19 ms·

Is attacking intersex people a political platform? I believe you're referring to transgender people who, while subject to all those horrible things you mention,

by causi 4y ago

Is attacking intersex people a political platform? I believe you're referring to transgender people who, while subject to all those horrible things you mention, have nothing to do with the biology of sex. Exempting them from bans on genital surgery for infants/children certainly is a political choice. That's very interesting, I didn't know that. Personally I believe in a blanket ban of all unnecessary surgical procedures/body mods on newborns and infants, including "genital correction", circumcision, and piercing.

ryan-c 4y ago
> Is attacking intersex people a political platform? Exempting them from bans on genital surgery for infants/children certainly is a political choice.
digging 4y ago
Trying to step lightly here, but > have nothing to do with the biology of sex is not true. The motivation for dehumanizing trans people is largely based on the (completely erroneous) twin ideas that "gender is sex" and "there are two sexes". Both of those things being false really takes the wind out of the argument.
- Alupis 4y ago
  We understand it now, 2 + 2 = 5 In all seriousness, changing language to fit some weird political philosophy and then berating others for not going along is as dangerous as it is outrageous. Constructs in your head are not real. When you die, they are gone forever. Yet, when they dig up your body 1,000 years from now as some sort of archeological dig, they will study your skeleton and determine your biological sex with certainty. You (or anyone) is free to think whatever you want about yourself or others - but you are not free to force others to think like you, particularly when your thoughts are irrational and not grounded in reality or scientific fact. And people make fun of the flat-earthers for denying reality and objective facts...
  - sobkas 3y ago
    > We understand it now, 2 + 2 = 5 "if someone says 2+2=5, the correct response is, ‘What are your definitions and axioms?’ not a rant about the decline of Western civilization". From Wikipedia because math is hard, let's go right wing. Use a wiki or something. Because when even I know that 2 + 2 = 5 can be true in some cases then you might want to reconsider your arguments. BTW. A + B != B + A also can be true. > Constructs in your head are not real. When you die, they are gone forever. Almost all of you is a construct, there are few things directly wired into the brain(but they aren't irrelevant) but most of it is learned. And when you die everything you had in your brain is gone forever. And then by your definition things that make us us are fiction. And they are as fictional as gender(btw. gender is not sex, and sex is more complex).
  - digging 4y ago
    Woof, I'm not going to engage fully with this post. It is too loaded. I am not sure I can fully parse this post, but I am going to state some assertions that I believe respond to the statements made. I am going to agree (?) that gender is a construct. I assert that it is a social construct. It does not exist inside our cells, only in our minds (individually and collectively). I am going to disagree that sex is determined by our skeletons. I assert that skeletal structure and other phenotypical features are symptoms of sex, which is determined by genes. This is a scientific consensus as far as I can tell. I believe I am disagreeing with you when I say that there are more than two possible outcomes of genetic sex determination. This is obvious, because there are multiple sex-determination systems in animals, not just XY. There is X0, there is ZW, and there are others. Even within XY, there are variations. An individual can be born with XXY chromosomes. Or they can be born male with XX chromosomes, or female with XY chromosomes. Or, a human can be born female with XX chromosomes, no outward differences from typical female phenotype, and feel they are a man. This is because, as stated above, gender is a social construct. Not actually sure if we agree or disagree on that. There is no berating happening here or anything else that should make a person feel victimized. Just science. A little more advanced than grade school science, but still science.
    - Alupis 4y ago
      > A little more advanced than grade school science, but still science. "He who controls the language controls the masses." - Saul Alinsky > Even within XY, there are variations. An individual can be born with XXY chromosomes. Or they can be born male with XX chromosomes, or female with XY chromosomes We are not discussing extremely rare genetic defects. We're discussing people who slander biological genders by dressing as offensive caricatures and then demand everyone else participate in their mental illness.
- bloxxox 4y ago
  If there are more than two sexes, please describe what they are, and the additional types of gamete produced by these sexes. Your explanation should be applicable to all anisogamic species over the past billion years or so, including all that are hermaphroditic and all that are gonochoric.
TheCoelacanth 4y ago
> Exempting them from bans on genital surgery for infants/children certainly is a political choice. Who is trying to do that? Gender-affirming genital surgery is not commonly, if ever, practiced on minors and no one is advocating for that except maybe a few people on the lunatic fringe. The whole idea that doctors are going around performing genital surgery on trans-kids is a baseless political attack by people trying to ban reversible gender-affirming treatment like social transitioning and puberty blockers under the guise of banning more extreme treatments that aren't actually performed on minors.
- antiteetyeet 4y ago
  Genital surgery typically isn't performed until the child is at least 16 years of age, usually older, but 'gender-affirming' breast removal is being done to female children as young as 12 years old. There's increasing scepticism as to whether social transitioning is reversible in practice (see the interim report of the Cass Review for more detail on this), and the long-term adverse effects of puberty blockers are currently unclear. This is part of the reason why the health authorities in many countries are starting to halt or restrict the gender-affirming approach, as it may be causing more harm than good to gender non-conforming children.

by causi 4y ago

ryan-c 4y ago

> Is attacking intersex people a political platform? Exempting them from bans on genital surgery for infants/children certainly is a political choice.

digging 4y ago

Trying to step lightly here, but > have nothing to do with the biology of sex is not true. The motivation for dehumanizing trans people is largely based on the (completely erroneous) twin ideas that "gender is sex" and "there are two sexes". Both of those things being false really takes the wind out of the argument.

