iNow

I can, and I do. In fact, I am rejecting your current discussion track on at least 4 distinct fronts: 1. You are making a claim that you cannot possibly support. There isn’t DNA evidence available for all of the populations you’re asserting had 100% XY chromosomes. Absent that evidence, you’re sharing little more than comforting fictions, not empirical facts. 2. As I and others have already shared repeatedly here, intersex humans are far more common that you seem to think (possibly 1 in 100 people). Remarkably often, within the same one individual, different genes will be XY while others XX. The human overall may outwardly express as male or female, but they rather regularly don’t have 100% XY nor 100% XX chromosomes across all of the cells in their body. It’s a mix 3. EVEN IF your claim is true (extraordinarily unlikely IMO), historical precedent is NOT a valid reason to reject modern changes. Just because “it’s always been this way” doesn’t mean it always must be this same way in the future. See also: Allowing blacks to compete in athletics or helmets in football. 4. This entire line of reasoning is irrelevant to the point you seem to be trying to argue. EVEN IF all winners in past male athletics had XY chromosomes, that has no bearing whatsoever on whether we should allow or disallow transgendered females with XY chromosomes from competing against cis-gendered females in female athletics moving forward. You may as well be saying I can’t have steak for dinner tonight because I had hamburger last night. It’s nonsequitur.

I am sharing with you that you can't possibly know what you are claiming to know, and asking you to support it with evidence. You've thus far done nothing more than evade and attempt to shift the burden of proof to me.

Please don’t ever apologize to me unless you’ve wronged me or those I love. You were genuinely mistaken, but I was not wronged by your post and that’s not what happened here ✌️

You shared “evidence” of females breaking barriers in sports, including hockey… okay. And now you seriously can’t understand why I refuse to accept your false inference fallacy suggesting that XY chromosomes were present in: ”every male athletics World Record, and every player on every major male Professional Sports team” …Or that this is somehow sufficient reason to bar all those 7 total transgendered females from ever competing against cis-gendered females in sports with arbitrary human invented rules?

Again, that was your claim, not mine. When I asked you for evidence, you replied instead with a deflective question to me… asking about what scientific information would give me any pause or reason to doubt that “every male athlete ever was XY.” I kindly shared my reasons as a good faith reply… even though you asked merely to evade the actual request to you to defend your assertion with anything more than appeals to “common sense.” And now you’re asking me why the article I shared in support of MY position fails to offer evidence in support of the claims YOU'RE here making and which I’m challenging. Good stuff, mate. Really… Can’t script this type of comedic gold.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

Why rethink it? I’m correct. You’re not. You cannot say (as you have now several times) that 100% of males who’ve ever competed in male sports were competing with XY chromosomes. That’s an interesting opinion, but your source is your rectum.

You’ve been here long enough to know that’s not how it works. Please argue in good faith.

Your links don’t actually show that: “XY chromosome athletes account for every male athletics World Record, and every player on every major male Professional Sports team” It actually IS a rather extraordinary claim since it’s almost certain no evidence in support of such an extreme stance even possibly exists. Hint: You’d need genetic records for all athletes

Nice try. You made the claim. You support it. The onus is yours. Did you miss the very first sentence in MigLs post to which I replied? He said, “Who are these people?” … in direct response to me referring to the people in this thread talking about XX and XY. It really shouldn’t be this hard, fellas. And Charon and others already explained in biological terms why even this framing was problematic.

You keep repeating this as if we’re supposed to just accept it as true, but it’s not. You’ve been corrected and seem to be ignoring those corrections. There are girls and women who have XY chromosomes and there are boys and men who have XX chromosomes. There are also genes on chromosomes other than the X or Y that contribute to sex development. There are additional factors that render your position plainly false, but you refuse to see it. Seriously, WTF are you talking about… he did it again in the post immediately preceding yours where you typed this.

As has been shared already and repeatedly, this isn’t about the incompleteness of biology. It’s about the category error people keep making by suggesting males are males and females are females based on XX and XY. For reasons already repeatedly cited, that’s inaccurate, simplistic, and demonstrates an ignorance of the subject matter.

Even if there were, IQ measures are generally garbage. It’s understandable that some people like to point and laugh at people who think politically different than they do and call them dumb, but general intelligence is less relevant than how people identify themselves tribally, what information sources they trust, and how open they are to change and new experiences… and most importantly, whether they prioritize personal freedom and security versus shared security and the well-being of the greater group of neighbors… do they prioritize themselves as an individual or do they prioritize themselves as an important member of a larger group. That’s more cultural than biological, and would be missed by simplistic views of IQ. You can’t generally tell a persons political beliefs based on general measures of intelligence.

Even then, it’s silly horseshit Exactly

Kids these days. So hard to please.

That’s dumb, because it’s the immune system doing the work whether vaccinated or not If anything, the immune systems of those vaccinated have been exposed to more variations and so are better prepared for new ones

One thing that brings us together and unites us is staying on-topic

No harm, no foul ✌️

And maybe you should actually read the articles you cite and stop acting like snotty little child when challenged... especially when those articles you're sharing DIRECTLY refute the very the claim you've been making. For convenience, here's the bit I found most relevant from your citation (emphasis mine): You can read more for yourself here: https://kinseyinstitute.org/pdf/Infidelity in hetero couples.pdf

It sounds more like you have never experienced any of these places for yourself and apparently don't know what you're talking about.

Minimal info, indeed. An opinion piece from the Daily Mail. Was it too hard finding an article in the National Inquirer or the Onion to support your claim?

Same reason there are colorful descriptions of poop Summarized: Needless shame

“Excuse me, kind sir. I couldn’t help but notice your recent infidelity. Am I correct in assuming you haven’t self-saddled the one-eyed baloney pony lately?” “No, it’s because Carol took such good care of me that I never felt the need!”

Counter proposal: Masturbation makes you MORE likely to cheat. It primes you to see others in more sexual terms, reinforces the pleasure mechanism and sense of joy from ejaculation, and leads you to seek more and more and more to overcome the desensitization and boredom from always doing it yourself. See how easy it is to make stuff up when evidence doesn’t matter? I even did it without suggesting you’re not lucky enough to be married or have no one to talk to