254
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] T156@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

"capability of holding eggs" covers the vast majority of humankind. Hands are useful like that.

[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Limes, on the other hand...

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Why can't I,

[-] Vandals_handle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

You put the lime in the coconut

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's funny, but it's not really a rebuttal, since the claim is that it doesn't exclude any cis women. A better rebuttal would be antinatalist women who are also born with defective ovaries. (I'm sure there'd be at least one person like that.)

[-] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Trying to categorize people into strict definitions for the purpose of determining their responsibilities without considering feedback from the people themselves about how they want to categorize themselves violates Kant's categorical imperative, also known as Granny Weatherwax's definition of sin as “when you treat people as things”:

The nature of sin

“There is a very interesting debate raging at the moment about the nature of sin, for example.”

“And what do they think? Against it, are they?”

“It’s not as simple as that. It’s not a black and white issue. There are so many shades of gray.”

“Nope.”

“Pardon?”

“There’s no grays, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people as things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.”

“It’s a lot more complicated than that—”

“No. It ain’t. When people say things are a lot more complicated than that, they means they’re getting worried that they won’t like the truth. People as things, that’s where it starts.”

“Oh, I’m sure there are worse crimes—”

“But they starts with thinking about people as things . . .”

[-] tlekiteki@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 month ago

The concept is worthless because its hard to define

[-] spicehoarder@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Do republicans think we're gineapigs? Born completely formed with no developmental years?

[-] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

They said "without excluding" not "without including"

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

My understanding was that current consensus was that humans with ovaries are born with all of the eggs already created - waiting to be released - and no more are created after that. So you're either born holding eggs or you ain't, and intention and capability don't come into it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Beardbuster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

A woman is one of those things where know you one when you see one. Doesn't have to be any more complex than that.

Like Jiminy Cricket said, "Let your conscience be your guide"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
254 points (96.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

8125 readers
3110 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS