Thread 40063784

you're boycotting the united kingdom, aren't you anon?

>>40063784 (OP)
Solidarity.

>>40063784 (OP)
You’re not a woman. You’re a man with a fetish.

That’s not hateful to point out. I accept you. I accept that you’re a man. I accept that you have a penis. You and half the world.

>>40063784 (OP)
I live there so I can't exactly boycot it, I'm only a few months away from my NHS trans wait list too so this hell is hopefully nearly over for me

>>40063797
it's not hateful to point out that israel is committing a genocide either yet that earns you a terrorism charge in the dictatorship that is britain.
>>40063799
please tell me you've been DIYing while you're waiting and didn't just wait 5 years for a hondose.

>>40063824
>earns you a terrorism charge in the dictatorship that is britain.
Based.
Add /Israel/ flag for pride month

>>40063832
Have you tried using retinoid lotion? It would help deal with those cracks on your hand, but unfortunately the sausage fingers and ape paw are permanent

>>40063784 (OP)
There's nothing positive in the UK, a boycott is just a normal day to me.

>>40063824
Well I'm 18 and the wait time for me wasn't as absurd as the rest of the uk...

>>40063797
Trans women are women. Stop denying biological reality. Why are you so dedicated to denying that estrogen changes biological makeup? Trans women ARE women. Whether you like it or not.

>>40063894
you done fucked up but it's okay, you're under 25 so probably still salvageable.
>>40063884
i do kinda wanna visit scotland but i'm not spending my hard earned money in the UK so i must wait until independence.

>>40063906
estrogen does not change sex are you the retarded?

>>40063920
Yes it does

>>40063906
wait even your own picrel argues against you, are you trolling?

>>40063923
No amount of hrt has changed your chromosomes, if you think it has you have some kind of schizophrenia

>>40063797
You're not a woman, because "woman" is not a thing
it's just a foid delusional enough to believe its anything past an incubator fuckhole

>>40063924
>wait even your own picrel argues against you, are you trolling?
nta but ur completely missing the point

>>40063949
literally says right there,
>chromosomes
>unalterable

>>40063932
Chromosomes does not equal sex.

I am a biological woman because I say I am

>>40063956
forgetting that basically any government or medical associacion will disagree with your definition of sex, I have a question for you
Can men get pregnant?

>>40063956
like i said , missing the point , that being that sex is not *just* a matter of chromosomes. defining it could very well include the other items on that list

>>40063965
chromosomes = sex
simple. Biological woman is a retarded phrase which you are a retard for repeating
>>40063967
>forgetting that basically any government or medical associacion will disagree with your definition of sex
yeah and the middle east kills gays so idrc
>Can men get pregnant?
I don't care, man is not a sex. If you mean can males get pregnant? In theory I don't think the definition procludes it. Some hypothetical person with xy chromosomes which somehow has a fully functional gestative system would be a male who is pregnant. Though I don't think that exists or is possible. So definitionally? I guess. In reality? No, there are no males who can get pregnant.
Male=XY
Female=XX

>>40063916
I may not have a lot of confidence but yeah, I don't think I'm too masculine yet, not like I'm balding or anything, I was referred to the Chalmers clinic late last year so I don't think I'll be waiting too much longer, it's probably the shortest the one in the uk currently, I'm kinda too poor and depressed to try diying desu

>>40063978
No it can't actually, hope this helps!
Sex = chromosomes
Male = XY
Female = XX
Intersex = not XY or XX

>>40064006
There are xy women who can give birth

>>40064006
what do you have to back up this definition. there's no point arguing it if you're pulling it out of nowhere

>>40064011
Show me one
>>40064012
All definitions are pulled out of nowhere. Are you trying to ask what my reasoning for defining this way is? If so you have very poor communication skills

>>40064017
>All definitions are pulled out of nowhere.
no ? some of them are evaluated according to certain criteria, such as, for example, its usefulness as a term in science. scientists do not use the definition you're using. what end does your definition fulfill better than theirs?

>>40063965
I don't think you can be biologically a woman simply by asserting that you are. But you can by taking hormones.

>>40064006
You're very wrong. There are LOTS of ways of being intersex that don't involve chromosomes. There are also people who are intersex in the way that they have normal chromosomes yet develop the sexual traits (even genitals) of the opposite sex to their chromosomes. Complete androgen insensitivity makes you grow into a woman with a vagina despite your XY chromosomes. But by your definition that person wouldn't be intersex. The biology of sex is VERY complicated and bot black and white at all. There's a lot more to it than a pair of chromosomes.

