TiktokUser
Mistral
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2024
- Posts
- 2,041
- Reputation
- 3,026
Anytime you’re in an argument with a retarded tranny, use this thread as a step-by-step copypasta guide to make them realize that their entire life is built on a lie. Show them that the foundation they stand on is nothing besides pseudoscience, full of inconsistencies and holes, and that they should KILL themself!
They can never actually ever define what a woman is, aside from giving a circular definition or one that can be attributed to men, which is why you always start off with the question “What is a woman.” They will almost always respond with:
“A woman is anyone that identifies as one / A woman is a woman
”
“Gender and Sex Are Two Different Things / Gender Is a Social Construct”
“Why do you care about such a small percentage, they’re not hurting you”
“But intersex people exist”
They can never actually ever define what a woman is, aside from giving a circular definition or one that can be attributed to men, which is why you always start off with the question “What is a woman.” They will almost always respond with:
“A woman is anyone that identifies as one / A woman is a woman
”The idea that a woman is anyone who identifies as one is deeply flawed and is just circular reasoning. You define womanhood purely by self identification, making the term completely subjective and meaningless. Without a fixed, observable standard for what constitutes a woman, the definition becomes illogical and allows anyone to claim womanhood out of the blue randomly.
A proper definition for “woman” would be rooted in biology. “A woman is an adult human female, defined by reproductive anatomy and chromosomal patterns.” This definition is more consistent and is held up across cultures, societies, and time periods, making it an objective and non circular definition. Social roles and gender expression can differentiate, but they do not change the fundamental biological reality of sex, which is why womanhood has always been tied to biology, not subjective identity.
A proper definition for “woman” would be rooted in biology. “A woman is an adult human female, defined by reproductive anatomy and chromosomal patterns.” This definition is more consistent and is held up across cultures, societies, and time periods, making it an objective and non circular definition. Social roles and gender expression can differentiate, but they do not change the fundamental biological reality of sex, which is why womanhood has always been tied to biology, not subjective identity.
“Gender and Sex Are Two Different Things / Gender Is a Social Construct
” You claim that gender is a social construct, yet you fail to define it in a way that isn’t circular or reliant on self identification. If gender is just a construct, what does it truly mean to be a man or a woman beyond social expectations? If it’s just about feelings or behaviors, then it becomes so vague that it loses all specificity. If gender is a label people can choose at will, then it applies to anything and becomes meaningless.
The idea that gender is a social construct is just used to justify the idea that anyone can claim any gender identity, which is again, meaningless. If gender is entirely based on self identification, then it just creates a paradox. That anyone, regardless of biology, can claim to be a woman, which results in a definition of “woman” that is so fluid and subjective that it no longer has any concrete meaning. If gender is truly separate from biological sex, then it requires a clear definition that doesn’t rely on personal feelings alone.
If gender is entirely subjective, then “womanhood” and “manhood” become meaningless in both social and biological contexts. A definition of gender must be grounded in something more than just personal declaration, because otherwise, the term becomes diluted to the point of being useless. Your argument that gender and sex are completely separate is based in pseudoscience and fails to provide a meaningful, non-circular definition that doesn’t collapse into self identification.
The idea that gender is a social construct is just used to justify the idea that anyone can claim any gender identity, which is again, meaningless. If gender is entirely based on self identification, then it just creates a paradox. That anyone, regardless of biology, can claim to be a woman, which results in a definition of “woman” that is so fluid and subjective that it no longer has any concrete meaning. If gender is truly separate from biological sex, then it requires a clear definition that doesn’t rely on personal feelings alone.
If gender is entirely subjective, then “womanhood” and “manhood” become meaningless in both social and biological contexts. A definition of gender must be grounded in something more than just personal declaration, because otherwise, the term becomes diluted to the point of being useless. Your argument that gender and sex are completely separate is based in pseudoscience and fails to provide a meaningful, non-circular definition that doesn’t collapse into self identification.
“Why do you care about such a small percentage, they’re not hurting you
”When your kind begins to indoctrinate young children and push this pseudoscience onto school systems and into the media, then it is harming the global population. Redefining words to mean whatever society wants makes everything subjective and unstable. If the term “woman” can mean anything we choose, it loses its meaning entirely, and that’s exactly the problem.
You’re not interested in protecting a real concept of gender, you’re pushing an agenda that disregards objectivity. You should stop warping definitions to fit your personal desires, and actually think about objective facts rather than your feelings.
You’re not interested in protecting a real concept of gender, you’re pushing an agenda that disregards objectivity. You should stop warping definitions to fit your personal desires, and actually think about objective facts rather than your feelings.
“But intersex people exist
”Their existence does not discredit anything I have said? Intersex individuals are born with variations in sex characteristics that don’t fit typical definitions of male or female, but that doesn’t mean we should discard the biological categories of sex altogether.
Intersex conditions are exceptions to the general rule, not the rule itself. This is why my definition remains objective that biological sex is based on the general traits that most people share, and exceptions don’t change the fundamental categories.
Intersex conditions are exceptions to the general rule, not the rule itself. This is why my definition remains objective that biological sex is based on the general traits that most people share, and exceptions don’t change the fundamental categories.
Last edited:
