Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#4837
Trans women are not female and therefore, should not use facilities catered to biological women.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Winner
0
3
After 3 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
Average_Person
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
3
1516
rating
20
debates
87.5%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Pro
#1
Biological sex– “Sex is a label –male of female – that you’re assigned by a doctor at birth based on the genitals you’re born with and the chromosomes you have. It goes on your birth certificate.”Gender– “…It’s a social and legal status, and a set of expectations from society, about behaviours characteristics, and thoughts.”Gender Identity– “…is how you feel inside and how you express your gender through clothing, behaviour, and personal appearance.”
Transgender women have the right to have their gender identity respected. However, they should not be entitled to have laws abide in their favour as much as they do currently, as they are the minority and do not represent the population as a whole.
Being a woman is not ‘up for grabs’ being a biological female is within its name, it is biology.
The Minority :
In the UK a census question asked girls aged 16 and over if they identify with the gender they were assigned with at birth, 94% of the population answered and 93.5% answered ‘Yes’. Meaning that,of the sample pool, only 0.5% were transgender. Advertising companies’ purpose is to appeal to the mainstream to acquire more customers, increasing sales and profits. It is sensible to focus upon appealing to the 93.5% as opposed to the smaller 0.5% of the population who are classified as transgender.
Therefore, when advertising using transgender women whilst trying to acquire more consumers, it backfires immensely for example, the brand ‘Anheuser-Busch’ had their sales decrease by 14% after partnering with transgender tiktoker, Dylan Mulvaney. Not only was it a failed appeal to the population from the company however, it was also turning away customers. Recovering from a 14% deduction in sales will not be recovered by 0.5% of the population.
MTF Hormone Therapy and its effectiveness :
Whilst MTF hormone therapy is effective in aiding transition, it does not change the biological sex of an individual. MTF hormone therapy does not cause a transgender woman to develop a uterus and therefore, transgender women cannot experience ‘period pain’ as some like to claim. When regarding the overall effectiveness of such treatment, in comparison to women, it is not how the media portrays it to be:
“Trans women receiving androgen-suppression therapy for 12 months showed significant reductions in strength, lean body mass, and muscle surface area, but even after 36 months, the measurements of these three indices remained above those for cisgender females.” (Tidmas, V., Halsted, C., Cohen, M. and Bottoms, L. (2023).)
Not only that, however, MTF hormone therapy may aid in many things such as, growing breasts and produce a more rounded body than that of a male. However, in no place does it mention changing the chromosomes of the biological man who is transitioning. In mammals, sex determination is strictly down to chromosomes and sperm only possesses male or female potentiality ( Gilbert, S.F. (2000). Chromosomal Sex Determination in Mammals. Developmental Biology. 6th edition.) To use the argument of inter sexuality is a null, as it is down to a biological mishap (Intersex: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia.) and only 1.7% of the population actually possess intersex TRAITS( Leonard, S. (2002). How Common Is Intersex? A Response to Anne Fausto-Sterling.) The biology of a female is different to that of a biological man:
“On average, she is smaller than man, lighter; her skeleton is thinner; the pelvis is wider, adapted to gestation and birth; her connective tissue retains fats, and her forms are rounder than a man’s…” (Beauvoir, S.D., Borde, C. and Malovany-Chevallier, S.(2012). The Second Sex.)“Women’s specific blood weight is less than men’s: there is less hemoglobin retention; women are less robust, more apt to be anemic.”“…man’s calcium metabolism is stable; women both retain less calcium salt and eliminate it during pregnancy…” (Beauvoir, S.D., Borde, C. and Malovany-Chevallier, S.(2012). The Second Sex.)
Ross Tucker, a sports scientist , stated that there was a blatant disadvantage of transwomen competing against women in sport. Whilst MTF hormone therapy can block testosterone to an extent, the effects of male testosterone cannot be reversed:
"Many anatomical sex differences driven by testosterone are not reversible. Hemoglobin levels and muscle mass are sensitive to adult life testosterone levels, with hemoglobin being the most responsive. Studies in transgender women, and androgen-deprivation treated cancer patients, show muscle mass is retained for many months, even years, and that co-comittant exercise mitigates muscle loss." (Heather, A.K. (2022). Transwoman Elite Athletes: Their Extra Percentage Relative to Female Physiology.)
