could you win a youtube-style debate that consisted of you vs 10+ transphobes reciting all of the usual "ywnbaw" and "muh basic biology" arguments?

>>40366881 (OP)
yes. through my millions of 4chan posts, i have finally mastered the art of being right

>>40366881 (OP)
no I have stage fright and while I can get my thoughts out over text, if I had to do it verbally and while others are talking I would freeze up, get tongue tied, talk like an idiot, and then get steamrolled and look like a retard

no im not built for debating and i dont like talking to ppl who obviously dont like me

Lol, yeah, it would end up like "I will call a woman who I perceive to be a woman" and when they start arguing with my perception I'd brawl with them and get kicked off the show. Fun times.

All trans women are socially and biologically male.

>>40366948
0/10

>>40366881 (OP)
yes because I'm a pretty youngshit passoid and I would cry if they are too mean to me

i dont think you can really argue with people who fundamentally want you dead

Lmao, even on here troons get BTFOd by random thirdie sharteens passing by.
One chud will ask about the definition of a woman and it's over

>>40366881 (OP)
I would never debase myself to do that. I dont think free speech is a good thing and I will stay consistent by not entertaining their worthless "thoughts"

>>40367111
>definition of a woman
a cis woman or a trans woman?

>>40366960
I’m right though

>>40367111
i dont know why people always say this
we have a definition of a woman, you guys have a self-referential definition of a woman

we win here every time because our definition is better than "X is X because it is X"

>>40367170
What are these prefixes?

>>40367252
Born as or transitioned/transitioning to

>>40367136
you should have no problem with them wanting to take away your free speech then, since you both fundamentally agree on that much

>>40367266
What's the woman suffix? You went with a circular definition.

>>40366881 (OP)
no bc I fundamentally agree with them

>>40367252
oh, fancy ourselves an ironist, do we? don't play socrates with me. say what you mean and commit to it

>>40367321
>say what you mean and commit to it
I asked for a definition of something and you gave me a circular definition saying that the something consists of a union of its (your view) subsets.
I don't think you are very intelligent and you made me feel like I just won a high school debate. Chækk mæyt, libtard.
What I actually believe?
You aren't women, of course. You can be one socially (because we are fit for different roles), and even look like one which should be good enough for most people (me included). Transitioning is the only way to treat dysphoria but it should be gatekept harder to weed out people who are not dysphoric enough and/or don't have the willpower to push to get what they want (since they'll need lots of (metaphorical) balls to live as a trans woman).
That's what I believe, thanks for asking.

>>40367377
i never gave you any definition. you're conflating me with this nona >>40367266
>you made me feel like I just won a high school debate
you sure do sound like it, big guy. how's repping treating you?

>>40367433
I'm not a repper, I am a strict bi top.

>>40367111
Sure whatever keeps you asleep at night

>>40367442
>I'm not a repper, I am a strict bi top.
i literally spit-take'd (spit-took?) my fucking coffee. you can't write this shit. this is why i still use 4chan

>>40366881 (OP)
I wouldn't win even against a single chud tbdesu
all he has to do is say ywnbaw it's not liek there is any real argument against that

>>40366881 (OP)
probably? I would just pretend to have not thought about any of it that deeply and cry. It would look like 20 gross Karens bullying one pretty girl over and over.

>>40367475
Awesome

>>40366881 (OP)
Yes. You just walk away and automatically win because they cannot be reasoned with.

>>40367575
You can't walk away. You will be locked in a room and forced to listen to their arguments before being given time for a response. Staying silent is an admission of defeat. How do you win?

>>40367236
most trannies literally define "woman" as "a person who identifies as a woman" which is circular nonsense, or they go smug redditor mode and say "Heh, someone who would never want to be with you, chud ;)"

>>40367284
A woman is an adult human in whom a majority of cells lack a y chromosome.

>>40366881 (OP)
Literally all fields of science universally agree with me.

2 min rant about chairs

Well all science still agrees with me.

Ywnbaw

Again all science disagrees.

Uh muh Bible

God's existence is irrelevant. Science exists and it agrees with me.

Etc etc

There's no debate to be had here.

>>40367732
A woman is vagoo and XX

>>40366881 (OP)

Enjoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBKVWUWEt-Q

>>40366881 (OP)
yes i could, but that's because the truth is that trannies and chuds are both wrong
i'm one of about 3 people in the world who gets it

>>40367236
>we have a definition of a woman,
what is it then?

>>40366948
They are male but occupy a non-man and non-woman gender.

>>40368452
we knew what a woman is a long time before we knew what science was, so science has no bearing on the definition of a woman

>>40367732
>>40368550
Both wrong. Just an adult AFaB.
Like, very, very, very, very, very likely XX, but could be some kind of intersex specimen. But the big part is we raise them into girls and then they mature into women.

We make women out of AFaBs.

>>40368644
What if the doctor sucked ass?

>>40368644
it's illogical to have a definition that depends on an unobservable state at birth

and nothing is normally assigned at birth, sex is observed at birth and usually some time before via ultrasound as well

>>40368676
Yeah, they usually catch things better than literal birth now but that's the idiom people use since that's around when a birth certificate gets made.

>>40368657
They've made mistakes. There are definitely people that got thrown in the wrong bucket and parents+society just... went with it.

>>40368729
no, it isn't, it's just tranny propaganda

>>40368597
true

>>40368597
but whats the truth then?

>>40368892
i'll let you work it out for yourself, since the moment i understood it was a life-changing epiphany and i wouldn't take that from you
it's not so hard to figure out what is going on, but you need to let go of some basic assumptions everyone is making for it to all make sense

>>40368628
>we used to think disease came from evil spirits and bad smells, so science is irrelevant here

>>40368982
but that proves my point, science is also irrelevant to the definition of what a disease is
it may be relevant to how diseases work, but science cannot define "disease" after the fact.

>>40369003
So you agree the definition of male and female was based on folk wisdom, cultural norms, and subjective perception? Not biology, not chromosomes, not anything empirical? Then you agree it's a social construct.

>>40369123
Reality is a social construct tbf

desu all that would be required to win this debate is to be extremely calm and let them look hateful. it wouldn't play with normies

>>40369123
no culture or norms or tradition whatever is required to know what a woman or a man is, those concepts predate culture and language
you're operating under a false dichotomy

>>40369135
Fair enough, my mind always wanders back to epistemology

>>40369149
The categories of "man" and "woman" are defined through language and culture. While biological differences exist, how those differences are interpreted and categorized varies across societies and history. Claiming these concepts predate culture or language ignores that they are, by definition, cultural constructs.

>>40369187
blank slateism has really made the humanities retarded, hasn't it
you aren't going to figure it out without a bit more thinking on your part, but everything you just said is flat wrong.

>>40369187
>>40369223
also, fuck off and stop using AI to answer questions

>>40366881 (OP)
no
its impossible

>>40369223
Which part of what I said is wrong? It's not blank slateism, it's basic anthropology. Biological traits exist, but you cannot neatly fit them into "man" and "woman", because biology does not operate in absolutes. The point still stands that how we define male and female is entirely a social and cultural construct. If you can't argue with that or accuse me of using AI, then I take that as a concession.

>>40366881 (OP)
They should do this
Now

>>40368628
Irrelevant conservanigger babble

>>40370803
Wow sis you can’t say that word

>>40366881 (OP)
What are the debate-winning arguments in favor of tranny shit? May as well spread awareness and teach our fellow trans queens how to stand their ground

>>40370819
It's not for black people anymore. It was racist towards them.

