125
126

Gigi Gorgeous 2010 vs. 2013 (i.imgur.com)

scienceisarealthing が 投稿

全 43 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]ponyokeTotally Excellent Rad Female 99 ポイント100 ポイント  (20子コメント)

"My choice to be a woman makes me more woman than a lot of women out there" So he's admitting that women don't choose to be women..but they call us "cis" because our "chosen gender identity" fits our sex at birth...but they also say biological sex isn't real...I mean I could keep going down this logic spiral but my brain hurts.

[–]bean18Loud Female 39 ポイント40 ポイント  (19子コメント)

you really have to engage with magical thinking to go along with this stuff.

[–]CannotStopEver 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (2子コメント)

"Magical thinking," you say? Not sure if it's okay to post this here - porn warning - but it's pretty telling.

TG Storytime is a popular site for transgender erotica. You'll notice that all of the most favorited stories are categorized as "magical or sci-fi gender change." The transformations described nearly always result in a fully functional female body for a person who was previously male.

Hmmm... Suggests to me that many trans really do understand that it's impossible to one's change birth sex, except in the realm of fantasy. They just don't want to admit it in public.

[–]NPerez99PETTY UTERUS 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Interesting. Brianna Wu did lots of sci-fi art showing Wu as some sort of stretched out victim being ravished by lizard people or something, I can barely recall it was awful. And Wu's husband is a sci-fi author. A terrible one, as I've understood it, but pretty popular. He abused his ex-wife so much he bullied her straight out of the sci-fi community. He posted this screed about their marriage on Facebook and the sci-fi community rallied to his support. His ex-wife, thankfully, did not pull any punches in her response. But people listened to Frank more, of course.

[–]bean18Loud Female 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (3子コメント)

like reading a fantasy novel

[–]ponyokeTotally Excellent Rad Female 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I mean it's gotten to the point where the logic eats its own tail. Its kind of hilarious some times. Depressing at others.

[–]languidswanThe Big, Bad She-Wolf 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Except a good fantasy novel is internally consistent.

[–]bean18Loud Female 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ha! Touché

[–]lesjoliesparisiennes 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Read on /r/raisedbynarcissists the idea that confusion is often a sign of being manipulated. If you can't clear up confusion in a reasonable time by clarifying the situation, it's very likely because something is wrong and we can't reconcile different elements into a coherent whole. Tactics include moving goalposts, or do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do.

Saying "women are female humans" might be mean to a few men, but an argument built on it will confuse NO ONE, because it can be logical and coherent. "I'm a woman because I feel like a woman" might sound nice, but it won't fit with a great many cases where women are implicated, including fetuses, baby girls, passed-out women or complete strangers whose opinion we ignore.

[–]mvmlego -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (10子コメント)

"Saying 'women are female humans' might be mean to a few men, but an argument built on it will confuse NO ONE."

Unfortunately, even biological definitions of male and female seem to have some inconsistencies with their actual usage. If you define them in terms of chromosomes, then folks with complete androgen insensitivity and other disorders appear to be misclassified. If you define them in terms of reproductive capacities, then it seems anyone who's infertile but otherwise normal would be considered intersex.

I still don't support the ideology behind the trans/queer community, but if we're going to oppose their ideology, then we need to make sure our own reasoning is rigorous. Do you have any suggestions for how to define male and female in a consistent manner?

[–]lesjoliesparisiennes 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (4子コメント)

No, "female" is defined as a group of characteristics from chromosomes to sexed bodies. If you have most of these, you are considered female, and the few exceptions are not confusing people, because they are exception. Everyone can agree that dogs have four legs while keeping in mind that a few don't. That's not confusing, it's acknowledging the limits of an idea.

These definitions of female limited to one element are designed to confuse people! They are not real! You ask me to convince you about a definition without exception: that's just not possible and a way for you to get superiority in the argument.

[–]mvmlego -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Evidently, the few exceptions are confusing people, given how widespread the T/Q movement has become, and given the number of them who are using the existence of intersex as an argument.

Saying that "female" is a group of characteristics isn't good enough; you have to be able to list those characteristics explicitly and explain why they belong together. In fact, saying that "female" is a group of characteristics is the same basis that the T/Q crowd uses for their beliefs--their group of characteristics just has to be different than yours.

[–]edwinagorey 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Except 1) They refuse to define those characteristics & 2) the word "female" was already taken to refer to mammalian reproduction.

[–]edwinagorey 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I also don't think anybody is really confused about this. I think they feel such disgust/shame about female bodies and such fear/deference about male bodies that they just go along with the censorship of anyone who wants to discuss either.

[–]mvmlego 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree that (1) is a major problem for them, and that's why, as I stated above, I don't follow their ideology. Their definitions are inconsistent at best and incoherent at worst. Our definitions are only inconsistent at worst, but at best they are an appeal to our own common sense, which they apparently don't share and hence won't be convinced by.

