[Split Thread] Different attitudes homosexual and transgender individuals

Foster Zygote · 25th April 2022, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Well, since I don't think it is a mental defect, I wouldn't advocate portraying it as such.

Originally Posted by Also Warp12

Well, I think it is a mental illness..or more accurately, a mental defect. It is an anomalous and unhealthy mental condition, in my view.

Why won't you answer my question? Do you really think that sexual identity is determined by cultural programming? In the absence of said programming, would sexual orientation be essentially random?

Split from What is the MAGAchuds’s beef with Disney?

Posted By:jimbob

Warp12 · 25th April 2022, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Originally Posted by Warp12

Well, since I don't think it is a mental defect, I wouldn't advocate portraying it as such.

Originally Posted by Also Warp12

Well, I think it is a mental illness..or more accurately, a mental defect. It is an anomalous and unhealthy mental condition, in my view.

Why won't you answer my question? Do you really think that sexual identity is determined by cultural programming? In the absence of said programming, would sexual orientation be essentially random?

I was directly responding to a post about transgenderism...not homosexuality.

Originally Posted by Warp12

Well, I think it is a mental illness..or more accurately, a mental defect. It is an anomalous and unhealthy mental condition, in my view. So, I don't want it being taught to my kids as "normal". People who suffer from schizophrenia are not "normal", and we don't pretend so.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post13789749

Obviously you could see this, since you quoted my post. That is quite a disingenuous representation of my position.

Thus, I suppose we won't be debating this topic any further.

Stacyhs · 25th April 2022, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Well, since I don't think it is a mental defect, I wouldn't advocate portraying it as such.

Why do you think being transgender is a mental defect but homosexuality is not?

Warp12 · 25th April 2022, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Why do you think being transgender is a mental defect but homosexuality is not?

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread.

Stacyhs · 25th April 2022, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread.

So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense.

Warp12 · 25th April 2022, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense.

First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue.

What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further.

Norman Alexander · 25th April 2022, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread.

What makes you think all transgender people mutilate their bodies or take hormones?

What makes you think all homosexuals do NOT mutilate their bodies or take hormones?

What makes you think NO straight people mutilate their bodies or take hormones?

Upchurch · 25th April 2022, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not.

The transgender kid in my son's class didn't mutilate their body or take hormones. Is it still insane if you are basing your judgement on a false premise?

Originally Posted by Warp12

Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender".

By that definition, neither is anyone born cis-gendered. Are you only cis-gendered because you believe yourself to be based on social norms? But if they are only social norms, nothing prevents one from being transgender. Hm.

(Of course, there is a bunch of biology that suggests that transgenderism is has a more physical root than that, but I'm guessing you aren't ready for that discussion.)

Skeptic Ginger · 25th April 2022, 07:38 PM

I raised a boy and one of my friends raised a girl of the same age. We both noticed our kids had strong gender identities very early on despite both of us being single parents who were pretty sure we were not instilling gender identities in our kids. She was dismayed her little girl was into princesses, Barbie and pink. My son was into batman and toy cars. Probably there were influences from TV and daycare but still, that could not explain all the gender identity traits kids develop at young ages. Biology had to have primed the pump.

Regnad Kcin · 25th April 2022, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue.

What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further.

Going to take your nipples and go home?

ZiprHead · 26th April 2022, 08:53 AM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

The transgender kid in my son's class didn't mutilate their body or take hormones. Is it still insane if you are basing your judgement on a false premise?

By that definition, neither is anyone born cis-gendered. Are you only cis-gendered because you believe yourself to be based on social norms? But if they are only social norms, nothing prevents one from being transgender. Hm.

(Of course, there is a bunch of biology that suggests that transgenderism is has a more physical root than that, but I'm guessing you aren't ready for that discussion.)

There's lots of biology that suggests that.

Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender

Upchurch · 26th April 2022, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

There's lots of biology that suggests that.

Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender

Good talk

Stacyhs · 26th April 2022, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense.

Originally Posted by Warp12

First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue.

What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further.

First, you're hallucinating if you're seeing me "making an attempt to twist (your) words. I repeated what you said and then asked you "Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either?" based on YOUR condition of "biology". That you cannot answer that with a logical and rational reason is why you aren't going to "debate it here any further." Stop peeing on my leg cuz we all know it ain't rain.