>>40063990
>in reality
wrong
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5885995/
https://www.endocrine-abstracts.org/ea/0013/ea0013p253
https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(10)02954-7/pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335446662_Successful_pregnancy_in_a_patient_with_Swyer_syndrome_or_pure_46XY_gonadal_dysgenesis
but honestly i cannot be surprised that a kike is retarded that's a bit of your thing

>>40064044
The chromosomes are a proxy for 99.999% of births having chromosome = SRY activation = Sex. If you want me to call it
Male = XY with active SRY gene and androgenization
Female = XX without or with inactive SRY gene and without androgenization
then i can do that. Didn't know you needed your hand held THAT bad

>>40064034
>some of them are evaluated according to certain criteria, such as, for example, its usefulness as a term in science.
That's out of nowhere. Do you not understand what subjectivity is?
>scientists do not use the definition you're using.
not all scientists use the same definitions
> what end does your definition fulfill better than theirs?
It creates a tertiary category where all males females and intersex people are seperate and observable.

>>40064065
>androgenization
so castration at birth can suddenly make you intersex? Hmm... for someone who thinks sex is immutable thats an odd definition

>>40063924
Dumbass, sex is more than just chromosomes. I seriously dislike you.

>>40064065
Quoting percentages makes no difference. There are more intersex people in the world than there are gingers. Most of them don't have abnormal chromosomes. The biology of sex is complicated and you're viewing it in a very simplistic and naive way that does not reflect reality. Chromosomes are only one aspect of sex, and not even the defining one. There is no one defining aspect of sex, but hormones are already closer to being that than chromosomes. The only reason people get so hung up on chromosomes is that they don't understand biology.

>>40064065
>Didn't know you needed your hand held THAT bad
discordia ur definition was patently wrong. you can't just turn around and say that it was secretly some other definition and we're all the idiots for not realizing it.
>>40064076
>Do you not understand what subjectivity is?
nothing to do with my statement that not all definitions are pulled out of nowhere
>not all scientists use the same definitions
does not contradict what i said. they may use a range of definitions, but little to none use *yours*
>It creates a tertiary category where all males females and intersex people are seperate and observable.
is this not true of every definition. i'm asking what advantage yours has

>>40064051
First article's LITERAL TITLE:
>Swyer syndrome
>Intersex condition
That's not a male retard, and if you were that retarded to put that as your first link I sure as shit am not bothering to look at the others

>>40064090
People with swyer syndrome have XY chromosomes. According to you that isn't intersex, but a male! You're not even being consistent in your retardness and then have the gall to insult the intelligence of other people.

>>40064090
You still listed "chromosomes=sex" at first when the argument was made which means that's a male to you
Kikes and reading comprehension

>>40064078
I don't consider murder to be a "natural" death despite all things in the universe being natural. You are just a retard who does not understand how definitions work
>>40064084
ur a retard, no it isnt. stop fucking coping jesus christ. Trans women are male. End of.
>>40064088
You clearly didn't understand what the percentage represented, moron.
>>40064089
No it wasn't. You can literally do what you did with any defintion. All definition require legwork on the part of the person reading the definition unless it's some fundamental axiom.
>>40064089
>nothing to do with my statement that not all definitions are pulled out of nowhere
Ok can you show me the universal constant that defines sex. Is it gravity? The speed of light? which one?
>does not contradict what i said.
directly does
>>40064089
no it's not. The definition you use literally does not do that.

>>40064098
>Male = XY with active SRY gene and androgenization
>Female = XX without or with inactive SRY gene and without androgenization
>then i can do that. Didn't know you needed your hand held THAT bad
>>40064103
Jesus you are actual debate pedophile lmao. If you want to have an actual discussion try making a good faith reply and I'll consider indulging you. "AFAB" basically broadcasting your retardation anyway
are you illiterate as well as retarded? rough...

>>40064107
what is this jewbabble KEK
you don't even make any sense anymore
Please go and get a debiism diagnosis, at least people who have the displeasure of working with you will understand your complete lack of cognitive thought

>>40064107
So because you have an ideology that says sex can't change, we have to change the definition of sex? Because sex is NOT just chromosomes. You are going plainly against science here.

>>40064107
>You can literally do what you did with any defintion.
not literally everyone you were presenting it to would have misinterpreted it if it was crystal clear
>>40064107
>Ok can you show me the universal constant that defines sex.
there is none, but if you agree on the criteria you want a definition to fulfill then you can come up with one that's satisfactory by your standards rather than just going off vibes.
>directly does
no it does not, i literally explained why: having several definitions does not mean they have your definition.
>no it's not. The definition you use literally does not do that.
well my definition would certainly have the three broad categories, it's just not a sure thing where to draw the line. just because your definition is simpler doesn't mean it's actually more useful for anything people need to talk about sex for. if you want to talk about chromosomes just say chromosomes

>>40064129
Sex is just chromosomes

>>40064138
You're not a rational actor then. You are driven by something other than reality.

