No Red Text

64.4K posts

No Red Text banner
No Red Text

No Red Text

@NoRedText

Information Expert. Just answering questions. Sense of self stolen by identity thieves. please be patient you have autism. humans dni

something to offend everyone Katılım Ağustos 2017
1.4K Takip Edilen1.4K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
Clinging to the phrase "a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman" is to tacitly admit that you can think of nothing that trans women share in common with natal females.
English
31
65
396
0
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
@missxlayy @CrunchAlias What was the empirical observation that informed this conclusion that "gender" exists, let alone develops in the embryo (or at any time), or for that matter cannot be changed?
English
0
0
7
57
Xlayy
Xlayy@missxlayy·
@CrunchAlias biologist here (genetics), so an individual (in X terms) cannot change genders as it is developed in the embryo. what a trans woman does for ex is match the biochemistry of her body to match her gender. pre transition she would only be a "gay man" as a social construct.
English
15
1
3
754
Sam Morgan
Sam Morgan@CrunchAlias·
If you think a gay man can become a straight woman, you believe in conversion therapy.
English
35
316
2.4K
30.3K
ostrasyn
ostrasyn@ostrasyn·
ostrasyn@ostrasyn

@NoRedText @MarsJaneM @richtofenlover @hasitcometothat @RadFemme74 @vanessa_blk @Biotransgurl @coolaunt2021 @tatapansepatu @FluffWingBirdie @ladyofcin_1 @BiardMacGuineas @cptmbf @SocialistSauce @uzidmanslefttit @huntcraw @Dorasalter @fletcherkathy8 @kittywoodoshea @bluebirdjam @brenda_archer @Stillweeping2 @Qyilldrisstessa @K60617909 @ghostoftoast @whackam0l3lol @Hereticalturf @EffinMaggie @TheGoldenMask5 @f3ck13ss @Catfan2506 @JLippy76 @VelvetLandmine @applecookedback @Lucifer_mortala @h_alliekat @latsot @0Tamahawk3 @StitchingSin @DerpyErika @KeirGale @GenderNeutralWC @JJAngie677204 @ffenics @BolyardLaura @AfterDeathTrut1 @GoodbyesToLight @89Batmobile89 @grok @_Witch_of_Aeaea just a description of "material reality"? That's an articulation of a view of how the world ought to be.

English
1
0
7
189
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
It is not incorrect. You simply are unable to avoid concrete thinking because as with all AGPs you are profoundly autistic. His DSD argument is given in service of his attempt to make a point about troons, but nevertheless, he proposes an alternative conception of DSDs. Literally he says something to the effect t of "a person may consider her testes to be the disorder" - testes, beibg a sexual development... and it being a putative disorder, it is therefore, ...what?
English
0
0
1
22
ostrasyn
ostrasyn@ostrasyn·
No Red Text@NoRedText

@ostrasyn @tatapansepatu @shamanspirit13 @RadFemme74 @richtofenlover @hasitcometothat @vanessa_blk @Biotransgurl @coolaunt2021 @FluffWingBirdie @ladyofcin_1 @BiardMacGuineas @cptmbf @MarsJaneM @SocialistSauce @uzidmanslefttit @huntcraw @Dorasalter @fletcherkathy8 @kittywoodoshea @bluebirdjam @brenda_archer @Stillweeping2 @Qyilldrisstessa @K60617909 @ghostoftoast @whackam0l3lol @Hereticalturf @EffinMaggie @TheGoldenMask5 @f3ck13ss @Catfan2506 @JLippy76 @VelvetLandmine @applecookedback @Lucifer_mortala @h_alliekat @latsot @0Tamahawk3 @StitchingSin @DerpyErika @KeirGale @GenderNeutralWC @JJAngie677204 @ffenics @BolyardLaura @AfterDeathTrut1 @GoodbyesToLight @89Batmobile89 @grok That is the conclusion he wished to draw from his alternative conception of DSDs - that anything could be a disorder relative to what the individual considers to be good. You do not understand that which you cling to.