Nigger is for conservatives who are willfully ignorant, evil, antihumanitarian scum that endanger not only their lives but the lives of everyone around them. They are the actual embodiment of the concept of niggotry. Everywhere they go everything they do they should be shutdown and treated like the violent psychopathic homicidal niggers they are. They are killing you. Children. Hurting women. Shaming and infantilizing men. Fuck them.

>>40366881 (OP)
yea ofc
respond back with "you want to be a woman though" spam and calling them hon and ma'am and misgendering them
they will start crying first, guaranteed
I've done it before

Every single trans woman on earth is a man pretending to be a woman, and all of them both look and act completely male.

This is a bukkake waiting to happen.

>>40370920
Hot

>>40366914
You can't define a word with the same word you're trying to define.
you lose.
Woman is a human adult female.
Oxford dictionary.

>>40370875
Damn nta but I’m trying to figure out how far back I’d have to go to find the point where our worldviews split so hard, it’s hard to conceive of an alternative timeline where I’m arriving at your conclusions. Thanks for sharing, you’ve broadened my perspective on just how far the gap is.

Can we get a non-furry guild in classic Tera for people who aren't gross?

>>40370893
This never happened
How does this even work
And if it did happen you are a mean piece of shit
>>40370875
I’m not irredeemable or evil fuck you
I’m not even a conservative anymore but this makes me feel like shit

>>40370875
well I really don’t know why I still keep the attitude and I’m offended by anything that shits on conservatives even if being a conservative in my case is self sabotage

>>40371055
>This never happened
I have like... four discord servers I'm in just to try and deradicalize nazis through hormone correction
>How does this even work
average TDS transphobe has dysphoria
>And if it did happen you are a mean piece of shit
I don't throw the first punch in online arguments like this and these are very hateful people

>>40370963
Ok but what if I snap your glasses and stab you with them, poindexter?

>>40371182
Well I was like that as a kid
But I just turned out to be a closeted chaser

>>40371193
You've still lost the argument, and reality matters to people.
Sorry about your tranny world view echo chamber.

>>40371195
you should try HRT, you might stop being miserable all the time

>>40371210
I don't mind, I knew it would end in a brawl.

>>40371218
I’m not miserable all the time I’m pretty happy sometimes
I’m not going to get groomed you know I have been here since I was 15
Go find some other target

>>40371223
but destroying my glasses isn't "the end"
You've lost the war.
*pushes up glasses frame into nose nerdily*

>>40371223
100 chuds vs 1 tranny

>>40371243
1 chaser vs 10 chuds actually
>>40371230
There is no "end"

>>40371270
Trannies hate chasers

>>40371227
>I’m not miserable all the time I’m pretty happy sometimes
I don't have to promote transition at all really, not transitioning is already killing you inside, why on earth would you double down at any stage and decide to commit to it, it's a zero sum game, you know it's already failed, why continue with that status quo
You provide the best arguments for just how well it's working out, I dont have to do anything but point that out

Anyway this is exactly how it would go in the hypothetical me vs 20 chuds argument
Oh and grooming you requires I have a malicious end goal, my end goal is that miserable reppers stop being common enough to start a career in politics
I genuinely think the best way I can improve the world is by encouraging people who will become extremists or just plain moderate politicians to transition instead of having anonymous sissy/CD hookups on grindr at 40
Don't John, 50 yourself

>>40371292
there is no repression, because there is no transition

>>40371292
People are different
I’m not going to argue with you
You are literally just a discord groomer lmao
Go crack some fresh eggs

>>40371307
happy people are different
sad people are all the same
you're not you when you're depressed and you're always going to be depressed as long as you repress

it's all very predictable

>>40371321
I really want to know why do you think I’m a repper

>>40367037
Justify why you shouldn't be killed to people who's entire existence is wanting you killed.... not exactly easy to argue

>>40367624
Ok if we get defeated what's the punishment? Death by gas chamber?

>>40371336
lol lmao >>40371195
>Well I was like that as a kid
>But I just turned out to be a closeted chaser
really not reaching here
plus you felt so incensed and personally attacked by the idea that someone would spot what you were that you had to jump on my first post and reply to it

it's always a self report with reppers
I prefer ftmreppers because when you catch them in the self report they'll go "oops, ya got me, yea I got that penis envy" while mtfreppers always go "NO, NO I'M NOT, YOU'RE A GROOMER" without fail
its just so tiresome

>>40371353
>>40371345
See I’m not a chud I don’t want trannies killed

>>40371356
Because maybe you are a groomer
And you still didn’t answer my question

>>40371364
reminding you that you want to be a woman and you're running from it in an adversarial manner is not what grooming is, and that's what I do
cozying up to you as your friend and convincing you to crossdress for my approval is what grooming is, I dont do that
the only time I've ever done something close to that I already hated that nigga so much that I was actively fucking with his head calling his pecs breasts/boobs because I knew it tore him up inside
there was no way we could ever be friends for it to be grooming at that point, it was strictly a personal attack
which is also how I know that I would win the argument with 20 chuds

and I did answer your question, you said "yeah I was a nazi teenager but now I'm just a chaser" and that's pretty much every second trans woman on this board's personal history
you're not unique

>>40366881 (OP)
no id probably start crying

>>40371420
Well I was just edgy plus a majority of people here where always libtards
I think you are just stupid

>>40371446
and I know you're depressed most of the time and only have little periods of happiness
dawg what are you trying to accomplish by repressing

>>40371490
I’m not really depressed
I’m just lonely
This proves you don’t know me lmao

>>40371288
I know but I still love them.

They need to do this with a passoid with a perfect voice, like Zheanna. She's actually smart too (unlike pseuds like Taftaj and giga-retards like Blaire White).

In fact I am shocked this hasn't happened yet

>>40366881 (OP)
it's not a debate if they aren't open to new information
ywnbaw isn't an argument, muh basic biology is immediately countered with advanced biology and the real debate can begin
but again if they aren't entering the conversation with a mindset to possibly learn from their opponent then it's not a debate, just a humiliation ritual

>>40366881 (OP)
debates are all bullshit
nobody ever won a debate by being correct, it's just about who can talk louder and project "correctness"

>>40371563
Advance biology

>>40367732
actually, in that case every human being is a woman
a very low percentage of cells in the human body even have dna

>>40366881 (OP)
A woman is whatever the fuck I find attractive

>>40371605
based and heterosexual

>>40371598
you just made that up lmao

>>40371508
of course I dont know you
but I know you're a chaser posting on /tttt/ feeling personally attacked by the idea that someone would think you'd be happier as a woman and trying to pretend everything is okay right now
you have provided 100% of the information I need to know that you are a repper

>>40371643
I’m not buzz light year

>>40366881 (OP)
Sure but I don't think it would be much of a debate.
Trans women have XY chromosomes and are intersex by definition so long as they are on hormones. Trans women are objectively not female and also not cis women.
In my book man and woman are roles not biological fact, hence the language surrounding men and women (saying that someone isn't a real man for example).
To me if it barks like a dog then it is a dog, I don't really care if people disagree, and I think the reduction of the discussion surrounding trans people being reduced to what-is-a-womanisms is a tactical ploy by the powers that be to ensure that the masses have something else to fixate on instead of killing politicians and journalists.
Whether or not you think trans women are women is in reality little more than semantics because trans women are by objectify fact trans women at the end of the day and the discussion should be around where they fit into society and how they should be handled.
Also trannies and femboys make my dick hard and therefore they are women.

