"Margaret Atwood misunderstands science."

[Lamahaha]

www.thestatemedia.com/2020/07/08/margaret-atwood-misunderstands-science/?fbclid=IwAR3DWHpR6SZxPZPizH7yLlTilBOuS0-KI4ZK-_jIt2XE8E9e9a3BaJ-_UP8

Claiming that slug sex, gay penguins and a ‘transgender’ fish prove that humans can change biological sex, the Handmaid’s Tale author’s bizarre Twitter posts show a worrying lack of critical thinking and scientific knowledge.

Almost immediately, people told Atwood that such a basic misunderstanding of science, and conflation of sex and gender, was incorrect, misleading and irrelevant to any debate or discussion around intersex conditions or gender transition.

Well little OJ made himself look a right idiot with that comment 😂.

Atwood just wants to be liked.

She spent yesterday trying to prove how nice she is.

I would love to be a fly on the ceiling of these people's consciences.
Surely, deep inside, they know, the must know, this is all crap?

It's so sad how the genderists eagerly jump on any crazy pseudoscience. A few days ago there were many retweets of a confused interview comparing quantum physics and gender identity!

I think they simply get lost down the TRA rabbit hole.

They then come to realise TRA's only have two modalities - pillory or adoration.

They like the latter but are scared of the former.

Interestingly those two modes are echoed within the activist community itself.

It's why those who detransition experience such vitriol and isolation and it also serves to keep people in check in other dangerous ways - sorry I can't remember the thread where the article was linked - eg an explanation by a now former teen trans man of how her sexual boundaries where questioned by older trans women who accused her of kink shaming and threatened/did shun and shame her.

We see these tactics played out on a "macro" level against GC women but they are imho even more dangerous when used in a "micro" capacity against vulnerable children who relied on their online community often in concluding they are trans and through transition, cutting off other support (as per pillory mode) in the process because that's what they've been schooled to do.

“Those stuck on nature being immutably divided into M+F should...

Oh ffs, having a discussion about human biology with science deniers does not mean we are stuck on anything, or ignorant of how other species reproduce.

I'm so baffled by all this stuff. I am quite middle-aged so maybe that's a big part of it but I always thought sex just about your bits and what you contribute to reproduction and means nothing more and gender is a socially constructed and highly contested concept (and therefore highly changeable and perhaps has not meaning beyond what each individual makes of it). Which makes statements such as "I feel like a woman" pretty meaningless (though wear what you want and do what you want).

It's a very confused article. Lots of sensible incredulity but also
Her comments come in the wake of yet another defence of women by Harry Potter author JK Rowling – who, this time, has warned that life-saving healthcare for trans kids could be considered “a new kind of conversion therapy”, a claim backed up by a recent BBC Newsnight investigation into the Tavistock Gender Identity Clinic.

Ah ranolf, you are so clearly comfortable with your inner essence matching your sex that you just don't understand, you have no disconnect so you can't feel it's pain.

At which you may say nonsense, the pain you feel is caused by you accepting and internalising societies concepts of masculine and feminine rather than throwing a strop and chucking the whole lot in the bin where they belong

There's an existing thread on this here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3960730-Of-all-people-Margaret-Atwood-we-re-all-part-of-a-flowing-bellcurve

*Ah ranolf, you are so clearly comfortable with your inner essence matching your sex that you just don't understand, you have no disconnect so you can't feel it's pain.

At which you may say nonsense, the pain you feel is caused by you accepting and internalising societies concepts of masculine and feminine rather than throwing a strop and chucking the whole lot in the bin where they belong*

I think you meant me? My inner essence has nothing to do with my sex and I am still trying to get round how for other people it is. I think you have to be very tied to rigid ideas of gender identity in order to rally so much against them in this way. I would never say 'nonsense' to it as people's pain is real but as far as I can make out - and as I say, it's all still very baffling to me - the pain comes from when you accept the socially constructed concepts of masculinity and femininity but then don't feel you fit into what you believe is being proscribed. In my era we challenged the rigid concepts of masculine, feminine but now it seems we focus our ideas of what should change on the body. Which seems to cause other levels of pain for people who are already struggling.

Why Atwood chose not mention cuttlefish, whose weaker males will disguise themselves as females in an attempt to mate without stronger males noticing, is unknown, but also remains irrelevant to human biology.

[laugh]

As a biologist of sorts myself, I am always confused why so many people search so hard for examples of nature’s anomalies to justify all the gender woo, but no one can produce a mammalian example that disputes binary sexual reproduction... when you’re having to talk about fish and slugs etc, you might as well go the whole hog and compare human reproduction to asexual replication of amoebae, the larval stages of insects, or all the dna we share with bananas. It doesn’t change the immutable facts of binary sex and how mammals reproduce. It is flat earth science at it’s best.

@NotTerfNorCis

Atwood just wants to be liked.

Yes I’ve just been perusing the Garbage comments: slag off women and throw in a Misogynistic insult or two: ‘oh you are my queen!’ ‘I love you!’ ‘Thank you so much’ ‘we love you’ ‘we all love you!’.

A few comments about them deleting an intersex tweer (Don’t know what that was).

Arses.