But Thats None Of My Business

But Thats None Of My Business Meme | THERE ARE ONLY 2 GENDERS. MALE AND FEMALE THE REST DOESN'T EXIST | image tagged in memes,but thats none of my business,kermit the frog | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
4,836 views, 81 upvotes
But Thats None Of My Business memeRe-caption this meme
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
8 ups, 2 replies
reply
6 ups, 2 replies
I suppose this is controversial to some people.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Besides, your picture is missing the red, yellow and albino folks.
reply
1 up
everybody needs education!
reply
1 up, 1 reply
But there are two kinds of melanin though 0_o
reply
1 up, 2 replies
Unless you think that makes different "colors" of people, I have no argument.
reply
3 ups
aka Who cares about different shades? It's the diversity that makes this planet interesting in the first place. ;)
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I don't know what you mean by "colors of people." But the ratio of "brown" melanin to "black" melanin is what determines skin tone. It's not just about the amount of it you have, it's about what mixture you have. For example, two populations from different ethnicities may have the same amount of melanin, but still look different in color because one has more of the reddish-brown pigment and the other has more of the grey-black pigment.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Again, as long as you don't want to differentiate between people based on the amount of the exact same pigment they have in their skin you have no argument with me. The ratio of different shades of the same pigment only cause superficial differences.
I have lived most of my life in the Southern US and have found that only shallow, usually ignorant people (of any so called "race"), want to class or group people based on such superficial differences.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Is not getting sunburned a superficial difference? 'Cause it sounds pretty nice to me :(
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Good point. It doesn't change anything about our intrinsic humanity.
Plus don't fall asleep outside without sunscreen and a hat.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Lol, some of us are so pale, we're like tanning mirrors to the people around us XD
reply
3 ups
Less crowdy… ;)
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
;) +1
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
reply
5 ups
reply
5 ups
reply
8 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
5 ups
reply
3 ups
Could you kindly stop beating the dead horse...
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Watch out the tin foil hats are going to disagree.
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up, 2 replies
reply
4 ups
lol
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups
reply
[deleted]
1 up
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
;)
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/1sm8cm.gif (click to show)
reply
2 ups
Yay my very own seizure
reply
0 ups
They do exist if you see them in drag! :)
reply
1 up
Gender itself doesn't exist.
reply
2 ups
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
So now logic is considered retarded?
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
Because the rest of "her" appears to be completely natural...
reply
3 ups
#JustKidding
reply
4 ups, 3 replies
Actually, I did answer. If someone says they're something they're not, they're playing make-believe. It's what kids do. When adults do it, they're having mental issues.

The person in that photo...what were they born with? That is what they are.

And before anything is said about it, in the extremely rare cases where a child is born with both sets of organs, then it's up to the parents to choose.
reply
2 ups
like no matter what doors and hood you put on a Chevy Chevette, its still a Chevette...the VIN number (birth certificate) will tell you
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
reply
3 ups, 3 replies
she was born with a dick.... nice of you to think you are in a position to judge...
reply
3 ups
Those who do not judge will lose all judgment.

Yes, I judge. So does everyone - you're judging me for judging the person in the photo. Judgment is real, you do it yourself all the time even if you think you don't. As soon as you see something or have a thought, you judge it. It's passive, not something that can be avoided.

So, my good compadre, I suggest that you refrain from judging me if you don't want me to judge other people. Yet...you can't. Judgment is part of everyone. It's a part of you.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
You're a degenerate
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
reply
[deleted]
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
born with a dick yes , but the breasts and makeup were added later in life through hormonal treatments and no spiritual direction in her life.
reply
0 ups
XD wtf?!
reply
0 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Anatomy determines sex. Gender is more than anatomy. It also involves the emotional and mental aspects. If you admit that men and women have their brains wired differently, then you would also have to admit that it's possible for someone to be physically male, for example, but have a brain hard wired like a female.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Doesn't the 'b' in lgbt imply only 2 genders?
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
The B stands for bisexual, i.e. people who are attracted to both male and female. It doesn't imply there are only two genders, as some people identify as pansexual, which is often defined as attraction regardless of gender, or attraction to all genders.
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
Where's the p then? And why is it necessary to put a b in there then? Shouldn't it be something else?
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Only the people who are suffering from the incurable mental illness of "post modern Progressive liberalism" define themselves by their sexual preference. They have NO other means of offering value to the world, except expressing where they want to stick their tingly bits, no matter how repulsive to normal folks.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
1. Every LGBT person has value to the world, because they are human. They have value to their family and friends, and they have value through their occupations and volunteer services.

