Gender dysphoria doesn't exist by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, you crearly don't. If you want to continue this conversation, I suggest you learn more about genetics, neuroplasticity and how they work. Otherwise, you can expect to keep being corrected.

TiM Olympian goes from not knowing anything about archery to competing on the women's Olympics team in less than 5 years. by shyambala in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, look! Another middle-age man who have got into the Olympics and he only picked up archery in 2016. What a joke! Please, peak the world alongside Hubbard, Barrett!

GC: Why doesn't passing count? by BasCaptain in GCdebatesQT

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

A man being mistaken for a woman is still not a woman. A woman being mistaken for a man is stil not a man.

And OP, I know it's you, Tea or Coffe, FastandCurious, BigSecret, TheCoolestAlphabetic/etcetera.

All: How have your beliefs evolved? by formerbird in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I never was a believer in "gender identity" or in "true trans". To me it was (and still is) very simple: men are not women. It's has never been a judgment, but a matter of fact, just like the Earth is round and the sky is blue. To claim that some men are actually women or can become women was always absurd to me. Also, I never felt particularly "feminine", so I found offensive that some men said they are women or like women because they were "effeminate". If they were women, then what was I?

Nevertheless, this was not a subject that I cared or payed attention that much. Despite that I thought certain annoying comments by some men who thought they were more "women-like" than actual women, I didn't think this could affect me in anyway. I mean, at the end of the day everyone knew that transvestites (*) were just very effeminate gay men, right?

Yeah, I eventually learned that was not the case and there were at least a few people who thought men can be women, but I ignored them. It was a fringed minority, I thought, and "trans issues" was still not a topic I was particularly interested in. However, I keep hearing more about this, and people were deadly serious when discussing this stuff. Soon it hard to ignore, especially in fandom spaces, that there was an increasing number of people defending this concept. The argument around if trans identified males should use women's bathrooms was so absurd that I'd thought it was a joke (obviously, if any man can enter, then predators are going to take full advantage of it) if not were because people were being deadly serious about this. Things like "non-binaries" seemed a joke, except people were not treating it as such. The arguments about how trans identified people didn't need to disclose their sex to potential partners sounded outright disturbing to me. Also, I started hearing about "cis" and immediately reject the concept. Like, c’mon, I’m not “cis”, I’m not feel “feminine” or whatever.

I'm prone to overthink things, and hearing all this stuff made me start analyzing the issue seriously (still wasn't researching this, mind you). In the end, I could only conclude that all of this "gender identity" was very regressive. People were claiming they were fighting against sex stereotypes, however, all evidence told me they were actually enforcing stereotypes. After all, if you cannot define what a woman and man are based on biology, how else can you define them? If things kept going this way, I could imagine a faraway future where I would be called "non-binary" or another made-up "gender" because I was neither “masculine” nor "feminine". And this lead me to the most maddening question: why were I only hearing socially conservative people speaking out against this stuff? I could not be the only person who saw how regressive all of this was, yet I barely saw anyone who share my concerns.

March 2020 came and the world was upside-down: there was a pandemic, the virus has arrived in my country and soon the lockdown would start soon just a few months after the government changed, the economy was already shit like usual, and here there was also an epidemic of dengue and measles. Everyone was freaking out, but I had an additional reason to think the world had gone mad as now "trans identified males" were celebrated on International Women’s Day and I was seeing graffiti saying there were girls with penises and boys with vulvas. Admittedly, I was getting angry every time I heard about trans issues by then. I’ve grew up reading the Harry Potter books and I’d heard about how JKR was recently deemed "transphobic" over a tweet saying sex was real or something like, but I didn't read further into it (I'm not on Twitter).

By this time, however, I did an internet search looking for criticism of sex positivism that didn't came from a religious point of view. And so I found a radical feminist website and there in the sidebar there was some recommended articles about transgenderism. I decided to check this too. Maybe these women could see the same than I was seeing? I wasn't planning to read more than that, however, once I started reading I could not leave the subject and started looking on another sites too. I spent the following days doing a crash-course on transgenderism. Soon enough, I'd learned about things like the cotton ceiling (WTF?!), the threats by transactivists (well, they certainly don’t look vulnerable wielding those bats), AGP (this is a fetish?!), de-transitioners (wait, this is a thing?), chest-binders (how is this legal?) minors being "transed" (WTF?!) and more. While everyone was more worried by COVID, but I was getting more and more alarmed about what I was reading. It seemed the "far future" that I feared it was coming already and it was much worse than I could have ever imagined.

