I just saw this unironically reblogged by 2000 people on tumblr
Can someone deconstruct whatever this is for me?
>>5204983
an online bumper sticker
people throw these statements on their blog or car to say "I think X" to anyone passing by
tumblr people are gender abolitionist sometimes
>>5204996
how does gender abolition call for recognizing them as "biologically female"
I mean, isn't that patently untrue?
gender, sure. But is the very reason they are trans not because they are not "biologically" female?
possibly: biological gender is really controlled by your hormones more than your chromosomes, which are just the blueprints for which hormones to use, and trans women have estrogen and female secondary sex characteristics
probably: gender has no basic in physical reality mind my pronouns shitlord
it's a subversion of the standard trans women are "biologically" men trope. biology is complicated and not all people assigned men are actually biologically male in every sense--this is especially true for brain sex, and sometimes chromosomes.
"biology" is itself a social construction, like gender, and the assignation of gender based on biology is grounded on socially and institutionally perpetuated ideas of what a "male" or "female" body should be, rather than what it actually is
>>5204983
>using tumblr
>Can someone deconstruct whatever this is for me?
Lysenkoism, basically denying basic established, proven science to push a political agenda.
Also it seems to be "newspeak" which is when people, particularly stemming from academia insist in changing the meaning of words artificially, most times on basis of political correctness.
Language evolves naturally and continually, but newspeak is forced and against the natural flow of language.
For example there is an empirical law of language that words that are of common use tend to be shorter, or become shortened, however the PC people insist on using ridiculously long terms for everything, as they consider established terms to be "offensive".
Sorry for the rant, but it's something I've noticed for a while.
>>5205041
Biology is not a social construct, that's the kind of shit why tumblrinas get called retards.
Biology precedes any society, therefore human societies are actually a biological function, arising from human behavior, neurology, etc.
You could say that "biological interpretation" is a social construct, as the knowledge of science is imperfect and incomplete, so mistakes are made, and someone could be miscategorized in gender.
>>5205083
I mean it kinda is in that everything is pretty much a social construct.
Social construct just means we as people of a society made that idea. And we did. We made the study of biology and science. The scientific laws and the act of photosynthesis and sperm fertilizing egg are all some shit that happen without us as humans studying it in biology or putting our own words to it. A rose is still a rose, yadda yadda, basically all words are social constructs. It cannot mean shit.
But biology is a useful social construct and if biological words lose their object meaning it's not longer useful and just bullshit. That's why that poster is a wrong tumblr fag.
Something being a "social construct" doesn't make it a fallacy. Only sjw misuse that word like that.
>>5205122
Ditz
Biology is the describing of what is found in living things in nature.
So, are two people fucking a social construct? If two birds fuck, how can two humans fucking be a social construct?
>>5205476
>Biology is the describing of what is found in living things in nature.
See this is the twisting of words I mentioned before "newspeak", a very insidious thing.
Its just playing with definitions to confuse laymen.
Biology refers to both the scientific study of life and the actual physical phenomena.
Claiming everything is a social construct is BULL-SHIT
get it
B U L L S H I T
There is always reality that can be used as reference, not everything is just debating and yada-yada
In the case of gender, it is now such an ambiguous concept its better ignored altogether.
Then there is sex. There are males and females.
Period. No other sexes.
A human male is a human capable of producing viable sperm, or is reasonably expected to produce it in the future, or who produced it in the past.
A human female is the same, but producing viable ovules instead.
And thats it. If you dont fit in either, youre an outlier, you dont have a sex, because you are not entitled to have a sex.
If you cannot participate in the process of sexual reproduction, you dont belong to either sex, and thats not a "third sex".
>>5205058
this
>>5204983
transwomen started noticing that Feminists were using "female" to describe themselves instead of "woman" so as not to be confused with males who call themselves women, and they started this shit in a temper tantrum
they also started saying TERF actually means "trans EXTERMINATIONIST radical feminist" and that it was made up by an evil faction of tumblr women as part of an ethos, not by one of their own dumbshits. tumblr trannies are manchildren.
>>5205122
biology isn't a social construct, the assignation of sexes based on genital formation is
it's real and fake in the same way days of the week are. sure, wednesday isn't "real" but if you have a bill due wednesday and you don't pay it you'll face real consequences
same goes with biological sex. females and males experience things different based on the assignation of female or male.
biological sex is real
it has material realities and social conditions tied to it, making it real
inb4 intersex people who make up an almost negligible portion of the population to counter this
>>5205525
>In the case of gender, it is now such an ambiguous concept its better ignored altogether.
No it isn't ambiguous. It is just that we can only see gender from unfettered expression of the natural urges a person has. Good luck finding that in normal human life.
>Then there is sex. There are males and females.
>Period. No other sexes.
What about those with ambiguous genitalia? Intersex needs to go on your list of sexes.
What about those with both ovarian and testicular tissue?
True Hermaphrodite also needs to go on that sexes list.
>>5205748
intersex is a condition, not a sex. intersex people are female or male. unlike gender, sex isn't about appearance.