No matter the effectiveness of MTF hormone therapy there is not a way, currently, to change all that is listed. Transwomen should not be competing in women’s leagues.
A blatant mockery of Women’s struggles:
Companies of sanitary products for women stated that they were facing a supply chain issue and thus,there was a shortage in sanitary products for menstruation. It was during this time that clips went viral of transgender women buying products for women’s menstruation for their own ‘period’.
Having a period is the shredding of the uterus lining, of which, transwomen do not possess. Therefore, it is a dead argument on whether transwomen experience periods. Therefore, why should Kenny Ethan Jones lead the advertisement for period products? Though transwomen may experience symptoms of PMS, they do not experience the shedding, the bleeding,or the cramping. Women are more susceptible to diseases due to her biology:
“from fourteen to eighteen 128 girls die for every 100 boys, and from eighteen to twenty-two 105 girls die for every 100 boys. This is the period when chlorosis, osteomyelities, and such strike.” (Beauvoir, S.D., Borde, C. and Malovany-Chevallier, S.(2012). The Second Sex.)
Transgender women also avoid the risk of endometriosis and PCOS of which, there is a lack of scientific research due to the gender health gap. Yet despite this, some transwomen claim to experience the same misogyny as a biological woman. However, this is misogyny claimed by the trans community should be taken with a grain of salt as there has been many barriers for women in politics (Maguire, S. 2018. IPR Report Barriers to Women Entering Parliament and Local Government.) due to previous expectations of women and femininity, something of which, women to this day, still struggle with.However, for being transgender tiktok influencer, Dylan Mulvaney managed to secure a meeting with President Joe Biden to discuss trans rights whilst women lack significant investiture into complications with womanhood and are under represented despite making up 49.74% of the world's population and 50.4% in the USA alone.
Cases to take into consideration when discussing transgender women and criminality:
Lexi Rose Crawford
Isla Bryson
Katie Dolatowski
Shane Jacob Green
Andrew Lloyd Miller
Michelle Martinez
Danielle Rose Gemini
Desiree Anderson
Sean Ojeda
These are few of many, the point stands as – Even if it is a small fraction of the 0.5% of individuals to identify as transgender, to open up public spaces specifically designed for women could be putting women at risk. Therefore, if there is a risk, why should we take that risk in the name of diversity?
“As CBN's Faithwire reported,Scott Smith, the girl's father, told The Daily Wire his daughter had been sexually assaulted in late May while she was in the bathroom at Stone Bridge High School. The attack was allegedly committed by a teenage boy who entered the girls' bathroom wearing a skirt.Smith grew visibly angry at a Loudoun Country Public Schools(LCPS) board meeting on June 22 when no one acknowledged his daughter's alleged sexual assault. He also voiced his concerns over students using restrooms that correspond with their chosen gender identity. He said the controversial policies being pushed by LCPS factored into the attack against his daughter.He was arrested for disorderly conduct. Superintendent's Email ShowsSchool Board Knew About Sexual Assault WTOP-TV reported on Oct. 21 Superintendent Scott Ziegler told the school board about the first incident on May 28, but it was hidden from the public for many months.( VA Judge Finds Trans Teen Guilty of Sexual Assault in LoudounCounty High School Girl’s Bathroom Case.)
Sources:
Beauvoir, S.D., Borde, C. and Malovany-Chevallier, S.(2012). The Second Sex.
Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.uvahealth.com. (n.d.). Transgender Hormone Therapy: Getting Started | UVA Health. [online] Available at: https://uvahealth.com/services/transgender/transgender-hormone-therapy.
Modibodi UK. (n.d.). How some trans women get their period. [online] Available at: https://www.modibodi.co.uk/blogs/womens/transwomen-period#:~:text=Having%20a%20period%20feels%20totally [Accessed 13 Aug. 2023].www.medicalnewstoday.com.
(2021). MTF hormone therapy and body changes: Expectations and more. [online] Available at: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/mtf-hrt-body-changes#:~:text=Male%2Dto%2Dfemale%20(MTF[Accessed 13 Aug. 2023].