On June 2020, of course I saw people were crying about how "transphobic" JKR were and how she should shut up, and how what she wrote was so "hateful" that it should not be read. So, without wasting any second, I did exactly the opposite. After reading her tweets and her essay, I was filled with awe by every single word she said and the way she had kept her position in spite of all the abuse. However, seeing all those death and rape threats being so easily condoned was infuriating. What have happened to all those who spoked out during #MeToo? Was it all for show?

Finding articles that weren't condemning JKR for the crime of saying that sex does matter was proving to be a hard task. Because I'd read that Google’s search results may be biased, I decided to do an experiment. I opened several search engines alongside Google and I did the same searches about this issue in all of them. Every single one of them gave me more balanced results than Google. I switched to DuckDuckGo that day.

Seeing more and more people who were done with this stuff was encouraging, though. I started lurking the GC sub on Reddit, and I saw how the subscribers were quickly increasing... until they got banned. Fortunately, the night before the banning someone mentioned saidit, so it was easy to find this place. Some weeks after, I stopped lurking and started commenting in the new GC sub because I needed to talk about this stuff. Finally, I started participating in this sub, too.

I had done a lot of reading on trans issues since March last year and I can say I’m very firm in the GC side. I found QT arguments unconvincing and incongruous, their tactics deplorable, and their goals are not something I'd approve of.

(*) Transvestite was the word used back then where I live. In fact, it is still in used around here. And, yes, I thought they were all effeminate gay men because that was what I associated transvestites with.

Sorry for the novel, I swear this comment was going to be much shorter!

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

Do you think women and men could choose not to be neither the sumissive or the dominant one in a relationship? I other words, do you think a relationship could not be based in power plays? Do you think someone can consent to abuse? Do you think abuse is erotic and desirable? Do you think women must accept to be dominated by men because is "natural"?

BTW, there is no "sex work", only sexual slavery. "Sex work" is a euphemism used by pimps to normalise and, eventually, legalise prostitution.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

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

Yeah, no surprised at all that you agree with MRAs...

Are you saying stereotypes are true?

There is a difference between saying someone fits the stereotypes of a group and saying all members of a group are like that. Anyway, you can observe behavorial differences between women and men, even if you limit such observation to an specific cultural group. However, how much of that is due to nature or nurture is hard to tell in many cases. The fact is social expectations affect us all since we're born and we cannot get rid of the influence of culture when studying sex differences. That is why I think your assertions about women and men are overly simplistic: you see a pattern and immediately assume that must be the natural state of things and that cannot be changed.

What femininity in men do you accept then?

I would prefer that society had less baggage about what men and women must do. I'd like women be treated as people, and that men were not jacking off of the abuse of women. I'd prefer men were not claiming to be women because they are not "manly" enough or whatever.

And where are transmen in that argument? Do they have opinion or influence? Are they really butch women with a lot of political power?

I was talking particularly of trans identified males only because they are the ones who really hold the power within the trans movement. There are two reasons for this. First, historically most people with a cross-sex identification were males. It's only recently that females whith a "trans identity" are increasing in numbers. However, most of these females are still quite young and, therefore, unlikely to be in positions of great influence. The second reason is females who identify as trans are still treated as women and they must prioritize the wishes of males who identify as trans.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know how many people identifying as "non-binary" there are here, but they can all put an X in the sex markers in their documents now (eyerolling).

Yeah, it's unbeliable that so many Americans appropriate and misrepresent things like hijra to further their own ideologies, and then they have the nerve to pose as "anti-imperialists".

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But I guess Americans forcing their beliefs on everyone else isn't anything new.

