that's the problem. You, and by you, I mean all of you, talk about and think about what to follow but you don't follow yourselves. You're followers and wonder why you are lost. Stop wondering.

@4thwiseman Why am I a follower wondering why I am lost?

@DenoPenno well you likely don't know you are lost. why are you a follower? Ask yourself. You follow this and that and do as your told. That's a follower.

It is yet another system people follow blindly.

@4thwiseman It is true that some do. But at the same time, it does display in itself that one extra bit of honesty, not found elsewhere, and. [agnostic.com]

@Fernapple certainly it is found elsewhere. It is found within us. If you believe what is outside more than you believe what is inside that's obviously a big problem.

@4thwiseman Inner honesty yes, but we were talking about institutions.

@Fernapple Perhaps you are. I'm talking about institutions vs intuition, if you will. Look at how wonderful the system of govt was set up in the US. Look at it now. Tell me institutions are anything but the people running them. They are not. This needs to be understood for all institutions and certainly for science. It is time to wake up and stop putting trust in others and put it in yourselves.

@4thwiseman That is very true, I too believe that humans are by nature wonderfully good, but that they are corrupted by the emergent properties called institutions, for which we have no natural defences. After all I have met many wonderful individual, and only a few bad ones, and I suspect that most of those were corrupted by institutions and institutionalized thinking. However I would still plead, that of a very bad lot, science is still the best of our institutions.

@Fernapple yes but it's not an issue of which institution is bad. The issue is that people follow institutions at all and then fight over which one is best.

And the two most famous examples that I can think of are Newton's Laws of Motion, and phlogiston.

If you have a dick you are a man. Righhht?

@Communistbitch If he identified as a man, yet lost his dick through an accident or disease, he would still identify as a man.

@nogod4me yes of course, cutting your dick off doesn't make you a woman

@Communistbitch If he identified as a man, even if he purposely cut off his dick, he would still identify as a man.

@nogod4me fuck your words identity. If he identified as a woman and cut his dick off, he's still a biological man without a dick

@nogod4me historically they were called eunuchs

@Communistbitch A eunuch (/ˈjuːnək/ ⓘ YOO-nək) is a male who has been castrated. Throughout history, castration often served a specific social function.

The earliest records for intentional castration to produce eunuchs are from the Sumerian city of Lagash in the 2nd millennium BCE. Over the millennia since, they have performed a wide variety of functions in many different cultures: courtiers or equivalent domestics, for espionage or clandestine operations, castrato singers, concubines or sexual partners, religious specialists, soldiers, royal guards, government officials, and guardians of women or harem servants.
Eunuchs would usually be servants or slaves who had been castrated to make them less threatening servants of a royal court where physical access to the ruler could wield great influence. Seemingly lowly domestic functions—such as making the ruler's bed, bathing him, cutting his hair, carrying him in his litter, or even relaying messages—could, in theory, give a eunuch "the ruler's ear" and impart de facto power on the formally humble but trusted servant. Similar instances are reflected in the humble origins and etymology of many high offices.

Eunuchs supposedly did not generally have loyalties to the military, the aristocracy, or a family of their own (having neither offspring nor in-laws, at the very least). They were thus seen as more trustworthy and less interested in establishing a private "dynasty". Because their condition usually lowered their social status, they could also be easily replaced or killed without repercussion. In cultures that had both harems and eunuchs, eunuchs were sometimes used as harem servants. - Wikipedia

@Communistbitch Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic

Biologists now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and male

A 46-year-old pregnant woman had visited his clinic at the Royal Melbourne Hospital in Australia to hear the results of an amniocentesis test to screen her baby's chromosomes for abnormalities. The baby was fine—but follow-up tests had revealed something astonishing about the mother. Her body was built of cells from two individuals, probably from twin embryos that had merged in her own mother's womb. And there was more. One set of cells carried two X chromosomes, the complement that typically makes a person female; the other had an X and a Y. Halfway through her fifth decade and pregnant with her third child, the woman learned for the first time that a large part of her body was chromosomally male. “That's kind of science-fiction material for someone who just came in for an amniocentesis,” says James.

Sex can be much more complicated than it at first seems. According to the simple scenario, the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what counts: with it, you are male, and without it, you are female. But doctors have long known that some people straddle the boundary—their sex chromosomes say one thing, but their gonads (ovaries or testes) or sexual anatomy say another. Parents of children with these kinds of conditions—known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs)—often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD.

Many people never discover their condition unless they seek help for infertility, or discover it through some other brush with medicine. Last year, for example, surgeons reported that they had been operating on a hernia in a man, when they discovered that he had a womb. The man was 70, and had fathered four children.

