Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IamSauerKraut t1_it82my0 wrote

Reply to comment by akennelley in A Queer Community Speaks Up for Student After Teacher's Transphobia by wdcmsnbcgay

Prolly a Dover educated creationist.

29

james97go t1_it96omy wrote

Prolly teaches the hard science that there are only 2 sexes. Male and female. Prolly likes to use the classic and beautiful language of his birth and not some made up silly newage jargon.

−21

IamSauerKraut t1_it98dhm wrote

Is it a "hard science" that there are only 2 sexes? Pediatricians and reality might disagree.

ps to person whose post is [deleted]: do not blame any specific religion for the teacher's views. not right to do so.

15

james97go t1_it997fr wrote

Yes it is hard science that there is only 2 sexes as defined by chromosomes at the cellular level. Don't confuse biology with psychology.

−16

SgtBaxter t1_it9omqh wrote

Scientifically the argument can be made there's 3, xx, xy, and xxy since 1 in every 600 people are born xxy. Physically they are male, but can have features like breast tissue which a true male will not.

There's also karyotypes of mixed chromosome pairs, and let's not forget divisions of the ovum that can result in two separate fertilized ova which is very common. Those ova often re-fuse, and a person can be born with both xx and xy chromosomes if the separate ova were fertilized by an x and a y sperm. This results in things like having a vagina but testicles instead of ovaries. Or having a penis where the clitoris is.

What sex is that?

We could also go on at length about SRY during meiosis, resulting in both testicular and ovary tissues being simultaneously present.

Biology is messy. Individuals are born every single day with the above mentioned. That isn't in their head, it's in their chromosomes. An actual biology teacher should know this.

If not, then they should be shown the door.

10

SomePaddy t1_itab9u7 wrote

There's also XO, XYY, and XXX if we're talking sex chromosomal aneuploidy. And androgen insensitivity syndrome in which XY individuals present as female.

3

james97go t1_itbcjnm wrote

You make good points but the truth of the matter is that the vast, vast majority of of people that claim to be transsexuals do not have aberrant chromosomes and are not born with abnormal genitalia.

3

IamSauerKraut t1_itc0zlj wrote

And what of it? If a kid wants to wear a dress, let the kid wear a dress. Or jeans. Just leave the kids alone.

2

james97go t1_itc9feg wrote

Oh I am absolutely fine with leaving kids alone. Just do not expect everyone to believe the delusion that a boy dressed like a girl is actually a female.

−1

IamSauerKraut t1_itcdxrd wrote

Who cares what you believe? If the kid is not yours, who are you to have a say in how they present themselves? I personally do not care for tats on kids but I don't make derogatory comments to or about that kid. Not my place. Not yours, either.

1

james97go t1_itd6tuc wrote

You are correct in that what I believe or what you believe and for that matter what some confused kid believes doesn't matter really. What matters is the truth. IDC if a kid thinks they are a fairy princess,or a cowboy I would play along with their imaginary reality for a bit but I would never suspend reality and tell the kid to go ahead and fly away by jumping off a roof or let them go and ride a bull. In reality they really aren't fairy princesses or cowboys, they just think they are.

−1

IamSauerKraut t1_it99cz9 wrote

Ah, so birth is just something in a woman's head instead of a baby with maybe unisex parts exiting from thru the birth canal. riiiiiiiight.

0

james97go t1_it9agz5 wrote

Unisex parts? Seriously is that is your argument for the 'transexual' phenomenon that permeates our societal discussions as of late? You need to get some data together and do the hard science to prove your point if it is.

−17

IamSauerKraut t1_it9puwd wrote

I understand science is hard (try organic, for instance) but at least do a basic internet search. Allow google to be your bbf for a few minutes.

As for "the 'transexual' phenomenon that permeates our societal discussions," that is not science based. It is based on people's ignorance of things different from them, their prurient interest in another's business, and in some folks' willingness to declare war on other people's children. There would be no "phenomenon" otherwise.

4

Evilevilcow t1_itb61pn wrote

You certainly dropped that "bUt SCIENCE sHoWs thERe ArE jUSt Two sExEs!" argument like it burned you.

But I bet you're going to bust out with it again the second you think the people you are making it to can't come back at you with science.

2

StupiderIdjit t1_it9j2ck wrote

sCiEnCe dUrr

This is what you sound like.

−4

SomePaddy t1_itabe5l wrote

This is a valuable contribution to the discussion. /s

4

--Cr1imsoN-- t1_it9jhwu wrote

lmao part of being a scientist is accepting change. You’re a piss poor scientist if you only follow the same age old theories without incorporating new knowledge.

4