You might actually try reading and thinking about what I've posted, particularly the quotes of Eva Kurilova, and the links to sexual dimorphism.
There are probably hundreds of behavioral and physiological differences between men and women, and that are not at all unique to either sex -- gynecomastia for example:
That a male has boobs -- as above -- doesn't make him less a male because, by the standard biological definitions, the ONLY thing necessary to qualify as a male is to have functional testicles. If he has his nuts removed then, by those definitions, he's no longer a male but he still has his boobs.
SAME thing with gender and gender identity -- that someone might have some masculine traits and some feminine ones does not mean they can't be male or female or even, by those biological definitions, sexless.
Try thinking that the psychological traits that come in under the heading of "gender" are not at all joined at the hip with the traits that define the sex categories.
As for Dale, hardly a case of "trolling". She makes some good points which I'm happy to quote her on. But she is also a scientific and philosophical illiterate, and too pigheaded to even consider a correction or two.
You might actually try reading and thinking about what I've posted, particularly the quotes of Eva Kurilova, and the links to sexual dimorphism.
There are probably hundreds of behavioral and physiological differences between men and women, and that are not at all unique to either sex -- gynecomastia for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynecomastia
That a male has boobs -- as above -- doesn't make him less a male because, by the standard biological definitions, the ONLY thing necessary to qualify as a male is to have functional testicles. If he has his nuts removed then, by those definitions, he's no longer a male but he still has his boobs.
SAME thing with gender and gender identity -- that someone might have some masculine traits and some feminine ones does not mean they can't be male or female or even, by those biological definitions, sexless.
Try thinking that the psychological traits that come in under the heading of "gender" are not at all joined at the hip with the traits that define the sex categories.
As for Dale, hardly a case of "trolling". She makes some good points which I'm happy to quote her on. But she is also a scientific and philosophical illiterate, and too pigheaded to even consider a correction or two.