Opinions you have that aren't popular on mumsnet(2)

[Lockdowner35]

As the last thread reached 1000 posts

I will start

Jo Swinson would have do a better job than Boris on Coronavirus

Yes please do link them.

Im trying to find ones that I can link, which don't require third party subscrption. Im going to paste quotes and authors

If you can give the name / date / author of the publications that would be useful too. Then I can look them up in the online journal library at work.

www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/visualizing-sex-as-a-spectrum/

www.nytimes.com/2018/10/22/health/transgender-trump-biology.html

sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/im-xy-know-sex-determination-systems-101/

Before you start on these are NOT the articles I used in my study (I had 3rd party access through university subscription to those articles) therefore I can't link them here. However, within these articles (widely available without subscription!) are the names of scientists quoted, and in very simple terms an explanation of the theories I'm talking about. Give them a read, see what you think. Link me some articles backing up your beliefs.

Just tell me the articles you are using. I work at at uni. I have free access to the journal library.

Link me some articles backing up your beliefs.

What that sex is a biological reality? Are you kidding me? You are a biology student. Any biology text book can tell you that. What course was it that you're studying again?

Read these ones whilst I do, because no offense, but they are a lot easier to understand if you don't study biology! Then when you read the other ones they will make more sense

No Opheila, not that, dont twist my words! I said that there is a growing school of thought within biology, and medicine, that sex is a spectrum, rather than a dichotomy. Give me some evidence that this isn't the case. That sex is not a spectrum, that no such school of thought exists within biology, that im just a bizarre internet fantasist that trolls mumsnet with pseudo science because ive got nothing better to do :s (confused smiley, not the laughing one that will probably come up!)

I've never had to debate this before.

It's quite obvious. Hopefully you'll learn something.

How many gametes are there? Have you found a third one?

So far not! Unless someone is going to come along and say that there is no such school of thought within biology, or better still acknowledge that there is, then say why, despite recent advancements, the old system for determining sex by genitalia remains the best one.

These are blogs and opinion pieces on intersex conditions. Intersex is a complex area, but people are still males and females no matter if it is not immediately apparent. Intersex people have repeatedly asked not to be dragged into the trans ideology debate because they are not the same thing. Are you aware that many intersex people find it offensive that these conditions are being used in this way?

You may find this helpful to aid your studies from the lovely Dr Emma Hilton.

www.wsj.com/articles/the-dangerous-denial-of-sex-11581638089

There are biologists who are young Earth creationists.

You obviously haven't learned that argument from authority is a logical fallacy, Frog. The existence of biological sex is self evident. Everyone on Earth is the result of a sperm from a male and an ova from a female. Trendy pomo philosophy about gender changes nothing.

Ovum, I should say.

Erish, they are not the only thing determining sex! By that logic there are 6 biological sexes in humans as determined by Karyotypes

There are not 6 biological sexes. There are two. Karyotypes are not sexes. Two gametes. Two sexes. Male and female. And variances in sex development within those sexes. How are you defining male and female, exactly?

Are you saying that conception is not the result of an egg and a sperm fusing?

Its not philosophy, any more than any discipline involves an element of philosophy in order to progress. we've constructed our method for understanding the world. science is ever evolving. Things thought of as fact, are only fact until proved otherwise. Until we delve deeper into understanding them.

This might be a start to help with your question of why. Of course there is plenty more information out there about the why. If you can be bothered to find it. The why I have is why ordinary people like your good self are so desperate for a gender spectrum to be true?

www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-lgbt-nonprofits-and-their-billionaire-patrons-are-reshaping-the-world/

The argument is that because some people are intersexthey have developmental conditions resulting in ambiguous sex characteristicsthe categories male and female exist on a “spectrum,” and are therefore no more than “social constructs.” If male and female are merely arbitrary groupings, it follows that everyone, regardless of genetics or anatomy should be free to choose to identify as male or female, or to reject sex entirely in favor of a new bespoke “gender identity.”

From the link below. Is this your view?

Its not philosophy

It's a philosophy that's imbued with political intent and power.

The why I have is why ordinary people like your good self are so desperate for a gender spectrum to be true?

It's a good question. It's the weirdly blind and unquestioning acceptance of an irrational ideology I can't get past.

No im not saying that conception isnt an egg and a sperm fusing. Im saying that the carrier of the sperm need not have male genitalia. That where this argument originated. From the belief that Sex should be determined by the lower genitalia. I said that was a ridiculous argument. I stand by that. Even if there are two gametes, it doesnt dictate that the carriers have penis