Intersex

[Tootsurly]

Bit of a thought experiment, plus curious as to how much people know about intersex conditions / DSDs.

This is slightly Black Mirror, although not totally beyond the realms of possibility. If there ever came a point where anything specifically related to being male or female required a DNA test to determine your sex before participating, what would happen to intersex people whose chromosomes didn't match their outward appearance (i.e. genotype and phenotype don't match)?

Except for clownfish, of course...

This is definitely something to add.
I agree.

It's not the thread I was expecting it to be and I'm really glad I was wrong in my initial scepticism re the "thought experiment". Thanks from me too OP for starting it and sticking with it.

I said I would RTFT and pick out the "circular" bits. I started to grab a few things that didn't quite make sense and then realised it wasn't necessary. You covered it all with this:

I didn't mean to paint myself as an expert and maybe could have worded my OP better. I do think it's a bit unfair to say I have "little understanding" though, compared with a non expert.

Yes, absolutely fair enough. I'm not a biologist and intersex is not just a single condition, I just really object to some of the sweeping statements that are made as if they're fact.

Having said that, some of those sweeping statements apply to other variations, even if not mine. Also good to realise my misconception about foetuses - not sure where I initially heard or read that.

I sometimes wonder how different things would have been if I'd had a "normal" adolescence. Those years were really blighted by my condition.

Sorry I was alluding to the study of embryology and genetics. I have a done a great deal of research into endocrinology having had a rare endo problem from my late teens. Our bodies are incredibly finely tuned and tiny imbalances can have a huge impact on the our whole endocrine system which is a complicated maze of feed back mechanisms. We are familiar with underactive and overactive glands but chemicals which stimulate the production of the “famous” hormones are as important as the end product.

Waitwhat23 · Yesterday 17:49

The Sex Redefined article and the infographic which many of us have seen before are mentioned, as is Dr Emma Hilton (dear God, I hope I've got her name and title right this time, unlike last night!) in this article -
^https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/sex-is-not-a-spectrum^

Thanks for posting this article, it's very clear in its message. I particularly liked the final two sentences:

"But over time, it’s become clear that they created a false theory of biology that distorts human nature and harms vulnerable individuals. When one attempts to achieve equality and justice by distorting reality, inequality and injustice are never eliminated, just relocated."

I posted this on the intersex WA group and it is being discredited because apparently Colin Wright is a nasty transphobe and a racist who left academia. Plus something about him bullying a Dr Obrein who criticised the Cass Review. Any truth in this?

I mean clearly I'm just shouting into an echo chamber at this point, but it would be nice to know if I've got egg on my face.

Anything which doesn’t unquestioningly affirm the faith is transphobia.

He did challenge O'Brien to a debate, but I'm not sure that counts as bullying.

https://x.com/SwipeWright/status/1793797299220423011?t=EcXrMtpdEEUbHt2_D6se6g&s=19

I haven't heard anything about the accusations mentioned in your post but just doing a search on Twitter brought up the following -

x.com/SwipeWright/status/1793110034596937948

(Wright offered O'Brian an open forum opportunity for discussion and was promptly blocked).

I'm not sure about the accusations of racism - I'll have a look.

As an aside, in terms of the Cass Report, it's worth noting that even the utterly institutionally captured Scottish Government accepted the findings.

As an aside, in terms of the Cass Report, it's worth noting that even the utterly institutionally captured Scottish Government accepted the findings.

Well, on the one hand they sort of did. And on the other they try to brush it under the carpet. No update of the scandalous school’s guidance.

Agreed. Was a huge breakthrough that they even recognised it though (through extreme gritted teeth).

Looking more into Wright's 'bullying' of O'brien, it appears to amount to 'peer pressuring into a debate'. The pressure appears to consist of the single tweet I posted above, after which O'Brien blocked Wright on Twitter. And of course, O'Brien doesn't have to debate. But making a public comment that the Cass review is a "sham at best" and then refusing to engage with any further conversation about it (apart from 'if you disagree with me, you're nothing but a transphobe') is a bit odd, at best.

