Anonymous #1 1w

This is from an independent journalist. I don't know what else to tell you.

42

Anonymous #3 1w

Transgender people are plain human beings. They by themselves do not pose a threat to our country. If you think otherwise, you are actually brainwashed.

52

Anonymous OP 1w

Human beings? Yes. Plain? Hell nah

-14

Anonymous #3 1w

Sure, they may be different from you, but that does not provide the means for this categorization.

22

Anonymous OP 1w

Do you believe that transgender people pose a serious threat to this country?

20

Anonymous OP 1w

In general or individually

-12

Anonymous #1 1w

NOW we want to debate good news sources????

1

Anonymous #3 1w

And who gives you the right to determine what’s plain? You’re not normal lmao.

20

Anonymous #3 1w

Tf you mean what’s wrong with that you can’t just say everyone of a certain sexuality is a terrorist that shit is fucked

12

Anonymous #6 1w

Me

-4

Anonymous OP 1w

It’s the severe mental illness, it becomes a threat. There’s been two shootings by trans now, the church and that school. And now this guy with Kirk his partner was radicalizing him. It doesn’t have an extensive history but it’s a growing trend. Carving their bullets with the ideology

-5

Anonymous #9 1w

The intense ideology and need for validation carries a lot of hatred

-5

Anonymous #9 1w

I want you to tell me, how many shootings have been committed by white, cisgender males?

6

Anonymous #9 1w

This "intense ideology" is literally just people expressing their true selves. We can get into the neuroscience behind transgenderism and how it's biologically implied and isn't only a psychological thing. But I'm not sure if you're quite at that level yet.

6

Anonymous #10 1w

They were classified as a mental illness until recently btw. We need to stop accepting and tolerating this life style and get them the help they need.

-3

Anonymous #9 1w

Ok and what about the other 99.99% of mass shooters that are straight? Aren’t they the bigger threat? Shouldn’t we be limiting their access to guns for being straight and dangerous?

5

Anonymous #10 1w

Hey, guess what buddy: things change. We used to do fucking exorcisms on people thinking that it was the answer.

8

Anonymous #10 1w

You must be extremely dense if you think that the "help they need" is anything but gender affirming care

7

Anonymous OP 1w

If we’re gonna stop gender affirming care I think we need to also stop affirming all the Botox republican women get. I wanna see trumps cabinet without plastic surgery and then hear them shit on trans people.

8

Anonymous #12 1w

I said it’s a growing trend, and truthfully we’ll never know if they were cis males bc it wasn’t as widely expressed before. Regardless of cis or trans bc it’s not even about that. The common denominator is mental illness. Mental illness doesn’t = trans. But trans = mental illness

1

Anonymous #9 1w

We need to advocate for mental health in this country, banning guns won’t solve that crisis

1

Anonymous #9 1w

A growing trend of 2 people, alright. Also, do you even know what cisgender means? Fuck do you mean "wasn't widely as expressed before"? The term cisgender was coined in 1994. Anyone who identifies with the gender assigned to them at birth is cis. Are you being purposefully dense?

0

Anonymous #12 1w

Should limit access to the mentally ill

1

Anonymous #9 1w

I didn't say anything about banning guns. You're literally just assuming shit. I'm also not gonna let you go on my neuroscience discussion. I can explain to you exactly how transgenderism is biological, not mental, but you choose not to continue the conversation in that direction. Very telling.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Did you forget about Aubrey Hale? I’m talking about trans people. You’re dense if you don’t think it’s gained popularity over the past several years

1

Anonymous #9 1w

I’ll agree children shouldn’t be medically transitioning. but what’s the difference between a grown adult getting plastic surgery to look how they want(transitioning) and Kristi noem, Pam bondi, Karoline levitt pumping their faces with Botox to look how they want. If a grown adult wants an operation they should be able to get it. Ever heard of freedom? Republican figurehead women are 99% plastic but I don’t see you calling that mental illness?

4

Anonymous OP 1w

Are you #12? Pay attention

-1

Anonymous #9 1w

What??

