On 7/26/24 13:30, Joel wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 26/07/2024 20:54, Joel wrote:
>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, Joel wrote:
>>>>> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> it will be fun to watch how limp-wristed individuals like
>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom or faggots in danger of spontaneously combusting like
>>>>>> Joel Crump will react to your posts.
>>>>>
>>>>> My girlfriend has a penis, but she's not a dude.
>>>>>
>>>> Ahh... the book says, show me your chromosomes and I'll show you your
>>>> gender! ;)
>>>
>>> She's biologically male, sure, but her gender identity is clearly
>>> female.
>>
>> Has he seen a a psychiatrist? There seems to be some deep unresolved
>> conflict there.
>
>
> She's perfectly sane, you're just a typical Usenet person, stuck in
> the past.
>
Some people will never get it typical of Usenet or not
and others just are trolling with the positions advocated by unstable
conspiracy theorists and cultists of Felonious45. Often they have
limited social experience and believe Patriarchal Propaganda. PP
of course is all about denying reality and history and simplifying
the reality to their taste and denying their own personality
structures. They think it makes them safer but it makes them
guilty in the long run. Denying humanity to women, non-whites,
and the whole LGBTQ+ Spectrum is not what was intended by any
of the so-called peacemakers.

Calling the LBGTQ+ people groomers is simply misdirection
helping the priests, protestant clergy, fathers, brothers, mothers
and sistems who are the primary sexual, emotional and sexual abusers
or children. And they are proud to point at theoretical abusers
in order to avoid investigation of real abusers and groomers.
They wish as well to suppress the sexual education of children
which again empowers the child to point out their abusers. This
is part of attacking books by us deviants detailing abusive
relationships as well as happier lives than they can deliver from
the strait-jacketed positions to which they cling.

Age: I started on Usenet with the Amiga when i was in my 50s through
BBSes with net connections. It still that long ago had all the
unpleasantness that we see today

bliss - the old tired nurse, who has seen enough, not all of the horror
people inflict on each other, but enough. another 3 weeks and I will
be 87 yoa.

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
> >There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
> >chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a
> >Y chromosone.
>
> Cite, please.

Lazy sod - google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more complex
as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X chromosome,
google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

The Natural Philosopher wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 27/07/2024 13:10, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> That's because your lazy ass can't be bothered with actually checking out
>> current research.
>>
> Oh dear. Another Believer ArtStudent™
>
> You tell me to check this research
> Where is it?

Google it yourself, fatass. But you won't, of course.

I'm not going to collect and post a bunch of studies that you're going to
ignore anyway.

--
Q: What is the sound of one cat napping?
A: Mu.

Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>> >There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>> >chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a
>> >Y chromosone.
>>
>> Cite, please.
>
> Lazy sod - google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
> la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more complex
> as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X chromosome,
> google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.

You can lead a horse to water but....

Heh, I first thought your nym was Middle Eastern.

--
It is so very hard to be an
on-your-own-take-care-of-yourself-because-there-is-no-one-else-to-do-it-for-you
grown-up.

Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> bliss - the old tired nurse, who has seen enough, not all of the horror
> people inflict on each other, but enough. another 3 weeks and I will
> be 87 yoa.

        _
       / )
___   / /__
   |-'    _)
   |      _)
   |      _)
___|-.____)

--
There are only two genders in your universe?
You're a bit?

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 12:12:19 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

> Heh, I first thought your nym was Middle Eastern.

<grin> Just an anagram that's less ego stretching than "That
Massive Hero".

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 27/07/2024 10:20, D wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 27/07/2024 03:43, Joel wrote:
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 26/07/2024 21:45, Joel wrote:
>>>>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Jul 2024, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024, Joel wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> My girlfriend has a penis, but she's not a dude.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ahh... the book says, show me your chromosomes and I'll show you
>>>>>>>>> your
>>>>>>>>> gender! ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She's biologically male, sure, but her gender identity is clearly
>>>>>>>> female.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is and always will be male. Idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's what "idiot" phobes say, ignorantly, yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>> You are the phobe dear.
>>>>>
>>>>> Afraid of your own sexuality, suppressing it and denying it
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm actually remarkably *open* about my sex life, I've done gay porn
>>>> even, but I talk about it publicly, I make no secret of my interest in
>>>> trans women, and my sexual history.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's how you suppress your feelings, By being overtly  boring and open
>>> about it. Trying to convince yourself.
>>> I don't really give a fuck.
>>>
>>> I am not surprised you have done porn. A simple exhibitionist arent you?
>>
>> I think you're close to the truth here. Not only is it revolting and a sick
>> lifestyle, I think as you say, that it is a marker of significant mental
>> illness. It expresses that he deep down feels like he has no worth, and the
>> only way he gets attention and "love" is to be revolting and being used.
>>
>> Sadly, it will probably end in alcohol and drugs and an early death if he
>> doesn't change his life.
>
> Not necessarily. Many narcissists last a long time by the simple expedient of
> never taking on blame themselves but projecting it onto others.
>
> AS the ultimate egotists, they don't do drugs that reduce or threaten ego, So
> no hallucinogens or other psychedelics. They tend to prefer ego enhancers
> like amphetamines or cocaine.
>
> Control is everything. Even alcohol may be to much
>
> They think of themselves as tough, and smart.
>

Very interesting. That must be a very uncommon type though? Most of the
SJW:s I've encountered have been full of psychological problems and
illnesses, real and imagined. Also remember, that the more diagnoses you
can pile on, the higher your value in woke-land, and is why the movement
will probably destroy itself, if it doesn't manage to destroy the world
first.

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:10:09 +0200
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>> Yep, very easy. Do you have a Y, male, do you not have a Y, female.
>> Problem solved!
>
> A perfect example of an answer that is simple, clear and wrong!
>
> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a Y
> chromosone. The triggering gene for being male is usually found on the Y
> chromosone but it can exist and function on an X chromosone and it can also
> fail to function on a Y chromosone.
>
> The complications arise from the fact that it is a triggering gene
> and the full set of activations and cascades that derive from it have yet
> to be mapped but certainly don't always go the same way resulting in women
> with masculine characteristics and vice-versa. When this affects brain
> development it can result in gender dysphoria and transgender people.
>
>

Nonsense, I disgaree with your definition. Y: male, X: female. Done.
Gender dysphoria has nothing to do with reality but is a mental illness
that should be treated by a good psychologist.

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 27/07/2024 11:00, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:10:09 +0200
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, very easy. Do you have a Y, male, do you not have a Y, female.
>>> Problem solved!
>>
>> A perfect example of an answer that is simple, clear and wrong!
>>
>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a Y
>> chromosone. The triggering gene for being male is usually found on the Y
>> chromosone but it can exist and function on an X chromosone and it can also
>> fail to function on a Y chromosone.
>>
>> The complications arise from the fact that it is a triggering gene
>> and the full set of activations and cascades that derive from it have yet
>> to be mapped but certainly don't always go the same way resulting in women
>> with masculine characteristics and vice-versa. When this affects brain
>> development it can result in gender dysphoria and transgender people.
>>
>
> And how many of today's 'transgender people' have modified genetics?
> Especially the ones responsible for rape....and infesting women's sports...
>
> One swallow doth not a Summer make.
>
> The Art Student always says that because something is possible, it is
> therefore desirable, inevitable, or the norm, or needs some special attention
>
> Normal people simply say that they should make the rules for normal people.
> And not pretend that abnormal people are in any way normal
>
> Transgender is just another Marxist Fad designed to disrupt normal society.
> It has nothing whatever to do with genetics or DNA.
>

That's another excellent argument. First of all the Y, male, X, female is
enough to categorize people. There are no people without Y and without X
cromosomes. Arguing about O chromosomes and XXY etc, still leaves the Y
and just shows an ideological bias.

Second point is, as you say, that the ones with XXY or XO are very rare,
and I'd wager that the vast majority of the ideological trans-people are
plain old XX or XY.

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2024-07-27 1:33 a.m., 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> On 7/26/24 8:55 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-26 3:32 a.m., 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>> On 7/24/24 9:30 PM, Heil Lunduke! Mein Forther! wrote:
>>>>> Maintainer banned for naming our favorite Jewish Software Fuhrer!
>>>>>
>>>>> Lunduke is Jewish and somehow a bunch of queer white men keep calling
>>>>> him, 'anti-semite'. Trans supremacist nutjobs beg for a final solution.
>>>>
>>>>    Gnome SUCKS anyway.
>>>
>>> KDE sucks more though.
>>
>>   KDE is much more "usable" ... however at this
>>   point it's become insanely fat, drags down the
>>   CPU unacceptably and far MORE places where it
>>   can go wrong. Seems to want to be Winders.
>>
>>   LXDE/XFCE *much* better.
>
> Yesterday, I was looking to try out Debian since it's one of the few
> distributions that hasn't gone down the social justice rabbit hole.
> Admittedly, I had no idea which desktop environment to select. I tried LXQt
> because I've been aware of the project for years but it looks like it's not
> yet ready for prime time. I then tried KDE and was reminded of why I didn't
> like it in the first place. I want to avoid GNOME because it is dyong,
> consumed by the progressive virus. I'd have chosen Cinnamon but if I wanted
> to use that, I'd just use Linux Mint. XFCE is probably the way to go.
>

Been using XFCE for many years and am very happy with it. When it comes to
distributions without a woke or socialist code of conduct I've found the
following:

OpenBSD by far the best in terms of refusing to have one and focusing on
shut up and code.

