Watch in real time as Trans Reddit turns on one of it's own for suggesting that maybe they are biological men and arguing they are not makes them look unstable.

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1t0t604/trans_girl_says_were_all_biological_males/

This.

I also hope that deep down, onepost does recognise that biological sex can't be changed. It's such an important thing for everyone to know for their own health.

Anyone who doesn't know their biological sex risks significant health issues e.g. transmen (who don't know they are female and haven't had an HPV vaccination) may not get their cervical smears done or transwomen (who don't know they are male) may not consider and manage their prostate cancer risk as they get older.

Everyone should wear what they like (within the context of the situation they are in) but nobody should force or shame others to share their beliefs. We can all get along together by following the law and recognising that some people believe we all have a gender identity and some don't. The concerning part is when those who believe in it genuinely think it replaces the reality of biological sex.

Victoria Smith wrote about this ridiculous conflation of so-called “right wing” views of gender, and gender critical views of gender:

There are people who think that sex is binary and immutable, and that all female people must be feminine, all male people masculine, and that same-sex relationships are wrong. Then some believe that sex is binary and immutable, but that masculinity and femininity are regressive concepts, and that same-sex relationships deserve protection in law. One of the ways in which trans activists and their defenders in academia and the media have sought to silence members of the latter group is by pretending they are no different to the former. They are, we are supposed to think, all members of the "global anti-gender movement". This conflation of two very different positions, promoted in books such as Judith Butler's Who's Afraid of Gender?, allows supporters of gender ideology to avoid any engagement with feminist, pro-LGB arguments against it.

https://unherd.com/newsroom/the-guardian-is-late-to-the-party-on-sex-based-reporting/

Archive link: https://archive.ph/Ywzt4

Just seen this. Please don't worry ❤️

A bit of dark humour is the perfect way to look at this.

Is this a school for those planning a career in the Neo Red Guard?

They'd be amazing at this. Obviously I'm not going to give details about the school but their "manifesto" for the next few years and management of dissent feels like it could fit well 😂

TBF though, they don't get a lot of dissent amongst the students (my daughters remain on message with preferred pronouns being all about respect) .... just from pesky people like me... because it's such a well-oiled, top-down, performatively inclusive and Be Kind ethos that even those dogs wouldn't resist.

Thankfully, we do at least acknowledge that biological reality is real in this house. However, apparently I'm mean for not actively using preferred pronouns (I don't use any pronouns when I become aware that someone has declared a gender identity that differs from their sex).

Is it that time again already?

My fav! Well, after Boiled’s series of Interrupterons… Oh and this one:

An essence?

And this classic -

A gendered soul that is separate from the body. One that is drawn towards a set of sex-based stereotypes to help the person whose soul it is make sense of themselves.

Similar to how the soul of a Christian is separate from the physical body and is drawn towards god to help a person make sense of their (earthly phase of) existence. TBF I'm not a Christian and don't believe in heaven, but that's what I remember from when I was.

FFS not the straw zygote fallacy again.

Being male or female is a matter of Wolffian duct and Mullerian duct development. Every embryo gets both relatively early on, but well well well after the "conception" stage. One atrophies whilst the other develops, determining your sex. Incomplete atrophy and abnormal development don't alter this fact.

Whilst the correlation between Mullerian duct atrophy and presence of a Y chromosome is strong, it isn't absolute.

You keep misrepresenting the biological reality like it's some kind of gotcha. It really isn't.

Phew. Thanks for explaining. For some reason the word essence in the context of sexual identity was leading me into moist gusset territory.

Sex is still set at conception though.

The duct behaviour (and other sex-specific differences) will follow according to whether there is a functioning SRY gene or not. Whether it functions or not starts at conception, irrespective of which chromosome (the Y in the vast majority of cases) it is on.

Point of order: sex is defined by developmental pathways that an early stage embryo takes. These are strongly correlated with chromosomal sex, but not absolutely dependent on them.

No probs.

You'll probably have taken some of the lurkers along with you into that territory now. Hopefully you got out before they arrived 🙃 Equally, hopefully we won't get any bothering to delurk tell us that they are there.

I'm so confused. So sex doesn't exist in the way most people think, and a man is a woman by claiming that he is, but he doesn't become a biological woman until he undergoes treatment? So a male who identifies as a woman but is poor/can't access treatment is a woman but not a female? Or is he always a bio female, by virtue of saying so? If that's the case then why change your body at all? If you believe you're already a female in every way and that sex has zero to do with it, then why are you having surgery or taking hormones to look like the opposite sex?!

Their logic eats itself.

Point of order on your point of order:

Sex is determined by the presence (or not) of an active SRY gene. See above.

Ps if you are Emma Hilton and I forgot something fundamental from your incredible X tutorials on DSDs during this Paris Olympics debacle, I'll wind my neck in 🙃

Sounds like you might have had a bigoted cat meowing in your ear 😼 Apparently they love confusing people almost as much as they love pretending you're the Best Human Ever when they want food.

🙃

It's not just a working SRY gene that makes a man, but also functioning testosterone receptors. CAIS (46,XY female) being the obvious DSD where the testes generate testosterone and the body isn't capable of responding to it with typical male development.

From the "safeguarding" perspective, a CAIS woman is at zero risk of pregnancy but she also has zero capability from birth, no cross-sex hormones required, of making someone pregnant

Blerh de blerh de blerh bleh bleh bleh

Makes a tasty word salad

Lots of highly intelligent people believe in utter bollocks. Just because you are smart doesn't mean you are immune from nonsense.

Remember, those people who, because of their detailed genetics, are XX males or XY females are edge cases (<2 in 10,000).

Don't make us start talking about Relativity and Quantum Mechanics again 😡

I think I've figured out why you think that "woman" is how one is treated socially by others.

Safeguarding precautions involve treating people differently based on reproductive role. So I get treated differently from Bob in law and some social contexts (e.g. changing rooms) because I can probably get pregnant and Bob could probably make me pregnant, whereas I can't make anyone pregnant and Bob can never become pregnant. The risks Bob and I face are different, justifying and causing the different legal and social treatment.

One would, if one didn't understand the underlying reproductive safeguarding reasons behind the different legal and social treatment, mistake the different treatment itself as being what makes someone a woman.

A trans-identified man who uses the women's loos and a female name and gets other people to say "she" instead of "he" mistakes this superficial treatment like a woman for actually being a woman. It's not the same.

Agreed. Stopping now.

What do you mean by this?

I’ve been told before on here - in relation to my rape - that it’s not the act that matters it’s the inclination of my rapist.

is this similar?

People are of course welcome to identify as believing in any philosophical or religious beliefs that they choose. The issue comes when men would like to enter and use women's spaces on the grounds that they believe themselves in complicated ways to be a form of women, and as is clear from this thread and many, many others, many women do not share that belief. And so they do not want to use a mixed sex space. And women in this country have a right to single sex spaces. And to not predicate their lives around what a man chooses to tell them about his personal identity and belief system. Particularly men who do not accept women saying 'no'.

I'm a fan of 'nonsense casserole'.