1 edit
@no1marauder saidSo not women. Not men Jesus Christ. So we are up to three categories from two categories. It follows that, within the purview of natural law, there will be be a fourth category. I simply base this finding on your statement above.
Your "basic point" is a bigoted principle that has been rejected by virtually every State in the union and by the SCOTUS i.e. that transgender women aren't women.
The new 4th category would be women who become men that are not really men. So they will not be men nor women, they will be the fourth category.
I am not unaware that they will all prevail. They are not going anywhere. So in the end, we will have four different categories. You had just stated the distinction with your comment.
So we have a new discussion evolving. How in the future, in the year 2030, will these four categories compete, for instance, in Olympic events?
My opinion will be that you will say, you will have to say, that everybody compete in all events, and the idea of having male and female competitions will be over. You liberals are really changing the world. Thanks a lot. Yes, good clean fun.
I’m not so sure about ticket sales, though.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@no1marauder saidTrans women are not women.
Your "basic point" is a bigoted principle that has been rejected by virtually every State in the union and by the SCOTUS i.e. that transgender women aren't women.
Put a hundred men and a hundred women on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of men and women.
Put a hundred men and a hundred trans women on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
@Cliff-Mashburn saidSo infertile women aren't women either?
Trans women are not women.
Put a hundred men and a hundred women on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of men and women.
Put a hundred men and a hundred trans women on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
How about impotent men?
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@no1marauder saidJebus.
So infertile women aren't women either?
How about impotent men?
Just no getting through to you.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@spruce112358 saidHere let's fix it even more.
Fixed.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred XX on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of XY and XX.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred trans XY on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
Science! 😆
In other words, 100 males and 100 females versus 200 males.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@no1marauder saidHow about this "woman?"
So infertile women aren't women either?
How about impotent men?
Does this fit your definition of a female?
@Cliff-Mashburn saidOh, you are getting through, all right. He is simply in a corner, and thinks it is a circle. ( I made that up. Logic is life)
Jebus.
Just no getting through to you.
@spruce112358 saidNow you have REALLY got him walking in his circle. He is trying to 'work in' infertility and impotence into the equation. Einstein would just stare at him until the class-over bell sounds.
Fixed.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred XX on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of XY and XX.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred trans XY on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
Science! 😆
1 edit
@spruce112358 saidNot if the XYs have Swyer syndrome and the XXs have de la Chappelle syndrome.
Fixed.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred XX on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of XY and XX.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred trans XY on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
Science! 😆
Science!
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@AverageJoe1 saidThey would be funny if they weren't being so willfully stupid.
Now you have REALLY got him walking in his circle. He is trying to 'work in' infertility and impotence into the equation. Einstein would just stare at him until the class-over bell sounds.
@no1marauder said😂
Not if the XYs have Swyer syndrome and the XXs have de la Chappelle syndrome.
Science!
@Cliff-Mashburn saidYou made a flawed argument based on a false premise.
Jebus.
Just no getting through to you.
Neither male or women's sex is based solely on reproductive ability.
1 edit
@spruce112358 saidHow about if all two hundred were gay or totally asexual?
Fixed.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred XX on an island and come back in a hundred years, you will have a large population of XY and XX.
Put a hundred XY and a hundred trans XY on an island and come back in a hundred years, and you will have two hundred skeletons.
Science! 😆
@no1marauder saidCircle did no save him ,.....he found the Wall surrounding the corner!!!
Not if the XYs have Swyer syndrome and the XXs have de la Chappelle syndrome.
Science!