Watch in real time as Trans Reddit turns on one of it's own for suggesting that maybe they are biological men and arguing they are not makes them look unstable.

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1t0t604/trans_girl_says_were_all_biological_males/

It's about deflecting us from the serious issues, such as egomaniacs having hissy fits because parrots and dogs don't go along with their lies.

Egomaniacs shitting on the world and expecting everyone else to do as they say are so 2026.

When an organisation requires identification including gender/sex, how does it acquire this? The word of the person? A quick genetic test? No. It's via a certificate.

This is back to the idea that female is anything a man can achieve, and not what they cannot. Female becomes hormone levels and certificates and not the sex that becomes pregnant and gives birth.

What TRA is doing is redefining women and claiming the name. These men aren't becoming what they want, they are changing the meaning of the word and pretending that's enough.

If sex is a certificate, without a certificate does anyone have a sex? If sex is hormone levels, do we change sex if we develop hormonal disorders?

'Transition' is a concept but not a reality. When we need to know who is male and who is female, for medical treatment for infertility for example, a certificate, hormone levels and a deeply held belief that's likely to last a life time is irrelevant.

The argument has always been, and will always be, where the 'need to know sex' line is, not where the 'transition' line is. Because transition doesn't change sex.

Sex discrimination on the basis of being perceived wrongly to be female is, rightly, treated as sex discrimination in the eyes of the law. This doesn't make a male victim female, it makes him a atypical man.

A man who breaks his career to look after his children whilst his spouse work full-time will suffer the financial and career progression costs we normally associate with women. This doesn't make him a woman, it makes him an atypical man.

I am white. Another white woman once started running her fingers through my hair without my permission. I found it very disturbing. Having white people touch one's hair is a common experience for black women. My experience doesn't make me a black woman, it makes me an atypical white one.

You are a very atypical man and that's OK. You've suffered for your atypicality and I sympathise. But you aren't a woman. Being a woman isn't just about how others treat you, it's about how your biology affect your life. You are trying to insist that how others treat you is the necessary and sufficient condition for womanhood. It isn't. If we ended all discrimination, sex-based violence, rape, and wifework inequality, women's lives would still affected by our biology.

I wonder why...

When a man who identifies as a woman, and claims that he has changed sex, and is now a 'biological female' and that every cell in his body has changed etc... why this isn't used as therapy for males with sex-linked disorders?

If these men have really changed sex, as they claim, why don't we treat Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, for example, with oestrogen and 'gender affirming care'?

Becoming a biological female is surely a much better option than the horrific slow decline and death caused by such a disorder?

> Any trans person in the U.K. now knows they shouldn’t be in the opposite sex space.

And why is that? Just because you have been abused by people born male in the past does not mean that they will abuse you. That is your own experiences and does not match reality at all.

Our mixed spaces is being recked by people born female who decides to police people.

People who identify as trans know that they shouldn't be in single-sex spaces for the opposite sex due to the clarification of the EA2010 a year ago.

Our mixed spaces is being recked by people born female who decides to police people.

But they weren't mixed spaces! They were single sex until you decided to barge your way in.

> Male Primary Features: Penis, scrotum, and testes.
> Female Primary Features: Vagina, uterus, ovaries, and cervix.

If a trans woman gets bottom surgery to get a neovagina then that is what they call changing primary sex characteristics.

Same with testes being converted to ovaries which has existed for quite some time but as an experimental method. Only one TIM in the UK managed to go through it.

Uterus transplants exists but they're not available to people born male because of the differences in pelvis/hips and more medical research is needed for that.

Everyone is born female in the womb even with XY chromosomes so a person who is born female has a tiny penis called the clitoris which functions the same way as a person who is born male with glans.

Everyone is born female in the womb even with XY chromosomes so a person who is born female has a tiny penis called the clitoris which functions the same way as a person who is born male with glans.

