For QT: Why is gender identity different than religion in social protocols? by divingrightintowork in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, "gender identity" sounds too much like "gendered" souls. So, I'd also ask them, if you enshrine "gender identity" into law, doesn't this break the separation between Church and State?

All: Why do a lot of trans people insist that being non binary or trans has nothing to to with stereotyoes, and then suddenly it really is about stereotypes? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you mean the pink, white and blue flag? Honestly, literally my first thougth the first time I saw it was "How is this not about stereotypes?".

All: Why do a lot of trans people insist that being non binary or trans has nothing to to with stereotyoes, and then suddenly it really is about stereotypes? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

El Page, age 34, is a good example. When El first publicly declared El's self to be a man, El said El had known since getting & liking a short haircut at age 9 that EL was actually a boy. More recently, El has started telling an entirely different version of what happened in El's childhood. Now the story is that El knew El was a boy when El was a toddler - in other words, when El was just learning to walk, which for most kids is around 12 months-old. In the new, more heavily retconned version of growing up trans, El at a year-old was even more precocious that Jazz Jennings supposedly was at two. Coz now El says that as a toddler boy, El not only had already learned to read and write, but El was actually writing love letters and signing them "Jason."

El Page's radically revised account of how El came to know El is really male makes sense given the political context. El's story of "knowing at 9" is politically "problematic" because age 9 is a little too old for El's story to be effective in advancing the notion that trans people are "born trans" and almost always "just know" who they are from the moment they first start developing consciousness and a sense of self. Moreover, if El didn't realize that El was a male until El was 9, then the tale of how El's transness came into being can't be used to debunk the theory put forward by Lisa Littmann, Abigail Shrier and many other "evil transphobes" - which posits that a lot of girls/women like El identifying as trans today are doing so partly in response to issues that came to the fore at or during puberty, or when puberty was fast approaching on the horizon, which most likely was the case for El at age 9. I'd bet good money that debunking the theory of sudden-onset "gender dysphoria" triggered by female puberty is part of the political agenda that El Page - with the assistance of the team of managers, lawyers, stylists, public relations specialists, image consultants and "LGBTQ" experts and advocates who are surely advising El - has set her sights on.

I can totally believe those changes about Page's "authentic self" discovery are politically motivated given the timing of Page's inflamatory coming out.

Suicide Facts and Myths - Transgender Trend by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nothing new here, but given the topic of suicide reappeared in recent threads...

All: Is physically transitioning ethical? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There is a lot ethical issues around "transition". Gender dysphoria seems to exist outside the usual practices of medicines. Criteria diagnostics rely on sexists stereotypes and, nowadays, you can't question a patient's "identity" without risking accusations of transphobia and conversion therapy. In other words, proffessionals have to accept trans people's self-diagnosis. Hormones and surgeries must be provided on demand, too. Many trans people seem not to have interest in research regarding what causes dysphoria or alternative treatements despite there is no evidence that "gender affirmement treatment" works as a cure or the many health complications that follow from exogenous hormones and/or surgeries. As result, research is very lacking and heavily politized.

Doctors often also minimize the risk and overstate the results. Many seem to care more about ideology and profit than science and ethics. Many don't seem to care much about all the other co-morbidities that trans identified patients present and "transition" is often sold as a panacea that may resolve all their problems.

Furthermore, I don't know of any other mental health issue that is treated like gender dysphoria. Nobody thinks anorexic people should be given liposuctions, for example.

Another important issue is that after "physical transition" many trans identified individuals become more entitled to be treated as the opposite sex in all aspects.

Finally, when in comes to minors, I don't think "transition" should be allowed at all. Most of them will desist if left alone. However, even if we could tell which children would persist in adulthood, as the judges in the Keira Bell's case said, they are too young to understand all the consequences.

GC: How problematic is accepting a man as a woman or a woman as a man if they pass well enough? And what problems does that bring? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm from Argentina. Sorry, I should have specified. Here in 2012, a law was passed legalizing both self-ID and "medical transition" (before then, "SRS" was only possible with a judicial order, something that didn't start happening until around mid 90's).

GC: How problematic is accepting a man as a woman or a woman as a man if they pass well enough? And what problems does that bring? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nobody is born in the wrong body. Your brain is a part of your body. An atypical brain doesn't make you the opposite sex. Also, if the brain theory were true, then why don't they make brain scans to determine who is truly trans? (Just a rethorical question).

