Men, do you feel like a woman?

[Smashingdoozy]

According to the white house all males are actually female!

Does everyone in the white house now share one singular brain cell 🙍🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

Updates

1 y

"During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female."

Also this language implies that anyone who doesn't produce eggs (large reproductive cell) is not female and anyone who doesn't produce sperm (small reproductive cell) is not male.

[RandomUser1000]

The whole thing is weird.
Trans people is a small part of the population and for the most part it seems they just want to be allowed to be who they feel they are and have human rights.

Yet Trump thinks so much about trans people that he makes it a priority to make discriminating laws as one of the first things he does.
Surely USA has bigger problems to deal with rather then Trump has to spend his time thinking about trans people.

It also seems that trans people is a minority that it's socially acceptable to hate on.

It would be interesting if he made discriminatory laws against a group that was less socially acceptable to hate on.

What if he made it illegal to be gay?
That gay people aren't allowed to live together.
That someone being gay is reason enough to fire them from their job or make them lose their housing.

Or what if he made some racist laws?
Maybe try to bring back slavery?

Would be interesting to see what kind of backlash he would receive then.

But I guess since he managed to pick on the one minority that is most socially acceptable to hate on.
He'll probably mostly get away with it.
(I'm sure there are still some people who are really upset, but will they be heard?)

One thing that are common with bigots is that they usually discriminate more then one group.
If you are not a white straight man, chances are that Trump doesn't actually respect you, just that he knows enough to understand if he officially hate on every other group, that he'd lose to much support on that.

One thing to consider though.
If you have a president that make it a priority to discriminate on people that are a part of other groups then himself,
Does that make him a suitable president?

[Smashingdoozy]

It's weird because it's always specifically trans women that people have an issue with.

[RandomUser1000]

Sometimes it's like people forget that transmen exist.

[CalmUntilAbused]

Well... The XY combination is still characteristic for men, so I suppose You are trying to find a fault in a logic that is not faulty at all. Just because the genitalia are not differentiated does not matter, since belonging to either sex is based on the XX (female)/XY (male) combination. Thus, all men are conceived as male. What You could argue is that it is not exactly technically possible to find out if a newly-conceived fetus is male or female due to non-differentiated genitalia, but factually speaking, all men are conceived male and all women are conceived female. Now... I know it has been a strong argument for how to tell a man from a woman among people who are already born, since it is a telltale sign at this point, but if You are trying to judge a fetus by the genitalia and not by the scientifically underlaying XX/XY combination, You might be a little too obsessed about these organs.

[Smashingdoozy]

There's actually quite a few more things that determine sex other than chromosomes. But the point of the post is the document isn't even talking about chromosomes and is using vague language that isn't even accurate to all people.

[Anonymous]

Imagine coming up with this, thinking you're so clever, only to find out you're the one that's stupid. That hate is clearly killing your brain cells.

[Smashingdoozy]

I'm not sure what you mean. I didn't come up with this..

[Still-alive]

sup dude

[valentina4eva]

so many “fake blue” accounts in this thread wowzers!!😅 women on blue accounts pretending to be men😂😂

[ehatsham_hussain]

Is it even possible? I also felt that sometimes

[Smashingdoozy]

😂 in the clurb we all female

[Still-alive]

it super easy to spot them lol

[valentina4eva]

@Shamingdoozy exactlyyy😂😂

[valentina4eva]

@Still-alive hmmm i think i might see one of those fake blues now🧐🤔

[AviatorTom]

One sperm IS smaller than one ovum, so what's the issue? Points a-e follow accepted medical definitions of sex.

Historically, sex and gender have had the same meaning. Then, several years ago, a trend started to redefine gender as whatever a person wanted to call themselves.

It's important to note that all federal and state laws with respect to discriminations, hiring practices, etc. in the US use the word "sex", not gender, and people who try to morph that to include a created meaning of gender are not following the law.

[Smashingdoozy]

You do realize they're trying to completely disregard gender. Everything to be based off sex AND having the ability to discriminate based on sex and sexuality

[Joshydavid25]

"Also this language implies that anyone who doesn't produce eggs (large reproductive cell) is not female and anyone who doesn't produce sperm (small reproductive cell) is not male."

That's actually not true.. Sex is determined at conception, but the hormones start to come together later on.. So at best you can say that we start off as "intersex" rather than female being the default..

[Smashingdoozy]

We start off as phenotypically female

[Joshydavid25]

A forming being with barely any physical characteristics has a phenotype?

[Smashingdoozy]

Yes.

[Joshydavid25]

Well the embryo hasn't fully developed at that stage, so there's really a lack of genitals, and not enough to say it's even female.. At best you could say that without the SRY it would develop into a female, but that's different than saying it is female at conception.

[Smashingdoozy]

Embryos prior to 6 weeks are Phenotypically female. This is scientific fact.

[Joshydavid25]

If we are all born with our chromosomes already at conception.. So therefore we are male or born from there.. Genitals forming, and nipples don't correlate to "starting female".. Or even being phenotypically female..

