Comments by "S S" (@SS-yj2le) on "BBC News"
channel.
-
11
-
10
-
8
-
6
-
5
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@klassiconetea9983 Hormones change muscle and do affect bones. It can even alter bone shape around the pelvis if it is administered early enough. Trans women are even warned about becoming weaker when they start hrt.
For lung capacity, there is quite a bit of variability on this within the sexes even if assuming that they are different here. Though whether they are different or not isn't certain.
For body sizes like height, everyone knows that and wasn't claimed such. For that, simply do what we already do and create different body class division on those like they have for wrestling.
No. Hormones only change the voice and body hair for trans men. They don't affect those for trans women.
No one claimed that anyone gets a uterus from hrt. Some claimed correlation with emotional cycles that could be linked to periods, but nothing else and that is largely anecdotal.
Looks like you don't know what hormones change. Hormones change the muscle via weakening or strengthening depending on gender, certain aspects of the bones which are why many trans women have to go on iron or even end up having their bones changed around their hips if done early, breast growth if it is male to female, softening of skin if male to female, deepening of voice if female to male, body hair growth if female to male, hair line not receding if present in male to female, thinning of certain body hair possible in male to female, fat redistribution in both male to female and female to male to respective patterns to what they transition to, nipple development for male to female, thinning of skin if female to male, and possibly others I don't know of.
So no. Not duh. You don't have as many answers as you think you do you simpleton. Maybe learn to take complexity and different outlooks rather than always picking what appears to be the simplest answer to everything. On top of that, you make claims of claims that were never even made like growing a uterus. No one ever claimed that and is why many trans women opt for sex reassignment surgery on that. Which even then, isn't there yet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Healing and Growth -INFP Even if you were right, using God is not a justification. This is a secular country. God is not a justification for any laws that is to be made and is unconstitutional. Two, you fail to even define a life. What about the millions of sperm a man waste in ejaculating into a vagina? Would that make him a murderer? Three, assuming they are a person, what right do you have to force a woman to carry a baby? You can’t find a way to remove the fetus and carry it yourself to term? Four, biologically speaking on what defines a sentient person, you are forcing a woman to create a child. The child isn’t formed at conception. It is formed much later. Five, you also didn’t count rape, incest, unviable fetuses, and miscarriages. Six, keep your religion out of the laws. You have absolutely no right to enforce it on anyone. I doubt you would like it if we lived under Sharia law. Seven, a blessing to have a child you never even wanted. Especially rape babies that can also serve as a type of reminder of said trauma. That is not a blessing. That is lifelong torture.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1