I need all you guys to help me put together a mass of links and studies that I can read and cite, that make a solid argument against the mainstream narrative on gender-blender.
Pls don't give me "IT'S A SIN IN THE EYES OF GAWD" type stuff, I'm looking for legit medical, neuroscience, and psychology materials.
Any insightful videos to the same effect could be useful as well.
Other urls found in this thread:
cnsnews.com
townhall.com
eje-online.org
youtube.com
counter-currents.com
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
archive.is
faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Here's a start. The most imporant one imo is the follow-up study which shows that a big majority doesn't have GID anymore after a few years
David Peter Reimer was a Canadian man, sexually reassigned as a female after his penis was destroyed during circumcision. John William Money was a psychologist and author, specializing in research into sexual identity and biology of gender. He persuaded Reimer’s parents that sex reassignment surgery was in David’s best interest. David’s testes were removed and he was assigned the name Brenda. Money saw David annually for roughly a decade for consultations and to assess the outcome of the surgery and societal reassignment. As this case had a control in the form of David’s twin brother Brian, Money sought to validate his claims that gender was exclusively a societal identity.
Reimer said that Money forced the twins to rehearse sexual acts involving “thrusting movements”, with David on the bottom. Reimer said that, as a child, he had to “get down on all fours” with his brother “up behind his butt” with “his crotch against his buttocks”. Money forced him, in another sexual position, to have his “legs spread” with Brian on top. Money also forced the children to “take their clothes off” and engage in “genital inspections”. On “at least one occasion”, Money photographed the children doing these activities. Money’s rationale for this was his belief that “childhood ‘sexual rehearsal play’ was important for a healthy adult gender identity.”
Notes by a former student at Money’s lab state that Reimer’s parents lied to lab staff about the success of the procedure. Brian Reimer developed schizophrenia.
In David’s own account, he did not identify as a girl. He was ostracized and bullied by peers, and neither the frilly dresses he was forced to wear nor the estrogen he was forced to inject made him feel female. By the age of 13, Reimer experienced suicidal depression, and he told his parents he would commit suicide if they made him see Money again. His parents told him the truth about his gender reassignment, and at 14 he reassumed his male identity, calling himself David. He underwent testosterone injections, and double mastectomy, and two phalloplasty operations. David told his story to sexologist Milton Diamond in order to dissuade physicians from treating other infants similarly.
For the first 30 years after Money’s initial report that the reassignment had been a success, his view on the “malleability” of gender became the dominant viewpoint among physicians and doctors, reassuring them that sexual reassignment was the correct decision in certain instances, resulting in thousands of sexual reassignments.
If it is impossible for straights to know what is it like to be queer (ignoring the fact that some gays have been sane at one point and vice versa), it is impossible for blacks to know what it is like to be white, and vice versa.
So using the tranny argument, we have draw. Using their argument, no matter how much a man feels he identifies as a woman, he is, by their argument, WRONG, because he cannot know what it is like to be a woman. Therefore he has no frame of reference to compare if he feels like a woman. Therefore, if he chose to identify as a woman, he still cannot be identified nor should be identified as a woman, because–since he had no frame of reference to judge–what he is choosing to identify as is a subjective view on what he thinks woman feel like, and he is simply trying to copy it.
~:~
If gender is a social construct, then there is no such thing as a “gender binary”. If this is true, how can one “transition” between “genders” or be “genderfluid?” If gender is a social construct and stereotypical gender binary “gender identities” and the gender roles stereotypically assigned thereto are entirely made up by an oppressive society for its own uses, why would “transgenders” want to take on, themselves, made up roles assigned to the nonexistent “gender” to which they are transitioning, and thus reenforce the system’s fake stereotypes of gender roles in the gender binary? By this “logic”, a man can act like a man but claim that he is a woman and feel no need in “transitioning”, and everyone must accept it. Thus is proven the transsexual mental illness.
