Should misinformation be banned from the major platforms?

[Daedalus X]

For this topic misinformation is any information that promotes needle hesitancy or anti authoritarian approved information.

Here is an example of misinformation that can't be posted to YouTube, twitter, Facebook or any mainline medium. Is this good public policy?



This is a MUST WATCH.

https://www.therealanthonyfaucimovie.com/viewing/

[brunumb]

With a few exceptions, all sexually reproducing organisms generate exactly two types of gametes that are distinguished by their difference in size: females, by definition, produce large gametes (eggs) and males, by definition, produce small and usually motile gametes (sperm).21 Dec 2022

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ful ... .202200173

Yes, those exception exist and they are human beings, no?

With few exceptions, people are right handed, should we force left-handed people to be right-handed?

The exceptions are meaningful, and you are trying to erase their existence by saying "oh, they're just exceptions". Rarity doesn't strip something of it's reality.

I see you have dodged the question. Your examples don't even relate to the issue (a common tactic used by trans activists I should point out). We are talking about the binary nature of sexual reproduction. You called my claim a display of ignorance and offered to show how I was wrong. Please do so. And no, human beings are not an exception to the binary nature of sexual reproduction. See the description in blue.

If cognitive dissonance isn't an issue for you, watch the video above outlining the source of transgender ideology and let us know what your thoughts are on that.

[brunumb]

The exceptions are meaningful, and you are trying to erase their existence by saying "oh, they're just exceptions". Rarity doesn't strip something of it's reality.

I am not trying to erase anything. Transgender people, if anything, highlight the binary nature of sex in humans. Males feel that they are females, and females feel that they are males. No extra sexes involved. The notion of multiple genders is just an example of people expressing different personalities. No different from people expressing themselves as hippies or goths or whatever. The bottom line is that when they decide to procreate they are going to need a biological female together with a biological male to accomplish anything. How they identify is irrelevant. One of the sad things among the chemically and surgically altered people is that they will never experience the pleasure of a normal sex life and the joys of producing their own children. I guess that can be compensated for by the satisfaction that people will be forced into not misgendering them or using pronouns they don't like.

[boatsnguitars]

[Daedalus X]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #283]

That is a well written post, did I miss the place where you cited your source? Or was there a reason why you did not cite the source?

[boatsnguitars]

[Daedalus X]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #285]

"Persistent Mullerian Duct Syndrome (PMDS) is a very rare condition with less than 300 cases described in the literature"

There is not much point in talking about extremely rare genetic anomalies.

Can you tell me what percentage of LGBT... people actually do carry some form of genetic anomalies? And how many of those people can we expect to reproduce those same genetic anomalies?

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #285]

"Persistent Mullerian Duct Syndrome (PMDS) is a very rare condition with less than 300 cases described in the literature"

There is not much point in talking about extremely rare genetic anomalies.

Can you tell me what percentage of LGBT... people actually do carry some form of genetic anomalies? And how many of those people can we expect to reproduce those same genetic anomalies?

People with genetic anomalies don't matter now? What is the percentage cut-off? Less than 2%? That would include people with green eyes, Jews, people with Downs syndrome, Dwarfism, etc.

What else should we know about your feelings towards people?

[Jose Fly]

What happens in hospitals where they have been captured by gender ideology does not refute the science that sex is binary. No one is denying that gender dysphoria exists or that some people do not recover from it with time and require medical intervention. That does not mean that anyone is actually changing their sex. They are merely modifying their body in such a way as to alleviate some of their distress.

That's why they're referred to as transgender. You would do well to learn the difference between gender and sex.

If this is all just part of what has been going on for ages, what accounts for the 5000% increase in the incidence of so-called gender dysphoria? How many of the people claiming to be trans genuinely have gender dysphoria and how many are just caught up in the hysteria and have been swept along with the wave?

How about we leave that to the actual professionals, rather than random people on obscure internet forums?

You may wish to dismiss me as whatever-phobic, but that does not reflect who I am or what I believe. It is just a convenient means of fobbing off any arguments contrary to your position.

Your hateful remarks speak for themselves.

You have not refuted my arguments regarding the binary nature of sex. The clips I provided here support my case. Instead of lazily providing links to send readers off to do your work, make your case here.

Already done.

Go ahead. If you are going to rely on outliers then don't waste your time.
To help you get started:

With a few exceptions, all sexually reproducing organisms generate exactly two types of gametes that are distinguished by their difference in size: females, by definition, produce large gametes (eggs) and males, by definition, produce small and usually motile gametes (sperm).21 Dec 2022

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ful ... .202200173

So when you said, "The animal and plant world evolved with a binary principle of sexual reproduction", you were only referring to production of gametes? Not anything else?

And if there are "a few exceptions", that means it can't be strictly and exclusively binary as you've been insisting, can it? Oops,

[Daedalus X]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #285]

"Persistent Mullerian Duct Syndrome (PMDS) is a very rare condition with less than 300 cases described in the literature"

There is not much point in talking about extremely rare genetic anomalies.

Can you tell me what percentage of LGBT... people actually do carry some form of genetic anomalies? And how many of those people can we expect to reproduce those same genetic anomalies?

People with genetic anomalies don't matter now? What is the percentage cut-off? Less than 2%? That would include people with green eyes, Jews, people with Downs syndrome, Dwarfism, etc.

What else should we know about your feelings towards people?

Okay, if your concern is about 300 people, of the 7 billion plus people in the world, then that is fine. They need advocates as well. But, I am more concerned with the larger group of people that make up to near 40% of the young that have no genetic reason to call themselves LGBTQ+ plus etc.

[Jose Fly]

Okay, if your concern is about 300 people, of the 7 billion plus people in the world, then that is fine. They need advocates as well.

As has been covered in this thread, that is just one of the many variations that don't fit into the strict binary framework.

But, I am more concerned with the larger group of people that make up to near 40% of the young that have no genetic reason to call themselves LGBTQ+ plus etc.

First, you do realize that "LGBTQ" refers to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (e.g., non-binary) people, right? So someone who is bisexual may still fit in one of the binary male/female categories for sex and/or gender, and just be sexually attracted to both men and women.

Second, how exactly do you know that none of those people "have no genetic reason" to be who they are?