• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If you find gay/trans perverted, why?

Yes, in male sports. Are you against that also?
There's no such thing as male sports as there is no rule that women can't compete they just simply can't that's why women sportsman's created so that they had an opportunity to compete among themselves.
Like you're against a biological female that competed in women's sports and then was declared ineligible decades later.
Who are you talking about?
I don't know what I'm talking about? You just repeated what I've been telling you all day. Bolded above for your pleasure. Each sport org has adopted their own approach. As it should be.
See, you are coming around.
Now just get rid of binary boxes.
Why sex is binary the binary boxes are not a creation of man it is how we categorize people based on the nature of them
Or you don't know what you're talking about.
 
It's always the most fragile that see criticism as a personal attack.
Don't be so fragile.
You made a post about me and not the topic. Some are not smart enough to know the difference. See mirror.
 
I am not a fan of overwrought public displays of affection in general but I certainly have more of a dislike of two men kissing in public.
I'm not the person that's going to try and tell you how to feel. I always think that public displays of affection should be kept tasteful. Holy hands a hug a peck on the cheek these are the ones I engage in I don't do that hardcore snogging I find that gross
Am I very concerned about it? No.
Like I said I'm not going to tell you how to feel it's not my place anyway.

You asked me if it was abnormal and no I don't think it is based on the definition of abnormal that I understand.
 
There's no such thing as male sports as there is no rule that women can't compete they just simply can't that's why women sportsman's created so that they had an opportunity to compete among themselves.

Who are you talking about?

Why sex is binary the binary boxes are not a creation of man it is how we categorize people based on the nature of them
Your boxes don't work because sexual traits are not binary.
There's heteros and gays. There's hermaphrodites. There's bisexuals. There's females with thick beards. There's males that can't generate sperm or grow any bodily hair.
 
I meant to write: "Biological males are very much still competing in some female sports".

And yes, I'm very much against that if the male has a competitive edge
No, biological males are NOT competing in women's sports.
Again, if you can't define biological male, you can't state what is or is not a biological male for anything, even for women's sports.
 
Your boxes don't work because sexual traits are not binary.
You will have to show me a female with a capacity to produce small gametes that are motile.

There's heteros and gays.
Not sexual orientation that has nothing to do with the capacity to produce small gametes so it's not related to sex.
There's hermaphrodites.
So someone that produces both a large and a small gamete has that ever happened I'm not sure that it has.
There's bisexuals.
Bisexual is another form of orientation that doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not you produce small gametes
There's females with thick beards. There's males that can't generate sperm or grow any bodily hair.
So these females that grow beards how do you know they're female? And these males that can't generate sperm are they then generating ova?

I don't think body hair is related to sex but nice try.
 
You will have to show me a female with a capacity to produce small gametes that are motile.


Not sexual orientation that has nothing to do with the capacity to produce small gametes so it's not related to sex.

So someone that produces both a large and a small gamete has that ever happened I'm not sure that it has.

Bisexual is another form of orientation that doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not you produce small gametes

So these females that grow beards how do you know they're female? And these males that can't generate sperm are they then generating ova?

I don't think body hair is related to sex but nice try.
I don't actually have to show you anything. You failed with your definition of biological male.
You said small gametes that can fertilize an egg. If the gametes never get used on a female they can not fertilize an egg. They may have the capacity, perhaps. But nothing is guaranteed.
Once a man's sperm is determined infertile, I am not aware of being able to make them fertile.
Body hair is related to hormones. Hormones are related to sexuality.

You're asking a lot of questions that will have different answers. Also showing that an answer or sexuality isn't binary.

But as complicated as this all is, it is certainly not binary.
...
A woman who is “genetically male” has had twins, after three years of pioneering treatment.
 
I did post 495.
it failed.
sperm can be infertile. Does that make that man, not a biological man? If it's infertile, it's not capable of fertilizing a female egg. As your definition stated.

So, not an accurate definition.
 
it failed.
sperm can be infertile. Does that make that man, not a biological man? If it's infertile, it's not capable of fertilizing a female egg. As your definition stated.

So, not an accurate definition.
Its very simply XX vs. XY. That's all. End of story.
 
I don't actually have to show you anything.
Then you're essentially telling me that leprechauns are real.
You failed with your definition of biological male.
No I didn't.
You said small gametes that can fertilize an egg. If the gametes never get used on a female they can not fertilize an egg.
What other kind of gametes would fertilize eggs?
They may have the capacity, perhaps. But nothing is guaranteed.
Something is if the egg is fertilized it was done by a small gaming that came from a male.
Once a man's sperm is determined infertile, I am not aware of being able to make them fertile.
I didn't mention fertility this is a red herring
Body hair is related to hormones. Hormones are related to sexuality.
Sexuality is not related to biological sex.
You're asking a lot of questions that will have different answers.
And you are feeling to answer.
Also showing that an answer or sexuality isn't binary.
Light sexuality isn't binary you can be gay you can be by you can be straight you can have no interest in it at all I never said sexuality was binary sex is binary.
But as complicated as this all is, it is certainly not binary.
What is not binary sex or sexuality?
...