Trans people are free to believe they are the opposite sex if they want. It's not reasonable, however, to expect that everyone else goes along with such beliefs. To force people to treat them as if they were "social women" (or "men") seems like a form of compelled spech. I don't share the idea that don't using prefered pronouns it's a rude, or worse, extremist position. Pronouns and the words women, men, female and male are not insults. Moreover, this "basic courtesy" we are being asked to do is pretty one-sided. Nobody asked me if I find the association of womanhood with sexist stereotypes (which trans people usually rely on to "pass") offensive, for instance.

As for how good is the idea of "social women" (or "men") is, well... I think it's extremely problematic. Part of the reason, I think, we are in this situation is because society have been politely going along with trans people's beliefs for too long. The issue is that treating them as honoraries members of the opposite sex creates the appearance that other people really believe in trans' "identities". And many trans people need external validation because, it seems, that deep down they don't believe in their chosen "identities", either. So, they will keep asking for more.

When transactivists lobbied for the self-ID (though they didn't call it that way, obviously) to be passed in my country, they focused on the concept of identity. They said the law wouldn't affect anyone else and it would only make their lives easier. Just a change in their documents, they say. However, it didn't stay that way. It turns out that if you make someone legally a "woman" (or a "man"), then you have to treat them as such in all aspects. Who would have thought it, right? Transactivists here, in preparation for the gender identity law, also make sure to "educate" local journalists about how this law didn't affect anyone else and "inclusive language" like prefered pronouns. You know, so journalists would be able to "explain" this stuff to general public properly.

How do we tell the difference? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But honestly, I think the claim that "no one minds" is fiction. Most of society has never been given a chance even to discuss this massive social change & its implications, much less to say whether we mind or not.

Yeah, I think the reason "it never was a problem before" is because most women didn't know about this. Now with the increasing numbers of trans identified people -who have also became bolder- and the widespread use of internet women are now more aware and talking back.

QT: Would any of these women be transwomen? (Also GC: Can you think of any other hypothetical tries?) by levoyageur718293 in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OP, I think you may find this article helpful. The author explains clearly what is the problem with QT arguments: they mix what sex is with how we recognize what sex someone is.

GC: Intersex conditions show that males can release eggs, get periods, get pregnant, etc, and females can produce sperm, have a penis, etc, which makes the words male and female meaningless? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OP doesn't believe this stuff. She stumbles upon TRA's arguments on the internet and then ask us to debunk them.

GC: Intersex conditions show that males can release eggs, get periods, get pregnant, etc, and females can produce sperm, have a penis, etc, which makes the words male and female meaningless? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've just answered your post on the debate sub, but I'll copy and paste my reply here.

So, about Persistent Müllerian Duct Syndrome (PMDS), here are some links explaining it in great detail:

https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/8435/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome/

https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/475516

https://scihubtw.tw/10.1071/rd17501

https://scihubtw.tw/10.1111/j.1365-2265.2010.03903.x

In females, the uterus, the Fallopian tubes and the upper third of the vagina are derived from the Müllerian ducts. In males, these ducts regress by action of the anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), which is secreted by the testes. Males with PMDS have Müllerian remnants because of mutations on the AMH or its receptor genes. They have otherwise a typical male reproductive system, though as result of their condition they may have cryptorchidism (undescended testes) or inguinal hernias. Infertility and risk of testicular or Müllerian malignancies are also common complications.

It appears there has been cases of males with this condition that present cyclic hematuria (i.e. blood in the urine), which may be explained by a hormonal imbalance (little androgens and excess of estrogens) leading to endometrial bleeding, and the presence of a fistula. However, that does NOT mean they can become pregnant. To be able to get pregnant, first of all, you need to have functional ovaries, which males with PMDS don’t have.

GC: Intersex conditions show that males can release eggs, get periods, get pregnant, etc, and females can produce sperm, have a penis, etc, which makes the words male and female meaningless? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is a very unfair accusation. I've spent plenty of time in this sub explaining what sex is and why is binary and, in humans, immutable. I've even explained Persistent Müllerian Duct Syndrome (PMDS) to you before. However, you keep asking us the same questions that we already answered over and over again. Really, this must be at least the third time that you ask us about PMDS that I can remember. So, the real question is do you even bother reading our replies and all the links we post? Don’t you understand that most users are tired of these threads? Look, I’m quite mad because all this sex denialism, that is why I keep explaining this stuff. But there must be more constructive ways for you to deal with this.

