Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To Think That Archaeology Proves That Men Cannot Be Women

137 replies

MrsMappFlint · 23/04/2025 08:31

A burial site has been found in Cardiff. It dates from the 6th or 7th Century.
The skeletons are all women.

In death, when all genitals have gone, the skeleton retains the truth about the simple fact-it is either male or female.

There is no third way. That's science and hundreds of years after death, the truth of biology is retained in the bone.

Your sex is in your very bones-male or female-that's it. In the end, that's all there is.

Men can pretend to be women but skeletons tell the truth.

The story is on the BBC website.

OP posts:
RhaenysRocks · 23/04/2025 09:03

Holdonforsummer · 23/04/2025 08:35

Intersex people might disagree but don’t let that get in the way of your argument.

Intersex people have asked repeatedly not to be drawn into the trans debate, which this clearly is about. Those with DSD are not "both" or "neither". They are xx or xy.

SummerFeverVenice · 23/04/2025 09:03

Archymum · 23/04/2025 09:00

The only reliable part of the human skeleton that can be used to make a sex ID within the archaeological record is the pelvis. There is a fairly large range in the morphology of a "typical" pelvis for both sexes and the area of overlap is relatively large. This is because humans display relatively less sexual dimorphism than many other species of primate. Because of this, almost all sex IDs for archaeological skeletal remains are estimates because many pelvises fall in the range where they might be either male or female.

That’s how I was trained, these days they just do a DNA test because skeletal morphology was only 80-90% accurate whereas DNA is like 99.98% accurate

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 23/04/2025 09:01

Holdonforsummer · 23/04/2025 08:35

Intersex people might disagree but don’t let that get in the way of your argument.

Given those with DSDs are all either male or female not sure what your logic is here.

Archymum · 23/04/2025 09:00

The only reliable part of the human skeleton that can be used to make a sex ID within the archaeological record is the pelvis. There is a fairly large range in the morphology of a "typical" pelvis for both sexes and the area of overlap is relatively large. This is because humans display relatively less sexual dimorphism than many other species of primate. Because of this, almost all sex IDs for archaeological skeletal remains are estimates because many pelvises fall in the range where they might be either male or female.

Original poster
MrsMappFlint · 23/04/2025 08:55

Holdonforsummer · 23/04/2025 08:35

Intersex people might disagree but don’t let that get in the way of your argument.

How many intersex skeletons have been found?

OP posts:
Original poster
MrsMappFlint · 23/04/2025 08:54

Pentimenti · 23/04/2025 08:34

We don’t need 6th c skeletons to ‘prove’ anything!

No, we don't but things are in such a dire state that we do

OP posts:
vodkaredbullgirl · 23/04/2025 08:50

🙄

HoskinsChoice · 23/04/2025 08:45

Please, PLEASE, make this stop!

Archymum · 23/04/2025 08:37

Archaeology also demonstrates that for tens of thousands of years, since the very earliest evidence of anatomically and behaviourally modern humans (Homo sapiens), some individuals in every society on the globe conformed to non-binary gender identities and roles. In the European Upper Palaeolithic, some of these individuals were celebrated and revered as spiritual leaders in their communities (i.e. shamans).

user1471538275 · 23/04/2025 08:37

@Holdonforsummer Intersex is an outdated term and has been changed to Differences in sexual development (DSD).

This better reflects that there is not 'inter' = between, there is only differences in the binary sexual development pathways - male or female pathways that can present very different challenges for those individuals born with these differences.

Holdonforsummer · 23/04/2025 08:35

Intersex people might disagree but don’t let that get in the way of your argument.

Pentimenti · 23/04/2025 08:34

We don’t need 6th c skeletons to ‘prove’ anything!