Alupis 4y ago
We understand it now, 2 + 2 = 5 In all seriousness, changing language to fit some weird political philosophy and then berating others for not going along is as dangerous as it is outrageous. Constructs in your head are not real. When you die, they are gone forever. Yet, when they dig up your body 1,000 years from now as some sort of archeological dig, they will study your skeleton and determine your biological sex with certainty. You (or anyone) is free to think whatever you want about yourself or others - but you are not free to force others to think like you, particularly when your thoughts are irrational and not grounded in reality or scientific fact. And people make fun of the flat-earthers for denying reality and objective facts...
- sobkas 3y ago
  > We understand it now, 2 + 2 = 5 "if someone says 2+2=5, the correct response is, ‘What are your definitions and axioms?’ not a rant about the decline of Western civilization". From Wikipedia because math is hard, let's go right wing. Use a wiki or something. Because when even I know that 2 + 2 = 5 can be true in some cases then you might want to reconsider your arguments. BTW. A + B != B + A also can be true. > Constructs in your head are not real. When you die, they are gone forever. Almost all of you is a construct, there are few things directly wired into the brain(but they aren't irrelevant) but most of it is learned. And when you die everything you had in your brain is gone forever. And then by your definition things that make us us are fiction. And they are as fictional as gender(btw. gender is not sex, and sex is more complex).
- digging 4y ago
  Woof, I'm not going to engage fully with this post. It is too loaded. I am not sure I can fully parse this post, but I am going to state some assertions that I believe respond to the statements made. I am going to agree (?) that gender is a construct. I assert that it is a social construct. It does not exist inside our cells, only in our minds (individually and collectively). I am going to disagree that sex is determined by our skeletons. I assert that skeletal structure and other phenotypical features are symptoms of sex, which is determined by genes. This is a scientific consensus as far as I can tell. I believe I am disagreeing with you when I say that there are more than two possible outcomes of genetic sex determination. This is obvious, because there are multiple sex-determination systems in animals, not just XY. There is X0, there is ZW, and there are others. Even within XY, there are variations. An individual can be born with XXY chromosomes. Or they can be born male with XX chromosomes, or female with XY chromosomes. Or, a human can be born female with XX chromosomes, no outward differences from typical female phenotype, and feel they are a man. This is because, as stated above, gender is a social construct. Not actually sure if we agree or disagree on that. There is no berating happening here or anything else that should make a person feel victimized. Just science. A little more advanced than grade school science, but still science.
  - Alupis 4y ago
    > A little more advanced than grade school science, but still science. "He who controls the language controls the masses." - Saul Alinsky > Even within XY, there are variations. An individual can be born with XXY chromosomes. Or they can be born male with XX chromosomes, or female with XY chromosomes We are not discussing extremely rare genetic defects. We're discussing people who slander biological genders by dressing as offensive caricatures and then demand everyone else participate in their mental illness.
bloxxox 4y ago
If there are more than two sexes, please describe what they are, and the additional types of gamete produced by these sexes. Your explanation should be applicable to all anisogamic species over the past billion years or so, including all that are hermaphroditic and all that are gonochoric.

TheCoelacanth 4y ago

> Exempting them from bans on genital surgery for infants/children certainly is a political choice. Who is trying to do that? Gender-affirming genital surgery is not commonly, if ever, practiced on minors and no one is advocating for that except maybe a few people on the lunatic fringe. The whole idea that doctors are going around performing genital surgery on trans-kids is a baseless political attack by people trying to ban reversible gender-affirming treatment like social transitioning and puberty blockers under the guise of banning more extreme treatments that aren't actually performed on minors.

antiteetyeet 4y ago
Genital surgery typically isn't performed until the child is at least 16 years of age, usually older, but 'gender-affirming' breast removal is being done to female children as young as 12 years old. There's increasing scepticism as to whether social transitioning is reversible in practice (see the interim report of the Cass Review for more detail on this), and the long-term adverse effects of puberty blockers are currently unclear. This is part of the reason why the health authorities in many countries are starting to halt or restrict the gender-affirming approach, as it may be causing more harm than good to gender non-conforming children.