So, about PMDS, here are some links explaining it in great detail:

https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/8435/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome/

https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/475516

https://scihubtw.tw/10.1071/rd17501

https://scihubtw.tw/10.1111/j.1365-2265.2010.03903.x

In females, the uterus, the Fallopian tubes and the upper third of the vagina are derived from the Müllerian ducts. In males, these ducts regress by action of the anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), which is secreted by the testes. Males with PMDS have Müllerian remnants because of mutations on the AMH or its receptor genes. They have otherwise a typical male reproductive system, though as result of their condition they may have cryptorchidism (undescended testes) or inguinal hernias. Infertility and risk of testicular or Müllerian malignancies are also common complications.

It appears there has been cases of males with this condition that present cyclic hematuria (i.e. blood in the urine), which may be explained by a hormonal imbalance (little androgens and excess of estrogens) leading to endometrial bleeding, and the presence of a fistula. However, that does NOT mean they can become pregnant. To be able to get pregnant, first of all, you need to have functional ovaries, which males with PMDS don’t have.

GC: Intersex conditions show that males can release eggs, get periods, get pregnant, etc, and females can produce sperm, have a penis, etc, which makes the words male and female meaningless? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

That's enough. Stop asking us the same questions over and over again. Go back to previous threads and reread all our explanations and links that we gave you. If you are GC, then maybe try to debate with QT users here for a change, instead of asking us to debunk sex denialism for you.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't say they were stupid. I said they were misinformed, which is different. Anyway, the sports seems to have exploded recently there, so problaby many people are waking up about what is happening. This poll from WoLF suggests trans activists' aims are not popular with Americans. If you think WoLF is biased, here is another poll, made by Politico, that shows that Republican laws regarding trans athletes have wide support.

AMAZE Is Indoctrinating Children by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

They identify as fact-based, you bigot!/joking obviously

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think the same source said 13 trans women requested to be transferred to women's prisons but I'm not sure the exact number.

Just 13? This news article suggests there are hundres of request from transgender inmates.

Also, isn't the term "trans identified males" not allowed?

I just changed it. Grixit said he would allow this term (but not the acronym), though the new rules hasn't been officialized yet.

Most people in the US are not gender critical. Also, cis women are less likely to be gender critical than cis men.

Most people in the US are likely not aware of what activists actually mean by trans rights. American liberal media takes a great effort to ofuscate the issue. For instance, they often talk about how Republicans want to ban trans identified athletes from sports, when actually they are being asked to compete according to their biological sex. The article from the LA Times that I linked above dismiss female inmates's worries as transphobia or propaganda.

This is by design. The activists that are changing laws worlwide know how umpopular their aims are and that is why they work behind the backstage. Here are two articles talking about transactivists secretism in the UK:

The document that reveals the remarkable tactics of trans lobbyists

Revealed: the secret trans-rights lobbying operation in parliament

Something similar happened in my country. When transactivists lobbied for making self-ID possible, they were clever enough not to make a big deal of access to sex seggregated spaces. They focused on the concept of identity and how this law, supposedly, wouldn't affect anyone else. Just an change in their documents that would make their lives more easy, they say. However, although the gender identity law of 2012 says nothing about sex seggregated spaces, it has been used to priorititise "gender identity" over sex. Because it turns out if you are legally a "woman" or a "man" you should be treated as such by the law.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

She seems to think females and males are equally dangerous and sex seggregated spaces don't deter predators. Honestly, I think some women just take the safeguarding provided for such spaces for granted.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, that changes it all. I wasn't at the old debate sub and I joined here this year. So, I don't know who Snarky is.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, that is interesting... Though 4 is a low number compared all the Californian males who identifies as trans hoping to be place with the women. Though is hard to make a proper comparison because there are fewer females in prison. It would be interesting to know which proportion of "trans men" requested to be placed according to ther "gender identity" and which proportion of "trans women" did likewise. Then again, Californian women's prison won't be safes for females, regardless of how they identify, if trans males start being sent there.

As for the ACLU, it's obvious they don't want this information to be made public because most people woulnd't agree with this policy.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe. I think is easy to talk about hypothetical scenaries, especially if they are not likely to happen. So, it's possible Snarky would think otherwise if she were faced with the reality of going to prison.

GC: What are the differences between neovagina and vagina, neopenis and penis? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If what makes something a vagina or a penis is functionality, then does that mean the penis of a male who has never slept with a woman and can not produce sperm is not a penis? Or the vagina of a female who has never slept with a man and can not release eggs is not a vagina? If it's still a penis or a vagina respectively, despite not functioning like it evolved to, why is a neopenis not a penis, or a neovagina not a vagina, despite not functioning?

Ok, first of all, what has virginity to do with what sex someone is? Second, we already explained to you several times what sex is, etcetera. The answers won't change not matter how many times you ask us about this. Third, if you have the stomach, I suggest you research how "neovaginas" and "neopenises" are made and see for yourself how they compare with actual vaginas and penises.