~:~
If someone says they are Napoleon trapped in the body of a modern day human, society agrees they are insane and the person is given medication and treatment. They are not invited to rule France (or exiled) for being Napoleon.
Of course, this is a “terrible” sign of the “oppression” that “transNapoleons” face on a daily basis. Every single day, they try to live their lives in accordance with their inner “identity” as Emperor of the French, King of Italy, and Protector of the Rhine Confederations. Every single day, they are derided and mocked. Small children run up to them and yell, “You’ll never be real emperor!” and “You’ll never lead the Grand Armee against the combined armies of Tsar Alexander and Emperor Francis at Austerlitz!”
All they want is what other Napoleons have–absolute power over the French Empire and its satellites in Europe, plus a dedicated Corps of Imperial Guards and a palace in which to live. But they can’t even move into the Palais de Versailles without “bigoted” policemen trying to arrest them.
Think about that. We cis-identified people get to live in our natural homes, but if they try to move into their natural home, they get arrested. I don’t even want to think about how the Russians would treat them if they went to visit Moscow.
So have a heart, mes amis. Start working for greater social justice for transNapoleons!
Claim: Gender and Sex are a social construct.
Origins: Liberals, feminists, and social scientists.
Status: False.
The words “gender” and “sex” have been skewed by feminists with the common belief that human behavior (gender roles, sexual identity) are explained 100% by culture. This disregards biological (evolutionary, genetic) factors, despite evidence to counter their belief. Such fallacies are being implemented into universities today.
We do not have a gender, we have a sex: male or feminine.
Definitions:
Male: “Of, relating to, or designating the sex that has organs to produce spermatozoa for fertilizing ova.”
Female: “Of or denoting the sex that produces ova or bears young.”
Nouns have a gender.
– Masculine
– Feminine
– Indeterminate (When we don’t know whether its female or male from the word. The noun ‘cat’ could be either. Cats have a sex, not a gender.)
– Neuter
(Tables, cups, gadgets. Objects. Not male or female.)
Two sexes.
XXX, XXY, and XYY all occur. They are always equal to the same sex and are bodily deformations caused by chemical imbalances/underdeveloped genitals. These are deviations–mutations–not a new sex that we’re only just discovering.
XX and XY are by far the most commonly occurring chromosomes, it would be wise to assume that those are the standard and healthy chromosome variations. If you look at the process of meiosis, you’d see that XXY, XYY and the like can only be the result of a flaw in chromosome configuration.
If you’d call these genotypes ‘mural’, then you'd have to call people with Trisomy 21 healthy, too. After all, it occurs due to the same meiotic error that causes sexual chromosome diseases.
“Hermaphrodites exist:” True.
“There are more than two sexes, in fact, there are at least seven sexes acknowledged.” False.
“It’s possible to be something other than what your anatomy implies.” False.
Genetic mutations/defects can occur in prenatal development. This is not justification for classing these as newly discovered sexes.
“What if someone’s body doesn’t start producing hormones when they reach puberty?”
“What about people who have both sets of reproductive organs in whole or part?”
A genetic male yet fully functioning female exists in such a small minority that it is a medical anomaly. 99% of XY women never reach puberty and can never reproduce. People with 46,XY DSD require HRT to go through normal puberty. Their anatomy is also abnormal (they tend to be taller than average women). Fertile XX men do not exist at all.
If someone is mentally female and physically male, this is due to an endocrine disorder, again, not a justification for classing them as a sex on their own.
Take the brain that occurs the most and you will intuitively see that almost the entirety of the human species can be divided into a female brain and a male brain, almost all humans with a male brain possess XY chromosomes, while almost all of the female brains possess XX chromosomes. The point is that during embryonic development, male infants receive a gigantic surge of testosterone. If one or several receptors are not working properly, then certain brain parts remain in the default (female) status that they were in, rather than developing into male parts.