If she gave birth then she's not male males can't do that.
 
it failed.
It did not.
sperm can be infertile.
So show me a different kind of gamete besides a sperm that fertilizes an egg.
Does that make that man, not a biological man?
No the ability to fertilize has no effect on the ability to produce sperm or the potential to produce sperm.

For example if someone with ovaries has no potential to ever produce sperm
If it's infertile, it's not capable of fertilizing a female egg.
So what you're not making a counterpoint 100% of eggs ever and existence that were fertilized where fertilized by sperm and nothing else.
As your definition stated.
My definition mentions nothing about fertility that's a red herring
So, not an accurate definition.
It is you had to make a red herring to pretend that it wasn't you failed.

Just so you know the definition I posted was the dictionary definition so you're saying words are wrong and the way we use languages incorrect which is something you can say but it doesn't mean anything.
 
Last edited:
Its very simply XX vs. XY. That's all. End of story.
XY women have had children of their own, from their own eggs. In fact, at least one was the biological XY daughter of her XY mother.


Chimerism can lead to a person having both XX and XY chromosomes in their body, from gestation, due to the combining of fraternal twins early in gestation.

 
Its very simply XX vs. XY. That's all. End of story.
This crap is why I avoid using the genetics.

XY women have had children of their own, from their own eggs. In fact, at least one was the biological XY daughter of her XY mother.


Chimerism can lead to a person having both XX and XY chromosomes in their body, from gestation, due to the combining of fraternal twins early in gestation.

There's another poster that does this crap.

I just use this.

male
/māl/
adjective
Of, relating to, or designating the sex that has organs to produce spermatozoa for fertilizing o
va.

female​

/fē′māl″/​

adjective​

  1. Of or denoting the sex that has the organs that could produces ova or bears young.

You can't say the one that produces sperm or eggs cuz they'll pull the same crap what about people who are infertile. If they have the structures that would normally produce further avail if they have the structures that would normally produce ova their female.

What you're fighting against with garbage posts like this is the univariant fallacy. These people will say essentially because there's no one trait that separates all men from all women there must therefore be a spectrum. Hey this is the address philosophy of person could come up with. And I make this point quite often in this discussion. There is no single trait that separates all cats from all monkeys but there isn't a monkey cat spectrum.
 
it failed.
sperm can be infertile. Does that make that man, not a biological man? If it's infertile, it's not capable of fertilizing a female egg. As your definition stated.

So, not an accurate definition.
  1. male​

    /māl/​

    adjective​

    1. Of, relating to, or designating the sex that has organs to produce spermatozoa for fertilizing ova.
Um no it did fail you failed to understand and comprehend.

Has the orchids to produce for does not be that fertilization necessarily happens. The point here is they have the organs that would produce sperm or to go a little further into it they have organs that would be associated with the production of sperm so that they don't have testicles with them repeated well that's associated producers people who have ova don't have penises
 
Its very simply XX vs. XY. That's all. End of story.
LOL. Only in a binary world. Of course, life isn't binary.

...

Any variation from these typical numbers is referred to scientifically as an “aneuploidy.” If there is one additional X or Y, it is known as a “trisomy” (“tri” denoting the number 3). Genetic conditions that reflect a trisomy include:



Trisomies are the most common X and Y aneuploid conditions. Less common are “tetrasomies,” which denote the presence of four sex chromosomes:



Still rarer are the “pentasomies,” indicating five sex chromosomes:



Typically, 48- and 49-chromosome variations produce more pronounced symptoms than trisomies, although this is not always the case.


At the other end of the spectrum lie the “monosomies,” meaning a person born with only one sex chromosome. The only survivable monosomy SCA is 45,X. This is an individual with only one X chromosome, a condition known as “Turner syndrome.”
 
Its very simply XX vs. XY. That's all. End of story.
Also not a true statement by you.
Here's a YY that could compete and then not compete. Due to testosterone and not genes only.
Binary thinking on humanity never works for all.

...


Who is Caster Semenya?​

Caster Semenya is a two-time Olympic champion and three-time world champion over 800m.

Between 2009 and 2019, the South African dominated her sport, with victory in the Doha Diamond League 800m in May 2019 being her 30th consecutive victory, external over the distance.
 
Back
Top Bottom