• BossDj@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    On the man’s plate are all the things that I listed, so I think it only fair that the chicken get the proportional features!

    • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Sure, but then as I said you’re comparing apples to oranges. You’re comparing the product of human birth to a chicken period, which just aren’t equal.

      In any case, I think this is just gonna go round in circles, so I’m going to stop here - have a good one

      • BossDj@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Haha yes we are comparing these things! Only due to semantics are they apples to oranges. We lazily call the ovum “egg”, but also the shelled “reproductive body” laid by birds, reptiles, etc. The same word with two listed definitions in the dictionary.

        You look at the human’s plate and your mind conjures the word egg (definition 1), and so on the second plate you believe there should also be an egg (definition 2)

        I look at the plate and see the various necessities for reproduction, which exist in both humans and chickens. The ovum IS on the human’s plate already, but so is all the other stuff!

        If it’s “chicken period” vs “human period”, then the other plate should also contain various other period stuff, too, if that’s what you like.

        Also isn’t it odd the shelled object is an “egg” no matter if fertilized or how long the fetus has gestated?