the quotes prove my assertion, what i'm trying to gather is if you are capable of conceding that, but apparently you are not

Cool and trendy nah but I can feel a bit overblown though. That's also because of the message some parents give. When you see tweets as 'proud my son is gay' you may expect some backfire if they have multiple children that could have been solved if they just said 'I am proud of my children and doesn't matter if they are gay or straight'.

South park mocked it with tweek and craig(h). wow my son is gay here is some money.  I expected cartman acclaiming to being gay aswell to get some new toy but he already had the transgender episode. 

I have already demonstrated that they in fact do not.

As previously stated, contextualizing and expanding on biology is not dismissing biology.

It appears we are at am impasse as you are incapable of acknowledging that exceedingly obvious fact.

"contextualizing and expanding on biology is not dismissing biology."

so why can't you answer the question? its really amusing that you're saying she's simply expanding the category to be more inclusive of biological abnormalities that occur because biology exists on a spectrum(I understand this to be your reasoning, but its stupid and your refusal to answer gives a indication of how its stupid)

but at the same time you refuse to affirm this position by simply answering yes

" it is hypocritical for any self-identified feminist to use “biology” and “body parts” arguments in their attempts to dismiss trans women"

"No, Trans Women Are NOT ‘Biologically Male""

"lets say I'm a man right now with a massive 10 inch penis, a full beard, rippling muscular body etc etc etc in your opinion do i become a woman by identifying as one now?

if you truly believed the quote was valid, you would just say yes"

it just makes it look like you aren't sincere in your proclamation that you believe this idea to be valid, so go ahead just take the plunge and say yes and you'll affirm your position

Wow, every time you type something you end up saying more things wrong. This is a true skill at this point.

Varying hormone levels are not biological abnormalities. Genetic variation is not biological abonormalities. These are differences that occur between literally every individual.

"Varying hormone levels are not biological abnormalities. Genetic variation is not biological abonormalities. "

yeah man fuck that strawman up

" it is hypocritical for any self-identified feminist to use “biology” and “body parts” arguments in their attempts to dismiss trans women"

"No, Trans Women Are NOT ‘Biologically Male""

"lets say I'm a man right now with a massive 10 inch penis, a full beard, rippling muscular body etc etc etc in your opinion do i become a woman by identifying as one now?

if you truly believed the quote was valid, you would just say yes"

Strictly speaking, there isn't. Realistically speaking, it'd be dumb, but not terribly detrimental. 

Sex = what you have down and up there. 

Gender = what we normally associate with one or the other. A guy wearing a female dress can be said to be of the male sex, but identifies as the female gender (or just likes to wear dresses for XYZ reasons). 

Sex is actual content. Gender is something we created to put the sexes in a box. 

You can be trans and not transition. Moreover, you can be trans and not want to transition. Some trans people transition and then later realize they didn't have to and regret it after, they're an extreme minority but it happens and it doesn't make them any less trans. Some people need to learn what it actually means to be trans.

"You can be trans and not transition. Moreover, you can be trans and not want to transition. "

good so you are in agreement with some of the most prominent thinkers on this issue

as an example: " it is hypocritical for any self-identified feminist to use “biology” and “body parts” arguments in their attempts to dismiss trans women"

in effect transwomen are women no matter what once they identify as a woman

so, therefore, if I was a man with a 10 inch penis, full beard, 6 foot 3, buff from hitting the gym all the time, this means that I become a woman in your view if I simply say I feel like one inside

are you in agreement with that or have I strawmanned you?

"Therefore: all people are not B."

so you are making a distinction between transwomen and biological females? you do understand that this is a no no right?

you know what's funny? how no one can answer that question directly, all that happens constantly is deflection, its very very revealing

i'm going to ask you too and again I expect, you'll either ignore it or deflect again

"so, therefore, if I was a man with a 10 inch penis, full beard, 6 foot 3, buff from hitting the gym all the time, this means that I become a woman in your view if I simply say I feel like one inside

are you in agreement with that or have I strawmanned you?"

do you have an answer for this question or will you continue to bring up other things in the hope that I trip up somehow and the conversation can be steered away from this question?

all I'm trying to understand here is whether all of the proclamations of acceptance for this idea are actually sincere and as expected, it seems that this is not the case

"What gender would you say this person on the right is?"

"Ignoring that, do you think women can't be buff?"

how are either of these questions relevant to the question I asked?

"Why do you bring up a "10 inch penis"?"

maybe I'm just fascinated by large penises, you have to admit that 10 inches is very large and some men do have penises that large

"Is a scrawny man with only a 3 inch penis, and no beard less of a man?"

no, but isn't that around the size of an intersex person's penis?

according to this ideology would that person not be closer to what you have called as a third sex than a man?

this is not my position but it sounds to me like it might be yours