I want to know your thoughts on Texas state lawmaker James Talarico case. He claims there are 6 sexes, because sex is determined by chromosomes and the varied chromosomes of intersex individuals show us there are more than 2 sexes, and that sex is a spectrum: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9509743/Texas-Democratic-lawmaker-stuns-transgender-sport-ban-hearing-saying-six-sexes.html

This article explains very well why this politician is wrong.

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Keep in mind this is also a trans men fight. Trans men are fighting for access to male facilities as much as trans women are fighting for access to female facilities.

Does that include prisons? There was a case here in Argentina of a convicted "trans man" who was sent to a men's prison. For a "mysterious" reason, she was very against the idea of going there with the men. Despite her protests, a judge decided that she belonged there because, legally, she was a "man". Do "trans men" in general agree with this judge criterion? Would they fight for the right of their "gender identities" being respected even in prison?

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I meant males who identify as trans, i.e those who you call "trans women". Do you tell them the same? And if so, how do they take this advice?

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 5 fun12 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Look, we can't prevent everything

Do you tell the same to trans males who complain about transphobia?

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OK, if you're changing in front of a bunch of random strangers, why does the sex of those strangers matter? You still don't know them and their intentions. Anyway, stalls without gaps with those turn locks that say "vacant" in green and "occupied" in red are the answer. I don't see what difference does it make whose in the next stall if no one can see you anyway.

I really don't know what to tell you. It's really hard to believe that you don't understand why people would be more uncomfortable changing besides people of the opposite sex. Is that a new rule of sex positivity? People shall not feel shame when naked in front of anyone because that is prudish? Then again, you often complain about the gaps in bathroom's stalls and think locker rooms should have individual stalls. So, you obviously care about privacy, which is why I find your position so odd.

And besides privacy's matter, women have to worry about safety issues. As other users have said, most violent crimminals are males and sex predators are overwhelming males. And men have a physical advantage over women if a fight happens.

If someone is harassing you in the bathroom, their behavior is the problem, not their presence. In that case you should report them.

When you report such incidents it's already too late. Women are quite often either disbelieved or blamed for their assaults. Males often get away with such behaviours, too. By barring males from entering intimate places like women's bathrooms, locker rooms, etecetera you're decreasing the possibility of harrasment, rapes, spy cams, etcetera. Creeps don't care about respecting boundaries, but surely they care about not getting caught. Until transgenderism gained so much support, a male would have a pretty hard time justifying their presence in women's bathrooms, etcetera. However, once you make special exceptions for certain kind of males all this protection is gone. What is more, now in certain places trans identified males who are convicted for sex crimes or violence against women can be sent to women's prison, where they can keep abusing women.

Here are some relevant links about these issues:

Single-sex toilets needed to overcome girls' barriers to education,' says Unesco

Unisex changing rooms put women at danger of sexual assault, data reveals

Women are losing access to public toilets 'by stealth' amid a boom in gender-neutral loos, say experts

Why was convicted paedophile allowed to move to a female jail?

Female prisoners at greater risk of sexual assault by transgender inmates, High Court hears

QT: Do you understand why women need single sex spaces? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, good for you for not finding sex-seggregated spaces necessary, but why do you get to decide for other women what we should get comfortable with?

Also, we consider trans women a group of women, not a group of men.

According to this study males who identifies as trans retain male pattern of crimminality, though. It's worth pointing out the authors only evaluated males who undergone full "SRS", i.e. likely the ones who are more commited to "pass" as women.

Definitions by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think this goes beyond the trans issue. Some people think that language shapes society and that by policing language they can change society itself. Transactivists just takes this view to the extreme and they believe (or at least want to believe) they can change reality itself. It's a lost battle, though. They could redefine woman and other words however they want. They could lobby every goverment in the world to make "legal sex change" possible. They could lobby to make "medical transition" legal and covered by the health systems everywhere. They could force everyone to "validate" them. And yet that won't make their "identities" more real. A male is still male regardless of how much he insists otherwise.

Furthermore, because sex exists and we need a way talk about it, people eventually would come out with new words to refer to the things that transactivists made nameless. The superstraight thing may have been a joke, but I think it shows pretty well how focusing so much in language leads nowhere.

Maya Forstater: ‘I am fighting for the right to say men can never be women’ by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

GC: Why shouldn't the definitions of "man", "woman", "male", and "female" be based on secondary sexual characteristics, thoughts, gender identity, legal documents/paper works, and behavior? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We've gone through this already. Why do you keep asking the same questions and ignoring everything we say?