>>5205748
>What about those with both ovarian and testicular tissue?
can they produce some kind of viable gamete?
if they can, it determines their sex
if they cant then they dont belong to any sex because they cant participate in sexua reproduction
>>5204983
mtf here
biological sex = what you are born with, xx, xy, or intersex. its biological and your body is what it is.
gender = personal identification. Gender is a societal that consists of the gender roles you take on, how you present yourself, and how others perceive you.
tumblr is full of nonsense OP
technically if being trans is caused by what happens in the womb, and brain wiring being that of the opposite sex then on a biological level trans women are women (because it's part if their individual biological make up), but it isn't the same biological standard people have decided to use to determine gender
it isn't what people are used to using, or what they're comfortable with, but it's a biological variation nonethless
it doesn't need to be posted ironically, and actually shows a broader understanding of biology and the knowledge that it isn't as black and white as "chromosomes determine everything"
>>5206321
gender roles aren't gender, they're societal expectations based on gender which is different
tumblr is loaded with dumb shit, i won't disagree, but that doesn't mean everything they all say has no basis in reality
being trans is part of a trans individuals biological make up, trans women are women (due to this) and are biologically female as a result
the only way they aren't a biological woman is in the accepted ways people are clinging to that come from a time when research on transgender people wasn't really a thing
we can't know about something that isn't studied extensively, and a lot of the knowledge we base our ideas of what does or doesn't make a person male or female are dated and based on knowledge acquired at a time where being trans was even more stigmatized and misunderstood
people are learning things now, knowledge of things not previously understood is becoming more widely available, and with science the most updated version of things tends to be best
>>5206520
A question:
>You say that trans women have female brains. I recently watched a documentary (great source, right?) where they put a trans man in a MIR scanner at various points during his transition and did various tests. In both the results before hormones he was clearly showing a female brain, however after hormones his brain and his behaviour was distinctly on the male spectrum.
I'm not saying he didn't 'feel' male before transitioning, but he was neither physiologically male nor psychologically in objective measures. Explain how he could of been born with a "male" brain?
I'm not saying he didn't need / want to transition, nor that he is due any less respect / compassion / etc due to being trans - I'm just pointing out that factoring in biology that does have objective truths when it comes to the physical presence of sex (not gender identity) and twisting them into weird pseudo arguments based on subjective measures like how people 'feel' doesn't help anyone.
Trans people are different from cis people, unfortunately for many of them. But does denying this difference actually help anyone?
I suppose my view of the subject as a cis gay male distorts things - it sounds like the equivalent of when people ask "but who's the woman" - trying to explain something that is distinctly not the norm by comparing it to the norm makes zero sense. It's literally like being given chop sticks to use and asking which one's the fork.
>>5206547
Hey, just chiming in.
You're talking about us learning things, but the thing is that in spite of some promising developments we can't (as far as I know) say definitively that trans people are... well... born that way. The same goes for gay people. Even though we have evidence, I don't think there's no room for argument at this point.
Plus, at most wouldn't what we know (or have evidence for) so far just make a trans. woman biologically intersex? I mean, unless we're exclusively talking post-op, I guess, but then a post-op trans. woman is still not working with what she was born with. There's a difference between saying someone is biologically a member of one sex and saying that they are biologically a member of one sex (thanks to the wonders of surgery and hormone replacement!).
>>5206602
i've read things that have said the opposite was true, and haven't seen that particular documentary
it's my understanding that pre-hormones the wiring is different, and post-hormones obviously changed (but i discount that since hormones created the change, and while someone could argue the initial hormones being the wrong ones also had an effect and be right, it's straw grasping and i won't go there)
if every trans individual was like that (a sample size of one doesn't say much) then all that does is say that it's more complicated than wiring and needs to be determined, but if a biological basis is found (it is not environmental) then it's technically part of the person's biology
the distinction "trans" and "cis" exist for a reason, and it's because biological doesn't quite work but there are of course major differences like you said
all it pertains to is an individual's biology, and as more studies are being done and more knowledge is acquired more answers will be had
there isn't a 100% sure answer as to why trans people exist, but there's been a fair amount of evidence suggesting that it isn't environmental in the majority of cases
keep in mind people do detransition and go through all kinds of confusion and make stupid decisions as well
or simply have preferences or feel a particular way
and those people are also going to be part of the research and evidence
the science behind it all is still not what it should be, and probably won't be for years
but it's my understanding based on articles i've personally read, and news reports etc that gender isn't as black and white as xx or xy
there's variation within that
so to what you've brought up all i can think to say is, more research on larger groups of people need to be done to figure out why there are inconsistencies and conflicting evidence
>>5205826
What happens if the person has variable estrogen and testosterone levels, and sometimes the ovarian part wakes up and produces eggs, and other times the testicular part produces sperm? That's my life.
>>5206269
>What clothes should they wear?
lol I ask that one whenever somebody challenges me on my gender presentation. "So what clothes should a hermaphrodite wear?" is the way I phrase it.
>>5206536
Such an uninformed view of genetics. Sorry, but geneticists have figured out it takes at least a good 20 plus genes to set somebody's sex properly, who knows how many for gender, and physical development can still go against what the genetics would predict. Did you know that there is a gene we all have that if you have two copies of it, you will be male, even if you have XX genetics. There is another gene that if duplicated will make you female even if you have XY genetics. There are even some humans with two or even three different genetically unique cell lines making them up. I have at least two. One is XX and the other is XY, an XX/XY chimera. They had a bit of a battle over what genitals I was supposed to have. I also have two blood types. That gives me a distinct advantage at blood transfusion time. I can accept almost any blood type.
>>5206664
>there isn't a 100% sure answer as to why trans people exist, but there's been a fair amount of evidence suggesting that it isn't environmental in the majority of cases
It is looking like there are multiple paths that can cause it. Some genetic and some environmental.
>the science behind it all is still not what it should be, and probably won't be for years
lack of research dollars is the biggest issue. There are plenty of scientists who wish to research it, but don't have the funding.
