this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
-23 points (18.9% liked)
Conservatives
104 readers
11 users here now
Pro-conservative discussions
Rules
- Pro-conservative or crazy liberal post.
- We are a discussion forum. No low effort, trolling comments.
- Everyone is welcome to opine, but be civil.
- Attack the topic, not the person
- Report violations of the rules
- Downvotes are disabled
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Where did I make such a claim?
My claim was that the specific gametes an individual may or may not produce is not socially relevant. Whether a person is socially a "man" or a "woman" is not a question of what gamete (if any) they produce. The offense you are taking above is to your own position.
Science has no interest in this social issue. Science's concern is only with regard to the medical needs of the individual. Unless you are trying to procreate with them, or provide them with medical treatment, you have precisely zero interest the nature of their gametes.
https://reduxx.info/canada-trans-identified-male-charged-after-allegedly-sexually-assaulting-multiple-women-while-staying-at-a-womens-shelter/
Women deserve their own spaces, free of men. Women want their own spaces.
Men that feel like women are still men and can have their own spaces, but don't get women's spaces
You're denying reality. That man didn't care how the people he assaulted identified as. Men don't care if the women they rape identify as men.
Stop speaking over women.
To my way of thinking, rape is wrong regardless of what gamete the rapist produces; regardless of what gamete the victim produces.
You defined "sex" on the basis of "gamete production". So, my comment should be read as:
Socially, the presence of a beard is a far more relevant characteristic than the specific gamete an individual produces. Or the timbre of someone's voice. When a 6'2", 250lb person with a heavy beard and a deep, booming voice, claims to be a man and walks into the women's restroom, the fact that they actually produce the larger, "egg" gamete isn't particularly relevant.
I didn't define sex that way, the entire field of biology did. That's literally the biological definition. You're pushing unscientific nonsense if you claim otherwise
You are conflating scientific issues with social issues.
The social factors are that a person claiming to be a man, wears masculine clothing, has masculine physical characteristics, such as a beard, large physical stature, deep voice, yet this person is trying to enter a female restroom.
The science says this person produces the larger, "egg" gamete, and is therefore female. By your "scientific" argument, this person-claiming-to-be-a-man is actually a women, and therefore entitled to the use of this women-only space.
Your interests here are social, not scientific. That this man produces eggs is not a significant factor; this is a social issue, not a scientific one. You have precisely zero interest in the biological condition of this person; this person is a man, just as they claim to be. The fact that they produce egg cells is not at all relevant: this egg-producing man should be denied access to this women-only space. The fact that they produce egg cells should not be a defense against their conduct.
There is nothing "scientific" about prohibiting this egg-producing man from using a restroom used by women. The only winning argument you have for keeping that FtM man out of the ladies room is social.