Shadowdweller · 26th April 2022, 02:30 PM

To clarify and elaborate on this for those less well versed in Biology / Physiology:
1. Sex hormones drive sexual differentiation, during embryological development, into male or female. Almost the entirety of the "male" part of the Y-chromosome (i.e. the part that makes it the Y-chromosome as opposed to the X-chromosome) is the SRY gene, which codes for testosterone receptors. (Androgens like testosterone are associated with male development whereas estrogens are associated with female development; but both are produced in both genders, serving different developmental and regulatory functions)

2. Different parts of the human body develop at different times during embryological development. In particular with respect to gender identity and orientation, genitalia and brain undergo sexual differentiation at different times.

3. Hormone levels during embryological development fluctuate. Meaning that fetal development of gonads may take place when hormonal levels are different than when structures in the brain develop. There are multiple factors than can change hormone levels during fetal development; or affect the fetus's response to those hormones.

One example, of many, is that there are classes of compounds similar enough to native sex hormones that they are capable of affecting the body to a greater or lesser extent like those hormones. Some of these compounds can be introduced into the body from what we eat. For example soy products are supposedly high in phytoestrogens: plant-based compounds that can affect the body like native estrogens. Both phytoandrogens AND phytoestrogens are known to cross the placental barrier during pregnancy.

Stacyhs · 26th April 2022, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I raised a boy and one of my friends raised a girl of the same age. We both noticed our kids had strong gender identities very early on despite both of us being single parents who were pretty sure we were not instilling gender identities in our kids. She was dismayed her little girl was into princesses, Barbie and pink. My son was into batman and toy cars. Probably there were influences from TV and daycare but still, that could not explain all the gender identity traits kids develop at young ages. Biology had to have primed the pump.

I agree 100%. As for nature vs nurture/society/ parental influence, etc., I've always said that clay and playdough can both be molded and shaped, but clay will never be playdough and playdough will never be clay. We are what we were born when it comes to certain things: our cis-homo-bi-whatever sexuality and our gender identity or two. No one "turns".

Stacyhs · 26th April 2022, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

There's lots of biology that suggests that.

Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender

Biology only counts when it comes to having a penis or a clitoris at birth. Otherwise, it's just a liberal sickness.

angrysoba · 26th April 2022, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual.

This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread.

It’s rare to find Americans who are so against circumcision as you are! Bravo!

However, I do hear that some people benefit from hormone replacement therapies and various surgeries that improve their quality of life. I get it that some people think this is “unnatural” but frankly natural is over-rated. Children born with cleft pallets etc…. probably benefit from such surgeries.

Warp12 · 26th April 2022, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

It’s rare to find Americans who are so against circumcision as you are! Bravo!

However, I do hear that some people benefit from hormone replacement therapies and various surgeries that improve their quality of life. I get it that some people think this is “unnatural” but frankly natural is over-rated. Children born with cleft pallets etc…. probably benefit from such surgeries.

Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina.

All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades.

The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations.

Stacyhs · 26th April 2022, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina.

All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades.

The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations.

The ridiculous nature some of the rightist input has put forth has fully met my expectations. If there is any reason not to support the right-wing's barely hidden agenda to legalize bigotry and homophobia, this thread delivers it in spades.

Proclaiming being transgendered is a mental defect in glaring opposition to medical and psychiatric/psychological organizations' saying it is not is pure narcissism. The "I don't care what the experts say, I know better for.....reasons" argument doesn't work well with people who actually have critical thinking abilities.

Regnad Kcin · 26th April 2022, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina.

All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades.

The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations.

Quick question: Is your high horse a stallion or a gelding?

kevbo · 27th April 2022, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

Quick question: Is your high horse a stallion or a gelding?

HansMustermann · 27th April 2022, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten.

I hope you realize they're not countering the right wingers' argument. The whole point of the "groomer" outrage is the scare that kids will be misled to do irreversible^* stuff at ages where they don't actually have the mental capacity to fully understand what they're doing. That it's (more) ok to do that as an adult is actually part of their argument.

^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility, as those cells don't just slow down at higher temperatures, they can actually just up and die. And the company in the link sells them only in sizes ranging from age 4 to teenage.