Tidmas, V., Halsted, C., Cohen, M. and Bottoms, L. (2023).The Participation of Trans Women in Competitive Fencing and Implications onFairness: A Physiological Perspective Narrative Review. Sports, [online] 11(7), p.133.doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/sports11070133.
Cleveland clinic (2022). Menstrual Cycle (Normal Menstruation): Overview & Phases. [online] Cleveland Clinic. Available at: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/10132-menstrual-cycle.
Roan, D. and Falkingham, K. (2022). Transgender Women inSport - the scientists’ View. BBC Sport. [online] 11 May. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/61346517.CBN. (2021).
VA Judge Finds Trans Teen Guilty of Sexual Assault in LoudounCounty High School Girl’s Bathroom Case. [online] Available at: https://www2.cbn.com/news/us/va-judge-finds-trans-teen-guilty-sexual-assault-loudoun-county-high-school-girls-bathroom [Accessed 13 Aug. 2023].
Planned Parenthood (2021). Sex and Gender Identity. [online] www.plannedparenthood.org. Available at: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity.
Gilbert, S.F. (2000). Chromosomal Sex Determination in Mammals. Developmental Biology. 6th edition. [online] Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9967/#:~:text=In%20mammals%2C%20primary%20sex%20determination.
medlineplus.gov. (n.d.). Intersex: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia. [online] Available at: https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm#:~:text=There%20are%20several%20possible%20causes.
Leonard, S. (2002). How Common Is Intersex? A Response to Anne Fausto-Sterling. [online] Journal of sex research. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/.
UN Women – Headquarters. (n.d.). COVID-19 Priority Area: Political Inclusion. [online] Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/hq-complex-page/covid-19-rebuilding-for-resilience/political-inclusion?gclid=CjwKCAjw_uGmBhBREiwAeOfsdxZmS2QbhxsJtbk7Grj5rFkvQjuFN8zkZ1wz9pITb_snAy1bpVdL3hoCKd8QAvD_BwE [Accessed 13 Aug. 2023].
Maguire, S. (2018). IPR Report Barriers to Women Entering Parliament and Local Government. [online] Available at: https://www.bath.ac.uk/publications/barriers-to-women-entering-parliament-and-local-government/attachments/barriers-to-women.pdf.
Heather, A.K. (2022). Transwoman Elite Athletes: Their Extra Percentage Relative to Female Physiology. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, [online] 19(15), p.9103. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159103.
Con
#2
Before I even get into arguments, let me go ahead and dissect the title so that it makes sense for me, pro, readers, and voters.
- BOP
The title is in the format “A therefore B”. Otherwise can be written as “A implies B” or “A → B” for logical statements.
Pro must affirm this statement. Because the debate straight up says “not” instead of “on balance, not”, pro must prove that all of the following are true:
- (1): 100% of trans women are not female
- (2): They should 100% not use facilities catered to biological women
- (3): (2) is a direct result/reasoning from (1)
However, I as con must prove at least one of the following:
- (1): Not 100% of trans women are not female (i.e. being trans woman doesn’t exclude someone from being female)
- (2): Trans women are allowed to use facilities catered to biological women
Since if I prove that any one of the two above are true, pro is unable to fulfill her bop.
- Definitions
Cater: to supply what is required or desired [1]
Facility: something (such as a hospital) that is built, installed, or established to serve a particular purpose [2]
Female: of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs [3]
Oogenesis: in the human female reproductive system, growth process in which the primary egg cell (or ovum) becomes a mature ovum [4]
- Not 100% of trans women are not female
I apologize to the voters and readers for the double negative, but it is effectively a negation of pro’s BOP #1.
This can also be reworded as “There is a percentage (greater than zero) of trans women that are female”. Referring to the definition of female (see above), once can be female if they have the capacity to bear young or produce eggs.
Of course, this is in a biological sense since it is directly talking about reproductive components
Pro also agrees that being a female also depends on biological context from her R1 arg.
So I can define:
P1: If someone has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs, they are female.
I can prove that some trans women are female if I can prove that some trans women have the capacity to bear young or produce eggs.
Which, in fact, some do. Through a procedure called sex reassignment surgery, surgeons are able to remove male reproductive organs and attach female reproductive organs [5]
In fact, transgender women who undergo male-to-female (MTF) sex reassignment surgery can conceive a child/bear young.