Where I from I never heard of "non-binaries" before. They are a very recent fenomenon and it's quite telling the local name they have chosen for themselves is a literal translation of "non-binary (people)". It's obviously a cultural import.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Me neither. Theory keeps saying this despite some of us have said we don't think so. I think the blank slate theory is more a thing in the so called liberal feminism, really.

GC: Sex is a spectrum, perhaps even a social construct, and people are more than what's between their legs so we shouldn't reduce them to their genitals? by WhyAreYouSoDumb in GCdebatesQT

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

Why do you keep doing this when you know your threads will be deleted? Seriously, just create your own sub to ask all the repetitive questions you want.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Answering my own questions from yesterday, I think there are many simmilarities between people who claim to be "non-binary" or other alternative "gender identities" and people who claim to be the opposite sex. Both base their identities in an ideal that cannot be physically obtained, rely a lot on stereotypes, require a lot of external "validation", and dismiss the importance of biological sex. I also read some accounts of people who use a "non-binary identity" as a stepping stone to either identify as the opposite sex or to detransition. Because of this, it surprises me that some people don't believe in the "non-binary" stuff, yet they still say TWAW and TMAM or believe in "true trans". I don't know, I feel like questioning the former would eventually lead to questioning the latter.

I too think neo-pronouns are anoying.

As for official documents, I think they should always reflect reality.

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As I said in the other thread, you have very black and white view of human relationships. You think men are naturally dominant and women naturally sumissive, and that abuse is just "erotic play". You think that a tiny minority of the population may prefere the opposite role, but they still conform to the idea that abuse is erotic and desirable and normal.

I don't think women are nauturally sumissive. Sumission is just a survivorship strategy, a way a aggressor more powerfull than you don't hurt you... Or at least a way you hope they don't hurt you that much. Anyone, including men, could act sumissive if the situation requires it. Like, for example, a robery done by thieves armed with fire weapons. Some people might fight back, but many won't resist and will do do as they are told. If you find yourself in a situation where you need to act this way a lot, you may come to view this behaviour as a part of you, like for instance, in slavery.

Women often find themselves in a sumissive position because men are physically stronger and because men are the ones who hold and have hold the political and economical power. I'm sure other users here could explain more eloquently and with more details than I could all the ways this works. Though, I can say the widespread use of pornography that has been happening in the last years has made a lot to naturalise abuse in the bedroom. Also pimps, pornographers or just regular abusers have been trying hard to naturalise the abuse of women by men throught the "sex positive" movement.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I said the how and why were not relevant for our particular conversation, that is all. I could ask you how you developed this paraphilia, but given you think you were basically born this way...

And I didn't say all the other things you think I said, either. The problem is that you see the world through your paraphilia lens. You can only see romantic and sexual relationships in terms of domination and sumission, therefore, when I challenge your ideas you think I want men to be all dominant and masculine. I don't that at all, I think this is a very messed up way to see human relationships. Why would I want women to be subjected to abuse of men?

By the way, I think it's pretty funny you think I want you to man up. The way ignore you keep ignoring what women have to say about our own experiences, they way you pretend to listen to us, the way you think you know better than us what we really want, the fact that you have a paraphilia (or several, maybe), they way you obsess over sex... all of that scream stereotipically male behaviour, dude. You keep saying how you're feminine and are rejected because of that by women. Yet when you talk about women naturally desiring to be subdued by dominant men, you sound a lot like a run-of-the-mill MRA. Sumissive in the bedroom or not, you don't sound stereotipically feminine like at all.

And I disagree that society don't listen to male cross-dressers. They have a lot of political power right now. It's just that most of them are calling themselves "women".

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The how and why someone developes this paraphilia would be relevant if we were talking about how to prevent it or treat it, but I wasn't talking about that. Instead, I was challenging the idea that there was no choice involved in what you do. And I stand by what I said, you could choose differently, but it's easier for you pretend your inclinations are completely natural and nothing can or should be done about it. It's easier for you to just keep making excuses about how men are naturally dominant and women are naturally sumissive. You have no real interest on what women may think about and you want to naturalise abuse by using euphemisms like "erotic play". To be honest, I have no idea why you come here to discuss about this stuff if you're so conviced that you know far better what women want than we do. Funny how you said nothing about what we said in the thread about sex stereotypes in the bedroom.

