London Review of Books’ contribution to sex & boxing furore

[SarkyMummy]

https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2024/august/fair-competition

This article is being promoted via Instagram feeds, I assume to garner some clicks, but it reads to me like a very confused set of non-arguments. Can anyone salvage anything from the wreckage?

The sensible argument (via Dr Emma Hilton) is that these DSDs appear to cluster in certain countries/races/ethnicities because the medical systems in those countries are not so universal, and are doing basic stuff to keep populations alive.

Could there also be a genetic factor? I've no idea whether DSDs run in families, but it would explain why they might tend to 'cluster'.

There does appear to be a familial link, there is definitely clusters of 5 -ARD in the Dominican Republic, Turkey and Papua NG
www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34290981.amp

According to a quick Google 5ARD is an Autosomal Recessive condition so if both parents carry the gene fault approx 1 in 4 of their children will have the disorder.

https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Autosomal-Recessive-Disorder

https://medlineplus.gov/download/genetics/condition/5-alpha-reductase-deficiency.pdf

I was once asked by a doctor if my ex husband and were related because they were investigating my DC for an autosomal recessive condition but that was for an ultra rare condition so ‘carriers’ are unlikely to find each other and make babies (we aren’t related and now have the genomic sequencing to show it!)
In areas where there are lots of carriers (who will be healthy and symptom free) more babies will be born with the disorder and even more carriers will be amongst the 5ARD person’s siblings.
Bigger families/multiple children will mean more potential for carriers/DSD babies. The family link must play a part in how unscrupulous coaches locate these athletes young enough to coach them).
.
I think I’ve read that some Ashkenazi Jewish communities now habitually have pre-marriage genetic screening due to the relatively small population of potential suitors and the recognised elevated risk of that population carrying particular gene mutations - I would have to Google that to fact check though and when I’ve written a long post with multiple links there is always a chance it will page reloaded and get wiped while I’m off looking for another link!

Presumably similar happens in other communities who aren’t yet able to avail themselves of genetic screening prior to starting families (seeing as it’s a new and expensive tech that will only work for conditions that are already well-studied)?

I'm surprised the body of science on Güevedoce boys hasn't been mentioned. Dr Michael Moseley covered the story for the BBC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34290981
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%BCevedoce

It's completely unsurprising to me that this was in the LRB. In the past they've had stuff on GIDS/Tavistock which was down-the-line genderist, plus the John Lanchester article @DeanElderberry mentioned. As far as I can see they reproduce in sentences of paragraph length a complete set of conventional liberal ideas. It's a highbrow echo-chamber.

The whole idea is putting men back on top.