The Guardian, on Trump's EO re: gender ideology

[theilltemperedqueenofspacetime]

Did anyone else notice that the Guardian has at last caught up with this discussion, and supplied exactly the tropes one expected of them:
Sex is really complicated, too complicated for you plebs to comprehend.
Now we're all female, because early embryos are not yet morphologically sex-differentiated , ha ha ha!
If Trump is allowed to say male and female are different, it gives him carte blanche to take away female's rights, just like the Taliban.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/25/trump-executive-order-sex

It was the most read opinion piece this morning but not open for comments. Nor did they solicit letters for the letters page.

I used to like the guardian but they have become an embarrassment

I did notice it!

I'd love to know how the 'you're all meanies' people wangle in their heads that they now think Trump is a woman due to this legislation.

Introverted navel gazing to suit their narrative. Can anyone write anything these day? Embarrassing

I'm glad someone has started a specific article to discuss this idiotic article and talking point in general.

*Specific thread

It is utterly demented.

But think about it - this is their finest take on the matter. All they have is declaring Trump is now a woman. By deliberately convoluting the very clear order.

And yet still someone will come along and agree with it. Any minute now...

I think there's a cat, that got lost on its way from the other thread.

Yes I agreed with the article.

🤣🤣🤣Only messing! What a load of bonkers! The Guardian is scraping National Enquirer level of conspiracy theory....

Totally stupid article full of misinformation.

Not to mention scientific illiteracy akin to flat-earthism.

The morphological sex differentiation which becomes evident is based on the chromosomal differentiation established at fertilisation.

Just to head off the ‘well we DO all start out as female’, I think this is helpful:

https://x.com/zaelefty/status/1883151425196458015?s=46

What is fucked up is that people genuinely believe that embryo that are undeveloped and don’t have testes yet formed = female. So again female people are simply co considered the ‘not male’ fall back position.

Truly astonishing they published that garbage. Well maybe not, given the direction the Guardian has gone in.

This properly made me lol https://x.com/berk_hamstead/status/1883217974896775347

Basically the author is an idiot who has believed nonsense like this doing the rounds:

https://x.com/fawfulfan/status/1881732562042982817

Under Trump's executive order, every single person in America is now legally classified as female. All embryos begin by developing female sex organs, with male sex organs only replacing them at around 6 weeks of gestation.

when the actual answer is this reply:

https://x.com/zaelefty/status/1881787730910470353

All embryos begin by developing undifferentiated gonads, undifferentiated genitalia, and a cloaca, before genetics differentiate our gonads into testes or ovaries, and our genitalia down the male or female path based on the gonad type.

There is no transforming of female anatomy into male anatomy. Being female is a specific path of differentiation just like being male.

Your claim makes no sense unless you want to argue that undifferentiated gonads, undifferentiated genitalia, and a cloaca are “female anatomy” which would be dumb.

But I would expect nothing less from a two bit opinion writer who had to find something wrong with it simply because it’s Trump who signed it.

And to think people genuinely believe the left wing media doesn’t partake in misinformation and propaganda 🙄

I think a lot of people have herd the claim over the years that we all start off as female.

Though - you used to also hear how all species start off looking the same, so are we now going to hear we are all cats, and cats are all monkeys, and monkeys are all dolphins?

Honestly, the Guardian is now the kind of publication that convinces American conservatives that obviously liberals must be morons if this is the best of their mainstream press.

Mind you, that McBride made the inane statement should tell us all we need for credibility in the first place.

This is why people like me left the Left. I just couldn't be associated with this sort of deliberate stupidity. This article is a living example of that many replicated research finding that intelligent people are more likely to believe ludicrous things as they use their intelligence to persuade themselves the ludicrous things are true.

These people have divorced the word sex from its meaning. Our sex categories define our role in sexual reproduction. That's it. Yes you get disorders in sex development but no sensible person could say that disorders of sex development undermine the sex binary. If there is not a sex binary, what is the third sex and what is its role in sexual reproduction? No-one ever answers this.

We. like all other sex binary species, have evolved to recognise on sight who is male and who is female as that enables us to reproduce. Its remarkable that people who have lived their whole lives doing this every day, pretend that they cannot spot on sight which adult is male and which is female in nearly every case.

‘ ..how complex sex is and why it’s hard to reduce it into a neat binary’

😂🙈 Stop it Guardian people. It is not hard to reduce sex into a ‘neat binary’. In fact, it is probably the easiest concept to ‘reduce’ into a neat binary.

Sex is at the front of the queue right before 0 and 1.

Jesus wept.

I thought the G had shown some signs of walking back its lunacy lately, but this? As noted, this is National Enquirer level stuff.

Most scientists now reject the idea that sex is strictly binary

Do they? Do they really? Try asking someone who knows what they are talking about. Plus, the pathetic and infantile implication that Trump (the orange fool) actually wrote the document personally. The sort of 'journalism' that the G rightly used to excoriate other papers for.

As for 'leaving the Left', it's the G and those like it that have done that AFAIC.

You've lost this war, Viner, you fucking loon!

It’s so depressing. It’s not just that someone wrote something this scientifically illiterate, without any checking, but that none of the subs at the Guardian spotted the factual errors either. After all, to quote a great Guardian editor, Comment is free, but facts are sacred.

Maybe they don't bother subbing 'opinion pieces', where you can say any old bollocks.

This is beyond embarrassing for the Guardian.

‘Explain the purpose of the seam in your ballsack’ is one of the posts on that X thread. Is that where they are going next? 😆

Scientists ourselves cannot agree on how to define the two sexes,” Rachel Levin, a Pomona College neuroscientist who studies the development of sex, told me over the phone. “To say that sex is simple and easily defined – and defined at conception – is factually incorrect.”

Is that the same Rachel Levine the former US Assistant Secretary for Health?

No, an ornithologist who studies animal sexual behaviour, apparently.

It’s a total embarrassment of an article. I despise Trump but it’s particularly pathetic to think tittering over calling Trump female is a feminist position. Female is a fact, not an insult.