Therefore:
P2: If someone undergoes MTF sex reassignment surgery, they have the capacity to bear young or produce eggs.
Combining P1 and P2 into C1 we get:
C1: If someone undergoes MTF sex reassignment surgery, they are female.
We know that 5-13% of transgender women do “bottom surgery” (sex reassignment surgery involving swapping the reproductive organs) [7]
So:
P3: 5-13% of transgender women do MTF sex reassignment surgeryC2 (P3+C1): 5-13% of transgender women are female.
There are 1.6 million transgender people age 13+ in the US alone [8].
39% of them are transgender women [8].
So that means that there are 0.39 * 1.6 * 10^6 = 624 thousand transgender women.
Of that, 5-13% have done MTF sex reassignment surgery and are female based on C2.
Therefore, 31200 to 81120 transgender women are female.
Let’s make this C3.
C3: 31200 to 81120 transgender women are female.
Since both 31200 and 81120 are greater than zero, there is a percentage (greater than zero) of trans women that are female. Let’s make that C4.
C4: There is a percentage (greater than zero) of trans women that are female.
Which satisfies BOP part 1, since I have proved that “not 100% trans women are not female” due to 31200 to 81120 transgender women being considered female.
4. Trans women are allowed to use facilities catered to biological women
Let’s refer to the definition of facility:
something (such as a hospital) that is built, installed, or established to serve a particular purpose [2]
I’ll be using the following to evaluate these facilities:
P4: If something is public, anyone is allowed to use it.
Cool, let’s google facilities. EPA has a nice list of all types of facilities:
- Commercial and Institutional: Pools laundry, kitchen/dishwashing, etc. are public to everyone
- Office buildings: They are public to those who work in them, of course. However, this can be considered public as someone is welcome to call help desk or HR to “use” the facility
- Hospitals: Public as long as you pay the medical bills. Many, in fact, are walk-in, allowing anyone to walk into the hospital to use the healthcare treatment services.
- Laboratories: Mostly public; while you cannot march into Area 51, you can generally get a blood test at a lab [9]
- Hotels: Public as long as you pay the prices for lodging.
- Restaurants: Public, since people pay to eat there.
- Educational facilities: Public, since anyone eligible to apply for college and attend that college. Community colleges also exist.
- Industrial: Public, since industrial visits are often allowed and encouraged. [10]
P5: The facilities listed above are public
C5 (P5+P4): Anyone can use the facilities listed above.
So if they can be used by anyone, they are also catered to biological women through the definition of cater, (these industries are able to supply needs of biological women).
Let’s make that C6.
C6: The facilities above are catered to biological women.
P6: If facilities are allowed be used by anyone, trans women are allowed to use it.
C7 (C5+P6): Trans women are allowed to use the facilities listed above
C8 (C7+C6): Trans women are allowed to use the facilities listed above, catered to biological women.
And the point is proved hence through C8.
5. Refutations.
These will be very simple.
Transgender women have the right to have their gender identity respected. However, they should not be entitled to have laws abide in their favour as much as they do currently, as they are the minority and do not represent the population as a whole. Being a woman is not ‘up for grabs’ being a biological female is within its name, it is biology.
Technically it is as proven through the use of sex reassignment surgery. The fundamental biological components of men and women change, thereby changing the ability of being a woman or not.
In the UK a census question asked girls aged 16 and over if they identify with the gender they were assigned with at birth, 94% of the population answered and 93.5% answered ‘Yes’. Meaning that,of the sample pool, only 0.5% were transgender. Advertising companies’ purpose is to appeal to the mainstream to acquire more customers, increasing sales and profits. It is sensible to focus upon appealing to the 93.5% as opposed to the smaller 0.5% of the population who are classified as transgender. Therefore, when advertising using transgender women whilst trying to acquire more consumers, it backfires immensely for example, the brand ‘Anheuser-Busch’ had their sales decrease by 14% after partnering with transgender tiktoker, Dylan Mulvaney. Not only was it a failed appeal to the population from the company however, it was also turning away customers. Recovering from a 14% deduction in sales will not be recovered by 0.5% of the population.
