"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.

'A significant association was identified between gender dysphoria and ERα, SRD5A2, and STS alleles, as well as ERα and SULT2A1 genotypes. Several allele combinations were also overrepresented in transgender women, most involving AR (namely, AR-ERβ, AR-PGR, AR-COMT, CYP17-SRD5A2).'

I said that these things have been observed by researchers. I wasn't wrong! This area of research is evolving....

As I said earlier, this study failed to control for all kinds of relevant variables and the very best this badly designed study could conclude is 'may have'.

This is not proof of anything.

I think this is what happens when someone who does not usually post on Feminism: Sex and gender discussions arrives with what they think are ideas that we have never encountered, and they want to either change or minds or more likely - as one of them rather pompously declared, to reveal the true nature of the dynamics on here.

We've heard it all before, and we've researched the topic in a lot of detail - some of us bringing a high level of expertise to the subject - and if someone comes on here [there seems to be a bit of an influx recently] and declares 'sex is ambiguous and fluid', there is only going to be one outcome: almost universal disagreement.

I can imagine this feeling like a pile-on, no matter how reasonable posters try to remain, when pretty much every single poster is disagreeing with you. And I know that in some cases, patience can be tested by having to go over and over the same already-debunked theories.

I also understand posters like springbirdss getting tired because they are taking on almost a whole threadful of posters disagreeing with them, and getting nowhere, so yes it must be tiring!

There also seems to be a pattern of signing off with a parting shot about meanness or rudeness or echo-chamber or the old reliable 'have you ever even met a trans person?' even if the discussion has been mostly disappointingly polite.

People need to understand that extremely rare edge cases around sex development don't mean that people with perfectly normal sex development are somehow really hard to sex correctly, or that these edge cases make sex somehow not real or really complicated.

If we look at the 'born in the wrong body' trope, there are actual rare, edge cases when someone (or a potential someone) is born literally in the wrong body (the body of their twin). It is called foetus in fetu. This does not mean that someone with perfectly normal development (who is not a foetus that formed within their twin) is 'born in the wrong body'.

But even if this eventually evolves into something of interest, it would just suggest that TW are undermasculinised/overfeminised males. I really don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but it is not going to be a reason to agree that TWAW

Spring, is this meant to be a test? Are you checking to see if we would catch this error?

'if someone has XX chromosomes they are categorically male'

Those aren't my words lol, I was quoting someone else.

@MarieDeGournay

I understand that nothing can surprise or provoke you into thinking differently. But it's still important to be challenged. I see soooooo much of this line of thinking on here; it is definitely an echo chamber. Very hard to have a fruitful conversation.

I am actually leaving now 😂

Is it like the time that you said that 'GC people' on this thread said that 'sex was a spectrum', only it was you that said it?

RE the echo chamber comment. I wonder what it's like being a flat earther and going onto a forum of astronauts and trying to persuade them that the earth is flat even though they have all seen the earth from space. I wonder how fruitful that conversation would be? It might even feel like an echo chamber to the flat earther.

You said that you don't believe in a gender binary, no?
No binary = spectrum in my mind.
Apparently not.

I didn't say you thought sex was a spectrum, I said you thought there was no gender binary; which you did say.

I wonder what it's like being a flat earther and going onto a forum of astronauts

Or an astronaut going onto a forum of flat earthers? ;)

You dont accept challenge. You never explained to me why natural selection would have led to a third sex.
You referred again to fluidity, so why would natural selection benefit from fluid sex? (What even is that - what is the 3rd, 4th, 5th... sliding scale of sex?)
We exist due to sex and natural selection drives human evolution and always with female and male dimorphic anatomical forms.
When you said everything in the natural world was fluid you missed the point that it isn't and with good reason; mutations without benefits are not naturally passed to younger generations due to an inability to breed.
If a being had a genetic difference to self impregnate it would still fail; our offspring need the genetic mixing from our mother's and father's DNA.
You cannot run away from the animal you remain just because of the ideology, "be kind" or "care about the bricks", or similar.

No, where I was quoting you doesn't count.

There has been a thread of dishonesty through your posts,

I had an ugly birth mark on my leg that had "always been there". Which didn't stop the surgeon removing it.

Oh van you give a list of all the doctors and medical experts who agree sex is not binary. For a concensus it must be a majority, not just your mate who did a first aid course 20 years ago

Translation the wimms won’t agree with meeeeeeeee.

Mate, we don't believe in gender.

It imaginary made up bullshit designed to keep people like Judith Butler in a job.

Of course it's not binary. It's not even real.

Kittens have always been small lawnmowers.

Well in all honesty, some kittens are. Their claws can shred not just grass, but human arms, flesh, etc. lol

Transvestites/crossdressers have always been around. TransGENDER is indeed a recent phenomenon.

Women are not a threat to other women or men. Hence not an issue.

If by ‘quite mean’ you mean that we deal in facts and not feelings, supposition, assumptions and nonsense, then you’re right.

None of what you have stated has any basis in science, even though you repeatedly claim that it has, and you are unable to link to any reliable data that supports any of your theories.

As I have said to previous posters with your views, there are women on here who know their stuff, intelligent, articulate, well informed women, with years of experience of dealing with the falsehoods surrounding this ideology. In order to combat the insidious nature of it, to prevent the harmful, experimental treatment of vulnerable young people, and to protect the hard won rights of women and girls, they’ve had to arm themselves with facts, and you’d best be on your A game if you have any hope of even conversing with them. There are also a lot of funny women on here, and humour is something that is sadly lacking from the GI community.

This just proves how very ignorant you are on the Gender Critical stance. We don't believe in 'gender' (hence the "critical" part), so how can we argue for a 'gender' binary? We argue that gender doesn't exist, it's a misogynistic man-made social construct. That only sex exists. We argue for a sex binary. Not a 'gender' binary. You argue that if a boy likes pink and dolls that his 'gender' is girl based on STEREOTYPES. You, are the ones who argue for a gender binary. Not us.

You’ve got better things to do than show us actual evidence of the validity of your claims, that you insist are factual, and that you arrive to tell us about on a regular basis? Sure Jan.

Very very good.

They'd like to have the stakes.

No, I don't know anyone who believes gender is a spectrum. Any more than they believe sex is.

I presume you are accepting of non-binary people and their preferred pronouns?

Non-binary is the default. Almost no one is 100% their gender stereotype, 100% of the time. Since 99.99999999999% of the population are non-binary, being, non-binary is the default. People who say they are 'non-binary' are basically saying they are the default. They think it means 'being different'. They don't even know what they're saying. It's a nonsense term, one created for attention.

Pronouns are sex-based, and I would never allow myself to be gaslit into mis-sexing a person.

That doesn't make them lawnmowers.