Scientifically speaking why is this a women again?
>Jawline says he is a man
>Arms say he is a man
>Hips say he is a man
>dick says he is a man
>DNA test would confirm he is a man
>bone structure would confirm he is a man
>urinalysis would even confirm he is a man
But because he """feels""" like a women I have to call him that?
Why are trannies such fascists?
This is a science question please don't delete it if any tranny mods are watching
Other urls found in this thread:
openparliament.ca
twitter.com
>But because he """feels""" like a women I have to call him that?
No laws that protect trans people like this has been passed. You don't have to call her "her" by law. That said, if you want to be nice then you should just call her "her".
>Why are trannies such fascists?
I don't know, man. All I know is that they have a huge victim complex that is kinda justified by the fact that we have a huge conservative population that actually discriminate against them... but then you realize that 99.9% of trannies actually come from well off ultra liberal families who even paid for their hormones so who the fuck knows.
I do wish we did not have a conservative population so professional victims like trannies did not have a scape goat whenever you ask them why they are so "fascist", as you put it.
Well thats kinda my point.
I call them by there preferred genders in public in order to be polite and avoid a shit storm however if I were like a doctor or something I would categorize him as a man
But this doesn't seem to be enough to some of them.
>if I were like a doctor or something I would categorize him as a man
I am sure that doctors still categorize them like that.
>But this doesn't seem to be enough to some of them.
Well, just let them cry about it on their tumblrs. As it is, trans people do not have any kind of political power that could allow them to pass these laws so who cares.
>>Jawline says he is a man
stopped reading there, you have no clue about human biology, even if i agreed with you on the larger point
you are a retard as much as she is a man
Bailer is a woman because I wanna put my dick in her and I'm not gay
Sure you are not gay, buddy.
Just come out, bro.
>No laws that protect trans people like this has been passed. You don't have to call her "her" by law. That said, if you want to be nice then you should just call her "her".
>No laws that protect trans people like this has been passed.
shut the fuck up if you don't know what you're talking about
>shut the fuck up if you don't know what you're talking about
Okay, okay. Point me to a law that protects preferred pronouns, please. I've never seen them.
What would be wrong if such laws were passed?
You dont like democracy ?
>But because he """feels""" like a women I have to call him that?
Aww did your snowflake lifestyle get triggered and turned on end by something that has absolutely no affect on you?
It's okay, mommy will make the boo boo better.
openparliament.ca
>openparliament.ca
>Canada
Holy shit calm down, autismo. I am so fucking sorry I am not up to date to the most recent canadian laws. You are retarded.
Anyways, this law is retarded too. What the fuck are you even doing, Canada.
> there is a uni prof in canada right now getting threatened to be fired and possible jailed because he doesnt want to call special snowflakes their preferred pronouns.
Pretty spooky. I don't really know what to tell you, buddy. He should, for now, just give up and use genderless pronouns.
>show me a law that protects preferred pronouns
>gets butthurt when someone does just that
>openparliament.ca
"clearly set out that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance that a court must take into consideration when it imposes a sentence."
So, no you will not be fired or imprisoned for accidentally misusing a pronoun. But if one maliciously and purposefully uses a label to hate someone with their speech, then they are in trouble.
Why do you can so much about changing a single word you use to describe someone? If that is literally the only harm, then you're a sincerely way too prideful about nothing that has any affect on you.
No, I get butthurt because you felt the need to insult me for not being up to date with Canadian law.
Daily reminder that Veeky Forums and in the internet is predominantly american. What we mean by laws is actually AMERICAN laws. Expecting some random person on the internet to know about canadian law is pretty retarded.
kys faggot. Maybe if you kill yourself, and then another couple million canadians off themselves too, then we will fix the problem you seem to have.
>Canada will soon become the first legally cucked country
>protects and supports a democratic system
>gets mad when the majority make a choice
While I agree with you theres no need to be this rustled.
Us leafs are just sensative about loonie lands
Also yes it Canada it is illegal to
-Disagree with a feminists on twitter
-Refuse to stand down to a hoard of trannies
-Criticize Islam
Honestly as a white male I am worried.
Imagine your in a debate about X and you say to an user saying "Show me a law about Y(in which Y has a legitimate relation to X) and then he shows you a law from the Slovenia.
First, just because I support a democracy does not mean I support every choice they make. You should know this. There are many laws you are against.
>the majority make a choice
No, not the majority. Do you know how this shit works? The only people voting for that law are people who are part of the political class. They are the top 1%.
