Agnostic.com

1 0

J.K. Rowling runs away with the "Person of The Year" poll, so they cancel the whole thing. 😎 Gotta love it...[trendingpolitics.com]

Captain_Feelgood 8 Jan 17
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Filled with dumbfuck straw man arguments.

Perhaps you'd like to point out a few.... Otherwise your comment is useless. 😏

@Captain_Feelgood "those who believe in basic biology". Believing there are only two biological genders is a religious or cultural belief, not biology. It goes downhill from there, just an anti-trans hate piece.

@Druvius πŸ€£πŸ˜„πŸ˜†πŸ₯΄πŸ™„Oooohhh REeeaaaalllyy... Well, let's see what the sciences say...

"The term β€œsex” refers to biological sex, which is basically determined by the sex organs and other sex differences between a man and a woman when a baby is born. A baby with a penis will eventually have larger amounts of testosterone compared to a baby born with a vagina that will eventually develop breasts and have larger amounts of estrogen in her system.

This is not a social construct because it is based on biology, genetics, anatomy, and several other related fields in science. A baby in the womb will begin developing sex organs at around the second or third month of development but will not show signs of its sex prior to this. However, fetuses that will become male babies have a genotype of XY, while a female baby will have XX.

Around 99% of babies will fall into either the male or female sex, assuming that there is no deformity in their development that changes this. But around 1 to 2 percent of babies will develop intersex conditions, which means that their genitalia upon birth is ambiguous. They may eventually develop male or female traits, but it’s possible that they remain sexually ambiguous."

Now, from what I can see here, you have been fed a load of 'anti-science' bullshit, probably given to you by some radical left wing SJW that really has no clue about science, much less biology, genetics, anatomy, etc, etc... Thus, making your original response the only bit of 'Straw man argument' in this whole discussion.

And this reminds me of why I had you on my ignore list to begin with. You're just too intellectually dishonest to have a discussion with. Well, that, and you not having the wherewithal to have an intellectual discussion to begin with. And with that, I bid you a friendly fare the well.

PS; Don't bother responding, I won't read it, much less respond. From this point on, you're just not worth the time or effort. 😁

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:645688
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.