Man in England gets pregnant! The madness reloaded

a reply to: Asmodeus3

That's nice you actually noticed me not answering, i noticed too.... so i hope in giving you my opinion to the issue, you will do so too and not shrug it off as a straw man, or outright ignore it.

You made an edit just to copy paste what you had said already???

How odd...

I know that technique of just repeating the same argument over and over while ignoring any other inputs or questions in a discussion.
I read about it in "propaganda for dummies". It's rather effective with the general population.

I belive that reproduction either works with two genders or without. But for mammalian there are two bilogical gender. As to the roles they want to play man, women, and anything between, 72 seems too little, but I don't really care either.
People like to box themselfs, I never understood that, so in a way I appreciate the tendencies to create new boxes.
This is just a lost society in search for the next escapism.

We'll get over it, most at least...

originally posted by: Doxanoxa
a reply to: Asmodeus3

She was never a man.

To quote the article "...He considered a hysterectomy, but never went through with it – partly because he had not ruled out the possibility of having children."

So, as a proposed acid test - a man cannot EVER have, or have had, a hysterectomy.

Common sense!

The newspaper reported a dad had given birth. How deluded they are! Or maybe not?! But still are trying to propagate an insane ideology in the name of transhumanism and woke nonsense.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Asmodeus3

That's nice you actually noticed me not answering, i noticed too.... so i hope in giving you my opinion to the issue, you will do so too and not shrug it off as a straw man, or outright ignore it.

You made an edit just to copy paste what you had said already???

How odd...

I know that technique of just repeating the same argument over and over while ignoring any other inputs or questions in a discussion.
I read about it in "propaganda for dummies". It's rather effective with the general population.

I belive that reproduction either works with two genders or without. But for mammalian there are two bilogical gender. As to the roles they want to play man, women, and anything between, 72 seems too little, but I don't really care either.
People like to box themselfs, I never understood that, so in a way I appreciate the tendencies to create new boxes.
This is just a lost society in search for the next escapism.

We'll get over it, most at least...

Good you agree there are 2 genders only! The entire gender ideology collapses under this premise.

Repetition is good for learning and understanding. In cases where questions are not answered or deliberately ignored then they repeated. In case important material is ignored then it is repeated.

You still haven't answered this question:

Can men get pregnant and give birth?

So, in summary. A biological female who has spent her life self-mutilating herself, and who has pretended to be a man, will have a baby.

I hope the baby grows up to be a well-rounded and balanced individual, unlike its mother.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

No answer what a surprise... Maybe you missed them... Or you are just doing propaganda.

is that any of my business if she adapts another role?

I got some more, in case its not fear but curiosity....

Can xx adopt the role of a father?
Can xy adopt the role of a mother?
What defines those roles for you?

If one hasn't any real life experience with an ideology, a fixation with a topic normally stems from curiosity or fear.
The way you discuss it, leads me to belive in your case it's fear.
But I might be mistaken, hence the question

... I wonder where all the fear is coming from?

As you think they mean so much to your argument stemming from an incomplete understanding of the topic, here is your answer to your rethoric question.
Xy will not birth children with the current technology.

Look you are 100% right if you are merely an instinct driven animal. Are you?
No, because there are more sides to the issue and you being right in biology doesn't really explain your investment on the issue.

If I wanted to be so simple minded i would just shrug it off and say i can't fathom the psychological aspects of gender roles, that's way over my head.
Bam done move on, why waste my energy if I don't want to actually expand my understanding of the issue.

I'm curious what motivates you to write those threads? Is it really news worthy?
are your questions really that groundbreaking? what are you hoping to achieve?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yet this is what is happening in UK/US.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Asmodeus3

No answer what a surprise... Maybe you missed them... Or you are just doing propaganda.

is that any of my business if she adapts another role?

I got some more, in case its not fear but curiosity....

Can xx adopt the role of a father?
Can xy adopt the role of a mother?
What defines those roles for you?

If one hasn't any real life experience with an ideology, a fixation with a topic normally stems from curiosity or fear.
The way you discuss it, leads me to belive in your case it's fear.
But I might be mistaken, hence the question

... I wonder where all the fear is coming from?