Your brain is a part of your body. Having an atypical brain doesn't make you the opposite sex. There are some men that are shorter than many women, but that doesn't mean these men are women either.

Convincing your goverment to change the sex markers on your documents doesn't make you the opposite sex. If, somehow, you convinced your goverment to change your birth date because you say you're 10 years younger, that wouldn't make you actually 10 years younger, either.

Sex is about reproduction. We're an anisogamic species, which means we reproduce through the production of specialized cells with half the DNA (gametes) of different size. Male individuals are the ones who produce small gametes (spermatozoon) and females are the ones who produce large gametes (ovum). Then, a spermatozoon and an ovum fuse to form the zygote, restoring this way the normal amount of DNA. Some species are hermaphrodites, which means they can produce both male and female gametes. Humans are not hermaphrodites, though. In humans, there are several genes involved in the process of sex determination, but one of the most important is the SRY gen. If this gen is present, then the embryo will develop testes. If not, then it’ll will develop ovaries. The hormones secreted by the testes drive the male differentiation pathway for the rest of the male reproductive organs. And the absence of these hormones drives the female differentiation pathway. As the SRY gen is located in the Y chromsome, XX individuals are females and XY individuals are males.

There are some people who have a disorder of sexual development (DSD), but they are rare and they are still either male or female, i.e. they don't produce a third type of gamete.

We don’t need to examine someone’s chromosomes or gametes to tell their sex. Secondary sex characteristics don’t define sex, but they are usually a good way to tell someone’s sex. We have evolved to be able to tell the sexes apart. If we weren’t able to say who kind of humans are able to get pregnant and what kind of humans can impregnate the former our continuity as species will be quite complicated.

Humans can't change their sex. Neither naturally nor with the help of medical technology. There is not such sex change. What "medical transition" can only do is to create a simulacrum of the opposite sex through exogenous hormones and cosmetic surgeries. However, every one of your cells keep having the same sex chromosomes you've since conception not matter how much exogenous hormones you take and not matter how many surgeries you undergone. Although hormones and surgeries may affect your fertility, you don't suddenly start producing the gametes of the opposite sex. BTW, both males and females have the same sex hormones. The difference lies in the concentration levels of them. Also, the hormonal profile of females is more complicated because it varies through our menstrual cycles and through our different life stages. Lastly, more often than not, we can tell your actual sex.

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm going to ask you this only once more, remove the part accusing GC of killing trans people because of our positions. If by Sunday you haven't done it yet, I'm going to delete the whole comment.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S,M] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll ask it again, remove the part about Greensquid's "passing" in your comment.

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Remove the part accusing GC of killing trans people because of our positions, Heimdekledi. It was agreed that such kind of accusations without proof will be against the rules.

GC: What are your arguments against "lesbians and trans men are men in women's bodies" and "gay men and trans women are women in men's bodies"? by CuteAsDuck in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A female brain trapped in a male body, or viceversa, makes no sense. Your brain is a part of your body. Having an atypical brain doesn't make you the opposite sex.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think everyone view as mainly a social activity. Proffessional athletes surely would disagre, for example. But anyway, how could you prove what level of handicap is too little or too much? It seems it'd be quite difficult to come to an agreement that will satisfy all parties. There is no lack of trans males who protest the request to lower their levels of testosterone. So, why would they agree to even more handicaps?

Puberty-blocker drug firm donated cash to Lib Dems by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Trans charities are using children as political pawns by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're welcome!

Copy the url of the page you want to archive and past it in the upper box in this page, then click on archive. Keep in mind that if you hit a paywall, Webpage archive won't unblock it. Though, you can past the url in the lower box to see if there is an archived version already.

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

1) I'm GC because sex is binary and immutable for humans. I think sexism and misogyny are rooted in sex. I reject the idea women must be a XYZ way and must be an ABC way. I don't think anyone can identify out of their oppression.

2) Nope. I just became more aware with the issues at hand.

3) A woman is an adult human female and a man is a adult human male.

4) They are men and women respectively.

5) I think the terms natal women and biological women are redundant. I reject cis because it implies that I believe in "gender identity", that I conform and agree with sex roles and stereotypes and that sexism is not rooted in sex.

6) Males have an athletic advantage over females regardless of how the former identify. That is why there are sex categories in sports. Technically, some men's sport categories are open to anyone, so trans females could compete there if they want.