Biological factors–including genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure–are well studied in determining a human sexual orientation. Gender roles and sexual identity are not explained by culture. Sexual orientation is also susceptible to environmental factors: males who have alleles that lead to poor expression of testosterone or are poisoned with chemicals like BPA are far more likely to adopt homosexual/bisexual lifestyles. Soy is high in antiandrogens, and bisphenol A, phthalates, pesticides and herbicides, triclosan and triclocarban, and the added estrogen burden of the water from birth control and HRT also contribute.
The picture to the left shows the typical brain differences between men and women (regardless of sexual preference). This supports the theory that gender is not a social construct at all, but rather a biological one, determined at (more precisely, before) birth. This merely acknowledges well studied, biological, genetic effects in prenatal development, whatever part such factors play. They have an influence in the development of a person.
“Gender is a social construct.”
“Cisgendered.”
‘Cisgender’ is a term feminists are now throwing around. Gender is fixed by biological constraints, as well. The fact that there happens to be some people who have psychological issues that make them feel otherwise doesn’t change this fact. I may feel like I am a dolphin–it doesn’t mean that species is a fluid concept. I may feel that I am identical to Barack Obama. That doesn’t make me President of the United States.
Issues like these, when not overwhelmingly caused by mental illness, are rarely caused by enzyme deficiencies in utero leading to improper hormone levels which cause deformities. Those people are still biologically male or female by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome. Their congenital abnormalities don’t change the definitions of the words. A baby born with renal agenesis doesn’t cause the presence of kidneys to be a “social construct.”
“This is a way to discriminate against people who aren’t in alignment with arbitrary rules on who can and can’t be what.”
Anything other than XX or XY is an aberration and should be treated as such. Healthy cells are diploid for every chromosome (one X can be replaced for a Y in men). If this is not the case, then cell division will malfunction and genes can be either over- or underexpressed, with a severe impact on the individual’s health. At most, you can argue two genital expressions are enough to satisfy breeding requirements for evolutionarily consistent breeding habits.
There is a reason that XX and XY are the only consistent genotypes. The rest result in infertile and unhealthy individuals. Again, reason to classify these deviations as a disease, rather than a sex.
Personal beliefs and feelings which lack evidence are of no use. There is no sociology required here. Facts are not “discriminatory” or “sexist.” Altering facts so they do not offend people should be of no importance. Implementing flawed, personal beliefs into education cannot be considered progress.
Transsexualism destroys identity. One of the things that can be observed with serious addiction cases is the gradual disintegration of personality. In effect, the addict’s body and personality become mere devices for the procurement of the advice substance or behavior. Everything else–every other characteristic–is blunted or erased completely. If we look closely at the people around us, we can see that behavior which pushes people away from social interaction causes gradual erasure of the self, to be replaced with what are merely tics, fetishes, and compulsion (these lead to arousal and excitement but are joyless). The same process appears to be at work with transsexuals.
The first clue is the willingness to destroy close relationships through neglect, abandonment, or outrageous behavior. Such destructive activity results from a long descent into the fetish of autogynephilia–the process of fetishization infects the personality like a cancer, eventually crowding out all other desires and attachments. Relationships, which have inherently altruistic qualities for healthy personalities, weaken and break apart because the fetish becomes the central desire, as in cases of chemical addiction.
The second clue is the desire to self-mutilate–usually in the form of taking opposite sex hormones, but sometimes going to the extreme of genital mutilation to outwardly resemble that sex (of course internally nothing has changed). Similar to cases of anorexia nervosa, in which women are so consumed by a distorted self-image that they destroy their own bodies in response, trannies often make repeated alterations to their appearance that exposes them to significant health risks–everything from tracheal shaving to facial surgery to radical genital alteration.
As should always be pointed out, when they opt for the last approach they are forced to keep dildos shoved into their open wounds at all times. The body cannot be fooled and will perpetually try to seal up the open wound they consider their “genitals”.