>>40064136
>not literally everyone you were presenting it to would have misinterpreted it if it was crystal clear
You can tell a pig to build a house to keep out wolves, yet the pig will still choose to build his house of straw. The error is not on you, but the pig for believing straw would deter a wolf
>there is none
then it's pulled out of nowhere, hope that helps!
>no it does not
yes it does
>well my definition would certainly have the three broad categories
three categories is not a tertiary system moron.
Chair Stool and Bench are are three categories, they exist on a continuum.

>>40064142
Reality says.... drumroll...... sex = chromosomes!!!! YAY!!!!

>>40064123
I can have whatever flag I want BITCH

If you're gonna be a complete fucking moron, stop posting with a trip. At least then you'll just blend in with all the other 4chan trash instead of demanding people recognize your stupid name.

Science communication was a mistake, the non biologists should simply be quiet and take their titty skittles if they want to change team

>>40064152
>The error is not on you, but the pig for believing straw would deter a wolf
if your position relies on assuming everyone other than you is a drooling moron, maybe you're the drooling moron
>then it's pulled out of nowhere, hope that helps!
the criteria is ultimately, ya. but like if you have a specific goal, such as doing science, the definition itself is not out of nowhere. it's not just vibes-based
>yes it does
if you're going to keep saying that you need to explain why my point about how having several definitions does not necessarily mean they have your definition is wrong
>they exist on a continuum.
did i say continuum? i generally see it as pretty clean-cut, again, i just can't exactly define the boundaries

>>40064160
mad for what lol
>>40064161
louder for the people in the back

>>40064172
>if your position relies on assuming everyone other than you is a drooling moron, maybe you're the drooling moron
Lmao the best compliment you could give. Seeing as my position relied on you having human intelligence, which means that I myself have human intelligence, and by your own logic, you have subhuman intelligence. Your lack of self awareness is astounding

>>40064183
>Your lack of self awareness is astounding
this is how u come off for the record

>>40064172
>but like if you have a specific goal, such as doing science, the definition itself is not out of nowhere. it's not just vibes-based
that description is pulled out of nowhere, neccesarily given your statement directly preceding it
>you need to explain why my point about how having several definitions does not necessarily mean they have your definition is wrong
I won't bc that's retardation and bad faith, seeing as I never said that
>i generally see it as pretty clean-cut, again, i just can't exactly define the boundaries
If you can't define the boundaries that is the exact opposite of clean cut lmao

>>40064190
its like ur literally trying to be as unpersuasive as possible

>>40064200
Why would I try to persuade someone acting in bad faith?

>>40064200
I don't think she's capable of convincing her way out of a paper bag. We're dealing with an intellectually deficient individual here.

>>40064204
>someone acting in bad faith?
it's so incredibly obvious that you're acting in bad faith and deliberately misinterpreting the things i'm saying. i can't imagine how you believe ur own bullshit

>>40064207
God what are you? You behave exactly like a gay man or a fat female

>>40064213
name one thing I "deliberately misinterpreted"

>>40064214
I'm a princess. Worship me, bitch.

>>40064137
t.

>>40064219
>>40064137

>>40064222
>>>40064219
:3

>>40064229
>>>>40064219
lmao try quoting right next time moron

>>40064217
>name one thing I "deliberately misinterpreted"
i started writing a reply listing all of the occurrences but i realized that it's essentially a list of everything you've had to be thus far. if you said it and i replied to it, i'm probably including it.

>>40064233
I did quote right, you're just stupid

>>40064237
>i started writing a reply listing all of the occurrences
>gets asked for a single example
>tries to list multiple example
You are either illiterate, retarded, or bad faith. Choose one or some combination thereof
>>40064241
no you didn't, wouldn't expect a fab to have the mental facilities to realize it let alone do it right

>>40064254
>tries to list multiple example
this exact statement is my example

>>40063784 (OP)
yes, for bombing the Houthis

>>40064254
>illiterate, retarded, or bad faith
every accusation really is a confession from you zionists

>>40064254
I actually feel bad for you
Please stop this
Please you don’t understand how much embarrassment I have from you stop shitting everyone’s threads. You probably are dealing with some problems but this isn’t the answer just leave this place you sound actually extremely unwell please

>>40063784 (OP)
what's in it for me?

>>40064254
your jewishness is showing hon

>>40064161
wrong decade, gradcel
i can read anything i want on the internet now
i can even quizz robots about the bits i dont understand

why are troons like this?

Discordia is quickly becoming as annoying as Emily tbhon, shitting up every thread

>>40063916
>implying england will ever allow independence to occur unless compelled by force
>implying the scots have the will to do it by force