all 27 comments

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

  1. Show me hermaphroditism in humans. In actuality, not some hypothetical gotcha attempt. If you can’t, this is irrelevant. There’s all kinds of things that exist in some species but not others... it’s one of the reasons we have the term species... and the differences are part of how we classify them...

  2. Unless all or like 99% of trans people are actually hermaphrodites I don’t think this is a great argument. Trans people are still born with a clear sex. Hermaphroditism, if it existed in humans, would be something that wasn’t a choice or a sense of identity, it wouldn’t be a series of surgeries and or artificial hormones, it’s how they developed, naturally. They’d be born that way.

  3. I’m just not sure what point you think you’re making here

[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

Do you understand what hypotheticals are? You can't even answer hypothetical questions? If sex, male and female, exists in mammals but not in non-mammal species, then sex is a social construct. We could sit here all day and come to the realization even "specie" and the difference between mammal and non-mammal is a social construct, some categories humans made up to make it easier for them to navigate through the world.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If sex, male and female, exists in mammals but not in non-mammal species, then sex is a social construct.

No? A lot of things exist only in mammals (and few rare exception), like livebirth, for example. So pregnancy and birth now is a social construct and does not exist?

Second thing - sex exist in almost all species, even species that have hermaphrodites - are either one or another sex during reproduction. You still need an egg and a sperm to reproduce. And definition of sex is unified among all species, and covers them all, and it is real biological thing that can be very easily tested and proved, easily distinguished in 99.9% cases. Sex is a descriptor of a real world phenomena. You can't test social constructs, they are just social constructs, something created in a mind, not in physical world.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you understand the part where I asked what point you think this makes?

I don’t think you do since you don’t seem to understand what mammals are or what sex is... maybe you should read up on both of those things before you come here. Maybe also look into the concept of social constructs because you seem utterly clueless. It’s impossible to take you or your post seriously after this comment lmao

Another suggestion: look up “logical conclusions”

[–]divingrightintowork 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

If humans aren't human are they human? If they're not human, what are they?


[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 7 fun9 insightful - 6 fun10 insightful - 7 fun -  (1 child)

Humans are a social construct /s

[–]divingrightintowork 7 insightful - 6 fun7 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

If Judith butler hasn't intellectually masturbated to it's nature does it even exist.

[–]SnowAssMan 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There are no human hermaphrodites, just as there are no humans capable of asexual reproduction. Our species perpetuates itself the same way all mammals do, sexually, males fertilise females. That's how your parents made you. Your existence proves that sex in humans is binary.

Men who identify as women are as male as your dad. Their sex is unambiguous. It's not a construct. "Transgender" is a construct.

Humans are bipeds. Just because other animals aren't doesn't call the validity of that classification into question.

Stop trying to erase sex. It's sexist.

[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

And hermaphrodites don't "perpetuate themselves" sexually, not at all. /s

[–]SnowAssMan 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)


[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Is hermaphroditism also a social construct?

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Simultaneous hermaphrodites have both the male and female sex organs and produce both types of gametes.

In animals, simultaneous hermaphroditism is one of a number of novel reproductive strategies that occur very rarely in certain species of fish in specific habitats that pose unusual challenges to reproduction. It does not occur in any mammals or other land-dwelling creatures. Doesn't occur in birds either.

Now, though hermaphrodites only exist in plants and other animals, think of these hypothetical scenarios where humans also have simultaneous hermaphrodites among them, so we're not just talking about other animals, but humans too:

No, this is a stupid sci fi "thought experiment" that's a total waste of time.

I think simultaneous hermaphrodites show us that sex, male or female, is not a universal thing

But even simultaneous hermaphrodites produce only two kinds of gametes - male and female. They don't produce a third kind of gamete that's part male, part female or is in some entirely new, separate category altogether. Moreover, sequential hermaphrodites can only reproduce if there's a fusion of a male gamete (sperm) with a female gamete (ova). So actually, sequential hermaphrodites prove that binary sex male/female sex is indeed a universal thing.


[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

Can you respond to these scifi thought experiments then? It will be nice to know how things for simultaneous hermaphrodites in other animals work, I can't ask "biologists" because most of them are tra.