The third clue is the newly self-centered personality. Before assumption of a tranny identity (that is, when there is still some control over the transsexual fetish), many of these people achieve success in their careers and produce families, whereas afterward they appear to exist for no other reason than to be trannies.
Contrary to tranny arguments, this is not because they have discovered their true identity. It is because they have obliterated their true identity. As mentioned elsewhere, at the heart of this is a great misconception–that the self is a pure entity that is masked or distorted by conformity to social rules. The exact opposite is true. The self only comes into being through the formation of healthy social relationships. The brain is plastic, but it is not indifferently so–there is healthy development and unhealthy development. The former maintains psychic security and resilience through social relationships and the latter malnourishes through isolation and obsession.
One need only look to the claims of trannies to see that they are completely deluded and inauthentic. Among other things they claim that they feel profound discomfort unless they are allowed to wear opposite sex garments (especially underwear) which do not really fit their bodies. This is a classic fetish symptom. The sense of agitation or restlessness unless they can experience the fetish even though it interferes with enjoyment of normal activities.
My argument is that this is more than just delusional behavior. It is part of a process that destroys personality. Secondarily, we can judge the unhealthiness of this and other behaviors by the degree to which they damage important social relationships.
It’s quite shocking to what heights of delusion society as a whole has risen. “Not every woman has a vagina,” is no longer a controversial statement.
These people are ultimately just harmless nutjobs, but their existence and the acceptance thereof is a symptom of a grave societal illness–a society that believe and stands for nothing, which can no longer even defend the most obviously true propositions about the world, for it privileges the feelings of shrill malcontents above facts.
We are in the second stage of this cancer. In the first, people already lacked the steadfastness to defend their values, even if they held to facts. We can see this behavior in rationalists and scientists still. They accept all manner of social aberration (being leftists), but [rattle on about their evidence and their reason, not recognizing that they already ceded crucial ground when they refused to defend the core values of their culture. Now, a few decades later, they are remnants of a bygone age. The cultural phenomenon of reason has failed, because the culture undergirding it was allowed to fail. Rationalism has been relegated to the private hobby of a niche population from which the left wing periodically demands obeisance in the form of the sacking of this or that scientists for some crime think (James Watson, Tim Hunt, et. al.) just to demonstrate who’s boss.
The denial of reality itself is the natural successor to this phenomenon. The anti-social segments have seen that they were able to get away once, so they push the envelope and demand that people distance themselves, not just from “ evil chauvinism”, but from inconvenient facts, too. I am a bald, bearded man with a large penis and hairy legs, but if I “identify” as a woman, you have to accept that as fact, no further evidence necessary, because demanding evidence has become an illegitimate form of argumentation. Only personal feelings and claims of membership in an “oppressed” (read: culturally hostile) group are admitted now. “I can say X because I’m a member of group Y” might be classically invalid, but it’s utterly uncontroversial nowadays. e.g.:
“I can talk about black crime because I’m black.”
“I can dislike gays because I’m gay.”
“I can call for white genocide because I’m an autistic transsexual black midget.”
The concrete issues do not matter. What truly unifies these groups is their hatred of mainstream, Western culture, personified in the straight, white male. A feminist might prattle on about “rape culture”, for instance, and a Muslim about Islamophobia, but it will be a cold day in Hell on which the feminist talks about the pervasiveness and brutality of rape in the Muslim community. Rape, as such, doesn’t matter to them. Attacking the enemy does. And they know who their enemy is.
Thing is, SRS doesn’t work. Hormones don’t work. Both of these things only make the problem much, much worse.
This is Dennis Avner, the Cat Man. Heard of him? He was transgender and transpecies. He believed himself to be a female tiger. So he had all the surgeries he wanted. He had his teeth filed into fangs, his lips, nose and ears surgically altered, his body tattooed, got contacts, and purchased an animatronic tail, and what ended up happening at the end of his transformation? The same thing that happens to most trannies, he killed himself.
