Good grief. Now they’re saying that not all xx are female and not all xy are male. And that xy ‘generally' means male.

It would indeed be perfectly lovely to have a wonderful soundbite that could express all the complexity of a DSD, in six words.

If it rhymed, even better.

Until then, we'll just have to keep explaining.

@DorotheaDiamond exactly - yet some posters are arguing for a strict XX=female rule in sports. That's going to bite them on the bum.

I think they're every bit as informed. They just don't give a flying fuck. Captured as hell.

Of course I'm not trying to make a generalised rule out of it. But the people saying "XX=female. End of." certainly are. I'm pointing out that if you apply a strict genetic test, then it might not necessarily close the door on permitting male-bodied individuals into female competition. It will just result in unscrupulous individuals scouring developing countries for individuals with 46,XX DSDs to compete as women, just as they have been doing with 46,XY 5-ARD indivudals.

The rules needs to address both karotype (genetics) AND phenotype (body composition).

I think there is an easy balance to be struck and it only takes a very little nuance (though some on mumsnet do seem to be incapable of this even to the point of denying that externally feminising XY DSD exists!)

You can't compete in female sport if you have some genetics or phenotype that is male (sadly for that individual but maintains fairness, safety and integrity of female sport).

But at the same time, putting female sport aside, otherwise insisting that people with an XY DSD who are externally feminised - to the extent they were sexed as female at birth and raised with a female identity, to the extent that they appear female until you get out a speculum or ultrasound machine (as for example is the case with CAIS) - should be forced to live as men is mad and cruel.

Just because the complexity of biological sex for a very small % people with DSD has been weaponised by TRA doesn't mean GC feminists need to adopt a knee jerk absolutist position.

If only the IOC was as articulate and informed as some of the people who post here.

no they are actually male because the sry gene which is normally on the Y chromosome and is the actual cause of male pathway development has been transposed onto an X chromosome.

in 99.99+% of men that is the same as xy.

how a man handles being diagnosed with this is between him and his family/doctors, but he would have testosterone in normal male range which should exclude him from female sports.

*if someone has such a dsd and wishes to continue life as a female then no one should be referring to them as “he”, or insisting they are male.

No one is trying to find out who's got a DSD, and running up to them to upset them about it, ffs.

Sex matters when it matters. When it doesn't, it doesn't.

Adults have responsibility for children. Children are not equipped to make such over-arching life decisions. A child with an identified DSD should have this introduced to them in an age appropriate way and at an age appropriate time. It would be cruel and irresponsible to have them believe one thing about themself, only for this to disintegrate at puberty.

If it is known that this child is likely to go through the puberty of the 'other' sex - then this can be prepared for and understood beforehand. Pre-pubertal children are quite ambiguous anyway. They don't need to be funnelled into particular sex specific streotypes or activities or clothing. Their own nature will determine their interests and inclinations.

The science is fascinating, and I enjoy these arguments, but don't we need something snappier? Something that will thwart the disingenuous obfuscators with political motives, and convince the previously uninvolved, but now confused, public?

How about:

XX=female and XY=male is the norm. It is very, very rare for (developmental variations to cause) someone to have some features normally found in the opposite sex. It would be very simple (and dignified and non-invasive) for all athletes to be swabbed for the SRY (maleness instructing) gene, so they can be excluded from female competition.

(Optional, or keep in reserve: you will hear that some XY individuals look just like women and have few or no male features that would give them an unfair advantage, because they cannot process T. Regulators should decide in a transparent way whether these individuals as a class merit an exception, based purely on the science (no individual's medical history would need to be revealed). These two boxers don't fit that category.)

It's still not very snappy! Better suggestions?

This complexity has gained attention of activists who wish to deconstruct the two sexes, claiming that people with DSDs are not male or female. But humans are a gonochoric species: individuals are either male or female throughout their entire life cycle. People with DSDs are not new sexes (this would require a third gamete type), and they are not both sexes

Either male or female.

Even the dictionary definition gets it.

Woman: Adult human female of or denoting the sex who bears eggs.

'Denoting'

'Eggs'

TRAs have been going out of their way for years to try and include DSDs under their ever expanding umbrella. They've even tried to claim that a trans ID stems from a DSD.

Women addressing these issues (for bloody years), are not strangers to this technique.

Every human is either male or female. And no, doctors are not stumped as to which.

As for whether it's kind to discuss it, that's not really relevant, in my opinion. If we don't discuss it, people are going to continue to pretend that two obvious men, unfairly battering women, might actually not be men.

Yet again, take it up with transactivists.

They are the ones who, in the teeth of helpless opposition from the very people they're trying to co-op, have dragged DSDs into it.

if someone has such a dsd and wishes to continue life as a female then no one should be referring to them as “he”, or insisting they are male.

This is the same as the TRA argument that we should pretend men are women if they demand it.

No.

but there has already been one response to my post referring to that (albeit hypothetical) child as “he”, and the child should be told they are male and be expected to adapt to that.

if someone has such a dsd and wishes to continue life as a female then no one should be referring to them as “he”, or insisting they are male.

Do you think the hypothetical child won't realise something's amiss when he doesn't start female puberty but instead goes through male puberty? Do you think this situation should not be investigated? Should his maleness somehow be kept a secret from him?

You are taking one incredibly rare occurence ( even in the context of DSDs) and trying to make a generalised rule that says as a consequence of this one particularly rare example, all male people with DSDs should be permitted into women's sports.

