- Dołączono
- 1 Sty 2021
Funny how, after all that faulty reasoning, tranny "intellectual" arguments always boil down to swear words at the end.This one baffles me. A tranny tries to be intellectual, understanding the TERFs is the best way to argue against them, y‘know? The question: what would be enough for GCs to say that a person’s sex has factually changed?
Her contention: if sex is a physical trait, then it MUST be changeable like changing coal into diamonds. It is known that all physical properties of an object can change over time, so sex must change under some precise circumstances. (I don‘t even know where her logic went wrong, I assume an aneurysm) Mx Idiot.. We know the properties of male bodies and female bodies. This does not mean that there is a fixed point at which A changes into B. My only guess is that she‘s trying to have hypothetical philosophical deep thoughts about biological objective reality.
Then she asks if changing a baby in the womb or DNA would be enough. Sure, just start up the time machine! Missy, since it is impossible to change every part of you down to your atom, you will never have a dick and always be female. She could also ask why we have not invented beaming yet. Yet she claims that since her absurd hypotheticals are rejected by TERFs that means sex is not physical, but supernatural and therefor a social construct. Which? What? How?
Sex is not an aggregate state of humans to cycle through. I cannot sublimate my womb or condensate into having a dick.
This one can't even construct a good straw man. Of course "gender criticals" can say what it would take for a person to change sex. That knowledge is how they can tell it's impossible to change sex.
The saddest part of that Twitter bio:
No wonder they 41%.
Ostatnio edytowane: