Cont: Trans women are not women (IX)

Status
Not open for further replies.
d4m10n said:
Where are you getting this figure from?
Click to expand...

Rolfe said:
Oh heck, there are a number of publications giving the error rate of eyeballing the infant as about 0.08%. I don't bookmark everything I see on Twitter. Someone took me to task last month because they had a paper saying it was 0.078% or something like that, so I had over-estimated.
Click to expand...

And Vixen might want to pay particular attention to the highlighted part

https://www.leonardsax.com/how-common-is-intersex-a-response-to-anne-fausto-sterling/

CONCLUSIONS
The available data support the conclusion that human sexuality is a dichotomy, not a continuum. More than 99.98% of humans are either male or female. If the term intersex is to retain any clinical meaning, the use of this term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female.

The birth of an intersex child, far from being “a fairly common phenomenon,” is actually a rare event, occurring in fewer than 2 out of every 10,000 births.
 
The thing people are forgetting here, including that last quote, is that this is real people being discussed. If we leave CAIS aside for now, that quote still brands people who are identifiably male or female as "intersex" in the sense of not being one or the other. Actual people do not have phenotypes that are not classifiable as either male or female, and fixating on chromosomes is highly detrimental to people with conditions such as Swyer syndrome (XY, but female because the Y chromosome lacks an SRY gene) or the XX male condition (where the SRY gene is located somewhere other than on the nonexistent Y chromosome). Jeez, the latter is often only discovered when the man seeks investigation for fertility issues. But that definition wants to consider him as not being male? Srsly?

I've discussed CAIS already and I don't want to get back into that right now, but aside from that, show me the actual person you think is not classifiable as either male or female. And then ask that person what he or she thinks of that conclusion.
 
Last edited:
Oh good grief, I'm posting in the transwomen are not women thread as if it was the intersex thread again. I'll leave that there, but really we're way off topic for this thread and we should stop.
 
Rolfe said:
Oh good grief, I'm posting in the transwomen are not women thread as if it was the intersex thread again. I'll leave that there, but really we're way off topic for this thread and we should stop.
Click to expand...

The issue is the fringe resets, which require re-explaining the whole "transgender is not intersex" thing again. If it were just SuburbanTurkey being a scumbag once he ran out of reason, we'd brush it off. But I think Vixen has genuinely never really thought this through, so it's probably only fair we introduce her to the argument in toto, at least once.
 
theprestige said:
No it isn't. "Gender assigned at birth" is just a synonym for "sex observed at birth" in language that predates the "T" in "LGBT".




This discussion of public policy would be a lot different if it were actually about such cases. But it's not.
Click to expand...

If 'boy' still appears on Lady Colin Campbell's birth certificate, would you be clutching your pearls and going into a faint if she turned up using the Ladies 'rest room'?
 
Rolfe said:
Sex is observed at birth, to an accuracy rate of about 99.92%, by looking at the infant's genitals.

Very occasionally an infant is born in which the genitals are ambiguous or misleading. Usually, as in the case of Caster Semenya, the problem is that a male infant has genitalia that look superficially female. Most mistakes are that way round. In the past, and even today in deprived societies (such as black South Africa), an infant was/is brought up as the wrong sex because of this. This outdated practice of looking at ambiguous genitalia and taking a guess became known as "assigned at birth" among people with anomalies of the genital system that caused such mistakes.

Modern medicine can virtually eliminate this by karyotyping, hormone analysis and other investigations, so that even for infants with these anomalies "assigned at birth" should be a thing of the past. It's always possible to figure out which sex someone is by doing the right tests.

Trans activists have appropriated the "assigned at birth" terminology for their own purposes. 100% of trans people, to a close approximation, are genetically and phenotypically normal members of their own sex, and there was no assigining going on at all when they were born (or more likely, when their mother had her ultrasound scan). Their sex was correctly observed.
Click to expand...


How many people have had their karyotype taken? If you applied chromosome tests to everybody, I think a lot of people are going to be shocked.
 
Vixen said:
Gender is assigned at birth. As an example of a wrongly assigned gender, there is Lady Colin Campbell:
Click to expand...

No. Sex is observed at birth, sometimes incorrectly. But that has basically nothing to do with transgenderism.

The irony is that the entire foundation of transgenderism falls apart if sex and gender are the same thing. So why would you deliberately confuse the two, unless your goal is confusion? The question answers itself in this case.
 
smartcooky said:
Indeed, the ability to determine the sex of other individuals is part of the natural order of things in of animals with binary sexes. Its part of the survival instinct.



Correct. Its just that some posters here do not understand (or are deliberately ignoring the fact) that the debate is not about transwomen who pass for women, its about those who do not, but they will keep going back to what they wan't to argue about because they mistakenly think their position gives them the high-ground.



Agree. The real danger here is that, if this situation of people who look like men being allowed to walk into women-only spaces becomes normalized and unquestioned, it won't be long before rapists, ones who have no transgender feelings at all, catch on that they can use "self-ID as a women" as a subterfuge to gain access to a space when a woman might be at her most vulnerable.
Click to expand...

What on earth is a 'woman's space'? I pointed out that the trend in modern places is for mixed toilets so that particular problem is solved for you already.
 
Vixen said:
How many people have had their karyotype taken? If you applied chromosome tests to everybody, I think a lot of people are going to be shocked.
Click to expand...

This is downright delusional. No, very few people would be shocked. And again, sexual development disorders have basically nothing to do with the transgender debate.
 
Rolfe said:
Oh heck, there are a number of publications giving the error rate of eyeballing the infant as about 0.08%. I don't bookmark everything I see on Twitter. Someone took me to task last month because they had a paper saying it was 0.078% or something like that, so I had over-estimated.
Click to expand...

