|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 27, 2024 11:43:50 GMT
The only definition I was discussing was the fact that Starmer, and now you don't know what a woman is. It seems you are talking about chromosomal abnormalities. This doesn't change the definition of what a man and a woman is though. Sorry. Your first comment is a lie. "chromosomal abnormalities" create variations from what might be referred to as the norm, for the individual caught up in those variations, where they are is the norm for them. That most males behave in a way expected from males and are accepted as males, is not in dispute. But even then there is visible mixing of the sexes, an example can be seen in the bone structure of some men and some women, which doesn't make them gay. Example: Men with narrow shoulders and wide, baby carrying like, hips. And females with wide load bearing shoulders and slim male like hips. I have seen some examples of the above, and I have seen both inside two different families. That doesn't change what a male and female are though. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jan 27, 2024 12:24:30 GMT
I suspect that ‘men ‘can only grow a cervix if they are women who pretend to be men .
In the Alice in wonderland rabbit hole that exists in leftie liberals heads that perfectly logical.
|
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Jan 27, 2024 13:55:18 GMT
Your first comment is a lie. "chromosomal abnormalities" create variations from what might be referred to as the norm, for the individual caught up in those variations, where they are is the norm for them. That most males behave in a way expected from males and are accepted as males, is not in dispute. But even then there is visible mixing of the sexes, an example can be seen in the bone structure of some men and some women, which doesn't make them gay. Example: Men with narrow shoulders and wide, baby carrying like, hips. And females with wide load bearing shoulders and slim male like hips. I have seen some examples of the above, and I have seen both inside two different families. That doesn't change what a male and female are though. I think you miss my point which is that there are grey areas in terms of the mix between what might be termed normal areas of the sexes and those who do not fit into that norm. The problem is that for those from the grey areas are dealing with that which is normal for them. Excluding the few idiots out there who bring disrespect to those trapped in their own biological mix-up. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 27, 2024 18:08:08 GMT
That doesn't change what a male and female are though. I think you miss my point which is that there are grey areas in terms of the mix between what might be termed normal areas of the sexes and those who do not fit into that norm. The problem is that for those from the grey areas are dealing with that which is normal for them. Excluding the few idiots out there who bring disrespect to those trapped in their own biological mix-up. Some people are born with 6 fingers but we dont then pretend that the Human Race normally has 6 fingers - we treat it as a flaw in their genes and unnatural. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 27, 2024 18:20:51 GMT
I think you miss my point which is that there are grey areas in terms of the mix between what might be termed normal areas of the sexes and those who do not fit into that norm. The problem is that for those from the grey areas are dealing with that which is normal for them. Excluding the few idiots out there who bring disrespect to those trapped in their own biological mix-up. Some people are born with 6 fingers but we dont them pretend that the Human Race normally has 6 fingers - we treat it as a flaw in their genes and unnatural. Just like some people are born as 'attention seekers' and believe me there is no lengths they will go to to draw attention to themselves, even if the woke snowflake virtue signalers tell you otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 27, 2024 18:39:31 GMT
Here's a prediction, I bet if national service is called upon, the transgender will go through the roof... LOL
National service was the standard peacetime form of conscription in the UK, introduced after the Second World War. It came into force in January 1949 and required all men aged 17 to 21 to serve in one of the armed forces for an 18-month period. It was discontinued in 1960, with the last servicemen discharged in 1963
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Jan 27, 2024 19:03:06 GMT
Here's a prediction, I bet if national service is called upon, the transgender will go through the roof... LOL National service was the standard peacetime form of conscription in the UK, introduced after the Second World War. It came into force in January 1949 and required all men aged 17 to 21 to serve in one of the armed forces for an 18-month period. It was discontinued in 1960, with the last servicemen discharged in 1963 Mind-you who is going to mess around with a deadly handbag, a deadly lipstick, and a pair of killer stilettos ... LOL
Watch out Putin our British conscription brigade are being chosen as we type  |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 27, 2024 22:55:05 GMT
That doesn't change what a male and female are though. I think you miss my point which is that there are grey areas in terms of the mix between what might be termed normal areas of the sexes and those who do not fit into that norm. The problem is that for those from the grey areas are dealing with that which is normal for them. Excluding the few idiots out there who bring disrespect to those trapped in their own biological mix-up. No, I think it is you who misses the point. Starmer isn't talking about chromosomal abnormalities. He's talking about a man 'feeling' like a woman, dresses like a woman, wants to be treated like a woman, wants to encroach on women's safe spaces, wants to take part in sporting events as a woman, and be addressed as a woman. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Jan 27, 2024 23:36:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 28, 2024 2:52:56 GMT
Hope this puts a end to Surnak illegal quest and a call by the loony right ring element who want Asylum seekers sent to Rwanda. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Jan 28, 2024 2:57:00 GMT
Revealed: The UN sends asylum seekers to Rwanda - while opposing Britain's scheme to send migrants to the country - link |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 28, 2024 3:38:08 GMT
Revealed: The UN sends asylum seekers to Rwanda - while opposing Britain's scheme to send migrants to the country - linkOh dear another Article by daily Nail unsubstantiated Source Claiming what Someone Said .And if it js Something A Rwandan official. Said it just Shows Shows how there willing to take A right wing Government Dirty blood money. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jan 28, 2024 3:44:08 GMT
Since when were you fussed about facts, lefty?
|
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Jan 28, 2024 3:51:10 GMT
Since when were you fussed about facts, lefty? Plenty of times that's why I Copy and pasted Articles with Substantial evidence to its Claime . |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Jan 28, 2024 4:04:21 GMT
Lol!🤣
|
|