As you think they mean so much to your argument stemming from an incomplete understanding of the topic, here is your answer to your rethoric question.
Xy will not birth children with the current technology.

Look you are 100% right if you are merely an instinct driven animal. Are you?
No, because there are more sides to the issue and you being right in biology doesn't really explain your investment on the issue.

If I wanted to be so simple minded i would just shrug it off and say i can't fathom the psychological aspects of gender roles, that's way over my head.
Bam done move on, why waste my energy if I don't want to actually expand my understanding of the issue.

I'm curious what motivates you to write those threads? Is it really news worthy?
are your questions really that groundbreaking? what are you hoping to achieve?

You have written an entire essay saying nothing! It's just word salad. So I will ask you again as you have failed to answer simple questions. You have fudge the questions so many times.

You still haven't answered this question

Can men get pregnant and give birth?

My motives are irrelevant. And everything else is irrelevant. And your philosophy is also irrelevant.

You are trying to bring the issue of fear in the conversations. Classical populist tactics that are employed by the woke crowd.

originally posted by: paraphi
So, in summary. A biological female who has spent her life self-mutilating herself, and who has pretended to be a man, will have a baby.

I hope the baby grows up to be a well-rounded and balanced individual, unlike its mother.

Indeed, this person is a woman as men cannot give birth. It's just so simple.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Try reading again, because I promise I answered your question. I just worded it to apply only to your limited biological understanding of the issue.
in case you got trown off by "xx" and "xy" it's a reference to the chromosomes.

Maybe now you can answer my questions?

I'm not expecting you to actually answer. You either lack the intellect or integrity to follow and contribute to a discussion...

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Try reading again, because I promise I answered your question. I just worded it to apply only to your limited biological understanding of the issue.
in case you got trown off by "xx" and "xy" it's a reference to the chromosomes.

Maybe now you can answer my questions?

I'm not expecting you to actually answer. You either lack the intellect or integrity to follow and contribute to a discussion...

Ok you said

Xy will not birth children with the current technology.

It was hidden in your long pseudo-philosophical argument

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Intellect it is...

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Intellect it is...

Since you said, although hidden in your pseudo-philosophical argument that men cannot give birth that implies men cannot become women and no transitioning could happen.

Alleluia!!!

Finally!!! Welcome to the world of common sense!!!

a reply to: Asmodeus3

just to clarify Freddy McConnell is not legally a man on the birth certificate, so your constant stating "can a man get pregnant" is something only you are saying, not sure why, each to their own.

McConnell gave birth to a son, publicly known just as SJ, in January 2018. When attempting to register the child's birth, the Registrar denied McConnell's petition to be listed as the child's father on the birth certificate, though allowing McConnell to use his current name. In September 2019, McConnell lost an application for judicial review to be described as father or parent on the child's birth certificate. Reports suggest that English common law requires those that give birth to be described as mother on the child's birth certificate, despite McConnell's possession of a gender recognition certificate under the Gender Recognition Act of 2004. The President of the Family Division of the Administrative Court also denied a declaration of parentage filed by McConnell. The president declared that McConnell was legally the child's mother and thus possessed parental responsibility of the child accordingly. Because of this decision, McConnell could not be listed as the child's father on the birth certificate.[5] This decision was later upheld at the Court of Appeal in April 2020.[5]

originally posted by: UpThenDown
a reply to: Asmodeus3

just to clarify Freddy McConnell is not legally a man on the birth certificate, so your constant stating "can a man get pregnant" is something only you are saying, not sure why, each to their own.