[Joshydavid25]

Male or female..***

[IamRight]

No, I do not feel like a woman. But I do understand you are making a unfunny joke of a poorly stated comment, and I am able to define a woman unlike leftists who are unable to define trans "women" as women and disagree with "transphobes" who "misgender" trans "women".

[Smashingdoozy]

The fuck is up with all the quotations

[IamRight]

Because a bunch of what I wrote deserved quotation marks. Trans "women" are not real women and leftists unable to define a woman can’t say otherwise. I’m able to define a woman unlike some leftists

[Smashingdoozy]

But you're using them incorrectly

[IamRight]

So ignore them if you feel that.

[RavVid]

I think they have out smarted themselves. Simpler to say XX and XY chromosomes rather big gamete producing people and small gamete producers.

Mostly though this game isn't worth the candle. We know who men and women are.

On the question I suppose I have to make the mandatory response that I feel like a few women right now. It's 5 am, my time..

[genericname85]

that's bullshit. gender is decided at conception. when the sperm cell enters the egg, it contributes either the x or the y chromosome and depending on that, it's gonna be a man or a woman. while things "can" go "wrong" during the development of the fetus, that's rather rare and not the general matter of fact.

[genericname85]

it is true that during fetal development, you can not really tell a male and female fetus apart. but unless we're speaking about genetic annomalies, it's never gonna be a woman, if the sperm fertilizing the egg had the y chromosome.

[Smashingdoozy]

Does the image screenshotted mention chromosomes?

[genericname85]

it mentioning chromosomes or not doesn't matter for the fact that the chromosomes determine the gender.

[KostasKouvalis]

Why are you worried about what the White House thinks about gender? Americans don't worry what your Parliament thinks about gender.
I can still make a case for foreign policy, but this is a domestic issue that has no effect on you and therefore shouldn't concern you.

[Smashingdoozy]

Hi, sorry to burst your bubble but I'm an American citizen so it does concern me 🥰

[KostasKouvalis]

Oh. Your profile says UK. That's YOUR bad😂
You can have Poland. I'm Polish, but I'm American, so you can have Poland. I don't care for it. Just don't ruin the nature and architecture :p

[Smashingdoozy]

I live in the UK 🥱 never heard of ✨ moving countries ✨?

[lil_will_12]

A little off topic but while in the womb all babies start out as female, so at one point all men technically were females lol

just wanted to say that, i think its cool info👀

[SomothErgai]

This is factually incorrect. Babies start out with body morphologies that are undifferentiated. If a male baby is not exposed to testosterone or has an insensitivity to testosterone, their body morphology defaults to the female body plan. This is not the same thing as being female. They still have testicles, they still have Male DNA. They do not have a cervix or ovaries or a uterus. Male and female are genetic certainties from the moment of conception regardless of whatever mishaps may happen along the developmental pathways.

[Shiprex]

they were foetus though and not a self actuating individual capable of independent life processes.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex that has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation we're having now does it?

[Shiprex]

@SomothErgai Yes it does because you can't apply a sex to something that hasn't developed yet.

[bolverk]

When this press release says " "Male" means a person belonging at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell" It quite literally means that a Sperm cell is dwarfed by the Egg produces by the woman see pix below;

[Smegskull]

The genitalia may not exist but the chromosome pairings would.
It said the sex that produces the cell not the person/individual who produces the cell. Infertile people would still classify correctly.
What it doesn't account for is intersex people. Considering that XXY/etc is now a known phenomenon it would not have been difficult to add a definition. Makes this look reactionary and spiteful rather than well thought out.

[Smashingdoozy]

USA law and related documents doesn't have to be easily digestible to the public. They purposfully use vague language to manipulate it how they see fit

[DrPepper12]

It's cumbersome n inartful at a minimum. Gotta dumb it down for MAGA...

[glennos89]

Masculine man are becoming more rare by the day it seems but I definitely feel masculine.

Although I have a more sensitive personality then the average dude out there. .

I definitely don't feel feminine at all 💪🏼💯

[Smashingdoozy]

Having emotions isn't unmasculine. It's human.

[glennos89]

I agree with you 100% but sadly nearly all boys grow up being told that a strong man doesn't cry. Crying is not always a safe thing to do because you are getting labeled from both

[Smashingdoozy]

So change that.

[glennos89]

Guys do this to protect themselves from getting hurt by toxic woman who like to abuse it later on against me to win a argument. Or they simply aren't emotionally supportive so it's in our best interest to be careful or we will risk getting hurt over and over again.

[SomothErgai]

Are you sure you can read? Or are you simply unaware that males produce the small reproductive cell? You are aware that sperm cells are smaller than egg cells... right?

[Smashingdoozy]

You're aware embryos are female at conception

[SomothErgai]

No, they are not. And evidently you need a lesson in biology.

Undifferentiated does not mean genetically ambiguous. I'll admit the definition they are using is not worded as well as it could have been. But it is not incorrect. The sex that produces the small reproductive cell is male. However "male" under the definition of biology is an organism that is genetically coded to produce small gametes. Which is sperm in Humans. It has nothing to do with ones ability to actually produce them. Only that you have a genetic code that says you're supposed to.

