Was thinking about this earlier. There is no actual transitive properties to being transsexual or transgender. By all scientific standards a “trans” person is accurately described as pseudosexual, or an imitation of another sex. It is abundantly clear that “trans” has no complete transition, it is an imitation, and in most cases a mockery. A transient state requires a completed transition, this is of course impossible for “trans” people because they can’t remake their dna or grow ovaries/ testes. Pseudo is the only apt description for someone who believes they are a different biological makeup and attempts an imitation of that makeup.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (62)
sorted by:
Did you even bother to read the materials you linked?
unassisted pregnancy is unheard of, but no reports of fertility in a 46,XY woman
The study literally says this is freak mutations over generations and is entirely hereditary. Once again, they had to Frankenstein the pregnancy.
who had a successful pregnancy through in-vitro fertilization by oocyte donation.
Once again, in both cases, they were pumped up with numerous female hormones to make their body simulate pregnancy because they couldn't do it naturally. This was again with a donor egg, so not even the Swyer trannies genes.
Person cant give birth naturally, is pumped full of hormones like a factory farm chicken and has such mutated DNA that its XY karyotype is not strictly XY, but XY, X, and XX.
93% 46,XY, 6% 45,X, and <1% 46,XX in the ovary
In other words this person is an amalgamation of Swyer Syndrome, Turner Syndrome, and normal female. Guess which part made the egg? Like I said, hereditary abnormality where the 7% won the roulette wheel, which also means that the egg did not grow from the XY karyotype.
Like I said, this person is an amalgamation of Swyer, Turner, and Normative XX.
I am correct, Swyer syndrome is always infertile, this person was a XY Predominant. An amalgamation where the 45X and the 46XX in the person allowed for fertility. I know this is difficult for someone not versed in karyotypes, but you're trying to argue something the study states is explicitly not the case. The fact of the matter is the small amount of 45X and 46XX created the fertility, none of the 46XY did. You are clearly confused or grasping at straws, the study itself states clearly that the subject is Not XY but XY predominant. If my right eye is blue and my left eye is blue/grey/brown then my eye color is not blue.
Again a lie, no doctor would ever state that. An infertile woman can carry another woman's egg and birth it. They did not create an egg, they are merely an incubator.
you are the only one shifting goalposts, you claimed XY women can have kids, this is a lie. You claimed the XY predominant woman is XY, this is again a lie. You are now claiming I'm shifting goalposts because according to you alone someone who has multiple sex karyotypes is somehow only XY. Let me put this very simply for you (46XY) does not equal (46XY, 45X, and 46XX).