>>40371679
the next time someone asks you if dogs can fly, what are you going to say exactly?

>>40371575
>debates are all bullshit
>nobody ever won a debate by being correct, it's just about who can talk louder and project "correctness"
I'd say like 0.5% are actually legit and worthwhile but the necessary (but DEFINITELY not sufficient) conditions are: high IQ, very educated, quasi-autistic traits, heavily prepares for debates in advance, longform reader and writer, and willing to bet real money on factual claims and predictions

Some rich guy started a "boonk/deboonk" company and posed a $100,000 debate challenge for anyone who wanted to contest any of their findings. Each party puts up $100k into an escrow account, two neutral judges are selected, then after like 15 hours of debating the judges decide who is more likely to be correct about the facts. If both judges pick the same person, they win. Those debates are close to a true Platonic ideal of a debate

In this case some random dude accepted the challenge a year or so ago and won. The company still maintains they were in the right, but at the end of the day the challenger got the $100,000 from them and also mostly won in the court of public opinion. That kind of stuff creates actual rigor and integrity in debates.

From my understanding this debate was also the single most influential shifter of people's opinions on possibly the most contested empirical topic of the past few years; one where each side has a plausible case and it's not the usual academics vs. retards situation. So this one debate proves not only the potential for good debates but their potential impact.

If anyone's interested in the details: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/practically-a-book-review-rootclaim

>>40371694
>it's a saying
>it's not literal
>the full saying is "If it looks like a dog, walks like a dog, and barks like a dog, it's a dog"

>>40371736
>cope
>cope
>cope
lol

>>40371784
>already given up trying to argue
1 done, 19 more to go

>>40371357
Then the debate is stupid.

20 terfs screaming at me isn't a debate, it's a struggle session. I'm going to continue taking my hormones, I've had my surgeries. Like what's the outcome gonna be? They'll let me know they don't like me, so what. Fuck them

You can't reason with unreasonable people, terfs are in a cult. They have to want to break free from it.

>>40372101
Well I’m not a terf
I just larp as chud so I can get all that sweet tranny attention

>>40371243
At least 3 of them are bichuds and they're violently using the troon's body to get their fix

They are women if they pass

>>40366881 (OP)
Yeah, I would win by shooting them all in the face.

>>40369320
>biology does not operate in absolutes.
what's the intermediate thing between a sperm and an egg again?

>how we define male and female is entirely a social and cultural construct
you're using this phrase as a crutch instead of thinking what it could mean
you need to use your brain and not ChatGPT
the concept and basic ability to recognize a man or a woman does not depend on culture or society in any way at all

>>40366881 (OP)
Winning an argument with a crowd is easier than an individual. Group mentality turns people real dumb real quick.

>>40372496
Stem cell

>>40366881 (OP)
There is no "winning" a debate. The right wing thing sex and biology is the same thing, the left wing think that they are seperate concepts and that "woman" is tied to gender rather than sex. There is no way to debate when you have axiomatically different views of the subject of your debate. There is only disagreement.

>>40372818
you're an actual retard

>>40373525
you don't understand the terms of the debate in the first place
you can't even define "gender"

>>40373547
let's say, hypothetically, for the sake of argument, that a woman is "an adult human female". and let's define mammalian females as those which have XX chromosomes. Let us inquire: why are the XX chromosomes relevant?
"It's because they are what make something female!", you say. But then they can't be at all part of the definition of female, since that would make it self referential. Congratulations, we now have:
>a female is one with the thing that makes it female
>a woman is an adult human with the thing that makes it a woman
And here we see the fundamental flaw of natural language definitions: natural language is altogether incapable of defining things, as every definition attempt of a term in natural language will rely on other terms in the natural language, which themselves must be defined relying on other terms in an infinite self referential chain and therefore is void. In order to avoid this, natural language would need to have undefined terms, which form it's ground truth (as is done in mathematics, a formal system which admits of real definitions based on fundamental undefined terms which are understood by their relationship to each other rather than through natural language descriptions. See Hilbert's axiomatization of geometry).
The purpose of natural language is to allow for the communication of an intuitive and internal sense of meaning between subjects, not for definitions, as a result "definitions" in natural language are all truly just descriptions, and by "woman" I am describing trannies as well. cope and sneedthe chuddie.

>>40366881 (OP)
Yes.

>>40367111
>on here troons get BTFOd by random thirdie sharteens passing by
Delulu

you will never be a woman thoughever

>>40367275
Too bad gender is a protected class.it was already enshrined.

>>40373632
What pathetic brain power you have.
It's always the dumbest people who think they're intelligent enough to win arguments.
Female is defined as the sex of an animal which is able to produce ova, and ova are the egg cell gametes in animals. Female is also sometimes defined as the animal with XX chromosomes, but that itself is not the same word as "female".
You erroneously said "female is one with the thing that makes it female."
It's more accurate to say "female is one born with a pair of X chromosomes".
And a chromosome is a linear arrangement of condensed DNA and associated proteins (such as chaperone proteins) which contains the genetic material (genome) of an organism.

None of these are self referral. But nice to know you still have to lie to yourself.

>>40367111
>the definition of a woman
Someone living in the cluster of physical characteristics/behaviors/social norms associated with a estrogen/progesterone dominant hormone profile. Every chud definition is refuted by intersex people.

>>40374107
How would "adult AFaB" be refuted by intersex cases?

You can be raised into a girl and then woman... but you'll realize eventually that your "labia" look more like a scrotum caught in a rotary saw accident.
You'll be like, "uhhh, Mom, Dad, am I boy?" and their answer will be, "well, no, but we raised you like a girl because they said it'd be easier overall".

And that girl would become a woman. Even without the right gametes produced.

>>40374107
There are no consistent "social norms" or "behaviors" directly associated with estrogen/progesterone, so that tranny definition is retarded.
And "intersex" people do not refute the definition of female and male sexes, as intersex itself doesn't even have an agreed upon definition by most communities, but even if it did, it's basically just a genetic fuck up of mixed up of the two binary sexes which still means there are clear definitions of males and females.
You lose again, tranny cultist.

troons getting bodied in this debate rn

>>40374177
Because that scenario and the phrase "Assigned Female at Birth" imply a social aspect, i.e. medical consensus could easily have said they should have been raised as a male. So a general definition of woman must encompass both social and biological aspects.

>it's basically just a genetic fuck up of mixed up of the two binary sexes which still means there are clear definitions of males and females.
So the definition of intersex requires the definition of male/female, which in turn must consider the definition of intersex (otherwise it isn't rigorous or suggests a third sex). It just brings things back to what >>40373525 anon said.

>>40374079
I guess postmenopause, ovarian cancer, hysterectomies, pre-puberty, turner syndrome, androgen insensitivity syndrome, etc. don't fit your rigid definition of female

>>40374270
No one is "assigned" his or her sex by another person. He or she is born with his or her sex depending on his or her chromosomes.
>a general definition of woman must encompass both social and biological aspects.
No. It really should not encompass social aspects. Woman is a female human adult as already explained.
Your feelings about social aspects aren't facts like science and sexes are.
>the definition of male/female must consider the definition of intersex
No. It doesn't need to at all. What a retarded thing to say.
Try again.

>>40366881 (OP)
I could never win any argument, I would start sobbing the moment they implied I wasnt really a tranny (fragile male ego)

>>40374285
XX chromosomes still apply to all those syndromes.
Try again.