2. Since when do people have to base their sexual behavior on what other people like or don't like? If consentual adults do things that some other adults don't happen like, so what? They aren't obligated to care.
reply
3 ups, 5 replies
It's not a matter of whether or not other people "like" it. It's a case of something that can medically be defined as a mental disorder.

If it was as simple as two adults wanting to be homosexual in private, no, it's really not my business. Or anyone else's. However it becomes my - and everyone's - business when those engaged in homosexuality and similar behaviors demand that everyone accept and APPROVE their lifestyle as being normal and laudable. It is neither of those things.
reply
1 up
"Homosexuality affects a minimum of two people."

Actually homosexuality affects a minimum of one person--the homosexual.

"Homosexuality is something that historically has been repulsed by societies and considered on a similar level with bestiality. Incidentally, when societies in history started accepting homosexuality and similar behaviors as normal, when they started becoming commonplace, the demise of that society and nation was not far behind."

So was intermarriage with foreign people. So was worshipping other gods. Are you saying that interracial marriage and religious freedom should be abolished? Because that's the type of logic you're using.

"How is it logical or natural to say that one's anatomy does not determine their gender?"

Because sex and gender aren't the same thing. Sex is physical, gender also deals with mental and emotional aspects.

"Well, let's go back to Darwin's "Survival of the Fittest". Under that belief - which you must have since you oppose Christianity - not only would homosexuals breed themselves into extinction within one lifetime, their own bodies are warring against themselves. So you're advocating something that contradicts your own belief in evolution."

I must believe in evolution since I oppose Christianity? That makes no sense at all. There are Christians who accept evolution. You're basically setting up a false dichotomy, which is a logical fallacy. Homosexuals are physically capable of reproducing with someone of the opposite sex, and many have. The idea that gay people would disappear within a generation makes no sense, especially when you realize that gay people are always being born...to heterosexual parents.

"If you do believe in Evolution, then it is in your best interests to further the human race's evolution as a whole. How is it possibly beneficial to humanity, from the evolutionary standpoint, for homosexuality to exist?"

Evolution isn't something that you "further" by your own action or willpower. It happens on its own. Again, gay people are capable of reproduction, and they can pass on beneficial traits to their offspring. I'm not sure why you think that homosexuality by itself would make a person detrimental to evolution.

(continued)
reply
1 up, 2 replies
"So homosexuality runs counter to Evolution. Very well; if homosexuality is not natural under evolution, then what is it? Unnatural...again. Your own belief in the world's history and the origins of mankind decries homosexuality as unnatural."

Homosexuality is natural if it occurs in nature, even if it's a small number of people. And as I said before, different doesn't necessarily mean bad.

"Unnatural" has many synonyms. The definition of the word itself is "contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal." Under that definition, which the theory of Evolution demands, homosexuality is therefore abnormal and not normal."

Please explain how the theory of evolution "demands" that everything be normal. Again, abnormal doesn't necessarily mean bad. If homosexuality is so detrimental, as you claim, why hasn't evolution weeded out all gay people by now?

"Last note, homosexuality is also not comparable with Christianity. Homosexuality is a lifestyle. Christianity is a belief. You don't believe IN homosexuality. You may believe homosexuality is acceptable, but you do not believe in homosexuality as a faith. Christianity, belief in Christ Jesus, is something that creates a lifestyle. One must believe IN Jesus to be a Christian. Big difference."

Define lifestyle. How is homosexuality a lifestyle, exactly? But you didn't really answer my question. If you can say that gay people should keep what they do to themselves, why can't I say that Christians should keep what they do to themselves?
1 up
Ah. There you hit the nail on the head. Homosexuals, in order to reproduce, must engage in Heterosexual relations. So...which is more natural? Heterosexual relations can sustain themselves. Homosexual ones cannot, without also utilizing heterosexual relations. Homosexuality depends on there still being Heterosexuals out there in order to survive.

My good friend, YOU are the product of heterosexual activity: an egg and a sperm cell. Homosexuals can reproduce, yes...but only by artificial means. Key word there: Artificial. Not natural.

