nonsense comparison. Actually, your example proves me correct and you don't even realize it, because you haven't even thought it through. You're parroting something you heard somebody else say. Braindead cattle. Don't give me an outlier in response to me giving you an outlier as if that disproves the existence of outliers. Fucking retard.
>>43507183Do you accept the existence of birth defects? Errors.
>>43507245>resorting to ad hominems and "ackshully you proved me right!!!!" instead of just answering the questionShame. Sex is still binary btw.
>>43507256No, why don't you explain to me what I just asked about?You mentioned people born with no limbs. Let's say you meet such a person. Are you going to act like retarded cattle and repeatedly assert to them that they are lying about having been born with no limbs, because you read that the textbook definition of a human is somebody with limbs?
>>43507097yes and also being biphobic is shooting yourself in the foot because bi people are going to be most likely to find trans people attractive
>>43507272No, I wouldn't. But I also wouldn't believe they are a separate category of human being just because they were born without limbs. I wouldn't say they're on the "limbless spectrum" or they have an "armless phenotype". I'd say their development pathway was interrupted during the limb formation process.
>>43507291Okay, so you have a different philosophy of epistemology from me. Why do you believe that makes you more correct?
>>43507077If we can always point to a friction point and say 'here’s the difference,' would that mean any cis woman who has, say, a hysterectomy or complete androgen insensitivity syndrome also possesses a friction point that distinguishes her from some ideal of womanhood? I’m genuinely wondering how broadly the concept applies.
>>43507183
sex isn't binary because sometimes biology assembles incorrectly okay sweetie?
>>43507327Did they transition?
>>43507035Swyer's xy with a womb is not the same as trans women though.
>>43507315>Why do you believe that makes you more correct?Because I'm backed by science and you're backed by vibes. I studied human development in college, you read some pseudoscientific ramblings by people more interested in the politics of sex and gender than the physical reality of human sexual differentiation.Sex is binary, this is a well-established fact that no amount of semantics or mental gymnastics can overturn. Even in cases of complete gonadal dysgenesis, what we see is an arrestment in typical sexual development not a third (or lack of) sex. In order for there to be a third sex, there would need to be a third gamete. You don't need to convince people you're no different from a natal female to win the "rights" you claim you don't have. Most of society was getting on board with the "sex does not equal gender" thing, including myself.
>>43507398Could you explain why you are intentionally being extremely obtuse? The point of bringing intersex people up isn't to claim to be intersex, but to demonstrate how shaky your definition of womanhood is and how it falls apart under exceptions (and trans people are another kind of definitional exception, just one you refuse to make, because of circular nonsense). You would have realized this was the purpose of bringing it up if you had thought about it for even one minute.You're using a pseudointellectual figleaf of justification for trans exclusion, i.e. appealing to the definition, then when the definition breaks down you start saying all definitions have unstated exceptions, except when you don't want to make the unstated exception, because it breaks the definition. Are you too low IQ to grasp this?
>>43507428Evidently you studied nothing, because you aren't capable of making a case for your position or integrating basic philosophy-of-science insights. Guess you wasted your money.
>>43507327The person who wrote this does not know what epigenetics is as a field of research. Literally everything activates "epigenetic signatures", that's the entire point of epigenetics. Epigenetics is the study of how environmental factors can alter gene expression. Taking exogenous hormones is going to do things to your body, big surprise. So does eating too much processed food or not getting enough sunlight as a baby or CO2 exposure or a myriad of other things.
>>43507428I’m a little confused: when you say sex is binary at the level of physical reality, do you mean every single biological marker (chromosomes, hormones, anatomy) always aligns perfectly into two non-overlapping clusters, or is there an acknowledged range within those two?
>>43507454I did make a case for my position you just refuse to see it because you are blinded by ideology. With the absence of a third gamete, sex is binary.
>>43507471There are two main development pathways for the human body. Arrestments within one of those two pathways does not indicate a "spectrum" no more than someone building half a car and stopping before they put in the engine makes it something completely different.
>>43507472If a third gamete is the only way to get a third sex, how do biologists classify organisms with ovotesticular tissue that produce both sperm and eggs, or neither?Also, I already showed you that viable eggs can come from male people, viable sperm from female people.https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/05/27/1177191913/sperm-or-egg-in-lab-breakthrough-in-reproduction-designer-babies-ivghttps://theconversation.com/eggs-from-men-sperm-from-women-how-stem-cell-science-may-change-how-we-reproduce-219005Why did you ignore this information I gave you? Are you intentionally and forcibly ignoring this information because you're blinded by rigid gender-police ideology?
>>43507483Who gave you the authority to define there being only "two main" development pathways? Is that something a textbook showed you and you immediately internalized it forever as a hard rule? Does biology typically ignore diversity for the sake of rigid rules?Could you point me to the consensus statement that defines sex strictly by gamete type and explains how that applies to individuals who never produce gametes?