I’m not too sure how related this is to your argument, but from what I can see you have committed three fallacies:
- 0.5% is only of the 94%. The remaining 6% are unquestioned, meaning the percentage of transgender can range anywhere from 0.5% to 6.5%.
- Dylan Mulvaney is in the USA, but you are generalizing this to the UK. The sheer number of transgender women is quite different (see my arg above).
- You are generalizing one transgender women who is specifically hated and targeted by conservatives [11]
Not only that, however, MTF hormone therapy may aid in many things such as, growing breasts and produce a more rounded body than that of a male. However, in no place does it mention changing the chromosomes of the biological man who is transitioning. In mammals, sex determination is strictly down to chromosomes and sperm only possesses male or female potentiality ( Gilbert, S.F. (2000). Chromosomal Sex Determination in Mammals. Developmental Biology. 6th edition.) To use the argument of inter sexuality is a null, as it is down to a biological mishap (Intersex: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia.) and only 1.7% of the population actually possess intersex TRAITS( Leonard, S. (2002). How Common Is Intersex? A Response to Anne Fausto-Sterling.) The biology of a female is different to that of a biological man:
- You do not show the relation between chromosomes and being a female, without using definitions of either.
- You fail to acknowledge that there are other options besides MTF hormone therapy (e.g. MTF sex reassignment surgery) for turning a man into a female.
Ross Tucker, a sports scientist , stated that there was a blatant disadvantage of transwomen competing against women in sport. Whilst MTF hormone therapy can block testosterone to an extent, the effects of male testosterone cannot be reversed:
- You have no argument about how any sport is a facility, and thereby you are applying sports logic to facilities ⇒ essentially another fallacy here
Companies of sanitary products for women stated that they were facing a supply chain issue and thus,there was a shortage in sanitary products for menstruation. It was during this time that clips went viral of transgender women buying products for women’s menstruation for their own ‘period’. Having a period is the shredding of the uterus lining, of which, transwomen do not possess. Therefore, it is a dead argument on whether transwomen experience periods. Therefore, why should Kenny Ethan Jones lead the advertisement for period products? Though transwomen may experience symptoms of PMS, they do not experience the shedding, the bleeding,or the cramping. Women are more susceptible to diseases due to her biology:
- Transgender women can have female reproductive organs through MTF sex reassignment surgery
These are few of many, the point stands as – Even if it is a small fraction of the 0.5% of individuals to identify as transgender, to open up public spaces specifically designed for women could be putting women at risk. Therefore, if there is a risk, why should we take that risk in the name of diversity?
- Not entirely sure how this is related to transgender women being females/facilities either.
6. Conclusion
In my arguments, I have sufficiently proved how 31200 to 81120 transgender women are female, and how anyone (including transgender women) is allowed to use facilities catered to biological women.
I’m not too sure how well pro is adhering to (her own) debate topic, as she references sports and criminalization without discussing what a facility even is (without showing how sports and criminalization aren’t “facilities”), and also has committed fallacies with her reasoning as listed above. Pro also keeps adhering to the topic of MTF hormone therapy as the only option to those that are transgender; however, she fails to acknowledge MTF sex reassignment and other bottom surgery options to essentially swap out the reproductive organs of a human.
Meanwhile, I have provided sufficient definition, reasoning, and even listed how each type of facility is essentially public.
I’ll look forward to pro’s R2.
7. Sources
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
Pro was not pro and therefore, should not use the voting facilities for real pro.
Best.Korea is the resident troll here. Don't engage him/her/it/?
"Transgender women can have **female reproductive organs** through MTF sex reassignment surgery"
Uh, no they cannot.
Having your penis turned inside out a vagina, cervix, and uterus it does not make.
All your sophistry fails on that single physiological, biological and human reproductive FACT!!!
I swear to God if this was a troll I’m going to bash my head on a wall
I think I played enough with you. You can now go back to your debating.
Once again, you are claiming everything to be an ‘attack’ on trans rights.
I will not continue debating with you if you keep deflecting the topic from transgender women and remain on the topic of religion. This is not a religious debate.
The only thing I shall say is:
“ Are you in favor of banning Christianity to uphold women's rights?”
