Except this isn’t “biology being real”. It’s non empirical. If you abide by the theory of evolution (which I assume you do), then you should be against teleology in biology, since there is no such thing, concretely, as a “body that’s supposed to do things”. It’s just layman speech to inform those that aren’t that far in biology (or to shorten things, since you assume your college knows anyway) “this is one of the possible things that a being (or its system) does in order to survive/reproduce”, not that it is necessary. To imply that it’s necessary would be to imply that nature has a will, or that there is some sort of supernatural will Teleology in biology
Yes.
Ok. What you are posting will assist in denying that.
I think that biology being real is not an affront on transgender individuals.
denying real biology just because it can lead to a few bad feelings is a very dangerous road. both can exist, and do. harmoniously.
Except this isn’t “biology being real”. It’s non empirical. If you abide by the theory of evolution (which I assume you do), then you should be against teleology in biology, since there is no such thing, concretely, as a “body that’s supposed to do things”. It’s just layman speech to inform those that aren’t that far in biology (or to shorten things, since you assume your college knows anyway) “this is one of the possible things that a being (or its system) does in order to survive/reproduce”, not that it is necessary. To imply that it’s necessary would be to imply that nature has a will, or that there is some sort of supernatural will Teleology in biology
Edit: clearing things up and syntax
How does posting scientific fact assist in denying trans people bodily autonomy?
it adds further fuel to the opinion of “there are only two genders, trans people are ____” (insert insult here)