[–]earthgardenNo prefix needed 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The definitions are already consistent.

A man is an adult male human. A boy is a child or adolescent male human.

A woman is an adult female human. A girl is a child or adolescent female human.

Intersex people exist, but this does not change these definitions. It is bizarre to suggest that we must deny reality for 98% of the human species, or to pretend as if we are not a blatantly sexually dimorphic species.

More people are born blind than are born intersex but no one would agree that being born with 2 functioning eyes is not an actual characteristic of a human being. Or pretend like we can't tell the difference between someone born blind and someone born who can see. Or act like eyes aren't real, defined organs because some people are born blind or without them. Come on now. We know what male and female means, we know what sex differences are, and as a species we are not defined by abnormalities or use abnormalities a base to define normality. It's the other way around.

[–]edwinagorey 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Every single possible biological classification of large groups of people could be nit-picked to death and yet we know young people aren't old despite the existence of aging diseases, white people aren't black despite the existence of black albinos or bi/multi-racial humans, humans are bipedal despite the existence of people born without feet/amputees. Etc. etc. Female mammals, when healthy & in sexual maturity, produce ova. Male mammals, when healthy & in sexual maturity, produce sperm. When a man and a woman have sex, we know which one could EVER POSSIBLY end up pregnant. There's really no need to cater to inane whatabouttery on this. http://secretlyradical.blogspot.com/2015/03/some-people-find-birds-and-bees-very.html

[–]mvmlego 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The statistical example used at the top of the article appears to highlight my point, not refute it. I understand that those who produce ova are a subset of women. The question is: who outside of that subset falls within the set of women?

P.S. great graphic at the bottom, though. I'll definitely be using that.

[–]BoozeBabe 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The example of infertile and intersex people?

No. It doesn't. Intersex people are intersex and infertile females are infertile females. "We don't know what biological sex is because some women can't make eggs" is a tired as fuck argument.

[–]mvmlego 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I get it now. I was conflating the ability to produce ova with the ability to fully reproduce.

[–]corpus_cavernosa_ 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (0子コメント)

What I can't wrap my brain around is that if gender is a social construct and not that important, then why is it SO FUCKING important?

[–]emorrell 31 ポイント32 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't even understand what's going on here

[–]ruthfisher_ 33 ポイント34 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Obvious untreated mental illness.

[–]lonelycatgirl69 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (0子コメント)

this guy is such a fucking caricature.

[–]Arywnnsartre and simone 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I can't stand him, he brings out the worst and most decadent/celebrity based aspects of the Trans community, which should not exist to make internet stars out it's members but rather create equality for all within it.

[–]throwawaygay03 44 ポイント45 ポイント  (1子コメント)

He also doesn't help the "MtT are mentally ill narcissists" stereotype.

He's a raging narcissist and attention whore, and even went as far as turning "lesbian" because the opportunity to date a billionaire heiress came along. He's sick. Like he would EVER date a woman as Gregory the gay boy.

[–]KWITHI 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

My mom was watching that show "Botched" yesterday and there was a MtT on there who had fucked up his cheeks with cheep surgery. The whole show, every time he was on, he was saying how much he loves just looking at his body and looking in mirrors. It was so disgusting. Every interaction was hypersexualized and completely disgusting. Seriously, everything that came out if this person's mouth was either talking about himself and obsessing over his body, or making uncalled for lewd comments. I wanted to puke.

[–]ethanGeltan 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (0子コメント)

When the movement is ideologically founded on the upholding of hierarchy, there is no possible outcome with equality, within or without the community. It is mutually exclusive.

[–]CannotStopEver 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Dude is approaching Michael Jackson levels of addiction to plastic surgery. Give it a few more years and he'll look something like this.

[–]NPerez99PETTY UTERUS 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Amanda Lepore looks like a doll and knows it.

[–]uhuhuhu 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

didn't he literally fuck a dog once?

[–]scienceisarealthing[S] 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Luckily, i think that was just a clickbait-y title for views where a dog came up & started humping him or something??

[–]ChaDrinkerOui-Binary 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

wat. Please elaborate??

[–]mxmoon 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Goodness! He has a video where he's coming out as a lesbian! The nerve of some people.

[–]purespeed 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Mental gymnastics w a touch of illness

[–]PaxFloridianaEXCLUSIONARY REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You can't choose to be female and putting on 10 pounds of makeup also does not make you a female. Christ this is getting old.

[–]GuineaPigParade 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, let's say it again for the millionth time. Frustrating.

[–]endoftheliner 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is sheer stupidity and ignorance.

[–]alliekizatyo 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

"I'm not following a trend nor do I need attention!" -other lies told by this stupid arrogant ignorant narcissistic man.

[–]fuzzy_winkerbean 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Who's that?