I don’t believe in state religion therefore, I don’t believe in banning a religion nor providing a platform for it to flourish.
If it is the person’s choice to practise Christianity then, they may do so in the comfort of their own home however, it should not interfere with the State or the rights of the people or ejusdem generis. If they break the law, they will be charged.
If an individual wishes to transition then, they may do so in their own comfort however, it should not interfere with the rights of people, others (ejusdem generis) or the State. If they break the law, they will be charged.
"Not everyone is a Christian"
Your definition includes Christians tho.
Christians are part of "everyone".
Please think of a definition that excludes Christians.
"And yes, transgender people can be reasonable and their demands reasonable however, when that begins to affect the rights of a biological woman, it is unacceptable"
It is mostly Christians who affect rights of biological women. In Bible, it says that woman doesnt even own her body. Her husband owns her. She cannot even deny him sex. Most of rapists are Christians. Most of murderers are Christians.
Are you in favor of banning Christianity to uphold women's rights? Because you seem to be defending Christians abusing women and children. Remember all those boys abused by priests? You tolerate that? But you attack minorities. You are attacking trans rights.
Not everyone is a Christian.
Not everyone is a Buddhist.
Not everyone is a Muslim.
Not everyone is an Atheist.
Nobody should be subjected to practise a certain religion by the state. This is not a discussion about religion, I am referring to the sexes at raw level.
I have already asked you to stop deflecting the topic matter.
I have previously stated this :
“ Any reasonable individual, OF THE SAME KIND, ‘ejusdem generis’. Are you telling me that individuals, men or women, who murder and slaughter are reasonable individuals? No. They are not.”
Note: “Are you telling me that individuals, men or women, who murder and slaughter are reasonable individuals? No.”
And yes, transgender people can be reasonable and their demands reasonable however, when that begins to affect the rights of a biological woman, it is unacceptable. They are the minority, we are not going to cater to them.
Yes, biological women, biological men, and transgender people are usually reasonable people by nature however, some are not.
This extends into your belief on human nature but I believe that humans are inherently good and reasonable - which is a Liberal belief.
To believe that human beings, biologically, are not reasonable is more of a conservative belief. To which, I am not.
Yes, all people have distinct features which is why here, we can differentiate between the sexes. However men and women, nonetheless, fall under the same category - the sexes - due to the possession of reproductive functions.
"Christians were never mentioned by myself"
You said biological men or biological women. Most Christians are biological women or biological men.
Do you want to change definition again, to exclude Christians?
"“Same kind” meaning gender in this instance, transgender should, in my opinion, be recognised as its own gender."
Another new definition. Great. At this point, you should probably write your own dictionary.
"Christians were never mentioned by myself, only you. A majority of Christians are reasonable however those who murder, rape, and slaughter are not, nor are they recognised such within the law. The same for transgendered people, ciswomen, and cismen."
You ignored how trans people are much more reasonable than Christians. You also ignored that Christians are greater threat to both women and trans, since Bible commands the death of trans.
Since Christians are objectively less reasonable, we cannot really label them as "reasonable others". At best, less reasonable others. Do you support ban on Christianity since it is a threat to women and trans?
"A “biological woman” would generally be a “reasonable individual”."
All biological women are reasonable individuals?
Obviously not. Plenty of cases of women killing their children. Women often abuse their children, beat them, emotionally abuse them. There have been even cases where women eat their children. So we see that biological woman and reasonable individual is not the same.
Maybe you mean in most cases, but in that case you concede that you were using two mutually exclusive definitions, one that includes all biological women, and the other which includes only reasonable ones. Also, you would be again moving the goalpost. But you are used to that.
"“Distinct from another”, all have distinct features, transgender people, biological men, and biological women"
All people have distinct features. This definition has nothing to do with previous. Which one of those people are most reasonable? Statistics say transgender, since they are least likely to violate others. They are most reasonable individuals among all other groups.
Christians, on the other hand, are most violent. Christians are much more likely to be rapists. In fact, Christianity and islam are most violent religions in history. Christian is statistically a threat to society. Christians even rape children. How can you not hate them?
He brings up a valid point as it is a valid point made up entirely of his own imaginary argument.
He does bring up a valid point though.