Everything else. 21/7/2021 by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I guess she expects we get tired and don't delete her posts anymore, but I have no idea what she gets of asking us the same stuff over a over again.

Everything else. 21/7/2021 by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Oh, no, it's the same user who keeps creating new accounts every time we ban her or delete enough of her posts or told her to stop. I've been deleting the same post for a few days by now but she keeps posting it...

Hope you get better.

Everything else. 21/7/2021 by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, that one.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know how you developed this paraphilia, but I think the how is irrelevant. It matters more that you still choose to endulge it despite that you supposedly understand why it's problematic. I think that claiming you were born this way it's a conforting lie that you tell yourself. This way you cannot be held risponsible for your sexual desires and be asked to do something about it. Telling yourself that women are naturally sumissive and naturally attracted to dominant men is also self-serving because it affirms your ideas about men and women. It allows you to see yourself as a victim: if only women were interested in men like you, your sexual life surely would be more satisfactory. It also allows you that avoid thinking in the uncomfortable possibility that many women may not be attracted to you not because you're sumissive, but because they may be put off about you getting off of a woman's caricature and/or about the idea of BDSM in general.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, I'm sure cheaters are going to be completely honest about their married status./s

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's TRA who are changing laws and policies behind everyone's back whithout any care about how they could affect anyone else. It's also TRA who constantly send rape and death threaths to dissenting women. It's also TRA who are burning books and suppressing dissenting voices. It's also TRA who are weaponising suicide to get what they want. It's also TRA who have got people fired for stating that sex is real and it does matter. It's also TRA who are keen on ignoring everyone else's boundaries. It's TRA who are advocating for the chemical castration of children.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How the heck is dropping acid fine?!!!

And why is there not an implicit expectation that your romantic or sexual partner be truthful about their biological sex? I mean besides that some trans identified people don't want to hear a no for an answer.

What do you think about cases of young boys raised as girls, but eventually realizing they are boys? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Besides being subjected to unnecessary cosmetic genital surgeries and lied to about his sex and medical history, David Reimer was forced by John Money to role play certain sex acts with his twin brother. According to Money this was supposed to help developing his “female gender identity”. Reimer rebelled against this when he was a teen. He re-identified as a man after being told the truth by his parents. But even if he hadn’t be sexually abused, it’s unlikely he would have never figured out his actual sex. It doesn’t exist any technology to actually change someone’s sex, so things like a lack of a menarche and lack of worry of his parents and doctors about this would likely had clued him. So, what was the point of raising him as a “girl”?

There is nothing to be inferred from Money’s experiment besides that medical and sexual abuse are bad.

Nevertheless, Money claimed his experiment with Reimer was successful and used it to implement the “optimal gender policy”, by which children with atypical or ambiguous genitalia would be assigned a sex of rearing and subjected to cosmetic genital surgeries. Feminization surgeries were preferred because of the difficulties of making a functional penis. Like Reimer, these children were lied about their medical histories.

David Reimer and John Money Gender Reassignment Controversy: The John/Joan Case

Changing attitudes to sex assignment in intersex

Deciding on Gender in Children with Intersex Conditions. Considerations and Controversies

Identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Then find a less aggressive way of arguing. Argue against our ideas rather than attack us.

Identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Expect such comments of yours to be deleted from now on then. And better quit with the baseless accussations that we want to harm you, too.

Alleged Trans incident at upscale LA Spa may have been staged by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Only QT think that way, but most people don't think a male should be there just because he says he is a "woman". That is why TRA are saying now that this incident is a hoax made up by "transphobes" who want to smear trans identified people despite that Californian law does indeed allow any male to enter female only spaces as long as he says the magic words.

Identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Next time don't call fellow users monster or similar things, wheter you apologize for it or not.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You call yourself a straight cross-dresser, so even if you don't ID as a woman, you still get sexually aroused by the idea of being a woman, don't you? You also has described yourself as sumissive in the bedroom and you link sumission with women (i.e. yu think we are naturally sumissive and naturally attracted to dominant men). That is what I meant.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Finding femininity sexual is bad?

