Gender is binary. Sex is a verb.

And all the evidence that I and others have given that proves sex is determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, you stand by your statement without providing a single supporting link or expert opinion? Well, yguy is right; there's no helping you. You could be an asset to the conservative cause but your ignorance will always stand in the way and open you, and the cause, to ridicule. Good luck with it. I'm done.

 

So if she come out crying that an actual female touched her, and she claims only urinating, we disbelieve the girl as well?

Again how is this different than if a cis woman does the act? It's still a she said/ she said, adult vs child

 

It's in the intent... When I was a kid, we had a joke: will you blow me for a million dollars (let's make it a billion now, for inflation)...You would? Now that we know what you are, let's negotiate price..... If you are a man and will have sex with a man, you are certainly not a heterosexual.

And yes, two is promiscuous if at the same time or overlapping times. Sex, at least between men and women, has consequences. That's why society has objected to promiscuity.

 

Actually it is the SRY gene, that is typically found on the Y chromosome. But that gene can both be missing on the Y chromosome and present on the X chromosome. So an XX person, with an SRY gene, can be born with a penis and testicles. Are they male or female?

 

Orientation is about attraction, not the act. According to the above logic, a chaste virgin is asexual regardless of how much they sexually desire one gender or the other.

So to be clear, multiple (2 or more) partners across a lifetime is not promiscuous as long as they are not overlapping?

 

Actually, nothing should be "viewed" as a "symbol" of anything unless it is specifically being viewed as that kind of symbol in that specific and particular circumstance. Symbols, like flags, are a convenient shorthand for something else, not the thing itself.

Frex. I really don't think that a certain well-known bus co has ANY connection to dog-racing, or breeding, or even dogs at all.

That being said, when the Manga Blade of the Immortal had its main character using a Swastika on his kimono they were at pains to repeatedly point out that it was a well-known usage among Samurai even though the story was a supernaturally based thriller set in 18th century Japan rather than anything to do with Nazis whatsoever.

Certain symbols have become so strong that they have a life of their own

 

But that has not been the actual way of things for going on a century now, and such consequences were really never totally unavoidable before.

 

We can go over the numbers for what percentage of sexual abusers are male or female. Suffice to say there are FAR more males.

Giving them unfettered access to places where women and girl are in various state school of undress is far too risky.

 

Sex as a verb - with chickens even...

 

You're right about orientation. Orientation is not an absolute. The act is. At least it is specific.

Oh, and as for definition of promiscuous, I'll conceded that two at different parts of life is not promiscuous. But that doesn't make a person bisexual. A lot of men marry, have children, and then come out as homosexual, not as bisexual. If they come out as bisexual then they're planning on having sex (should I say intercourse to keep from feeding the other debate in this thread?) with more than one person - but maybe they're planning on having sex with their male partner and then waiting to have sex after the partner has the operation...


But, seriously, there are far more important topics going on in this thread than the bit of difference we're debating... I have little interest in this because it's not affecting anyone's life.

 

Which is, once again, why societies for millennia, whether religious or secular, have frowned on sex across multiple partners. It led to disease and, maybe even worse from the view of the ages, to one man having to feed and house another man's child. Now we have men with 10s, maybe 20s or more baby mamas and you and I find ourselves having to help pay to raise those babies.

 

What ARE you going on about? People who are stably MARRIED nowadays don't have children and they don't have to. This is 21st century America, not 21st century BCE Middle East. Birth rates are declining for EVERYONE and unwanted teenage pregnancy is largely a thing of the past. As for disease, every hear of hygiene and prophylaxis?

 

Male. Because they have the SRY gene. How their genitals present is irrelevant. That was easy.

 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sex

As a noun.

 

Which brings us right back to words. Language evolves and as such words get new meanings and uses based upon context. This the argument that a word has meant something for X period of time means nothing.

 

And here I thought the argument was that even one is too many when it comes to the abuse of children.

The problem here is that we are taking the statistics of one thing and trying to apply it to another without proof. While some might argue "common sense", remember that it was also "common sense" that the sun moved around the earth.

 

No what I am asking is for you to tell us how to differentiate between the transgender who genuinely wants to use the opposite sex bathroom and the sexual predator who is abusing the rules to find his next victim.

If you can’t tell me how to do that then the risk is too high.

 

You were arguing earlier that it was the Y chromosome, so that meant that an XX person with the SRY gene would have been female. So now let me up this one. An actual genetic chimera, possessing two distinct sets of DNA, one XX, the other XY. The genitals region of the body develops with the XX set, but the head develops from the XY set. Male or female?

 

Then the risk is also to high for, as you note with the percentage of male attackers, for men to be in a restroom with boys.

That is one of the things I find amazing. The claim is that pedophiles are mostly homosexual, yet there is more fear of them attacking girls in the women's restroom. And yes I understand that the worry extends to adult women being attacked as well.

 

Is that an argument that sex is only a noun, or also a noun?

 

Well pedophiles are mostly straight although homosexual pedophiles represent a far greater percentage of the total pedophile population than their representation in the overall population would indicate.

I mean I can source as many instances of a boy being sexually assaulted in the bathroom as you want. It happens all the time. But homosexual males are a relatively small population and the number of times it happens is low.

But you’re talking about giving ANY man who simply says he identifies as a woman legal access to women and girls in various states of undress and private rooms with no cameras and usually only one way out.

How do you not understand the danger in that supersedes Gary’s right to to feel comfortable peeing sitting down in his dress?

 

Also

 

Gender is genetic. HomoSEXualaity does not alter one's gender. Sex is as sex does.

 

… nor is there a law that compels you to disclose your reason. As for the listed prohibitions, such as race, religion, sexual, etc., they are powerless because there is no law compelling anyone to disclose their reasons. Just say no.

 

There are laws against certain reasons, such as race, religion, sexual, etc., so technically one cannot discriminate for "any" reason. HOWEVER, those laws are powerless because there is no law compelling anyone to disclose their reasons.