Maybe like 3 of those people actually campaigned for trans rights before being elected, but 3 votes do not make a law. The odds are most other votes are coming other law makers from the same party who are simply following a command from the top that says:
>To please the retarded poor people and make them vote for us again, lets pass this pointless law that does not affect any of us at all.
That is all there is. Maybe if all of these politicians had campaigned hard on trans rights and then were elected on those terms THEN I would say that indeed this is a "majority choice" but no. It is a minority choice from the top 1% of the top 1% meant to please a small sample of swing voters because even though this means a lot of the few trans voters, non-trans voters won't even mind that much. They will not lose voters on this law. They will simply secure another voting block that in no way constitutes a majority.
>Imagine your in a debate about X and you say to an user saying "Show me a law about Y(in which Y has a legitimate relation to X) and then he shows you a law from the Slovenia.
Ideas aren't isolated to one area, user. We should still call out bullshit on our neighbors when these ideas could very well spread to us as well.
>Forcing people to call mentally ill people by their preferred pronouns instead of what you want to call them is democratic
You were given the choice to go against it... But didn't win tho.
Sorry good luck next time :^)
that's a woman (male)
>-Disagree with a feminists on twitter
Plainly untrue. The man involved had all charges removed. The only reason they charged him in the first place was that legitimate hate speech was spewed from fake accounts.
Yes, this is shitty, yes it is wrong it took them that long to figure it out, yes it is shitty that it creates abject fear to argue online.
But dont think for a second this sets any sort of legal precedent for simply disagreeing with feminists online. That is an outright lie, and you're propagating 100% false news.
Stop it with the half-assed awareness of what actually happened which only riles up trolls with more fake news.
scientifically speaking are girls with penus the pinnicle of sexual evolution?
>implying the law should guide our moral compass
@8706267
>look ma I keep missing the point!
kys yourself
No more (you)'s for you
>can't discern feminine vs masculine facial features
How's it feel to be a cherry?
>Scientifically speaking why is this a women again?
I have standards for seeing someone as a woman: not much she won't do, with whoever.
This isn't a Veeky Forums question, this is a /r/shamefulwanks question. And the answer is you're gay
>are transgender really there perceived genders isn't science
COMMON CORE YES!
>>are transgender really there perceived genders isn't science
Are the social implications of labels for particular sex's and/or genders relevant to science?
Nope, not one bit.
It might matter if doctors were suddenly prevented from knowing patients had transitions or were a previous gender which would impact their ability to heal them with actual science. There is nothing to suggest this even remotely..
Get off you're high horse, stop wasting your time arguing, and simply change a single word in your vocab. You are a big boy, i know you can do it. Who's a good boy? YOU ARE!
Whew, you have to be either trolling or plainly ignorant and uneducated. At least /pol/ makes this board entertaining even if it is dribble.
if you tolerate them they'll eventually shut the fuck up (hopefully)
maybe the special snowflake syndrome will die out if we do
>are humans wanting to use logic and reason in there objection to catering to special snowflakes relevant to science?
If someone has a mentall illness I am not going to enable that illness. Thats why its a question for science to determine if gender dysphoria is a legitimate thing or just a mental illness.
I don't have a problem with calling trannies a women when I know for a fact they are not. I do so out of respect and politeness.
However I would refuse to refer to a millenial hipster as a they zhe xhe or zyr
Is that ok?
>Scientifically why isn't this person who I've placed within this taxonomic group admit that they are within it?
You're talking about referents to make claims about signifiers instead of claims about referents.
Broadly speaking everyone is the master of their own language and the conversation I am having with you is wholly distinct from the conversation you are having with me, due to the fact that anything I read you saying will be read in my terms, and anything you read me saying will be read in yours. Even if someone just claims they fell like one gender or the other, that's an observable action which you're capable of using to form distinct groups. What you're doing is like walking into a metaphysics debate and simply asking why people don't presuppose your ontology.
forcing people to kill themselves by popular vote is democratic, unless you're just presupposing your own unique definition of the word "democratic"
>implying the law should guide our moral compass
well yeah, that's why your prior statement made no sense
>enforcing my own equally arbitrary paradigm is my MORAL DUTY
riiight
>their definition isn't SCIENCE
Determining the significance of the words "male" or "female" in general isn't science, there's no empirical work at all which goes into simply deciding which characteristics we make each group encompass. Saying "the definition of male is [blah blah blah]" isn't a falsifiable claim unless you're talking about a specific person's definition, and even that is still semi-presumptuous when you consider the problem of other minds etc.
Once you've settled on a definition of a grouping term, you can use science to judge which items meet the requirements to be placed within that set. Deciding upon the requirements in general is an inherently science-free process, no matter how scienc-ey your DNA/urine/etc requirements sound.