Assigned at birth

[HDDD]

I have a real issue with this phrase. It seems to have crept into common parlance. I've just read it in a news report on SKY. I've seen it in a questionnaire I had to fill in for my local authority. It was in the charity commission doc about LGBA.
It's blatantly not true. Sex is observed, not assigned. I get that some people will 'identify' as different to their sex as observed at birth. I feel the need to 1. collect instances of use of the phrase 2. challenge use of the phrase. Anyone with me?

This is kind of what I was saying before when asking (never did get an answer!) if there are no characteristics of being a woman, nobody asks me and I don’t tell anyone, how is it is that there’s no dispute that I’m a woman?

There is no answer, of course. It’s the same as “A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman”, which definitively indicates that we know what a woman is, thus demonstrating that the real accepted meaning of woman is exactly as it always has been.

Aka a circular argument.

If breast milk changes according to the sex of the baby, I take my hat off to my breasts - they're clearly cleverer than I am! I breastfed my m/f twins until they were 2 years old. 😲

@AnyOldPrion

This is kind of what I was saying before when asking (never did get an answer!) if there are no characteristics of being a woman, nobody asks me and I don’t tell anyone, how is it is that there’s no dispute that I’m a woman?

There is no answer, of course. It’s the same as “A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman”, which definitively indicates that we know what a woman is, thus demonstrating that the real accepted meaning of woman is exactly as it always has been.

I asked this on the vagina havers / Tampax thread - so if the definition of woman is now supposed to be anyone who identifies as a woman, then what exactly is a woman? The definition of woman is adult female human being where female is defined as the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova). How can you identify with that?

Very much with you @HDDD

How can you identify with that?
Well exactly. This whole house of cards falls down unless most of us stay in our old, boring sex and accept our "gender identity ". Non-binary relies very heavily on the binary.

@334bu

*that a mother’s breast milk changes the composition slightly as to whether the baby is male or female. Isn’t nature/biology great ?*

Really, how does that work with boy/ girl twins?

Absolutely no idea. Good question. I did google it (just to see if it said it elsewhere and not just Kellie - Jay ) and it seemed to say that . But also doesn’t it change composition from newborn, to young baby to toddler anyway? So if you were feeding a newborn and a toddler I wouldn’t know.

Maybe it’s based on hormones in your body so if it’s a girl then it’s girl milk , a boy boy milk because your body recognises it has testosterone and b/g twins maybe the milk is averaged. No idea. Might be like Mary Poppins with her bottle of medicine that changed flavours . I’m sadly not a biologist - didn’t even do O-level biology.

@NecessaryScene1

You see if humans could change sex, then it would be clear what we as "sex matters"/GC people are worrying about is current sex, not original sex.

(Although I could imagine there could be some difference between "born as male" and "converted to male later" humans in this hypothetical universe, the current sex would be a big deal.)

Actually I don't agree. I think the different socialisation that male and female people are subjected to from childhood and throughout their lives - everything from the characters, storylines and "normal" they grow up with in advertising, books and films, to what they see in adult interactions and behaviour, to the (often subconscious) way their caregivers treat them, to expectations from other children which are formed by a myriad of variations of the same social pressures - give hugely different outcomes in how they see themselves, and what behaviour and abilities they and others expect from them.

Even if trans people in some as yet undetected yet deeply real way empirically are the gender they identify as just as much as a "cis" member of the same gender, they still have a totally different lived gender-experience. And that applies to their pre transition life as the opposite gender, but also in their post-transition life because they are a person who has actively chosen their social gender constraints rather than having them imposed from birth.

So if actual sex change were possible, current sex would be the criteria for many of the reasons we need single sex provision, but birth sex would still be important to things like political representation, career and education opportunities and so on.

And that's why today, when actual sex change is not possible but there is an ideology agitating to replace all use of sex as a social or legal descriptor with a self-defined gender identity, it's important to accept that single sex provisions are valid and necessary and it does not invalidate a trans person's gender to sometimes be excluded based on their sex.

But also doesn’t it change composition from newborn, to young baby to toddler anyway? So if you were feeding a newborn and a toddler I wouldn’t know.

Here's one I can answer as my eldest managed to carry on feeding throughout my pregnancy and for a few months after.

At some point around the end of my second trimester my milk went something like colostrum and stayed like that until my milk came in after giving birth. Toddler never seemed to notice/care that the milk had changed when I was pregnant but definitely noticed when my milk came in!

So it seems that the youngest takes precedence, but I also have no clue how it works with twins.

I always found the idea that my body could not only grow a human, but produce food for it without me doing anything other than provide access to that food quite fascinating.

Anyway, there was no MW in the room when my DS was born so it was me that 'assigned' him his already-known sex at birth. I did not assign a gender, because I know society would do that anyway.

@AnyOldPrion

This is kind of what I was saying before when asking (never did get an answer!) if there are no characteristics of being a woman, nobody asks me and I don’t tell anyone, how is it is that there’s no dispute that I’m a woman?

There is no answer, of course. It’s the same as “A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman”, which definitively indicates that we know what a woman is, thus demonstrating that the real accepted meaning of woman is exactly as it always has been.