Though I'm not sure how the Florida bill is supposed to do anything about it. The whole Florida argument is that such things should be in the hands of the parents, aaand... surprisingly enough, it's parents who buy the underwear at that age. I don't think any school started giving out underwear.

bruto · 27th April 2022, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

I hope you realize they're not countering the right wingers' argument. The whole point of the "groomer" outrage is the scare that kids will be misled to do irreversible^* stuff at ages where they don't actually have the mental capacity to fully understand what they're doing. That it's (more) ok to do that as an adult is actually part of their argument.

^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility, as those cells don't just slow down at higher temperatures, they can actually just up and die. And the company in the link sells them only in sizes ranging from age 4 to teenage.

Though I'm not sure how the Florida bill is supposed to do anything about it. The whole Florida argument is that such things should be in the hands of the parents, aaand... surprisingly enough, it's parents who buy the underwear at that age. I don't think any school started giving out underwear.

No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants.

theprestige · 27th April 2022, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility

I doubt there's any kind of pants that would affect a boy's fertility, no matter how convinced they might be that they're actually a girl.

Upchurch · 27th April 2022, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by bruto

No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants.

I ...what? Are you talking about the DeSantis law in Florida?

HansMustermann · 27th April 2022, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I doubt there's any kind of pants that would affect a boy's fertility, no matter how convinced they might be that they're actually a girl.

Apparently it can. Well, by the time it starts to matter.

Though I'm still not sure why it's a problem for the conservatives. I mean, that would solve whatever trans genes there might be in the long term. You know, Darwinian style.

Oh... wait... they'd first have to be onboard with Darwin

mgidm86 · 27th April 2022, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Cleft pallets, no, but circumcision is having part of your wang cut off. How do you now know this?

I know that in some benighted parts of the world, lopping off bits of a boy's wang is done when a child is an infant! For Gawwwd's sake! They get zero say in this!

I hope you are against this barbaric practice, otherwise I will consider you to be the worst person in the world for the crime of unthinking hypocrisy.

On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten.

A thing for which people of all and no genders and have laid their lives on the line.

A thing called Liberty!

Oh yes, and freedom too!

It would be cruel of me to expect NPC MAGAbots to understand these things, and doubly cruel to engage in intellectual argument with people so blatantly unequipped for debate, but I will leave you with a warning.

If you try to counteract your plumetting testosterone levels with exogenous testosterone, you can end up growing a pair of moobs. This is colloquially known as gyno.

This could have disastrous impact on your social life when you turn up to the Dave Rubin Show that someone gifted you tickets for (when they found out he was a "groomer"), as you might get singled out in the crowd and told to "Go back to Disneyland!"

The statement was "Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not."

Sorry, I disagree with the sentiments of the poster you are replying to, but you aren't arguing against what he actually said.

theprestige · 27th April 2022, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Apparently it can. Well, by the time it starts to matter.

Though I'm still not sure why it's a problem for the conservatives. I mean, that would solve whatever trans genes there might be in the long term. You know, Darwinian style.

Oh... wait... they'd first have to be onboard with Darwin

You're probably thinking of virility.

bruto · 27th April 2022, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

I ...what? Are you talking about the DeSantis law in Florida?

Not directly - I'm talking about getting uptight about whether some kid has suspiciously tight-looking underwear, which it appears some are trying to lump under the heading of "grooming" that must be curtailed.

HansMustermann · 27th April 2022, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

You're probably thinking of virility.

No, the claim is literally that the cells producing the spermatozoa die over time if they're kept at body temperature. Has nothing to do with virility.

Upchurch · 27th April 2022, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by bruto

Not directly

Nor indirectly. There is nothing like that in the Florida law.

Originally Posted by bruto

I'm talking about getting uptight about whether some kid has suspiciously tight-looking underwear, which it appears some are trying to lump under the heading of "grooming" that must be curtailed.

I was not under the impression that had anything to do with teachers.

catsmate · 28th April 2022, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

There's lots of biology that suggests that.

Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender

Personally I like the Genderbread Person.

catsmate · 28th April 2022, 09:10 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Cleft pallets, no, but circumcision is having part of your wang cut off. How do you now know this?

I know that in some benighted parts of the world, lopping off bits of a boy's wang is done when a child is an infant! For Gawwwd's sake! They get zero say in this!

I hope you are against this barbaric practice, otherwise I will consider you to be the worst person in the world for the crime of unthinking hypocrisy.

On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten.

A thing for which people of all and no genders and have laid their lives on the line.

A thing called Liberty!

Oh yes, and freedom too!

It would be cruel of me to expect NPC MAGAbots to understand these things, and doubly cruel to engage in intellectual argument with people so blatantly unequipped for debate, but I will leave you with a warning.

If you try to counteract your plumetting testosterone levels with exogenous testosterone, you can end up growing a pair of moobs. This is colloquially known as gyno.

This could have disastrous impact on your social life when you turn up to the Dave Rubin Show that someone gifted you tickets for (when they found out he was a "groomer"), as you might get singled out in the crowd and told to "Go back to Disneyland!"

Emily's Cat · 28th April 2022, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by bruto

No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants.

Are you quibbling with the term "fertility" or are you questioning that the underwear could actually damage a male's ability to produce sperm and cause sterility?

ETA: Answered

Originally Posted by theprestige

You're probably thinking of virility.

Emily's Cat · 28th April 2022, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

No, the claim is literally that the cells producing the spermatozoa die over time if they're kept at body temperature. Has nothing to do with virility.

Fertility is a female-specific term, virility is a male-specific term.

So let's just sidestep all of that, and say that pushing a child's testes up into their inguinal canals and using very tight-fitting underwear to force them to stay inside their bodies can most assuredly cause sterility.

HansMustermann · 28th April 2022, 01:38 PM

Ah. Well, my limited knowledge of English strikes again. Thanks for the correction.

TomB · 28th April 2022, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Fertility is a female-specific term, virility is a male-specific term.

So let's just sidestep all of that, and say that pushing a child's testes up into their inguinal canals and using very tight-fitting underwear to force them to stay inside their bodies can most assuredly cause sterility.

No, it's not.

Quote:

Examples of fertility in a Sentence
She studied the effects of pollution on the fertility of the local fish population. The doctor ordered a test of his fertility. The area is known for its soil fertility. the fertility of his imagination

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

The relevant definition of fertile is:

Quote:

: capable of breeding or reproducing

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

And virility is not related to reproduction:

Quote:

Definition of virility

: the quality or state of being virile:
a : manhood sense 3
b : manly vigor : masculinity

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

Warp12 · 28th April 2022, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

No, the claim is literally that the cells producing the spermatozoa die over time if they're kept at body temperature. Has nothing to do with virility.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

So let's just sidestep all of that, and say that pushing a child's testes up into their inguinal canals and using very tight-fitting underwear to force them to stay inside their bodies can most assuredly cause sterility.

Oh, I'm sure that won't be a worry for too long. Probably some "experts" will soon publish a paper that suggests early surgical mutilation is best. It is "gender-affirming care", after all.

Thinking about this makes me chuckle...briefly. It is like the goal for some liberals is to literally create a society of dickless men. We must then refer to these people as "women"...or else.

Pretty kooky.

gnome · 28th April 2022, 02:37 PM

Not hard for things to get kooky when you make them up. I think it tells you more about yourself than anything else.

Upchurch · 28th April 2022, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

Thinking about this makes me chuckle...briefly. It is like the goal for some liberals is to literally create a society of dickless men. We must then refer to these people as "women"...or else.

To which liberals are you referring, specifically?

25th April 2022, 10:23 AM	#2
Warp12 King of Kings Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,043	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote Originally Posted by Warp12 Well, since I don't think it is a mental defect, I wouldn't advocate portraying it as such. Originally Posted by Also Warp12 Well, I think it is a mental illness..or more accurately, a mental defect. It is an anomalous and unhealthy mental condition, in my view. Why won't you answer my question? Do you really think that sexual identity is determined by cultural programming? In the absence of said programming, would sexual orientation be essentially random? I was directly responding to a post about transgenderism...not homosexuality. Originally Posted by Warp12 Well, I think it is a mental illness..or more accurately, a mental defect. It is an anomalous and unhealthy mental condition, in my view. So, I don't want it being taught to my kids as "normal". People who suffer from schizophrenia are not "normal", and we don't pretend so. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...9#post13789749 Obviously you could see this, since you quoted my post. That is quite a disingenuous representation of my position. Thus, I suppose we won't be debating this topic any further.
	__________________ "Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust whitey; see a doctor and get rid of it." - Navin R. Johnson Last edited by Warp12; 25th April 2022 at 10:29 AM.