McConnell gave birth to a son, publicly known just as SJ, in January 2018. When attempting to register the child's birth, the Registrar denied McConnell's petition to be listed as the child's father on the birth certificate, though allowing McConnell to use his current name. In September 2019, McConnell lost an application for judicial review to be described as father or parent on the child's birth certificate. Reports suggest that English common law requires those that give birth to be described as mother on the child's birth certificate, despite McConnell's possession of a gender recognition certificate under the Gender Recognition Act of 2004. The President of the Family Division of the Administrative Court also denied a declaration of parentage filed by McConnell. The president declared that McConnell was legally the child's mother and thus possessed parental responsibility of the child accordingly. Because of this decision, McConnell could not be listed as the child's father on the birth certificate.[5] This decision was later upheld at the Court of Appeal in April 2020.[5]

Take a look at the Guardian Article and their title. They literally said a dad who gave birth. It's this I am criticising and the perception some people have who believe men can get pregnant and give birth.

English common law seems to be based on common sense and reality. But for how much longer?

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: RonnieJersey

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: RonnieJersey

You should ask Moon68 about his theory on crazy sometime, it makes a lot of sense.

Thank you, I will look out for him!!

Mornin' Ronnie. Here's a quick bit of my theory:

In the 80's, as part of negotiations for Reagan's financial reforms, Democrats demanded that all mental asylums be closed down. All but the most dangerous, criminally insane mental defectives were released to the public. We're talking a minimum of 10's of thousands, I've read estimates of upwards of 300k. I'm fairly certain that many of them procreated, some with other unstable individuals. The United States has literally been breeding insanity bringing societal shift to where we are now. Two, going on three generations in and we sit around wondering what's changed in the last 30 years. We've propagated crazy and society and the policies that govern it.

Sounds valid to me, and looking around these days I cannot believe how no one can even add 2 and 2 anymore.
I hear 'oh my child is autistic' or 'he has adhd' or 'she is dyslexic' and on and on and on - when I went to school we simply got on with it, and every child did not have some type of strange disorder. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but can it possibly be the majority? And now we're lumping gender confusion into the mess, for some stupid reason.
Just why did the democrats want the asylums closed down? I don't understand the reasoning.
What I do see is that a completely different society has emerged recently, very low level, and which will live on government support for life.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

well they are incorrect, dont get triggered by them, legally on the birth certificate a mother gave birth, end of

a reply to: Asmodeus3

You sound unhinged, so much emotions for something irrelevant?

I start to understand why you won't touch psychology with a ten yard pole, i wouldn't want to wander in that mind either...

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Moon68

originally posted by: RonnieJersey

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: RonnieJersey

You should ask Moon68 about his theory on crazy sometime, it makes a lot of sense.

Thank you, I will look out for him!!

Mornin' Ronnie. Here's a quick bit of my theory:

In the 80's, as part of negotiations for Reagan's financial reforms, Democrats demanded that all mental asylums be closed down. All but the most dangerous, criminally insane mental defectives were released to the public. We're talking a minimum of 10's of thousands, I've read estimates of upwards of 300k. I'm fairly certain that many of them procreated, some with other unstable individuals. The United States has literally been breeding insanity bringing societal shift to where we are now. Two, going on three generations in and we sit around wondering what's changed in the last 30 years. We've propagated crazy and society and the policies that govern it.

Sounds like crazy right wing conspiracy theory...

More like anecdotal observation over the last 40 years

Incremental insanity until we've hit the tipping point where it's no longer just on the fringe but in your face everyday, you must not only accept but celebrate the madness.

Inclusiveness and tolerance

Objective reality

originally posted by: UpThenDown
a reply to: Asmodeus3

well they are incorrect, dont get triggered by them, legally on the birth certificate a mother gave birth, end of

I am not getting triggered. If you take a look at my threads I find pleasure exposing the gender and transgender ideologies as they are detached from reality.

They are also dangerous as they try to teach kids in schools and online they are just away from a surgery that will give them happiness and prosperity. They must get exposed.

I mean there are several threads by various members on the subject. Other platforms don't even allow discussion on this apart from twitter.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Asmodeus3

You sound unhinged, so much emotions for something irrelevant?

I start to understand why you won't touch psychology with a ten yard pole, i wouldn't want to wander in that mind either...

What emotions and what psychology?? Here we are talking about biological reality.

You said men cannot give birth that implies men cannot become women and no transitioning could happen. Embracing reality! It's great! You need to stay away from fantasies and pseudo-philosophies.