GC: Evolution comes with change, biology is not infallible and immutable and can change, therefore sex is not immutable and can change?

submitted by Not_a_celebrity from (self.GCdebatesQT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Sigh, is there a reason you feel like asking me that question is ever going to answer my questions? Answering my question with a question isn't going to help me.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I’m trying to understand so I can answer. sigh

You make these posts and there seems to be no logic behind them. How would we evolve if sex is a construct to begin with? How would we keep reproducing humans in order for anyone to exist to evolve without sex?

Sigh all you want but the fact is you never answer our questions, you just keep popping up with your own.

[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

My question this time was not: "Is sex a social construct". It was: "Why isn't sex mutable when biology itself is mutable?".

Evolution exists, things change, which means biology does not stay the way it is, and changes over time. And since sex is biological or a part of the biology which changes, it means sex changes and is not immutable. At least that's what I get from this. GC says sex is immutable and can not change, so I want to know why you disagree with --> "Sex is mutable and can change, because evolution comes with change and biology is mutable and can change, and since sex is a part of biology, sex is mutable and can change"

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And my point was, I needed your answer to my question in order to form my answer to the questions you keep asking. I’m trying to understand how humans even fit into the posts you make. How are we made and how would we be made in the future if sex isn’t real or has mutated? And wouldn’t we have to evolve naturally, so there’d be no trans at all, because we’d all just be flip flopping sex? What would cause this? Can we change back and forth? Would we all change, or just some of us? Why? It makes no sense.

And you haven’t shown us any proof of sex being mutable nor have you explained your post well, so I’m lost for an answer. Where did you get the idea that sex is mutable? Yes evolution exists and things change over many many many years- but humans have existed for millennia and somehow haven’t evolved past sex or into mutable sex, so what would occur to make this happen in the future?

GC is correct, sex is immutable and cannot change, currently. So how and why would this truth change in the future?

[–]adungitit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Evolution exists, things change, which means biology does not stay the way it is, and changes over time.

So, if evolution changes stuff, does that mean I am a dog now? Or a burrito? Or a space shuttle? Does that mean I have 10 arms? Or 50 eyes? Biology is mutable, right?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Actually it would really help illustrate exactly what sex is and why it’s not changeable in a human.

When a mummy and a daddy make a baby, the daddy gives the mummy a gamete called a sperm. Mummy has an egg for her gamete and when the spent and egg make friends in mummy’s tummy, a baby happens.

Mummy is female because she is an adult human who developed a body that would, in good health and during her fertile years, produce eggs. Her body would not make a sperm even if she really wanted it to.

Daddy is a male because his body developed in a way that means he will in going health and during his fertile years, make sperm. His body would not make an egg under any circumstance.

If mummy or daddy get sick or old they will stop making gametes, but their bodies are still the same structurally and are still bodies that developed to produce one of two options.

If mummies and daddies in the future have gills, should mummy stop taking her lung medicine? No because the future gills aren’t relevant.

Should we define sex by something that might happen in the future? No because future sexlessness is not relevant.