Regardless of every single malformation and mutation that has ever been observed in humans, there has not ever, not even once, been a human with ambiguous DNA as to whether or not they are male or female.

The reason we know genetic abnormalities exist that lead to ambiguous morphologies is exactly BECAUSE we can tell from the genetic code that they were "supposed to be" male or female but some mutation or defect occurred along the way to cause the anomalous morphology.

Males are males and are not ever, under any circumstances, female. And vice versa. The degree to which one wishes otherwise or mutilates their genitals has exactly zero effect on that fact

[Shiprex]

they're embryos with no sexual traits. They have the genetic information to BECOME male or female. Trying to define something like a mixture of gases hydrogen and oxygen as a liquid is stupid yet when there's a spark OH2 becomes made that will become the drinkable version H2O we can drink (as a liquid)

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Wrong. Whether or not you are male or female is determined at the moment of conception. which is to say at the moment genetic recombination completes and a unique genome is produced. Male and female are, at the most fundamental level, defined by your genetic code. your genes say male. or they say female. period. there are zero exceptions to this fact. other abnormalities and mutations may come along to screw up the development of your physical morphology. but the only way we know that happened is because we can see, by your genes, what you were supposed to be had the abnormality not come along and screwed up the plan.

Also, please, for the love of fucking christ, refrain from pretending to understand any aspect of science.

The formula "OH2" is nonsensical. Water's chemical formula is H2O, not OH2. "OH" usually refers to the hydroxide ion, which is something else entirely. Your statement seems confused about the states of matter. Hydrogen and oxygen gases can react to form water, but they don't "become a liquid" on their own just because of the chemical reaction. The resulting water can be a gas, liquid, or solid, depending on temperature and pressure. While it's true that a spark can ignite hydrogen and oxygen gases to form water in a combustion reaction, this is an energetically violent process, not something that instantly yields a neat, drinkable liquid. In reality, the heat produced by the reaction often vaporizes the water, creating steam, not liquid water.

The way the statement is written makes it unnecessarily confusing and difficult to follow. Phrases like "becomes made that will become the drinkable version" are clunky and don't make much sense.

[Shiprex]

@SomothErgai
wrong
What you will BECOME is determined after fertilisation.
Tell me what the chromosome combination XXY or XYY or any of the other arrangements of the X and Y chromosome is AFTER the foetus has become developed.
Using the OH2 as an example places the greater MASS element as the primary driver not the minor party in the molecule. It is ONLY convention that places the H first and OH- is an ION the OH2 indicates there are 2 H atoms attached to the 89% total mass O atom. IN normal conditions the reaction would produce a gas that under controlled circumstances such as collecting H from reacting a metal in a strong acid then conducting the widely known test for H in a lab called the POP test you will see the evidence of WATER on the container not steam but water vapour that condenses on nearby surfaces INTO LIQUID that could be drunk.
When you conflate an embryo with a fully formed self sustaining being then you're assigning a state of life that is wrong.
Do better.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Oh, where to begin with your incoherent, misguided mess of a response? The sheer density of ignorance and pseudo-scientific gibberish in your reply is staggering, but I'll do my best to wade through it and point out just how painfully stupid it is.

First, you start with "what you will BECOME is determined after fertilisation," as if that's some profound counterpoint. Let me make this crystal clear: what you "become" is entirely determined at the moment of conception. Your genetic code is established the second the sperm fertilizes the egg. That genetic code, the ultimate blueprint, dictates whether you are male or female. Mutations or abnormalities might affect development down the line, but those are deviations from the plan, not the creation of a new one. You’re arguing, poorly, against basic biology, and the fact that you even wrote this suggests you have no clue how genetics or development works. Seriously, take a high school biology class before you embarrass yourself further.

Then you have the audacity to ask about chromosomal arrangements like XXY or XYY "AFTER the foetus has become developed," as though that somehow challenges my point. Do you even understand what you’re saying? XXY (Klinefelter syndrome) or XYY are chromosomal anomalies, deviations that we identify precisely because we know what the genetic code is supposed to look like. These conditions don’t create ambiguity, they confirm that we have a clear baseline to compare against. What you fail to grasp is that the genetic determination of sex is absolute; even in cases of abnormalities, the underlying genetic sex is identifiable. It’s embarrassing that you think these examples are some kind of clever gotcha when all they do is expose your ignorance of biology.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex And now we get to your trainwreck of a tangent about OH2, where you’ve so spectacularly butchered basic chemistry that it’s hard to believe you’re being serious. "OH2"? Really? You’re out here trying to correct me while you can’t even write the chemical formula for water correctly? Let me educate you since you’re clearly incapable of doing it yourself: it’s H2O, not "OH2." The arrangement of elements in a chemical formula isn’t arbitrary. it reflects the molecule’s structure and bonding. Your ridiculous attempt to argue that "mass" somehow determines naming conventions is both irrelevant and laughably incorrect. Oxygen’s mass doesn’t magically make it the "primary driver" of the molecule. it’s the bonding structure that matters. The fact that you even brought this nonsense up as if it were some profound scientific insight is a testament to how utterly clueless you are.

But wait, you weren’t done humiliating yourself. You rambled about condensation, "pop tests," and steam, none of which have the slightest relevance to the conversation. Your attempt to derail the discussion with a haphazard mix of half-true chemistry trivia is not only irrelevant but also painfully stupid. Water vapor condenses into liquid on surfaces... and? What does that have to do with genetics or sex determination? Absolutely nothing. You’re flailing around, throwing out irrelevant jargon in a desperate attempt to sound intelligent, but all you’ve done is prove how little you actually understand.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Finally, we get to your laughable philosophical assertion about embryos and "self-sustaining beings." You accuse me of conflating an embryo with a fully formed being, as if that somehow invalidates the biological fact that sex is determined at conception. Newsflash: my argument is about genetics, not your misguided musings on the nature of life. Whether an embryo is "self-sustaining" or not has nothing to do with the fact that its genetic code has already dictated its biological sex. Your attempt to shift the conversation to some vague philosophical point only highlights your inability to address the science.

In conclusion, your response is a masterclass in ignorance, confusion, and irrelevance. You’ve tried to use scientific jargon to mask your lack of understanding, but all you’ve done is reveal how painfully unqualified you are to even engage in this discussion. Next time, do yourself a favor and don’t try to argue about topics you clearly don’t understand. All you’re doing is embarrassing yourself.

I would tell you to do better but I hear that's insulting to fucking retards.

[Shiprex]

SO you can't Read the CONVENTION places the Atom which is more electropositive atom FIRST then the more electronegative second. BY CONVENTION
Read that CONVENTION not because it's lighter heavier or ANYTHING
I used a MASS as an Alternative but your dimwitted ignorance of anything BUT RELYING on convention (somehow still grasping the compound as WATER not trying the Dihydrogen Oxide or Hydrogen Hydroxide eye roll of a high schooler meant you understood it but couldn't grasp the idea that using other ways to state the chemical formula do not detract from the action substance.
JFC Are you this dim?

[Shiprex]

It is determined but not what you are. Like are you a man at conception NO you are not anything because an embryo is not a person but a clump of cells not even certain to become an actual living thing
The use of the variations of the XY chromosomes are there to show variation within the genome that only once able to be an actual self sustaining life form does it become possible to develop male and female traits that determine the WOMAN or MAN the person becomes.
What is astounding is there are still so many people who refuse or can't grasp the concept that gender is not sex and that insisting that adults who decide at birth somehow know the individual born and are infallible can't be shown to be wrong.

[Shiprex]

By conflating the notion that sex (male and female) and gender (man and woman) you've already derailed the conversation to something you're obviously stuck in a misguided rut over. Try digging out or maybe take advice and pay attention to humanity and how it evolves.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Your reply is so profoundly stupid, it’s almost awe-inspiring. Not only have you failed to engage with even the most basic principles of science, but you’ve managed to string together an incoherent mess of pseudo-intellectual garbage that only serves to highlight your profound ignorance. Let’s break this down.

First, your desperate rant about "CONVENTION" is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to save face after you embarrassed yourself with your nonsensical "OH2" claim. Yes, chemical notation follows conventions, but the convention is not arbitrary. It reflects the actual molecular structure and bonding of the compound. H2O is written as such because it accurately represents two hydrogen atoms bonded to one oxygen atom. Your laughable attempt to justify "OH2" by rambling about mass or electropositivity is not only irrelevant but flat-out incorrect. The placement of elements in the formula has nothing to do with mass or your half-baked "alternative." It’s clear you don’t understand chemistry at even the most basic level, so stop pretending otherwise.

And then you call me "dimwitted" for relying on convention? Let’s be clear: you’re the one too stupid to grasp how conventions are based on molecular structure, not some arbitrary whim. Trying to hide your ignorance behind insults and buzzwords like "electropositive" doesn’t make you look smart, it makes you look desperate. You have no idea what you’re talking about, and it shows.

[SomothErgai]

Next, your pivot to embryos is laughable and irrelevant. You write, "Like are you a man at conception NO you are not anything because an embryo is not a person." This is not only a straw man argument but also a complete non sequitur. The discussion is about sex determination at conception, not the philosophical status of an embryo as a "person." The fact that you’re trying to conflate these two entirely separate topics only highlights your inability to engage with the actual argument. Whether an embryo is a "person" or a "clump of cells" is utterly irrelevant to the fact that its genetic code, determined at conception, clearly defines its biological sex. Stop shifting the goalposts and pretending you’re making a valid point.

Your attempt to invoke variations like XXY or XYY is equally idiotic. These are chromosomal abnormalities, and they don’t create any ambiguity about the underlying genetic blueprint. We can identify these anomalies precisely because we understand what the baseline, male (XY) or female (XX), is supposed to be. Your claim that these variations somehow undermine the clarity of sex determination is not just wrong; it’s laughably stupid. You’re essentially arguing that because we can identify anomalies, the baseline doesn’t exist. That’s like saying typos in a book mean the original text was never written. It’s a nonsensical argument that only someone completely out of their depth would make.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Then there’s your unhinged rant about "dihydrogen oxide" and "hydrogen hydroxide," which is nothing more than a desperate attempt to distract from the fact that you don’t understand basic chemistry. Throwing around technical-sounding terms doesn’t make your argument any less wrong. You tried to justify "OH2," which is blatantly incorrect, and now you’re scrambling to cover your tracks with irrelevant word salad. Newsflash: using alternative names for water doesn’t change the fact that your initial claim was scientifically illiterate. It’s H2O, always has been, and always will be. Deal with it.

