Page 13 of 19
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:20 am
by Skepdick
henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:16 pm
As a society we have a choice: persecute or accomodate.
Most folks are willin' to accommodate a man in a dress.
What they won't accommodate is bein' bulldogged into callin' that man a woman.
Most folks are willin' to leave that man in a dress be.
The persecutin' starts when that man demands to recognized as a woman.
I feel terribly persecuted when all these persons demand to be recognized as "man" or "woman".
And, you know, it wouldn't even be all that bad if it stopped there, but it doesn't!
This man is buldoggingme into recognized him "Henry", that woman is buldoggingme into recognizing her as "Henrietta".
That man is buldoggingme into recognizing him as "Julia", that woman is buldoggingme into recognizing her as "Julius".
Everybody wants to be fucking recognized as themselves.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:06 pm
by henry quirk
Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:20 am
henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:16 pm
As a society we have a choice: persecute or accomodate.
Most folks are willin' to accommodate a man in a dress.
What they won't accommodate is bein' bulldogged into callin' that man a woman.
Most folks are willin' to leave that man in a dress be.
The persecutin' starts when that man demands to recognized as a woman.
I feel terribly persecuted when all these persons demand to be recognized as "man" or "woman".
And, you know, it wouldn't even be all that bad if it stopped there, but it doesn't!
This man is buldoggingme into recognized him "Henry", that woman is buldoggingme into recognizing her as "Henrietta".
That man is buldoggingme into recognizing him as "Julia", that woman is buldoggingme into recognizing her as "Julius".
Everybody wants to be fucking recognized as themselves.
Guy, I don't give a shit what you call me, or what you think I am.
Have at it.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:48 pm
by Skepdick
henry quirk wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 3:06 pm
Guy, I don't give a shit what you call me, or what you think I am.
I don't think you are anything. I don't use language like that.
As for calling you stuff - I guess I can call you anything I want to call you. Since you don't seem to have preferences.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:56 pm
by Immanuel Can
Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:20 am
Everybody wants to be...recognized as themselves.
Fine. But is the real "themselves" a man, a woman, or the confusion in his/her head?
So yeah, recognize people for what they
are: XX or XY, end of story.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 8:19 pm
by henry quirk
you don't seem to have preferences.
Sure I do. But if someone calls me -- old, bald, bearded, with a beer gut, and obviously a man -- miss then I'm dealin' with a jackass (like right now) or a crazy person. Either way: I got no time or appetite for it.
I walk away...like I'm doin' now.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 9:33 pm
by Skepdick
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:56 pm
Fine. But is the real "themselves" a man, a woman, or the confusion in his/her head?
The real themselves is ... (surprise!) themselves!
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 6:56 pm
So yeah, recognize people for what they
are: XX or XY, end of story.
Of all the organs in their body, of all the cells in their organs, of all the organelles in their cells. You picked the nucleus.
And of all the stuff in the nucleus you picked the DNA. And of ALL 26 chromosomes you decided to choose
THESE TWO to determine "
what they are"?
How fucking arbitrary is that?!?!?!
chromosomes.jpg
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:17 pm
by Immanuel Can
Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 9:33 pm
Of all the organs in their body, of all the cells in their organs, of all the organelles in their cells. You picked the nucleus.
And of all the stuff in the nucleus you picked the DNA. And of ALL 26 chromosomes you decided to choose
THESE TWO to determine "
what they are"?
How fucking arbitrary is that?!?!?!
chromosomes.jpg
Apparently, not at all.
According to genetics, they're the sex-determinative chromosomes. And since they are either one or the other, there's not a thing arbitrary about that at all.
How unscientific and unrealistic is your objection?
Hint: that's a rhetorical question. No answer is required. 
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:29 pm
by Skepdick
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:17 pm
According to genetics, they're the sex-determinative chromosomes. And since they are either one or the other, there's not a thing arbitrary about that at all.
You got the orde of events backwards. Who determined that those particular chromosomes determine "sex"?
What IS "sex", outside the contex of genetics again? You seem to have tangled yourself up in your own bullshit.
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:17 pm
How unscientific and unrealistic is your objection?
As scientific as it gets. Which science gets to determine which physiological property of the human anatomy determines what?
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:55 pm
by Immanuel Can
Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 10:29 pm
What IS "sex",...
Ask your parents. You're too old for me to give you 'the talk.'
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:05 am
by Immanuel Can
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:01 am
henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:16 pm
As a society we have a choice: persecute or accomodate.
Most folks are willin' to accommodate a man in a dress.
What they won't accommodate is bein' bulldogged into callin' that man a woman.
Most folks are willin' to leave that man in a dress be.
The persecutin' starts when that man demands to recognized as a woman.
Well said. No one cares what delusions these people have or how they dress. The problems start when they encroach on the lives of others and demand that everyone else adhere to their claims
OR ELSE.
And then, there's this...
Don't even look at it, unless you have a strong stomach. But it certainly makes the point.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... mates.html
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:27 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:05 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 05, 2021 7:01 am
henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Aug 04, 2021 5:16 pm
As a society we have a choice: persecute or accomodate.
Most folks are willin' to accommodate a man in a dress.
What they won't accommodate is bein' bulldogged into callin' that man a woman.
Most folks are willin' to leave that man in a dress be.
The persecutin' starts when that man demands to recognized as a woman.
Well said. No one cares what delusions these people have or how they dress. The problems start when they encroach on the lives of others and demand that everyone else adhere to their claims
OR ELSE.
And then, there's this...
Don't even look at it, unless you have a strong stomach. But it certainly makes the point.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... mates.html
And this thing will be shown on statistics as a 'female' who 'raped 'her' mother'.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:03 am
by Immanuel Can
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:27 am
And this thing will be shown on statistics as a 'female' who 'raped 'her' mother'.
It's unspeakable.
But it shows very clearly that those who doubt our women need protection from these kinds of people are living in a fool's paradise.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:12 am
by vegetariantaxidermy
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:03 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:27 am
And this thing will be shown on statistics as a 'female' who 'raped 'her' mother'.
It's unspeakable.
But it shows very clearly that those who doubt
our women need protection from these kinds of people are living in a fool's paradise.
Oops. You'll have the male 'feminists' like mick and terrapin jumping on you for that one
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:25 am
by Immanuel Can
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:12 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:03 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:27 am
And this thing will be shown on statistics as a 'female' who 'raped 'her' mother'.
It's unspeakable.
But it shows very clearly that those who doubt
our women need protection from these kinds of people are living in a fool's paradise.
Oops. You'll have the male 'feminists' like mick and terrapin jumping on you for that one
Let 'em. The principle's too important to concede.
Re: JK Rowling vs. History
Posted: Fri Aug 06, 2021 8:21 am
by uwot
Mr Can, you old drama queen you. The point henry quirk and vegetariantaxidermy were making is essentially that reasonable people don't get too worked up by freaks, but won't be told what to think. But to Mr Can I have the Apocalypse now? the behaviour of one nutjob
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:03 am...shows very clearly that those who doubt our women need protection from these kinds of people are living in a fool's paradise.
What sort of preemptive legislation would you introduce to protect women from their own children?