-->
@ILikePie5
Or race. Elizabeth Warren is the whitest Indian I know. All you have to do is claim your identity. Proof is an anachronism.
What is a female?
Posts
Total:
48
-->
@bmdrocks21
Still trying to figure out if every post is bait
What’s bait?
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
For gender, it is a good argument. 5 year olds need a good definition for what separates men from women.
-->
@Bones
We shouldn't base the differentiations between male and female on how children differentiations between them.
Fair enough, so are you saying presenting as a gender isn’t enough?
-->
@zedvictor4
So how would you define a female human?
-->
@Intelligence_06
Your profile says you are male, so this is blatant contradiction.
If he is cisgender, then all valid definitions of male applies to him.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Chromosomes are about sex not gender though. A “man” or “woman” could mean different things depending on whether we are discussing a “man” or “woman” biologically (in terms of sex) or a “man” or “woman” psychologically (In terms of gender).
Also, all a 5 year old can go off of are “signs” (a deep voice, facial fair, certain facial definitions etc.) to determine if one is a man.
However, it is a completely absurd to think a proper definition of a man should be able to be understood by a 5 year old.
-->
@TheUnderdog
Egg producer.
-->
@zedvictor4
{ ovum } Egg >< spermoza { seed }
Womb { oven } one-in-the-oven
One nucleation in the oven is 12-around-1 sphericals via four hexagonal planes defined by 12 sphericals.
When all { Universe } is in equanimity, ---X x - X y---we have three X chromsomes for every y chromosome in Universe
Equanimity is the four hexagonal planes when constsructed from paper we have:
24 chords >< 24 radii wherein, each is of exactly same length, ergo, same vectorial value
2 nuclei { nucleations } OO OO OO * * OO OO OO
See B graphic in link http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s04/figs/f5511.html
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
Also, all a 5 year old can go off of are “signs” (a deep voice, facial fair, certain facial definitions etc.) to determine if one is a man.
Not all men have deep voices and not all men have facial hair.
However, it is a completely absurd to think a proper definition of a man should be able to be understood by a 5 year old.
I disagree.
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
In terms of gender.
Gender is a hijacked word.
Formally meaning one of two sexes...Male and Female.
Now meaning anything one can conceive of relative to a persons sexual fulfilment....Relative to ongoing socio-psychological conditioning.
And anything you condition a 5 year old to accept as true, a 5 year old will inevitably grow up believing so.
So tell them that one mummy is both daddy and mummy, and the other mummy is also mummy, then that is what they will become conditioned to accept.
And if a liberal society enforces such information then this is what you will end up with.
Though, one still cant hide from the fact that the butch one with the cropped hair, tattoos and boxer shorts is unable to produce male gametes.
-->
@TheUnderdog
I was only speaking in generalities, not absolutes. There are always exceptions to rules.
-->
@zedvictor4
"Though, one still cant hide from the fact that the butch one with the cropped hair, tattoos and boxer shorts is unable to produce male gametes."
This would only mean that their sex isn't that of a man, not that their gender isn't that of a man. The term "man" has two meanings; one in terms of biology, and one in terms of psychology.
Maybe this hasn't always been the case, but sex and gender are not the same thing in 2022. Semantic changes over time are common in the English language so I don't see this as an issue.
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
For sure.
I'm not the lexicographer who is in a position to manipulate language.
Nor am I the lobbyist who demands that language is manipulated.
Nonetheless language is manipulated.
And the male produces male gametes and the female produces female gametes....End of the true story.
Gender fiction can be anything one cares to imagine.
-->
@zedvictor4
It is called a Semantic Change, which is common in the English language.
Again, nobody is denying the reality here of biology.
The point is that psychology is a whole different branch in and of itself.
One can be a male biologically but that doesn't mean they aren't a woman psychologically.
One's psychological states are not a fiction, they are very real.
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
One can be a male biologically but that doesn't mean they aren't a woman psychologically.
Can you give us the definition of man and woman please.
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
As I said, gender fiction can be anything that one can imagine.
So I agree that psychologically anything is possible.
One can be a hermaphrodite turnip from Mars if one want's to be.
-->
@DebateAllDaTings
Can you think of any areas besides gender where a definition has exceptions?