Good grief. Now they’re saying that not all xx are female and not all xy are male. And that xy ‘generally' means male.

[AShortName]

The more this misinformation spreads, the more people will believe it. I am concerned that if it continues, then it will soon become regarded as a truth.

To add, I’m seeing it more and more in comments under articles and on those stupid Facebook posts that are all written in the same style - probably ai that are being shared.

The final straw was hearing a presenter introduce a debate about this on the radio referencing this. The debate was actually good, but so balanced to give credence to scientific bollocks. Sometimes wrong is wrong and that has to be stated.

This has been pushed for years.

And yes, it's going to do damage.

The IOC claims a passport proves eligibility. It's self ID.

It's true but rare. Some people with disorders of sexual development have non-standard chromosome patterns.

See the table posted on page 2 of this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5134040-can-a-xx-woman-go-through-male-puberty?page=2

Someone said this to me on FB and when I questioned it she shouted do you have a degree in biology??? It’s like talking to monkeys.

XX= female, XY= male is a useful shorthand because it is true almost 100% of the time. The SRY sex-determining gene is almost always located on the Y chromosome.

When talking about DSDs, it is true that there are a vanishingly small number of conditions where the SRY gene either isn't in its usual place or is otherwise inactive. This means it is possible to have XX males because the SRY transposes onto the incorrect chromosome, or if it misfires then male development won't occur.

But there is definitely misinformation in relying on these vanishingly small DSD cases to justify that anyone with a DSD can just call themselves a woman.

Yes, that's true. Reporting your post so that the title can be edited, you might want to do that yourself.

Some people need to decide if the argument they’ve believed and stated for so long, that vagina=female and penis=male is correct. Is genitalia what makes you male or female? Or is it genetics?

Ah, the clowns are up early today.

Some people need to decide if the argument they’ve believed and stated for so long, that vagina=female and penis=male is correct. Is genitalia what makes you male or female? Or is it genetics?

It's gametes for me.

The devopmment toward one of two reproductive roles has always defined sex (woman/ man, female/ male) and is determined by genetics.

I know what you mean
Personally, when I see comments on social media that I think are goady or entirely stupid, I think it best to grey rock. There are certain disingenuous individuals who pop up a lot and I simply won't bother reading what they have to say anymore. I have so much admiration for the patient engagers who do go on to challenge some of the stupid ideological rhetoric we're seeing across the platforms - and I know they are doing it for the observers rather than try to change the mind of the terminally daft. I just don't have the patience to engage as I consider some of the opinions generated are not just ill considered but reveal someone to be a bit unwell.

Apart from the disorders that have been mentioned already here.
It is possible to not physically resemble what your genetics suggest you should be. This is a fact, I’m not sure how there can can be any argument over it

@Mostunexpected - the definition I've seen on Mumsnet is based on gametes.

If the body, if everything were in working order, is the type to produce large immobile gametes (ova) then = female sex.

The type of body (if everything in working order) to produce small mobile gametes (sperm) = male sex.

But some people have disorders (DSDs), of which there are many types, and they're not straightforward.

No, inclusive of those disorders.

The development towards one of two reproductive roles is a pathway that relies on lots of things going correctly in order to be fertile, but once you're on a pathway you can't switch between the two.

Being fertile isn't a condition of my definition.

It is also true that during pregnancy and birth you can absorb some of the DNA of your children, so if you are the mother of a sone if is perfectly possible to have patches of cells in your body that are XY

They have a point.

if you have a child with what looks like normal female external anatomy, that child will be “female”

if that child gets to 15, 16, and doesn’t appear to be going through puberty/starting periods, so you take her to the doctor.

it turns out she has a dsd where testosterone didn’t do it’s job in utero. So despite being externally female, they have no uterus, a blind vagina, and internal testes. Genotyping reveals XY chromosomes.

so now what. Do we go full mumsnet, point and shout “MAN”, and give no thought to how the child feels?

do we start genotyping everyone at birth so we can identify those who’s phenotype doesn’t meet their genotype to avoid this issue and identify “real” sex?

I suspect with sport we will have to have a blanket ban on XY in female sport, dsd or not. But dsd’s do exist in real life so yes, in those cases do we go by physical appearance or XY?

Do we go full mumsnet, point and shout “MAN”, and give no thought to how the child feels?

No, that would be cruel.

But the child in your example is male and will need help to come to terms with that.

How does that take into account those who really are on the wrong pathway and are therefore infertile? People who don’t produce any gametes? Where do they fit?

do we start genotyping everyone at birth so we can identify those who’s phenotype doesn’t meet their genotype to avoid this issue and identify “real” sex?
That could be easily done using the sample from the heel prick test.

Very tough for the kid, but doesn’t mean he gets a place in women’s sport.