The racism bit seems to be regarding Wright's comments on Critical Race Theory. I won't even begin to try and analyse that as it's beyond me. I genuinely don't mean that in a facetious way. I've tried to read about it before and there's so many strands to it that I just don't get it. It's like when people talk about Marxism - I feel a bit like Joey in an episode of Friends when he's just nodding along.

It sounds like you're straddling two world views (some activist members within the group you're in and this MN board) very effectively. I can't imagine that's easy at all.

In my experience, this board isn't always an easy place to be but it's a great place to have your own assumptions challenged. It's also an incredible place to build up knowledge, with posters sharing source info.

I guess the difficult bit is that there is always lots of source info that "prove" the case for sex being a spectrum.

Hopefully your group gives you helpful support, even if it does come with a side helping of gender identity belief?

Oh I don’t like that. It does smack of harassment to me.

I remember this. At the time I read it more as 'arrogant rude bastard gets called out over lie about reading Cass and then betrays complete inability to evidence his child-endangering bullshit ideology'.

Yes, I remember it too.

At the time, I had been keenly waiting for some kind of debate (having only seen the shut down of No Debate) and thought this sounded like a good one.

One key point about the Cass review is that it comes from a position of belief. It assumes that we do all have a gender identity. Obviously lots of people (me included) don't believe this at all, so I'm particularly interested in a document that accepts it as "fact" yet still questions whether social transition and medical interventions are the appropriate approach, given the lack of evidence. In many ways, it's even more powerful as an argument, that even if you believe we all have a gender identity, it's important to have a good evidence base to support changing people's bodies to align with this belief. A debate about it would have been interesting.

It seems cowardice to criticise the Cass Report and not explain why.

It’s one thing calling someone out, no problem with asking O’Brien to debate the subject, that’s absolutely appropriate.

But the tweet goes beyond that imho. Not the first invitation, but the one quoted by @NoBinturongsHereMate. It’s badgering, pestering in tone. I mean, launching a GoFundMe for a children’s hospital all contingent on O’Brien’s participation in the debate? Did I read that wrong? If I didn’t that’s definitely harassing behaviour in my book.

It was right on the edge of my comfort zone in that respect, but I thought it was fair enough overall. O'Brien was criticising a 4 year review but won't defend why in a debate format.

From memory, Wright refunded everyone's donations when it was clear that the debate wouldn't happen.

It is a bit badgering,, but with no personal threats or accusations beyond quoting O'Briens own tweets. Wheras in reaponse to the original perfectly polite suggestion of a debate, O'Brien appears to have responded with a barrage of personal accusations.

I think the fact that O’Brien wouldn’t engage in debate would have spoken for itself.

The GoFundMe thing was ill-conceived and tawdry in my opinion. Even before that they were trying to bribe O’Brien basically. Dreadful.

I dunno, I think people who profess to be speaking in a professional capacity probably deserve a bit of badgering if they are unwilling to explain how their opinion is formed.

No Debate got Bloody Boring circa 2018.

Given he was libelling Cass and all the reveiwers involved in the report, he was lucky not to have to be debating in court.

Oh I agree regarding no debate. It’s not fair.

But this was ‘two wrongs don’t make a right’ imo.

I’ve worked as a scientist and if someone challenged me or a colleague in the manner Wright did then we’d automatically refuse a debate, no matter how confident we were of our thesis. We’d refuse to engage with bullies.
This interaction was very far from the norm in that world, ime anyway.

I do understand Wright was frustrated but that does not excuse his behaviour.

And how would you feel if someone very publically condemned all your work as a sham and then refused to explain themselves any further?

I’d be very confident their foolishness and lack of objectivity would become clear to all in the fullness of time. I’d know it was clear to many already.

Was Wright a co-author or something?
It wasn’t his work as far as I’m aware.

Scientific papers disagree with one another all the time. It’s part of the process.
However, O’Brien was well out of order in the manner in which he disagreed with Cass. Calling the review a sham was far from ok, but OP has asked specifically about Wright’s behaviour here and it really wasn’t good either.

How about if soneone sent a barrage of tweets claiming you were profiteering?

Wright's respose wasn't ideal, but he was provoked and the balance of bad behaviour seems to have been in the other side.