Gender equality
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
kraftiekortie wrote:
Sometimes, the only way you can tell that a female was formerly male is to look at the person's feet.
Unless a woman is really tall, she probably wouldn't wear a men's size 10. And her foot would usually be narrower, too.
This is far from universal, of course. There are women who have big feet.
I would also say it's a virtual guarantee that a person born male would not wear a women's size 7 or below as an adult.
Unless a woman is really tall, she probably wouldn't wear a men's size 10. And her foot would usually be narrower, too.
This is far from universal, of course. There are women who have big feet.
I would also say it's a virtual guarantee that a person born male would not wear a women's size 7 or below as an adult.
You would be surprised.
_________________
We won't go back.
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
paintmepink wrote:
Have you ever met a transgender person? They sound like men. They look like men.
I have, and she did not look or sound like a man maybe like a bit more masculine looking female but still pretty female...if it hadn't been mentioned to me in conversation I probably wouldn't have guessed she was transgender and had transitioned from being male.
Are you sure you aren't talking about cross-dressing?
_________________
We won't go back.
kraftiekortie wrote:
I probably wouldn’t stay in Bangkok if I went to Thailand. If stay in the northern interior.
And certainly no sex worker contacts.
And certainly no sex worker contacts.
Well... in Thailand transgenders can be met basically everywhere - shops, malls, restaurants, etc. Lots and lots of them. Apparently, you just didn't recognize them.
XenoMind wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Seriously, do you work for Infowars?
No.
And I have a question for you, too. Are you really sure that you belong to this website rather than to some "dark triad" forum?
Your question is spurious.
Where's your evidence that Chronos "must be completely delusional" in support of your personal attack? We were promised "facts and logic".
adifferentname wrote:
Your question is spurious.
Not more than your question that implied that I'm a paid shill. So, don't be such a hypocrite. Try having some intellectual honesty.
adifferentname wrote:
Where's your evidence that Chronos "must be completely delusional" in support of your personal attack? We were promised "facts and logic".
Well, maybe not completely. Just partly delusional.
Once again, for the brightest kids in our class:
"Turing was gay and had mental problems, and the system destroyed his life completely, literally. Do you really think that being a woman is worse than that?"
If someone really thinks that being a woman is worse than being disowned by your country and chemically castrated, than that someone definitely must be delusional - i.e. "having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions" (from the dictionary). Simple.
XenoMind wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Your question is spurious.
Not more than your question that implied that I'm a paid shill. So, don't be such a hypocrite. Try having some intellectual honesty.
Your inference, not my implication. Claiming I'm a hypocrite or intellectually dishonest based on a strawman born of ignorance rather suggests that you are the intellectually dishonest hypocrite, does it not? Should I be generous and allow you to take refuge in your ignorance, or should I hold you to the standards which you've applied to others in this thread?
If you would actually like to know what my implication is, feel free to ask me rather than projecting whatever fantasy best suits your rhetoric over my words. Of course, the previous caveat still applies.
Quote:
adifferentname wrote:
Where's your evidence that Chronos "must be completely delusional" in support of your personal attack? We were promised "facts and logic".
Well, maybe not completely. Just partly delusional.
In that case, if you have even an ounce of integrity, you'll retract all of the infantile personal attacks and issue an apology. I'm going to predict that you do not.
Quote:
Once again, for the brightest kids in our class:
Were I discussing the subject of other people's alleged delusions, I'd refrain from self-aggrandising rhetorical conceits.
Quote:
"Turing was gay and had mental problems, and the system destroyed his life completely, literally. Do you really think that being a woman is worse than that?"
If someone really thinks that being a woman is worse than being disowned by your country and chemically castrated, than that someone definitely must be delusional - i.e. "having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions" (from the dictionary). Simple.
If someone really thinks that being a woman is worse than being disowned by your country and chemically castrated, than that someone definitely must be delusional - i.e. "having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions" (from the dictionary). Simple.
Such as the "false or unrealistic belief" that someone who cleaves to a false or unrealistic belief or opinion "must be completely delusional", or indeed the "false or unrealistic belief" that one is an educator in a classroom rather than a participant in an online discussion with a penchant for ad hominem and who presents as something of a troll.
adifferentname wrote:
XenoMind wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Your question is spurious.
Not more than your question that implied that I'm a paid shill. So, don't be such a hypocrite. Try having some intellectual honesty.
Your inference, not my implication. Claiming I'm a hypocrite or intellectually dishonest based on a strawman born of ignorance rather suggests that you are the intellectually dishonest hypocrite, does it not? Should I be generous and allow you to take refuge in your ignorance, or should I hold you to the standards which you've applied to others in this thread?
If you would actually like to know what my implication is, feel free to ask me rather than projecting whatever fantasy best suits your rhetoric over my words. Of course, the previous caveat still applies.
Quote:
adifferentname wrote:
Where's your evidence that Chronos "must be completely delusional" in support of your personal attack? We were promised "facts and logic".
Well, maybe not completely. Just partly delusional.
In that case, if you have even an ounce of integrity, you'll retract all of the infantile personal attacks and issue an apology. I'm going to predict that you do not.
Quote:
Once again, for the brightest kids in our class:
Were I discussing the subject of other people's alleged delusions, I'd refrain from self-aggrandising rhetorical conceits.
Quote:
"Turing was gay and had mental problems, and the system destroyed his life completely, literally. Do you really think that being a woman is worse than that?"
If someone really thinks that being a woman is worse than being disowned by your country and chemically castrated, than that someone definitely must be delusional - i.e. "having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions" (from the dictionary). Simple.
If someone really thinks that being a woman is worse than being disowned by your country and chemically castrated, than that someone definitely must be delusional - i.e. "having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions" (from the dictionary). Simple.
Such as the "false or unrealistic belief" that someone who cleaves to a false or unrealistic belief or opinion "must be completely delusional", or indeed the "false or unrealistic belief" that one is an educator in a classroom rather than a participant in an online discussion with a penchant for ad hominem and who presents as something of a troll.
Hey, you two
FFS, get a room...
The sexual tension between you guys is scaring the animals...
adifferentname wrote:
Pepe wrote:
Hey, you two
FFS, get a room...
The sexual tension between you guys is scaring the animals...
FFS, get a room...
The sexual tension between you guys is scaring the animals...
However low your opinion of the other posters might be, referring to them as "animals" is a tad distasteful.
Be honest. You just wanted some attention too.
I hadn't thought about calling *people* animals...
I will have to use that next time...
Test: The sexual tension between you guys is scaring the *hooman* animals...
Attention is good but is more about creativity and neural connectivity through different ways of thinking...
Akin to neuro-plasticity...
I embrace, rightly or wrongly, the principle: "if you don't use it you lose it..."
If you exercise your brain, you will be in a better cognitive shape when you are older...<shrug>
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
The persistant Gender Pay Gap |
15 Mar 2024, 11:16 am |
Do you hide your gender? |
13 Mar 2024, 1:45 pm |
Do you prefer hiding your gender online? |
07 Feb 2024, 10:01 pm |
Ohio's Governor Vetoes Ban on Gender-Affirming Health Care |
29 Dec 2023, 6:54 pm |