Then you have debian and free and netbsd, I think they are kind of
alright.

Slackware and Artix I think are also distributions without too much CoC
bullsh*t.

You probably also have seen that Lunduke wants to start his own
distribution with CoC b.s. so that could be promising as well! =)

On 2024-07-27 11:42 a.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a
>>> Y chromosone.
>>
>> Cite, please.
>
> Lazy sod

No, you made an idiotic statement so it is your responsibility to stand
behind it.

- google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
> la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more complex
> as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X chromosome,
> google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.

No, provide specific cites confirming what you said above.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On 2024-07-27 12:05 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 27/07/2024 13:10, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>
>>> That's because your lazy ass can't be bothered with actually checking out
>>> current research.
>>>
>> Oh dear. Another Believer ArtStudent™
>>
>> You tell me to check this research
>> Where is it?
>
> Google it yourself, fatass. But you won't, of course.

This will be my response to anyone who asks me for a cite from now on.

> I'm not going to collect and post a bunch of studies that you're going to
> ignore anyway.

They're ignored when they come from ridiculous sources like MSNBC or
universities like Berkeley. Otherwise, they'll probably be looked at.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On 2024-07-27 2:10 p.m., D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:10:09 +0200
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, very easy. Do you have a Y, male, do you not have a Y, female.
>>> Problem solved!
>>
>>     A perfect example of an answer that is simple, clear and wrong!
>>
>>     There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with
>> a Y
>> chromosone. The triggering gene for being male is usually found on the Y
>> chromosone but it can exist and function on an X chromosone and it can
>> also
>> fail to function on a Y chromosone.
>>
>>     The complications arise from the fact that it is a triggering gene
>> and the full set of activations and cascades that derive from it have yet
>> to be mapped but certainly don't always go the same way resulting in
>> women
>> with masculine characteristics and vice-versa. When this affects brain
>> development it can result in gender dysphoria and transgender people.
>>
>>
>
> Nonsense, I disgaree with your definition. Y: male, X: female. Done.
> Gender dysphoria has nothing to do with reality but is a mental illness
> that should be treated by a good psychologist.

Mutilation and hormones should not be the first solution proposed as it
is today.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:39:13 +0100
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 27/07/2024 11:00, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:10:09 +0200
>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep, very easy. Do you have a Y, male, do you not have a Y, female.
>>>> Problem solved!
>>>
>>> A perfect example of an answer that is simple, clear and wrong!
>>>
>>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no
>>> Y chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...)
>>> with a Y chromosone. The triggering gene for being male is usually
>>> found on the Y chromosone but it can exist and function on an X
>>> chromosone and it can also fail to function on a Y chromosone.
>>>
>>> The complications arise from the fact that it is a triggering
>>> gene and the full set of activations and cascades that derive from it
>>> have yet to be mapped but certainly don't always go the same way
>>> resulting in women with masculine characteristics and vice-versa. When
>>> this affects brain development it can result in gender dysphoria and
>>> transgender people.
>>>
>>
>> And how many of today's 'transgender people' have modified genetics?
>
> It's not about "modified" genetics - the fact of the matter is that
> *nobody* is purely male or female. We *all* have a mix of "gender related"
> characteristics.
>
> So the best answer to your question is perhaps *ALL OF THEM* as
> well as everyone else.
>
>

Nice shifting of the goal posts. X and Y and 100s of thousands of years of
male and female. That's all there is to it. Anything else, is just
woke:ism trying to impose nihilism and relativism to destroy the west.

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 14:19:23 -0400
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

> On 2024-07-27 11:42 a.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
> > chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> >>
> >>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
> >>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...)
> >>> with a Y chromosone.
> >>
> >> Cite, please.
> >
> > Lazy sod
>
> No, you made an idiotic statement so it is your responsibility to stand
> behind it.

Wrong I made a statement consistent with modern genetics. The
idiotic statement being made *WITHOUT* any backup at all is that gender is
simple male or female end of story - so shoe foot other.