I have to admit, the recent discussions on DSD have been the first to make me think that things aren't perhaps as binary as I'd previously believed and I am willing to conceed that some of my previously held opinions were based on an over simplified version of science. For a tiny minority of humans, they don't fall neatly into the male / female categories that my previous understanding of biology/ genetics led me to believe there were. We are deliberately taught a simplified version of biology (same goes for chemistry and physics!) as the actual complexity is too mind-blowing and vast for gcse/a level courses.

This is completely seperate to any trans issues and I remain firmly GC, a male does not becomes a female, but reading about conditions such as Swyer syndrome (no testes or ovaries, female genitals and most internal organs and can carry a baby to term (donated eggs) but XY chromosomes - missing the part of the chromosome that switches on male sexual development so the foetus never becomes 'male')... I am willing to say that chromosomes alone, for some people, aren't the only thing that should be considered. Not all DSD are this extreme but it's what changed my thinking.

A person with Swyer syndrome certainly isn't a man, they have never had a penis or testes, didn't go through a puberty and would have been raised as female and could carry a child. I believe I am female, it's all Ive ever known, but if I had a blood test that showed I had this would it instantly make me a 'man'? Would that make my partner a gay man?

How best to fit people with DSD into our existing categories of male / female in society and sport is a really interesting discussion.

We've clearly established in recent years that people don't believe biology or evolution. They probably think the earth is flat.

Hopefully this will be helpful to anyone who is just venturing into this topic.

https://www.theparadoxinstitute.com/read/what-are-sexes

'Universal Biological Definition

In biology, the two sexes are defined this way:

Biologically, the female sex is defined as the adult phenotype that produces the larger gametes in anisogamous systems.

Biologically, the male sex is defined as the adult phenotype that produces the smaller gametes in anisogamous systems.

Lehtonen & Parker (2014). Gamete competition, gamete limitation, and the evolution of two sexes. Molecular Human Reproduction, 20(12).'

https://www.theparadoxinstitute.com/read/sex-development-charts

'Scientific Background

First, some basics: There are only two sexes, male and female. The male sex is the phenotype that produces small gametes, and the female sex is the phenotype that produces large gametes. This biological definition of male and female applies universally to all species that reproduce through two gametes of differing size (this includes us!). In humans and most other animals, male and female have specific reproductive structures that function to produce either gamete type (the gonads) and release it (the internal and external genitalia). Thus, sex development is the process through which a fetus develops these reproductive structures, and therefore, becomes a male or female.

Sex development occurs in two steps:

Determination: the development decision that directs the bipotential gonads to differentiate into ovaries (the egg-making factories) or testes (the sperm-making factories).

Differentiation: direction of the internal and external genitalia (the gamete transportation systems) down the male or female pathway once the gonad has been established.

To visually illustrate this process, I have created a series of flow charts, inspired by a paper on sex determination and congenital conditions of sex development (DSDs). The information on the flow charts is directly from peer-reviewed developmental biology papers and textbooks on human sex differentiation.

The mechanisms that regulate sex differentiation are so complex and time contingent that, occasionally, atypical variations and genetic mutations can occur in the system. Because of this, I show two things: 1) the sex development process for typical males and females, and 2) the sex development process for DSDs: congenital conditions which can result in atypical development of the gonads, the internal genitalia, and the external genitalia.

This complexity has gained attention of activists who wish to deconstruct the two sexes, claiming that people with DSDs are not male or female. But humans are a gonochoric species: individuals are either male or female throughout their entire life cycle. People with DSDs are not new sexes (this would require a third gamete type), and they are not both sexes (this would require the full development of both male and female gonads and genitalia in a single individual. A hermaphrodite has never existed in humans).

In reality, people with DSDs are males and females like everyone else. They have sex development disorders that can cause infertility and a host of other physical and psychological problems, some of which are life-threatening. Understanding the basic development process for these conditions can help fight against misinformation regarding human sex development while illuminating the complex processes that form these congenital conditions.'

Dear Lord. It's amazing how much over engineering goes on to try and ensure something that the vast majority of the population object to happens.

At least 99% of athletes could be correctly classed as male or female by reintroducing the cheek swab text that was used for around 30 years.

If someone had a very rare DSD that meant they had XY chromosomes, did not have internal testosterone producing testes and had not gone through male puberty, individual ruling could be made. It's not rocket science and this would only need to take place once in an athletes career.

A person's social history and identity should have nothing to do with how they are sex classified for sport. Competing in elite sport in a category that you mistakenly thought you belonged to is not a 'right'. I imagine the experience of discovering being mis-sexed at birth is traumatic, if you also had aspirations to compete on the international stage and this precluded this, this would be even worse. However, it is not the role of elite athletes to compensate for this.

It is possible to have compassion and empathy for these athletes but still hold the line about sex segregated sports.

There is no third sex.