Yes, I've seen two male sheep going at it. You know why? Because there weren't any female sheep around; the two sheep were raised for food, and they (unfortunately) weren't castrated. The sight was...disturbing. Yes, it's unnatural. And disgusting. So aren't we better than animals? You're advocating behaving like animals. Well, if you ever get out in nature and actually watch what happens, nature is a pretty nasty place! Animals kill each other to survive, for food, whatever. Sometimes just because they can. If we are to behave like animals, then yes, homosexuality is fine. But so is cannibalism and murder. And incest. And just about anything else under the sun.

Why would a homosexual be detrimental to evolution? Lol...they wouldn't; if they engaged only in homosexual activity from birth to death, they would breed themselves out of existence in one lifetime. You're speaking of individuals, not as a group. So what if some homosexual dude has great genetics from a physical standpoint? In order to pass those on, they've still got to engage in heterosexual relations at some point. As a group, homosexuals do not benefit Evolution as a whole, nor will they survive more than one lifetime...UNLESS THEY ALSO ENGAGE IN HETEROSEXUAL RELATIONS. Wow. Imagine that.

I will also note that I am only arguing from this viewpoint because you wouldn't accept any Christian argument I could offer. Which, I am a Christian. I believe in Jesus Christ as my lord and savior. Evolution? Well, yes and no; Microevolution, yes. Evolution within a species does take place, and is the reason why there are thousands of dog breeds out there today and not just one. Macroevolution, now, the idea that a dog can evolve into a human given enough time, that concept is laughable. Because, the only instances that support Macroevolution to some degree do an even better job supporting Creationism. Continued...
0 ups
The "missing links" haven't been found, after 1000 years of searching. Darwin himself said Evolution was a flawed theory; however he couldn't come up with anything better. He was, at that time, disillusioned with God for one reason or another.

No, different doesn't mean bad in and of itself. So that's when it's time to examine something and try to figure out: are the differences in this thing good or bad?

What are the benefits of homosexuality from an evolutionary standpoint? Not on an individual scale - on the group plane. What does homosexuality offer that heterosexuality does not?

Lifestyle - a choice of how one will live their life, what actions they will take, what they will do. It's not a belief; we already covered that. You don't "believe in homosexuality". It's not a religion. You're comparing apples and oranges. One may believe that homosexuality is acceptable or even good, but you are still not believing IN homosexuality itself. Because it is not something to be believed in or not. There is no "Church of Homosexuality". It's not something to have faith in or no.

Christianity isn't a form of mental illness. It has been persecuted throughout the ages, hated and feared. Attempts have been made to exterminate it. Yes, horrible crimes have been committed in the name of "Christianity" by the Catholic Church in particular and by other churches in general. However those crimes were committed by men who twisted Christianity to fit their own desires. Which, anything may be perverted from its original form. In which case it is no longer the original, but a mutated fake.

Why should Christians not keep what they believe to themselves, if homosexuality is not tolerable in public? Christianity isn't a form of mental illness.
reply
1 up
"Homosexuals, in order to reproduce, must engage in Heterosexual relations. So...which is more natural?"

Both occur in nature so both are "natural". Heterosexuality is more common, though. So what?

"Homosexuals can reproduce, yes...but only by artificial means. Key word there: Artificial. Not natural."

No, if a gay person has sex with a straight person, it's by natural means. Are you saying gay people can only reproduce through artificial insemination? Because that's false.

"Yes, I've seen two male sheep going at it. You know why? Because there weren't any female sheep around"

You don't know for a fact that that's why they had sex with each other. You're making an assumption. Maybe one or both of them had homosexual leanings.

"The sight was...disturbing. Yes, it's unnatural. And disgusting."

That's your opinion. Opinions aren't facts.

"So aren't we better than animals? You're advocating behaving like animals."

Humans ARE animals. Scientifically. Biologically. Taxonomically. It's a fact.

"if they engaged only in homosexual activity from birth to death, they would breed themselves out of existence in one lifetime."

No, they wouldn't, because heterosexual parents give birth to homosexual children all the time. If every single gay person were to instantly stop having sex, that doesn't mean gay people would vanish in one generation, because straight people keep producing gay people.

"So what if some homosexual dude has great genetics from a physical standpoint? In order to pass those on, they've still got to engage in heterosexual relations at some point."

And some do.

"Microevolution, yes. Evolution within a species does take place, and is the reason why there are thousands of dog breeds out there today and not just one. Macroevolution, now, the idea that a dog can evolve into a human given enough time, that concept is laughable. Because, the only instances that support Macroevolution to some degree do an even better job supporting Creationism."

"Macroevolution" is nothing more than "microevolution" over a larger scale. Saying you accept microevolution but not macroevolution is like saying you can walk to your mailbox but not across town. The process is the same.

"The "missing links" haven't been found, after 1000 years of searching."

Yes, they have. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils This is a very common and VERY discredited claim by creationists.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
"Darwin...was, at that time, disillusioned with God for one reason or another."

You're committing a logical fallacy called bulverism. You're saying something is false because of a perceived psychological bias on the part of the person proposing it. That's faulty reasoning. That's like me saying that you find homosexuality repulsive, therefore I can dismiss what you say because of your psychological bias against it.

"What are the benefits of homosexuality from an evolutionary standpoint? Not on an individual scale - on the group plane. What does homosexuality offer that heterosexuality does not?"

Who says it has to "offer" something? Why can't it be neutral? What does left-handedness "offer"?

"Lifestyle - a choice of how one will live their life, what actions they will take, what they will do."

I don't see all gay people living their lives the same way, doing the same things, etc. Calling homosexuality a "lifestyle" doesn't make sense, because it's not a way of living one's life. It's simply one aspect of the person as a whole.

"Christianity isn't a form of mental illness."

Neither is homosexuality.

"It has been persecuted throughout the ages, hated and feared. Attempts have been made to exterminate it."

So has homosexuality.

"Why should Christians not keep what they believe to themselves, if homosexuality is not tolerable in public? Christianity isn't a form of mental illness."

Neither is homosexuality.
1 up
Natural. Hmm. If "nature" had intended for homosexuality to be the mainstream, or even a form of mainstream, then...two guys hooking up would be able to make babies. They should've evolved by now. They've had what, 2 billion years? Yet, still, heterosexuality is the only way to reproduce. That, or artificial insemination. Which also involves an egg and a sperm cell, thus it is perforce heterosexual.

Yes, humans are physically animals. However last I checked, animals don't wear clothes (unless people put them on them). Animals may be intelligent, but it's on a completely different scale than humans. If we act like animals, then we're evolving backwards.

Actually, Darwin believed in God before he formed his theory of Evolution. And he actually did become disillusioned with God. I'm simply stating historical facts.

And sorry, but a Wiki or Wikipedia is hardly a sound scientific source for information. If that's the best reference you've got, you better try a little harder.

Okay. Wouldn't you describe heterosexuality as a lifestyle choice? Let's go with that. So then heterosexuality and homosexuality are both lifestyle choices. But they're still not beliefs, because they are not anything that can be believed IN. So you comparing them with Christianity - or any religion - is laughable.

Now, as for what homosexuality "offers" evolution: Nothing. No, it doesn't really matter. But, if you believe in Evolution, then you must perforce believe it's in humanity's best interests to try to discourage those traits which are not beneficial. Neutrality, in Evolution, is never a good thing; those which evolve backwards, or cease to evolve, will in time be outmoded by those which continue to evolve upwards.

Now tell me this, to change things up a little: How do we decide what's right and wrong?
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
I don't think that gay people demand that you approve of their behavior as much as they don't want your disapproval to be used to justify discrimination. I would disagree with you that homosexuality isn't normal. Even if it weren't normal (which I think it is), does that make it bad? Being left-handed isn't normal, so does that make it bad? Giving up all your worldy possessions and living in a remote monastery isn't normal, so does that make it bad?

I could use the same logic towards religion. "If someone is a Christian in private, that's fine. But it's not okay for them to demand that everyone accept and APPROVE their delusional beliefs as being normal and laudable." Would you be okay with me saying that?
3 ups
Can always count on you to come up with a bigoted remark against Christians. Do you worship Satan in private or out in the open?
2 ups
Bad analogy. Being left-handed is something that affects only one's self. Homosexuality affects a minimum of two people.

Homosexuality is something that historically has been repulsed by societies and considered on a similar level with bestiality. Incidentally, when societies in history started accepting homosexuality and similar behaviors as normal, when they started becoming commonplace, the demise of that society and nation was not far behind.

