8mo ago

Ability of holding rules

96 comments

I didn't know it was possible for everyone to simply intend for their body to engage or not engage in such a bodily function. Interesting. /s
- Yeah, honestly, screw the meme reply, what the absolute holy hell is "the intention of holding eggs" in your body?
  I mean, pretty sure that covers a whole bunch of trans women and decidedly not a whole bunch of cis women, but that's besides the point. What did she mean?
  I fear there is a whole pseudoscientific terfy rabbit hole behind this and I don't want to fall down that hole, but I kinda need to know if it's a slip of the tongue or what.
  
  It's just regular misogyny this time, in that they only see "real" women as capable of giving birth, and then tried to cover up medical problems that would get in the way of that with the word "intention".
  
  I intentionally ate an egg sandwich this morning, guess I’m a woman now
  
  To me, it seems like she was going to only say "capability of holding eggs," then thought about it and actually realized it would exclude some cis women, so she added "intention" as if it meant "would usually be capable of" but just used a bad word to imply that. I could be reading into it a bit much though.
  Of course, that wouldn't work either, since that could then include or exclude people with various assortments of chromosomes in which it's undetermined as to if they would or would not typically have eggs, and would also just open a whole meta argument about how early in the developmental process there would or wouldn't be "intention" for that to happen, which is entirely subjective.
  
  What did she mean?
  She meant god.
  If you listen to some people talk about evolution or ancient mysteries of the body, they love describing things by their supposed purpose.
  I had a long argument with somebody once, trying to convince them that sex wasn't for babies, even though that's what it often results in.
  So like, evolutionarily, sex produces babies, that's why "it" "cares." But, a bird doesn't need to know what sex is or why it should want a baby to be motivated to do the thing that makes one. Similarly, a bee doesn't need to know that it's spreading pollen around, it just wants that sweet little flower juice.
  I don't remember why this argument was important to have, but I do remember them just not getting the distinction between "does" and "meant to."
  
  I’m very confused, isn’t the reply in support of trans people while the OP is clearly against them? Like why bother replying with that if you agree with the OP?
- What makes one think they have any interest in a woman's intentions with herself..? Intention is a loaded word and needs to pull over to the weigh station for inspection.

Born with the intention of holding eggs? Do they not know what the word intention means?
- $20 says it implies "intended by god".
  These asshats tend to try and hide their religious bias, but it comes out like this every now and then, and they often don't realize.
  
  If god intended for women to hold eggs, but many don't have the capability, did he fuck up?
  
  It doesn’t need to be intended by God. It can be intended by nature. It’s kind of like saying that homosexuality is unnatural because nature intended for male-female reproduction. That whole nonsense. Seems the same here.

- This knocks loose a memory for me. The instructor for the anthropology class that I took in college introduced the idea of natural categories versus cultural categories, and the example that he used was the category of things called "chair." It's a cultural category, which is defined as things that humans assign to the category somewhat arbitrarily.
  A chair might be something for a human to sit on, like a wooden platform on four legs, with a vertical back for lumbar support. It may have armrests ("arms") or not. If it doesn't have a back, it's a stool. But stools can also have backs, like some barstools, if they have longer legs. But a director's chair has long legs, and a back, and is not a stool?! And then what of a papasan chair, with no legs, with the seat and backrest combined into one, curved platform?
  If you sit on a stump around a campfire, that's kind of an improvised chair, defined more by the use than the shape. Then, put a collection of stumps around a table in a cabincore dining room, and now they are formally chairs.
  In the other direction, the student union at my university is well-known for its colorful terrace chairs with a sunburst pattern on the back. It has a couple of 10-foot-tall versions for people to climb on (at their own risk!) for social media photo ops. Those are chairs, because of the shape, although they're not for a human to sit on.
  And then let's not even get into lounge chairs, upon which you can be fully recumbent instead of sitting... Point is "biological female" is a natural category (sexually-reproducing organism bearing the larger of its species' gametes). It includes lizards and ferns, but not all of what we call women, because women is a cultural category. It's kind of arbitrary.
  And yeah, intelligent people know this, and the "adult biological female" people are just trying to hide their bigotry. I just like to think out loud about it.
- TIL the creator of Father Ted is a bigot. Fuckin bummer. Why can’t these assholes keep their shitty opinions to themselves?
  
  He wrote an otherwise funny episode of the IT crowd, but the B plot involved violence against a trans woman. When he was criticized for it, the universe presented him with a choice:
  reflect on one cheap joke, or
  make it his whole identity
  
  I prefer the enemies out themselves.

I just intentionally ate 2 more eggs then normal today. What's going to happen to me?!1 am i going to get gregnat
- I'm sorry you found out this way. Prepare your preganante fund
- grEGGnat
- This is the same way i got picante too
- <Insert egg joke here>
  
  <insert "I am laughing" reply here>

Huh, then menopause it's the moment when a cis woman turns into a cis man? No wonder they are super upset about the whole thing. The more you know, the full cycle of manhood is more complex than you know.

Behold, a woman

Went to shop today to buy egg specifically til I am woman amazing

how is anyone born with the intention of holding eggs?
- Jesus stuff

Well, if it’s a biological being and it identifies itself as woman, I think it is a woman? That said, I have never met a non-biological woman, maybe some minerals that haven’t been discovered yet have genders?
- I got an extension cord that is non-biological and has a female end, does that count?
  
  Can the female end of your extension cord hold eggs?
  
  I'm reasonably sure it's also got a male end though.
- We need AI to have non biological women.
  Just have a strong AI identify as a woman and watch Transphobes heads implode.
- In German, most minerals have a gender.
  
  Wait, most? I'm pretty sure all nouns are gendered in German.

The US seems to have an eggsistential crisis.

"Behold! I've brought you a [wo]man." -Diogenes

“What's up fuckers hey check out this woman I found, isn't it such a woman? Look at her wow! Plegghh what a gal. Anyway, love to stay and chat but I saw some trash outside that looked delicious. Smell you later, deliberator.”

So as long as i have the intention to hols eggs i am a women or when people stop being capable of producing eggs they automatically get a raise for becoming a man?
- Proximity to egg is inversely proportional to salary
  
  With eggflation, salary can also be paid in eggs Sometimes I wish I could delete comments on Lemmy
- No, no. You have to be born with the intention or capability. If you did not intend or were able to hold eggs at birth, then you're not a woman.
  
  tbh I don't think most babies intend for anything the moment they're born

This is a really bad definition because it very obviously excludes people who transition to women later in life.
- That's intentional.
  But it's also a really bad definition because it excludes most women over the age of 50.
  
  Technically not. They were born with the ability to hold eggs but lost it. Not saying I agree with the transphobe, but the definition technically doesn't exclude the elderly.

Sounds like a problem for their doctor or a scientist, there isnt anywhere else it would matter about their biological status. So a woman is someone that says they are a woman.
- "It's complicated" is probably better for doctors and scientists. The other day I was filling out a "women only" medical form and about half of the questions were relevant to me.
  And for a scientist, what exactly are they studying? For social science or psychology I'm an outlier no matter which gender or sex box you put me in; for reproductive stuff I'm closer to male but still somewhat of an outlier (because hormones); for various other medical things I'm closer to female (hormones again); neurologically idk, but there's evidence trans people tend to not match their AGAB here.
  But yeah, normal people shouldn't care about any of that when just talking to me.
  
  i want to hear more about the sex box, please

Relevant to those struggling with the gender/sex definitions and why they might be misleading: https://youtu.be/koud7hgGyQ8

96 comments