Gender identity is just one of thousands of sex characteristics. When allocating sex, GC people sometimes prioritise gametes, sometimes gonads, sometimes chromosomes, sometimes socialisation - kind of depends which one you ask, and when you ask them, but trans inclusive people tend to prioritise gender identity.

Obviously, you don't agree with that approach, but no circular arguments are required.

When allocating sex, GC people sometimes prioritise gametes

Lol!

Is this like when weighing something you sometimes prioritise how heavy it is?

Also sex isn’t really ‘allocated’. It’s determined at conception.

I am not engaging with stupidity any more.

When 'allocating' sex to newborns, trans inclusive people prioritise gender identity? Are you sure?

Just noticed encroacing language change.

The original argument was gender assigned at birth. Which always meant sex and still does to most people, but was taken literally to mean internal gender ID assigned at birth.. Even for non subscribers to current gender ideas it's fair to say that with the sex observed, a gender role would be assigned IE girls are like this and boys are like that and the boxes are very small and often include awful things in the future for the female baby.

Note it's now sex assigned at birth...

In other arguments it's all oh sex and gender are different you don't get it.

But then other times...

Assigned sex at birth
Assigned female at birth

Creeping change. Very clever really. Unless it's the gender ID people who don't understand the difference. Or don't want there to be one.

The straight theft of terminology and arguments from so many other groups- people with DSDs, feminists, LGB people and thosr who fight against/ raise awareness of racism is just grim.

@Shizuku
When allocating sex...trans inclusive people tend to prioritise gender identity

What? Are you sure you have that right?
I thought "gender identity" was an innate personal sense of ones gender.

SW's glossary says:
A person’s innate sense of their own gender, whether male, female or something else (see non-binary below), which may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth.
And Mermaids says:
an individual’s internal, innate sense of their own gender.

So how on earth does the newborn convey this innate personal sense of gender to the person "allocating" the sex?

I'm more confused than ever

The only way to get around that is by not recording sex at any point including prenatally and for everyone to pretend that they don't know and won't know until the child is old enough to know gender ID.

The ramifications of that in many ways are massive.

Good thing is that all of the gender role stuff would have to be stopped. Pink/ blue, boys will be boys, girls are naturally less interested in physical activity etc etc etc. Same clothes for all etc.
That would be really really hard to do.

Stats would be stuffed- no more knowing about differences in female mortality for female babies globally. Or if there was an illness that had high mortality in male infants but none in female no one would know.

That's the logical end point of the ideas about sex assigned/ coercively assigned and certainly I've seen it said that babies should not be assigned anything at birth in this respect.

I'm not sure what that would mean in the end as with no differences in society in expected behaviour/ how you're treated/ what you wear then what does that mean for trans people? As it's in internal, nothing I think in theory but in reality?

Not sure what has to be done about puberty though. That often gives big clues that society acts on irrespective of how you're dressed etc.

I see stonewall is using sex assigned rather than the old gender assigned of a couple of years back.

None of this creep in language is accidental.

The phrase 'assigned at birth' always makes me smile - it's just so ridiculous.
I assigned my DD1 the male sex at birth. I had a long, difficult labour and she was handed to me backwards. From the rear view, I thought I saw testicles and said 'It's a boy!' (I was really tired!) The midwife laughed at me, said 'turn her round,' and I could see it was a girl.
I assigned my child a sex at birth - but it was the wrong bloody one and it was corrected based on the biological evidence. Unless you have a DSD, your sex is observed at birth.

Gender identity is just one of thousands of sex characteristics. When allocating sex, GC people sometimes prioritise gametes, sometimes gonads, sometimes chromosomes, sometimes socialisation - kind of depends which one you ask, and when you ask them, but trans inclusive people tend to prioritise gender identity.

It's not a question of prioritising, it's a question of fact. So-called gender identity is a set of feelings and behaviours, none of which confer a particular sex on a person. The idea that 'feeling like you're a woman' constitutes evidence that you're of the female sex is beyond ridiculous.

The idea that 'feeling like you're a woman' constitutes evidence that you're of the female sex is beyond ridiculous

It also just doesn't work for women. Any categorization shouldn't disadvantage one category over another. It is very telling that Shizuku keeps on popping up on threads on mumsnet to tell us that actually our biological sex (and thus our reproductive potential) doesn't actually matter as much as someone's feelings. It doesn't work for us and we don't accept it. Back to the drawing board.

Well its all very silly really isn't it? Anyone with half a brain knows that sex assigned at birth is up their with anti vax and flat earth theories as too stupid to even argue. Its just a shame that the response to this of many people is #bekind and indulge the silliness, but lying to people is not a kindness.

@HermitsLife

Well its all very silly really isn't it? Anyone with half a brain knows that sex assigned at birth is up their with anti vax and flat earth theories as too stupid to even argue. Its just a shame that the response to this of many people is #bekind and indulge the silliness, but lying to people is not a kindness.

This sums is up nicely.

I often wonder why posters like Shizuku are so keen to waste their time talking nonsense to women and mothers, who are far too well qualified to fall for it. It’s like a flat Earther wanting to argue with NASA!

I wouldn't get to hung up on this. Before long it will be a boy or 'congratulations, it has a vagina'