The prince is not a biologist . Not only does he not know if she is a girl. He doesn't even know her species .
The Little Mermaid - Kiss the Girl - YouTube
|
The prince is not a biologist . Not only does he not know if she is a girl. He doesn't even know her species .
The Little Mermaid - Kiss the Girl - YouTube
Perfect example of sexual assault. He never ASKED her permission. Shame!! He should've gotten it in writing.
The disease is evidently highly contagious. Now the Biden admin itself cannot define what "woman" means.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bid...s-define-womanQuote:
A handful of Biden administration federal agencies were unable to define the meaning of the word "woman" – in some cases, even in relation to their own uses of terms such as "women's health" – when asked by Fox News Digital.The Biden administration's Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Education, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Federal Bureau of Prisons were all contacted by Fox News Digital requesting a definition of "woman." None of the agencies provided their definition or criteria for an individual to be categorized as a "woman," despite each boasting entire initiatives aimed at helping women and DOJ declined to comment.
The Washington Post, unsurprisingly, ran a headline about "pregnant people" being at risk from Covid. Pregnant "people"??? The entire article magically managed to never use the word "woman" a single time. It included this.
So not even the Post can decide what it means to be a woman. I suppose the next mystery for liberal dems will be what it means to be a person. Will we see an article about "pregnant hominids" next?Quote:
"Pregnant people who are vaccinated against the coronavirus are nearly twice as likely to get covid-19 as those who are not pregnant, according to a new study that offers the broadest evidence to date of the odds of infections among vaccinated patients with different medical circumstances," they wrote.
My heart goes out to the TG pop. It must be a horrible disorder to have to deal with, but telling 6 year olds that it's perfectly normal is not the answer. There seems to be no genetic or biological connection to it that I can find. I suspect an unbiased research effort would unlock at least some clues.
You are seriously misinformed.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I'm always open to correction, but you have not managed to present anything to the contrary. Gender is determined at conception. That is an obvious and plain biological truth which can be found in any 9th grade biology textbook and has been known for more than a century. There seems to be no hormonal keys to the condition and certainly no "testosterone bath" that all unborn children, male and female, are subjected to, or at least not that you have been able to present. But like I say, I am open to evidence. I wish everyone the best, TG individuals included, but I am not willing to believe that which is clearly not true.
"All human individuals—whether they have an XX, an XY, or an atypical sex chromosome combination—begin development from the same starting point. During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female. After approximately 6 to 7 weeks of gestation, however, the expression of a gene on the Y chromosome ["testosterone bath"] induces changes that result in the development of the testes."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222286/
You don’t understand what you are discussing. Phenotype only refers to appearance and not to genetic nature. Look up genotype. Gender is locked in at conception. Your “testosterone bath” was not in your article and completely unsupported. It is just poor conjecture. So you simply have no support. You don’t understand the science.
You can also look up “undifferentiated”. It will be enlightening.
This part of your article really makes it clear. "Until about the 12-millimeter stage (approximately 42 days of gestation), the embryonic gonads of males and females are indistinguishable."
This portion of the article you linked pretty much says it all.
Quote:
In contrast, mammalian sex determination is more directly under the control of a single internal event: fertilization. Under normal conditions, the direction of sexual development is initiated and determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome.
No wonder you don't understand the Bible!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Ugly comments don't amount to rational discussion.
Look up genotype, phenotype, and undifferentiated. It will help you.
You might also read the article you linked.
Right. They show as female.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
undifferentiated -- synonyms:identical · similar · alike · (exactly) the same · indistinguishable · uniform · twin · homogeneous · of a piece · cut from the same cloth · corresponding · correspondent · commensurate · equivalent · matching · like · parallel · analogous · comparable · cognate · equal
Like "you don't understand the science"? Look in the mirror when you say that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You did not read the definition of undifferentiated. Sad. You also should look up "indistinguishable".
Did you look up genotype/phenotype? You will find that very helpful.
undifferentiated. not having any distinguishing features
In other words, you cannot tell one from the other.
You don't understand how phenotype and genotype differ. You blew past the definition of "undifferentiated". You do not understand the article, and you will not affirm what has been known for a century and is acknowledged in your own article, that gender is determined at conception by the sex chromosomes.
Good night.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:33 PM. |