So that is eight in every thousand. That is a lot. About half a million in the UK alone.
 
Rolfe said:
I think in practice Blaire White would be fine (he has exaggeratedly feminine mannerisms as well as expert facial surgery) as would Jazz Jennings and Jackie Green and the like. Chances of any of them being challenged, essentially zero. The old-school transsexuals would be on a stickier wicket, potentially, but behaviour counts for so much. A male, even if fairly obviously so, who appears to have tried his best to present as female and simply goes in and comes out without trying to "own" the place or set up a confrontation with a woman is unlikely to suffer many challenges. If challenged, he should simply apologise and leave. Also, if there is a gender neutral facility available, he should use it. I don't think your daughters would use a pepper spray in that situation.

The man who is there to impose his masculinity on women, to get his jollies by making women uncomfortable, to assert his right of ownership of the space, is the one we want to be able to exclude. By pepper spray if necessary. And without fear of being branded transphobic and the predatory man coddled like a frightened infant.
Click to expand...

From what I can see, the aim of a transgender is not to make women feel uncomfortable.

Take one example, Quentin Crisp. He was notoriously anti-gay liberation and thought homosexuality was an abomination. This, despite having worked as a rent boy for homosexual clients during his youth. In his memoirs he believes he was actually transgender, not gay as is the general assumption. He was outrageously camp but always obviously male. I don't think he was out to 'invade women's spaces'.
 
smartcooky said:
And Vixen might want to pay particular attention to the highlighted part

https://www.leonardsax.com/how-common-is-intersex-a-response-to-anne-fausto-sterling/

CONCLUSIONS
The available data support the conclusion that human sexuality is a dichotomy, not a continuum. More than 99.98% of humans are either male or female. If the term intersex is to retain any clinical meaning, the use of this term should be restricted to those conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female.

The birth of an intersex child, far from being “a fairly common phenomenon,” is actually a rare event, occurring in fewer than 2 out of every 10,000 births.
Click to expand...

Why is it so incredibly important to ensure that only someone with 100% female karyode gets to use the Ladies loo at John Lewis or Victoria Station?
 
Vixen said:
Why is it so incredibly important to ensure that only someone with 100% female karyode gets to use the Ladies loo at John Lewis or Victoria Station?
Click to expand...

You really don't pay attention to what people write, do you? You come up with an amazing amount of non sequiturs to think otherwise. It's like you're having a conversation with someone the rest of us don't see.

It's never been about abnormal karyotypes, indeed the people who push for self-ID think it's irrelevant.

But please, keep up with the derails. I can't wait to see what's next.
 
Vixen said:
What on earth is a 'woman's space'?
Click to expand...

Female public toilets
Female toilets in schools, colleges, techs and universities
Changing rooms in public facilities such as swimming pools
Changing rooms in privately owned facilities such as fitness centres


Vixen said:
I pointed out that the trend in modern places is for mixed toilets so that particular problem is solved for you already.
Click to expand...

Its not the solution you think it is

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyl...afraid-to-use-loo/ILNGYA36N7JF45UGQVYTFRUHQY/

....some girls are refraining from using the toilet during school hours because of a lack of privacy and taunts from boys including "period shaming".
According to the campaigners, some girls stop drinking water during the day to avoid going to the bathroom and some students have complained of sexual harassment and a lack of privacy.

One parent of a secondary school girl told the Daily Express: "She won't use the toilets and tries to last all day. Boys are always speculating on whether girls are having their periods according to how long they take in the toilet.​

Some schools had changed to unisex, and changed back after a flood of complaint from parents and female students. There are instances of parents removing their kids from schools over the issue.

We have also had unisex public toilets taken out by local councils and replaced with standard male and female ones because there were too many complaints, and people (mostly women) refused to use them - if you've ever been into a men's toilet just before it was cleaned, you can probably guess why.

All this unnecessary stress and worry that the vast majority of girls have to put up with, because a bunch of posturing, virtue signalling, politically correct wankers are trying to fall over themselves pandering to a tiny minority!
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Female public toilets
Female toilets in schools, colleges, techs and universities
Changing rooms in public facilities such as swimming pools
Changing rooms in privately owned facilities such as fitness centres




Its not the solution you think it is

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyl...afraid-to-use-loo/ILNGYA36N7JF45UGQVYTFRUHQY/

....some girls are refraining from using the toilet during school hours because of a lack of privacy and taunts from boys including "period shaming".
According to the campaigners, some girls stop drinking water during the day to avoid going to the bathroom and some students have complained of sexual harassment and a lack of privacy.

One parent of a secondary school girl told the Daily Express: "She won't use the toilets and tries to last all day. Boys are always speculating on whether girls are having their periods according to how long they take in the toilet.​

Some schools had changed to unisex, and changed back after flood of complaint from parents and female students. There are instances of parents removing their kids from schools over the issue.

We have also had unisex public toilets taken out by local councils and replaced with standard male and female ones because there were too many complaints, and people (mostly women) refused to use them - if you've ever been into a men's toilet just before it was cleaned, you can probably guess why.
Click to expand...

Oh dear. The right wing press quoting the DAILY EXPRESS which seems to be in a permanent state of 'fury'. Likewise the DAILY MAIL with its non-stop stories about how the NHS are now avoiding the use of sex-specific nouns. It had a headline the other week about a woman who had undergone surgery from male to female in her youth and now regretted it. Fiar enough, it is a human interest story and the tales of the 'silly woke agenda' does come across as absurd. But try putting it in the perspective of is it really important to distinguish men from women and if so, why? Then ask yourself what is the agenda of these right wing rags, if not to spread hate and resentment towards minority groups?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom