Response from health care service providers "assigned at birth"

[FernlovingNodosaur]

Can you please give your thoughts on this matter and if your smart wording/thinking could add anything to my response letter.

I complained via email because I very recently received an unsolicited advert from my major health care provider see below for company. About a serious sex based disease yet the advert used assigned at birth manta.

Their response email below:

Dear Ms

I'm emailing you in response to your complain on Wednesday 2nd November regarding your unhappiness that we make reference to the term "assigned at birth" rather than classifying a specific gender.
I apologise if it has caused you any offence - it is not the service that Babylon aim to deliver.
Our marketing team are using the term "assigned at birth" to cause minimal offence to our many patients and we will be continuing to use this term. Unfortunately, we can't adapt marketing emails individually to each person's gender and have to use a neutral term.
If you have any further queries, please let me know.
Cheers,
Clinical Operations Team Leader.
**

Can it really be done any other way. Surely the patient's happiness counts, or at least it does to those with any sense of ethics. We know almost everyone with Swyer syndrome goes on to identify as female for example, despite the fact many posters on here would claim they were male and so presumably assign them as male and force them to use male spaces. What if that makes them throughly miserable? What if it makes them suicidal? What if they get raped in the boys changing rooms at school because they have a vagina - can you imagine what their life would be like? Should they be prevented from accessing hormonal treatment at puberty as well and forced to wait until age 18? To what end, to score some point about gender identity by classifying people as a certain sex based on arbitery and what would in some cases be almost miniscule differences in internal organs even if the evidence shows that would make them deeply unhappy? It would be pure cruelty which is why clinicians base their decisions on evidence and in the interests of the physical and psychological health of the child and not gender critical ideology.

It's not done the way people here claim which renders many of the arguments on this thread redundant.

Maybe you missed this.

Can you please be very specific as to what process you think posters have said is being used?

You also seem to have your own concepts on what you think people on this board believe. Yet, you seem to not be able to articulate it beyond what you must think are zingers.

Yup

@FernlovingNodosaur
I think shorter is better, as a couple of PPs have noted (unnecessarily rudely, in one case). The suggestion of "sex recorded/observed at birth" is also excellent because it makes clear what the problems are with using the phrase "gender assigned at birth". Ie the relevant information in this case is sex, not gender and sex is not assigned.

BellaAmorosa Yes Eurochicks is certainly more concise and to the point in a way that mine isn't. I will use that as a frame work, thanks Eurochicks. Though I think Babylon have been captured by the gender ideology so it may be a waste of time, but I will still do it.

My opinion on what some people on this board believe is based on the things they say. I had no idea there was such hostility to basic intersex rights on here as well towards trans people.

Many of you, including yourself, for example seemed to want the exact scenario I posted above to happen to Castor Semenya, with the additional trauma that those with her condition who aren't diagnosed until puberty would be expected to suddenly become boys and start using men's spaces despite having a vagina, having been raised as a girl and identifying as a girl. And it appears there is no agreement even amongst gender critical people on what constitutes a woman or man in cases of ambiguity. Neither does there seem to be much understanding of how gender is assigned in such circumstances. One person said it was done by chromosonal analysis, in which case the women who carried a pregnancy to term would actually be a man. When I explained to you that predicted gender identity played a role in assigning sex your reply was 'bollocks' despite several sources showing this is the case. It seems the views here on intersex people are in several cases inconsistent, uninformed and in my opinion downright cruel.

And it appears there is no agreement even amongst gender critical people on what constitutes a woman or man in cases of ambiguity

Well… that’s because we aren’t lumping everyone born with a VSD (of which there are many, many different types) into one ideologically constructed ‘intersex’ box.

Variations of Sexual Development, believe it or not, vary, so no, there is one size fits all solution for people with these incredible rare conditions which manifest in lots of different ways.

And it appears there is no agreement even amongst gender critical people on what constitutes a woman or man in cases of ambiguity

In this one, extremely rare instance. And even at that, people are simply reacting on a message board to an article. This individual didn't produce eggs, so 'carrying a pregnancy to term' is somewhat misleading. They didn't do that without significant assistance.

The vast, vast majority of DSD are not ambiguous at all actually.

Variations of Sexual Development, believe it or not, vary, so no, there is one size fits all solution for people with these incredible rare conditions which manifest in lots of different ways.

Well that's kind of my point. Gender critical people can't seem to agree on which phenomena should be used to define sex and access to single sex spaces. That's a bit of a mess don't you think?

And you say intersex conditions are very rare but the most acute cases involving ambiguous genitalia are 1.8% of people I think we all agreed on. The estimates for the numbers of binary trans people are generally around 0.1 to 0.3% yet that doesn't stop them being portrayed as the most significant threat on the planet by some people. I doubt you'd find many gender critical people claiming binary trans people were very rare.

The pregancy was very rare but Swyer syndrome is less rare with a prevalance of around one in 80,000. So around 1000 people in the UK, similar to the number of trans kids who've ever been referred for puberty blockers - and gender critical people claim this is happening so often it's a social emergency.

