I've just been called "unscientific" for saying that you cannot change sex

[CloudyMoment]

It's just a rant really, but also fishing for possible counter-arguments.

I thought that nobody really properly argues against the fact that sex is something you are born with, and that his cannot be changed.

Apparently those people think sex is not immutable. That it actually can change- because apparently also eye colour can change throughout life. I tried arguing against, that we are still born with a coded expression hair or eye colour, and that this does not change. I feel that this is very much a philosophical discussion to be had.. but meanwhile. How do you show robustly and scientifically that sex is immutable?

The hamster could have had a hamster version of this condition... again these people don't change sex, they just appeared female at birth. Quite interesting though.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guevedoce

Nemo appears by post 4. Is that a record?

@MishyJDI

lols. Cause it is not clear cut. That's what trans and scientific people find funny:

Science is messy and complicated, so it’s best to steer clear of it and stick to a few slogans, such as “Sex is real.” (This one has the advantage of implying that trans people deny that sex is real, which makes them seem unreasonable.) Don’t, whatever you do, talk to actual biologists or psychologists currently working on the subjects of sex or gender. They are obviously interested in maintaining the trans-friendly status quo, and their testimony can be ignored. (Side note: you may have wondered whether people with intersex conditions complicate the issue. My advice? Acknowledge they exist, but in the next breath make sure to dismiss them as a negligible minority.)

There are animals (mostly fish) that change their sex. The difficulty with trans folk is there is observed sex, and then other things going on that make them who they are.... which means sex is not that clear cut.

Also chromosomes. Yes they cant change, but there are more than just XX and XY combinations, and other stuff in there as well.

Trouble with science - it ain't black and white. Which is kinda cool really.

It is clear cut. No human has ever changed sex. Nor has any other mammal. We humans aren't special in that way. We are mammals, just like dogs, horses, whales, etc. And we come in one of two immutable sexes.

"Intersex people" - "intersex is an umbrella term relating to 40+ sex-specific Variations in Sexual Development. "Intersex people" are, just like all other mammals, one of two sexes. The fact that on some extremely rare occasions, determining the sex of a baby with a VSD takes more investigation that simply looking at their genitals does not change the fact that they are still either male, or female.

Yes, some fish can change sex. They are called sequential hermaphodites. Humans are not fish, and cannot. And anyway, if sex is not clear cut, then how would science have observed that fish can change from one to the other, if it's all an ambiguous mystery.

Other chromosomal variations in humans, beyond XX and XY, are also not different sexes. People with different chromosomal makeups are, like all other humans, either male, or female.

@EndoplasmicReticulum

Nemo appears by post 4. Is that a record?

I think so! Good spot

There was a great comparison someone posted on here a while back. Gravity. How it works on a theoretical level is really complicated, not accessible to laypeople and academics will argue about the finer points for years.

That doesn’t change the fact that it exists and we know the effect it has in the real world. An engineer doesn’t need to understand all that complexity to build a good bridge. DH and I don’t need to have long conversations about which of us was going to take the career hit and do the all the pregnancy and breastfeeding.

There are animals (mostly fish) that change their sex.

So that they can produce more fish.

Humans do not have that capability.

The point of sex is reproduction. If sexual reproduction in humans were very complicated humans would have died out long ago.

How do you show robustly and scientifically that sex is immutable?

It's up to the unscientific idiots who think sex is mutable in mammals who need to show their proof. They can't, because it doesn't happen.

It's possible for mammals to be neutered, and for them to acquire some of the secondary sexual characteristics of the other sex. But sex is fundamentally about reproductive role. That's what it evolved for. A mammal born male can't produce female gametes - ova- encoding his own genes. A mammal born female cant produce sperm encoding her genes.

You can unsex yourself but you can't change sex. The burden of proof is on those making the extraordinary claim that you can.

I wish I could put money on @MishyJDI posting that same copy and paste job, which only proves the GC stance more and then not returning with anything of substance.