>>5206640
i imagine the statement is just recognizing the biological evidence of what makes someone trans the way they are, and recognizes transwomen as women
i never said we have all the evidence and knowledge on the subject, we don't and a lot needs to be done, but it is getting there and evidence does tend to point towards biology rather than environment or nurture
but clearly much more needs to be done until we have definitive answers
still the statement isn't nearly as ridiculous as people want it to be, and it has much to do with a lack of understanding about sex and gender
i don't doubt that there are cases where nurture or environment affect someone's gender identity, but that doesn't mean that's the standard and a generalized statement like "transwomen are biological women" isn't going to take all the finer details into account, which makes sense considering no generalized statements do that
tumblr is often stupid, but this statement really isn't all that crazy especially in comparison to the multitude of bullshit that could've been pulled off of tumblr to demonstrate the collective garbage that comes from there
if it's a biological issue and someone sees a transwoman as a woman (which is rather subjective, and we could discuss what makes someone a woman or whether or not a person's physical form is more who they are than their mind and all of that other shit that would take an eternity to discuss so we won't) then the person making that statement isn't wrong they're just saying something that reflects their perspective and some scientific evidence
>>5205737
>it's real except for when it's not
Great logic.
>>5204983
I suppose the brain is part of biology, so they are mainly female, but although the outer body is less important it must be accounted for as well
Melodram patheticism
>>5204983
My brain hated being pumped full of testosterone. I was depressed, and anxious all the time. Now that T has been suppressed, and it is now full of estrogen, I feel much much better.
>>5204983
-.- god I hate tumblr...
>>5205058
>Lysenkoism, basically denying basic established, proven science to push a political agenda.
So basically what anti-trans people are doing?
>>5204983
Probably thinking about hormones, because with hormones, especially from a young age, a trans woman is more female than male, even more especially if she's had an orchi or SRS:
>>5204983
>trans women are biologically female
i wish ;_;
>>5205041
>biology is complicated
Not really.
>brain sex
Fictional concept.
>sometimes chromosomes.
Which affects something like 0.1% of the population and has absolutely nothing to do with your average tranny.
>"biology" is itself a social construction
This is so fucking ridiculous I can't believe that you even typed it. Are you brain damaged?
>>5213148
>Not really.
Yeah it is.
>Fictional concept.
Nope.
>
Which affects something like 0.1% of the population and has absolutely nothing to do with your average tranny.
1 in a 1000 is still extremely common. And it does show that different aspects of sex/gender don't always match up.
>This is so fucking ridiculous I can't believe that you even typed it. Are you brain damaged?
They're referring to the concept of biology and the significance we attach to it.
>>5205737
>inb4 intersex people who make up an almost negligible portion of the population to counter this
Even one counter-example is enough to disprove a theory though.
>>5213228
It doesn't disprove the theory and it's not a counterexample. Intersex people have a medical condition that makes them partially female and partially male. That in no way disproves or invalidates the standard male/female dichotomy. Even intersex people fall on it. They're the bisluts of the gender world.
>>5205689
>they also started saying TERF actually means "trans EXTERMINATIONIST radical feminist" and that it was made up by an evil faction of tumblr women as part of an ethos, not by one of their own dumbshits. tumblr trannies are manchildren.
It means trans-EXCLUSIONARY radical feminists. As in radfems who refused to accept the notion that an AMAB person could be a "real" woman.
basically words are made up and can mean whatever you want
it's newspeak
>>5213239
Dichotomy implies you are either one or the other, with nothing in between. Intersex is somewhere in between, it's not compatible with a dichotomy. It's a spectrum, not a dichotomy.
>>5213243
When you completely make up an enemy, they can be whatever you imagine!
>>5213263
>arguing bullshit semantics
You know you've lost when you've gotta resort to that.
>>5213267
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transsexual_Empire
>>5213278
>oh no someone 40 years ago said something i don't like
>>5213272
So you acknowledge that there are those who are not biologically 100% male or female?
>>5213267
Just look up TERF. No one (except for you) says it means trans exterminationist. And it's not some "made up enemy", they have a history of keeping trans women out of women's spaces and even encouraging violence against trans people.
>>5213377
I didn't say it means trans exterminationist. It's just not a term used by anyone who actually believes in the ideology. It's easy for them to be like "oh it means trans EXTERMINATIONIST" when they're the ones who made up "TERF" in the first place.
>>5213377
Obviously? I actually said that to start with. It has nothing to do with the point, though. Why are you being an idiot?
>>5213392
Right, but no one except you claims it means that. And I'm not 100% sure that radfems don't call themselves TERFs - after all, they consider being trans-exclusionary to be a good thing.
>>5213439
I'm a gender critical feminist. We don't call ourselves TERFs. We call ourselves gender critical feminists.
>>5213447
Right, but that's basically a "nice" word for TERF. You can't be gender-critical and accept the legitimacy of trans people.
>>5213452
Bruh, we're talking about whether anyone who subscribes to the ideology uses the term TERF. "Yeah but they exclude trans people" is basically a nonsequitur. Keep up with the convo.
>>5213471
It's completely not. Because I have seen TERF use the label unironically, especially on blogs. And their philosophy is literally and uncompromisingly trans-exclusionary, and they proudly put themselves under the label of radical feminist. TERF was a badge of honor before people saw how fucking hypocritical and hateful they were, and now there's a push for obfuscation with a new label. It's irrational and exploitative.
>>5213471
It's irrelevant whether they call themselves that. "Trans-exclusive radical feminist" has a pretty clear meaning, and whether one calls themselves that or not has nothing to do with whether they fit the definition.
>>5204983
>Can someone deconstruct whatever this is for me?
Trans women have the brain wiring for the female set of sex characteristics that weren't built in the factory with.
HRT provides the soft tissue secondary sex traits and female typical endocrine levels.
Surgeries could be sorta counted for kinda-sorta providing a pussy, which is a primary sex trait, even if there's no reproductive parts connected to it. I'd understand someone not being willing to count that, though. Fuck, I'm a tranny myself and even I consider it borderline at best.
So, "trans women are biological female" is true when considering the aspects I mentioned, and it's likely considering the neurology to be the big determinant.