25th April 2022, 04:19 PM	#4
Warp12 King of Kings Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,043	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Why do you think being transgender is a mental defect but homosexuality is not? Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread.
	__________________ "Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust whitey; see a doctor and get rid of it." - Navin R. Johnson

25th April 2022, 05:10 PM	#6
Warp12 King of Kings Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,043	Originally Posted by Warp12 Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. Originally Posted by Stacyhs So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense. First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue. What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further.
	__________________ "Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust whitey; see a doctor and get rid of it." - Navin R. Johnson Last edited by Warp12; 25th April 2022 at 05:11 PM.

25th April 2022, 05:11 PM	#7
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Gundungurra Posts: 11,742	Originally Posted by Warp12 Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread. What makes you think all transgender people mutilate their bodies or take hormones? What makes you think all homosexuals do NOT mutilate their bodies or take hormones? What makes you think NO straight people mutilate their bodies or take hormones?
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015} Last edited by Norman Alexander; 25th April 2022 at 05:12 PM.

25th April 2022, 07:38 PM	#8
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,848	Originally Posted by Warp12 Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. The transgender kid in my son's class didn't mutilate their body or take hormones. Is it still insane if you are basing your judgement on a false premise? Originally Posted by Warp12 Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". By that definition, neither is anyone born cis-gendered. Are you only cis-gendered because you believe yourself to be based on social norms? But if they are only social norms, nothing prevents one from being transgender. Hm. (Of course, there is a bunch of biology that suggests that transgenderism is has a more physical root than that, but I'm guessing you aren't ready for that discussion.)
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

25th April 2022, 03:37 PM	#3
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Originally Posted by Warp12 Well, since I don't think it is a mental defect, I wouldn't advocate portraying it as such. Why do you think being transgender is a mental defect but homosexuality is not?

25th April 2022, 04:50 PM	#5
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Originally Posted by Warp12 Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread. So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense.

25th April 2022, 07:38 PM	#9
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 91,594	I raised a boy and one of my friends raised a girl of the same age. We both noticed our kids had strong gender identities very early on despite both of us being single parents who were pretty sure we were not instilling gender identities in our kids. She was dismayed her little girl was into princesses, Barbie and pink. My son was into batman and toy cars. Probably there were influences from TV and daycare but still, that could not explain all the gender identity traits kids develop at young ages. Biology had to have primed the pump.

25th April 2022, 08:17 PM	#10
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York Posts: 10,562	Originally Posted by Warp12 First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue. What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further. Going to take your nipples and go home?
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

26th April 2022, 08:53 AM	#11
ZiprHead Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sag-Nasty Posts: 547	Originally Posted by Upchurch The transgender kid in my son's class didn't mutilate their body or take hormones. Is it still insane if you are basing your judgement on a false premise? By that definition, neither is anyone born cis-gendered. Are you only cis-gendered because you believe yourself to be based on social norms? But if they are only social norms, nothing prevents one from being transgender. Hm. (Of course, there is a bunch of biology that suggests that transgenderism is has a more physical root than that, but I'm guessing you aren't ready for that discussion.) There's lots of biology that suggests that. Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender
	__________________ When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy. IIDB is back, baby!

26th April 2022, 01:13 PM	#12
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,848	Originally Posted by ZiprHead There's lots of biology that suggests that. Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender Good talk
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

26th April 2022, 02:27 PM	#13
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Quote: Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. Quote: Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post So, you think anyone who "mutilates" their bodies/take hormones to be something they are not "biologically" is the problem. Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either? We don't know what the cause of homosexuality is any more than we know what causes people to be transgender. Your distinction makes no sense. Originally Posted by Warp12 First, I can see that you are making an attempt to twist my words in order to cover a broad spectrum of conditions. I am talking very specifically about this one issue. What I've said makes perfect sense. But I am not going to debate it here any further. First, you're hallucinating if you're seeing me "making an attempt to twist (your) words. I repeated what you said and then asked you "Why is that a mental defect but homosexuality isn't when that is not what "biology" intended either?" based on YOUR condition of "biology". That you cannot answer that with a logical and rational reason is why you aren't going to "debate it here any further." Stop peeing on my leg cuz we all know it ain't rain.