Gender Identity Disorder is similar to Body Integrity Identity Disorder, wherein someone believes a part of their party is foreign to them, and if they just cut it off their life will improve. Fittingly, there’s a lot of overlap between the two conditions. In fact, you may as well call them the same.
It’s also very similar to people addicted to plastic surgery. Women getting breast reductions, and then implants, and then smaller implants, then larger. Liposuction, nose jobs, botox–on and on; it never ends. They end up looking freakish and malformed and are never able to fix what they perceive is wrong with them.
Trannies have high levels of overlap with autism and mental retardation, as well. A notable anecdote can be found in I Think We’re Alone Now, a documentary about the stalkers of some pop singer named Tiffany. The second stalker followed is a sad case of a man who lived his whole life normally. He was straight, happy, and very intelligent, and then he suffered a traumatic brain injury. When he woke up, his speech was slower and he couldn’t process things as quickly. He suddenly felt he was gay, and not long after that decided he was a woman.
You think there’s something wrong with you, something maybe surgery can fix, but it never does. Now what happens to someone when they finish their “transformation”–when they’ve made the change they thought would fix them, and none of their actual problems have gone away?
Now add to that the devastating effect bombarding your body with hormones would have on anyone. Then consider that you have to keep taking those hormones for the rest of your life, because as soon as you stop the changes go away since the human body is absolutely astonishing at fixing itself. Then you find you can’t really look how you want to look; you end up looking at best neither male nor female, having a voice that’s instantly jarring and a body covered in scars. You’ll never be able to reproduce the way someone the gender you believe you are does. If you were MtF you’re not getting your balls back. If you were FtM, you’re not getting your boobs back.
Now magnify that even further. Suppose you’re surrounded by a media telling you this is the right decision for you, that you’ll be better and should be celebrated for it, and you get into a community of other people all going through the same thing, and they’re all supportive but aggressive and irrational, and then once you reach the end of your “transition” you feel it was a mistake, and suddenly all those family members and counselors and members of your “community” who supported you suddenly turn their back on you. Admitting you could be wrong means admitting they were wrong. Now all that progressive, empty-headed support is gone and you’re left still being bombarded by those hormones in a mutilated body.
Now ask yourself, who hates these people? The ones who want them to be happy and continue to live, or the ones who are perfectly fine watching them ruin their lives and kill themselves because to do otherwise would conflict with their political dogma?
Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’
cnsnews.com
Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.
The transgendered person’s disorder, said Dr. McHugh, is in the person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh.
He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”
Transgenderism Is A Mental Illness, Not A Civil Rights Issue
townhall.com
If someone came to a doctor and asked him to cut off a perfectly healthy arm because it just felt “wrong” for the arm to be there, should the doctor do it? This isn't an idle question because this does happen with a mental illness called Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID). People who have it feel as if they're not supposed to have a certain body part, like an arm or leg. As a general rule, doctors won't remove a healthy body part; so some of these poor deluded people crush, mangle, burn, or otherwise deliberately destroy their own arms or legs in order to get a surgeon to slice them off.
This raises a question: Are surgeons who refuse to remove healthy limbs from people with BIID doing them a service because they're mentally ill or are they denying them their civil rights? MOST of us would say that a surgeon who refuses to cut off a healthy leg is doing the right thing. Of course, not everyone would agree. In fact, there are some people who will tell you that mental illness is a “super power.”
Additionally, your mortality rate will be 51% higher than the general population because of suicide and all the female hormones you’ve pumped into your body en masse. In fact, the suicide rate for people who are transgender is 25 times that of the general population according to the American Psychological Association.
eje-online.org
Jerry Springer-I'm Happy I Cut Off My Legs!
youtube.com
To be male or female is so much more than just fucking. That’s almost secondary, because it’s the innate spiritual qualities of men and women that are far more important. I know that some people aren’t huge fans of Evola because his writings are pretty esoteric, but not only was he completely right about the nature of men and women, this is how the nature of men and women has been understood for thousands of years prior to the fairly recent mass insanity that we’re currently experiencing.