Only the most retarded of our ranks would refuse to admit that we aren't carrying around some male typed sex traits still, even if they're not the ones that determine how you get read the vast majority of the time.
Even the best and luckiest of us is still basically a retrofit job done with the tools on hand.
The majority of us get this nuance, the loudmouth dumbfucks don't and take the inaccurate line like in the OP that's said for brevity more often than not as being the end of that story because they're refusing to read the rest of the goddamned book.
>>5204983
some physical traits are feminine (primary and secondary sex characteristics like vaginas, soft skin, feminine-style socialisation and approaches to problem solving, less dense bones etc) and some physical traits are masculine (penises, thicker skin, male-style socialisation and problem solving, denser bones etc). the human brain subconsciously recognises these characteristics in others and assigns them one of two possible labels: man or woman, and subconsciously assigns behaviours to use when interacting with both. however, humans are not cleanly split into these two groups; as we saw above, some physical characteristics are inherently masculine and some characteristics are inherently feminine, but there is no one characteristic which applies to every person who others subconsciously place in the same grouping ("man" or "woman"): some "men" do not produce sperm, some "women" socialise like men, some "men" ovulate, some "women" do not have an XX chromosomal arrangement, and so on.
given these facts, one must recognise that sex at the societal level (which is the only one that matters for all humans, as many humans are incapable of reproduction) is decided purely by the perception of a given person by his or her peers, which is subconsciously decided based on a collection of unequally valued masculine and feminine physical characteristics he or she possesses. thus, a person whose physical characteristics suffice to place him in the category of "man" around his peers is biologically a man, regardless of whether one of his physical aspects is not masculine (i.e. he socialises like a woman, or he has a typically feminine ratio of body fat to muscle mass, or he has a vagina).
>>5213648
basically, a person who passes as X because of physical traits typical of X is a person who is X, biologically.
>>5213611
>>moving the goalposts this hard
I'm not moving the goalposts. I'm just saying that a TERF is a TERF, no matter what they call themselves.
their point is that gender dysphoria is "biological" or at least something people are born with.. which is basically true, but that's not what biologically female actually means, so it's stupid. it's a radical way of saying something that's not actually all that radical lmfao
>>5213665
we can see examples of people who, despite aberrations which tranny haters try to claim as being somehow critical, are unquestioned in their biological identities by either law or society as a whole in the cases of XX men (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome) and XY women (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome)
this indicates that the refusal to accept trans people in particular as biological members of their sexes is completely a conscious one (at least in the case of those who pass) and, thus, a result of irrelevant ideology
>>5213648
>>5213665
>>5213697
as an example of a similar phenomenon which might make this concept easier to understand, consider the digital computer.
digital computers (or at least all the common ones) work with binary, a number system which allows exactly two possible values for any given unit of information: 0 or 1. however, there is no way to, in the real world, produce a signal at a perfectly steady voltage and amperage (just as there is never a human who is "perfectly masculine" or "perfectly feminine". think of plato's forms). thus, digital signals must be *interpreted* to be either a 0 or a 1 when, in reality, they lie somewhere along a sliding scale of possible voltages and amperages (just as humans are *interpreted* to be male or female by other humans).
in some hardware, like USB, what is considered a 0 or a 1 actually changes over time, measured as a difference from a reference signal. this is a much more realistic parallel with how sex is determined in humans, as we as a species have evolved and continue to evolve over time, so the characteristics of what is physically male and physically female continue to change, and significant differences exist simultaneously between different evolutionary branches (take, for example, the story which was posted on here a bit ago about a trans guy who was interpreted as a man in latin america and as a woman in the us, because the physical traits which each uses to subconsciously determine sex was different for those two groupings)
>>5205018
The former is just gorgeous.... But these tumble ire morons probably mean the latter when thèy post this....
>>5204983
The whole point of medical transition is to change sexy traits .
Sex is a phenotype, go and change phenotype and its a no brainier then.
I don't get why people are so outraged over taking hormones and surgery into account.
liberals ignoring reality to the point of stupidity, nothing else is new
>>5204983
I agree with this statement solely because if you are born trans, you will have a predisposition to transition. Although I am more in agreement that transsexualism is an intersex condition.
>>5204983
>>5213148
>affects only .1
http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
>These discoveries have pointed to a complex process of sex determination, in which the identity of the gonad emerges from a contest between two opposing networks of gene activity. Changes in the activity or amounts of molecules (such as WNT4) in the networks can tip the balance towards or away from the sex seemingly spelled out by the chromosomes. “It has been, in a sense, a philosophical change in our way of looking at sex; that it's a balance,” says Eric Vilain, a clinician and the director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It's more of a systems-biology view of the world of sex.”
Everyone actually.
Any animal more complex than a fly differentiatesits sex phenotype by gene expression. That's hormones and transcription.
>>5205058
>Lysenkoism
From the lunatics in the fringe right end authoritarian left sure.
Why you and the other extremists would rather ignore the whole modern feild of molecular genetics and force scientists to revert to a system discredited half a century ago is beyond me.
Sure you don't like gene expression, but that's no excuse to ban its study.
>>5214313
>Modern Medical procedures don't count as reality cause I said so
Moonbat please
>>5205058
>Lysenkoism
Yep, this is the one.
dropped out after first day of school, no biology classes
Transsexuals are just intersex, period. Just a type of being intersex.
The only reason society doesn't understand this is because the brain isn't well understood, and society has a feelsy gap of logic regarding the brain, and fails to recognize that it's simply another bodily organ, regardless of it being 'you' or not.
It's really that simple. It's just deeply imbedded western snowflake ideals of "muh psyche" and "muh soul" being unique and spiritual and not simply a fucking organ.
There's no real discussion to be had, or argument to be made, once you stop holding the brain up as a mythic golden goose.
