Comments by "Z P" (@zachman5150) on "Leeja Miller"
channel.
-
27
-
7
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
Correct. All men are born male and all women are born female with exactly ZERO exceptions and neither are a social construct, feeling, fetish, preference or a costume.
Gender: The status of being either male or female. The entire purpose of the gender/sex division in most species of animal life is to facilitate procreation, the sexual identity of an individual is best classified according to the gametes produced by the person in question. There is no extant third gamete.
An extremely minute percentage of humans are either “intersex” (typically referring to those who are anatomical hermaphrodites) or of indeterminate gender (that is, not easily determined by a cursory inspection of the external genitalia), but that does not negate the incontrovertible scientific fact that there are only two genders.
As far as we know, there has never existed a single human being with the ability to BOTH conceive a child in his/her womb and, simultaneously, successfully inseminate a woman (or in more disturbing terms, for a hermaphrodite to inseminate him/herself). And even if such an individual has existed, that person would be a combination of BOTH male and female, and not some imaginary, novel third gender.
Cf. “sex”. Both terms (“gender” and “sex”) originate from Latin words: “genus” (meaning “begin”; “birth”; “kind”; “race”; “gender”) and “sexus” (meaning “sex”; “division”; “gender”).
So, essentially, the only significant distinction between the two terms is that the etymology of “gender” pertains to the beginning of things, as can be plainly seen by the other English words that originate from "genus", such as “generic”, “genetic”, and “generate”, whilst “sex” is a scrupulously-literal translation of the Latin cognate “sexus”.
The mere fact that the word “genitals” (referring to reproductive organs) is very closely related to the Latin “genus” is further evidence of the assertion that the term “gender” refers to the binary division of human (and of course, many non-human) sexual identity, and NOT to any taxonomy based on emotion, feelings, psychology, or any other non-biological categorization schema. ;)
Way too many inappropriately and incorrectly conflate gender/sex (There are only 2-- male/female... That's it) with personality traits and temperament (There are a ton and none are gender exclusive-- hence effeminate males, butch females and tomboys), and again with gender roles (without exception refer to the roles of males and females in society) as though they're synonymous and they are not.
Science has already proven that the binary dichotomy of all mammals is male/female.
A man in a dress is still a man
A man with anxiety about his sex/gender-- still a man
A man calling himself a woman-- still a man
A man with an effeminate personality--still a man
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Why should a subjective, unverifiable gender identity matter at all, in areas designated by biological sex? There's no hate involved in recognizing that a male in women's clothes is a male in women's clothes. Get Real
The arguments just don't withstand scrutiny, because life is based in objective reality, and the trans imagination just doesn't override people's capacity for discernment.
A man believing he's a woman, doesn't make him one. Take your time to process reality, for a change.
Believing there is some "essence" specific to males or female as far as feelings go, that can manifest "in the wrong body", is akin to a religious belief, having faith in something that is impossible to prove or disprove.
The thing is though, that no one on the "trans" side can actually even explain what this "essence" is, they can't even explain it to themselves yet have convinced themselves that the feeling they have means they "are in the wrong body" - without realizing that their discomfort simply stems from not realizing that they view conforming to sexist stereotypes as legitimate measures of manhood or womanhood. That is why every explanation given of WHY a male "can't be a man, but is instead woman" etc. relies upon listing stereotypical stuff, or, in some cases is completely abstract and refuses to actually provide any explanation of what they mean, simply stating they "know" that what they feel means what they say it does, even though they can't actually provide a definition of it.
"It's hard to explain but I know I'm right" is an attitude one constantly comes up against - a religious faith in something they can't define.
This idea that the terms "man" and "woman" carry all this baggage, sexist stereotypes, that people need to live up to or feel comfortable with is a complete fabrication coming from the "trans" side. You lot want a term to reflect aspects of your personality as well, you want to create more boxes to put people in, as you won't accept simply just being a man or a woman based on being born male or female (and reaching adulthood, obviously people are boys and girls before becoming men or women), but believe you need this "freedom of expression" to broadcast what sexist stereotypes you feel more comfortable with - thinking the world needs to adopt the sexist view you lot have (you fail to see just how much you have in common with Conservatives).
Replacing objective definitions which are based in physical reality, with entirely subjective metaphysical claims, is not logical in any way, is not morally superior, and is demonstrably harmful, not least to female rights and protections, but also to practically anyone that buys into it as it warps people's perception of the underlying issues. It hinders people in their quest for individuation, creating this false narrative of them becoming more "authentic" when the total opposite is true, they believe they need validation from others in order to be happy etc. instead of being encouraged to find more inner strength and resilience with less reliance on how people see them. Demanding to be legally recognized as the opposite sex of what one is, is in no way shape or form more authentic than accepting the physical reality one is born into.
To believe we as individuals can have 100% control over our identity in society, what we are seen as by others, in interaction with, and in relation to, society/the world/physical existence is a fool's errand, it is a delusional understanding of reality and existence.
Now you know better
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Holding one form of gender expression with a preference over another-- isn't the same as recognizing the difference between males and females, boys/men and girls/women, fact and fantasy, or truth over lies.
What they don't have is-- a reasonable expectation to occupy spaces and organizations designated, designed and implemented for females-- just because they make a subjective and unverifiable gender identity claim, doesn't change the fact that the areas they're obsessed with occupying, which are designed for, designated for, and implemented for females are done so based on biology-- Not feelings or socially constructed gender identities
The entire toxic notion of 'trans women' is a fictional metaphysical, unverifiable, subjective, and incoherent ideological talking point, and a counter-culture cult term, that is not based in objective reality, and forces it's religiosity on women, with no right nor rational justification whatsoever.
