Trans patient records medical team during cancer surgery

This seems appropriate here

https://x.com/womenreadwomen/status/2025448741910479269?s=46

“Canadian taxpayers paid for a training video targeting nurses at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.

Trans-identified male and BDSM fetishist Nina Arsenault was invited to show women how to respond to "trans women" who refuse to say that they are male.”

This was linked further down the thread too. It is an example of Operation: Let them speak. Yet, Arsenault falls into the fallacy trap where he defends his rejection of feminists saying no male person can be female with the tropish ‘well some women won’t have those body parts that the feminists are saying female people have’ line he trots out.

x.com/womenreadwomen/status/1659516917537976323?s=46

Ig, this is a poster who doubles down that male breasts can be 'female breasts' based on simply shape, size and some similarities in composition. Who then rejects the fact that a female breast is connected to a completely integrated female reproductive system that monitors and controls milk production complete with feedback systems from their infant.

To some people, replacing testosterone with estrogen is all that is needed. Never thinking about the many other hormones and chemical interactions that happen to support the female breast. All happening controlled by a system that is not simply developed with 'estrogen'.

But apparently, we get told that we 'know nothing about my experience'. As if a male person taking supplements of estrogen can somehow magic a complete integrated system over decades of use.

I believe that a group of male people have used the fact that male people do have 'breast' and that with estrogen they can grow those breasts and that some male people can produce a substance to secrete from their breasts, to think that the male version of the breast is truly just like the female version. And through this body part, they can strengthen their claims to be female because to them this body part is a key to opening the gate to legitimacy of claiming to be female, so to speak.

These claims such as 'we will see' about Khelif are just bravado now. Because I don't believe that even Khelif believes he will be competing in the next Olympics.

We understand that you like to find as many ways to denigrate and demonise the women who reject that you are female in any way. You have effectively called us 'race realists' several times now in an attempt to align a repugnant belief set that is 'race realism' with the very well established and proven science that there are only two sexes and no male person can ever become a female person.

It is right up there with your attempts to align our support of this established science with homophobia and other things as well. For example, the way you attempt to shape concerns about safeguarding as being just like homophobia, and just like being against same sex marriage, when the points being made are completely irrelevant to those comparators.

Unfortunately for you, material reality will always prevail. There is no science that proves that one race is 'better' than the other or that one race has more capacity for intelligence or whatever negative concept it is you are using the term to mean.

There is no science that you have linked to support any claim of yours that you have become 'female' in any way either. There is however, plenty of established and proven science that there is two distinct sexes and that if you have the body of one sex you cannot become the other sex.

Just like your fall back mantra of 'you know nothing about my experience' or 'I know my body better than you do'. These are also highly hypocritical considering your assertions that you are female and have a female body and that you have been through a female puberty and so on.

Either way, your continued derisory attempts at framing evidenced arguments as being bigoted fails every time. It must make you feel better inside to do it. That way you can just keep dismissing people's points. But just like many of the points you have been making, they are not based on material reality.

On one level, 'sex realist' is a simple pin-pointingly accurate label. Gender critical is so mushy. It does sit in my brain next to 'race realist,' because both sincerely held beliefs feel very similar to me.

Makes me laugh when @onepostwonder says 'sex realists' with such disdain.

Surely he should be calling TRAs sex fantasists? Because that's the equivalent converse?

Its always good to see the bs that gender identity idealogs are currently spouting, and I must admit that the current trend of calling us sex realists is quite amusing as I really don't think its having the effect that they wanted. I've had a couple of people asking what they mean and as soon as you explain that it means we don't believe that anyone can change their biological sex the response I've had is oh so sane people need a label now too do we 🤣.
When the vast majority of people disagree with your crazy harmful ideology it's really not a good look to try and name call and shame them, all it does is show them quite how crazy you and your ideology are. Operation let them speak is still going strong.

This is not how genetics work, you don't get an entire chunk of DNA disappear from every cell in the body from one test to another. You can test Khelif till the cows come home and he will still be a man.

Ahhhh. Thank you, prof.

If you're purple with horizontal stripes, you're probably mine. I have the other in my odd-sock pile.

It is very much still along the lines of ‘let’s see if I can find an in to convince female people to stop excluding me in particular.’