In a thousand years time, if humans are still around, the word "transsexual" will have long faded out of history.
>>5214965
>In a thousand years time, if humans are still around, the word "transsexual" will have long faded out of history.
What'll people do about dysphoria though
>>5214965
a great point
the egyptians didn't consider the brain the root of the soul, so how would they have handled the concept of brain sex?
They wouldn't have. They'd be going off of body and presentation alone.
>>5214995
They'll transition, they just won't call it that. Like how intersex people that transition to a different presentation usually don't.
The difference in language exists solely because we as the dominant language and society have soul-based ideas about the brain and mind.
As neurology matures as a science, it'll become increasingly more clear that there's no magic going on. An organs an organ. Chemical processes simply are.
>>5214965
Intersex has a specific definition that does not include trannies. They are not intersex, because that's not what that word means, and y'all need to stop appropriating intersex shit to make yourselves feel better.
>>5215019
You're an idiot that cannot grapple with intangible concepts like "the brain is not unique" or "organs are organs"
Intersex has a specific definition rooted in our specific culture's non-scientific deification of the brain.
The same concept, minus the distinction tied to deification of the brain, exists in every culture.
Humans are such gender-fucked creatures that, in tribal societies, we more often default to heteronormative bisexuality than true heterosexuality.
Virtually all tribal societies think being gay is okay, as long as someone in the relationship wears the pants. This points to innate heteronormativity, not sexuality, in humans. It contradicts opinions of innate monosexuality.
>>5215019
Human has a specific definition that does not include niggers, which is why the founding fathers are okay with slavery.
You're smart.
>>5215019
http://journals.aace.com/doi/abs/10.4158/EP14351.RA
Doctors say you're full of it.
I'd stop hikejacking the struggles intersex people face for the sake of your vendetta with the medical community and their patients if I were you.
>>5215568
nice meme
>>5205122
Found the tumblrina.
>>5219640
fix'd
>>5214965
>>5215019
>>5215072
Actually the more an more we understand about the biology of transsexuality, the more it looks like another form of intersex condition.
>>5215072
>Humans are such gender-fucked creatures that, in tribal societies, we more often default to heteronormative bisexuality than true heterosexuality.
>Virtually all tribal societies think being gay is okay, as long as someone in the relationship wears the pants. This points to innate heteronormativity, not sexuality, in humans. It contradicts opinions of innate monosexuality.
It's only the Christian and Muslim worlds that got this wrong in a big way. Jesus era Jews, and initial Christians, both found homosexuals fine. On the other hand they found going against your nature to temple prostitutes as bad. Later somebody distorted things and translated temple prostitution to the more generic anal sex. Later it got further mistranslated to homosexuality.
"going against your nature" is the interesting part of the old teachings. They were referring to heterosexual men who would go to the temples and anally fuck the male temple prostitutes. That was the sin, and it was only at the same level of sin as adultery, and pride.
>>5215568
That's a review article. It just summarizes other research. No peer review needed. Look at the papers it does cite.
>>5219855
lol Except religion is just based on faith, not scientific rigor.
>>5223183
Except the process of induction is itself unprovable.
Alternatively the "rigor" of science leaves itself open to a constant and necessary flux of uncertainty and questioning which, admittedly, is better than most religions demand but is not as clear cut as some would have others believe.
>>5214330
It seems by siting that article you are using extremely rare conditions of ppl being intersex as reasons to validate ppl choosing to be trans. Then you go and say all this:
>From the lunatics in the fringe right end authoritarian left sure.
>Why you and the other extremists would rather ignore the whole modern feild of molecular genetics and force scientists to revert to a system discredited half a century ago is beyond me.
>Sure you don't like gene expression, but that's no excuse to ban its study.
So, basically you are criticizing (or rather deflecting by being dishonest) someone's accusations of "Lysenkoism" with Lysenkoism.
Thanks for the keks.
>>5213648
YOU FUCKING RETARD
ITS HAVING A BABY
OR HELPING BUT NOT HAVING THE BABY
FEMALE
OR
MALE
THATS IT
THATS THE ENTIRE FUCKING THING YOU UTTER SCREAMING IDIOT
>>5204983
Human beings are not capable of being 2 sexes at the same time. Even in cases of genetic mutations there is only the appearance of both sexes, but only one sex will function.
It is important to remember that transgender represents a mental condition, not a physical condition. When the body is healthy but the mind is not, they we have transgender.
If trans women were biologically female, then they would not have the label "trans" to begin with. Simple logic.
>>5223543
remember that gender assignment at birth is only based on visual clues.
There is also much research showing a biological basis for transsexualism.
Here is something to think about. How does a cow know how to get the attention of the bull when it is in estrous? How does it then know how to stand for a bull? They even know how to do this even if they have never been raised around other cows and bulls. These are urges that are programed into the reptile part of the brain. We have them too. A transsexual is somebody who's reptilian urges are those of the opposite sex of their assigned sex. By the way this has been observed in laboratory setting in rats. Scientists have also been able to make rats transgender by messing with hormone levels in vitro as they are gestating.
>>5223364
>I'm triggered by the fact that there are people who don't obsess over reproduction 24/7
>>5204983
Simple. Trans "men" still have a womb, and trans "women" still have a prostate. Simple as that. Can't change biology.
>>5213823
>"but anon, much of that is due to societal influence on people to see others a certain way rather than things hard-encoded by genetics!"
societal norms and genetic norms, from an evolutionary perspective, serve the same purpose: both are means by which a previous generation can pass information to a successive generation in order to shape them, both in form and appearance. the latter simply adapts more rapidly, so its differences in different branches are more readily apparent
>>5223364
i am incapable of producing offspring. my boyfriend is incapable of producing offspring. my mother is incapable of producing offspring. my friend is incapable of producing offspring. all these people need to be placed in physical groupings by sex for societal purposes, but your dichotomy applies to none; thus, it is an invalid simplification. as i said above, no one trait, including this one, can be applied universally to all people, leaving the only possible deciding factor, the only one that matters for everyone, to be the way that person is treated socially by others
>>5223869
*both in form and behaviour, sorry.
i hope everybody's having a nice day!
