Men are simply born men! Women simply are born women!
Mostly, yes. However, sometimes their bodies and brains disagree on which one exactly they are.
Ask any non-Darwinist geneticist and you tell me what the truth is!
Considering that Darwin's ideas are accepted by just about every reputable scientific institution in the world, I'll be legitimately impressed if you manage to find a geneticist who doesn't believe in evolution. Even more so if said geneticist somehow manages to build an actual defense for their beliefs which won't get them laughed out of the room.
But then, it's not as if there isn't a bunch of scientists willing to put their names on any "study", as long as you pay them well.
If Transgenderism is valid, why do transgendered "women" commit crimes at similar rates to men?
Erm, no, not really, no. Actually, as that summary in the link shows, it's transmen who seem to have male pattern of violence (which makes sense, since it's them who are men of the trans community), not transwomen, outnumbering the latter in prisons by a factor of about 4:1. At least in the U.K., that is. Which is just about the factor by which men in general outdo women in terms of criminality, since men commit about 75-80% of (not sure if only) violent crimes.
In societies where men are stereotyped as more aggressive, at least. As far as I'm aware, there aren't any studies which seriously look at criminality in strongly matriarchal societies dominated by aggressive women, to compare them with patriarchal ones, simply because the former are so few in the world. Which is a damn shame tbh. The "no studies" thing, not the "no matriarchy" one, if it's not clear. Also, there doesn't seem to have been any attempt to repeat the 1994 Princetown University study, which found no sex difference in aggression in complete absence of social roles, which would imply no natural sex difference in aggression, which would further imply that perfectly egalitarian society would have no sex difference in perpetration of violent crimes. Like seriously, this stuff's actually interesting and could have interesting social ramifications, change our understanding of ourselves etc., yet nobody bothered to look at it again?
Yet I'm the one with the third grade understanding of science.
Well, yeah, since you seem unable to move past elementary school level biology, and refuse to accept scientific facts even a middle schooler would find easy to understand.
Homosexuality is unnatural because children who are raised in homosexual households are more likely to be in poverty, incarcerated, depressed, and also more likely to become homosexuals. This is verified information
image
Taylor Swift's "reputation" album and corresponding music videos have shown off her drunkenness, vindictiveness, as well as her lack of modesty in attire. Quite sad, really.
What do all you freakazoids have with Taylor? Just about the only problem with her I can think of is that she's far less political than she should be. Progressives in the U.S. could definitely use the help of someone on her level.
Well, OK, that thing and also, if you are a member of the generation who grew up on old disney shows (like me), you might also dislike her for pretty much singlehandedly ending Delena as a BFF pair.
But considering you are neither a progressive (self-evident), nor (in all likelihood) somebody who was a teen in late 2000s/early 2010s, I really don't understand what exactly is your beef with her? She does what pretty much all other celebrities do. Deal with it, grandpa.
hyper-PC liberals who decided that the word "tranny" was comparable to the n-word.
Considering just how widespread violence against and dehumanization of transwomen is, I think we can safely conclude that slurs specifically targetting them belong among the lowest of all dehumanizing language.