> - google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
> > la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more
> > complex as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X
> > chromosome, google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.
>
> No, provide specific cites confirming what you said above.

Lazy sod! There's plenty there to find all the material you could
want - men without a Y chromosome are called "XX males" the synbdrome is
also known as "de la Chapelle" syndrome - it's common enough to have a
medical name. Swyer syndrome describes the problems XY females tend to have
due to lack of a second X chromosome - again common enough to have a
medical name.

I am *NOT* the one talking nonesense.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 20:12:30 +0200
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> That's another excellent argument. First of all the Y, male, X, female is
> enough to categorize people. There are no people without Y and without X
> cromosomes.

Actually there are no people without X chromosomes (which are
rather larger than Y chromosomes) but there are male people without Y
chromosomes and female people with Y chrmosomes. So your categorisation
does not work. Google "de la Chapelle syndrome" and "Swyer syndrome" to
find medical material on the subject.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On 2024-07-27 2:16 p.m., D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> On 2024-07-27 1:33 a.m., 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>> On 7/26/24 8:55 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-26 3:32 a.m., 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>> On 7/24/24 9:30 PM, Heil Lunduke! Mein Forther! wrote:
>>>>>> Maintainer banned for naming our favorite Jewish Software Fuhrer!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lunduke is Jewish and somehow a bunch of queer white men keep calling
>>>>>> him, 'anti-semite'. Trans supremacist nutjobs beg for a final
>>>>>> solution.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Gnome SUCKS anyway.
>>>>
>>>> KDE sucks more though.
>>>
>>>    KDE is much more "usable" ... however at this
>>>    point it's become insanely fat, drags down the
>>>    CPU unacceptably and far MORE places where it
>>>    can go wrong. Seems to want to be Winders.
>>>
>>>    LXDE/XFCE *much* better.
>>
>> Yesterday, I was looking to try out Debian since it's one of the few
>> distributions that hasn't gone down the social justice rabbit hole.
>> Admittedly, I had no idea which desktop environment to select. I tried
>> LXQt because I've been aware of the project for years but it looks
>> like it's not yet ready for prime time. I then tried KDE and was
>> reminded of why I didn't like it in the first place. I want to avoid
>> GNOME because it is dyong, consumed by the progressive virus. I'd have
>> chosen Cinnamon but if I wanted to use that, I'd just use Linux Mint.
>> XFCE is probably the way to go.
>>
>
> Been using XFCE for many years and am very happy with it. When it comes
> to distributions without a woke or socialist code of conduct I've found
> the following:
>
> OpenBSD by far the best in terms of refusing to have one and focusing on
> shut up and code.
>
> Then you have debian and free and netbsd, I think they are kind of alright.
>
> Slackware and Artix I think are also distributions without too much CoC
> bullsh*t.
>
> You probably also have seen that Lunduke wants to start his own
> distribution with CoC b.s. so that could be promising as well! =)

I might just end up waiting for Lunduke's distribution. I imagine that
once it's released, the press around it will be purposefully negative.
When that happens, I'll be glad to install it.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On 2024-07-27 2:44 p.m., D wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:39:13 +0100
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 27/07/2024 11:00, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 11:10:09 +0200
>>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yep, very easy. Do you have a Y, male, do you not have a Y, female.
>>>>> Problem solved!
>>>>
>>>>     A perfect example of an answer that is simple, clear and wrong!
>>>>
>>>>     There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no
>>>> Y chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...)
>>>> with a Y chromosone. The triggering gene for being male is usually
>>>> found on the Y chromosone but it can exist and function on an X
>>>> chromosone and it can also fail to function on a Y chromosone.
>>>>
>>>>     The complications arise from the fact that it is a triggering
>>>> gene and the full set of activations and cascades that derive from it
>>>> have yet to be mapped but certainly don't always go the same way
>>>> resulting in women with masculine characteristics and vice-versa. When
>>>> this affects brain development it can result in gender dysphoria and
>>>> transgender people.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And how many of today's 'transgender people' have modified genetics?
>>
>>     It's not about "modified" genetics - the fact of the matter is that
>> *nobody* is purely male or female. We *all* have a mix of "gender
>> related"
>> characteristics.
>>
>>     So the best answer to your question is perhaps *ALL OF THEM* as
>> well as everyone else.
>>
>>
>
> Nice shifting of the goal posts. X and Y and 100s of thousands of years
> of male and female. That's all there is to it. Anything else, is just
> woke:ism trying to impose nihilism and relativism to destroy the west.