>>5223313
>rare
The system of sex development that is used by humans and other mammals isn't rare in the least.
http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
>These discoveries have pointed to a complex process of sex determination, in which the identity of the gonad emerges from a contest between two opposing networks of gene activity. Changes in the activity or amounts of molecules (such as WNT4) in the networks can tip the balance towards or away from the sex seemingly spelled out by the chromosomes. “It has been, in a sense, a philosophical change in our way of looking at sex; that it's a balance,” says Eric Vilain, a clinician and the director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It's more of a systems-biology view of the world of sex.”
Everyone works by those rules, the fact that Nature article upset you enough that you need to claim scientists are cooking some conspiracy says enough.
Why do you say it is wrong to quote the most prestigious journals in the world on what they say about gene expression creating sex?
>>5223313
>universal biochemistry is rare
>hikejacking intersex patients for the sake of your vendetta with science
Funniest irony ever
>>5226095
>>5226109
99% of the world can either make or have babies and that determines whether they are male or female.
the exce[tion proves the rule and you are being a disingenous retard if you can't accept plain and simple fact.
intersex= freakish and rare
>>5223766
you are a retard and have never seen a newborn baby in your life
>>5223869
you and he are either male or fucked up thanks to the genetic lottery but that means you are outliers and in no way representative of anything. this is not a slur or an attack on your personhood, it is a fact.
>>5226145
One hundred percent of humans have a phenotypic sex solely because transcription and other expression. It's also unstable if all the experiments Nature reported or old women changing histologically sand expression wise to a different phenotype.
You're seriously this mad genetics has moved past the classical genetics and chromosomes from last century and into molecules. I'd take a look in the mirror and see if you actually care about facts or just want a crusade.
>>5204983
Wrong place to ask mate, you gonna trigger the tranny brigade and get an ass whoopin'
>>5226190
baby comes out of vagina thus your argument is invalid.
male
female
other(a tiny minority)
that's all there is, Snowflake, nothing else.
>>5226218
>muh black Swan fallacy
Whole lot of normal women are born barren. Guess they aren't women according to you.
And that's not even counting that menopausal women are incapable of fertility and histologically and gene expression wise they certainly aren't the same as fertile women.
By your standards nearly half of all women aren't women. You're about as Snowflake as you can get.
>>5226259
Depends on a counties age distribution. Whole lot don't ever have kids.
Plus you're telling me to ignore gene transcription and histology and blood chemistry and every measurable phenotypic train in favor of your vague female essence argument about old women.
You've gone as Snowflake as you can get.
>>5226269
>I reject reality and substitute my own
>how is babby made
okjlaw.jjpg
you are mentally ill and I hope you get the help you need
>>5204983
Idk but after 3 years of HRT trans women are biologically more female than male so maybe that's what they're getting at. Genetically still male of course
>>5226382
>http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943 is fradulent
Lovely to know bringing up science and phenotype triggers you so. Maybe when you can finally explain how barren women are women by your definition it'll make sense.
>>5226417
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule
stop being stupid, it's offensive to me
>>5226462
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction
That's pretty much every menopausal women plus the ones born barren.
If your definition falls apart at that then maybe it wasn't a good one?
Why can't we consider phenotype?
>>5226145
>>5226259
>99% of the world can either make or have babies and that determines whether they are male or female.
LOL
6% of the general population is infertile.
>>5226145
I've been in the delivery room for the births of 4 babies. You?
This >>5226385
All cells in the body are gendered. They react to chemicals in their environment in a gender specific manner. This is why men and women react differently to drugs.
>>5226462
You are the one being an idiot and burying your head in the sand.
>>5226480
It's to complex for its tiny brain.
>>5226385
>Genetically still male
not nessacarily. the y chromosome doesn't really do much after birth. It gets kept around by constant testosterone triggering it, but without that its the first chromosome to go in somatic cells. There are lots of cases of cis men who have aged or who smoke who have more and more cells without y chromosomes. Its apperently normal to some degree. I imagine feminaztion would greatly hasten this.
>>5226794
>transwomen: we're real women
This makes me cringe every time and I'm trans.
Please for the love of god cut it out you sjw tumblrina's
>>5226822
science equals tumblrina? I dont really understand the point your trying to make. youre not quibbling with my science, or even attempting to make some sort of counterclaim... is there a point to what you are saying? i'm not sure i understand.
>>5226845
>science says trans women are the same as natural born women
But that's wrong you retard...trans women aren't genetically the same as natural born women either. The thing science says is that trans women have parts of their brain similar to natural women, that's all and that doesn't mean you are the same as natural born women.
You're wrong, deal with it.
>>5226845
>is there a point to what you are saying? i'm not sure i understand.
Yeah that transwomen aren't real women. I guess your reading comprehension isn't that great huh?
>>5226861
Trans women aren't the same genetically to 99% of females similar to how women with extra fingers aren't the same genetically to 99% of women.
I don't think you get what gene expression means. Say you plop a male primary reproductive system into a normal female with some novel technology, replacing her vagina with a cock. Keep her on estrogen. Her genetics will maintain that cock, regenerating its cells etc just the same as preop trans women on estrogen do because their gene expression is so similar.
>>5226901
>Trans women aren't the same genetically to 99% of females
Trans women just aren't genetically the same as women period. They also don't have female genitals and female internal organs. So I was correct and you were wrong.