And then, of course, we get to your climactic display of stupidity: "What is astounding is there are still so many people who refuse or can't grasp the concept that gender is not sex." First of all, this is irrelevant to the argument. The conversation is about the biological determination of sex, not the sociological construct of gender. By dragging gender into this, you’ve shown that you don’t even understand the topic at hand. You’re desperately trying to shift the conversation to something tangential because you have no actual rebuttal to my points about genetics. It’s pathetic, really.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Let me spell it out for you one last time: biological sex is determined at the moment of conception by the genetic code. Mutations and abnormalities may affect development, but they do not change the fundamental blueprint. Variations like XXY or XYY are deviations from the norm that we can identify precisely because the norm exists. Your clumsy attempts to argue otherwise only highlight your ignorance. And your irrelevant tangents about gender, chemistry, and embryos do nothing but expose your intellectual incompetence.

In short, your response is a dumpster fire of bad logic, irrelevant tangents, and pseudo-intellectual blustering. You’ve done nothing to refute my argument and everything to embarrass yourself further. My advice? Stop talking. You’re only digging yourself deeper into a hole of stupidity.

[Shiprex]

@SomothErgai
You didn't have an argument. You took your own route to oblivion and tried to bring everyone with you the question that you chose to wander off aimlessly on was on point for a trumpster. ideologue.
Now following the binary nature you adhere to, how about a chemistry challenge that seems unable to distinguish between conventional H2O and OH2 or even HOH, while at the same time finding that the substance in the end known as water is somehow different because it's gaseous liquid or solid, tell me how you are able to tell apart this nugget of chemistry that of acetic acid aka ethanoic acid and written as CH3CO2H, C2H4O2, or HC2H3O2 and why if they're not the same thing ARE they written differently with different names but yet the chemistry is ALWAYS the same? So genius tell us why there's one rule fo DiHydrogen Oxide or Hydrogen Hydroxide or WATER whether it's solid liquid or gas (but to you they're different). Is it because you want to conflate because you can't distinguish between chemical and physical behaviours as the binary mind virus seems to have grabbed hold and made eyerolling inflexibility of mind?

[Shiprex]

@SomothErgai Read the question that leads the thread. It's there for all to see while your yellow brick road mindset wants to push some black and white notion of what isn't black and white

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Oh, the irony. You’re sitting here accusing me of going off on a tangent when you’ve derailed the entire discussion with your nonsensical ramblings about chemical notation, water states, and acetic acid. none of which have anything to do with the actual topic of sex determination at conception. You’re so far off the mark that it’s almost impressive, but let’s be clear: the only person wandering aimlessly here, is you. Let me remind you what the discussion is actually about, since you seem incapable of staying focused.

The topic is simple: biological sex is determined at conception, based on the genetic code established when sperm meets egg. That’s it. That’s the entire argument. But instead of addressing this straightforward fact, you’ve thrown yourself into an irrelevant pit of pseudo-chemistry and philosophical nonsense because you can’t refute the point. Let’s take a closer look at your latest disaster of a response and really highlight how absurd it is.

First, your fixation on H2O versus "OH2" or "HOH" is as idiotic now as it was the first time you brought it up. You’re the one who dragged this irrelevant nonsense into the conversation, and now you’re acting like it’s some profound “challenge.” It’s not. H2O is the correct notation because it reflects the molecular structure and bonding. "OH2" is flat-out wrong, and "HOH" is an outdated alternative that no one uses anymore. The fact that you’re still ranting about this only proves how desperately you’re clinging to irrelevance because you’ve got nothing meaningful to say about the actual topic.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex And then, as if your chemistry blunders weren’t bad enough, you decide to drag acetic acid into the mix. Congratulations, you’ve officially gone from irrelevant to outright incoherent. Yes, acetic acid can be written in different notations like CH3CO2H, C2H4O2, and HC2H3O2, because they all represent the same chemical compound. These variations are just different ways of expressing the same thing. This doesn’t remotely relate to the discussion about sex determination, and the fact that you think this is some kind of clever “gotcha” only demonstrates how little you understand about either topic.

And let’s not forget your earlier foray into embryos and “clumps of cells.” Once again, completely irrelevant. Whether an embryo is a “person” or a “clump of cells” is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one, and it has nothing to do with the fact that sex is determined at conception. You keep dragging in these tangents because you have no actual counterargument, and it’s honestly pathetic.