26th April 2022, 02:30 PM	#14
Shadowdweller Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,217	To clarify and elaborate on this for those less well versed in Biology / Physiology: 1. Sex hormones drive sexual differentiation, during embryological development, into male or female. Almost the entirety of the "male" part of the Y-chromosome (i.e. the part that makes it the Y-chromosome as opposed to the X-chromosome) is the SRY gene, which codes for testosterone receptors. (Androgens like testosterone are associated with male development whereas estrogens are associated with female development; but both are produced in both genders, serving different developmental and regulatory functions) 2. Different parts of the human body develop at different times during embryological development. In particular with respect to gender identity and orientation, genitalia and brain undergo sexual differentiation at different times. 3. Hormone levels during embryological development fluctuate. Meaning that fetal development of gonads may take place when hormonal levels are different than when structures in the brain develop. There are multiple factors than can change hormone levels during fetal development; or affect the fetus's response to those hormones. One example, of many, is that there are classes of compounds similar enough to native sex hormones that they are capable of affecting the body to a greater or lesser extent like those hormones. Some of these compounds can be introduced into the body from what we eat. For example soy products are supposedly high in phytoestrogens: plant-based compounds that can affect the body like native estrogens. Both phytoandrogens AND phytoestrogens are known to cross the placental barrier during pregnancy.
	Last edited by Shadowdweller; 26th April 2022 at 02:46 PM.

26th April 2022, 02:33 PM	#15
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger I raised a boy and one of my friends raised a girl of the same age. We both noticed our kids had strong gender identities very early on despite both of us being single parents who were pretty sure we were not instilling gender identities in our kids. She was dismayed her little girl was into princesses, Barbie and pink. My son was into batman and toy cars. Probably there were influences from TV and daycare but still, that could not explain all the gender identity traits kids develop at young ages. Biology had to have primed the pump. I agree 100%. As for nature vs nurture/society/ parental influence, etc., I've always said that clay and playdough can both be molded and shaped, but clay will never be playdough and playdough will never be clay. We are what we were born when it comes to certain things: our cis-homo-bi-whatever sexuality and our gender identity or two. No one "turns".

26th April 2022, 02:57 PM	#16
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Originally Posted by ZiprHead There's lots of biology that suggests that. Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender Biology only counts when it comes to having a penis or a clitoris at birth. Otherwise, it's just a liberal sickness.

26th April 2022, 03:49 PM	#17
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 32,788	Originally Posted by Warp12 Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not. Also, if we consider gender norms a societal construct, nobody is born "transgender". Homosexuality is not based upon such constructs; it is based upon sexual attraction, which is more instinctual. This discussion is probably more appropriate for the transgender-specific thread. It’s rare to find Americans who are so against circumcision as you are! Bravo! However, I do hear that some people benefit from hormone replacement therapies and various surgeries that improve their quality of life. I get it that some people think this is “unnatural” but frankly natural is over-rated. Children born with cleft pallets etc…. probably benefit from such surgeries.
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

26th April 2022, 04:41 PM	#18
Warp12 King of Kings Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,043	Originally Posted by angrysoba It’s rare to find Americans who are so against circumcision as you are! Bravo! However, I do hear that some people benefit from hormone replacement therapies and various surgeries that improve their quality of life. I get it that some people think this is “unnatural” but frankly natural is over-rated. Children born with cleft pallets etc…. probably benefit from such surgeries. Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina. All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades. The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations.
	__________________ "Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust whitey; see a doctor and get rid of it." - Navin R. Johnson

26th April 2022, 06:33 PM	#19
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 24,873	Originally Posted by Warp12 Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina. All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades. The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations. The ridiculous nature some of the rightist input has put forth has fully met my expectations. If there is any reason not to support the right-wing's barely hidden agenda to legalize bigotry and homophobia, this thread delivers it in spades. Proclaiming being transgendered is a mental defect in glaring opposition to medical and psychiatric/psychological organizations' saying it is not is pure narcissism. The "I don't care what the experts say, I know better for.....reasons" argument doesn't work well with people who actually have critical thinking abilities.