You don't think that there is something wrong in gettig off of women's subjugation? You think this all fun and games, but for women, femininity is imposed as a way to control us.

How about find masculinity erotic?

Do you mean AAP? Maybe, but I don't know how reaally comparable it is with AGP. I can't tell wheter the motivations are the same for both paraphilias, but possibly not. There is also the fact the world is not a matriarchy and that men don't really see women as a threat. I suspect that gay men find male-attracted trans identified females more annoying than anything else, unlike lesbians with female-attracted trans identified males.

Where can we find out what the average women like?

You could start by actually listening to women and not assuming we are all a monolith.

GC: What should the limits be on erotic consumption and sexual behavior? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In one context or another I'm constantly surrounded by people "leaving the left" over the behavior of other people, while they say their own principles are unchanged. When did political ideology become group identity? If we all said "I advocate an end to capitalism" instead of "I am a leftist" could we have preempted this situation?

I don't think so because what many people mean by "left" is actually liberalism, which is pro-capitalism. So, they will need to word their advocacy differently. Anyway, I think phrases like that are more an expression of disappointment over their political party of choice, which won't dissapear wheter they view their political ideologies as a group identity or not.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I don't think we agree at all. You strongly lean on atributing (nearly) all sex differences to nature and assigning a sexual motive to (almost) everything. You often miss what we told you here because you refuse to analyse the power dynamics present in what society expect from each sex unless you're getting off of it, that is. Sex roles and stereotypes vary through time and culture, but always men are at the top of the hierarchy. Men who are perceived as not "manly" enough for whatever reason are looked down by other men, but women lose not matter wheter they conform to social norms or not. But you refuse to recognise this because you get off on viewing yourself as a sumissive woman and women being naturally sumissive. And when you're challenged here for your sexist views, you twist what we say to suit your own ideas of women and men.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

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

There is a difference between a man being GNC and man getting off on the idea of femininity or an man doing "feminine" things to "pass" as a woman. Also just because a man is going against sex roles or stereotypes it doesn't mean he is suddenly a renowned expert in womanhood like many of those men tend to believe.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But in what do they based their "gender identity" if not "gender expression"? So, how can then "gender identity" be innate?

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why wouldn't humans have sexual display?

You're missing the point again. She is not saying that humans don't have sexual display, but that humans are driven for other things besides sex. You were the one who claimed that feminity and masculinity were sexuality, so why are you surprised that others think you view everything through sexual lens? And I think Juniperious is right: you seem to be extrapolating your own particular experiences to everyone else. You may not claim to be a woman, but you surely like to act as if you were an expert on women and you try to shield your views under the excuse of "evolution".

And before you ask, no, I don't believe in the blank slate theory. I think differences between women and men are due to both nature and nurture.

If every cell in the body can become a sperm or egg in laboratory, does that mean everyone is already both male and female? by BigSecret in GenderCritical

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

Yes, I disagree with that claim. If you want to know why, then pick some biology and medicine textbooks because I won't explain things to you anymore. Honestly, I suspect you know why this claim of everyone being both male and female is bullshit, anyway.

If every cell in the body can become a sperm or egg in laboratory, does that mean everyone is already both male and female? by BigSecret in GenderCritical

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

Those are yoour words:

If every cell in the body can become a sperm or egg in laboratory, does that mean everyone is already both male and female?

If every cell in the body can become a sperm or egg in laboratory, does that mean everyone is already both male and female? by BigSecret in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You have been posting this question or any other variation on how male and female can be real in the debate sub for months under many different names. I and other users have explained to you how there are only two sexes and how humans can't change sex several times by now. But you keep ignoring all our previous explanations and keep posting these threads. You have been told not to keep asking the same question over and over again, but you ignore all our warnings. You keep asking using alternative accounts like if we couldn't tell it's you by now. We ban your accounts and you keep creating more. Yourself have admitted you don't really believe all the stuff you post and you're only playing devil's advocate. We also had to delete some comments of yours that said nothing but insults. Last Friday, you kept posting one of your repetitive threads. I had to delete it like 6 times in a span of a few hours and peaking deleted it once more; and I banned you every single time you posted that thread, but you kept coming back with a new account. Saturday, you posted the same thread and I only allowed it because I was tired. I only deleted it at night after it was reported 3 times (2 as spam and 1 as dumb) because, yes, most users there are tired of your acctitude. That is why you have to demand other users to actually answer your threads now. Today you came up with a new thread and I deleted it twice, but I didn't ban you since it's useless. So now you're posting it in the comments of other thread of debate sub! But sure, we mods are the real jerks here...

