"Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Discuss

[dunBle]

To save further derailment of the Sandie Peggie tribunal threads with people debating Tandora's statements on the above theme, I've started this thread to point them to instead.

No. I don’t have an idea, or a belief, of who they are

Followed by-

they’re a man - it’s a material reality

Discuss.

This is an abnormality though. It’s like saying humans don’t have 5 toes on each foot because occasionally an abnormality means they have 6 or 4 or webbed.

Anyone angry today about people born with genetic abnormalities?

Nice try. Can you discuss for me why my observation that the human being in-front of me is observably male is either a belief or an idea.

This is the issue beowulfa.

This emotional response and emotional reasoning is for the purpose of emotionally manipulating others to believe what is being said. Again, no evidence links are being provided. Simply someone’s say so on the internet.

The discussion is about how those people with CAIS are either male or female genetically and whether this group of people fit into statements such as ‘Human sex is categorised on whether a body has been formed around the production of small or large gametes, regardless of whether that person produces, has or ever will produce those gametes.’

And for the purpose of this statement, it is covers those people with CAIS who are male.

We have seen dishonest characterisations of that sentence in attempt to discredit the validity of that statement. Such as removing the production status of the gametes from the sentence and making a declaration about fertility.

We have seen the emotional pleas where it has been the falsely extrapolated as if this group is correctly described as being a ‘male person’ genetically , society will only ever treat them as being male for every purpose. It is, of course, false to make that extension because of course, this is a group of people with unique needs.

We have seen the same poster who is determining to declare that this group of people be only ever referred to as being ‘female’ as a blanket statement. Now at least we are given the concession to say this group of people have ‘male karyotype’.

This is an excellent example of where a poster manipulates discussion through language. Through censuring and dictating language around the use of ‘male person’.

This time this poster is politically leveraging those with CAIS to destabilise the sentence: ‘Human sex is categorised on whether a body has been formed around the production of small or large gametes, regardless of whether that person produces, has or ever will produce those gametes.’

However, we apparently are the ones to be denigrated and shamed for making a poster ‘ill’, and all sorts of emotionally manipulative tactics being used.

You are the one who is claiming that sex isn’t material reality.

You have yet to prove your claim.

No it's like saying:

"There are two types of creatures - humans with 5 toes and non-humans without 5 toes".

"Actually that's not true, because there are some humans who don't have 5 toes...People can have any number of toes or no toes at all, they're still humans.."

"But the DEFINITION of HUMAN is Person WITH 5 TOES".

"But.... it's not though, because some humans don't have 5 toes. And it's actually really a problem that you are saying they aren't a human... Pretty upsetting in fact."

"This is science! Why are you so upset and emotional about science. What is this country coming to!"

"Well it's not really science though is it? - it's your dogmatic beliefs about who is and isn't a human based on how many toes they have. And I'm quite upset about it because you are saying that people who don't have 5 toes are not human, but a human can't be reduced to how many toes they have...They are still a human, just a human with less than 5 toes".

"But not having 5 toes is exceptionally rare, that doesn't change the definition of human as a person with 5 toes."

Bangs head against wall.

I know right! It's like the people who say me being dyslexic when I don't have any objective measurable problems spelling or writing is somehow facetious or mocking dyslexia!

If I feel better about myself identifying as dyslexic and getting extra time to complete work because I'm dyslexic and having more work from home days because I work better at home because I'm dyslexic or get to join the ND support events because I'm dyslexic or speaking at conferences about my challeges with dyslexia why should they care?

it is so bigotted to dyslexic people to assume I should have problems spelling because I'm dyslexic. Why should it matter to anyone else?

I know I am dyslexic whatever anyone else thinks, but still it hurts me to have people deny who I am.

Accepting that I exist as a human being with dyslexia but with no symptoms of dyslexia doesn't take anything away from anyone else with dyslexia. Their dyslexia is personal to them just as mine is personal to me, and no one can change it, steal it, or whatever else they claim my having dyslexia in my own way does to it.

How does one go about completely divorcing a human being from their genetic makeup up?

Humans with abnormalities are still human but they are have an abnormality!

also bangs head

No @Tandora, it's like saying since humans have 5 toes, the existence of humans with 4 toes means that 5 must equal 1+1+1+1

No one is disputing the existence of the people. They dispute the conclusions you draw from them.

Nobody would dispute the fact that DSDs are rare/ atypical, it's a variation in typical development.

So if that's what you think we are arguing about then we are arguing about nothing.

Humans with 6 toes are still human and XY humans are male even if they don’t look male

That.... that doesn't say what you meant it to say....

If anything it proves men are men even if they chop off their dicks.

Maybe use a pillow to avoid a concussion?

Well done Tandora, you are absolutely wiping the floor with this lot. 👏

It is very clear to see that you are deeply knowledgeable in this field and the ignorance, harassment and gaslighting of others shines through, time and time again.

I often wonder at the complete lack of self awareness from those posters, how silly and bullying they look to anyone reading this thread through an objective lens. It is deeply embarrassing for them. I don't know if they are genuinely so self unaware that they do not perceive this, or if the posts are part of a general 'overwhelm' approach to try to confuse others and spread prejudice and ignorance. Either way, people see through this very easily, they just don't get involved on these threads because they don't want to be next in line for harassment.

If you ever read threads on the main boards of Mumsnet you will the contempt that is held for the prevailing attitudes demonstrated on FWR.

I have an idea that my dog understands bits of what I say to him. I have a belief he’s the most handsome dog in the world. I don’t however have an idea or a belief that he’s a dog. He just is. It’s a material reality. Not complicated. (He’s also clearly male and weirdly it isn’t controversial to say this)

Because ours is based on fact and theirs is based on feelings.

Why should feelings trump facts?

is this satire? Reads like satire

Yours isn't based in fact, though is it?

You, (and others on this thread), have bizarrely set yourself up as an authority in sex, as omniscient judge and arbiter of who is male and female, despite demonstrating no credentials or solid understanding in this area. It's incredibly embarrassing for you and it's bizarre that you don't see it.

But trans women are not people with DSDs. They are people who are unambiguously male but want us to pretend they are female.

This is a fact.

😂

so was my 10 week old foetus nipt test result wrong?

it clearly said male.

You don't have the facts.

You are simply not in a position to categorically state what you are saying with authority.

I don't know. Neither do you, do you? Mistakes are made.

What are the facts?