Mishy

😂😂😂😂😂😂
🐠🐠🐠🐠 ≠ 🕵️+👵

I think your scientific friend needs to prove their point rather than making you prove something that is demonstrably true. They keep telling us we only have a high school level education (like thats something to sneer at) and that we need to educate ourselves, but they're pretty light on sharing facts to back up their claims.

It's up to the unscientific idiots who think sex is mutable in mammals who need to show their proof.

And it wouldn't be hard. All they would need to demonstrate is a mammal that has managed in its lifetime to mate with both a male and a female, and produce offspring each time.

How hard can that be?

They keep telling us we only have a high school level education (like thats something to sneer at) and that we need to educate ourselves

Do they? Is that misapprehension sexism or ageism or both?
Not that an accurate understanding of sex and reproductive roles really requires BScs and PhDs....there's an awful lot of practical expertise on MumsNet. The clue is in the name.

There's no point arguing science with people who have a strong faith position. Like antivaxxers or creationists. No amount of evidence will change their minds. I'd change mine, if the evidence was there, because that's how it's supposed to work.

I know where you are having that conversation as I am engaging with the same person they think an article written by a journalist is proof. Probably not worth your time to be honest - I gave up.

If we looked at the chromosomes of a trans person do you think they would be of a non-standard nature? Is that what you mean? We could test the dna of all children then and save a lot of bother.
I very much doubt that trans people would turn out to have a chromosomal make up different from their sex

The Tavistock abandoned genetic testing of the children in its care because they found no evidence of an increase of DSDs in children with gender dysphoria.

And certainly if there was a genetic test for being trans, I doubt it would make transgender people happy, who have after all, successfully uncoupled being trans from having the medical condition of gender dysphoria.

I do know, from talking to a number of transsexuals, that there is frequently an earnest, often desperate desire for an explanation. Why am I the way I am?! And DSDs offer an explanation. That's why Lily Elbe for instance fervently believed in (and publicised) a personal medical history of having a DSD. Because something actually having gone wrong with one's body was a preferable root cause for transsexualism than something having gone wrong with one's mind. And I understand that desire.

But it doesn't change the fact that in line with everyone else, almost all transgender people undergo a perfectly normal sex development resulting in the bog standard arrangement of the chromosomes, gonads and genitals corresponding to their sex.

Throwing insults is the last refuge of people with no valid arguments.
If the TRAs bothered to check, they’d find plenty of us on MN who have medical or science doctorates. Only one side of this debate needs to educate itself, and it isn’t us.

EndoplasmicReticulum Oooh! I was considering my next name change being SarcasticReticulum! Maybe I won't cos it might confuse some of the hard to science!

You could be smooth? I think there's a Golgi apparatus around here somewhere.

@NoHunGosh

Erm... Babies? Anyone ever heard of any male animal suddenly growing ovaries and uterus?

Yes. Please do some research into babies that are born intersex. It is a thing however much this section of this website tries to dismiss it.

@EndoplasmicReticulum

You could be smooth? I think there's a Golgi apparatus around here somewhere.

I have fond memories of teaching that! Hence the deliberate misper!

Sorry, I know this is off topic but why is the term trans folk used instead of trans people. Folk. It's odd and I can't pinpoint why.

Yes. Please do some research into babies that are born intersex. It is a thing however much this section of this website tries to dismiss it. What?

That was a a response to Anyone ever heard of any male animal suddenly growing ovaries and uterus? And you want us to educate ourselves‽‽‽‽‽

@jellybeansforbreakfast

Yes. Please do some research into babies that are born intersex. It is a thing however much this section of this website tries to dismiss it. What?

That was a a response to Anyone ever heard of any male animal suddenly growing ovaries and uterus? And you want us to educate ourselves‽‽‽‽‽

TRAs expect us to be baffled by the idea of DSDs, rather than have a basic (or better) grasp of what they actually are. There's nothing in their script for handling people who have actually heard of DSDs, so they can only start it again and repeat themselves.

Aye! That is true.

Yes, I did say that you can't acquire the ability to give birth as a male, but this argument gets rebuffed by saying that "so infertile men stop being men?"

my comeback is that sex basically a classification system based on your body having male or female characteristics. Being infertile doesn't change the category you belong to.