I think Colin Wright explains it really well when he's says biological sex is like a coin, it has two sides but it also has a narrow edge.

Male and female are opposite sides of the coin and DSD's are the narrow edge not a third side of the coin.

I agree with PP that binary sex is fairly straight forward and well understood but the more I read about DSD's the more I think we understand very little about them. I've seen tables where multiple karyotype variations are described as Turners Syndrome for example. I suspect the rarity of such conditions makes it harder to study them and develop a reliable and comprehensive picture of all the variations.

None of it changes the fact that there are only two sexes.

There is no continuum or spectrum of sex.

The is also true of monoecious species like snails and daffodils - they have male gametes and female gametes and nothing inbetween.

The problem is that we've had it explained to like we are 5 and we keep shouting that information as 'fact' because the realiry is mind blowingly complex. In reality for most people and most situations that simple 5 year old version works, however there are a very small number of variations, some possibly so rare that thy haven't been discovered yet, where it isn't that simple.

While XY is a 'male' genotype, I wouldn't say that an XY person born with a vagina and uterus, raised believing they are a female, subjected to the same pressures as every other young girl growing up, is instantly 'man' in society on discovering a chromosomal difference. What bathroom does someone with a vulva / no penis but XY chromosomes use? I wouldn't be sending a young person with a vulva that looks like any other little girl into the men's room!

Agreed.

but there has already been one response to my post referring to that (albeit hypothetical) child as “he”, and the child should be told they are male and be expected to adapt to that.

if someone has such a dsd and wishes to continue life as a female then no one should be referring to them as “he”, or insisting they are male. It is their disorder and we should be lead by them and how they want to be treated/referred to.

pp has said about using the heel prick test at birth- so your baby that looks like a girl has XY chromosomes. Now what? Reconstructive surgery? No, I expect it would continue as before where the child is brought up in a social role to match it’s appearance, then given the information when it’s old enough to understand and make the choice.

*caveat I am not including sport in this discussion, I have already said there will probably need to be a blanket ban on XY in women’s sport.

This issue has highlighted how tangled thinking is on this subject, and how the language surrounding sex and gender doesn't help since it means different things when talking about different issues.

It is not hugely complex and difficult to understand at all but conflation of sex and gender makes it so.

A: Humans are either male or female genetically, and cannot be neither or change from one to the other.

B: Humans sometimes present as male or female or non binary, and this presentation is sometimes different depending on the individual and what they want or feel or what they have been led to believe

Both things are true and in some cases they are not connected at all.

People shouting about how some women are male are correct

People shouting about how males shouldn't compete with females are correct

I did credit the general public with a bit more common sense before this but honestly I despair

Would you describe a married adult man, who is being investigated for fertility issues, and is found to be XX as female? Because that is how de La Chapelle syndrome is often diagnosed as there is often no hint of it in earlier life. Fully functioning male genitalia (but sterile) and normal male appearance. Should such an individual be permitted to participate in women’s sport?

Given the scouting that goes on for athletes with DSDs in areas where there is known to be increased prevalence, I'm not so inclined to believe that these individuals really get to the age of 16 before the discovery is made.

It really is the most patronising, white saviour bollocks to assume the natives are uneducated and stupid.

Its misogyny. Girls have no value. "Girls" with a DSD involving a Y chromosome and a testosterone surge during puberty are valuable.

Where are we gettinf sex is observed/determined at birth? Sex is determined at co ception and many, many people observe this while the baby is still i the womb, either through visualisation with ultrasound or via conclusive diagnostic tests such as CVS, amniocentesis or foetal blood sampling. Hence all the gender reveal parties (where I am screaming it's a sex reveal!)

Nobody shouts " man" at a child....they are a child.

But as a child grows into an adolescent any underlying conditions may become apparent and can be tested for. It is a tough and confusing hand to be dealt a DSD, obviously - but human beings are by nature quite adaptable, and with time people with DSDs can come to understand the full truth of their condition and adapt accordingly.

All of this stuff about X and Y genes and DSDs is a complete red herring and being used to mislead people.

DSDs and genotypes other than XX and XY are rare. The overwhelming majority of this small number of people with DSDs are unambiguously male or female.

There are no humans who have a complete set of male and female reproductive organs (hermaphrodites).

There are no women with completely normal female physiology but XY genotype and no men with completely normal male physiology but XX genotype.

There is no continuum or spectrum of sex. All of the abnormalities of sex chromosomes like XXY, XYY and X0 result in a person who is male or female. Ambiguities are vanishingly rare.

There are people like Emma Hilton and Carole Hooven on X who can explain all of it. Emma Hilton is a scientist whose research specialism is development of sex differentiation. Yet they constantly get told they're wrong by non-scientists parroting complete nonsense that they've read.

Until a few years ago none of the non-scientific general public had any interest in DSDs. The ONLY reason there's been so much talk about DSDs and sex chromosomes in recent years is because of men saying they're women. One of the arguments supporting them saying they're Actual Women, not just cross dressers, was this notion that sex is complicated and not binary. And here we are now, with absurd notions to do with chromosome differences, which are not the slightest bit relevant to 40 year old men deciding they're women.

Sadly you're right @AShortName , the internet is being flooded by this nonsense, and it sounds very plausible to many people so it's being accepted as truth.

Are already being done for everybody that has a fetal screening test for Downs etc i.e pretty much every pregnant woman in developed countries at least.