>gene expression means
That was nothing to do with whether or not a person is genetically male or female. Also I'm very skeptical that anything you said is actual proven science and not trans science nonsense you made up so you can walk around saying you're genetically female.
Regardless trans women still are genetically male and not female, this is science fact.
>>5226954
>Trans women just aren't genetically the same as women period.
Sorry but they are lol. Males and females all have literally the same genetics my friend with the exception of the SRY gene, and even the SRY gene can go un-expressed (thus why you see XY individuals born with vaginas, sweyer syndrome). The only thing that makes them different is gene expression which is controlled by hormones and transcription. See >>5214330
You are literally antiscience and superduper butthurt. It's pretty sad.
>>5226971
>they are the same except for the parts that aren't the same at all
Fucking dumbass.
>>5227005
Yeah they are the same except the 2 or 3 genes that control the creation of male genitals; genes which can be turned off when not enough testosterone is present, thus creating XY people with vaginas.
You aren't very bright are you. Once you're on estrogen those genes are meaningless.
>>5227020
And by meaningless I mean that the real, current state of genetic expression you see in trans women on estrogen is literally the same as females. Their phenotypes are different but their genetics are the same. Flat out.
>>5226954
even the biological sexes male and female refer to arbitrary groupings of bodily functions, reproduction patterns, etc
certain species of animals go completely against what is commonly understood by the terms
yes, it may be a "fact" that certain things happen in nature, but humans have categorized it in a specious way
and then built upon the already flawed conceptualization of sex is the even more flawed idea of gender
>>5227020
>Yeah they are the same except for all the things that make them completely fucking different to everyone with a brain
It's like arguing with a 9/11 conspiracy nut.
>>5227020
>>5226971
>trans women are the same as cis women biologically and genetically!
>modern science disagrees
>nope cuz this gene expression is blah blah blah something syndrome phenotype haha get educated cis scum bigot
*sigh* this is why I hate other trans people.....
Please stop chimping out and acting like autistic sjw's. You're making us look worse to society.
>>5227078
This. There's no point in trying to deny reality, you should be focused on fixing it instead.
>>5226861
you do know that I'm not the same anon right? ugh... Don't associate me with other peoples statements. All I was talking about was the chromosomal makeup of somatic cells. That is literally all I said. Nothing about degrees of realness (which is a completely arbitrary classification anyway, but whatever). I have not made any other posts in this thread. So stop putting words in my mouth.
>>5227020
>>5227023
>>5227039
You are literally a crazy person. You're saying multiple completely contradictory things in one sentence. You wanting it to be true, will not make it true, no matter how many times you say it or how you try and argue that sexual dimorphism don't real.
gb2tumblr, you pathetic hon. You're not a woman, and you never will be.
Obliga
>>5227050
>a gene that can be turned off and create an XY person with a vagina is "completely fucking different"
I'm the conspiracy nut?
>>5227078
Modern science agrees with me actually lol, see the study I linked. Sex differentiation is entirely up to gene expression--you give someone estrogen, they have the gene expression of the female sex.
>>5227085
stay mad
>>5227126
i (5227039) wasn't referring to sexual dimorphism, i was referring to animals where males give birth, where females are the more physically strong hunter gatherers or whatever
i mean sex as it exists in nature is not the same and arguably more complex than the way humans have decided to conceptualize it
every different culture prior to the colonial era has had a different conceptualization of sex and gender, and they've had different meanings and values in those contexts
and im a gay male, thanks for the assumption
>>5227139
XY females are physiologically very different from XX females. You moron.
>a gene that can be turned off and create an XY person with a vagina is "completely fucking different"
This is 100% accurate. Do you not understand what a "difference" is? If you have two cups, and one has water, and one has juice, they are different cups. Shouting "but they both have liquid SO ACTUALLY THEY'RE EXACTLY THE SAME IN ALL WAYS" is completely fucking insane and reads of tumblr-style denial.
>>5227140
Oh sorry, I assumed you were the mad hon replying to himself again.
Your post is reasonable, but
>every different culture prior to the colonial era has had a different conceptualization of sex and gender, and they've had different meanings and values in those contexts
They had a pretty static conceptualization of sex. Gender, I'll give you.
>>5227150
The average XY female isn't genetically identical to the average XX female, that's correct. I never said they were. I said their genes are all the same and literally the only difference is gene expression (mostly the genes in the X chromosome that tend to decide to flip on or off when another X chromosome is present). If you put estrogen in an XY person's system their gene expression is certainly overwhelmingly more similar to females than males, that's the point I was making.
>>5227153
Not so much about sex desu. Until the 18th century it was believed that there was only sex at least by scientists in europe or whatever. Women were just men with inverted genitals. Also sex and gender as seperate things only really came about in the late 19th century, and even then it was experimental. That these are completely different things is extremely new, no more than 60 or so years old.
>>5227162
Anatomically, they are not the same, is what I'm saying. Phenotypically. The actual physical parts that are there are very different.
Seriously, how are you possibly this uneducated about basic biology?
>>5227204
That's what I'm saying. The concept of sex has been static. The concept of gender has changed, in that there wasn't one before recently.
I studied this shit in college, man.
>>5227221
idk who you were but the original person I was talking to was talking about genetics not phenotype. prioritizing a useless estrogen infused cock that has possibly been transformed into a vaginal form over the overwhelming majority of genes related to sex dimorphism does seem like a bit of an autistic obsession though.
>>5227078
Hon, believe me, your going out in public does way more harm than whatever crap people quote from Nature.
>>5204983
If the theory that transgender women (i.e. not even transsexual, i.e. not even HRT or anything) have an innately different brain that's more similar to an average female brain, that's one part biological female.
If she had HRT, that's another part biological femaleness.
If she had some kinds of surgery, that's another part of biological femaleness.
