I saw a post get banned. Well I dont wanna be a taboo subject. The more we shut down conversations the more we are ostracized. We shouldnt be so dogmatic. A society where people are free to express unpopular opinions is the one we want to live in. Seriously folks.

  • powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    The truth is that there is an observed binary in this case. N = 2. Gametic definition provides utility. That’s why it’s the only definition used in biology.

    Do you want to learn? Would recommend.

    • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      So, are you a hateful troll because you’re transphobic, or are you transphobic because you’re a hateful troll?

      There is no “utility” in demanding that intersex humans be categorized as either male or female. No actual medical researchers study “biology”, and actual science tells us that models where we treat human sex, gender, and sexuality as having only a coincidental correlation to reproductive cells are substantially more useful.

      I mean, unless you’re a transphobic bigot scared that the kids you love might realize that they are trans and dump you the way all victims dump their abusers. I guess a transphobic model could have some utility in spreading transphobia. Not that it even passes the first requirement of parsimony, though, since you need to ignore all of those damn edge cases…

        • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          It doesn’t matter how many times you share the same transphobic oversimplification, it’s still a transphobic oversimplification.

            • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              Why? You’d have to ask the authors why they put up a transphobic site. My guess is that they’re either personally hateful bigots or just amoral cowards who take money from the same.

              As for how

              [How] is it transphobic?

              Go read the “about us” link on that advocacy page you keep pushing. Specifically the part about how “activists” are trying to confuse their “truth”.

              The advocates they’re talking about are non-cis LGBTQIA+ folk whose dastardly agenda is “just let us be who we are.” I suspect that if you scratched down to their funding source you’d find some of the same people pushing bathroom bills and gender marker shenanigans on official documents.

              [How] is it an oversimplification?

              For the Nth time, it’s an oversimplification because categorizing all humans based on which reproductive cells they make ignores or misgroups humans who either don’t produce any or who look and smell like they might produce the other ones than those they might once have produced.

              • powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                20 days ago

                So the link isn’t transphobic. Each chart has links to sources. Please learn.

                Sorry, you’re confused. Nobody is ignored or misgrouped. Everyone has a sex. Some people don’t produce gametes. Their bodies still contain sexed structures.

                Looks and smells aren’t how sex is defined. You’re confusing gender and sex. Please stop.