Nobody is changing definitions, opposition is purposely misconstruing my comments then, gets angry when I simplify my comments to their standard.
A “biological woman” would generally be a “reasonable individual”.
“Distinct from another”, all have distinct features, transgender people, biological men, and biological women.
“Same kind” meaning gender in this instance, transgender should, in my opinion, be recognised as its own gender.
Christians were never mentioned by myself, only you. A majority of Christians are reasonable however those who murder, rape, and slaughter are not, nor are they recognised such within the law. The same for transgendered people, ciswomen, and cismen.
Stop taking everything as an ‘attack’ on transgendered people.
You said that meaning remains consistent. Lets see if thats true.
What is consistent between "biological woman" and "reasonable individual" and "distinct from another" and "reasonable individual of same kind"?
And how does any of this exclude Christians? Christians arent reasonable?
I assume the last one about "same kind" is you attacking trans-species-people.
hold up what now?
We can change definitions?
Stop making up arguments based on wobbly foundations. It is evident that the meaning remains consistent, I only changed it recently due to your lack of understanding - I merely simplified it for you.
hold on ima get some popcorn and watch this unfold.
"“‘Other’ in this case means any reasonable individual, ejusdem generis, of the same kind.”"
Now you have a fourth definition????
Okay, lets go through this again.
First you said "Until they interfere with the rights of another".
Then you said:
"Other’ would know I meant other people who aren’t transgender, biological man and woman"
Then you said:
"Other’, in this case, means any reasonable individual."
Then you said:
"Other - a person or thing that is different or distinct from one already mentioned or known about"
Then you said:
"“‘Other’ in this case means any reasonable individual, ejusdem generis, of the same kind.”"
4 completely different definitions of "other"!
I dont know if anyone told you this, but in debate, one word has one definition, not four different definitions.
Could you please point us to which of these definitions excludes Christians?
Also, you said you are comparing reasonable trans to reasonable others, but in your debate, you obviously compare unreasonable trans to reasonable others in order to throw dirt on reasonable trans.
Then you run away after it was proven that trans are most reasonable as a group. Statistically, you are much more likely to be raped or killed by a Christian.
There are no reasonable others, when trans are the most reasonable group. You are blaming trans for something Christians are famous for. So you dont include Christians as reasonable.
Allow me to simplify:
Other
pronoun
1.
a person or thing that is different or distinct from one already mentioned or known about.
"a language unrelated to any other"
“…that is different or distinct from one already mentioned…”
Men and women are biologically different,
Transmen and men are biologically different,
Transwomen and women are biologically different.
Therefore, ‘other’ is used.
So let me correct my vague statement, made in assumption that I was talking to someone with necessary comprehension skills:
“‘Other’ in this case means any reasonable individual, ejusdem generis, of the same kind.”
You are grasping at straws as a result of your lack of understanding.
It is evident that you lack necessary comprehension skills when it comes to such things.
As you cannot do such by yourself, allow me to specify what I mean by :
“ ‘Other’, in this case, means any reasonable individual.”
Any reasonable individual, OF THE SAME KIND, ‘ejusdem generis’. Are you telling me that individuals, men or women, who murder and slaughter are reasonable individuals? No. They are not.
Am I saying that transgendered people are unreasonable? No.
It would be the same if I had said:
“Until their cisgendered rights interfere on the rights of others”.
‘Other’ here would be referring to any reasonable individual…
OF THE SAME KIND - gender -
In which comment did I bring forth Christianity? Because you will find that it was you who brought up the topic of religion. You cannot stay on topic. I never defended them either.
I have explained my intention numerous times, you are simply being narrow minded and wilfully ignorant.
I think I understand now. You have a bad eyesight.
You cant tell difference between:
1. Other’, in this case, means any reasonable individual.
2. Other
a person or thing that is different or distinct from one already mentioned or known about.
The hint is in "reasonable".
You already conceded about Christians. They are included in other. Now you lie about it. Christians are biological men and women. So yes, Christians are relevant.
Christians are bad and corrupt. Remember all those pedophile priests?
Christians used to execute trans. Who is violating who again?
Christian president literally invaded Iraq. He killed millions of people. Should we forget all that?
You cannot complain about trans. Christians and muslims are worse. You dont attack them, no. Its the trans you attack.
