fellow enbies how do we counter this chud talking point?

humans aren't bipedal. not all humans have 2 legs, the image is right

I mean your logic just proves enbies exist they're just not typical or common

>>40304449 (OP)
>eh uh different genitalia = not being able to walk or something
This is definitely a very normal person with very normal views on sex and relationships

>>40304462
Intersex, technically

non binaryism is retarded and this isn't even the best counter-argument

>>40304449 (OP)
on average humans has less than 4 limbs

>>40304449 (OP)
Behold! Plato's biped!

>>40304462
And yet in 2025, half the girls on TikTok claim to be enbies. Strange... Even more strange all those self-proclaimed enbies also supposedly have many rare 'neurodivergent' disorders.

What are the odds?

>>40304449 (OP)
I've said this ten thousand times before. If an argument can be easily dismantled, it doesn't require similes or analogies or paraphrasing. If it's so easy to dismantle it, dismantle it. Not something loosely related.

>>40304449 (OP)
Humans are not retarded and yet you are, how do you explain that?

>>40304852
i guess it's a good thing that nobody cares about your made up criterion then. most of the time the reason people piss and shit their pants over analogies is not because there's something wrong with analogies, it's because their stupidity is shoved in their face and they're unequipped to handle it.

>>40304471
intersex people existing doesn't validate enbyism, nor does it disprove the obvious existence of a gender/sex binary

>>40305008
Okay. One is a physical thing. The other is a psychiatric thing. Here's me shoving your stupid into your face without using analogies.

I only see woman doing this

>>40305008
there is something wrong with analogies, the limitation of analogies is precisely that they compare two things that are at most analogous or resemblant at a surface level, but who might not at all be equivalent at a deeper meaningful level, in order to make a point that would require such deep equivalence. Analogies are a nothing but a rhetorical device.
This very analogy in this post doesn't make much sense. What is it even talking about? Gender? What point do you think it is making? Whatever the person that made this image thought it meant, it falls flat. Is there even a single nonbinary person that denies the overwhelming bulk of the population is in the gender binary? Analogous (heh) to this argument would be having a color gradient that goes from red to blue, then some retard insisting whoever says that there are colors in between red and blue is denying the existence of red and blue, but this is a position literally no one takes

>>40304790
this is still a biped because now her arms are also legs and she is using two of them

>>40304821

>And yet in 1865, half the whites on minstrel shows claim to be blacks. Strange... Even more strange all those self-proclaimed negros also supposedly have comically large red lips.

>What are the odds?

>>40304449 (OP)
>Legs are a spectrum
>Therefore humans aren't bipedal
Um, you fucking retard mouthbreather, why do you think wheelchairs exist? BECAUSE NOT ALL HUMAMS ARE BIPEDAL! you moron! I bet you walk up the disability ramp instead of taking the stairs too!

>>40304449 (OP)
all you gotta do to dunk on enbies is ask what is it that they're doing that makes them nothing like a man or a woman at all

>>40305089
and? i see many people struggle with this. when you want to discredit an analogy you need to give an argument on why the analogy is not applicable, not convince me that the two are not the same thing.

>>40305195
like this person. the reason analogies are so powerful is precisely because they don't need to compare equivalent objects in order to make a valid logical conclusion, as a matter of fact they by definition can't CAN'T compare equivalents because then they wouldn't be analogies. and the insane part is that there is literally no limit to how far apart you can stretch the two observed entities and still have it be a coherent argument under the right circumstances. they don't even have to be fucking real lmao. for example i could've just as easily made this same point by saying

"well certain xerbogalogs on planet hiawatacunt are born with only 1093 kongelers instead of 1094, does that mean that it follows that xerbogalogs generally having 1094 kongelers isn't a valid taxonomic instance?"

and it would still be just as valid. if your thesis applies to humans and gender, then it should just as well apply to humans and legs, and xerbogalogs and kongelers, provided that they are analogous, which they are.

>>40305301
lmao what is it that so called "men" or "women" do that makes them allign with an imaginary gender, like people who think they fit into an extremely widespread gender identity are deluding themselves because they wanna see themselves as normal

like you are born with a cock or a pussy and you make it your whole personality, or you are born without one and you make it your whole personality

>>40305545
so you're a gender abolitionist?

>>40304449 (OP)
This image seems more related to intersex people rather than non-binary people, since it's about physical features, where as gender is a social and psychological phenomenon. So the image and text are just an irrelevant non-sequitur.
That being said I think posters in this thread are missing the point of the image, which is the implication that non-binary people are ill or disabled. Arguing against that requires a more concrete theory of both gender and mental illness, and once you engage you are now on the back foot attempting to explain Foucault to a retarded chud who doesn't want to know and isn't actually interested in forming reasonable arguments.
The correct option is to not engage with bait like this.

>>40304449 (OP)
yes you retard
this is why you shouldn't legally define humans as having 2 legs

>>40304449 (OP)
They don't understand the difference between biology and sociology. The talking point relies on the person reading it to not understand that physical presentation and your state of mind are separate, which is why gender exists as a spectrum but sex doesn't.

>>40305872
nobody did that though?

>>40304449 (OP)
>>40304460
>OP meets someone with only one leg
>WHAT THE FUCK? STOP TRYING TO CONFUSE ME, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TWO LEGS, BY DEFINITION HUMANS HAVE TWO LEGS, I DONT SEE IT, IM CLOSING MY EYES, STOP OPPRESSING ME!

>>40305352
ok mr yapsalot