Not really, that is just you using a subjective argument to attempt to back your claim and to dodge being a Politically Correct Super Person. We are all rigid in some ways and flexible in others. Kinda a feeble argument.
Oh, so it is just, like, my opinion, man, that black people should not be enslaved? And as such, calling you a bigot and rigid for simply disagreeing with my opinion is not logical?
A female that can lay eggs or produce young and is a girl or woman is not subjective. :roll:
Yes, and you completely ignored the "relating to" I pointed out.
How am I hurting trans people. Be specific now... you are sure happy to toss out the insults and I would like to see if you have the brains or balls to actually back up your stupid assertion.
You are perpetuating ignorance and philosophical dislike of trans people which is inhumane. The perpetuation of such hurts them immensely in terms of societal acceptance, job security, success in general, and not surprisingly mental health - and I'm sure any interaction you'd have with a trans person would be a disaster too if you knew they were trans - which is arguably why so many feel extremely compelled to go through these "deceptive" surgeries/therapies anyway.
you can't have case by case cases because that is not fair to trans-women. You argue that some should be allowed in but not all. What if some can fight fairly (Weakly) with some women but some are so tough they could destroy all women just like some men dominate all men (LeBron James, for instance). How is that fair to the dominate trans-woman? It isn't. Besides, that isn't the point as I have shown above.
Everyone is different. There are inequalities all over sports. Why you're focusing on this one's potential is beyond me, and why you don't support LeBron James being banned to play with all of those who are clearly worse than him in spite of the last precedent you set is also beyond me.
I have daughters and one plays field hockey... it pisses me off because this stupid league allows boys to play this year because not enough boys could ge ta league together. Many of these boys run circles around the girls, including mine, for various reasons and the main one is speed and the other is agressiveness (running into people). I had this stupid mom from my team say that it is fine and the girls can compete with the boys. Obviously they can't, as the only all girl team they are getting smashed every week and are in dead last place. Just because there are a couple of girls in the league better than the boys, as this mom pointed out, does not mean that it is fair, as you would undoubtedly argue as well. It is a stupid politically correct, we can all get along and are the same, type of argument.
I don't doubt what you're saying, but an anecdote means nothing to me. There are some girls that'd undoubtedly do better than the boys in question. What's your point? You saw some typically weak girls? Okay? So what if it's factually supported that more often than not girls underperform next to guys? Create more performance and physicality regulations.
I am not a victim and never indicated that I am either... vicitmhood is a mentality. The fact that you are rude does not make me a victim... it just makes you rude. I made the case for PC and you want to ignore it... as most PC people do, incidentally. :lol:
By your descriptions of the events in politics, you are definitively a victim to this phenomena. Now, of course I find your descriptions incredibly fallacious and inaccurate. Victimhood is not a mentality, and those that spout this non-truth have telling tendencies. The fact that you so quickly dismiss that wrong things can be exacted on people (and those who are the victim of those wrong things are the victims, ala victimhood) is questionable.
I am making an argument about biological fact regarding the persons SEX. "You people"... :roll:
You so readily argue about a complex issue for your intellectual enjoyment - meanwhile people are killing themselves over the dread that is brought upon them by lack of acceptance and support.
Let's break this down:
Anatomy: Studies organisms and their parts (Notice the lack of distinction between which parts they were born with and otherwise)
Sex: "The anatomy of an individual's reproductive system, and secondary sex characteristics"
You're asserting that, because normally it's implied that when you talk about someone's "parts" you logically assume they were born with them, that all people should be applied to such a scenario, when not all people logically would apply - in fact millions of people.