>>43507498>how do biologists classify organisms with ovotesticular tissue that produce both sperm and eggs, or neither?I didn't study that so I'm not going to talk out my ass about it. Something you should try.>Also, I already showed you that viable eggs can come from male people, viable sperm from female people.You can take the parts off a microwave and make a tesla coil out of it if you wanted to. That doesn't mean microwaves are naturally tesla coils. We are talking about human development.
w iq mog from op
>>43507090You seem to say that because pushback happens, the attempt itself was wrong. Could you help me see how that differs from saying any truth that provokes a backlash should be hidden?
>>43507504Do I have to prove to you that the sun is hot as a hard rule?
>>43507504https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03348-3
>>43507498babe why post popsci and insect facts??
>>43507528Non-sequitur. You got BTFO and that's okay.
>>43507572Okay. Sex is still binary.
>>43507498>Trans women are women!>Points to the word "trans">What's dat do?You're manipulating bits of trivia to obfuscate a very very VERY obvious reality.
>>43507536This is not a consensus statement. It's a journal article by a radical anti-trans extremist, Colin Wright, who likes to slob Elon Musk's knob. What an embarrassing reply from you.
>>43507590Okay. Sex is still binary.
>>43507590>Everyone who disagrees with me is wrong
>>43507584It means people transition their sex characteristics into a grey area that can be interpreted as an overall sex change from one to another. Are you brain-damaged or something? Are you a little baby? Why do you need this explained?
>>43507580>>43507600Having a little meltdown because your garbage talking points were deconstructed? It's okay. Take a deep breath. Maybe if you keep spamming the same talking points regardless of any logic or facts you meet it will assuage your embarrassing, crippled attempt to argue with me.
>>43507590this goes hard in the 'cord
>>43507626It's okay. You studied at a freakin' college. That means you're smart and special.
>>43507524>You seem to say that because pushback happens, the attempt itself was wrong. Not exactly but the attempt to force the "truth" on the public was wrong as a matter of strategy. Of course if the trans lobby or their allies had enough power they could pull it off like how Arabia was converted to Islam. But they didn't and now tranners are hated as representative of progressivism/woke.
>>43507606So they're not women. They are *men manipulated into being interpreted as* women. There's the difference.
>>43507643Objectively incorrect.
>>43507649A cessation of gamete production, combined with a change to a female phenotype, and a change to a female gene expression, means they are made female. For someone who's so smart he studied at college you seem to have a little trouble following a very simple concept.
>>43507097If passing is the key, what happens when someone passes perfectly in one setting but not in another, does their validity fluctuate depending on the lighting or who’s looking?
>>43507684lookism applies to trannies too
>>43507662I mean, it doesn't work like that, but let's assume you're right and it does. Was a woman ever a man? Nope! So then that becomes the difference. Then there would be women and *used to be a man* women. Even in your hypothetical the distinction is 100% there.
>>43507729stealing the argument from above>You can take the parts off a microwave and make a tesla coil out of it if you wanted to. That doesn't mean microwaves are naturally tesla coils. if a microwave is reconfigured into a tesla coil, is it still a microwave?if a man is reconfigured into a woman, is she still a man?
>>43507764she's still a man unless she passes
>>43507764In this hypothetical the man would still have once been a man and experienced life as a man. No woman can do that.
Pedantry is a mental illness that makes reasoned discussion impossible. There is no sane reason to push people further from science or reality in general.I understand you may find dealing with your own reality difficult, but trying to enforce psychosis on society is not helping.Being able to produce different gametes via a convoluted technical process doesn't improve acceptance, nor does changing simplified explanations to kids into vague nonstatements that only serve to avoid offending anyone.If you genuinely care about trans whatever issues, then your first goal should be to advance medical technology. Most people dislike trans* because they are ugly, in the context of being considered what they are claiming to be. Then because they are neurotic (annoying, loud, nitpicky, often unwilling to compromise or accomodate others while expecting others to do so).tldr: It doesn't matter how much you argue, people will never accept you if you are mean and ugly. The argument itself is irrelevant and usually counterproductive.
>>43507729WTF is this dog shit reply? You're not giving me anything to work with here. Just asserting how you feel things should be defined.
>>43507920Where drilling down to the point of distinction between trans women and women, because you fail to see it.
>>43507196When you say the anatomy ‘arranges itself,’ does that mean a single body continually reorganizes its tubes and tissues the moment gamete percentages tip from 49.9 to 50.1, or is there a committee of cells that votes?
>>43507948Where?
>>43506786Tolerating*
>>43507948It's like saying tall and short women exist. So what? And of course you just out of hand rejected what I told you based on demonstrated facts and evidence. As if your mere assertion that contradicts evidence is equally valuable. It's not.