Nope, that's absolute rubbish

A "neovagina" is a penis turned inside out, or some other rearrangement of colon tissue. It isn't a vagina.

And there we have it. Its just "reframe your trauma" in different words.

We do not consent to having male people in female spaces. You can't consent on our behalf.

> Nope, that's absolute rubbish

I mean look. That is how biology works so there is no need to deny how reality works. People like you on here are very bold to make assumptions without knowing how your own body works.

> A "neovagina" is a penis turned inside out, or some other rearrangement of colon tissue. It isn't a vagina.

It still is a vagina regardless of how you define it.

"testes being converted to ovaries"

That's a Nobel Prize right there!

“Everyone is born female in the womb even with XY chromosomes so a person who is born female has a tiny penis called the clitoris which functions the same way as a person who is born male with glans.”

This is wrong multiple levels.

It is a falsity that ‘everyone is born female’. An undifferentiated male embryo is not a femal embryo. This sound bite has always been risibly wrong. Please stop repeating misinformation.

No tiny penises are clitorises. If someone has told you this, they are wrong.

For a start, women don’t urinate from their clitoris. However, a penis has a urethral outlet.

You seem to be taking on incorrect sound bites and repeating them as if you have wisdom to impart. I suggest you start with these videos and then find others.

theparadoxinstitute.org/videos

Who said this?
^Everyone is born female in the womb even with XY chromosomes so a person who is born female has a tiny penis called the clitoris which functions the same way as a person who is born male with glans’

Whoever you are you are completely confused.

It still is a vagina regardless of how you define it.

No. it isn't.

As for testes turning into ovaries - don't be so silly and gullible.

No. An artificially constructed tube inserted into someone’s groin is not a vagina.

What purpose is that artificial tube on a male person, that you are describing incorrectly as a vagina, used for? Anything other than a cavity to put a penis or an object in? Can you name a purpose?

> That's a Nobel Prize right there!

It's not a nobel prize at all :)

CRISPR is a gene editing tool.

> This is wrong multiple levels.

If it was truely wrong, then my child would not have a scar in their middle of their scrotum!

> No tiny penises are clitorises.

Yes they are when the embryo is less than a month old. You'd know that if you did an x-ray.

> For a start, women don’t urinate from their clitoris. However, a penis has a urethral outlet.

That is because a couple of weeks later the sex differences start. How do you not know this?

Testes converted to ovaries?

Absolute crap. You really, really do not understand biology at any level.

I don’t know where you have got this rubbish from but it isn’t true and it isn’t science. It’s like saying you can make a kidney into a liver.

Embryos are not all female - how do you think male and female embryos are identified during IVF? Just because they are not visually different very early on doesn’t mean they are the same. Male and female are different developmental paths; a male is NOT female just because it hasn’t developed a visible penis yet.

I am sorry that someone is taking advantage of your poor levels of education by feeding you lies and poor science.

> Anything other than a cavity to put a penis or an object in? Can you name a purpose?

Outside of a sex object (and I have no idea why people are obsessed with that), it would be medicines but that depends on how it's constructed because there is 7 different types of bottom surgeries.

“That is how biology works so there is no need to deny how reality works. People like you on here are very bold to make assumptions without knowing how your own body works.”

May I suggest that to prove your claim you post evidence.

I am really looking forward to you educating me on what I am missing. Post links please. Or perhaps you have misunderstood what you have read or been told? Or never checked the integrity of the information.

Please post your evidence to support your claims.

Sorry. Please clarify what you have just written. It doesn’t make sense at all.

CRISPR is a gene editing tool.
What is CRISPR going to do in a fully developed human?

> I don’t know where you have got this rubbish from but it isn’t true and it isn’t science.

Oh boy. I would suggest you to look this up. Testicles/ovaries are very identical in its genome sequence.

> It’s like saying you can make a kidney into a liver.

That is not what I said and is near impossible. You're comparing multiple organs with different purposes with different genome sequences.