We know almost everyone with Swyer syndrome goes on to identify as female for example, despite the fact many posters on here would claim they were male and so presumably assign them as male and force them to use male spaces.

I'll repeat myself again. Patients with Swyer syndrome are born with normal external female genitalia and their Müllerian ducts develop into normal internal female organs. Apart from ovaries, which do not form, these patients have normal fallopian tubes, cervix, uterus and vagina.

They are raised female because they are born with a female body and their perfectly normal external female genitals means they are observed to be female at birth.

I fail to see your evidence that anyone on this thread would insist on identifying such a baby girl as a boy, insist on raising such a baby girl as a boy and insist on banning her from female spaces.

Please remember that Caster Semenya has a completely different condition and don't keep grouping these two conditions together as if they were the same and as if patients presented the same. They aren't and they don't.

Caster Semenya was born with a condition called 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency (or 5-ARD for short). Patients with this condition are born with atypical genitalia, which in countries with access to good healthcare means their sex is usually determined through medical diagnosis rather than mere observation. And in these countries such children are not normally raised as girls anymore.

They are born with a complete male reproductive system, complete with testes (which are normally undescended). That's why these patients are normally fertile with the ability to father children. Most importantly, unlike patients with Swyer syndrome, these patients develop typical masculine features during puberty. (FAOD all this means they have a male body, i.e. patients with 5-ARD are male patients with a difference in sex development unlike patients with Swyer syndrome who are female patients with a DSD.)

Unfortunately in Caster's case, there was no access to the healthcare system that would have allowed a correct diagnosis and Caster was initially raised as a girl. It is clear however that throughout later childhood years, especially once puberty started, Caster was allowed to present as a boy. If it hadn't been for unscrupulous sports scouts, Caster would by now be openly living as a man.

And you say intersex conditions are very rare but the most acute cases involving ambiguous genitalia are 1.8% of people I think we all agreed on.

Nonsense.

The number of babies born with ambiguous genitalia is nearly a hundred times smaller than you claim. It's 0.02% of babies born who require specialist input to determine their sex. All other babies born with DSDs are recorded as either male or female at birth (because they are male or female) with a very small number of girls being diagnosed with a DSD at puberty.

And out of that 0.02% the vast majority don't just have a sex assigned to them. Medical tests shows them to be either male or female and that result is then recorded. In the UK that's about 130 babies per year and only in around 7 or 8 cases can the sex not be clearly determined. These babies will then have a sex assigned to them based on the best projected outcome for each individual child as determined by their particular DSD.

I had no idea there was such hostility to basic intersex rights on here as well towards trans people.

I think you should be very clear what rights you think posters on this board don’t think people with DIfferences in sex development should have?

I really don’t think you have understood that most people are not going to answer you with any depth because you are politicising people’s medical conditions for your own agenda. These conditions are not gotchas.

Many of you, including yourself

Well since you are now directly accusing me, I don’t believe you do know what I think. Because I have not really responded to you with what I think because each difference in sex development conditions is just that, different. I also don’t think it is in any way appropriate to discuss their situations for political point scoring which is what you are doing.

And it appears there is no agreement even amongst gender critical people on what constitutes a woman or man in cases of ambiguity.

We are talking about sex not gender. Male and female. You seem to be the only one on this thread talking about gender.

You were given a definition of male and female pages back. I don’t believe you have even acknowledged the definition. Maybe because it didn’t fit your narrative that ‘posters can’t define it’.

Can I also remind you what else you have neglected to answer?

What tools and processes have specialist clinicians used for patients with Differences in sex Development to ‘identify the child’s likely gender identity’ which you are so keen on having us believe.

Your continued inability to link us up to it is almost a guarantee that it is non existent and you have been talking bollocks.

There is no diagnosis of predicted ‘gender’ identity as such because these days anyone can be any gender they feel like. There are over 100 genders and there is not a test for them.

One person mentioned chromosome testing. And you cannot deny it is one part of what is used. Posters who have been on the board enough have answered posts like yours time and time again. Go and search for yourself.

There is a series of tests and they certainly will include chromosome testing. Did anyone say it was only Chromosome testing? I believe I and others told you there were multiple tests but we probably didn’t go into it. Why should we? I know I don’t want to engage in your politicising this group of people.

the other tests will also include internal scans for internal organs, including streak gonads. They will also involve testing such as molecular genetic diagnosis and hormone /steroid testing, depending on what is needed for that particular medical condition.

If a child has one of the very rare instances were a person is male but cannot process testosterone at all, there will be discussions with parents about the future needs of the child . These are very special cases. They are still technically male and for the purposes of this medical communication scenario, they need to know they are male. They may also need some medical checks specific to their unique body configuration.

By the way, one of your links that you posted talked about ‘gender testing’ when it was clear it was from the USA and they meant ‘sex testing’. It was clear from the excerpt they were waiting for the battery of diagnostic tests for their child. You were told this.

Anyway, with modern technology, a child can be diagnosed with which difference of sex development condition they have. We have told you that most of these will be specific to a sex.