>>43507966One transitioned and one didn't, at the very very most minimal point that is the distinction that can't be denied, but of course there are other points of distinction.>>43507981>le small and tall is the same as le transThis is a word game.
>>43508026I said "it's like saying". I didn't say "is the same". Who are you quoting?
>>43507230Is there a certain frequency of variation, like 1 in 1,000 versus 1 in 1,000,000, that makes something a spectrum, or does any variation at all qualify? I could see reasonable people disagreeing.
>>43508045>saying le small and tall is like saying le transThis is a word game.
>>43507235You have made no claims that are supported by the random collections of citations that you spam in lieu of dialogue. I only have to recognize you for the irrational obsessed lunatic that you present as, in the same way that I recognize the differences between feminized males and females.
>>43507333>>43507352Sex characteristics changing is pretty well within comprehension if you aren't brain-damaged. It occurs in nature sometimes even.Let me guess, you think heart surgery is an unspeakable horror too? Bet you'll love this:https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/news/2023/lessons-learned-from-worlds-first-successful-transplant-of-genetically-modified-pig-heart-into-human-patient-.html
>>43507652I don't see how that disproves anything.
>>43508299Are you brain damaged? Can't read a chart?
>>43508254>Lioness dying of cancer>See? That means I'm a real woman!Just shut up man, you're embarrassing yourself.
>>43508318No I'm not brain damaged, maybe if you weren't you could put into words what you're trying to show with that poll?
>>43506926What Is that image
>>43507385Lol
>>43508422that's the secret button that turns cute boys into cute girls
>>43507513>"I studied developmental biology">"I did not study developmental biology">"muh heccin nature"LARP or retardation?
>>43507789they can? Ftmtf?
>>43508359>Any level of testosterone in a female past 0 means they'll get a gazillion cancers and explodeNo, I think you should shut up. And possibly read up on a condition that affects like a tenth of women, starting with P and ending with S
>>43507729>it doesn't work like thatIt doesNo matter how much you can twist around and convolute reality by using more and more words, constantly going around the point and using retarded strawmen, it does.
>>43507625Okay. Sex is still binary.
>>43509139all things are both binary and spectrum
>>43511703>goomba_fallacy.jpg
>>43506786Chuds don’t care about facts, only their own feelings.
>>43509139the world is not black and white. if you think a system as complicated as the human body could ever be described in terms this unequivocal you are on the intellectual level of a middle schooler. words do not make reality, they taxonomize it, and this is a steaming dogshit taxonomy.
if frogs can change sex there's no reason humans can't outside of prejudice hindering progress.
>>43508359Only thing I see that's embarrassing is you getting red in the face because I pointed out that natural sex variety exists.And it's not "cancer", do you lack reading comprehension or something? Brain-damaged retard.
>>43509139>still raped about getting BTFO
>>43506984>7 states of matterthat's why I'm gender plasma, tyvm
>>43507021>you want to say that trans women are cisf afab born with uterus and vagina, but the science actually says trans women got cock n balls (usually) and something's fucky with they brain gender chunks and prolly endocrine systemI think you got your cards mixed up there bub
>>43506786I agree with the majority of what you’re saying, but holy shit Cis people don’t care. All they care about is whether you were born with a penis or a womb and that’s never going to change. It’s about procreation. This is an unwinnable battle. There’s no point in trying because no amount of HRT or surgery results in a full sex change. Even if trans women could implant wombs, we can’t pass on our mitochondrial DNA, its matrilineal.
>>43506786Brain scan studies clock you as what you are: third gender.
>>43513786It's not even about procreation really, it's more so about a world view where it's important to simplify things like that. Even if trannies could give birth they would still assign us male because it's easier to think of that way
>>43506786>Intellectual Honesty>wikipedia screenshot
>>43514146No they wouldn’t, I’m sorry
>>43514151Not an argument. What, because it's on Wikipedia it didn't happen? Is that what you're saying?
>>43513786>Even if trans women could implant wombs, we can’t pass on our mitochondrial DNA, its matrilineal.you're much more likely to be able to get an egg cell from a male than implant a functional uterus into a tranny and attach it to a srsussy lol
>>43506960what if guys on your high school baseball team always told you that you were "built like a bitch" specifically speaking about shoulders/waist/thighs/ass lmaoBecause uh...
lol
>>43506786I accept transsexuals because I respect the bodily autonomy of all persons. Facts don’t enter into this at all for me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact%E2%80%93value_distinctionYou’re never gonna convince chuds to accept you, first of all, because >>43512403, but secondly because this is a conversation about values, not facts, and chuds don’t respect your bodily autonomy and never will. https://youtu.be/IqeFeqInoXcYou can stop wasting your precious time on Earth on this now and start working on improving your own life instead. You’re welcome.
trvke
>>43508359Anon, doesn't cancer make you go bald?
>>43518718The treatment makes you go bald. Not the cancer itself.The radiation and chemotherapy.