Both: Which side has the pandemic helped more? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's.... depressingly probably true. Hopefully there could be some major revelations by people about what that might say about our priorities as social creatures.

True, but is also difficult to follow other issues when a good bunch of the Media either don't report the problems or misrepresent the issues. Big tech companies like twitter or reddit get rid of any wrongthought they see and Google search results are biased.

GC: What should the limits be on erotic consumption and sexual behavior? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Even if there is not a debate sub on Ovarit, IMO discussions there would go much better without the dowvotes. It doesn't seem likely they will get rid of them, though.

GC: What should the limits be on erotic consumption and sexual behavior? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'd rather a respectful man look at a naked photo on Reddit

I doubt such man really exists. If men are watching porn, it doesn't end with them just looking to nude photos. They are watching far more and far worse. It's not like the violent stuff is hard to find. And there is no lack of other men telling each other that it's all "harmeless fun" and that porn is "free speech" and anyone who says otherwise should not be listened to.

Both: Which side has the pandemic helped more? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think many people dismiss what they see on the internet because, well, it's the internet. Users with extreme positions may be easily dismissed as trolls or sock accounts or just a vocal (but powerless) minority.

Sports is a really great way to peak people because: (a) the unfairness of males competing in the female categories is self-evident, (b) unlike other issues like prissons or children's "transitions", this issue is not as easy to hide because many people follow sports, (c) many of these athletes seem to love all the attention and are happy to appear in the Media. Also as the Olympics are viewed by people of all countries, it would have been (or will be) a big wake-up call for people from countries where either there aren't TRAs or they have no gained much political power yet.

Both: Which side has the pandemic helped more? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know, but I think there is one thing where undoubtly the pandemic has helped the QT side with: delaying the Olympics. If not were for it, lots of people worldwide would have learned last year that when TRAs say TWAW they mean it literally.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe try to read the links you posted... This has been explained to you before. Stop playing dumb or I'll ban you again.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

See, I've explained PMDS and CAIS to you before. Pretty sure I was the one who sent you those links, but keep pretending you have memory issues.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Stop playing dumb. She meant we answered you in your previous threads who you have been posting for months.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, neither is nice of you to "forget" everything we say to you, so you keep asking the same question. It's also is not nice that you keep conflating trans with intersex when you got explained several times how they are not related.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, I could do that. But I won't. Because as long as I give you the answers you want, you will keep coming here to play devil's advocate.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've answered you already. Go back to your previous threads and reread my replies.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well, you're right on something. It's useless for you to use the search function because you're the one who created most threads about this...

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This thread again? Just create your own sub!

Woman... by Chunkeeguy in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Funny how they write their own definition of woman, but still can't define it. A social category, you say? But what exactly does define such category, TRA?

GC: Women can have penises and men can have vaginas? by Fastandthecurious in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You keep asking the same question, so what can we say that we haven't said before? Just give up already.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't write the rules. I think it was one of the GC mods from the old debate sub on reddit who wrote them, but she has left the sub. I joined the sub early this year and I've been a mod for only around 3 months. Being a mod was not in my planes, but u/grixit have been looking for another GC mod for a while and I was the one who accepted the offert.

I don't think the subject of "front hole" came up before during my brief moderation time, so I'm asking the other mods what they think.

QT: Is not dating people due to beliefs bigotry? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They already think we are bigots because of our beliefs, anyway. So, I assume using said beliefs to reject trans identified people is further proof of "bigotry".