7) Misgendering is refering to someone by their sex rather than how they may identify. I think a belief in gender identity is aking to a religious belief because gender identity can't be externally determined, unlike sex. People are free to believe in this stuff if they want, but they don't have a right to force their beliefs in everyone else.

8) Sex is a biological category based on what reproductive role a kind of individuals of a given species has. Female is the sex that produces large gametes (eggs) and male is the sex that produces small gametes (sperm). In humans, sex is determined at conception based on your sex chromosomes (XY are males and XX are females).

Gender refers to what society expect from someone based in their sex. Tbh, I don't like the word gender because I think it's only make things more confusing.

9 & 10) I don't really talk about this stuff IRL. I know some people who are QT leaning. I think my family and friends mostly don't believe in transgenderism, but I wouldn't say they are exactly GC.

11) I think they are neither. Though, based in past interactions in this forum, I think the QT/transmed is not as straightforward.

12) Disagreeing with someone is not the same that denyng their existence.

Extra) I'm a straight woman from South America. Last year, I found some radical feminist websites while looking for criticism of sex positivism that didn't came from a sexist or religious viewpoint. There I saw some articles about transgenderism that picked my interest and that is how I learnt about all the changes that were happening.

Trans charities are using children as political pawns by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S,M] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ok, Greensquid, that is enough. You don't get to tell other users what they can or can't say here just because you disagree with their premises. Otherwise, GC users could also tell you that basing your arguments presuming TWAW is only stroking the QT's ego. If you can't argue without putting others down, I suggest you came back to this thread once you've calmed down.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S,M] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Please remove the part about Greensquid's "passing" in your comment.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, I learned I new word today! I've to look up what mortarboard meant because I figured out mortars didn't fit in this context. I never knew how those hats were called, nor even in my natal tongue.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S,M] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This is a debate sub. She is allowed to make all the GC talking points she want as long she is following the rules, just like you can do the same with your views. Try to engage with other users' arguments rather than jump to rude comments and "threatening" not to read/reply what they say like you often do.

Edit: I was too lenient the first time around, so I'm deleting this comment now.

GC & QT: What are your views? by PeakingPeachEater in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If I think of more questions, I shall edit post or make a part 2?

I think 12 (+4) questions are enough for a post. I'd recommend you ask any additional question(s) you may have in another post. You can also ask other questions in the comments.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

That is the problem, though, women and men are not phisiological the same even if we exclude the reproductive system of our analysis. Like other users had said, it's not only about current levels of testosterone but PAST levels of testosterone and the fact we're genetically different (i.e. males are XY and females XX). Surgeries and exogenus hormones won't change that. Besides sports, medicine is other area where those differences are notable, like for example the different way women and men are affected by COVID. I've not finished reading it yet, but so far I think this review gives a good summary of sex development and sex differences (certain phrases like "assigned sex at birth" notwithstanding...). It may be too academic, though.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And your solution is playing doctor and promoting self-medication?

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Are you a doctor or a pharmacist? Because if not, I think giving medical advice to strangers on the internet it's pretty irresponsible.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, this is ultimately about validation. And they crave it so much that they don't realise the sport issue will be their downfall. By that I mean, this is something that they can't hide. If transactivists have it their way, everyone will see through all their lies.

Richard Dawkins Says He Didn't Mean to "Disparage Trans People" By Asking How Identifying As Opposite Sex Is Different To Identifying As Another Race. Then He Disparages Gender Critical People As "Republican Bigots" In The Next Sentence by MarkTwainiac in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I never though Dawkins would be a feminist hero or anything like that, but given his background I'd have though he would be alarmed because of all the anti-scientific stances of TRAs. That is why I was so disappointed.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Trans people are already included in competitive sports. They are only being asked to play according to their sex and not gender identity because sex is what matters in sports.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I must have assumed the CAH thing after hearing he was a "woman with high levels of testosterone" then.

Well, I've just watched the video and I'm going to sound like a bigger "bigot" now. There is no way anyone would mistaken him for a woman. I mean, really, you would think he would try to mantain his own charade, but nope.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I felt the same about DSD in general, but the whole Semenya saga and the "hyperandrogenism" was a joke from the let's go. It's been a while since I learn from him, but I think at the beginning the Media said he was a woman with adrenal hyperplasia (or maybe I just assumed the adrenal hyperplasia thing because that made more sense than the reality, really). Though, the instant I saw a picture of him I knew something was off.

QT: Where are the “trans men” athletes winning against men? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wow! I admit that when I wrote this post I did thinking trans females weren't allowed to compete while taking testosterone. That is why I remarked transactivists' claims of males don't having an athletic advantage over women. It was a pre-counterpoint of QT saying "transitioned" females aren't allowed to compete. I didn't know some sport's bodies already made special exceptions for them. Interesting how females athletes want to be allowed to take testosterone while male athletes don't want to lower their testosterone levels...

Richard Dawkins Says He Didn't Mean to "Disparage Trans People" By Asking How Identifying As Opposite Sex Is Different To Identifying As Another Race. Then He Disparages Gender Critical People As "Republican Bigots" In The Next Sentence by MarkTwainiac in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 26 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 0 fun27 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Seriously?! Are you f***ing kidding me?! This guy is a renowned biologist and atheist, but he has so little selfrespect that he is kow-towing to all the wanabe biologists zealots who are forcing their nonsensical religion on everyone else in the world? Such coward! I'm 100% sure he didn't receive a single rape for an "unknown" reason. I'm fed up with him and all the others with a background in biological and health sciences enabling trans fantasies. It's pretty simple: men are not and wil never be women! There is not a single reason to going along with this TWAW bullshit when not even trans identified people themselves buy such a nonsense! We may as well give anorexics liposuctions and tell schizofrenics the voices are real at, too at this rate! It's exactly the same!

And no, I'm not going to moderate my language. I don't care if the unhinged idiots at the stupid stalking sub take at screenshot of my post. The people who take offense at my language, but at all the death and rape trhreats, all the racist and rapey, and othet garbage that transactivists say daily are a lost cause, anyway.

Why does QT hate transmedicalists? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As a outsider, it seems like the QT position is basically "biological sex is a spectrum and/or a social construct, therefore since you can't know who is female and male from their bodies self-ID is the way to go." Also, QT are against requiring trans identified people undergone any step of "medical transition" in order to legally change sex. Since transmedicalists favour requiring a clinical diagnostic and "medical transition", I guess that is why QT hate them.

I think QT use gender dysphoria in their arguments because, first, they understand this is something the general public is more likely to accept and, second, because they still want "gender affirming treatment" being covered up by the health system.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So, your answer to me saying this shows QT doesn't want to debate is basically "but, you're a hate group!"? Just because you think the QT position of "no debate" is justified, doesn't change the fact many QT supporters doesn't want to debate transgender stuff, you know?

By all means, show me the receipt of GC encouraging suicide. I'd like to see actual proof of this for once. I'd happily debate you or anyone else over the "hard data" supporting "transition", though not now, as this is way too off-topic.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Add an "I think" or an "in my opinion" in the middle of the phrase if you like it more. Though, honestly, I don't see how this is a controversial view when I've seen countles of QT supporters literally saying "shut up" to anyone expressing the mildest criticism. To say nothing of all those who jump straight to death and rape threats. And what about all the users who have been banned from platafforms like twitter, reddit, etc from saying the wrong think? And what about reddit banning the gender critical, GCdebatesQT, LGBdroptheT, superstraight and several others for "wrongthinking"? And what about Medium u others banning articles or users that are critical of transgenderism? And what about people being fired, doxed, smeared or harrased IRL over this stuff? And what about things like the hashtag #RIP JKR? And what about all the people I've seen saying you should not read JKR's essay because she makes "transphobic" stuff sound as too reasonable? And what about all the people who have been accused of wrongthinking because they follow or retwitted the "wrong" people? And what about some transactivists literally burning books? There is even English proffessor at Bekerley who have advocated stealing and burning books, didn't you know? And what about the "hate speach" laws transactivists would like to pass in many countries? And what about the fact transactivists want to ban any therapy that is not affirming of a transgender identity? And what about compelling speach like mandating people to use prefered pronouns? There is even a law firm, Dentons or something like that, that have adviced transactivists to work behind the scene and not let the general public know what they advocate for.

I'm sorry, but I don't know how to interpret this as anything but QT supporters don't wanting to debate this stuff. But if you have another explanation, I'd like to hear it. If you want receipts about what I'm saying, I cand post a lot of links to prove it.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No need to apologize! I didn't say much on my first comment on this thread, so I felt like I needed to expand on my thoughts.

Who is masks?

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just wanted to clarify I do agree with the idea behind the new rule. I guess I understand where grixit is coming from because I do have strong opinions on the issue of language and transgenderism. I don't think pronouns and the words female, male, woman and man are insults. Also, I don't think using prefered pronouns is a neutral act even when is not done because of compelled speech. That said, I suggested the use of neutral language as a middle ground because I realize we may not have any QT user to debate with if we don't make at least this compromise. Unlike Spanish, my natal tongue, which is a minefield for "misgendering", English is a pretty gender-neutral language. So, I think using gender neutral language to refer to trans identified users could be doable here.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I do agree most regular users of this sub are GC, but that is because many QT supporters are NOT interested in having a debate.

