Changing chromosomes is possible

I posted onto another thread
which turned into a fascinating but epic derail

a lot of the Trans ideology hangs its science on a misunderstanding of post pregnancy chimerism

• the fact that mothers absorb cells from their unborn children
• and that younger siblings can absorb cells from their older siblings back from the mother
• and round and round

but has fuck all to do with Tans

By far the largest proportion of Individuals with DSDS are not intersex. XXY Are males who May be diagnosed As having Kleinfelters syndrome. XO are females who will likely be diagnosed by puberty as having Turner syndrome. XXX and XYY are normal, usually females and males respectively so aren’t even DSD.

Virtue points about this topic are very cheap for men, in general. None of their rights are threatened (yet), nobody calls them ejaculators in health pamphlets, and nobody tries to erase the word "man" on condom packets. Trans men will not take away most of their Olympic medals, ever, and will not pose a threat in toilets.

Ally McZeal

ChattyLion - well you can’t spell Wally without Ally.

Thats brilliant TorkTorkBam

I agree, he is a fool. I bet hes got a beard, I bet he spends a lot of time stroking his beard. I find these men who debate our reality like its theoretical study so tedius and ever so slightly ridiculous.

I too think you should post the brilliant "To the man who thinks biological sex doesn't exist" Medium article. He probably won't see the irony though.

I can't stand pompous, self-important men like him. I'd be deleting and blocking. With a goodbye flourish like the excellent one you suggest.

[quote Broomfondle]@holidayplanningnewbie

Don't forget

• Sex segregation is literally like race segregation.

He's talking bull. He's also talking sexist bull. I'm actually very interested in epigenetics and sex based differences. Anyway

I'd just ask him if sex is so immaterial and women can have penises and men can have vaginas etc and it's bigoted to think otherwise, why the trans lobby allows the most vulnerable portion of the people it represents to get life changing surgery on their healthy bodies in line with that 'bigoted' ideal? That men do have penises and no breasts and women do have vaginas and breasts? Why are healthy bodies being medically and surgically altered to uphold a binary they criticise?

Woman - I'm female because I have a female body.
TRAs - "Bigot! Transphobe!"
Transwoman - I'm a woman and therefore need a female body.
TRAs - "Of course! It's your right! Anything less would be a literal invalidation of who you are!"

Woman - I'm female because my reproductive system is geared towards making ova
TRAs - " Sex doesn't matter! It's so much more complicated than that! It doesn't make you a woman anyway! Loads of women have penises or no breasts and they are still women!"
Transman - "I'm a man"
TRAs - "Ok here are these hormones to help you develop male secondary sex characteristics and here is the clinic that will remove your breasts and female reproductive organs as they are obviously in direct conflict with you being able to identify as man.

It's crazy how "you're female so can't be male" is compared to "you're female so make me a sandwich". The first is only sexist if you value one sex over another.
Acknowledging sex is not invalidating identity.
It is also not saying 'I acknowledge your sex so believe you are less worthy of rights and protections'. Women have fought for years for them not to be treated differently because of their sex when it is irrelevant and for specific rights and services when it is.
The relevance of sex in some circumstances has not changed. The relevance of gender reassignment in discrimination has been acknowledged hence the protected characteristic in the equality act.

You know who agrees that it's shit to be made to feel bad for your sex? Feminists. But it's just not reality to therefore do away with it all together and treated everyone as sexless.
If feminists had argued sex is a spectrum and females were really males and that's the basis their rights should be based on women would not have the rights and services they specifically need today.
Same if homosexuals had used that arguement to say they were really heterosexual.
If transwomen and transmen are given rights and services on the basis they are male and female they will not only erase the rights of others but miss out on creating the rights and services they specifically need.[/quote]
Fabulous post.

This is an excellent scientific take-down of the "sex is a spectrum" bollocks.
twitter.com/zaelefty/status/1283462168478973952

The short version - the whole point of two sexes in animals is to support anisogamous reproduction, in which members of one sex develop with a reproductive system capable of producing small immobile gametes and members of the other sex develop with a reproductive system capable of producing large immobile gametes.

Everything else is evidence of variability within the sexes - even, for instance, XX individuals with a translocation of the SRY gene onto one of the X chromosomes such that they end up with a functioning male reproductive system despite the SRY gene having ended up on an X chromosome instead of its normal location on a Y chromosome.

Variation within a sex (even when - e.g. height - that variability is so great that the distribution for the male sex overlaps with that for the female sex) is not evidence that there's no such thing as sex, or that sex is a continuum.

But seriously, the man's a dick. As far as I can see, your only connection with him is you went to school with him. Block him. And post some genuine science on your own page for your real friends to see.

Or a Robert Galbraith quote 🤫

Reply with an Orwell quote. He will delete it of course but it's your best chance of giving him pause for thought.

Mainly block the dickhead though. Who needs that crap in their life. Actually, block him then post on your own timeline the article about "to the man who thinks biological sex doesn't exist." Then you'll have a load of others telling him or dismissing him and you will find out which of your friends have the winning combination of both brain and backbone.

I feel like sometimes a brief, 'don't be silly, you don't really believe that' is all that such idiocy merits.

menopausal women had more in common with a man than a woman due to hormones.

Crikey! I find the people who say things like this are people seriously in denial of reality. That any person looks at a woman or a man at one particular time in life and declares their sex based on that is moronic.

Even a post menopausal woman who is a brave cancer survivor with the loss of body parts is never anything like a ‘man’!!!

This is where being kind and allowing TW AW to stand as a ideal.

I read one earlier in Twitter. He said sex was more than gametes and was hormones etc. He then said a menopausal women had more in common with a man than a woman due to hormones. In other words sex is irrelevant and providing you take oestrogen you are a woman

My rule of thumb is that the longer the FB post and the fewer paragraph breaks, the greater the chance of it all being bullshit. I’m sure you could write a formula to express this. (If x is number of words and -n represents paragraph breaks ...)

