What about intersex people?

[tecbrowidow]

Hi mumsnetters, I can see a lot of posts in support of the UK court judgement ruling that the definition of woman is based in biology. I'm not in favour of this ruling because, aside from the trans issue, it places intersex people in an impossible position. For example those who are born with a female body and XY chromosomes (a rare condition which affects thousands of people in the UK). Biological sex is quite complicated, and I think the law should reflect that reality. I'm curious what other people think on this as I don't see the intersex angle being discussed in the media.

Biological sex is not complicated at all (other than in a more philosophical sense of 'aren't all living creatures absolutely amazing').
There are 2 sexes: male and female, and at a basic level what that means is that all human bodies fall into 2 categories at the moment of conception, for the production of small gametes (male) or large gametes (female). That is irrespective of whether those gametes end up 'working properly'. So in the same way, human bodies are produced around being bipedal, having 2 arms, 2 eyes, 2 ears etc.
Of course, things do go 'wrong' and some babies may be born without a limb, or with an extra finger or whatever, but that does not make them a different type of human.
And 'intersex' therefore, as well as being poor terminology, doesn't mean that there is a third sex. What very occasionally happens (in the same way as humans without a limb or with an extra digit) is disorders of sexual development, where, for example, the penis is not visible.
This is extremely rare and further, specific DSDs are linked to either being male or being female.
Or perhaps you're going down the fallacious route of other syndromes or illnesses that have effects on the body like more than average facial hair in women (eg pcos).
The same applies: a woman with pcos is a woman, a man with a dsd is a man, a baby born with no limbs is a human, either male or female.
There are only two sexes and for time immemorial, those sexes have managed, at population level, to recognise themselves and each other.
This is after all. the main building block of a species' continued existence.
So no, there is no issue with 'intersex', in whatever (incorrect) sense you are using that term.

Reaching The Simpsons levels!

When did biological sex suddenly become so complicated? Henry VIII knew about it. The church has always known who to blame for original sin. The bastards from boko haram knew who to kidnap to make their point. Why is it suddenly way too complicated to discuss? It really isn’t.

Some organisations for people with DSDs have been captured/ seen the opportunity for higher profile and cashflow and jumped on board the Fausto-Sterling train sadly.

This is good on the 'invention of intersex':

https://differently-normal.com/

Is this another drive-by woke scolding?

This is from https://www.bmj.com/content/389/bmj.r797

(which was also discussed on this thread https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5323111-bmj-editorial-sex-and-gender-should-not-be-conflated-in-medical-data )

Never, ever complicated when a surrogacy agreement is sought either, is it? Only one type of woman appears to be relevant then. I wonder why.

Family member has Klinefelter syndrome (XXY) which is a more common DSD. Still a man and no confusion over which single sex spaces he should be using.

I don’t think it’s fair of the OP (and others) to drag people with DSDs into this. I am sure there is some overlap but most people with DSDs are not trans and most trans people do not have DSDs. It’s unkind to use people with DSDs (who already have a condition that may cause infertility and other symptoms) as some kind of gotcha.

another day, another idiot trying to say gotcha

🥱 at the OP

What about them?

This is about sex.

People with DSDs have a sex.

The end.

It really couldn't be simpler, OP.

The judgment doesn't affect people with DSDs in any way. They can continue doing exactly what they were doing prior to 16th April.

OP? Where have you run off to? You OK hun?

Biological sex for the purpose of the EA 2010 is (and always has been) based on the sex at birth, as determined by medical staff.

Where someone is born with a DSD, doctors will do further tests to determine the appropriate sex to register the baby as. As the NHS link posted above explains, this further testing usually confirms the correct sex within 42 days (i.e. the standard deadline for registering a birth).

So every person with a DSD knows what their biological sex is for the purpose of the EA 2010, as they can refer to their own birth certificate.

Do you really think that anyone born with a DSD will only be thinking about their biological sex for the first time as a result of the SC ruling? Biological sex matters in loads of contexts, so obviously they will have dealt with the same issue before.

If you know someone specific with a DSD, then it’s best to listen to them as to whether they’re confused or not.

If you don’t know anyone with a DSD, but are genuinely concerned or confused, then the NHS website should help you to clarify the situation.

And if you don’t know anyone with a DSD but are just using them as a pawn in the argument for letting biological men back into women-only spaces (or are unwittingly repeating a bad faith argument you’ve heard a transactivist use), then I know there are many people with DSD online who have been quite vocal about the fact they wish the trans community would stop using them and spreading misinformation about them like this.

There's a certain type of poster that likes to throw a supposed "gotcha" out there and then never comes back to the post, isn't there?

I suspect it’s because they have no coherent argument and lack the intellectual ability to defend their points.

Well said!

So it's rare, but affects thousands? My poor female brain can't compute.

People seem to have a fond belief there's going to be some kind of vote on the judgment and their not agreeing with it is somehow going to be relevant.

In my opinion, this is just another poorly informed plop post using outdated and unwanted terms for people with DSDs in an attempt to muddy the issue.

FWR has discussed this issue extensively and knowledgeably in the past.

DSDs are still male or female and are sick of being used as a political football by the trans army

Oh good Bog. They are not intersex, it is an outdated, offensive and misleading term. They have DSDs and every single one is sex specific. There is no third gamete and no human hermaphrodite.

It's been YEARS, how are people still bloody asking this????

Gosh, there’s a lot of plopping and running today

Biological sex is not complicated. It is very simple.

There are 2 sexes. Male and female.

What you are saying is kind of like saying that because very very few people are born conjoined, that the heads and limbs of the human race are on a spectrum.

They aren't and neither is biological sex.

Things can and do go wrong during foetal development. Hormones aren't released when they should be, organs don't grow where they ought to, a twin can be absorbed into the other twin, twins can become fused, things can fail to develop correctly... so, so, so many things can happen that affect the individual.

None of them change the fact that the human body has a template.

And that there are only 2 biological sexes.

I was thinking this too.

Either way OP, people with DSDs in the UK know what sex they are.