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.

OP is not coming back

They never do.

They can't actually debate their position and are unable to take in other people's views if they differ from their own.

If they can't get their own way by shouting and making threats they storm off because they simply do not have the skills to engage in a discussion where their views are being challenged.

I suspect they don't have the intelligence for that either but that's just a guess.

It is the end of the school day, they have to go home now.

OP actually thought that DSDs had not ever been discussed 😎

TRAs are always saying that people can't be sure of their sex if they haven't had their chromosomes tested. People with DSDs probably have had their chromosomes tested so by TRA standards they are one group who can be certain of their sex

@spannasaurus

Brilliant!

I think you really need to read a bit more about DSD… which is the proper way to describe people with difference of sexual development, not the rather outdated and frankly insulting ‘intersex!'

Every person with DSD is either male or female and mostly with undeveloped sexual organs…. but will still be either male or female by chromosomes.

They are absolutely nothing to do with trans people, and being used as a dog whistle by trans activists to make an unfair and misleading comparison.

so, as I said, please do some research…

Thanks for this!

And maybe we should consider peeps like Douglas Bader, who ended up with fewer than two complete legs. Not human? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Bader

I do find it bizarre when a poster begins a new thread with a supposed gotcha, then disappears. What on earth do they hope to achieve?

It's as if they're intent on establishing a rolling series of "Gender Critical 101: Q&As for Beginners" one the first page of the forum.

It's perfect: lots of new, curious visitors, all seeing these posts and thinking, "Yes, that's just what was worrying me / what I don't understand / what I heard about elsewhere - let's see what they have to say!"

Whereupon they read a series of well-reasoned, evidenced and empathetic explanations of the GC perspective, with nary a counter-argument in sight (bar the occasional emotive attempt at derailing).

Bizarre.

But the ruling is that access to single sex spaces is based on biological sex, not socialisation or whether they pass. cais individuals have testes and XY chromosomes, so should by the ruling use male or third spaces.

Many experts define biological sex in a way that would define people with CAIS as female.

SRY gene plus functional testosterone receptors is male, everyone else is female

My daughter has DSD. She is tall, beautiful, a girl, a TERF, and would tear strips off anyone calling her intersex. Most people with DSDs want no involvement in gender culture because they fear being cruelly used by people like you as a trump card for the trans movement. No one is two sexes at once, no one is a female with XY chromosomes and no one appointed you, with your lack of knowledge and even less empathy, to speak for people with DSDs.

Thanks, that's interesting.

No.

They explain their terminology and the term biological sex is used to mean sex at birth, which means as registered.

They are distinguishing between that and what they call ‘certified sex’ which refers to somebody who has a GRC.

Except a previous poster said an individual with CAIS (XY) should use female toilets and the poster above you said many experts would consider them female by sex too.

It's a good job we have random Internet posters to interpret the law for us, isn't it? Otherwise we'd need - I don't know - a Supreme Court or something? XY = male. But what do I know? I'm only a biologist.

Defining sex on the basis of SRY gene plus testosterone receptors is from Prof Robert Winston

OP, you're talking shite, there are no "intersex" people (but I suspect you know that). 🙄

Oh look, another post feigning ignorance about the SC clarification, and such a surprise that the OP hasn’t responded to anything since 10am.

OP has left the building. Hopefully they will have learned something today.

Having shown themselves up to be embarrassingly lacking in any kind of logic or knowledge perhaps they will stay out of the building.

The OP should mark well this quote before engaging in future:

It is better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Its fucking rude

The term intersex is outdated and most people who have DSD's are of a specific sex not somehow both sexes. The SC ruling was correct, so stop trying to transgress women's boundaries you misogynist. No Males in Women's spaces, end of, now off you trot op.

Hasn't GCSE study leave started in some places?