Aristotle associated the male principle with form and the female with matter. According to Evola, form means “the power that determines and arouses the principle of motion development; becoming” while matter means “the substance or power that, being devoid of form in itself, can take up any form, and which in itself is nothing but can become everything when it has been awakened and fecundated.” The fundamental feminine characteristic is changeability. Thus the female is associated with water, which is fluid, and adapts to whatever form it is put into, just as matter is shaped by form. Evola writes that woman “reflects the cosmic female according to its aspect as material receiving a form that is external to her and that she does not produce from within” (Eros, 153) This fits in with Carl Jung’s description of woman’s animus, which is not self-created but instead is a subconscious collection of the thoughts of men. This changeability is related to a woman’s tendency to live for someone outside of herself due to the fluidity and changeability of her nature. For Evola, this means following the path of a mother or lover, fixing herself to a virile force in order to obtain transcendence In contrast, “modern woman, in wanting to be for herself, has destroyed herself.” (Revolt. 165) By believing that she is merely her personality, she loses her transcendent aspect. counter-currents.com
The problem is that a tranny just can’t fake these things. It doesn’t matter if you look like a woman and you can fuck someone like a woman, because you’re not a woman. It would be meaningless from a purely physical perspective, and the act of having sex with a tranny is about as disturbingly purposeless as trying to plant seeds in a pool of cement. Nothing will grow, no children will be born, the whole act is pointless because it’s just impossible. From a spiritual and psychological perspective, trannies just don’t possess the nature of the sex that they’re attempting to emulate. They can’t, and this is especially true for a MTF because being a mother is one of the core parts of womanhood. I’d go as far as saying that a girl isn’t even a woman until she’s a mother, because motherhood and that connection to her family is such a profound part of what it means to be a woman.
We live in a disgusting time where people no longer care to recognize these things, though, and everything is crumbling because of it. People just throw their children to strangers and have them raised in daycares while the mother rejects her role as a mother entirely, wears trousers, and goes to work as if she was the husband. Everything is either backwards or completely destroyed. Now we live in a world where true femininity has been buried away and women have been told that they must essentially act like a man in order to be a “modern woman,” and so it’s really no surprise that people get very confused in such a mixed up and disgusting world and they begin to think that men can become women and women can become men. I don’t even blame them for thinking this. It’s not much of a leap to think that the difference between the sexes is just a slight difference in behavior when society tries to promote the idea that female behavior is really nothing more than a slight variation of male behavior with slightly different clothes and a sassy, high pitched voice.
Transsexuals are four times more likely than the average person to be infected with HIV.
archive.is
About 88% of children who have gender dysphoria do not hold those beliefs when they grow older.
archive.is
Only 12% of boys who believe they are transsexuals still believe so when they are older.
archive.is
MRI scans indicate that MtF transsexuals are either men aroused by the thought of possessing female genitalia or homosexuals who want to seduce straight men.
archive.is
41% of transsexuals have tried and failed to commit suicide.
archive.is
Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide.
archive.is
65% of transsexual youth have seriously considered suicide within the last year.
37% of transsexual youth have attempted suicide within the last year.
Most young transsexuals have committed self-harm within the last twelve months.
1 in 10 young transsexuals has attempted suicide more than three times in the last year.
archive.is
Only 21% of transsexuals can successfully pass as the opposite gender.
archive.is
53% of mothers of transsexual children have Borderline Personality Disorder, compared to only 6% of mothers of normal children.
archive.is
16% of transsexuals have been sent to jail or prison, compared to 2.7% of the general population.
archive.is
Gay and transgender students are half as likely to graduate high school as straight students.
archive.is
legitimate studies are hard to come by. A paper that points out what transexuality actually is, isn't going to get published
You're in luck OP, I have an entire, peer reviewed study on the subject!