Now, let’s address the real kicker: you accusing me of going off on a tangent. Are you serious? You’ve spent this entire discussion obsessing over water chemistry, acetic acid, and your bizarre interpretation of binary thinking, none of which have anything to do with sex determination at conception. You’re projecting so hard that I’m surprised you don’t have a shadow on the wall behind you. The only person here who’s gone off the rails is you.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Here’s the reality: I’ve stayed on topic and consistent from the beginning. Sex is determined at conception, based on the genetic blueprint laid down when sperm meets egg. Mutations and anomalies may affect development, but they don’t change the fundamental genetic code. That’s the argument. You haven’t refuted it, you haven’t even addressed it, and all you’ve done is embarrass yourself with irrelevant tangents and pseudo-intellectual drivel.

So here’s my advice: stop talking. You’ve already proven that you’re incapable of engaging with the actual topic, and every additional word you type only makes you look dumber. Stick to arguments you actually understand. though, based on this performance, I’m not sure those exist.

[Shiprex]

The TOPIC was the title and YOU went of on some weird ass rant ignored that CONVENTION is one way to display the chemical formula but STILL there are other ways. I didn't

[Shiprex]

SO if acetic acid can have different ways to show the same thing then why tf is HOH H2O and OH2 any different?

[Shiprex]

The tangent started when you brought up sex at conception which is not the point the questioner sought. Stay on topic and realise the flip flopping you can't handle is nowhere near wrong.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex The title:

"Men, do you feel like a woman?"

is the intro. Imbecile. And the highlight on the accompanying picture:

"(e) "Male" means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell."

and the following text:

"According to the white house all males are actually female!

Does everyone in the white house now share one singular brain cell

Updates

"During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female."

Also this language implies that anyone who doesn't produce eggs (large reproductive cell) is not female and anyone who doesn't produce sperm (small reproductive cell) is not male."

Are what the topic is about. but i wouldn't expect an absolute retard to be able to comprehend that.

The fact that you can’t grasp this basic context only highlights how utterly clueless you are. The original post and accompanying text are explicitly about biological sex determination at conception. a topic you’ve failed to address even once. Instead, you’ve derailed the discussion with irrelevant, incoherent ramblings about water chemistry and acetic acid, neither of which have the slightest connection to the subject at hand.

Let me spell it out for you since your reading comprehension is clearly on par with a rock: the highlighted definition explicitly ties "male" to the production of the small reproductive cell (sperm) and establishes this at conception. The updates reinforce this by discussing early fetal development and the differentiation of gonads. Nowhere in any of this is there room for your bizarre chemical tangents or philosophical detours about embryos being "clumps of cells." You’ve strayed so far off-topic that it’s embarrassing.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex If you actually understood the topic, or had even a shred of intellectual honesty, you’d recognize that I’ve been entirely consistent in addressing it. But instead, you’ve resorted to projecting your inability to stay on point onto me, all while spewing irrelevant garbage to distract from the fact that you have no argument. You’ve done nothing but derail, deflect, and embarrass yourself with your staggering ignorance.

Next time, try engaging with the actual discussion instead of throwing out irrelevant nonsense in a desperate attempt to look smart. Or better yet, save us all the trouble and just stay quiet. You’re clearly out of your depth here.

[Shiprex]

You are using a POLITICAL statement as a scientific document. THAT'S THE point where you've jumped off accepting a policy statement as scientific. It's a POLICY asserting something that is not correct
Here's the definition of what the dictionary defines GET THAT DEFINES not sets it's own definintion
what a male is

"of or denoting the sex that produces gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring."

Where tf does it say ANYTHING about it being AT CONCEPTION apart from the warped ideological fallacy you are trying to promote as science?

Just because DonJon and his Nazi cronies want to redefine things so idiots with bigoted tendencies want to push agendas against common knowledge doesn't make it facts.
Just as you can fathom how conventions are used in science for one area they can also be used other places too BUT not in your binary mind.

Learn to learn instead of pretending to be a smartarse.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Good fucking job cutting off part of the definition you copied from Google. Let’s look at the full version:
"Male: of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring."
Notice how you conveniently left out the critical part about "small, typically motile gametes." This kind of dishonest cherry-picking is exactly why your argument is absolute garbage. Every credible definition aligns with the executive order’s assertion about males producing the smaller gametes. The point made in the executive order is biologically accurate, no matter how much it triggers your delicate feelings.

Let’s pile on with even more definitions, since you clearly need remedial help. From Merriam-Webster:
"Of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to produce relatively small, usually motile gametes which fertilize the eggs of a female."
Or from Cambridge:
"Belonging or relating to the sex that fertilizes eggs, and does not produce babies or eggs itself."
And even fucking Wikipedia:
"Male (symbol: ♂) is the sex of an organism that produces the gamete (sex cell) known as sperm, which fuses with the larger female gamete, or ovum, in the process of fertilisation."
Every source confirms the same goddamn thing: males are defined by their role in producing sperm. You can keep pretending otherwise, but you’re not arguing with me anymore, you’re arguing with reality.

The definitions you quote, and the ones you dishonestly ignored, don’t contradict the executive order. The only thing the order does differently is explicitly clarify that this distinction is determined at conception. And guess what? That’s biologically accurate. The genetic coding for male or female (XY or XX) is established the second sperm meets egg. If you’re too dumb to understand this basic biological fact, that’s not my problem. It’s yours.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Now let’s drag the original post back into this mess, since your retarded ass can't seem to comprehend this. The asker’s mocking claim that “all males are actually female” shows a fundamental misunderstanding of biology. Yes, gonads are undifferentiated early on, but that doesn’t make the embryo "female." The genetic sex is already determined at conception, and gonadal differentiation is just the result of that genetic blueprint playing out. Stop pretending early phenotypic similarities somehow invalidate the reality of sex determination.