+1

Let's redefine the simplest things, men and women, to make it impossible
for people to get together, get married and have children. The world is
overpopulated, after all, so pushing this idiotic gender theory will
make sure that birth rates fall even farther and humanity kills itself.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On 2024-07-27 2:56 p.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 14:19:23 -0400
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-07-27 11:42 a.m., Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
>>> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>>>>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...)
>>>>> with a Y chromosone.
>>>>
>>>> Cite, please.
>>>
>>> Lazy sod
>>
>> No, you made an idiotic statement so it is your responsibility to stand
>> behind it.
>
> Wrong I made a statement consistent with modern genetics. The
> idiotic statement being made *WITHOUT* any backup at all is that gender is
> simple male or female end of story - so shoe foot other.

Modern genetics = horseshit. My cite: common sense.

>> - google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
>>> la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more
>>> complex as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X
>>> chromosome, google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.
>>
>> No, provide specific cites confirming what you said above.
>
> Lazy sod! There's plenty there to find all the material you could
> want - men without a Y chromosome are called "XX males" the synbdrome is
> also known as "de la Chapelle" syndrome - it's common enough to have a
> medical name. Swyer syndrome describes the problems XY females tend to have
> due to lack of a second X chromosome - again common enough to have a
> medical name.
>
> I am *NOT* the one talking nonesense.

You can't even spell the nonsense you're spewing. You clowns and your
ideas are destructive, but people are gladly seeing through your
horseshit and rejecting it. Only the dumbest of the dumb, progressive
women and effeminate men like Chris Ahlstrom and Joel Crump, still value
your idiotic theories.

--
CrudeSausage
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 20:10:45 +0200
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> Nonsense, I disgaree with your definition. Y: male, X: female. Done.

It isn't my definition it's modern biology - yours is decades out of
date and long since proven to be a gross oversimplification.

You even oversimplify the original out-dated theory it was XX
female XY male - but in reality it is the presence of an SRY gene that
turns a zygote male and this gene can appear on the X chromosome resulting
in an XX male. The SRY gene can also fail to express from its normal
position on the Y chromosome resulting in a (somewhat hormonally troubled)
XY female. See other posts for the medical names for these syndromes.

> Gender dysphoria has nothing to do with reality but is a mental illness
> that should be treated by a good psychologist.

Wrong again, it is very real.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 20:44:23 +0200
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> Nice shifting of the goal posts.

I didn't shift any goal posts. My point is and remains that gender
is not a simple binary thing - even sex is not a simple binary thing and
gender has to do with mental viewpoint.

> X and Y and 100s of thousands of years
> of male and female. That's all there is to it. Anything else, is just

I've pointed out over and over again - with terms to search for -
that this is not current understanding, so much so that there are medical
terms for the exceptions.

Whatr was it you guys called someone who insists on believing what
they want to regardless of the contrary evidence ? That is what you are
doing.

> woke:ism trying to impose nihilism and relativism to destroy the west.

A closed mind is a terrible thing - do some research and open yours.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
For forms of government let fools contest
Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope

D wrote:

>I'd wager that the vast majority of the ideological trans-people are
>plain old XX or XY.

Ya' think?

CrudeSausage wrote:

>> I am *NOT* the one talking nonesense.
>
>You can't even spell the nonsense you're spewing

*Still* no cite.

On Sat, 27 Jul 2024, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 10:04:52 -0500
> chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> There are males (penis, testicles, hairy, muscular ...) with no Y
>>> chromosone and there are females (vagina, ovaries, mammaries ...) with a
>>> Y chromosone.
>>
>> Cite, please.
>
> Lazy sod - google "SRY on X chromosome" or "XX male syndrome" or "de
> la Chapelle syndrome" for the former case. The latter case is more complex
> as XY females often have issues due to the lack of the second X chromosome,
> google "Swyer Syndrome" for more details.
>
>

Doesn't change anything. Y, male, X, female. XXY have male characteristics
and are characterised as male and XO female, and characterized as female.
Freaks of nature can of course occur, but for categorizing, X and Y still
suffice. Turner syndrome, single X, is female, Klinefelter syndrome, XXY,
male.

"Google it" as the saying goes. No matter how hard you idiots want to
imagine something which is contrary to fact, it will never become reality.

On 27/07/2024 21:46, D wrote:
> No matter how hard you idiots want to imagine something which is
> contrary to fact, it will never become reality.

And yet the whole of the Liberal Left depends on the propsosition that
what you *imagine* to be true IS THE TRUTH.

Bandar Logic.
"We all say it, so IT MUST BE TRUE".
Truly they have the Dewanee.

--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey