734
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
734 points (88.7% liked)
Malicious Compliance
19537 readers
3 users here now
People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.
======
-
We ENCOURAGE posts about events that happened to you, or someone you know.
-
We ACCEPT (for now) reposts of good malicious compliance stories (from other platforms) which did not happen to you or someone you knew. Please use a [REPOST] tag in such situations.
-
We DO NOT ALLOW fiction, or posts that break site-wide rules.
======
Also check out the following communities:
!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Prove they're genetically not a female. You can't without genomic testing. And forcibly testing for so many people (literally everyone who claims to be a woman) is both unethical no matter the reasoning and logistically impossible.
Therefore you can't prove they aren't a woman.
Yes it does. Your position requires you be able to prove definitively they are "not biologically women"
If you cannot your entire argument falls apart. That's unknowable. You cannot know they are biologically women so using that term is just a smokescreen for bigotry.... and shows you lack an understanding of human sexing (which is objectively not a binary)