Biology is not as simple as one might think trust me i am a biologist….

Yes. Because I do it and it is my fingers working faster than my brain and the e is easier for me to reach often mid sentence with my thumb. I did wonder why I was doing it and I recognised the pattern. It was something I did on my phone with thumb typing.

Now for the life of me I seem to have a thing about their and there when typing from thought with both phone (thumb typing) and using a full keyboard. That is a different story.

Very true. I suppose we're going to see torrents of fake facts, denial and wailing tomorrow. But maybe not on here so much?
I was reading the comments under Suzanne Moore's article in the Telegraph earlier - over 800 of them and a majority of the posts would have fitted in on here. They were child safeguarding centred, many giving sad examples of their own children and grandchildren caught up in this. Lots of posts challenging the outrageous social grooming of children in schools, relevant links, lots of knowledge re the history of GIDs and several gay men talking about their experiences and their fury at what's happening to children. And some posts that would have ben deleted on here.

I'm saying all this because it often feels that women have been fighting this battle alone - but no longer. Involving children is what will bring much of this to an end.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2024/04/09/cass-report-trans-children-have-been-lied-to-by-adults/

Yes. The entire ideology is driven by blatant sexism. Butch girls and fey boys are entirely unacceptable.

I see it a lot on Twitter - 'the GC's are obsessed with this third gamete!! Weirdos!!'

It's because they won't twatting answer the question!

Unless im mistaken, even the peer review is subject to the politics of the day ?

I saw that post and my fingers hovered over the key board, then I just thought, no, can't be bothered, and went and put a chocolate hot cross bun in the air fryer and made a cup of tea. I was impressed with the number of people who did have the patience to repeat all the sensible arguments.

There was a female marine biologist arguing that DSDs mean the genetics of sex is not straightforward on Twitter the other day. The problem comes with the leaps they make.

I mean “DSDs exist and therefore our understanding of the genetics of sex is a little more complex than simply XX and XY” is a reasonable take.

But to move from there to “therefore some men are women” is ludicrous.

Similarly, the idea above, which sounds like a version of “hormone washing”. I can get behind the idea that hormonal differences in utero might potentially lead to feminine men and masculine women. It’s the leap from there to “having an opposite sex sense of self” which is a massive overstep.

Personally, I think it’s likely that feminine boys, who have traditionally been bullied for not being “masculine enough” probably experienced that bullying at the stage when their personality and understanding of the world and where they fit in were being formed. No wonder a boy, meeting with parental disapproval for his behaviour, might easily conclude that he should have been a girl. It’s a very child-like concept. That theory would also explain why there were traditionally more boys with gender identity disorder than girls, as being a “masculine girl” has always been more socially acceptable. That seems way more likely to me than people having some kind of “sexed soul” that dictates that they “are trans”.

"A rejection of the limitations imposed on girls in my generation. I’ve never been a conventionally girly women"

Very off topic, but a trend I've noticed a lot in the last 7-8 years is people both online AND when speaking using the word "women" when they mean "woman" or vice versa.
I can't for the life of me understand why or where this phenomena is coming from - Has anyone else noticed this?

Never mind the fact that a purported 68 year old female biologist can't seem to use the correct word to refer to herself🙄

It's the latest propaganda technique demonstration.

It's an 'appeal to authority' technique where you say you have more authority than others because you have a certain status or recognised skill.

Please read this wiki with a list of various different techniques. There's a whole pile that have been commonly used. Some examples:

Ad hominem
A Latin phrase that has come to mean attacking one's opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.
Ad nauseam
This uses tireless repetition of an idea. An idea, especially a simple slogan, that is repeated enough times, may begin to be taken as the truth. This approach is more effective alongside the propagandist limiting or controlling the media.
Bandwagon
Bandwagon and "inevitable-victory" appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that "everyone else is taking."
Inevitable victory: invites those not already on the bandwagon to join those already on the road to certain victory. Those already or at least partially on the bandwagon are reassured that staying aboard is their best course of action. (e.g., "The debate is over. Nearly everyone who matters agrees with me.")
Join the crowd: This technique reinforces people's natural desire to be on the winning side. This technique is used to convince the audience that a program is an expression of an irresistible mass movement and that it is in their best interest to join.

There's loads more. Glittering Generalities is a fav on these boards.

Most of the self identified scientists, safeguarding / mental health experts, lawyers, "worked with vulnerable children" etc are evidently just anti women transactivists who are normally quickly outed.

absolutely. And it's the dogged, relentless continuing that outs them even more.

Operation: Let Them Speak did not happen by accident!

What happened to the Nature article? Has that been ditched in favour of Wiki?

I mean this is literally the entire anti-vax community.

Gotcha, thanks helleofabore

I'm trying to think if Fords Speke or Halewood would have been closer to Hunts Cross although I should think British Leyland (?) might have been the closest. (Really stretching into arcane knowledge of car manufacturers in that area back then!)

Back to science/society/contemporary culture. We'll see what happens when the Cass Review is dropped for public scrutiny tomorrow!

Gosh! Two pages in and no derail. Do you think mishy and co are ok?

Oh I saw that. I was interested until the penultimate paragraph and then I thought what? you've just diverted from science to fantasy

It reached 40pages Ruf.

Just ignore them.

Scientists don't have to rely on 'trust me'. If they were genuine & competent, they could provide scientific fact, peer reviewed and acknowledged.

I'd love to make a sensible interjection but I'm too busy laughing at the idea of a scientist seriously citing Wikipedia. Marvellous.

Yes, I saw someone claiming to be a scientist and citing Wiki. I just rolled my eyes and moved on. I couldn't even bother quoting and saying WTF? At some point you just know that almost everyone else reading that rolled their eyes too, and the ones that didn't? They are also playing 'scientist' from their basement.

I met many a fitter at Fords Halewood 😊

@Karensalright I think you're right, it's the current argument of choice. As pp said the imminent arrival of the Cass review is probably making them desperate.
I suspect that most TRAs have cried themselves to sleep every night since JKR posted in support of Maya and the fact that they can't silence KJK must cause them nightmares when they do finally drop off.
Add in all the other brave women and men challenging the ideology plus the growing group of hurt, angry, loud de-transitioners and I think they know that the end is coming. There are scientists, counselors, campaigners and sensible people TERFS approaching from all sides. Most know they jumped on a shit bandwagon but don't know how to get off. So fake science is all they have left.

I'm sure that was far more important a job than being a fitter at Fords Halewood (niche knowledge on display there…).

I remember when FWR had a geneticist poster who was pretty much Nobel prize adjacent. So much fun when people would turn up and start strutting their nonsense.

I find men often use the phrase “Trust me” before they give their opinion as fact. The onus is on the other to do the verb of trusting. Lets them off the hook of doing the work of “convincing” someone with informed argument. (You know, just in the local pub for instance etc.)

Probs a bit of a tangent...