1

Anonymous #12 1w

I agree with you, they can absolutely get the surgery to transition to looking how they want as adults. But that does not magically make them the thing the got surgery to look like. And we as a society do not have to pretend for them. Also we should NOT be paying for these cosmetic procedures with tax dollars/insurance. No one is pumping their face with Botox or plastic surgery through insurance bc it is ✨cosmetic✨

0

Anonymous #9 1w

"We'll never know if it was cis males because it wasn't widely expressed before" This is the sentence I'm referencing. The term cisgender HAS existed and HAS been applied before. Transgenderism has only seemed to rise in popularity because it's more accepted now, so people feel more free to come out. There are historically transgender people who couldn't come out because of their own safety, hence why we have no measurement of transgender people from a certain point in the past

1

Anonymous OP 1w

You can explain to me the biology of transgenderism till you run out of breath, and it will always circle back around to xx and xy.

1

Anonymous #9 1w

I’m a neuroscientist, and as much as OP is saying there’s biological proof of transgenderism, that’s not how biology works. I may stray from what OP is trying to say but IDC it’s my perspective. There’s evidence yes, but what you said is also the reason we have to differentiate gender and sex. Biologically, genetically, all the above they are their birth sex. referring to someone as their preferred pronouns isn’t gonna change their chromosomes, but it also isn’t gonna hurt you to respect them

1

Anonymous #12 1w

And Kristi Noam, Pam Bondi, Karoline Levitt, even Ivanka are getting - gender affirming procedures/surgery.

1

Anonymous #12 1w

I get where you’re coming from, and respect your calm and educated take on this. I just wish that with this being known, we could promote and support people loving the body they were born in, instead of pretending their new costume now makes their existence more important and valid. We’d be doing people more justice that way and people would be happier and happy with themselves

1

Anonymous #9 1w

This is where I’m gonna piss both you off likely. just let kids express themselves. I fully agree you should be taught to love your body and that it’s yours. I’ll be fr I’m a gay man and growing up I would wear dresses and my sisters would put makeup on me, I’m not trans. And I’m very grateful I was never asked if I wanted to be a women. I did that shit young, realized it wasn’t for me and moved on with life. Instead of immediately letting kids transition and shoving them full of hormones—

6

Anonymous #12 1w

Just let them live and development will do the rest, don’t interfere with biology

6

Anonymous #12 1w

I think this is where my neuroscience degree really influences my views, let kids express themselves however they want but please do not medically transition them before they can even consent to medical procedures by themselves. That’s batshit IMO

5

Anonymous OP 1w

Oh I see what I said was confusing sorry; I meant trans was not widely expressed before. Like they could have been confused about their sexuality or gender expression and not said anything is what I meant. My b.

1

Anonymous #12 1w

No I actually totally agree with this. I think a boy enjoying wearing girls clothes for example but acknowledging he’s a male is perfectly normal. But you just said it yourself; you never told anyone to call you a woman bc you put a dress on.

4

Anonymous #3 1w

Majority of violent crimes per capita are done by straight, white, cis men. They’re the terrorists

1

Anonymous #9 1w

You know that they have been dozens of cases of XY people giving birth, right?

2

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

If you produce ova, you’re female by definition.

0

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Still male. You can change whatever you want, add a uterus, but you’re never going to be a female no matter what. You’re just a male who had a uterus implant.

1

Anonymous #9 1w

So, “it will always circle back around to xx and xy.” Until it doesn’t?

4

Anonymous #13 1w

So infertile women aren’t women?

5

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Female is the phenotype organized around the production of ova. Infertile women are also woman because their phenotype is still organized around the production of larger gametes.

1

Anonymous #13 1w

If it’s phenotypic (based on outward appearance more than genetics) wouldn’t that also make trans women as much of a woman as infertile women, by your logic?

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Neuroscientists chiming back in, both of you are just arguing semantics. You both have different definitions of women and will never convince each other of a point. Ones sex goes beyond just hormones, genes, and what’s expressed. IMO, yes we can make epigenetic changes for people who transition but male/female brains differ mosaically with many nuanced developments. For example: trans women still have a a lot of male phenotypes that can’t be changed, they have biologically male development.