I welcome the opportunity to educate other people on the specifics of DNA and chromosomes and sex and gender and the complexities surrounding all of it. translation.

I am a massive wanker who did 4th form science. I don’t remember much of it, but someone on Reddit said this and it sounded convincing. I didn’t finish reading it because it was too long and there weren’t any paragraph breaks, but it sounded good. Also, I’m a man and I science better than women because penis.

Having failed at a number and of explanations, TRAs have started on the “humans can change chromosomes” thing. The capacity of humans to swallow bullshit astonishes me.

I revise my previous assessment,

He's a pompous scientific illiterate who doesn't give a shit about women's rights.

@holidayplanningnewbie

Don't forget

• Sex segregation is literally like race segregation.

He's talking bull. He's also talking sexist bull. I'm actually very interested in epigenetics and sex based differences. Anyway

I'd just ask him if sex is so immaterial and women can have penises and men can have vaginas etc and it's bigoted to think otherwise, why the trans lobby allows the most vulnerable portion of the people it represents to get life changing surgery on their healthy bodies in line with that 'bigoted' ideal? That men do have penises and no breasts and women do have vaginas and breasts? Why are healthy bodies being medically and surgically altered to uphold a binary they criticise?

Woman - I'm female because I have a female body.
TRAs - "Bigot! Transphobe!"
Transwoman - I'm a woman and therefore need a female body.
TRAs - "Of course! It's your right! Anything less would be a literal invalidation of who you are!"

Woman - I'm female because my reproductive system is geared towards making ova
TRAs - " Sex doesn't matter! It's so much more complicated than that! It doesn't make you a woman anyway! Loads of women have penises or no breasts and they are still women!"
Transman - "I'm a man"
TRAs - "Ok here are these hormones to help you develop male secondary sex characteristics and here is the clinic that will remove your breasts and female reproductive organs as they are obviously in direct conflict with you being able to identify as man.

It's crazy how "you're female so can't be male" is compared to "you're female so make me a sandwich". The first is only sexist if you value one sex over another.
Acknowledging sex is not invalidating identity.
It is also not saying 'I acknowledge your sex so believe you are less worthy of rights and protections'. Women have fought for years for them not to be treated differently because of their sex when it is irrelevant and for specific rights and services when it is.
The relevance of sex in some circumstances has not changed. The relevance of gender reassignment in discrimination has been acknowledged hence the protected characteristic in the equality act.

You know who agrees that it's shit to be made to feel bad for your sex? Feminists. But it's just not reality to therefore do away with it all together and treated everyone as sexless.
If feminists had argued sex is a spectrum and females were really males and that's the basis their rights should be based on women would not have the rights and services they specifically need today.
Same if homosexuals had used that arguement to say they were really heterosexual.
If transwomen and transmen are given rights and services on the basis they are male and female they will not only erase the rights of others but miss out on creating the rights and services they specifically need.

Dear god. What a deeply misled, self important wally, now actively propping up sexism and homophobia and erasing child safeguarding and freedom of speech. He should be honest then and own it that his argument comes from the values above and that he is arguing politically, not using facts or logic. He starts with ‘science proves!’ But then ‘just talk to people and ask what they feel, that proves it!’ ‘(But only if you’re talking in a genuine way!’)

Love the way he says he’ll harass dissenters with lots and lots of published papers but then says like a poor shrinking violet to ‘only contact me in a week or two’ when you’ve repented. What’s in all this for him that’s not equally applicable to you?

That article holidayplanner linked to is fucking amazing. If you can be arsed to get back to this friend I would send him that one.

they were taught something in 1995 by a teacher who didn't have a degree in epidemiology and have clung onto that as 'fact' ever since - sounds a bit close to your own experience eh? What a plonker.

trans people are the most marginalised group in the world

Ah, I hadn't realised science, or maybe it's social science, had developed a reliable meter for this. That's useful. I wonder what the readings are for, say, Yazidi girls burned to death for refusing to be sex slaves, or the Uyghurs currently being persecuted in China, or the Indian girl and her mother killed recently by one of the men accused of the girl's gang rape.

Brilliant (quoted by holidayplanningnewbie upthread)

"You know what a female body is, dude? It’s the only type of body that makes men like you ask such stupid questions. So please, stop. This is an emergency. This is three and a half billion human beings tied to the tracks, and you’re riding on the train. Your insistence on nuance, your fetish for accuracy, your smug deconstruction of common sense — it doesn’t make you thoughtful. It doesn’t make you wise. It doesn’t make you progressive. It makes you an asshole."

That article says everything. I got into comments to say, uni bio prof here, yes, two sexes in mammals, anything else is twaddle, etc etc, but, honestly Gender Detective in that article addresses the real issues perfectly.

Also, that interminable "answer" from this beak quoted by OP above? What a load of horseshit. If you excise all the times he says variations of "go forth and educate yourself," without once providing links to original sources, that whole mess would be only a quarter as long.

Plus I keep wondering why he thinks epidemiologists would be studying IQ differences between races. Psychologists used to do that before they got terminally laughed out of town. Sociologists tend to be the ones studying women's sandwich-making abilities. They're impervious to laughter, so they're still at it. Maybe he means population geneticists? But those characteristics would have to have identifiable alleles for population geneticists to work on them. As people have already said, you can't argue with stupid. It'd be really nice if stupid stopped arguing with us.

That’s the very one I was thinking about Vermeil. The one that also says nothing but infers a lot of tosh. And like them all says ‘it’s complicated’.

He is an absolute embarrassment to science, debate, free speech, equality and all the other things he purports to endorse. The irony is laughable!