Overall, trans women have varying degrees of biological femaleness.
And so on.
All in all, even biological sex is not so black and white. Reducing sex/gender to chromosomes is pretty silly, scientifically.
>>5226954
>Gene expression has nothing to do with whether or not a person is genetically male or female. Also I'm very skeptical that anything you said is actual proven science and not trans science Nonsense http://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943
Jesus Christmas, since when has Nature been tranny science according to you?
>These discoveries have pointed to a complex process of sex determination, in which the identity of the gonad emerges from a contest between two opposing networks of gene activity. Changes in the activity or amounts of molecules (such as WNT4) in the networks can tip the balance towards or away from the sex seemingly spelled out by the chromosomes. “It has been, in a sense, a philosophical change in our way of looking at sex; that it's a balance,” says Eric Vilain, a clinician and the director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It's more of a systems-biology view of the world of sex.”
>According to some scientists, that balance can shift long after development is over. Studies in mice suggest that the gonad teeters between being male and female throughout life, its identity requiring constant maintenance. In 2009, researchers reported7 deactivating an ovarian gene called Foxl2 in adult female mice; they found that the granulosa cells that support the development of eggs transformed into Sertoli cells, which support sperm development. Two years later, a separate team showed8 the opposite: that inactivating a gene called Dmrt1 could turn adult testicular cells into ovarian ones. “That was the big shock, the fact that it was going on post-natally,” says Vincent Harley, a geneticist who studies gonad development at the MIMR-PHI Institute for Medical Research in Melbourne.
Ask any genetics professor and they'll tell you that higher animals like humans are all but identical genetically and need hormones to transcribe right and develop sex
Why is it wrong to bring up genetics?
>>5227942
Some late "transitioning" dude who thinks clown makeup is enough.
Oh yeah, goes on and rants about how doctors who help people medically transition and younger patients are all agents of the patriarchy.
>>5227958
Looks more like an aging drag queen
>>5227240
I'm the same anon from before. Apparently you're too stupid to follow a basic line of conversation. Which isn't all that surprising, given that you're repeatedly spouting this war-is-peace, freedom-is-slavery nonsense.
See ya around, hon.
>>5227050
You have a high schooler's understanding of biology. That's not any else's fault, senpai.
>>5228618
Don't blame him, he's never heard of a gene chip in his life. It makes sense he'd reject all the science saying that what you read out on one is actually what matters in sex development.
>>5228618
>>5228630
>>5228576
I've said it before ITT but needs to be said again. You are pants on head retarded and/or fully delusional if you think there is any merit to what you are saying. You sound like those lunatics that say black people can't be racist even when they're beating up Jews and shit
>>5228727
Weirdest thing ever is she's some sort of late transitioners who never bothered to get the least bit of corrective surgery but insists she's more trans than all the kids she's fighting with.
Oh yeah, and wants the NHS to impose state restrictions on medical transition and make it impossible for anyone young to do so.
He'd want to force everyone to boycott medicine and become a creepy old crossdressers like him.
>>5228727
I mean I don't get the ban everyone under 25 from hormones(except dangerous xenoestrogen contraceptives) argument they push.
Bodily autonomy is a universal right.
>>5228801
>xenoestrogen contraceptives
Meaning they single those out as an exception that should be given to girls as young as twelve, nevermind the immense risk for blood clots and pulmonary embolism ethynil-estradiol xenoestrogen has.
I mean bodily autonomy says you can take those if you want but I don't understand how the most dangerous of all the meds known to kill thousands of women each year get an exception.
HRT stuff is one of the only things that makes me glad I'm American. I feel bad for all the eurofriends who have to deal with so much red tape
>>5228823
Hey look, everyone's got it bad there. The NHS bans experimental cancer therapies even after they've shown efficacy cause of insufficient proof and "safety".
There's no shortage of university hospitals and biotech that will pump you full of experimental stuff in the states but you're literally stuck with the relics from last century with the NHS.
>>5228723
You are full-stop retarded, dude. You keep jumping to these faulty metaphors to justify your knee-jerk reaction instead of looking at the legitimate science and adapting your understanding of yourself and your world to new information. That is retardation: your development is being slowed by your inability to learn at a reasonable clip. You are objectively, verifiably, scientifically wrong. This isn't an opinion piece, bro. Step it up.
>>5228957
>>5228979
Not a single fucking thing you have brought up about sex and biology means a goddamn thing and you need to grasp that.
NOBODY CARES. maybe other biologists but other than that NO ONE GIVES A SINGLE FUCK
either you can have babies or help make babies or you are a statisically irrelevant outlier and that is THE solitary dividing line used by the entire rest of humanity and nothing else matters.
Stop jerking off about
>muh science clearly proves me
>blahblahblah
it's just bafflegab and self indulgence to make you feel better about being a freak of nature, cut it out, face reality and you'll be better of for it, I promise you.
>>5228781
God, it's like a real life version of the Pink Flamingo's star. Just with bad male pattern baldness.
Gross, you'd think hons would at least try and not look frightening before throwing themselves into the limelight.
>>5229268
>I don't give a single fuck about anything I'm talking about
>but you better shut up and listen anyway
>because I have freedom from speech
Nah. You're still retarded.
>>5229268
>NOBODY CARES. maybe other biologists but other than that NO ONE GIVES A SINGLE FUCK
Lol jesus, rage on tranny-kun.
>>5205041
What the fuck are you going on about you retard?
>>5229268
>either you can have babies or help make babies or you are a statisically irrelevant outlier and that is THE solitary dividing line used by the entire rest of humanity and nothing else matters.
If you're an orientation that is generally incapable of reproduction, why would it even matter if you're biologically capable of reproduction? It's just making a meaningless distinction at that point.
bump I want this to hit 200 replies