>>40374341
>androgen insensitivity syndrome
>XX chromosomes still apply to all those syndromes.

>>40374359
Yes, and your point?

>>40374328
Not that anon, but--
I'm pretty sure your chromosomes aren't evaluated (at least, I'm pretty sure) unless your development is going a little fucky and they need to confirm an intersex disorder.

Otherwise, you can just observe development and make a pretty easy guess as to what genetics are activated regarding XY or XX. If it's a recognizable intersex disorder, then a "sex" is chosen based on proximity, what generally is known to work better for those individuals per disorder.

But that's the assignment phase. Everyone gets assigned, either medically or, historically, just taking a peek at genitals.
Then the sexism begins, and you now get the "girl" and "boy" experiences as your parents and the world reinforce roles consciously or unconsciously.

>>40374341
If you wanna go there, how do you define Turner syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, triple X syndrome, XYY syndrome, mosaicism, chimerism, 5-alpha-reductase deficiency, XX male syndrome... I could go on

>>40374392
>your chromosomes aren't evaluated unless your development is going a little fucky and they need to confirm an intersex disorder.
I never even implied chromosomes were evaluated at birth so that's an irrelevant point you're making.
>But that's the assignment phase. Everyone gets assigned, either medically or, historically, just taking a peek at genitals.
Yes, but we're talking about two different things.
When I said your sex isn't assigned by another person, I mean your sex is determined by your chromosomes. You're talking about what another human writes down medically on your chart which is irrelevant to your actual sex as humans doctors for example can make mistakes the same way a delusional tranny mistakes his or her sex.
Sex and chromosomes aren't a mistake. They're based in pure logic and science. Not feelings or subjectivity.

>>40374438
Klinefelter syndrome:
A genetic condition in which a person is born with two X chromosomes and one Y chromosome.

Turner syndrome:
A particular genetic condition, caused by partially or completely missing an X chromosome (monosomy), that leads to sterility and other issues.

etc, etc
But what do rare genetic disorders have to do with defining the two sexes?
Are you asking what sexes people born with those genetic disorders have?
Depends on the disorder.
Does this have anything to do with 99.99% of trannies who are born with perfectly normal XX or XY chromosomes who then decide to cross dress and/or take the opposite sex's hormones?
No.

>>40371736
DUCK

>>40374458
Sure, you're defining male and female.
But we didn't have "chromosomes" as a concept for millennia.
We still had men and women, however.

We assumed their sex--sometimes incorrectly, and far worse than we can do now--and raised them with a flavor of sexism to make boys/girls and then men/women as they aged.
I'm saying men and women are made through experience, which is tied very closely to their presemed sex.

>>40374755
>But we didn't have "chromosomes" as a concept for millennia.
>We still had men and women, however.
Yes. And? We understood biology better as time went on. For millennia we also didn't have trannies taking hormones and pretending they were the opposite sex or demanding to be identified as the opposite sex.
What the hell is your point?
We have the definitions of woman based on science, and trannies have their delusional versions of what a woman is, based on subjectivity and feelings, which most of society does not agree on.

>>40366881 (OP)
I would out Chud them

>>40374819
We don't have definitions of women "based on science", we just glue it to "female". We've had plenty of not quite XX women.

Transwomen, in my definition of woman, are excluded. They lack social engineering, showing up to the party two dozen years late. We're probably more similar than different but I'm saying that a woman is not always female.

>>40374819
>We have the definitions of woman based on science,
But they weren't based on science. At what point did we all agree that the definition of the word woman had changed?

>>40374884
>We don't have definitions of women "based on science"
Yes we do. Are you incapable of reading established definitions which include scientific aspects like chromosomes?
>We've had plenty of not quite XX women.
No we have not relatively speaking, because those kinds of genetic disorders are extremely rare, and even in those cases the person still falls into either the male or female category scientifically, there are still only two sexes and a woman is still an adult human female.
>I'm saying that a woman is not always female.
Say that all you want but it's factually incorrect.

>>40374902
in the English language, a woman has been defined as an adult female human for a very long time.
We have known what a female was for a very long time, and incorrectly defined it as a person born with female genitalia before we knew more about the scientific explanations behind why a human is born with male or female genitalia.

>>40374951

a woman has been defined the same way since time immemorial, and nothing changed about the definition of a woman before or after biologists started studying women.

you can't have an incorrect definition, since a definition is defined in terms of word usage, not facts.

queermajority.com/essays-all/if-biological-sex-matters

>>40374975
>a woman has been defined the same way since time immemorial
Nope definitions change over time, usually based on new information and evidence, or new social norms. Definitions are agreed upon by the societies who speak that definition's language.
>you can't have an incorrect definition
Yes you very much can. A definition is considered incorrect if it's not agreed upon as the correct definition by most of society.

Kinda like how trannies currently have the incorrect definition of a woman.
Hope that clears things up for you.

>>40374951
a woman has been defined the same way since time immemorial, and nothing changed about the definition of a woman before or after biologists started studying women.

you can't have an incorrect definition, since a definition is defined in terms of word usage, not facts.

https://nitter.poast.org/glykosymoritis/status/1943937183578214446

>>40374997
>Nope definitions change over time
could you show me where and when the definition changed?

>A definition is considered incorrect if it's not agreed upon as the correct definition by most of society.
okay, when did that change?

>Kinda like how trannies currently have the incorrect definition of a woman.
that implies that all they'd have to do to be right is to be more persuasive, which isn't an incentive for them to admit you're wrong, is it?

>>40375009
>that implies that all they'd have to do to be right is to be more persuasive
Only if they happen to actually convince most of society who use that language, but there's currently a very low chance of that.
>could you show me where and when the definition changed?
Do you have a specific definition in mind, or are you asking me to show you where any definition has changed over time?
If it's the latter, that's actually sad if you didn't realize that definitions change over time. What fucking grade are you in?

>>40375050
sure, some words do change their definitions
for example a "car" used to be something you attached to a horse, now it's something you drive.

but when did the definition of the word "woman" change and who agreed on changing it?

>>40374926
>nobody is outside the two boxes even if they have the characteristics that place them outside of them , because... they just aren't okay?

>>40375063
>but when did the definition of the word "woman" change and who agreed on changing it?
It's probably changed multiple times, but I don't have that data sitting in front of me.
Rule of thumb, like any definition, is that it changed as soon as 51% or greater of the population began agreeing on a new definition for the word.
Currently most of society would say that a woman is defined as a human adult female, so that's all you need to know.
That's how languages in societies work fundamentally.

>>40375081
is that the actual definition they are using, or is it the definition that they would see in the dictionary?
do people ask for a gamete check every time they call someone a woman?

>>40375063
>for example a "car" used to be something you attached to a horse, now it's something you drive.
That was called a carriage you drooling nigger

>>40375079
They're never "outside the two sexes". They're arguably always one or the other, or close enough to be considered one or the other.
An apple that was genetically crossed with another fruit but is still 99% an apple is still considered an apple.
A white man who is 99% white genetically is still a white man.

>>40375095
car is short for carriage anon

>>40375090
It's the actual definition they're using in their minds to describe a woman.
>do people ask for a gamete check every time they call someone a woman?
No. Why would they, you retard?