Here’s the real kicker: You whine about this being a “policy statement,” like that magically invalidates it. It doesn’t. Just because this is in a policy document doesn’t make it unscientific. The executive order’s definition of male perfectly aligns with established biological principles. It simply codifies what scientists have known forever: sex is determined by genetic coding at conception. If you want to argue otherwise, bring actual science, not this weak-ass bullshit about “ideology.”

And don’t think I missed your pathetic Nazi comparison. Throwing out “Nazi cronies” just makes you look desperate. It’s a cheap, lazy tactic used by people who have no real argument. This discussion isn’t about politics or ideology, it’s about biological facts. Your inability to separate the two is your problem, not mine, and certainly not the science’s.

[SomothErgai]

@Shiprex Finally, let’s address your closing nonsense, since you clearly like to double down on stupidity. You said, “Just because DonJon and his Nazi cronies want to redefine things… doesn’t make it facts.” Listen, dumbass: nothing has been redefined. The definitions of male and female, based on gamete production, have been the same for centuries. The executive order didn’t change anything, it clarified that sex is determined at conception, which is an unassailable biological fact. The only thing “redefined” here is your understanding of reality, and not in a good way.

In summary, your entire argument is a fucking joke. It’s built on cherry-picking, misrepresentations, and completely irrelevant political rants. The definitions you cite only reinforce the executive order’s accuracy, no matter how much you try to twist them. Your tangents about ideology and Nazis are embarrassing distractions, and your dishonesty shows just how unqualified you are to even be in this discussion.

If you have anything worthwhile to add, let’s hear it. but I’m not holding my breath. You’ve been nothing but a trainwreck of bad arguments and embarrassing ignorance, and I’ll happily keep tearing you apart if you insist on continuing this farce. So bring it on, if you dare.

[Anonymous]

really? this is what we're gonna concern ourselves with?

I don't recall Biden haters being this obsessed with everything him and his administration did including down the exact wording on a document.

[Smashingdoozy]

Perhaps because they didn't understand 🤨

[Opinion Owner]

the only reason something like this had to be written was because there exists people who are confused about gender in the first place

for some reason it is believed that these people aren't confused over wording

[Shiprex]

usually the people who confuse gender with sex

[Unit1]

I sure do 🥰 wrong body it seems.

[DryGermanGuy]

So the war in Ukraine, the high grocery prices and healthcare are no longer the important topics? I am shocked. 🙄

[Smashingdoozy]

Talking about one thing doesn't make all the other things irrelevant. Hope this helps. 😊

[DryGermanGuy]

No, but it shows that administration’s actual priorities, contrary to all their bombastic campaign talking points.

[Smashingdoozy]

Of course everything they say they I'll do is a lie.

[pierre7i]

The 'morning wood' I woke with a few minutes ago tells me I'm definitely not a woman !

But -- I often feel more empathy with women than with men !

[FunkyMonkee]

Sure! But, I can never find one!!
As for your "logic" or lack thereof, where do you see anything that says men are women?

[Smashingdoozy]

"at conception" all embryos are female at conception

[FunkyMonkee]

I've been telling people that for at least a decade. Up until the third month, when the male hormones on a potential boy baby kick in.

[FunkyMonkee]

"Also this language implies that anyone who doesn't produce eggs (large reproductive cell) is not female and anyone who doesn't produce sperm (small reproductive cell) is not male."
Yeah? So, what's your point?

[Smashingdoozy]

So people born with non functioning ovaries are male?
And people born with non functioning testicles are female?

[FunkyMonkee]

Does that mean you were a little boy until you turned 13?

[Smashingdoozy]

Mmm. No. Did you skip basic education of reproductive organs?

[FunkyMonkee]

No but, it sounds like you did.

[Smashingdoozy]

Biological females are typically born with their eggs. They don't just ✨ magically✨ appear.

[FunkyMonkee]

But the ovaries don't function until she's at least 12.

[Smashingdoozy]

That's irrelevant

[FunkyMonkee]

Oh! I see.

[HusamRocks]

It says the male produces the small reproductive cells and they were referring to the sperm 😅

[Smashingdoozy]

It's like they're afraid to use proper language or perhaps they don't know the correct terminology

[HusamRocks]

They have to keep it shady in case they change their minds 😂

[lightbulb27]

a sperm is smaller than the ovo thingie.

so seems correct...

[Smashingdoozy]

Good thing I didn't say it was incorrect

[Levin]

Being a woman is definitely pretty sweet. As the song goes, man, I feel like a woman.

[Smashingdoozy]

I'm glad someone got the reference

[Still-alive]

yeah i saw that lol. makes those 'what is a woman' trolls look very dumb

[JonCobretti]

Males produce small, mobile sperm; females produce large, nutrient-rich eggs.

