If born male you biologically stay male until you die? Yes?

[daisiesonmydress]

Just that really. That's my understanding. No matter how you dress or what surgery you have?

And you can legally say this too?

But they don't use the nose to identify the skeletons sex, do they? There's barely any bone, it's mostly cartilage. Haven't you seen a skull?

Nose jobs often involve the nasal bones. Especially the most common ones that women have:, removal of any hump or bump and/or reduction of the nose size. Look it up.

Noses don't have bones It's cartilage that is reshaped.

And here is a letter from Michael Biggs.

www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpem-2021-0180/html

In it he points out the now established fact that Puberty blockers drop bone density dangerously low. And YOUR study shows that in females, Testosterone does not fully replace this loss.

@UltraVividLament

You cite one instance of mis-classification of a skeleton. Here is an interesting article about a new method for determining sex which mentions the efficacy of current techniques:

archaeology.co.uk/articles/sciencenotes/lets-talk-sex-determination.htm

It states that when looking at the morphology of skull and pelvis "its results are usually estimated at between 80% and 95% accuracy depending on the preservation of the bone, among other factors". This is for adult skeletons obviously.

So pretty darn accurate if you have a well preserved skull and pelvis.

80-95% = getting between 1 in 5 wrong to best case only 1 in 20 wrong adds up to quite a few mis-classifications on the average dig of a burial ground with a few hundred individuals. Say it’s a cemetery of 300...so that’s what? 60 people called the wrong sex at worst or 15 best case.

So not that accurate. That’s why they tend to do the DNA sampling and wait for it before publishing nowadays.

Nose jobs often involve the nasal bones. Especially the most common ones that women have:, removal of any hump or bump and/or reduction of the nose size. Look it up.

Errr…. That’s cartilage, not bone. That’s why skulls don’t have noses

@titchy

Nose jobs often involve the nasal bones. Especially the most common ones that women have:, removal of any hump or bump and/or reduction of the nose size. Look it up.

Noses don't have bones It's cartilage that is reshaped.

Yes they do. Look up “nasal bones” and “rhinoplasty”

Oh no they don't!

It's behind you!!!!

Boooo!!!!!

It IS panto season, yes?

The nasal bones are small and support the cartilage and soft tissue of the nose. Any alteration to them is tiny - but you’re claiming that this will alter the sexing of a skull?

"So not that accurate. That’s why they tend to do the DNA sampling and wait for it before publishing nowadays."

Yet every skeleton they tested the new technique described in the article on showed a match with the traditional technique result. That's skeletons from burials where the identity of the person was known back to Neolithic samples.

@HaroldMeeker

But they don't use the nose to identify the skeletons sex, do they? There's barely any bone, it's mostly cartilage. Haven't you seen a skull?

Nasal bone size and length is in fact one of the differences looked for between sexes. Males tend to have longer nasal bones than females.

But rhinoplasties can result in malformations of the nasal bones or bone loss of the nasal bones through surgery trauma. Bone is a bit unpredictable, when shaved off or grafted on to, it can go mad and grow bigger/overcompensate in the healing, or it can shrink away and you have bone loss. This is assuming no infection, if there is infection and myelitis takes hold you get some very strange bone configurations.

That’s one reason why so many botch articles about plastic surgery.

So?

[quote EmpressCixi]@FlyingOink
The bones don't get bigger and stronger because the transman works in a warehouse and takes testosterone.

Yes they do. It’s biology my friendly neighbourhood Oink.

Strength training, or any physical job that results in strength training increases muscle size, which in turn increases bone mass and density. Any physical activity that is more than 4hrs a week does this,,,and if your job is a physical one, you are doing at least ten times this.

What is one thing women are advised to do to avoid osteoporosis? Strength training.

And, testosterone absolutely impacts this both in the ease of developing lean muscle mass and the amount of muscle mass you can build up...ever look at a body builder? And again, knock on effect, testosterone protects against bone density loss plus makes it easier to add muscle mass which in turn increases bone mass, size, density.[/quote]
Your bone density peaks in you 20s with most gain in your teens (precisely when bone density gain is prevented by puberty blockers). After that it is about preventing bone density loss and all strength training etc can do is slow this down.

Empress

I'm just going to quote your link back to you.

The Effect of Pubertal Blockade on Bone Health in Trans Adolescents

GnRH analogues are frequently employed to provide puberty blockade in adolescents with gender incongruence or gender dysphoria. From their use in other medical conditions such as prostate cancer, their deleterious effects on the bone are well known, although these have the potential to be reversible if treatments are stopped or add back therapies can be given [47,48].

What I see after that chimes with other studies which show that bone density which should be rising at this stage, isn't.

People sometimes miss this detail, because they see that the patients' density is recorded as stable or slightly increasing. But that's like having the same monthly wage during ten years of high inflation: in real terms it's a pay cut!

I don’t even know what is being argued on this thread any more! That despite all evidence to the contrary, people can change sex? Or just that they can confuse archaeologists a bit with cosmetic surgery? None of this holey old argument makes any sense. (But what’s new?)

Well I never. I never ever thought that a skull would be sexed by a nose.

