Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j8tee94 wrote

Reply to comment by ThirdFirstName in Northfield's Police Chief Takes Flak for His Provocative Public Stances by BudsKind802

Again, not my definition. This movement represents an iconoclasm of language. Just insane that you knew exactly what I was asking but you must have typed twenty pages of circular reasoning to avoid answering.

It would have been easier to say off the bat "no I don't think females should be allowed to have spaces without males, whether it be group therapy, women's shelters, women's fitness centers, women's sports or even in women's clinics, males should be allowed to participate."

−1

ThirdFirstName t1_j8teypy wrote

Oh no again I believe that female identifying individuals should have spaces free of male identifying individuals. No I don’t think this should be determined by their gamete production.

No it is your definition and it’s not backed by the science period.

3

[deleted] t1_j8tgwhz wrote

lmao it's not my definition. Show me one scientific source that has a different definition of female.

You can't "identify" as female if you were born male. You could identify as a woman, but male and female are traits you are born with.

I empathize with people who wish it was different but not everything in life is how you wish it is. Males can never be females. Sorry dude.

And you have to accept your real beliefs that you believe that people who are born male should be allowed to enter spaces that women have designated for people born females only. Typical male privilege.

Going to just mute you, this feels like I'm huffing paint. Your cognitive dissonance is dominating your life.

−1

ThirdFirstName t1_j8thqjn wrote

Haha just because you say it’s that way doesn’t mean your correct. These people exist and they always will do you will have to deal with that. Biologically the definition is gamete psychologically the definition is different. I can get you some sources on that if you want.

3