Titled "The Man Who Would Be Queen" it details how transsexualism is actual a fetish gone too far. It sheds A LOT of light on this subject, and also sheds light on how there are a ton of people in academia who don't buy into the bullshit, but are ignored by the media and other leftists.
You don't need studies you fucking faggot. Two X chromosomes = female. One X & one Y = male. Everything else is a mutation. KYS
We don't need a legitimate study against anything.
Gays are bad. Because I said so.
Or, alternatively, if you have a Y, you're a guy.
And it doesn't matter what mutation you are.
XX, XXX, XY, XYY
Sorry mate, switching Linux and stuck on droid. Will help later…
But, start with examples of
'homosexuality in nature'.
I found a study that cited like 300 species and said roughly 5-10% were gay.
I was incredulous so I looked into the data.
Practically all species listed had 1-3%.
Every twentieth had 40-80%… They were jacking up the numbers using outliers.
So I kept digging, looking into the outlier studies.
They were saying that if two male\female animals were raising offspring, it constituted homosexuality.
They were doing this in every (((study))).
The only animals which buttfucked, were from domesticated farm animals. The animals rarely buttfucked. They formed 'partnerships'.
Again, sorry I can't link you.
But start with shutting down the stories that gayness happens in nature.
The entire degen argument hinges on bullshit studies like these.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
More of a brief case study but it shows that there is (at least in some cases) a definite link to brain chemistry problems
The anus isn't a sex organ therefore faggots are bad
There you said it; Mutations and anomalies=not normal=handicap
Men don't act like women, therefore faggots are bad.
I said if you have a Y, you're a guy.
Sphincters are designed for one-way passage of material. Therefore faggots are bad.
SJW-tier college professors all use this case as an example of how Gender doesn't matter. Their logic is always fucked, but just remember they see this as supporting them.
I think you're making this too biological.
The dick is made for the vagina, therefore faggots are bad.
I don't like their silly faggot voices and mannerisms. Therefore, faggots are bad and silly.
John William Money (8 July 1921 – 7 July 2006) was a psychologist, sexologist and author, specializing in research into sexual identity and biology of gender. He was heavily criticised for abusing his young patients.[citation needed] Money was one of the first scientists to study the psychology of sexual confusion and how the societal constructs of “gender” affect an individual. His work has been both celebrated for its innovation and criticized, particularly in regard to his involvement with the sex-reassignment of David Reimer[1] and his eventual suicide. Money published around 2,000 articles, books, chapters and reviews. His writing has been translated into many languages. Money has received around 65 world-wide honors, awards, and degrees[2] but also heavy criticism.
During his professional life, Money was respected as an expert on sexual behavior, especially for allegedly demonstrating that gender was learned rather than innate. Many years later, however, it was revealed that his most famous case was fundamentally flawed. The subject was the sex reassignment of David Reimer (Born as Bruce Reimer), in what later became known as the "John/Joan" case.
In 1966, a botched circumcision left eight-month-old David Reimer without a penis. Money persuaded the baby's parents that sex reassignment surgery would be in Reimer's best interest. At the age of 22 months, Bruce underwent an orchidectomy, in which his testicles were surgically removed. He was reassigned to be raised as female and given the name Brenda. Money further recommended hormone treatment to which the parents agreed, Money then recommended a surgical procedure to create an artificial vagina, which the parents refused. Money published a number of papers reporting the reassignment as successful.
David's case came to international attention in 1997 when he told his story to Milton Diamond, an academic sexologist who persuaded Reimer to allow him to report the outcome in order to dissuade physicians from treating other infants similarly. Soon after, Reimer went public with his story, and John Colapinto published a widely disseminated and influential account in Rolling Stone magazine in December 1997.
...
In 2000, David and his twin brother (Brian) alleged that Money forced the twins to rehearse sexual acts involving "thrusting movements", with David playing the bottom role.