I was reading some social media interactions recently about those male people who go along with supporting keeping some male people out of female single sex provisions. They tell women that they support them etc. but then it turns out that they get upset when they are excluded too.

Sometimes it really feels like we are test subjects to trial arguments.

Male socialisation pops when it comes to arguing that belting women is fine.

That male with olympic level training will be fully aware he is a male.

There is no way he has gotten to his level of training without having multiple tests to check for olympics qualifying testosterone levels. No way he did not have medical investigations to work out why his body was producing male levels. Algerian has medical hospitals which do DNA testing.

None of the actual female boxers agreed to box males. If they all were told that the other person in the ring would be female.

He was the one who decided that he would get into a ring with a female boxer.

He could have opted to fight as a male against other males.

That was and is his "personal history and experience in the world"

We know that you find it more comfortable to dismiss material reality. We get it.

You see, many of us posting on this board seek to understand the material reality you seem to reject. That is why we have these discussions. To sort through misinformation and falsehoods and gain an understanding of knowledge based on the evidence.

This is becoming headache-inducing, even more than usual.

I didn't say they were people. Maybe they are. They could be bots?

I'd suggest that removing men from female boxing competitions would do a great deal to protect female boxers. As would men not entering female spaces or facilities generally. A man's 'feelings' don't take precedence over reality.

Khelif is as much of a woman as Caster (im no less of a woman because i have internal testicles) Semanya is.

Huh!! Hey wims! We have graduated from six women with socks to repeating falsehoods from 100 righteous twitter users!

Is this job enrichment? We get to repeat stuff from 100 people?

(Whose sock am I by the way? I have never found out?)

Maybe. It is really easy to write off most sex realist accusations as frothing rumour, boiled in the rage of 100 righteous twitter users.

With respect, it's quite a leap to infer:

'anyone who requests entry to a female sports category must be female, regardless of the results of laboratory sex testing'

from

'some sportswomen have in the past been wrongly accused, at the bar-room debate level, of being men'

For the avoidance of doubt, by "quite a leap" I meant something very close to 'utterly risible'.

'.

Sex realism always ascribes the worst faith to every situation. This is not different. Calling Khelif a man has no ability to rewrite her personal history and experience in the world. Speculating on tests, constructing motivations and spreading conspiracy theories does not protect women.

Sex realists do believe Khelif is a man and is a tool of the patriarchy to pummel female athletes. No one needs to convince me of that, I am well aware, thank you.

I'm going to keep saying it. Khelif is a man with a DSD. He has never been a woman. I would suggest he has ambiguous genitalia and a micropenis. Some men with a micropenis have a very small one, of about 1-2 centimeters. As a baby it would have been quite easy for medical personnel to mistake him for a female. As he got older it was probably evident that they were mistaken but no one had the courage to admit it and carry out proper investigation
Instead they turned him into a boxer, to beat women up. It's a disgrace.

Those female boxers have little choice if they wished to represent their country. Those female boxers were also told that they were boxing a female competitor.

Their consent was negated by the IOC’s false assertion.

You have engaged in a form of victim blaming. And shown again that you don’t understand consent.

Again… well done. You are pulling out all the tactics to defend a male boxer punching female boxers in the ring in female boxing matches.

Fucking hell! The misinformation and false comparisons keep coming.

Martina is female and always was. There is no equivalence between her situation and that of Khelif. At all.

Khelif is MALE. You stating he was never a ‘man’ is irrelevant, because he is MALE.

Can you explain what part of no female athlete competing in the Olympics has ever had to suppress her naturally occurring testosterone levels do you not understand? Because I can attempt to explain in more detail if needed.

But if it is just your choice to keep doubling down, that is fine. I reckon posters will just keep pointing out how misinformed you are

You are making irrelevant points that are just sparple at this stage trying to defend your claims about Khelif that you didn’t bother checking before making.

Statistically higher than any sex realist has ever pondered.

Those female people are boxers. They willingly participate within in a sport of risk and trauma. Khelif is not a man and has never been a man.

When Martina Navratilova started to dominate tennis, female players said they'd never played against any woman as powerful and manly as Martina Navratilova. Fans (and not fans) speculated all sorts of theories about how and why this was. Martina Navratilova is a woman.