iNow

I think it’s caused by using the wrong type of toilet paper. This assertion rests on the exact same footing as your OP. It’s a wild ass guess. It’s not even speculation.

It also offers me that time back in my day where I can catch up reading news, responding to emails, attending calls, etc while being chauffeured. It also simplifies transportation of children too young to drive to school or sporting events, or over to friends houses and back (actions today owned by parents who basically become unpaid Uber drivers).

Sure! Here he is in Gerudo Town (it’s off limits to men, hence the garb):

Who owns and manages this fleet of vehicles large enough to provide rides to every human being?

Or, experience shows that maybe you aren't engaging in good faith.

Who gets to decide when someone is no longer eligible to be considered human? You? Do YOU get to decide that this person no longer deserves to live? Who watches the watchers?

Is the mass shooter not also an "other?"

Sick burn, bruh

Why are your assertions so often nonsequitur?

Are you trying to win a bet with someone that you can be even more ridiculous and even more profoundly absurd than you already were in previous posts?

I don’t think that has much to do with being female. Many of us try to redirect anxiety into useful outputs and improving our surroundings. I do it, too. Turn the stress into something positive… though accelerated beard growth doesn’t seem to be one of those things.

Yes. You totally pwned me. Golly. Gosh. And stuff. I'm so totally embarrassed. "When did you stop beating your wife?" >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question If not a "category," what is a "sex" in this context?

Here again is what I said: And here is what the citation I provided in response to your request for one said: To which you replied: So, this later quote from you seems especially appropriate as a reply... to you: But once again... As I already said in the very first post of this absurd exchange with you (who has a mind made up and is clearly unwilling to change it): What does this mean? It means that all this talk about sex is irrelevant to the topic. Thanks for attending my TED Talk.

Of course I can: https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm Now, will you update your flawed preconceptions, or carry on repeating inaccuracies?

Affirmative (even just within the intersex bucket, there are at least 4 different categories which brings us to a minimum value of 6 biological sexes), but we're talking about gender here anyway. Right, but you've just argued my point for me by accepting and acknowledging that it's a spectrum. A spectrum, by definition, includes more than 2 binary choices, even when those 2 binary choices represent a plurality. YOU: There are ONLY two colors. ME: That's clearly false. Look at this spectrum of wavelengths. YOU: Well yeah, there's a spectrum I agree, but most colors are one of these two. ME: Who cares? Your original point is self-evidently false. There are, even by your own admission, more than two colors. You should reconsider this part of your argument and move on. Another view: YOU: There are only two brands of cola: Coke and Pepsi ME: Uhm... well, no. There's also Tab, Schweppes, Rite, Fanta, Corsica, RC, and about a thousand other local brands. YOU: Yeah, but those don't sell as often, so like I said... there are ONLY two brands. ME: Dufuq? That's not how categories work, bruh. How can you not see this?

It's an opportunity to answer thusly: Gender dysphoria develops by noticing a pattern (which we see everywhere even when none is really there), applying a label to it, then trying to find common variables which seem to be involved with this arbitrary category we just created. For the most part, these labels and patterns are ever evolving, often get discarded, and frequently are unhelpful. They also have tremendous overlap with other patterns we've forced on to the territory, and the one we choose as our lens on the world varies from one moment to the next and based on context and desired outcome. This isn't really directed at you, btw... just used your comment as a springboard for a larger point.

Will be?

This doesn't follow. This isn't an either/or situation, but is instead both/and. Not everyone will be able to afford autonomous cars or have a place to store them, and I doubt you'll be outlawing ownership in favor of socialistic sharing. Also, in many circumstances such as large cities, the existing infrastructure of trains and centralized transit will be faster, easier, and lower cost. The future is already here, it just isn't evenly distributed.

Wow. You're genius. I didn't realize that. They're called "words," you say? Well, I never... Gosh. Learn something new every day. Another thing I learned today? Gratitude for the day 1 five post limit.

Is a label needed at all, or shall we just call them Bruce and Loretta (or whatever)?

Yes, absolutely!

There's opportunity to realize how labelling something as a "disorder" brings with it a negative connotation and inherently judgemental valance, whereas simply accepting the characteristic as something specific to that individual allows us to take a more neutral approach and provides opportunity to avoid treating them as somehow "other" or not normal... "one-of" instead of "less-than."

I thought stress made hair fall out. Wouldn't more vigorous growth be rather opposite to that?

Or they can’t afford one. Don’t want to deal with either the cost or responsibility of maintenance. Lack storage location for it. Can’t afford insurance. Or gas. Or want to reduce co2 pollution… or or or or or or… This does not follow, especially given the efficiency gains from removing (even reducing) random human decisions and mistakes from the system. A software patch has already been deployed so that doesn’t happen again. Mistakes will happen. There will be far fewer mistakes made by autonomous vehicles than by those controlled by human operators… like orders or magnitude fewer.

Of course