This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]circlingmyownvoid2[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

They died, but that’s hit the case anymore and it still doesn’t make breasts a sexual organ.

I didn’t avoid anything. Ask a non rhetorical question without writing a novel if you want every single sentence addressed.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

Breasts are sex organs and breast development is part of the normal maturity in women, the adult human female of our species, and thus they are unique to one of the two and only two sexes of our species. The kidneys on the other hand is an organ common to all humans and thus it is not a sex organ at all. Neither factory made formula nor a dialysis machine make their function non-essential.

It is more like the following dramatization:

"whoa, I'm an infant and I ain't got no breast milk anywhere to be found."

"Whoa, what a coincidence infant! I'm an adult and I ain't got not functioning kindeys anywhere to be found."

"OK adult, what are those things over there" I'm a talking infant but I still can't see very far."

"Good eye, infant, in spite of not being able to see very far! Those are a big pile of infant formula cans on top of a dialysis machine!"

"We're saved! Both of us! Yeah"

"Yes! We are! The essential services we both need have been sufficiently imitated by technology."

"OK, where's the can opener and the electrical outlet for your machine?"

"Oh no, we're doomed!"

[–]circlingmyownvoid2[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Trans women can grow breasts identical to natal women with timely hormonal intervention so in fact they aren’t.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Can they? How do they do that? And they are identical? Ohh, wait you said "with timely hormonal intervention". So, are the transwomen growing the breasts or is the "timely hormonal intervetion" doing it and the place the transwoman simply the place where that intervention occurs? The team of medical professionals and and the factory making the hormones that do the intervening seem to be the ones growing the "breasts".

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From what I've read, the breasts that males who've been through the male puberty of adolescence grow later in life when taking estradiol do not develop the lobules, ducts and milk glands that in female people mature and develop during female puberty. In male puberty, the breast tissue does not get the same signals as breast tissue gets in female puberty, and my understanding is that male sex hormones in males during puberty causes permanent atrophy of the structures in the breasts related to lactation.

It's not clear what happens to males whose development has been blocked with GnRH agonists aka "puberty blockers" at an early Tanner stage like Jazz Jennings.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The bodies grow then. As do Cais and Kleinfelters sufferers who you consider male.

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

Only two cases have been reported where individuals with CAIS are said to have breastfed. In both cases, the women had to take heavy-duty exogenous drugs that could be harmful to newborns - an unnamed galactagouge in one case, FDA-banned domperidone in the other. In each case, the women were only said to have "partially breastfed for one month." No details were given in the reports about the nutritional contents of the secretions that issued from the breasts and whether the stuff was indeed milk. The aim in both cases appears to have been to provide the CAIS women - one of whom adopted, another of whom hired a surrogate to bear a child - with a sense of emotional bonding with the babies and an "authentic motherhood experience." The physical wellbeing of the babies seem to have been of secondary concern.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You don't know what I consider about anyone. If the bodies grew them, they'd grow them. The drugs grow them, the body is the plaything of the drugs in this case.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If you leave a bottle of estradiol on a desk it won’t grow breasts. That’s a thing bodies do.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How many ways are you wrong here? As many as possible. But you know that. You get a kick out of being wrong.

Growing breasts is a thing adult human female bodies do, not "bodies" in general. Without the drugs growing the breasts, no transwoman will experience them growing at all. That's not a thing their bodies do.

Also, Did you ask the bottle? How do you know? We may have a case of Schrodinger's Artificial Breast. You'll have to open the bottle and pour out the contents to look under a microscope to see if any breasts are growing there. I imagine that would ruin the contents so you'd have to kill the tissue to find out if it is there in the bottle growing. I'm just using QT-type reasoning here where objective reality is subservient to perception.