this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
363 points (95.5% liked)

Reddit

13638 readers
2 users here now

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, your big argument against the existence of trans people is semantics?

Oh. My. God. You literally aren't reading a word I'm saying. Again with you guys it all comes back to "you're denying our existence!!" when literally no one is denying your existence. Saying "you're a male" when you identify as a woman isn't "denying your existence". Saying "Assigned Male At Birth" is, however, denying scientific and biological reality.

I’m telling you what assigned means when people say “assigned male/female at birth”.

I'm sure you don't even see how dumb this argument you just made is. "I'm telling you what it means, therefor that's what it means even if what I'm telling you is wrong" lol.

Nobody is denying that biological sex exists.

Apart from all those who are.

Again, biological sex and gender are two completely different things.

Debatable still. The current use of gender is as a feeling, whereas previously it was intrinsically 1:1 linked to sex. This is what people are talking about when they say "gender ideology" and how they disagree with it. You think gender is simply a feeling. I don't.

Of course, you seem to want to choose to invent some fantasy world and then get offended when reality doesn’t match it

Oh lord, the irony is too good here.

If describing you accurately is “name calling”, then yes. I’m name calling. You’re a snowflake. A stupid, crazy, immature snowflake.

Yeah we're done here. You're clearly not of the right mental capacity or frame of mind to have a logical discussion. Shocking.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

You literally aren't reading a word I'm saying.

I've read everything you wrote. It's all profoundly stupid. You're trying to pretend that the phrase "assigned male at birth" means something it doesn't mean. You can look it up yourself, you know; you don't have to take my word for it. We live in an age of extreme information availability. So it's frustrating for me when you ignore all available evidence and cling to your stupid fantasy.

Again with you guys it all comes back to "you're denying our existence!!" when literally no one is denying your existence.

2 things: I'm not trans. Also, this entire comment chain started by you pretending that people were being banned because they pointed out that biological sex exists. When I pointed out that that was stupid and crazy and incongruous with reality, you doubled down. So how else am I to interpret your stance other than you love sticking your fingers in your ears, sticking your tongue out, saying "LALALA", and pretending that gender identity isn't separate thing from biological sex?

I'm sure you don't even see how dumb this argument you just made is. "I'm telling you what it means, therefor that's what it means even if what I'm telling you is wrong" lol.

I wasn't arguing with you in the same way that telling a schizophrenic that there are no demons around him isn't arguing. It's pointing out reality to a crazy person. If you're too dumb to look it up yourself, or too ideologically blind to believe the evidence you find, then it's not an argument. It's simply a person with way too much patience trying desperately to get you acquainted with reality.

Apart from all those who are.

Ok. I'll bite. I'm sure you'll have no problem linking me to any mainstream arguments that biological sex doesn't exist since you believe it to be so prevalent. I'm happy to read any evidence you provide.

Debatable still. The current use of gender is as a feeling, whereas previously it was intrinsically 1:1 linked to sex. This is what people are talking about when they say "gender ideology" and how they disagree with it. You think gender is simply a feeling. I don't.

It's not, though. Because on my side is practically the entire weight of the scientific community, and on your side is bigots and crackpots. Refer to my previous paragraph about why that's not a debate.