to point out that one Y chromosome does not make you a male

[Nimbostratus100]

In response to other posts insisting that one genetic test and one Y chromosome makes an athlete indisputably male with no room for error, I just want to point out that it not true.

There is always genetic exchange, for example, between a mother and baby, so anyone who has had a son will still have Y chromosomes in some cells in their body, and that will possibly show up in a genetic screening.

I am all for keeping men out of women's sport, and defining them genetically, but please lets not go over the top - one test does not prove you are male

I agree, some people have a knack for pointing out the obvious 😆

Bio men can't give birth so how is this an issue? Surely a few questions such as have you ever been pregnant with a boy would suffice?

I find the presence of a dick and balls is pretty conclusive, personally. No need to go delving around in chromosomes. Other clues also exist….

I can give a real life example of DNA and genetics.

My ds has a neuromuscular disability. He has a missence gene on a chromosome. It's the BSCL2 gene.

I have been discovered to have the same fault. I do not have the disability.

The only other person who has the same genetic fault that's been discovered worldwide has a similar yet different diagnosis of a neurological disorder to ds.

So if you blind tested the 3 of us then technically I would be classed as disabled and could be a para athlete like ds.

Except I can't. Mainly because the other actual characteristics required to be diagnosed with the disability aren't there in my case.

But they'd know what the lab tests indicate because you can't just dismiss something by a single genetics test.

The same way you can't assume someone is male because of 1 Y chromosome that's crossed into the dna. You use the fact you have someone which a penis and visible adams Apple in front of you.

Are you drunk op? Bit early for that...

You’ve got to be kidding, no serious person could type this.

what, by trying to explain some science, because people are harming our cause by showing ignorance of this science, and being hostile and aggressive with that ignorance?

This.

Who exactly is ignorant of the fact that having a single, or a few cells with a Y chromosome in them in a normal female doesn't make you a man? I knew that.

So is this whole thread basically

"This idea that I've just had that we could do genetic testing based on a single cell sample is dumb?"

because having the Y chromosome in your body does not make you male, which is the point of this thread - tackling this ignorance

This is mind-bogglingly obvious, just as having sperm in your body also doesn't make you male. Can we do that thread too?

"AIBU to point out that containing sperm doesn't make you male?"

Are you going to say any athlete can enter the woman's game, if they claim to have given birth in the past?

Any midwife can tell if a woman has given birth or not, by examining the cervix.

I don't know what makes you a geneticist, but you have made several errors in your claims on this thread, and then got angry when people have pointed them out.
I'm going to make a suggestion. Look up 'forced teaming', 'logical fallacies' and 'passive aggression'. If that makes you feel angry, let it pass, then come back and read it again. Then look into them.

This isn't about sides. Its about how we can order society fairly.

Is it more important to you to try and tell other people they are stupid, or to use the benefit of your extensive education and inform people more about the complexity of genetic testing? Because most of your posts shout the former.

they can tell a lot from one test, and you are being misleading. When I had the nipt, which is testing on blood , they don’t call and say well baby might be a girl or perhaps that’s because you’re a girl and baby is a boy so sorry we’ll just never know. Nor do they call and say so baby is a boy or maybe you’re a boy congratulations!! But we had better do another test.

imagine you’re talking to colleagues from another field. Imagine they are not stupid. Imagine they fully comprehend false positives etc. Take a deep breath and try again. or just shout you are all stupid if that’s really your goal.

it isn't a problem for the testing, no, they will just test more, which is fine

The problem is the abuse and suspicion directed at women who end up needing the further testing

Finding Y chromosomes is not conclusive, but the reaction from some women, out of ignorance, is to react as if it is.

To what end? What do you think women don’t understand? What do you hope to achieve? Do you think trans women should be allowed to play women’s sports?

To be fair to the OP that's not what she's arguing.
She's predicting that we will all get the pitchforks out the moment a y chromosome is detected. And she feels the need to tell us that some of those may indeed be female.
The fact that there is no evidence of aggression and the likelihood of a stray y chromosome is minute seems to have passed her by.

no, I am saying that a similar procedure is done in forensics, where it is accepted that finding a Y chromosome does not mean that the person who toughed that door handle was male.

Just as finding a Y chromosome in a sample from an athlete does not mean that the athlete is male

because having the Y chromosome in your body does not make you male, which is the point of this thread - tackling this ignorance

But having a penis does.

You have a penis. You are male. You compete on the male category.

You don't have a penis. You are female. With possibly 1 Y chromosome. With lower testosterone levels. You compete as a female.

There are a few anomalies and these should be treated with respect and on a case by case basis.

But these are as few and far between as trans people wanting to compete in sport.

And the whole elite sporting body should not change for a few anomalies that can be dealt with as they arise.

Finding Y chromosomes is not conclusive, but the reaction from some women, out of ignorance, is to react as if it is.

You seem to misunderstand what the initial test is. They're not looking for "a single Y chromosome in any cell" as if searching for contamination.

They're looking for the entire genetic makeup being XY.

Which they will - because it's a lot easier! - be done on HUGE sample of cells.

If there were a few XY "contamination" cell in there it wouldn't show up. They're looking for people with 99.9% XY cells. Not people with 0.001% ones.

I think we can safely say that people can tell the difference between that small exchange and a biological adult male. Don't worry.

I think the OP could start an argument in an empty room..........

’only a very few Y chromosomes, honest’.

But nimbostratus why would they test a woman who presents physically as woman and was born a woman to see if she had a stray Y chromosome to compete as a woman?

yes, it can happen after an early loss

And in sport, the simple answer after a Y chromosome is found in a sample from a female, is just to test a few more times, so it can be clearly established they are genetically female, with chimerisms.

That isnt really a problem, in itself

The problem is the attitudes of some women, who dont really understand the genetics, reacting so angrily to athletes who need more than one test.

People simply need to understand that sometimes women are found to have Y chromosomes in their bodies

That would include many, if not most of the women on here, at some place, somewhere, in small amounts

Sporting federations work off a category called ‘Sport Sex’ which is slightly different to biological sex and nothing to do with legal sex.

At the moment CAIS athletes are allowed to compete in the Women’s category as they haven’t benefited from a male (testosterone driven) puberty.

However, these rules will no doubt be reviewed in future as we come to understand more about stuff like the impact of the menstrual cycle on female athletes training and competition (CAIS athletes don’t have menstrual cycles) and whether the observed difference in height/arm span etc gives an unfair advantage (CAIS people are, on average, taller than XX female people, as one of the two genes that determine adult height is on the Y chromosome, and obvs, XX females don’t have that gene).

At the moment the benefit of the doubt is still with CAIS athletes but it’s not the same for 5ARD athletes (who are often ambiguous at birth but become obviously male at puberty and in some cases, can father children).

Having a Y doesn’t automatically get an athlete disqualified, it just means further clarification is necessary and there is a tribunal type system to for athletes to challenge decisions made on their category eligibility.

It’s all pretty complicated and OP has got the wrong end of the stick as to what ‘sport sex’ is defined by.

Er, I don't think it's the men and women that want to keep men out of women's sport that are showing ignorance of science mate. It the India Willoughbys et al that spent 40 years as a man then decided one day that they had become women and magically grew a cervix overnight that maybe should have paid a bit more attention in Biology.

As I said though, as a scientist, it is quite encouraging to see activists actually engage with biological reality for once. It will not be the gotcha they think it is though. As any actual scientist would know (and a PP pointed out the univariate fallacy), exceptions dont invalidate the rules, someone born with one leg doesn't mean humans aren't bipedal Yadda Yadda. You know this OP, give it up.