>>40375098
1. Thats not how genetics work
2. There's basically no way for a fruit species to have nearly all of its original DNA (as i assume from your retardation that you dont know that one percent of dna difference is a lot actually) after crossbreeding unless you were breeding it with a species already very close in genetic material
3. In said white man, that one percent can be the one that manifests in external phenotype, making him look mixed and generally be perceived phrenologically as another race

>>40375125
>It's the actual definition they're using in their minds
how do you know?

>>40366881 (OP)
my iq is above 70 yes

>>40375154
>1. Thats not how genetics work
Yes it is.
>2. There's basically no way for a fruit species to have nearly all of its original DNA unless you were breeding it with a species already very close in genetic material
Yes. Exactly. Glad we agree. and your point?
>In said white man, that one percent can be the one that manifests in external phenotype, making him look mixed and generally be perceived phrenologically as another race
No it would not make a 99% white man look like a non white race.

What does any of that have to do with trannies who use an incorrect definition of "woman"?
What does any of that have to do with 99.99% of trannies who are born with either XX or XY chromosomes?

Nothing? Oh great. Thanks for the time wasting retardation.
Two can play at that game:
>Phenotype? How do you define phenotype? Let me just derail this thread into discussing phenotypes now.

>>40375195
what is truth?

>>40375160
because only retarded trannies are brainwashed into believing something else. And trannies only make up like 1% of the population.
Normal people like agreeing on established definitions.

>>40375212
no, i'm asking how you know what's going on in people's minds when they use this word
don't try to get out of answering, show me some evidence.

>>40375234
nta but resorting to spooky bullshit is not the way. speech always demonstrates an intent

>>40375234
I don't have to provide you evidence for something extremely obvious and experienced by simply talking to people, but if you choose to believe something else, go ahead retard.
Doesn't make you correct.

>>40375247
it's just as obvious that some trans women are women
this presents a problem for you, doesn't it

>>40375266
In fact, trans women appearing to be obviously male is most common.
So no it's not a problem for me. For you maybe.

>>40375279
i didn't say a majority, i said some
if you're denying that any trannies pass you're delusional, because they can and do

>>40375279
>i know you are but what am i
sad

>>40366881 (OP)
tranny would lose automatically if ugly

>>40375291
I never said there weren't trannies who APPEARED to be female.
I have consistently and correctly said "trans women" aren't actually females though.
Problem with that? I just can't stop winning.

>>40375316
if everyone calls those trannies women, why aren't they women?

>>40375316
Not to mention that even those "trans women" who appear female usually no longer appear female upon simply closer inspection.
>>40375333
>everyone
Well unfortunately for you, not everyone calls trannies women. The opposite is quite true.

>>40375316
are you also a "strict bi top"?

>>40375338
passing or even clocky trannies do get called women and thought of as women
that isn't people lying, they just see them that way

>>40375342
You wish, faggot.
Proud to be normal and straight.
>>40375355
>that isn't people lying!!
KEK!

>>40375368
god gives his silliest battle to his funniest clowns. why are you here arguing with trannies? not a very "normal and straight" thing to do

>>40366881 (OP)
No because being a woman is about being treated like one by society and if they can clock me they wont treat me like one. Its why people stealth in the first place

>>40375355
there's a difference between being "called" something out of respect for someone's feelings and actually being something.
Similar to the special olympics. These people are "called" special. Are they special in reality? Nope. The opposite. They're they opposite of special.
That's what trannies fail to understand.

>>40375368
Passing means they dont know youre not trans retard

>>40375375
I don't believe in God, but nice assumption.
Also why are you here arguing with me if you don't consider debates to be "normal"?
Believe it or not, some people actually want trannies to get a grip on reality and better themselves rather than wallow in a pitiful life of delusion and lies.

>>40375387
I'm referring to those who don't pass.
I have already said there are some who appear to pass until closer inspection.
You have nothing left? Sad.

>>40375384
you're unable to admit that some trannies can pass and get called women, not out of anyone trying not to hurt feelings, but simply because they look like women.

if you did admit that, you'd have to go back on your claim that women are whatever 50%+1 of the population thinks are women or else you'd have to admit at least some trans women are women

>>40375394
autistic repper, it's a stale zoomer meme

>>40375384
If someone treats you as a woman you are a woman. Its a sociological term not grounded in biology. People in the special olympics are special, not all disabled people can compete at that level. If you think some guy who got his legs blown off in afghanistan and learned to pole vault isnt special then youre a misanthropic loser

>>40375424
>If someone treats you as a woman you are a woman. Its a sociological term not grounded in biology.
this is a false dichotomy

>>40375409
>*runs out of arguments*
>Muh heckin MEME and name calling!
Good one.
>>40375424
>If someone treats you as a cactus, you are LITERALLY a cactus.
No one cares about your or other people's delusional ways of life.

>>40375405
difference is that I was discussing a scenario in which 51% or greater of a population truly believes in the definition they're using to be truth.
You're discussing a scenario where 51% or greater of the population calls a tranny a "woman" but does not actually believe that tranny is a woman.
No I'm not saying some trannies can't appear to be female looking and fool a certain percentage of the population. How many times do I have to repeat that to you?
That does not make them a woman, and most of those who pass would no longer pass under a little bit more inspection.

>>40375439
you are a repper. socrates wanted to fuck alcibiades. argumentum ad motivus. no other argument is needed than the irony in your use of logic, which is obvious, to anyone with any reading

>>40375439
People arent plants, but some of us are women
>>40375437
Go back

>>40375478
True normal people dont go on the tranny board to argue about gender politics bc it doesnt really affect them, this is repfag behavior

>>40375504
it's apparent to everyone but her

>>40375473
if 51% of people call a tranny a woman, how is your claim about their definition correct?

>>40375403
If you can clock 100% of peoples genders you would advance the medical field tremendously, so please stop wasting your time on 4chan because the world needs you. If you can do it and get it peer reviewed i will stop calling myself a woman

yes because i know these are about optics and so i'd cry. not in an overly emotional way but just enough to make them look like ghoulish weirdos harassing some young woman

>>40375518
You really suck at reading eh?
It's about belief of their definition. Not about what they choose to "call" someone.
51% of society does not believe trans "women" are actually women, but a lot of people would call that tranny "a woman" out of kindness or more likely out of fear of being labeled as a "bigot" and unjustly targeted by certain radicalized faggots.

>>40375545
if 51% of people call a particular tranny a woman, how is that tranny not a woman?

>>40375545
you're that girl who was seething in mtfg just now aren't you? that anon said things you couldn't respond to and so you and you came here instead lol

>>40375481
>but some of us are women
If you mean "some of us trans women are women" then actually you are not by definition.
That's the point. You can't just claim you are something you're not.
That's called delusion, and no society isn't playing along with your delusion.

>>40375545
Its crazy how we're 1% of the population and the other 99% are so afraid of misgendering us that none of them can even say theyre afraid. Its literally 1984.

>>40375552
because being called something out of kindness or out of fear doesn't make you what you've just been called.
Not to mention most people would not even call a trans woman a woman to begin with.

>>40375568
why is it so crazy?

given that a capitalist system concentrates all the power on the top 1%, wagies are fucked if they go against the fads of corporate HR.

>>40375568
That would be crazy if 99% were actually afraid.
I'd guess it's around 30-40% who are afraid of being labeled "a bigot" while the rest don't give a shit.

>>40375566
>You cant just claim something youre not
Im claiming to be something i am tho, youre the one claiming im not

>>40375581
how do you know it's not just calling someone what they look like?

there are lots of trannies who look like women. calling them men would make you look insane.

like your whole world view depends on there being no passing trannies whereas in reality there are.

