Untitled

Appeal to authority isn't an argument.

>studies based on surveys that fail reproducibility
>politicized globalist orgs run by post modern intersectionalists
>science
Woo lad....clownworld

Yeah and everyone who disagrees has a sluggish schizophrenia.

Its not science. 60% of their studies are based on surveys(people lie you know) and also fail reproducibility.
Its actually a religion, not science.

This. I think its psych and sociology fields are failing 60% reproducibility

It's called (((Null Hypothesis)))
You degenerate
>Nigger

This. John Money was a pedophile that murdered David Reiner with his experiments

I don't give a fuck they are still just mentally ill faggots to me. And the best part is? I don't care how transphobic it sounds. Suck my genetically and biologically superior MALE penis. As only a penis could be.

notice how they never actually produce the science behind transgenderism?

Yep. It is. Trannies are mentally ill, need medical help, and gender theory is a joke. All serious scientists agree.

>"FUCK THE STATUS QUO!"
>*recites the status quo*

>"Our revolution will not be televised!"
>*recites what the television has been feeding them*

It literally is. What retard told you it wasn't?

Statistics should be enough. Why do you question the narrative?

Is this creature implies that biology in University somehow cancels biology taught in school or something?
It is true, though that there is no debate ""gender"" dysphoria is indeed a mental illness.

Scientists agree! there is no bias in science or medicine. The science is settled. Its fact. More medical physicians smome camels than any other brand of cigarettes.

>Statistics should be enough
40% of trannies kill themselves, those statistics?

*ahem*

Attached: 1551533845329.png (738x669, 186K)

Yeah, that's why it's considered a mental illness to be transgender. What was his point exactly?

>gender isn't real, it's only a social construct
>Also, there are more than 2 genders

BZZZT, wrong. If it's only a social construct, then there are zero genders, making it a useless concept, so let's just stick with sex and forget about gender altogether.

>DOCTORS AND SCIENTISTS SAY IT'S OKAY FOR ME TO SNIP OFF MY DICK SO THEY CAN MAKE MONEY FROM IT SO IT'S THE TRUTH
Based retard, and the people who responded or liked or whatever are fucking "anarchists" supporting a billion dollar industry. What a fucking joke.

Attached: The_Transsexual_Empire_(Janice_Raymond_book).jpg (206x300, 14K)

Based.
And redpilled.

Or is it a mental illness that benefits population control?

Haven't you heard? The (((World Health Organization))) said trannies aren't insane for paying thousands of dollars to cut off their pee pees now.

nice fallacy fallacy, fagit

Yes, the transgenders are the ones who have learnt the 6th grade science and called it a day, this is accurate.

don't bother op. the angry incels on here who like to pretend they are scientists will never admit their hatred of trans* people is irrational

don't worry, history will forget these losers

Blow it out your front butt.

The ppl who know say it is so it be !!!!!!
You're a fucking idiot.

CORRECT user, you have changed my mind. There are two sexes and gender is a meme. The term gender was coined by a child-abusing cock-chopping madman called John Money.
bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/dr_money_prog_summary.shtml
Protip: The term 'Moneyshot' refers to the *coup de grace* of his 'explorations' into child sexuality.

kill them all, debate that

Wait, what?
Scientists endorse hacking your dick off?
What has been verified, peer-reviewed and endorsed?
This tweet makes no sense.

endorsed by kike science

fuck off, you fucking mental degenerates

MENTALLY ILL FUCKS

Attached: fed problems.jpg (508x750, 157K)

The more you know, the easier it is to construct a lie to support what you want to believe.
- paraphrasing Sowell

Attached: wont hear jesus again.jpg (968x408, 120K)

"Peer reviewed" doesn't mean shit when you share the same opinion as the "peers" reviewing whatever bullshit that's put on paper. Ignore this bullshit.

>psychology
>science
LMAO, the argument is flawed from the start.

