Emma Hilton's cheap quick accessible sex test

[fanOfBen]

Maybe this has been discussed here before but I hadn't seen it, so perhaps others will be interested too. Emma Hilton (fondOfBeetles) writes:

Hello all. A quick update from me.

My sex screen assay is progressing well.

I promised rapid: I can detect SRY from a cheek swab in about 30 minutes. I am currently testing whether I can drop it to 10 minutes without compromising reliability.

I promised cheap: The current cost per assay is about £2. I am currently testing whether I can drop this to below the pound line, and it’s very promising.

I promised accessible: The assay could be run by any grassroots sports coach, school nurse, and my Mum.

I promised on-site: This is where my lab efforts are currently focussed. I’ve always held “from the UK to Uganda” as a principle, and ensuring easy deployment is crucial. I’m currently learning a lot of materials science…

The other main push is setting up various blinded, larger-scale tests. This will require lots of form filling.

If anyone wants to help me hit my final budget target, my crowdfunder is here.

https://x.com/FondOfBeetles/status/2065328378945601931

The crowdfunding site can be found directly by putting
Protecting women’s sport through better sex screening
into a search engine - I just gardened, as this seems well worthwhile.

I've donated to this before and will send a bit more Emma Hilton's way, since she has made such good progress. If this stops greedy sports coaches from actively seeking out children and young people with certain DSDs, then it will be worth every penny. As a bonus, it might help some developing countries to diagnose DSDs earlier, and offer support rather than exploitation.

I guess there could be push back from within GC positioning from those who are purists around any presence of a Y chromosome requiring exclusion.

Emma is of the view (the right view in my mind) that it is male puberty that makes the significant difference and is what counts performance wise. She has acknowledged that there may be some small advantage that comes from the Y, but until there is evidence to show otherwise, these can be considered to align with the genetic variations that arise within the female (XX) category

Amazing isn’t it?

As if women with no hair look like men 🙄

We can all tell a woman from a man, whether she is bald, short haired or a butch lesbian I know. All women know. The test could be useful if a man is pretending to be a woman.

Oh come on.

You can hardly expect anyone to believe that you care about women being challenged in toilets because you care so much about women, when you have no care at all for the women who have been harmed and excluded by trans identified men in women's spaces. You're merely weaponising some women and feigning care for them in your ambitions for men. You're feigning it to force non consenting women to suffer a choice between being distressed with men - many of whom behave extremely badly and at least some of whom are there to use those women as sexual props with no care about consent - or to be excluded altogether from everything. It's the opposite of anything caring.

It's male supremacism, and it's pretty ugly. Men will now have third spaces - which is more than they've ever permitted the women they've harmed and excluded to have - and they will be fine in there. No man needs access to a non consenting woman in a state of undress and any man who desires it is demonstrating that what he does need is legal barriers he can't get around. Trans identified men are not the only people who matter, they are part of a population of equals with rights of their own.

And as a lesbian, I'm delighted any time to be challenged or to do a quick and easy cheek swab if it reassures and protects needed single sex access for other women.

And I'll add - the burden, largely fantasy by male centred activists though it is, about 'pooooor women being challenged in women's spaces' -

is a burden dumped on women by men, when they forced entry to women's spaces and made women have to be suspicious, afraid and to need to be sure of who they are in that space with.

Men caused it. Women pay for it - and the choice of price is some women being challenged for ID, or some women losing all access to any spaces at all.

Because there'll be no third space for them, and no MPs passionately signing incoherent nonsense for them, and no one's given a damn about them all these years while they suffered these actions from exceptionally selfish men.

Being challenged is a lesser price than being excluded altogether.

Exactly, if no selfish, entitled men ever invaded women’s spaces women wouldn’t be so suspicious.