How is it logical or natural to say that one's anatomy does not determine their gender? If it's based off of feelings, then clearly that person's body chemistry is screwed up. Hmm. Well, let's go back to Darwin's "Survival of the Fittest". Under that belief - which you must have since you oppose Christianity - not only would homosexuals breed themselves into extinction within one lifetime, their own bodies are warring against themselves. So you're advocating something that contradicts your own belief in evolution. If you do believe in Evolution, then it is in your best interests to further the human race's evolution as a whole. How is it possibly beneficial to humanity, from the evolutionary standpoint, for homosexuality to exist?

Bear in mind, that argument is the natural and inevitable conclusion of the Evolution theory, when extrapolated out to its ending. But let's take it even further.

So homosexuality runs counter to Evolution. Very well; if homosexuality is not natural under evolution, then what is it? Unnatural...again. Your own belief in the world's history and the origins of mankind decries homosexuality as unnatural.

"Unnatural" has many synonyms. The definition of the word itself is "contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal." Under that definition, which the theory of Evolution demands, homosexuality is therefore abnormal and not normal.

And if it's not normal...again, we are not talking about the freedom to exercise any of this right now. We're merely speaking of whether or not homosexuality is natural, which you claim it to be. Evolution would say otherwise.

Last note, homosexuality is also not comparable with Christianity. Homosexuality is a lifestyle. Christianity is a belief. You don't believe IN homosexuality. You may believe homosexuality is acceptable, but you do not believe in homosexuality as a faith. Christianity, belief in Christ Jesus, is something that creates a lifestyle. One must believe IN Jesus to be a Christian. Big difference.
reply
1 up
"Can always count on you to come up with a bigoted remark against Christians. Do you worship Satan in private or out in the open?"

And I can always count on you to come up with a bigoted remark against liberals, gays, trans people, Muslims, atheists, etc etc. :)

I don't worship Satan. If you think that someone who doesn't share your belief system must worship Satan, then you're even more illogical than I thought.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
The label of pansexual is more recent, and probably wasn't around when the LGBT community started using that collective label. The B is there because bisexuality is not something new, and bisexual people were likely involved in the community from the very beginning.
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Well they added q most recently. Bisexual implies only 2 genders.
reply
3 ups, 7 replies
Bisexual implies attraction to two genders, not that only two genders exist. Just like vegetarianism doesn't mean that steak doesn't exist.
reply
5 ups
Nope. Because of that were true there'd be a p, in there.
When will they add a double p and an a for that matter.
I see you guys are already pushing for pedophilia genders.
I wonder when you'll wake up and realize your islamic?
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
Basically the lgbt community is a hate group, because they discriminate against all, but two genders. :/
Down voting again? :)
3 ups
"When will they add a double p and an a for that matter."

Some people add A for asexual and I for intersex.

"I see you guys are already pushing for pedophilia genders."

I don't see anyone doing that. Also, pedophila is not a gender.

"I wonder when you'll wake up and realize your islamic?"

I'm an atheist, not a Muslim.

It's not a hate group. They don't discriminate against any genders.

The only comment of yours I DVed was the one where called laonsite a degenerate.
reply
4 ups
And that's fine. You'll have an explanation for everything, no matter how outrageous it is.
That's your freedom. Good day.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Technically, T shouldn't be there. Gender Identity has nothing to do with sexual preferences....
Just get rid of the L and G too since being gay no longer is a thing, just attracted to another being on the gender spectrum.
2 ups
"Gender Identity has nothing to do with sexual preferences...."

That's true, although LGB people face the same sort of discrimination at T people, so they rally together in support of a common cause.
reply
3 ups
If they don't discriminate genders then why only imply two?
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Lastly, I have a question for you to answer.
If a man who identifies as a woman, gets their p**is sucked. The person who's sucking the p**is is sucking a woman's p**is? Yes or no.
3 ups
I suppose I would say technically yes.

"If they don't discriminate genders then why only imply two?"

I'm sure many people in the LGBT community are accepting of non-binary people
reply
3 ups
That's all I need to know. :)
Have a good one.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
"pansexual, which is often defined as attraction regardless of gender, or attraction to all genders." and by all genders you mean "BOTH"
reply
1 up
No, I meant all. If I meant both I would have said both. But I meant all, so I said all.
Flip Settings
But Thats None Of My Business memeRe-caption this meme

Made by anonymous 2 months ago

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
THERE ARE ONLY 2 GENDERS. MALE AND FEMALE THE REST DOESN'T EXIST
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back