[Smashingdoozy]

Wow. I had no idea 🤪

[slatyb]

Yes, and war is peace and insurrection is peaceful protest and science isn't real.

[Anonymous]

I think you need to talk to a Doctor, Egg cells are a lot bigger than sperm.

[Oncewildtwiceburned]

She’s a single cellular orgasm

[valentina4eva]

every embryo starts off as female for the first few weeks, so at conception we were all female…

[Smashingdoozy]

As valentina4eva said. At conception everyone is female

[Opinion Owner]

@valentina4eva @smashingdoozy If your going to define sex based upon the existences of undeveloped gonads and just assume its female if it is not male. Your not being quite fair particularly when there is a more definitive definition in the form of your yet to be fully expressed DNA which is decided at conception.

[Smashingdoozy]

@monorprise then the white house should make their legislation say as such 🙃

[valentina4eva]

@monorprise it’s literally not us “not being fair” it’s the trump admin doesn’t understand biology!!😂😅😂

[Anonymous]

No I don't even if my rings were and some of my past fragrances were androgynous

The 'at conception' part is wrong but used to push forwards both certain transphobic elements and more critically anti-abortion measures

[Dargil]

Yes. As I feel like a cold beer in hot weather.

[Tomisworthless]

I dont feel like a man but not super gay either but still inferior to the straight female and most lesbians

[Snakeyes7]

They have always had XY chromosomes. That's what makes them male.

[Smashingdoozy]

But that's not what the document says does it 😊

[Snakeyes7]

Unless the document is referring to the sperm and the egg of which the former is smaller than the latter.

It is a really weird way to put it. He really should have just said XX/XY chromosomes.

[Anonymous]

Why is there so much petty shit coming from liberals after Trump won the election?

[Smashingdoozy]

Making fun of ridiculous documents that risk the livelihoods of human beings isn't petty. It's a coping mechanism,😊

[Opinion Owner]

Risk the livelihoods of human beings? Over-dramatic much?

I get the coping mechanism thing though. We are seeing a whole lot of that lately. But hey, whatever works for you.

[Smashingdoozy]

It's not over dramatic. telling thousands of people they are no longer allowed to be be who they truly are, forcing them to use bathrooms their outward appearance doesn't match, forcing people to bully them is risking their livelihoods. People will die because of this.

[Opinion Owner]

So, outward appearance should be the standard? Are you sure about that?

Look, Americans are sick and tired of being told they must acknowledge this insanity as "reality".



Americans have spoken, and the majority want reality, not insanity. Will some people struggle with the adjustment back to sanity/reality? Sure, but is that a valid reason to not course correct? Nope.

[Miristheiss]

No, I do not feel like a woman.

[Smashingdoozy]

That's too bad. Perhaps there is something we can do to make you feel more womanly? What would you prefer, your reproductive rights taken away or constant sexual harassment?

[Miristheiss]

"Rights" huh?

I didn't know having sex was a right. It is a biological act and function. It is a right now huh? Ok, is there a law you can't go screw and get knocked up. Nah, there is already enough of that.
Oh, you just want to be as big of a slut as you want without the responsibility of being mommy.
You just get to be a degenerate, fucking around, being careless and then you get to murder your own innocent children.
Well, unfortunately they still let you do that. You get to go around murdering your own children. It is a still legal you moron.
Your precious abortion is still legal so you can still be a slut and get knocked up and then snuff all the babies you want.

[Smashingdoozy]

Oh I struck a nerve

[beefcakebradybatson]

TUCK FRUMP !!!

[seeyounexttuesday]

Does a male fetus have XY or XX chromosomes?

[Smashingdoozy]

Does the document mention chromosomes?

[seeyounexttuesday]

So you don’t know the answer? Men have XY chromosomes. As they do when they are a fetus. Hope this clears it up for you.

They produce sperm which is the small reproductive cell. Women produce eggs, which are the large reproductive cell.

[Smashingdoozy]

I know the answer. I'm talking about a document on a government website, which has no mentions of chromosomes. A document that's intentionally vague so they can do with it what they want. You're AFAB but was born without eggs? Now you're a man. AMAB but your testicles don't function? Congratulations you're a woman.

[seeyounexttuesday]

lol, the exception doesn't disprove the rule.

[Smashingdoozy]

There is no rule. It's a government document that's not based on science.

[seeyounexttuesday]

Males produce the small reproductive cell, females produce the large reproductive cell. Clear biology to me. But again, it doesn't seem like science is your strong point.

[Smashingdoozy]

Doesn't seem like reading comprehension is your strong suit considering I never denied that claim

[seeyounexttuesday]

So then that document clearly informs you what a man and woman are. Thanks for playing.

[Charliefretz329]

Nope, still have my penis

[Smashingdoozy]

But you didn't at conception 🤯

[Charliefretz329]

True… hmm… maybe I’ll cut it off then ! 🤷‍♂️

[KrakenAttackin]

I think you are missing the point.

[Smashingdoozy]

No I'm just making fun of poor language choices on an official document 😊

[ehatsham_hussain]

Funny statment lol

[straightmax12]

Hell no.