And I think it is idiotic to suppose that a larger skull, with a sloping forehead and what appears to be 'injuries' or 'modifications' to the brow bone that shows no breakages would not give the sex away.

Just seeing that there is something happening with that brow ridge would be ringing bells.

But maybe, since you are so up to date with statistics, you could tell us the rate of females getting their brow ridges shaved vs male.

Because if any archeologist in the future worth their qualification did not see that modification and start to look at other markers for either further 'male' feminisation modifications then they would probably be not worth their pay.

But happy to reconsider once you post up the % of female vs male brow ridge modifications.

@foxgoosefinch

The nasal bones are small and support the cartilage and soft tissue of the nose. Any alteration to them is tiny - but you’re claiming that this will alter the sexing of a skull?

No, I’m not claiming that as nasal bones are only one of several sex markers on a skull. What I am disputing is the pp claim that any skull with an indication of having had a nose job will make an archaeologist conclude the skull is male.

What I am disputing is the pp claim that any skull with an indication of having had a nose job will make an archaeologist conclude the skull is male.

Who said that?

And @EmpressCixi this means that people can change sex, does it?

@UltraVividLament

"So not that accurate. That’s why they tend to do the DNA sampling and wait for it before publishing nowadays."

Yet every skeleton they tested the new technique described in the article on showed a match with the traditional technique result. That's skeletons from burials where the identity of the person was known back to Neolithic samples.

New technique gets exact same results as old technique is hardly worth crowing about. It’s still dozens given wrong sex per dig.

Is now a good time for Shakira?

It will make the archaeologist conclude the person has had work done

Unlikely to complicate the sexing

Impossible to assign a gender

Whatever fun archaeologists may be destined to have with the remains of someone's nose in 100s of years, this seems immaterial to the question of the quality of life for children after being prescribed medication to interfere with their physical maturation.

I don't much care whether archaeologists in 300 years' time have a difficult time determining the sex of my dead son or daughter. I do care very much whether he or she develops osteoporosis in as a young adult. It is an awful, debilitating condition.

@Helleofabore

Let's have a look at that study you have posted. Many of us have seen it and read it. Did you? Did you really?

The baseline Z-scores in the trans boys were better with average areal BMD Z-score 0.17 ± 1.18, BMAD Z-score 0.28 ± 0.90). However, Z-scores in the trans boys also showed an expected drop during GnRHa treatment. Similarly, they did not fully Bmake up their bone loss as Z-scores at age 22 were still lower than baseline (aBMD Z-score − 0.33 ± 1.12 and BMAD Z-score average − 0.033 ± 0.95), despitea small increase in absolute aBMD. One transman at age 22 had a Z-score of < −2.0.^

Just to be sure....

Similarly, they did not fully Bmake up^ their bone loss as Z-scores at age 22 were still lower than baseline (aBMD Z-score − 0.33 ± 1.12 and BMAD Z-score average − 0.033 ± 0.95), despitea small increase in absolute aBMD. One transman at age 22 had a Z-score of < −2.0.

And

This group also reported on bone density and turnover markers in a trial of adolescents/young adults [50] (median age 13.5 range 11.5–18.3) which included some overlapping study participants treated with GnRHa followed by GAHT. In both the young trans men and trans women BMAD Z-scores decreased during treatment with GnRHa and increased after initiation of GAHT but remained below the population average and below baseline levels even after 24 months of GAHT. They also looked at bone turnover markers, which did not completely correlate with DXA findings. GnRHa resulted in lower formation and resorption markers, as measured by P1NP and ICTP, which is consistent with GnRHa use in cis adolescents. Despite initiation of GAHT, these markers continued to decrease although BMAD increased as described above. This may be in line with findings at the end of puberty, but many require further study as to the impact of other hormones or lifestyle on bone health in young trans adults.

Are you sure what you read?

Sorry, I got distracted and pressed submit too soon.

So, your claim was

they have done a study on trans men who were given puberty blockers as girls. Bone scans have shown that their pelvises do not expand into the usual female wider shape and configuration, but remain narrow like a males pelivis. It’s why there are fertility and childbirth complications in transmen, they are more likely to require a c-section due to this nonfemale narrow pelvis. Their limbs also show higher bone density...which would in an archaeological setting be called “robust” bones...more indicative of a man.

Their limbs also show higher bone density...which would in an archaeological setting be called “robust” bones...more indicative of a man.

ie. females taking PBs and then Testosterone have “robust” bones...more indicative of a man.

To which we have told you is bullshit.

Your study even tells you this is a bullshit claim. There are gender clinic specialists stating just how dangerous PBs are to bone density.

To be clear. As other PPs have stated.

The danger is that females do NOT gain the bone density they need during a blocked puberty. They then get some effect but not reliably enough density to put them to where they should be.

Please tell us what WE are not understanding and what YOU understand better.

Ooooh Shakira Shakira!!!!

How many bodies do we have on this thread ? And how would we know they were missexed since we can't ask ?
And why is it important?

You can't change sex
You can only tell sex from the bones , not gender
Sex remains when all else has faded away