>>40375595
Assuming you're a so called "trans woman", how are you a "woman" if you're a biological male and the definition of a woman is a female human adult?
Please enlighten us.

>>40375603
>if you assume my axioms that say you are not X, how are you X

>>40375597
No as I've said like 10 times already (you absolutely suck at reading), I've said there are trannies who fool others and appear female to those people. Genuinely. I never once denied that.
That being said, that's a small percentage of the overall "trans women" who can genuinely fool the general public.
Most look something along the lines of pic related.

>>40375592
Corporate hr across the world are submitting to the whims of the tranny jew
>>40375593
Does that make the rest bigots? If youre not one then why does it matter if youre treated like one?

>>40375606
They're not "my axioms"
Those are the definitions laid out by most of society.
Problem, tranny?

>>40375603
I am a female human adult

>>40375619
personally i am always very happy when i see someone posting stuff like this because it reminds me how easy passing is. you all just have no clue. please go on believing thats how most trannies look because my passing privilege is predicated on that belief

>>40375619
how are they fooling anyone? they just look like women, they aren't claiming to be anything by just looking a certain way. there's no intent to make anyone believe a falsehood.

the actual proportion is irrelevant. either your definition of a woman is wrong or these trannies are indeed women.

>>40375619
You look closer to picrel than i do

>>40375622
>Does that make the rest bigots? If youre not one then why does it matter if youre treated like one?
No it doesn't. It makes them LABELED as a bigot as I said.
No you shouldn't care if you're labeled as one ultimately, but that doesn't mean some people do care and are genuinely afraid of being labeled as one.
Those are mostly women who are afraid of those labels and pussified men.

>>40375635
>please go on believing thats how most trannies look because my passing privilege is predicated on that belief
trvke. if honkies learned to clock like we clock they'd realize we're everywhere, like the (((lizardmen)))

>>40375628
>Those are the definitions laid out by most of society.
they clearly are not the definitions society actually uses since society calls at least some trans women, women.
problem, chud?
>t. even a tranny, just dislike people who can't think critically

>>40375643
>>40375635
You have zero proof that most trans women look like genuine females.
Meanwhile I have been shown some of the "most feminine looking" trans women in the world and can still tell they're biologically male.
There's been a few times when I admit they've looked genuinely female, but that is about 0.5% of all trannies.

>>40374177
>How would "adult AFaB" be refuted by intersex cases?
you don't even need to go to intersex cases to refute this. it just kicks the problem back a step. "AFAB" just means "a doctor said this person was female." ok, that means the real criteria are the ones the doctor was using to make that pronouncement. what are those criteria?

>>40375676
im not trying to argue that with you diva im saying im glad you believe that we don't and i hope you go on maintaining this belief. i gain nothing from convincing you i am a woman or that i pass. please think i am a ugly crossdresser

>>40375651
Again you ignore the difference between calling someone something you don't believe to be true, and defining something you do believe to be true.
How convenient.

>>40375648
Labeled by who?
Btw this is crazy how memetic your world view is. Like you just regurgitate the pushed narratives and have no real substantiation beyond the concepts. Its like you read a fantasy novel and confused it for reality. I dont really care atp im gonna go do stuff but we are so fucked, the propaganda machine has never been this powerful.

>>40375676
also you are 100% the girl i was talking to in mtfg earlier lol

>>40375481
if i start treating you like a plant, do you become a plant tho?

>>40375696
>Labeled by who?
I already stated that. I said labeled by radicalized faggots. You missed that part or what?
>. Like you just regurgitate the pushed narratives and have no real substantiation beyond the concepts.
I could say the same about you, but what a shit argument that would be.
I prefer arguing with facts and reason.

>>40375676
You already know theyre trans retard, youre just confirming your own biases
Most of us who can stealth will because of people like you btw, and those were probably porn stars who are more popular if theyre clocky

>>40375696
hyperreality was bad enough, but when machines can mass-produce the very form of art, and we have to distinguish between "genuine" (human) simulation and "fake" (machine-generated) simulation -- hypersimulation. i miss jean baudrillard

>>40375692
It's very obvious to everyone.
Sorry you have to find out this way.

>>40375707
Im not capable of photosynthesis, but you could theoretically alter my biology enough to make me
>>40375720
You havent stated a single fact this whole thread
So radicalized faggots control the world eh? Literally 1984

>>40375749
omg you're right :((((
its over for me. you've convinced me
i'll detrans now ty for helping me see the light your picture of a speedrunning thing really opened my eyes i had no idea this is what trannies look like

>>40375751
>So radicalized faggots control the world eh?
Nope.
There's just a lot of people who are afraid of being labeled as I said.
Lots of pussies in the world. About 40% because most women are pussies who are afraid of being socially outcast as "bigots" and many pussified men as I said.
How does that equate to faggots "controlling the world" in your delusional mind?

>>40375759
Sorry to break it to you that the majority of trannies are obviously biological male.
I've jacked off to like 1% of trannies who actually pass but overall, trans women are not fooling anyone.

>>40375749
the absolute fucking duality

>>40375737
Whats interesting is that since ai doesnt have stimuli-induced bias it tends to learn ideas in their simplest form, making it a really powerful brainwashing tool since it can mimic someones writing style and repackage its ideas in ways that seem most natural to them, making them believe they arrived at the conclusion through logical analysis of their environment.

>>40375763
Yeah the woke mind virus got it
Youre immune to propaganda tho cuz youre so smart

>>40375749
mogs me

>>40375751
humans literally photosynthesize UVB light into vitamin D.
More proof that trannies are retarded and know nothing about reality or biology.

>>40375799
i don't think it learns. like you say, ultimately it's a logic machine working with conceptual inputs. that's why it struggles with things like irony and wordplay

>>40375333
I call them transwomen
because that's what they are

We literally use transwoman or in your perception that transwomen are a subcategory of woman: trans woman, because we all basically agree you don't simply become a woman.

If you could just take HRT and become a woman, we wouldn't even use the trans prefix. They'd just be women.
But, clearly, there's something exclusionary going on and everyone knows it.

Trannies lost this debate so hard it's unreal.

>>40375849
You got me, i didnt specify that the type of photosynthesis i was referring to was unique to plants, how silly of me. That couldnt have possibly been implied and im stupid for thinking it couldve been.
>>40375852
Its literally called machine learning because it learns concepts and patterns from large datasets. What do you think "training a model" means? It can even adapt post training via rlhf.

>>40375870
Yes we are women who used to be men

>>40375894
still men by most of societal definitions.

>>40375902
What definitions would those be

>>40375910
KEK!
>man (plural men)
>An adult male human

>>40375886
look, i'm just saying, it won't learn like us, or even like a dog, until it possesses the bias of stimulus. pain and pleasure are the basis of all intent. no one can make a robot as self-sufficient as a cockroach, because mere concepts are shadows of sensation passed into language. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i really believe we'll never have a sapient ai until we create an ai that can feel pain and pleasure. which would be a quite morbid thing, indeed, and i hope no one ever tries

>>40375925
Im not an adult human male so your wrong

>>40375938
Suuuuuure :^)

>>40375938
you are a trans woman, correct?
if you are using this site, you are at least 18
so yes, you are an adult human male
an adult human male who injects estrogen into his ass is an adult human male that injects estrogen into his ass, not a female

>>40375936
We already simulate pain and pleasure to train neural nets (positive and negative rewards)
We dont know what makes something conscious so theres no telling if it actually feels it but it sure acts like it does. I think youre kinda right tho in that consciousness is probably a very specific phenomenon that would have to be intentionally replicated
The only reason ai isnt more intelligent is due to a lack of quality training data but thats changing as big data becomes more aggressive in their spying

>>40375954
Im a trans woman but im not an adult human male no matter how hard you claim i am

>>40375972
Doesn't matter what that one anon personally claims you to be.
It does matter what the majority of society claims you to be, and most of society would indeed claim you to be a male (and therefore a man if you're an adult) if you were born with XY chromosomes.
Sorry tranny jew.
The world has spoken. It's time for you to listen.