He said as a child, Money forced him go "down on all fours" with his brother, Brian Reimer, "up behind his butt" with "his crotch against" his "buttocks," and that Money forced David to have his "legs spread" with Brian on top.
Money also forced the children to take their clothes off and engage in genital inspections.
On at least one occasion, Money reportedly took photographs of the two children doing these activities.
Money's rationale for these various treatments was his belief that "childhood 'sexual rehearsal play'" was important for a "healthy adult gender identity".
Reimer had experienced the visits to Baltimore as traumatic, and when Money started pressuring the family to bring him in for surgery during which a vagina would be constructed, the family discontinued the follow-up visits.
From 22 months into his teenaged years, Reimer urinated through a hole that surgeons had placed in the abdomen.
Estrogen was given during adolescence to induce breast development.
Having no contact with the family once the visits were discontinued, John Money published nothing further about the case.
For several years, Money reported on Reimer's progress as the "John/Joan case", describing apparently successful female gender development and using this case to support the feasibility of sex reassignment and surgical reconstruction even in non-intersex cases.
Money wrote, "The child's behavior is so clearly that of an active little girl and so different from the boyish ways of her twin brother."
Notes by a former student at Money's lab state that, during the follow-up visits, which occurred only once a year, Reimer's parents routinely lied to lab staff about the success of the procedure.
The twin brother, Brian, later developed schizophrenia.
On July 1, 2002, Brian was found dead from an overdose of antidepressants.
On May 5, 2004, after suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and marital troubles, David committed suicide by shooting himself in the head with a sawed-off shotgun at the age of 38.
Reimer's parents have stated that Money's methodology was responsible for the deaths of both of their sons.
Money claimed that media response to the exposé was due to right-wing media bias and the antifeminist movement.
He claimed his detractors believed "masculinity and femininity are built into the genes so women should get back to the mattress and the kitchen."
However, intersex activists also criticized Money, stating that the unreported failure had led to the surgical reassignment of thousands of infants as a matter of policy.
Privately, Money was mortified by the case, colleagues said, and as a rule did not discuss it.
John Money was critical in debates on chronophilias, especially pedophilia.
He stated that both sexual researchers and the public do not make distinctions between affectional pedophilia and sadistic pedophilia.
Money asserted that affectional pedophilia was about love and not sex.
Money held the view that affectional pedophilia is caused by a surplus of parental love that became erotic, and is not a behavioral disorder.
Rather, he took the position that heterosexuality is another example of a societal and therefore superficial, ideological concept.
What did he mean by this? What's that supposed to mean?
It means OP is a godless atheist trying to argue with godless atheists, and thus anything in the vein of 'sin before god' will immediately lose them the argument by handing the opposition the means to discredit and silence them in the majority of 'legitimate' contexts wherein such argumentation might be made.
So many diseases cured yet we still stand defenceless to this kind of blind follower doublethink
Why need sources?
It's abnormal to "change your gender".
It's like eating shit - repulsive.
Transgenderism involves cutting your penis/vagina and drugging yourself for months an end.
This aint normal.
It means I'm taking a "here are sound dialectic reasons" route. The whole, hurr durr bible says is bad, routine doesn't really work on anyone who isn't already a christfag.
Which is basically what I suggested.
Great Thread!
That "animals are gay in the wild 10%" is going to be a blast when I ask for the criteria for gay animals. Is is buttfucking or male/female not raising child together? Are farm animals "wild". Does actual penetration occure, is there ejaculation occuring? How many times do these same "couples" engage in the activity?
I normally just say that we should start fucking kids and eating people, because if gayness is nature - who are we to deny nature and not rise about it? Now if you'll excuse me I have to kill my ex-wife's sons so that I can reproduce with her, you can't fight nature, Chaim.
It has always bothered me that that picture would require the text on screen to be backwards.