So Owen Jones is as full of shit as ever he was...

Um, yes you have mentioned you, see my post above. A most personal posting regarding what sort of sex you didn't want.

I would not want sex with a woman. I would not want to have sex using my penis or to have my penis used during sex. I am waiting for surgery and hope to have sex after that.

Ego What sex would you want to have then?

Apologies for calling you brave. I've obviously misunderstood.

Ego... you have proved my point. Again. Thank you.

Until I read your endless hatred toward women, I was pretty ambivalent toward the subject. You are the reason I am gender critical. You are the reason a lot of women have become more and more gender critical.

It is utterly pointless discussing an issue when you come onto a thread, because you have to constantly reframe all discussion toward you. I am sorry that you have such a hard time. I hope you find the life you want.

Hiding the thread now actually hiding it, unlike you who just says they will and doesn't because it's now going to be all about you, which makes discussion difficult. If you want answers to your demands, you'll find them in my earlier posts.

Elendon, it's a point that I've raised before. In 100 years time, all this isn't going to matter, because someone digging up a trans* woman's bones will state with certainty that physically at least, they were male. (Unless they have undergone some seriously painful restructuring in order to cure their dysmorphia)

Ego You don't recognise a female definition of being brave? I felt brave walking over Carrick a Rede rope bridge. But I wouldn't ever compare that fear with those who change gender.

Thanks for the support.

Yup, for me at least, it's about the lies he tells in the penultimate paragraph. Which suggest that, the skidmark is full of shit.

But, I don't think we'll be able to discuss this anymore, because if we do, we'll get acres of text telling us, with no actual knowledge of us as people, that we're hateful.

Seems like it's fine to threaten women, but not to take exception to a paragraph of lies written by a man.

Again.

Also meant to add that a prepubescent skull is not dimorphic (but the size would be obvious). I studied archeology at university. Sorry for the derail.

I thought the "full of shit" comment was primarily about the penultimate paragraph

Almond Those characteristics in the skull; mainly, chin, forehead are not indicative of sex per se, but yes, would generally point to either male or female, depending on the age. A skull in it's fifth/sixth decade would see less of this prominence though.

You can sex humans with some degree of accuracy from the skull, but that is from external morphology, not the brain cavity.

And just to get this straight. I give all support to those who change gender. It's a brave thing to do, especially as we are so gender binary in western society. What I find disingenuous is the tweaking of science to bolster the change.

But that is confirmation bias grimbletart

There is no way on looking at a brain post mortem you can discern this.

It's like saying those who are psychic actually exist because brain studies show it to be so.

The famous example of brain plasticity and environmental influence on learning and aptitude is the research done on taxi drivers and how the hippocampus area of their brains are physically enlarged after doing "the knowledge".

Small structures that show sexual dimorphism and have different structures in men and women.

No such 'structures' exist in the brain. Studies have shown that no one can discern the sex of a person by brain only. They can do so by skeleton the most obvious, i.e. the pelvis, DNA (sorry, that ole xx/xy) analysis if the pelvis doesn't exist. And that's it. You can age a skeleton by the skull (if present) due to fusion of the skull bones because by the age of 45 they have fused totally (the skull is smooth, with no lesions).

All human brains are alike in structure, despite racial and social differences. Some parts of the brain may be slightly elevated (we are talking -mm's here), but it would not indicate sex. It might well indicate a certain physical and/or social conditioning. e.g. say a long distance runner.

Gah, I meant to have arrows pointing to the post above, not italics. Sorry.

I'm wondering the same

Interesting thread. I find OJ annoying, but I find most columnists annoying...

Gay men, lesbians and bisexuals owe many of their rights to the courage and determination of trans activists, and should return the solidarity

This statement confused me a bit. Isn't it the other way around, with the gay liberation and equality movement occurring first?

Are you worried that there might be a biological cause for trans people and that it might have something to do with a small region in the brain?

No, I don't think so. It's a very narrow view I have but I'm not all that interested in why trans people are trans. All I care about is the effect on biological women of some of the more extreme views that some trans people have. Not just cotton ceilings and female penises (although these have some horrible implications for many biological women), but mainly the ways trans people want language to change to accommodate them in ways that make it more difficult to discuss the specific discrimination and inequality endured by those of us born with female bodies.

I'd easily and happily live and let live if the tools for class analysis of female experience were not being systematically dismantled.

And Ego is that part of human female history, the exchange of women to gain political power play any part in your identity?

Almond thanks for clarifying :)

After reading that, he sounds confused.