>>40375962
i don't know a lot about this. forgive me if this question is silly. if the machine is essentially an analogy to the brain, and the simulated pain and pleasure are analogous to nerves sending messages to the brain, doesn't the machine only ever understand an analogy of self-interest, at best? is an analogy of pain, pain?

>>40375994
Everyone i interact with calls me a woman so
>>40376033
Yeah but you can say the same for other humans. Its just solipsism we can never know, but as a performative measure it works. Maybe machines cant be conscious but we may never have a way of telling. Best theories of consciousness ive seen say that intelligence and consciousness are innate properties of matter.

>>40366881 (OP)
yeah easily. I'm intersex and trans so I have a huge leg up in these debates

>>40376178
>so
>....
so you have no point. Got it.
No one is saying you trannies can't, on the very rare occasion, be attractive and look female to the point where a normal person will jerk off to you or maybe even fuck you.
But to think you're actually a woman by most people's definition is pure delusion.

>>40376189
>thinking someone saying 'so' means they have no point
Nta but did you really think that you were going somewhere with that

>>40376197
still no point I see

>>40375994
>It does matter what the majority of society claims you to be
it matters materially, but that doesn't make it correct, those women were not witches when burned.
>and most of society would indeed claim you to be a male
anyone with any backing in biology would disagree though, we'd be classified as genotypically male but have phenotypic female characteristics which would make us intersex, just man made intersex.

argumentum ad populum is stupid because we've seen many times the majority of society to be incorrect, it will shape your reality in how you're treated, but not change the facts, and hopefully enough people will learn enough to sway them to a more factual take

>>40376208
>intersex
That's where you lose the argument as trannies are not intersex.
Intersex is a category reserved for 0.001% of the population who are actually born with chromosome disorders.

>>40376233
>That's where you lose the argument as trannies are not intersex
well for one I have a chromosomal disorder as do trannies at a much higher rate than cis people
>intersex is a category reserved for 0.001% of the population who are actually born with chromosome disorders.
it's actually closer to 1% for chromosomal disorders and doesn't encompass only chromosomal disorders, and the term for that is a DSD not intersex, intersex just means between sexes, that lion who got his nuts cut off and could no longer grow a mane and started developing female pattern behavior was scientifically classified as intersex, they didn't have a DSD they were born with.

>>40376254
define "woman", tranny

>>40376233
inter is just a latin prefix for between. intersex: between the sexes. oh no how dare we be literally intersex

>>40376254
>well for one I have a chromosomal disorder as do trannies at a much higher rate than cis people
do they tho?

>>40376233
let me also follow up, do you think PAIS and CAIS are chromosomal disorders? pretty common DSDs and im gonna just let you know they're not classified as chromosomal.

dyadic people think they know shit about DSDs but they don't, the only ones I've seen get close to an understanding other than biologists have been trannies

>>40376278
no. Trannies are delusional freaks who should be in mental asylums.

>>40376278
yeah nearly 17% of intersex people also identify as trans in a binary way, klinefelters specifically is 4x as likely in trans women than in cis men.
>>40376272
it's a social construct as we've seen with intersex women for forever, this is obvious because we had the idea of woman before we had an understanding of chromosomes, if the majority of the time people treat you as a woman then you are one, which for me is my lived experience having not been clocked in years.

>>40376305
>then you are one
incorrect.
By your logic, you can dress up like a very convincing gorilla, fill a room with 300 people who are convinced you're a gorilla based on your appearance, proceed to to have all 300 people claim you're a gorilla, and then you are magically therefore a gorilla.
Absolutely delusional. Seek help immediately.

>>40376334
then define a woman in a way that excludes all non-women and includes all women.

>>40376178
>we can never know
i think you're resorting to "we cannot kno nuffin." cockroaches demonstrate an understanding of non-constructed that we can't replicate in ai. and yes, we can know other people are conscious in the same way we ourselves are. at our current level of sophistication, an ai can't think like you think. it can only ever simulate the way you think, much in the same way that a lay person might simulate professional knowledge

>>40376354
female.
adult.
human.

what is so hard about that? Trannies are so sick in the head i swear to DOGE

>>40376429
now define female, need to know your understanding of that word for this definition to work.

>>40376436
human born without the Y chromosome.

>>40376473
there are xy cis women who are afab and have lived as cis women from birth. try again

>>40376473
interesting. so men can give birth? this clearly doesn't meet the required definition because again people with XY chromosomes with DSDs have been women since before we knew what chromosomes were so try again.
>>40376354

>>40376484
Literally if they were born with XY chromosomes, they are by definition NOT female and not women.
You try again.
>>40376485
Ability to give birth doesn't define female.
XX chromosomes does.

>>40376510
cis women who find out later in life that they're xy and have internal testes aren't even that uncommon. at this point, i have to assume you're merely in bad faith. goodbye

>>40367170
Yeah, that would be interpreted as rhetorical surrender

>>40376528
>cis women who find out later they're not women
you literally just gave the answer to yourself. Congrats. It wasn't a cis woman to begin with.
You're an absolute moron. Goodbye.

>>40376510
>XX chromosomes does.
Okay so I'm a woman then? I have XX chromosomes as well as a Y
>>40376510
>Literally if they were born with XY chromosomes, they are by definition NOT female and not women
this also actually isn't true according to any biologist they would be genotypically male but phenotypically female, sex is not solely genotypical and in a medical field and social field the phenotypic sex is more important.

this also is just a crazy definition because it excludes people who have always been women and will always be considered women to 99% of the population, which goes against the original argument
>>40375994

>>40376559
the inclusion of the Y chromosome means you're not a female, so you're not a woman.

>>40376575
but I thought XX chromosomes meant they're a woman? what about mosaicism where they're fully genotypically female in some cells but fully male in others?

It's difficult to fight chud rhetoric because they lean on genetic definition and by that definition alone they cannot be proven wrong

Trans people rely on a social and cultural definition, which chud's do not acknowledge or believe in

It's a rhetorically impossible argument over definitions neither party is interested in actually having and is stupid to entertain in the first place

>>40376552
>afabs who find out at 30 they're xy are FUCKING MEN
just do yourself and the world a favor and fucking troon already

>>40376586
The number of identified persons with that condition are so vanishingly rare they could be fit in a single US classroom

>>40376588
>It's difficult to fight chud rhetoric because they lean on genetic definition and by that definition alone they cannot be proven wrong
>Trans people rely on a social and cultural definition, which chud's do not acknowledge or believe in
trans people actually use the scientific understanding of sex if they know anything and are in fact correct as HRT makes you present more phenotypically female, genotypic sex is not the classification of sex used in any definition, why de la chappelle is known as "XX male syndrome" as well

>>40376598
and all swans are white because so few are black, i suppose

>>40376586
>mosaicism
Not female due to the presence of Y chromosomes.
Also incredibly rare, and shouldn't even be considered in the grand scheme of things nor this debate.
Most trannies are either XX or XY, and if they were born XY, they are males.

