To Think That Archaeology Proves That Men Cannot Be Women

[MrsMappFlint]

A burial site has been found in Cardiff. It dates from the 6th or 7th Century.
The skeletons are all women.

In death, when all genitals have gone, the skeleton retains the truth about the simple fact-it is either male or female.

There is no third way. That's science and hundreds of years after death, the truth of biology is retained in the bone.

Your sex is in your very bones-male or female-that's it. In the end, that's all there is.

Men can pretend to be women but skeletons tell the truth.

The story is on the BBC website.

Intersex people are a) rare and b) either male or female since Differences in Sexual Development (the term preferred by people who have these conditions) are sex specific. Our skeletons do indeed record our sex.

They didn't change sex. Gender norms are social constructs and some people have always subverted them - that doesn't mean they changed sex.

But they are still either male or female since DSDs are sex-specific.

Eyebrow ridges or lack of, also, I believe. Males have pronounced ones. This was one means of identifying the sex of the skeleton which proved to be Richard III - along with the pelvis - despite the slightness of the bones. Richard was in life described as slight, which did not prevent him fighting in battle with a battle axe and lance.

No, we find what we interpret as 'third genders'. How we see 'gender' is most likely not the way the societies where cross-role taking was acceptable saw the matter at all.

Why are you so upset by the SC judgement?

DNA also identified both Richard and his sex.

You can’t tell by what’s left of someone physically wether someone was gay or not.
that doesn’t make it any less real
identifying as the opposite gender is in the mind

LOL! No such thing.

At least it isn't a death or rape threat but I suppose those are OK as they are only directed at TERFs

Agreed.

So we won't know if a person was homosexual, but we will know their sex. In most past societies being homosexual was taboo, so will have had an impact on anyone so inclined, of course. Only when we have societies which leave written records can we guess at such things - so we know that upper class males in Classical Greece tended to have a wife, a mistress and a male lover, for example, because we find that in their literature.
What we glean elsewhere can only give a partial picture. But sexual orientation is something subject to proof - gender ideology is not.