You have attempted to over simplify this discussion for your own political agenda. There is no ‘simple’ discussion. And your attempt at fitting one answer to all of the different conditions is just a further indication of politicking rather than engaging in a meaningful discussion.

You have no idea what posters know because I suspect most of us have tried to ignore your fuckwittery around this topic and given it minimum engagement.

I know I have.

This 1.8% figure has been explained pages back.

Of this number 1.5% of the 1.8% are females with LOCAH. That also includes females with PCOS.

Go and check the numbers.

And stop posting dangerous misinformation.

Well that's kind of my point. Gender critical people can't seem to agree on which phenomena should be used to define sex and access to single sex spaces. That's a bit of a mess don't you think?

You are clearly attempting to leverage people with these medical conditions into your desire to use them as a gotcha for male access to female single sex spaces.

This is your political agenda. It is very clear you don’t care that you are using this group in this way.

That really was a shockingly dishonest post from livvy. Not only the grossly distorted and inflated figures re numbers of people with ambiguous genitalia, but also the lie about our supposed agreement with it.

A friend’s son has the condition hypospadias, which is one of those often included in those fake stats. It’s a condition in which the urethra doesn’t open in the usual place at the head of the penis, so obviously that presents some significant problems.

He’s had to have quite complicated surgery on his penis to correct it, and you can imagine how distressing it’s all been for him and his parents.

There was never the remotest suggestion that he was anything but male. It’s a condition where the penis doesn't form as it should, so obviously it can only happen to males. And yet I see this listed as an “intersex” condition by some, and included in those ridiculous stats. It makes me so angry when I think of this child’s pain and distress being used as a gotcha to “prove” that sex isn’t real and isn’t binary, and that women don’t need single sex spaces.

The estimates for the numbers of binary trans people are generally around 0.1 to 0.3%

Has anyone seen this stat verified at all?

What is your source for this livvy

And you say intersex conditions are very rare but the most acute cases involving ambiguous genitalia are 1.8% of people I think we all agreed on. The estimates for the numbers of binary trans people are generally around 0.1 to 0.3% yet that doesn't stop them being portrayed as the most significant threat on the planet by some people. I doubt you'd find many gender critical people claiming binary trans people were very rare.

Good to see your real agenda being posted now.

The number of babies born with ambiguous genitalia is nearly a hundred times smaller than you claim. It's 0.02% of babies born who require specialist input to determine their sex.

Apologies, that was a typo, I meant 0.18% not 1.8 as reflected in the links I posted.

Several people on this thread have indicated that those with Swyer syndrome should be assigned as boys. That is not out of line with much of the ideology posted on here, people with Swyers are XY, have internal gonads (if underdeveloped), usually no ovaries and require HRT to develop female secondary characteristics at puberty. They often have a male type skeleton and male typical height. But they also almost always have a female gender identity and are usually assigned as girls if the condition is diagnosed at birth.

For people with 5-ARD assignation is more controversial. Traditionally this group have been raised as girls and some literature suggests many of them are happy this way: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1477513118304996

Other research has found that up to 60% of people with 5-ARD raised as girls seek gender reassignment at puberty. So you can't possibly know how Castor would have turned out if it wasn't for 'unscrupulous sporting agents' and any attempt to claim otherwise is a dishonest smear.

Regarding Intersex rights I refer you to the Malta Declaration and the most recent Vienna statement, an collective international statement of demands supported by most major Intersex groups.

www.oiieurope.org/malta-declaration/

www.oiieurope.org/statement-1st-european-intersex-community-event-vienna-30st-31st-march-2017/

It is clear from this thread that many are in direct opposition to those demands.

I'm really shocked by that. I know someone who had that condition and needed a few ops. In no way were they anything approaching intersex. A relative had an incredibly mild symptom related to the same condition at birth and it was very simply treated. They were also completely male.

Traditionally this group have been raised as girls and some literature suggests many of them are happy this way:

"Many". Have you actually read that article?

A feature that is peculiar to 5-ARD is that there is no reported gender inadequacy in individuals raised as male, whereas the incidence of gender dysphoria in individuals raised as female is among the highest in any of the disorders of sex development, reaching around 63% of cases, as reported in a review article

In other words, the male determination is correct, but a minority of those told they are female choose to stay calling themselves female.

A somewhat bizarre study, because it starts with the basic acknowledgement that "assignment" as male is correct, and guarantees no gender issues, but they're trying to figure out what happens to those who are "assigned" female, and what determines the outcome variance.

It’s hilarious that anyone would try to include hypospadias as a DSD, and even sillier that they think it has any bearing on allowing men into women’s changing rooms! DSD patients and transgender patients are two separate groups.

And by the way, did maddy68 ever come up with a diagnosis on their imaginary hermaphrodite nephew? I can’t be bothered scrolling back through pages of incoherent unscientific nonsense.

DSD patients and transgender patients are two separate groups

Exactly. There seems to be virtually no overlap between them at all. So why are one group being co-opted to support the other?