>>40376598
when creating a strict definition it has to be able to meet all exceptions to say there is no exception to this rule

that also is a completely untrue statistic, you seem to have very little understanding of how many people there are and how many of them have various DSDs

>>40376594
sucks to be born with a deformity.
Sucks to suck, but that's how it is.

>>40376613
>Also incredibly rare, and shouldn't even be considered in the grand scheme of things nor this debate.
definitions must encompass all things within and exclude all things without, exceptions need to be accounted for, since you are proposing a new definition not scientifically used you must be able to make it function like this

>>40376627
less than 1% of the population.
That's enough to disregard it entirely unless you're a retard.

>>40376633
you would know, trog

>>40376640
DSD are more common than these so what are these

>>40376694
>more lies
okay fag

>>40376702
both green eyes and red hair are less common than being intersex lmao that's not a lie

>>40376694
only for a retarded definition of wht a dsd is

>>40376715
It's not, and it's not even close.

>>40376608
While I personally support trans people and understand the argument you are making, the fact remains that there are distinct, bi-modally distributed genetic markers for sex with rare outliers.

It's a cop out for chuds to lean purely on that but to deny genetics entirely and claim your own definition is "Scientific" comes off as a bit ridiculous to me.

>>40376724
you mean the medically recognized and scientifically correct one?
so your argument is basically "ignore science because my feefees hurt"

>>40376733
it is scientific under both a biological and sociological and psychological understanding of sex and gender so I'm not understanding which fields you would say disagree with me?

>>40376742
there's no single medically recognized definition but a man with a hypospadia is not meaningfully intersex in any way

>>40376733
sshh... let's see how far the dumb tranny will delude reality for the sake of his cult.

>>40376757
actually there is the term DSD and the prevalence of it being 1-2% of the population are both coming from medical sources :)
hypospadias isn't included in this but neither is klinefelters despite it being a chromosomal disorder, weird huh?

>>40375894
Mmm. Not really.
You bypassed having a female brain and girl experiences in youth.

It's far more sensible to make a weird little artificial intersex box for transgirls. New technology should simply beget new genders.

>>40376752
If you'd like to do away with genetics entirely and warp the discussion of biological differences by assuming a trans person who transitioned prior to puberty, than that's fine. Just don't pretend your position is axiomatically correct throughout all of the sciences and just say trans people exist because it's socially, morally and culturally true.

>>40376766
Fuck you, I actually do believe trans people exist and I'm not a chud, chud.

>>40376804
sorry you got tricked, goy

>>40376791
>If you'd like to do away with genetics entirely and warp the discussion of biological differences by assuming a trans person who transitioned prior to puberty
that's not anywhere near what I'm arguing though, trans people are biologically intersex due to prevalence of phenotypically female sex characteristics and male genotype and any biologist would agree with this, passing trans women are women under both a sociological and psychological definition, unpassing trans women would be intersex under biological definition and women in accepting circles, but only truly women in a psychological framework.

but claiming they are male or men is incorrect under all 3 frameworks

>>40375682
They literally know best, lol
Obstetricians are people that do sex assignment day in and day out, assessing how the fetus is developing, etc.

They're the ones picking up on traits, intersex syndromes, etc. And based on statistics regarding what we know about people living as "M" or "F" after assignment, make the best call for an intersex neonate to basically get shoved into the best lane.

And, yes, shit might not work out. Nothing is clean but a professional determination is better than unprofessional

>>40376837
You are seperating trans people into distinct scientific categories based on whether they are "passing".

And how would you define that exactly?

>>40376859
>You are seperating trans people into distinct scientific categories based on whether they are "passing".
in a sociological framework yes because sociology is completely dependent on how people interact with society, under biology under psychology they are intersex or women, using a purely genotypic definition is incorrect in biology as well, so if they are using a separate definition it is completely unscientific

>>40376880
Listen, I'm not trying to be a dick. But pretending the scientific underpinnings of a definition of a trans person are as flexible as you're making them out to be is just not coherent. A person is not made intersex by a scalpel in many scientific disciplines. A scientific consensus on what is "passing" is impossible and a fool's errand. The base argument for trans people is much stronger along lines of morality and culture, and to fight conservatives along scientific lines is asking for an unfavorable definition to be codified by an unfriendly supreme court.

>>40376960
>A person is not made intersex by a scalpel in many scientific disciplines.
incorrect, biologically intersex is defined as a mix of sex characteristics, not that it is inherent to the individual, many animals used in studies are defined as intersex which are purely man made. it is not from a scalpel it is from the fact they have female level hormones and female sex characteristics, definitionally intersex in a biological framework.
>A scientific consensus on what is "passing" is impossible and a fool's errand
incorrect once again, in sociology passing as a woman is easily defined as someone who interacts with society in a way expected of this group, social constructs are completely dependent on how people treat them on a daily basis.

>>40366881 (OP)
Easily but it would likely be considered cheating or a "biological advantage" because I'm a transgender and they're not. They would try to replace me with someone who is cis I assume.

>>40376997
And what of genetically intersex? And what new term would be needed to codify those with XYY chromosomes or XXY? And what of those who are "passing" with some but not with others? What is the line that seperates "passing" from not? etc. etc. etc...

Again, I'm not trying to be a dick, but saying I'm flat out wrong feels like you're trying to be argumentative. The sciences shouldn't have to be warped for trans inclusion and they don't have to be, there are much greater sources of support for trans inclusion elsewhere and yet trans people are trudging through a veritable minefield during the most anti-trans time in recent memory for no logical reason. If you'd like to really pull this string and see where it goes, be my guest. I'll bet you it ends in front of nine judges, six of which have a much more concise definition than the either of us do, but be my guest, asshole.

>>40377078
>And what of genetically intersex? And what new term would be needed to codify those with XYY chromosomes or XXY?
those would be chromosomal disorders or genotypically intersex, they're under the same umbrella but to specify what they are in that umbrella we use adjectives, this isn't a new concept this is how they have separated something like PAIS which is phenotypically intersex from Klinefelters which is genotypically intersex, both intersex. These aren't new definitions just going with the biological consensus since we discovered these concepts.
>And what of those who are "passing" with some but not with others? What is the line that seperates "passing" from not? etc. etc. etc...
thin in the contexts where they don't pass they are not women in a sociological framework and in contexts where they do they are, an example of this would be race as a social construct, to some irish aren't white, in other contexts they are, their status of white would be contingent on who you ask, or money, the USD is not accepted in some countries, if you give an american bill it is not usable making it not currency here but it is in the US. The thing that separates it is how it is defined.
>The sciences shouldn't have to be warped for trans inclusion and they don't have to be, there are much greater sources of support for trans inclusion elsewhere and yet trans people are trudging through a veritable minefield during the most anti-trans time in recent memory for no logical reason. If you'd like to really pull this string and see where it goes, be my guest. I'll bet you it ends in front of nine judges, six of which have a much more concise definition than the either of us do, but be my guest, asshole.
so first of all don't see why you started being rude but okay, and no one is warping any sciences, these are how these things are defined scientifically and have been for years outside of for trans inclusion purposes, I am simply using correct scientific definitions.

XX chromosomes? Female.
XY chromosomes? Male.
Any other combination? Rare freak of nature. Literally who cares.