Big Tech only care about profit, not morality, just like any other big company. The fact they claim to care about social issues is pure marketing. However, it seems not all social issues are seen as marrketable. For instance, big plataforms often turn a blind eye to the many rape threats that women receive in them, especially if said threats are sent by transactivists. Big Tech is also very pro-pornography despite all the abuse perpetrated in the industry and all the blatant misoginy and racism promoted by porn. They are also very pro-prostitution despite this being basically paid rape. Also, like the latest reddit drama has showed us, they also doesn't seem to be too bothered, if at all, by pedos and their enablers. So, I don't really trust their judgement about what a hate group is.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We're here because most plataforms on internet don't allow any wrong think, particularly as transgender issues are concerned. Any slight doubt about the official narrative are heavily punished, especially if the offender is a woman. Transactivists also strongly discourage its follower to read what the others sides have to say. "No debate" is literally one of its slogans. So, I find it curious you're complaining this sub of being mostly a echo chamber.

Rules change, so far by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I do think using neutral language for other users could work as a compromise. However, do you realize that the inverse case (i.e. "cis" was fine, but "misgendering" not) was the norm before and no one on the QT side thought this favoured them?

Rachel Tuval live! by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I find "interesting" the very different way transracialism and transgenderism are treated by woke people. Honestly, given how common racism is among transactivists, I can only think the real reason they don't embrace transracialism too is because they fear the backlash it would ensue.

How the Transgender Movement is Destroying Feminism by BEB in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I really don't know how separatism is viable at long term unless you want to go either the extinction or transhumanist route. Plus, most people are heterosexual and want to have biological kids, so it's not surprising this is not a popular position to take.

Transmaxxing: The Incel to Trans Pipeline by WildApples in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

One of those "transmaxxers" used to troll in this sub for a while promoting his blog about how "medical transition" was so good for men. He just kept creating new accounts with the same username, just changing the number at the end. Not very original...

Doctors who mix up sex and gender ‘put patients at risk’ by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Bolding mine:

The percentage of individuals who identify as transgender (TG) comprise a quickly growing section of our population, recently estimated to be over 0.5% of US adults. Notably, approximately one-third of the TG community does not identify with a gender binary, and some people do not identify with any gender terminology. Although the accurate categorization of blood products by biological sex is critical to reducing harm from transfusions, in many cases blood is collected based on a self-reported gender binary. The Food and Drug Administration mandates either a male or female “self-identified or self-reported” gender be correlated with every unit of blood. Collection practices vary by center, and some have employees and software ready to handle nonbinary donations. Red blood cells are always tested for the group, Rh type, atypical cells, and certain diseases, but not for donor sex. The AABB reported that among 3 separate samples of TG donors, the percentage of TG males stating they had been pregnant prior to donation (and therefore raising the risk of HLA antibodies in their FFP and platelets which would have been otherwise categorized as male) ranged between 1.5% and 6%. As the understanding of sex- and gender-based research evolves, so should our collection tools for documenting biological sex versus current gender identity.

Talk about a ridiculous policy... And then TRA have the nerve to say nobody is trying to replace sex with gender identity.

NHS adviser to review hormone use on young by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Doctors who mix up sex and gender ‘put patients at risk’ by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

High Observation: Feelings of Gender Identity are Stronger around Other People. by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What is the aim of this thread?

Also Heimdekledi, try not to immediately jump to accusations of bigotry.

Ok, it's time to update the rules by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I guess whether the word is an insult or not really depend on the context. I don't think is always an insult.

Ok, it's time to update the rules by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think trans identified people are delusional, at least not in a clinical sense. I think deep down they do know they are not the opposite sex, they just wish they were for a variety of reasons. And that is why they so keen on redefining words, etcetera so as not to aknowledge their biological sex. I supose that is why QT are protesting the use of "delusional".

Grixit has disallowed describing trans people as delusional in other post recently.

Making Sense of Gender Identity by JulienMayfair in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As far as I read, eating disorders are overrepresented, too.

Anyone get annoyed with TIMs and their fixation on representing themselves with cutesy cartoon girls? Almost no real women I know do this. by 1st_Class_Mail_Ally in GenderCritical

[–]BiologyIsReal 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Anime has had its bad rep for a while, but it feels like this TRA stuff is making it worse. The ironic thing is plenty of anime are "transphobic" by TRA standards.

After reading this talk, I think I've to watch Sword of the Stranger.