[scientificamerican.com]

@Communistbitch

@nogod4me hermaphrodite exist, but we aren't talking about hermaphrodites. That's a strawman. Now of a motherfucker born with a dick, that's a man, born with pussy, a woman, with both, a hermaphrodite.

You don't get to decide your sex, you're born with it

It’s obvious that you didn’t read the article and that you would rather wallow in willful ignorance. You sound like a believer and your cognitive dissonance is showing. You state that there are only two sexes while also agreeing with scientists that there are three: male, female, and intersex. According to your simple understanding the man born with a womb would become a woman if his dick and balls were cut off, he would be a person with a womb which, according to you, would make him a woman, although he may still identify as a man.

Many people believe in only two sexes because of Biblical indoctrination. However, many ancient cultures accepted the fact that there are more than two sexes and the Bible reflects that concept.

According to the Bible God is both male and female, yet, identifies as male:

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. - Genesis 1:27

Also, when God created Adam he was both male and female, created in God’s image, yet, God identified him as male:

Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. - Genesis 2:7

The Bible doesn’t specify how long Adam was both male and female before he took the female part out of Adam, however, it was long enough for him to name all the animals. - Genesis 2:19

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. - Genesis 2:20-22

The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.” - Genesis 2:23

That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. - Genesis 2:24

If you had read the complete article you would have realized that there are basically three sexes: male, female, and intersex. Intersex can have a broad spectrum. An intersex person will always be intersex no matter what you “cut off or change” but they may identify as male, female, or even non-gender, etc.

@nogod4me and you still provided a strawman argument. People who are not intersex can't just decide they are the opposite sex.

@Communistbitch Your ignorance is amazing. Read the complete article, a non-intersex person would not need to identify as another sex, nor probably want to.
Just because you cannot see physical attributes does not mean you can judge if that person is intersex or not.

Parents of children with these kinds of conditions—known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs)—often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD.

As I explained earlier, many people never discover their condition unless they seek help for infertility, or discover it through some other brush with medicine.

@nogod4me you're projecting. Still a strawman idiot. Plenty of people that aren't intersex think they are a different sex

@Communistbitch You are a believer and therefore a waste of time. Why would a male who identifies as male need to correct anything? Why would a female who identifies as female need to correct anything?

You are the one who is projecting your false morals on others. You need to educate yourself, you sound stupid.

@nogod4me another strawman idiot.

@nogod4me a man born as a male who identifies as a woman is still a man

@Communistbitch Like a believer you fall to educate yourself and have no clue about intersex people. And like a believer, you are a waste of time.

An intersex male may identify as a female.

@nogod4me read what I said dumb fuck

@Communistbitch And as I told you before you miserable dumb fuck: a male who identifies as as a male is not intersex, he would not identify as a female. A male who identifies as female is intersex.

You are an uneducated imbecile.

@nogod4me no if he has a dick and not a pussy, he's a brainwashed communist like you

@Communistbitch According to your handle, you are a communist and a bitch, suggesting also that you are female or maybe a weak male according to definition, which is very ironic. If you are female and identify as female then you are not intersex. Would you ever identify as male? No? Then that just makes you a ignorant, judgemental, bitch.

You should follow your own path, not someone else's no matter who that person or system is.

Guy with dick= woman

The truth is always there to be found, by anyone, but every lie is a special invention, which dies with its supporters.

If you think peer review makes for accurate results you've never played a pick up basketball game before

@Communistbitch ummmm, what?
I guess you never looked up the meaning of " non sequitor" like I told you to do last week.......

@annewimsey1 it's not a non sequitur you dumb bitch.

@annewimsey1 to explain it to a dumb bitch in retarded speech: when you play pick up basketball, you keep score. This score is peer reviewed, and it's nearly always wrong, because people cheat or make mistakes or just don't care if the score is wrong. So, peer reviewed doesn't mean jack shit.

@Communistbitch so you not only express yourself eloquently like your idol drump, you keep score like he does playing golf...must make you a really sought-after player on the court.......

@annewimsey1 I see your stds are talking again

The back story on asparteme is a good example of questionable data, political influence - Donald Rumsfeld was hired by Serle to gain the ear of Ronny Raygun to push for the approval of their new chemical as a safe food additive.

consider where you put your trust.

@4thwiseman You're comparing apples to oranges, so that makes no sense.

@Druvius I'm simply pointing out the ways in which the two are the same. Denying that fact says quite a lot.

@4thwiseman Being as you are our local simpleton, I very much doubt your ability to recognise any fact. /@Druvius