English
2
0
5
242
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
Yes, that's ego's point, and he uses this point to propose a new conception of DSDs, as part of his argument - asserting that a person could consider their testes a disorder on that basis - this would be a DSD, literally a disorder as he puts it, if sexual development - with the implication this is as consistent, parsimonious et al as the general biological reasoning Hilton applies. It is, as noted, built on a false premise: DSDs and the general biological reasoning are not defined or performed in relation to what the individual considers good. This is the problem of deconstruction - it is an extended fallacy of equivocation in this case regarding the word "should".
English
1
0
2
50
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
@Babygravy9 It is not too late to ruin their lives. They each and every one need to be driven into misery, a lesson to whomever comes after that there are lines which you cannot even consider crossing.
English
0
0
2
38
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
Ergo absolutely proposed an alternative conception of DSDs - developing as male instead of female, relative to what the person in question considers "good" - as his criticism, proposing this would be an equally parsimonious, consistent et al view. You do not understand what you cling to so desperately.
English
1
0
5
147
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
Yours truly, not being a feminist is not a gender critical feminist. Again, your only option is to give an alternative accounting of biology that does not rely upon the same logic. Which you will not, because you cannot, as the logic is indeed foundational to all of biology and its derived fields. You continue, as ever, to posture instead of pay up, maintaining the AGP fantasy only accommodates dissembling and evasion.
English
0
0
3
48
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
It is dogshit and evidently so Because, as noted, it is built on false premises- no DSD is defined in terms of the personal preferences of the individual. Even conceding all of ergopraxis' premises it establishes nothing with regard to Hilton's position. Insofar as you might consider this a criticism it is because it applies to biology in toto. You are free to be a radical sceptic of biology but it firmly establishes that you have nothing to continue on matters of biology.
English
2
0
4
142
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
One has repeatedly said that it is built on false premises and serves not at all to demonstate an issue with Hilton's logic. The only time you engaged with this was to deploy the typical progressive tactic of actual or pretend miscomprehension, because, again, this is all that is available to you.
English
1
0
1
40
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
Insofar as "normative" applies it is either banal and true, or remarkable and wrong. You continue to have actually made an argument and your continued posturing changes this, not at all You could have countered by giving an account of health, species, endocrine disruption, for example, that fulfilled your requirements without the sort of counter factual reasoning yours truly and Hilton advocate, but, of course, you did not because you cannot. You have studiously avoided addressing every counter argument or request for clarification, because, again, you can do neither. And you never addressed your many failings regarding Khelif.
English
0
0
1
19
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
One has not used the word "ought", that, again, is all your invention. You continue to joust against biology in total and health, in particular. One is happy to discuss your off metaphysics onve you concede you have nothing to contribute on the subject of biology and its derived fields.
English
2
0
1
103
ostrasyn
ostrasyn@ostrasyn·
ostrasyn@ostrasyn

@NoRedText @tatapansepatu @shamanspirit13 @RadFemme74 @richtofenlover @hasitcometothat @vanessa_blk @Biotransgurl @coolaunt2021 @FluffWingBirdie @ladyofcin_1 @BiardMacGuineas @cptmbf @MarsJaneM @SocialistSauce @uzidmanslefttit @huntcraw @Dorasalter @fletcherkathy8 @kittywoodoshea @bluebirdjam @brenda_archer @Stillweeping2 @Qyilldrisstessa @K60617909 @ghostoftoast @whackam0l3lol @Hereticalturf @EffinMaggie @TheGoldenMask5 @f3ck13ss @Catfan2506 @JLippy76 @VelvetLandmine @applecookedback @Lucifer_mortala @h_alliekat @latsot @0Tamahawk3 @StitchingSin @DerpyErika @KeirGale @GenderNeutralWC @JJAngie677204 @ffenics @BolyardLaura @AfterDeathTrut1 @GoodbyesToLight @89Batmobile89 @grok "completed normally" (x.com/ostrasyn/statu…). Sounds like you're begging the question.

English
1
0
4
139
No Red Text
No Red Text@NoRedText·
It has no issues. Ergopraxis does not demonstate any, as demonstrated. In no small part because his argument rests upon a false premise or equivocation, as has been pointed out to you, repeatedly. It is how all biological reasoning proceeds. Insofar as you have an issue with it, you have an issue with biology and all derived fields. More power to you, but it utterly disqualifies you from saying anything meaningful about biology.
English
0
0
1
37
ostrasyn
ostrasyn@ostrasyn·
ostrasyn@ostrasyn

@NoRedText @tatapansepatu @shamanspirit13 @RadFemme74 @richtofenlover @hasitcometothat @vanessa_blk @Biotransgurl @coolaunt2021 @FluffWingBirdie @ladyofcin_1 @BiardMacGuineas @cptmbf @MarsJaneM @SocialistSauce @uzidmanslefttit @huntcraw @Dorasalter @fletcherkathy8 @kittywoodoshea @bluebirdjam @brenda_archer @Stillweeping2 @Qyilldrisstessa @K60617909 @ghostoftoast @whackam0l3lol @Hereticalturf @EffinMaggie @TheGoldenMask5 @f3ck13ss @Catfan2506 @JLippy76 @VelvetLandmine @applecookedback @Lucifer_mortala @h_alliekat @latsot @0Tamahawk3 @StitchingSin @DerpyErika @KeirGale @GenderNeutralWC @JJAngie677204 @ffenics @BolyardLaura @AfterDeathTrut1 @GoodbyesToLight @89Batmobile89 @grok Your "as expected, without disorder or deficiency," is nothing but Emma's "but for." And it carries the same issues.

English
2
0
3
144