26th April 2022, 08:01 PM	#20
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York Posts: 10,562	Originally Posted by Warp12 Yes, circumcision and cleft pallet surgeries are exactly like men lopping their wangs off and having their privates fashioned into a pretend makeshift vagina. All of this has already been covered. One thing is for sure, if any conservative needs a great reason to support the FL legislation and condemn Disney, this thread delivers in spades. The ridiculous nature of some of the leftist input has exceeded all of my expectations. Quick question: Is your high horse a stallion or a gelding?
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

27th April 2022, 01:22 AM	#21
kevbo Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Rogue Valley, Oregon Posts: 347	Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin Quick question: Is your high horse a stallion or a gelding?

27th April 2022, 09:31 AM	#22
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20,097	Originally Posted by angrysoba On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten. I hope you realize they're not countering the right wingers' argument. The whole point of the "groomer" outrage is the scare that kids will be misled to do irreversible^* stuff at ages where they don't actually have the mental capacity to fully understand what they're doing. That it's (more) ok to do that as an adult is actually part of their argument. ^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility, as those cells don't just slow down at higher temperatures, they can actually just up and die. And the company in the link sells them only in sizes ranging from age 4 to teenage. Though I'm not sure how the Florida bill is supposed to do anything about it. The whole Florida argument is that such things should be in the hands of the parents, aaand... surprisingly enough, it's parents who buy the underwear at that age. I don't think any school started giving out underwear.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand? Last edited by HansMustermann; 27th April 2022 at 09:33 AM.

27th April 2022, 01:15 PM	#23
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 32,389	Originally Posted by HansMustermann I hope you realize they're not countering the right wingers' argument. The whole point of the "groomer" outrage is the scare that kids will be misled to do irreversible^* stuff at ages where they don't actually have the mental capacity to fully understand what they're doing. That it's (more) ok to do that as an adult is actually part of their argument. ^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility, as those cells don't just slow down at higher temperatures, they can actually just up and die. And the company in the link sells them only in sizes ranging from age 4 to teenage. Though I'm not sure how the Florida bill is supposed to do anything about it. The whole Florida argument is that such things should be in the hands of the parents, aaand... surprisingly enough, it's parents who buy the underwear at that age. I don't think any school started giving out underwear. No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

27th April 2022, 01:42 PM	#24
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 58,576	Originally Posted by HansMustermann ^* Apparently including even wearing tight underwear to try to hide the boy parts can irreversibly reduce one's fertility I doubt there's any kind of pants that would affect a boy's fertility, no matter how convinced they might be that they're actually a girl.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

27th April 2022, 01:51 PM	#25
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,848	Originally Posted by bruto No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants. I ...what? Are you talking about the DeSantis law in Florida?
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

27th April 2022, 02:09 PM	#26
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20,097	Originally Posted by theprestige I doubt there's any kind of pants that would affect a boy's fertility, no matter how convinced they might be that they're actually a girl. Apparently it can. Well, by the time it starts to matter. Though I'm still not sure why it's a problem for the conservatives. I mean, that would solve whatever trans genes there might be in the long term. You know, Darwinian style. Oh... wait... they'd first have to be onboard with Darwin
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

27th April 2022, 02:15 PM	#27
mgidm86 Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 7,740	Originally Posted by angrysoba Cleft pallets, no, but circumcision is having part of your wang cut off. How do you now know this? I know that in some benighted parts of the world, lopping off bits of a boy's wang is done when a child is an infant! For Gawwwd's sake! They get zero say in this! I hope you are against this barbaric practice, otherwise I will consider you to be the worst person in the world for the crime of unthinking hypocrisy. On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten. A thing for which people of all and no genders and have laid their lives on the line. A thing called Liberty! Oh yes, and freedom too! It would be cruel of me to expect NPC MAGAbots to understand these things, and doubly cruel to engage in intellectual argument with people so blatantly unequipped for debate, but I will leave you with a warning. If you try to counteract your plumetting testosterone levels with exogenous testosterone, you can end up growing a pair of moobs. This is colloquially known as gyno. This could have disastrous impact on your social life when you turn up to the Dave Rubin Show that someone gifted you tickets for (when they found out he was a "groomer"), as you might get singled out in the crowd and told to "Go back to Disneyland!" The statement was "Because homosexuals don't mutilate their bodies/take hormones in an attempt to become something that they are biologically not." Sorry, I disagree with the sentiments of the poster you are replying to, but you aren't arguing against what he actually said.
mgidm86 Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 7,740	__________________ A zombie would starve here.