Hypothetical 1- A simultaneous hermaphrodite has sex with another simultaneous hermaphrodite. One fertilizes the other. What's happening here? Which one is true and why? a) a "male" is fertilizing a "female", b) a "female" is fertilizing a "male", c) a "female" is fertilizing a "female", d) a "male" is fertilizing a "male", e) all of those

Hypothetical 2- A male has sex with a simultaneous hermaphrodite. He fertilizes the hermaphrodite. What's happening here? Which one is true and why? a) the male is fertilizing a "female", b) the male is fertilizing a "male", c) both of those

Hypothetical 3- A hermaphrodite gets pregnant. Which one is true and why? a) a "male" gets pregnant, b) a "female" gets pregnant, c) both of those.

If sex, male and female, exists in mammals but not in non-mammal species, then sex is a social construct. We could sit here all day and come to the realization even "specie" and the difference between mammal and non-mammal is a social construct, some categories humans made up to make it easier for them to navigate through the world.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Sexual reproduction still exists if there are species that don’t do it. How on earth is sexual reproduction impacted by how a slug or a slime mold makes another slug or slime mold?

Would a chicken stop being a chicken if we didn’t evolve language? Or would the entire category of animal cease to exist? Would they suddenly start laying fertilised eggs without roosters around if we got rid of the names?

The categories are not invented. They are observed and recorded in an invented language.

Human sex can’t be forced to fit into the mating habits of a clownfish just because you want it to.

[–]Not_a_celebrity[S] 2 insightful - 8 fun2 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 8 fun -  (1 child)


[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

do you understand what hypotheticals are? You can't even answer hypothetical questions?

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Who gives a sperm is male during that time, who have egg is female. It is not rocket science. Definitions are very simple and complete - and it describes overwhelming majority of species, with some exceptions among viruses and bacteria (and maybe mushrooms, I don't know if their reproduction is sexual or not).

[–]emptiedriver 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If sex, male and female, exists in mammals but not in non-mammal species, then sex is a social construct.

How do you draw this conclusion? Is warm bloodedness a social construct? Is hair? I mean what is NOT a social construct if it only counts if it applies universally across all species and types... Are you trying to make some broader claim about reality being a social construct? If so, sex is the same level of social construct that a rock about to hit your head is, which is to say, it has real consequences that can't be changed by you personally or even with the agreement of your peers deciding that it is not so.

Human beings reproduce sexually, as in A+B, and each of us has a body that can provide one or the other part of the necessary equation. We have lots of other characteristics, but a sexed body is one of them and it isn't dependent on the traits of other animals or plants

[–]ColoredTwiceIntersex female, medical malpractice victim, lesbian 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you cut a part of potato and throw it into the ground, both parts will grow up - so potato will reproduce and mulgiply itself.

If you cut one "hand" of sea star - old one will grow up hand back and hand will grow up to fully functioning sea star.

Lets test the same on humans? Lets test on you - and cut your a hand and wait until it grow back. If it is in other species - it proves same will happen to humans by your logic. Right?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)


Are you trolling? If so bravo

[–]censorshipment 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Sex is not a man-made social construct... the language we use is.

[–]No_ 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We’re not barnacles or snails, we’re mammals.

Mammals are either female or male or have a genetic mistake in their DNA

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do hermaphroditic species have to do with human sexes and the sexed oppression that humans have?

What about a slugs reproduction changes the sex binary of humans?

1.there are no human hermaphrodites. 2.there are no human hermaphrodites.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

You are correct, sex is a social construct and a human invention: babies are, in fact, brought by storks. Or found under cabbages.

As for your hypotheticals: why the fuck can' t you live in reality instead of trying to "prove" something by using examples of individuals that do not even exist? It' s like you decided something is true, but it is in direct opposition of reality so reality has to go because it' s a hindrance to your ravings.

Next up, follow my podcast in which my misanthropy demonstrates that since we haven' t proven the existence of aliens, then human beings must be... a social construct... Created by humans... Who don' t exist. 🤔🤔🤔

I honestly have no clue how you TRAs can manage to live with that level of cognitive dissonance. I guess your life is much easier, just pretend reality doesn' t exist, and you will be in a WORLD OF MAGIC!!!!!!

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 8 fun11 insightful - 7 fun12 insightful - 8 fun -  (1 child)

I think it’s really messed up that you wouldn’t include the children that were made by carving enchanted wood. #pinocchioisarealboy

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

My most sincerest apologies for the erasure I committed, and thanks for educating me on this incredibly important issue.

BRB, there' s some flogging to do.