Can anyone make it make sense?
3
-
3
-
3
-
You either can or can't articulate a coherent response to the scrutiny of your narratives and claims or you can't...
You think segregation of women and men's showers, prisons, locker rooms, changing rooms, restrooms, sports leagues/teams/divisions are based on subjective unverifiable gender identity claims or perhaps they're based on biology for a reason?
C'mon now... If, according to you-- genitals don't define gender, and gender and sex are separate, how does removing/adding them, and/or presenting as a caricature, using the stereotypical biological primary sex characteristics of the opposite sex as the goal post -- affirm it?
You're not a fairy princess because you identify as one, and dress in the costume.
Make it make sense
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@TransHippie Cope... 1st you denied any such reports exist, then I prove you wrong. Then you argue it says stuff it doesn't say, and I prove you wrong again. You should be embarrassed.
What it did show is: Among the findings:- About 64% of these offenders had committed a “CURRENT sexual offense,”
— 44% of the trans women convicts, ARE 'sex offenders'.
-- 88% had previously been convicted for sexual offenses, and -- About 94% committed their crimes while living as their biological sex.
— 82% of gender-diverse offenders were trans-women with an average age of 42 years old and almost half were serving “indeterminate” sentences."
— Two-thirds (66%) had low reintegration potential.
— The vast majority, 85%, were convicted of violent crimes that caused death “or serious harm” to their victims (58% of whom were children or women).
“It’s quite shocking. The study also shows that 41% of trans-women are in for homicide-related crimes while with male inmates it’s only 21%,” Mason said, adding that the study also revealed that in just four years, the number of trans inmates almost doubled.
NO, those people aren't entitled to be anywhere near the girl's showers. Get Real
You've destroyed your own integrity and credibility by acting like a petulant brat, and failing to engage with questions which expose your narratives as nothing but incoherent unjustifiable nonsense
3
-
@TransHippie I'm not wrong about the science. You are a science denier, spouting nonsense and conflating science-fiction, fantasy and pseudo-science with actual science, all the while-- having proven nothing you've claimed to be true, correct nor accurate, and have not proven anything I've written as incorrect whatsoever.
It's why your narratives are rejected as delusional madness, by those who aren't confused about reality or suffering from delusions.
Science has proven ALL mammals are of a binary sexual dichotomy categorized as male and female, and that state is fixed and permanent. Your issues with that are yours to have, but they don't change anything.
Reality isn't an anti-trans ideology... Trans is an anti-reality ideology though. If you could've, you'd have made your case a compelling one proving me wrong, but NOPE, not an ounce of credibility, or integrity from you or your claims.
I know the truth can be a bitter pill to swallow, just cope harder. You can dress and act however you like-- it doesn't make a trans woman a woman-- still a man, and your cosplay and LARP doesn't obligate anyone to affirm your delusions as though they're based in reality, because they're not.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
I don't accept the cult terminology, or the philosophical narrative's as valid. I think that those to whom you refer as trans, are either males w/ identity conflicts or females with identity conflicts, and the conflicts and anxiety about their gender doesn't change their gender
All men are born male, and all women are born female, and neither is a social construct, feeling, fetish, preference nor a costume.
One's anxiety about their biology doesn't change anything about the reality of their biology being what it is, nor entitle them to the participation of everyone in society, pretending that they're something they're not, by granting them access to places and organizations established based on biology like the girl's shower.
3
-
Nope... Subjective gender identities and gender roles are social constructs-- People are not.
Cf. “sex”. Both terms (“gender” and “sex”) originate from Latin words: “genus” (meaning “begin”; “birth”; “kind”; “race”; “gender”) and “sexus” (meaning “sex”; “division”; “gender”).
So, essentially, the only significant distinction between the two terms is that the etymology of “gender” pertains to the beginning of things, as can be plainly seen by the other English words that originate from "genus", such as “generic”, “genetic”, and “generate”, whilst “sex” is a scrupulously-literal translation of the Latin cognate “sexus”.
The mere fact that the word “genitals” (referring to reproductive organs) is very closely related to the Latin “genus” is further evidence of the assertion that the term “gender” refers to the binary division of human (and of course, many non-human) sexual identity, and NOT to any taxonomy based on emotion, feelings, psychology, or any other non-biological categorization schema. ;)
You/Pro trans activists seem to want a term to reflect aspects of your personality-- as well, you want to create more boxes to put people in, as you won't accept simply just being a man or a woman based on being born male or female (and reaching adulthood, obviously people are boys and girls before becoming men or women), but believe you need this "freedom of expression" to broadcast what sexist stereotypes you feel more comfortable with - thinking the world needs to adopt the sexist view you have.
Replacing objective definitions, which are based in physical reality, with entirely subjective metaphysical claims, is not logical in any way, is not morally superior, and is demonstrably harmful, not least to female rights and protections, but also to practically anyone that buys into it as it warps people's perception of the underlying issues.
It hinders people in their quest for individuation, creating this false narrative of them becoming more "authentic" when the total opposite is true, they believe they need validation from others in order to be happy etc. instead of being encouraged to find more inner strength and resilience with less reliance on how people see them. Demanding to be legally recognized as the opposite sex of what one is, is in no way shape or form more authentic than accepting the physical reality one is born into.
To believe we as individuals can have 100% control over our identity or self-perceptions in society, what we are seen as by others, in interaction with, and in relation to, society/the world/physical existence is a fool's errand, it is a delusional understanding of reality and existence.
You're wrong
3
-
3