27th April 2022, 02:21 PM	#28
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 58,576	Originally Posted by HansMustermann Apparently it can. Well, by the time it starts to matter. Though I'm still not sure why it's a problem for the conservatives. I mean, that would solve whatever trans genes there might be in the long term. You know, Darwinian style. Oh... wait... they'd first have to be onboard with Darwin You're probably thinking of virility.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

27th April 2022, 02:32 PM	#29
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 32,389	Originally Posted by Upchurch I ...what? Are you talking about the DeSantis law in Florida? Not directly - I'm talking about getting uptight about whether some kid has suspiciously tight-looking underwear, which it appears some are trying to lump under the heading of "grooming" that must be curtailed.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

27th April 2022, 02:39 PM	#30
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20,097	Originally Posted by theprestige You're probably thinking of virility. No, the claim is literally that the cells producing the spermatozoa die over time if they're kept at body temperature. Has nothing to do with virility.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

27th April 2022, 03:20 PM	#31
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,848	Originally Posted by bruto Not directly Nor indirectly. There is nothing like that in the Florida law. Originally Posted by bruto I'm talking about getting uptight about whether some kid has suspiciously tight-looking underwear, which it appears some are trying to lump under the heading of "grooming" that must be curtailed. I was not under the impression that had anything to do with teachers.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

28th April 2022, 09:08 AM	#32
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 26,913	Originally Posted by ZiprHead There's lots of biology that suggests that. Robert Sapolsky: Brain Gender Personally I like the Genderbread Person.
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

28th April 2022, 09:10 AM	#33
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 26,913	Originally Posted by angrysoba Cleft pallets, no, but circumcision is having part of your wang cut off. How do you now know this? I know that in some benighted parts of the world, lopping off bits of a boy's wang is done when a child is an infant! For Gawwwd's sake! They get zero say in this! I hope you are against this barbaric practice, otherwise I will consider you to be the worst person in the world for the crime of unthinking hypocrisy. On the other hand, if a grown man chooses to mutilate their bodies by ear piercing, fake boobs, chopping off their wang, etc... I am not one to stand in their way. In fact, I believe in a little something that you right-wingers seem to have forgotten. A thing for which people of all and no genders and have laid their lives on the line. A thing called Liberty! Oh yes, and freedom too! It would be cruel of me to expect NPC MAGAbots to understand these things, and doubly cruel to engage in intellectual argument with people so blatantly unequipped for debate, but I will leave you with a warning. If you try to counteract your plumetting testosterone levels with exogenous testosterone, you can end up growing a pair of moobs. This is colloquially known as gyno. This could have disastrous impact on your social life when you turn up to the Dave Rubin Show that someone gifted you tickets for (when they found out he was a "groomer"), as you might get singled out in the crowd and told to "Go back to Disneyland!"
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

28th April 2022, 11:29 AM	#34
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 17,830	Originally Posted by bruto No, but some people should perhaps beware what they ask for. They're going to preserve the morals of society by giving teachers an excuse to probe their children's pants. Are you quibbling with the term "fertility" or are you questioning that the underwear could actually damage a male's ability to produce sperm and cause sterility? ETA: Answered Originally Posted by theprestige You're probably thinking of virility.
	__________________ The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian

28th April 2022, 11:31 AM	#35
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 17,830	Originally Posted by HansMustermann No, the claim is literally that the cells producing the spermatozoa die over time if they're kept at body temperature. Has nothing to do with virility. Fertility is a female-specific term, virility is a male-specific term. So let's just sidestep all of that, and say that pushing a child's testes up into their inguinal canals and using very tight-fitting underwear to force them to stay inside their bodies can most assuredly cause sterility.
	__________________ The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian

28th April 2022, 01:38 PM	#36
HansMustermann Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 20,097	Ah. Well, my limited knowledge of English strikes again. Thanks for the correction.
	__________________ Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?