I do not believe in gender identity.

[SernieBanders]

There are two sexes: male and female. Occasionally, that matters.

There is no such thing as an innate gender identity—no internal essence that makes someone more inclined to wear dresses and sip wine, or football boots and down pints. Those are cultural stereotypes, not proof of some mystical gendered soul.

The idea of gender identity is sexist, misogynistic, and regressive. It reinforces outdated norms instead of challenging them. Women do not need an inner feeling of womanhood to be women. Men do not need a gender identity to be men. Sex is real. Stereotypes are not.

I hope with the flurry of cultural changes, legal challenges, scientific findings and executive orders in the last ~12 months, more people feel able to stand up and be counted, and say - No More.

Address what I have said please.

I have not said that people with differences of sex development exist. I have also said that humans come with a wide variation of body forms within each sex.

Your accusations at this point are misinfomed.

Please go ahead and explain, in your very own words, what the specific difference between the two terms.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/#:~:text=It%20means%20a%20person%27s%20sex,to%20use%20the%20term%20intersex.

Here is a great resource to start your discussion from our very own NHS.

I have not said that people with differences of sex development do not exist. I have also said that humans come with a wide variation of body forms within each sex.

Apologies for the missing words

let's have a look at the links being plopped on this thread without engagement around differences of sex development.

Do we have to ?

The term Difference of Sexual Development (DSD) is a medical synonym for intersex, referring to individuals whose sexual development does not fit typical definitions of male or female. DSD is considered the proper term because it is more neutral and clinically precise, focusing on the differences in sexual development rather than implying that a person can exist “between” sexes. While “intersex” is often used in a broader, more social context, DSD is preferred in medical and scientific discussions as it avoids any misconception about gender or sex being fluid or ambiguous, and instead highlights that these individuals may have characteristics that do not align with typical male or female classifications. This terminology allows for a clearer, more accurate understanding of the diverse range of biological variations that occur in sexual development.

You don't. I did however look at them and noted what was and wasn't said.

I am hoping that this poster stops spamming the thread with the links now because the links really don't add anything to the thread that has not been discussed.

You don't. I did however look at them and noted what was and wasn't said.

But I knew that without looking.

Same as if someone posted something saying their links to papers showing that objects of a different mass fall at different rates based on the FTSE.

Sure. I like to read things that people post though and evaluate their meaning and usefulness though. I judge each on their merit. You never know what people post, it might be something a new paper. I also would hope that no one simply dismisses my links or posts without reading them.

I tried reporting them as SPAM but clearly not been upheld. And they wonder why users are upset at the moderation of this site.

I suspect that the poster believes that they are doing good work and educating people. But they are really not.

Whose existence have I denied? There is no third sex.

Did you know that some people with DSDs don’t consider themselves as intersex and resent having this label forced on them by LBGT+ campaigners?

Generally so do I.

However, as I said, if someone is asserting something that is bollocks in the final reduction, then why on earth would I waste my time with it ?

It's a brutal technique, but it makes for a very efficient parsing of huge amounts of bullshit.

Couple it with Hanlons Razon, Hitchens Razor and Betteridges Law and you can probably get through 1000 pages in less than 15 minutes.

There is also the fact that if there were to be something that fundamentally changed our understanding of the world in which we live, it is highly unlikely to be premiered on Mumsnet. Which is another razor.

All of these are rules that are trivial to build into an "AI" engine. Which makes me wonder why nobody has.

when categorising humans into either sex, medical experts test for a selection of indicators that include chromosomes, body parts and other indicators. The experts look at whether a body is formed around the production of small gametes or large gametes, regardless of whether that gamete has been produced or will be in the future. No human produces both.

We can really only be sure that no human has been observed to produce both @Helleofabore. It is theoretically possible in the case of chimerism, but would be exceptionally rare.

It’s theoretically possible that humans can live for hundreds of years. But we’ve not seen that either.

@Cornflakes123
A transman is a woman who identifies as a man (FtM ie Female to Male).
A transwoman is a man who identifies as a woman (MtF ie Male to Female).

Any transman would be welcome in female spaces as they are XX females who identify as men…

I think we’d notice that one more easily 😉

How would this work though? Because it takes an endocrine system that is configured to produce one gamete (and in the case of ovaries, ova to have developed ready to mature already while that foetus is still in the womb).

Yes chimerism is very rare. But it still takes an endocrine system configured to produce a particular type of gamete. Do you think that a human can have an endocrine system that will do both jobs? That will produce large enough quantities of all the hormones needed to sustain the production of both? Or do you think that in the case that it would require intervention to do this, in other words, creating a false environment?

I know it was actually a typing mistake. Gosh I’m so sick of this thread

Do you think that a human can have an endocrine system that will do both jobs?
There has been a suggestion in the literature that it may have occurred. Not sure how certain we can be as it is so very rare, not least because of the reasons you mention. I’ll see can I find a link, it’s old iirc.

I would love to see it. The Chimera or mosaic pregnancies that I have found in the past are female people who menstruate. I do recall there was someone who had Swyers with a usable uterus but streak gonads removed as a teen. This patient was assisted in pregnancy and iirc was assisted during pregnancy to sustain that pregnancy. It was not in any way a natural pregnancy controlled by the patient's own endocrine system.

As I said, the body would require an endocrine system that would support both. As far as I know, the testosterone to produce sperm would likely mean the person went through a masculinising puberty and would not be menstruating. Therefore, would not be considered female when all elements were considered. Does that make sense?

Repeating it over and over again doesn’t make it true

I think this is the link I was looking for @Helleofabore. Unfortunately I don’t have access to the full article at present.

https://academic.oup.com/bjs/article-abstract/69/5/279/6185759?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false

So, in this case, it does suggest that a single person may have pronounced both small and large gametes? Which was my original point.

If this report is correct I was actually wrong to say earlier that it was theoretically possible but we hadn’t observed it…

Anyway, hard to be sure based on one report. But can’t be dismissed out of hand either I think?

I think it is too hard for readers on this thread be sure based on a report that we cannot access and which is unexplained. Was it genuinely ovulation or had something triggered a positive test result or caused a pattern that looked similar?

Either way, these people’s medical conditions have no relationship to transgender identity, and they do not destabilise the sex binary.

Produced, not pronounced upthread, sorry.

It was published in the British Journal of Surgery, peer reviewed. People can access the article if they want but it just costs too much (£44) for my budget 😅
I don’t know if it was genuinely ovulation, the authors obviously thought it was at that point.

Either way, these people’s medical conditions have no relationship to transgender identity, and they do not destabilise the sex binary.

Absolutely agree with this.

My original point was that your earlier statement - “The experts look at whether a body is formed around the production of small gametes or large gametes, regardless of whether that gamete has been produced or will be in the future. No human produces both” - may not be completely true perhaps (though an exceptionally rare condition if it’s not).