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This only show that deep down they don't believe in their own "identities", either.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not scrubbing everything that is offensive. Unfortunately, I cannot satisfy everyone. You and others think I'm too harsh as a mod. On the contrary, others think I'm too bland.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Feel free to make a thread about "inclusive" language. I made one some months ago, but got off-topic. The only problem, I think there is only a "trans man" in this sub.

"Cis" being nonsense is one of the key ideas of GC, yet they still can call GC users "cis". That is what I meant by GC being the only ones making compromises.

I don't have any problem not using "fuckhole". I don't see what is the problem for QT to use vagina instead of "front hole".

GC: Women can have penises and men can have vaginas? by Fastandthecurious in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 15 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

For goodness sake, you already know the answer!!! Stop asking the same question over and over again! Find another question to ask for once.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're misunderstanding the situation. Heim is a "trans woman", not a "trans man". We cannot "misgender" Heim, yet Heim thinks Heim feels entitled to use such language to talk about female bodies. And as I said there is a clear double standar in regards to what language is used to talk about male and female bodies. You don't see things like prostate-havers, semen producers or other ridiculous terms being pushed as "inclusive", either. I'm objecting to peope of Heim's sex using it. If trans identified females were to refer this word for themselves, I'll reluctantly accept it. Though, I'd still challenge them about this double standard.

I'm just tired that GC are always the ones asked to make compromises.

Is that the purpose of a debate sub?

I don't know why you think that asking them to use the word vagina means they can't still make their own arguments.

All: What do you miss about the old sub? by womanual in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll only allow "front hole" when they stop getting offended by "misgendering".

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You say this like is only QT who are conditioned in what language they can use here when, in fact, GC have to walk in eggshells so as not to "misgender" any trans user here. And, sorry but calling vaginas "front hole" is far worse than calling a man a man. I cannot believe this term don't come from misogyny. Trans identified males get to call their penises as "girldick" or "female" penis, but trans identified females get instead this word for them? QT can deny this all they want, but everyone knows that trans identified females are still treated as women in their own movement.

If you want to see both sides represented in their truest form, then why don't we stop worrying about "misgendering" the trans users here? If QT want to use this term so much, then why can't GC use "fuckhole"? QT have all the rest of the internet to use derogatory words for the female body, they should be able to handle being told "no" for once.

Edit: grammar

Trans Koreans are Koreans - The Spectator World (satire) by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It’s rude to stare at a woman’s penis - The Spectator World (satire) by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All: What do you miss about the old sub? by womanual in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, they focused only in pronouns and they got what they wanted at the end because the rule about "misgendering" was not changed.

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A male cross-dresser is far from being an authority on female sexuality, and theory usually miss the point of what he is told in this sub to suit his own ideas about essentialism.

I find off-putting men who think women are a prize to win over. I don't want to be anyone's sex toy.

Gender dysphoria doesn't exist by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, tearing a hymen does not change the DNA and I'm not aware that people who believe in virginity tests think it does. Genetic refers to gen and a gen is the basic unit of hereditary information. Mutations, i.e. permanent changes in the DNA, may happen because of errors during DNA replication or cell division, radiation, certain chemical sustances or virus.

All: What do you miss about the old sub? by womanual in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't ban it in a whim. I enforced the rule of not using derogatory terms to refer to people's genital, a rule that I didn't even write. And, as I said, you're not even a "trans man", anyway.

Gender dysphoria doesn't exist by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What are you talking about?! Virgnity tests are bullshit, but they never were about genetics. Genetic is not a synonimous of biological.

You don't need sex in order to get pregnant. Pregnant simply occurs when a vagina arrives into contact with sperm. Someone could just masturbate onto a leaf, and then hand that leaf to a female individual, for her to pour the sperm into her vaginal opening. It doesn't require PIV, just masturbation. And, even then, not always masturbation, as people can cum as a result of experiencing wet dreams. So, it doesn't even require anyone to touch themselves.

LOL

All: What do you miss about the old sub? by womanual in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That is funny comming from you. I mean you're the one who often accuse anyone of being a bigot as a argument. So, what kind of QT friendly rules are you looking for? Some that let you bully other users while they can say nothing?