(((science)))

Pozzed to the core.

twitter.com/RealPeerReview

>wanting to cut off your dick because you think you're a woman trapped in the body of a man
>not a mental illness
Ummm... sweaty, that's not how it works

Attached: 1551279638912.png (1500x500, 82K)

I'll blow it in your ass

Attached: leaf duke.png (634x583, 15K)

Shake it baby, shake it baby.

>when you side with radical feminists because you happen to sort of agree on trannies
You know they just hate trannies as an extention of hating men, right? They're not our allies.

>literally who twitter grab
here's a bright idea. mods range ban whoever posts these

They mean the (((APA))) and soft science hacks vs people who know biology but aren't shackled to the academic system and thus aren't in fear of retribution for speaking out

“Peer-reviewed” by gender ideologues

“Science” = politically motivated that starts with a conclusion and works backwords to fir “data”

Then using “data” to bully and lobby health organizations (who themselves have political interests) to get definitions changed and mental illnesses removed from diagnostic instruments. They are basically taking political views and mixing them with thomas szasz antipsychiatry ideas.

Scientists, especially in biology and sociology, have freshmen-tier knowledge of their general fields of study.

Their expertise manifests in their one very narrow research path (imagine one enzyme for half a decade) and grant begging. The term is subject idiot.

Whoever appeals to muh academia is a weak willed faggot who looks for an authority figure to cuddle.

t. Subject idiot

Attached: 3489D71D00000578-3605293-image-a-9_1464024918901.jpg (306x448, 49K)

u wana dans?

Attached: leafgirl2 1.png (850x711, 391K)

People who dont consider willful body mutilation just to feel better is just as RETARDED as the person who mutilated themselves

>transgender debate
>debate
What did xhe mean by this?

Attached: honkthehonk.jpg (988x566, 56K)

/thread

>using transgender people as a political football

>verified, peer-reviewed science.
*social science. none of it is back by scientific truth.

dog humping peer reviewed expert here you are full of shit

In other words people who have jobs they;re afraid to lose so won't dare say anything else.

Lefties treat academia as a religion substitute. Lacking in knowledge, or confidence, or both, they look to the priests of science for guidance in the most fundamental of life affairs.

Asserting something for oneself is blasphemy, if you connect two dots without a study connecting them prior you've clearly forgot your place as a bugman.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-05-04-19-13-51.png (720x1280, 298K)

friendly reminder that scientists haven't been able to agree on what a human should eat for over 100 years

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_USDA_nutrition_guides

Reminder that there is not one scientifically-accurate, based on truth report or study that proves that men can have, "female brains," and vice versa, and that the only study (and all other 'studies' which are just carbon copies of this one) that "proved" that was a heavily biased group of people who looked for evidence to back their answers rather than determine their answers based on the evidence they found, and it is a load of shit.

Attached: mfw shrek mentally ill tranny k m k m.jpg (747x780, 135K)

Not only lie but the questions can be constructed in such a way to encourage answers and discourage others. Also the way you operationalize definitions can bend the data to your needs.

For example, a questionnaire on human sexuality if i operationalize “teenager” as any one between the age of 10 to 19 and 364 days and child as any one under 18 and 364 days. Then ask a series of questions are you sexually attracted to 10 year olds (then ask the same question for 11-19) you would get most men answer no to 10-17. Then yes to 18-19.

When i group the data i could the lump all teenager under one set and come out with a result
That 90% of men are attracted to teenager and of those 90% 77% are attracted to children. Then conclude that it is normal for Men to be sexually attracted to children. Then discuss how policy should reflect this data (lowering age of consent or decriminalizing pedophilia etc).

Obviously this is a retarded way to group data and misleading but i have seen things like this done in “peer reviewed” papers which were seen as examples of good research in the field of social,gender, and sexual psych and sociology.

There's no such thing as an "everyday joe" lefty, they always exist in some fringe and extreme condition that warps their view. Poor, traumatized, physically inferior, history of abuse,gross faliure in relatioships, pick 2 or more and there you have it.
Most internet leftiea describe themselves as such by their own admission.

Leftism is the ideology of cope.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-02-01-13-32-24.png (720x1280, 861K)