Trans are most peaceful group. The others are the problem. But yes, the poor eyesight.
How many more definition changes? How many more moving goalposts?
Others are Christians and muslims. Pick which do you support.
How so?
It isn’t changing a definition when you refer to a category of a gender and referring to a set of individuals who differentiate from transgender - such as men and women - as ‘other’.
Christianity is irrelevant here.
If I was to ‘run’, why would I still be replying?
Your definition included Christians, until you changed it to different.
Run away from the truth, like a pretty girl would.
I never mentioned Christians in my comment, at all. That is something you added on later, you brought up Christians.
Being ‘pretty’ is the least of my worries.
I am not an alternative account.
You misinterpreted my comment, you have now realised you were wrong, and now you are deflecting.
Also, I had to bring up the definition because you clearly did not understand what was meant when the word was used.
Its okay. You dont have to be shy that you accidentally included "Christains" in "others" and then werent able to defend that point and had to say that by "others" you mean reasonable others, such as in this comment:
"Other’, in this case, means any reasonable individual."
You are pretty so you can get away with moving the goal post, changing definitions of words, running away from trouble. You dont need to think since people tend to vote based on looks. Obviously, you will lose this debate. I assume you are alt of Novice.
Also, not once did I list transgender people as ‘unreasonable’? I meant that people who were interpreting my comment the wrong way were being unreasonable.
But once again, you have tried taking the comment and escalating the discussion, creating a bigger scene than necessary.
You are over- inflating points in order to shut down the conversation however, upon further inspection, they are all misconstrued.
Once again, you misinterpreted my comment. REASONABLE people who see I used the term ‘Other’ would know I meant other people who aren’t transgender, biological man and woman. As transgender is of the same category of the sexes, they are the third sex.
Change what definition ?
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/other
"I see that you changed the definition so you dont have to defend Christians."
https://c.tenor.com/TDC-kzU-F2UAAAAC/trump-donald.gif
Now I will take most reasonable trans and compare them to most unreasonable biological women. There are plenty of reasonable trans and unreasonable biological women, so it wont be hard.
I see that you changed the definition so you dont have to defend Christians. Very sadly for you, biological men are often Christians, muslims, chinese or indians really. I like how you included "reasonable individual" to exclude all Christians in the world. Of course, thats called moving the goal post to the point where its funny. You want to compare reasonable people to unreasonable trans to make trans look bad. I have never seen a person doing more cherry picking in my entire life.
Yes, I do care about rights which is why I’m having this debate.
I am not attacking trans. I, as a cisgendered woman, am voicing my opinion and concerns with the transgender community competing against cisgendered women in sports.
I did not state “other” in order to discuss religion or political stance. ‘Other’, in this case, means any reasonable individual.
Other
pronoun
1.
a person or thing that is different or distinct from one already mentioned or known about.
"a language unrelated to any other"
“Other people” who are different from transgender people therefore, biological men and women - that was my intention and that is what would be generally accepted.
Truth does hurt a lot and that is exactly why your responses are becoming passive aggressive. If you cannot handle varying opinions then I commend refraining from debating until you can be more receptive to the opinions of others.
You said something about rights of other people. Christians are other people, so its on topic. I am pointing out that Christians are horrible people. You choose to ignore that and attack trans. Trans are least violent of all out there. Of course, truth hurts a lot, doesnt it? If you care about rights, check Christian abuse.
To reply to a debate regarding something entirely different and changing the subject is a fallacy.
Stay on topic, we don’t want “whatasboutism” here.
Not just violence. Christians are famous for all sorts of sexual abuses, violations, rape, crime, wars. Really, it was the Christian parents who threw out gay teens on the street making them homeless. Christians are the ones who sentenced homosexuals to death not so long ago. Christians are also famous for scaring their children with hell. But yes, lets not mention all that.
Not once did I mention violence in my comment.
Actually, trans people are least violent as a group. If you are after violation of rights, check Christians.
Until they interfere with the rights of another.
Trans rights are human rights.
Oh yikes...
Don't listen to Best.Korea, he/she/it/they are the resident pro-pedophile debater that makes little sense more often than not.
What?
Some of them are female girls tho