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Honestly, I've thinking about it and I'll not allow the use of "front hole" anymore. Refering to genitals in derogatory ways is against the rules and I think "front hole" qualify as such. And you're not even a "trans man", to use it anyway.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is not how it works. Exceptions don't make the rules and ovotesticular disorder is the most rare of DSDs.

https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/ovotesticular-disorder-of-sex-development/

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

Stating boundaries is transphobic? Why so many trans people want to have sex with "transphobes", anyway?

Alleged Trans incident at upscale LA Spa may have been staged by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You have to click on the "send a new text post" button that is below "send a new link" button. If you want to include links you have to put them within the text post.

Alleged Trans incident at upscale LA Spa may have been staged by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This a debate sub. Where is the debate here? You didn't even bothered writing your own thoughts.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There are only two kinds of gonads, which produce the two respective gametes, and two development pathways.

How many of you were not on the Reddit sub and if not, how did you learn about this space? by formerbird in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I wasn't in the reddit debate sub. I found the reddit GC sub by chance around March last year and started lurking often in it after the JKR "controversy". Then the GC sub was banned and moved to saidit where I started participating after a while. It was in the GC sub where I learned about the old and the new sub.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The fact that gametes don’t determine sexual status is clear from people who don’t produce gametes.

The fact that some people can't produce gametes doesn't meant their bodies aren't built around the prodution of them.

The fact that an egg cell and a sperm cell are usually required for a zygote to form is not proof that sex is binary

Excuse me, are you saying that there have been babies that were born from any other combination than a egg and a sperm cells? Provide proof.

because sex is about anatomy not just gametes

Where do you think gametes come from?

The Decline and Fall of Science-based Medicine by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't like where things are going either. Of all the too many current pseudosciences, sex denialism is the one I find the most frightening because its falsehood should be self-evident.

Off topic, 29/06/21 by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Authoritative tone, you say? Oh, no, Heim. Trust me, if I were really an authoritative queen I would have banned you long time ago. ;)

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I like how "my" terms are the only ones representative of an inaccurated ideology...

How are babies made, Heim? Which combination of gametes produces a zygote?

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

but knowing the sexual orientation of the person you are dating can help determine if it's okay or not.

And here lies the problem. Because many trans people want to interpret other people's sexual orientation to be based on "gender identity" rather than sex.

Off topic, 29/06/21 by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you so much! I love that you know my proper pronouns without even asking me. ;)

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

Oh, do you mean like how trans identified people don't want to be refered by their sex? You and others think that being called a "man" is an unforgivable sin despite that for most people is a neutral term. Yet calling a vagina a "front hole" despite how dehumanizing and anatomically inaccurated it is is all fine and dandy.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most people don't think you can change sex, though.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

You cannot consent to have sex with a trans identified person if you don't know that said person is trans.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

It's not semantics, it's anatomy.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Females, however they identify, don't have "front holes". They have vaginas. Also, "front hole" is anatomically inaccurated too because the vagina is between the uretra an the anus.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, they should disclose. No one is owned sex. Not disclosing information that your (potential) partner would find as a deal breaker is a selfish move. And given that sexual orientation is based on sex, not disclosing your actual sex it's a big deal. It also opens the question on what else would you lie about. Anyway, I don't know how likely those cases actually are. I mean, in most cases people can see what sex someone else is, especially once clothes are off.

When to disclose? Pretty early in the relationship, I think. Personally, I'd say before dating, but that may be because I wouldn't date a stranger, let alone get physically intimate with one.

I never understood the safety worry that trans identified people bring about in this topic? I mean, why would you want to sleep with someone that would kill you? Shouldn't you want to filter out the "transphobes"?

Off topic, 29/06/21 by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Drop the subject, Heim.

Off topic, 29/06/21 by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think you'd have used anti-gay evangelicals as an example if you thought they were harmless. I don't know about other countries, but here evangelicals are very cult-like. The leaders scam their followers doing "exorcisms" and things like that.

Off topic, 29/06/21 by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You said her actions are hurting trans people and compare her good intentions with those of religious zealots. How is that not an acussation of bigotry?