why won't you answer the question?

I just did, I said human beings are a bipedal species lol. I don't feel like sitting here answering your childish questions. It was cute at first.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and why are these people being banned? does that not occur to you? because scientifically they are not considered to be completely female because it is well understood that men have the capacity to be stronger than women... personally i'd wager that they are intersexed or have embedded testes but regardless they are not considered to be female for the purposes of this sport

Why are the bannings being suspended, has that not occured to you? Scientifically they ARE considered to be female because they have the associated chromosomes that scientifically make them female. Why would I care that you wager they are intersexed as if you have the scoop on the whole industry. lol.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but you forgot to mention (in a religious way mind you) that when this happens, as we see above, gender becomes ambiguous and as a result in some cases these people are not considered to be female

These cases that you are referring to have to do with women having the Y chromosome, yes it happens, read a book. And you call me religious? pfff take a look in the mirror, you are trying to convince yourself - or "wager" as you would call it - that these aren't women but you don't want to admit most would scientifically be classified as women because then you would be agreeing with me.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's correct, the point is that they acknowledge that there are behavioral differences between the sexes... i suspect that its because of the pc environment we live in that scientist are at this point reluctant to put forth certain conclusions

I also acknowledge that there are behavioral variations between the sexes but also that there is no behavior that is bound by sex. This should be so obvious.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is such a silly question that my answer is open your damn eyes and look around you

o...m...g, too perfect lol. One of the most typical responses to the question, "Why do you believe in God." Religious people quite often say, "Open your eyes and look around you". pfffhahaha....and I'm religious? Oh man.

Man, I just see you in a crazy spin. It's obvious that a man or woman may be more inteligent, rational, science orientated or any single indicator you want. But when you look on averages or pick extremes on the same side man and woman will have pronounced differences. But you want to pick opposite extremes and get a very small intersection to validate your points.

We have provided several differences in physical, homornes, brain activities and etc but you want to insist on a not proved notion that they basically have no interference on psychological (even if on real world those differences are very apparent, but then discredit then as social constructions).

Men can have PMS don't you know?

I have accepted from the beginning the differences in physical nature, brain activity and that they do obviously have a psychological effect. How many times do I simply have to say that no psychological state is bound by sex.

so what's your take on his question? since when have you seen a man have pms? i wasn't going to bother acknowledging such a stupid question because even though i've been replying to a lot i do have a limit and if this religion of yours has weakened your perception of reality that badly then there really is no point 

good and with that your argument collapses

My argument was never against this in the first place so explain how it has collapsed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

because of religion, the same religion that is allowing men to fight as women in ufc

http://www.advocate.com/sports/2014/09/22/ufc-womens-champ-refuses-fight-trans-athlete-fallon-fox

your religion is winning its changing society and it is having the desired impact of making people buy into the lie that men and women are the same

but that has nothing to do with science

Religion? It's because of science! Did you not read why these bans are being suspended?

I'm not saying you are one but you are talking like a legit conspiracy theorist. You seriously think society is changing because of people buying into a lie that men and women are the same? OK...

I'm not saying men and women are the same, I'm saying men and women can have the same psychological states. You put so much extremety into the context of what I'm saying, effectively blowing it out of proportion.

I'm not advocating the direction of response towards individuals I'm simply pointing something out. I have backed up my claims that women can have testosterone in the male range and you simply don't want to accept that.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 i did acknowledge in the same sentence that it happens and said that it results in ambiguity with regards to gender, which is why people were banned to begin with

Bannings underwent through the approval of the IAAF due to the ambiguous nature of 'certain' female athletes. We all know transgender individuals exist but not all ambiguity leads to one conclusion. It's because of science that the bannings have been suspended since not all women who were banned are considered ambiguous.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i think that in all your stupid assertions you are beginning to lose sight of what my argument was, which is that physiology and psychology are linked, but in doing that i acknowledged that exceptions do exist but ultiamtely we have to generalise to make sense of things

which is why i asked you if humans are a bipedal species which you agreed to... obviously even though there are cases where people are born with more legs we still default back to the generalisation when we discuss human beings as a group for obvious reasons

also you hilarious proved my point about the links between psychology and physiology more than once by yourself

Just because I point out that psychology and physiology interact with one another does not mean I have proved your point. I said that psychology and physiology are not linked in the manner that you proposed, but you are close enough and what you said is socially standard so I'm willing to see eye to eye. And speak for yourself, I don't have to generalize in order to make sense of things, that's how you end up with mixed results. But hey, in my eyes it's acceptable to generalize, just don't sell it as fact like this video does.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so what's your take on his question? since when have you seen a man have pms? i wasn't going to bother acknowledging such a stupid question because even though i've been replying to a lot i do have a limit and if this religion of yours has weakened your perception of reality that badly then there really is no point 

No there is no point if your best example is PMS (lol) since PMS is a syndrome that refers to emotional symptoms such as depression, food cravings, anxiety and stress to name just a few. All these are things that men psychologically experience on a constant basis.

Ok. So since you have accepted that the general psycological traits are gender biased (but I agree not bonded) why are you still discussing it? You are being unclear with o_0.Q on it. Because we already have agreed that there is some connection between body/brain/mind and gender, but there are deviations and fluctuations, but in macro vision we know what to expect from each side and that men/women are quite different even if they can even reverse.

that was my mistake i was trying to take your question and pass it on to him, i forgot how the quote system works sorry

Which was my only point in the beginning. I pointed out that it is our biology that separates men and women, not the psychology. This is where our disagreement is.

Welp I still believe our biology influence psychology, and you agree that on generic terms men and women have psyco differences and I agree that yes no psyco trait is exclusive even if generally more inclined one way or another, so perhaps if you direct quote  o_0.Q he would understand it as well.