3

Anonymous #12 1w

BUT! You can still respect how someone identifies. If someone wants to get surgery to present a certain way, gender has nothing to do with sex atp. In articles I read, gender is no longer considered the same as sex. Arguing that they’re biologically the same is kinda dumb. But being a dick and refusing people’s wishes/freedoms is also dumb

6

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Phenotype doesn’t mean “what you look like on the outside.” It means all the observable traits that develop from your biology and environment. That includes internal features like reproductive anatomy, and secondary sex traits, not just appearance.

6

Anonymous #13 1w

I know that, and I agree that this is semantic, but that doesn’t discredit my point. That basing “what is a woman” off of reproductive capability is shortsighted.

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

I don’t think you’re going to find anything to define “what a woman is” and include both sex and gender. Sex is kinda unchangeable. Dopamine receptors literally function differently between men and women and transitioning can’t fix that. Him basing it on reproductive capability is wildly stupid cause we can pick and choose how we define “women”. Woman is a word, we define it. If you wanna talk about biology then describe the processes and mechanisms of how we develop and we need to be explaini-

4

Anonymous #12 1w

I base what a women is on gender, not sex.

0

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Woman*

1

Anonymous #12 1w

Explaining how/what transitioning is. It does not make you biologically another sex but having surgeries to change how other people see you can absolutely change your gender. A “passing” trans person has much less problems cause people don’t even know. You can’t look at someone and know their sex/gender so just go with what people prefer

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Still circles around to xx xy, because like I said, it’s still a male lol

1

Anonymous #9 1w

Infertile women have xx chromosomes. They’re women

5

Anonymous #9 1w

So men can give birth?

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

No, women can give birth. Giving someone with xy chromosomes a uterus, doesn’t make them have xx chromosomes now

0

Anonymous #9 1w

So, xy people have given birth, yet they aren’t women. But only women can give birth?

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Why can’t it just be a man who likes presenting himself as a woman? There’s no much more respect in that than saying being a woman = (wearing / surgically applying) a woman costume

1

Anonymous #9 1w

WTF are you talking about? Cross dressers and femboys exist, but there’s a big difference between them and trans women. Also, you’re floundering now that I pointed out the discrepancy in your comments.

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Yea. men with xy chromosomes are men, regardless if they have had a uterus implant and given birth. Regardless of they wear a dress. Regardless if they get boobs put in. Still genetically a man. Still have that prostate hiding in there. There will always be evidence of the surgical alteration of the body no matter what they do.

1

Anonymous #9 1w

They didn’t get uterus implants…

1

Anonymous #9 1w

Those don’t even exist yet

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Uhhhh did they push it out of their pp hole? You may have to explain a little because pregnancy requires a uterus on this planet.

0

Anonymous #9 1w

They had a uterus AND xy chromosomes.

1

Anonymous #9 1w

I know c-section is a thing but how are they growing a baby to birth without a uterus

0

Anonymous #9 1w

Did… did you read my comment?

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Do you have a story? I’m intrigued. I looked it up and it says it’s not possible unless a genetic disorder like androgen insensitivity syndrome? But even they can’t cause they don’t have a uterus

1

Anonymous #9 1w

There are people who are born with both A uterus And XY chromosomes

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

I get that part.. can you elaborate on your knowledge of this? What I’m reading now, cause I’m actually interested in what you’re saying, is that genetic disorders can cause this. In my opinion , bottom line is, whatever you’re born with is what you got. You can’t change it with procedures and hormones.Medical anomalies exist. There are multiple factors in these cases that affect how the body functions as either a man or woman.

-1

Anonymous #9 1w

Okay, my larger point is that the binary between sexes is much more fluid than people make it out to be, and that it’s pretty foolish to make a statement about one characteristic that makes someone a man or woman. This was the report I was referring to.

3

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 1w

Thank you for sharing

3