"We have always been here"

[DiamondThrone]

Been noticing this a lot. It seems to be the new #TWAW #nodebate #bekind, after those didn't work.

I mean - lots of things have "always been here". Like women, for instance 😄

Just interested in new terms that arise, and how they are used to try and shut down comment.

This is my last post on this thread because it's very tiring and some of you are quite mean lol

I just thought I'd point out some more scientific reasons for the existence and validity of trans people:

Chromosomes/sexual development aside, studies have identified structural and chemical differences in the brains of transgender people, particularly in the regions that process sexual orientation and gender identity. The same part of the brain that influences sexuality (the reason why we're not all straight) can influence experiences of gender.

I know a lot of you don't believe in gender identity, but we do have neural networks related to it.

Trans people's brains have also display differences in networks associated with body perception and self-referential processing, which has been linked to gender dysphoria. Hormone related genes also contribute to dysphoria, and differences in gender identity.

Brain differentiation and genital differentiation can sometimes occur at different phases during a pregnancy. They are not always synchronised and can lead to mismatches. Exposure to testosterone in the second half of pregnancy can 'masculinise' the brain for example.

Feel free to fact check all this.

Obviously you're not going to change your minds, but I think it's important to state that transgender identities do have a biological basis of their own. Many of you simply argue that they don't exist, are deluded, or have an agenda.

I was ridiculed for saying this earlier, but nature truly is mysterious and surprising.

OMG is birdss saying I became a man half-way through my pregnancies😱

I've often thought the trans movement missed a trick by not embracing phrenology.

I wouldn't have to do that to show that you are not stating a scientific consensus.

But in any event, here is a case study of an individual who has evolved both developmental pathways to produce both small and large gametes, as you put it and seem to be using that as your distinguisher of male or female:

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3418019/

I think so, it must happen when your amniotic fluid changes into gender fluid

Nah, you pulled that one out last time. New material please

As I said before - perhaps you didn't see my post - our 'logic' or our 'idea of a biological woman' is entirely irrelevant to what sex a person is.

I don't know why you've come back with another question which implies that whether or not a poster on MN thinks that someone 'qualifies as a woman' matters.

We don't decide who is male and who is female. Biology does that.

Sorry, what?

I have never referred to this case study before.

Poster asked me for example of individual on a developmental pathways to produce both gametes, and I have done as they have asked.

You win MN for today🏆

So is the one case you can come up with.

And it's of a three year old child who's sexual organs haven't actually developed, so production of gametes has not happened yet.

Slow hand clap.

Um, I think you're the one that said "All bodies evolve on a pathway to produce small gametes or large gametes" - you deliberately used 'pathway' and stopped short of saying actual producer of gametes (presumably because you are well aware that would be problematic for definition of female / male as well)

Slow handclap right back at you.

There is no study that proves any of this.

There is a study that attempted to prove it, but was very badly designed (didn't account for sexual orientation even) and even then didn't ultimately show that the subjects brains were unusual for their sex.

I did.

In extremely complex and rare DSDs like this one, it may necessary to observe the patient beyond the age of three to understand which pathway will ultimately mature and produce gametes.

So yeah. Nice one babe. Got anything else?

springbirdss This is my last post on this thread because it's very tiring and some of you are quite mean lol

I've participated in this discussion with great interest, and I think it was a very lively, fair and 'mean'. Most of us didn't agree with your main point, but we gave evidence for our opinions.
Some of us tried to tease out the tangle of 'sex' and 'gender' that you seemed to have created in some of your posts, e.g. about archaeological finds of women warriors.

I asked you on a couple of occasions why you think that posters on this thread have the ability to decide what sex a person is, but you didn't explain your thinking on that.
We engaged with you. We disagreed with you. We thought you were factually incorrect, but 'mean'? Hardly. If you want meanness, try being GC on Reddit!

I think you are wise to just agree to disagree about sex being binary and immutable. It is indeed tiring.

Not really, just happy to identify that you want to shift the terminology and determiners to suit you for any particular point that you are trying to make, and to highlight that the scientific community doesn't have a consensus agreement with you for whichever way you want to have it.

You have one three year old that you think is proving your point. I reckon my position is safe. 😂

"This is my last post on this thread because it's very tiring and some of you are quite mean lol"

Impatient is more accurate.

You may not know this, but we have heard/read these arguments countless times and they do not get more persuasive due to repetition.

You want me to post about every other similar case study out there ? 😂 I've got better things to do. Do some research, there's plenty more information out there.

One that didn't involve a preschooler would be nice, yes.

Still not seeing the spegg

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30247609/

This one? Or the Hudson Medical Research Group one?

I take it back Suggestions, I am not disappointed. That is a cool case. 😎

It doesn't blow apart the sex binary, methods for determining and defining sex, or mean that people can change sex though.

Even the authors of this study will only go as far as concluding this ...

Conclusion: Gender dysphoria may have an oligogenic component

You note the use of the word 'may'.

Gosh, its real barrel scrapings tonight,

I asked you on a couple of occasions why you think that posters on this thread have the ability to decide what sex a person is, but you didn't explain your thinking on that.

I don't think they have the ability to 'decide' a person's sex. I don't know what posts you're referring to, but those people had probably said things like 'if someone has XX chromosomes they are categorically male' while previously saying that other characteristics (such as genitalia) defines a woman. I was making the point that those traits can co-exist in the same body.

Gosh, its real barrel scrapings tonight,

And it's an old barrel of scrapings. I've seen all this on MN before