I'm sorry, that's awful. A lot of that is just the people who are 'debating' us, too.
There were words used on me when I was a child that I can't repeat here. But there was a time in school it was a fun activity to find the worst words possible. One person landed on 'abomination'.
This is a nice article from Freddy. It's such a shame he was mistreated by the legal system, but really excellent he keeps advocating for a better country in spite of it.
Still thinking back to describing my experience of being intersex to an MP who was hating on trans people, and him calling me a 'complex argument'
Bro I'm right here
India can have a full apology, restitution and literally anything they want from the British Museum. Just let us keep garam masala please
I really don't understand why Labour are considering this.
As an aside - get well soon!
It's categorically unfair, because it misses the nuance of sex development, because intersex variations are complex, numerous, and vary drastically even among diagnostic categories.
The only reasonable way to overcome this unfairness is case-by-case analysis.
.... Which we already did.
The categorisation is a logical error.
They say SRY -> Testosterone -> Unfair.
But you don't need SRY to have a testosterone driven puberty. And you don't necessarily have one WITH the gene.
So:
No SRY -> Testosterone Puberty -> Allowed to compete
SRY -> Estrogen Puberty -> Disallowed to compete
I'm bored of the simplification of intersex variations. People are driving segregation practices with little more than 3 minutes of Wikipedia scrolling. A large number of genes are involved in 46,XY sex reversal, and we're yet to discover roughly half of the molecular causes. (3/3)
As well, CAIS is one of the exceptions allowed. However, CAIS is a classification of AIS made by observable phenotype. Two athletes may be classified as both CAIS and PAIS despite having similar androgen responses. (2/3)
There's a few aspects of unfairness here.
The 'functioning SRY' gene is used as a proxy for "capacity for testosterone driven puberty".
However, some of us do not have the SRY gene, but still had a testosterone driven puberty, and are still allowed to compete. (1/3)
Fuck it, we're not NEARLY woke enough. We need to go FURTHER.
ALL genitals should be removed at birth. Then, at puberty, everyone gets to decide.
Transgender people.
As an intersex person who went through conversion "therapy" as a child in 2007-2009 in the UK, this shit hits hard. Even in my 30s, I have a long way to recovery.
Excellent video. You ought to be very proud of yourselves. I'm grateful that you represented intersex people so well, too.
This is a good step.
I mostly hope it's understood by the Lib Dems that the SC judgment can only be understood in one way - as exposing an irreconcilable legal conflict. As it stands, businesses 'following' the SC judgment will still result in violations of the HRA and even the EA itself.
If we as a society are dead-set on using biology to invalidate trans people, can we at least get the biology fucking right?
Tired of straight up pop science misinformation treating the SRY protein like a magical on/off switch imposed by The Lord God Himself.
Damn. This is excellent.
Today I submerged my left tit in a bowl of water to determine its mass.
Why tf aren't people understanding that this is a joke?
I was on ADHD medication for two years and now I'm off of it - that shit may've been the worst decision of my life. It gave me 4 months of the best productivity of my life. Then it basically killed my humanity in exchange for nothing at all.
My friend
This is what we refer to as a joke
"Grafter"?
NOPE. VOTING REFORM NOW. YOU'VE FUCKED IT ZACK.
Why aren't TERFs bored of being called biological women?
They didn't like being called cis women.
Do they just accept the former because, despite how gross it is, it's great for delegitimising trans people?
I feel that it will settle on intersex people are the 'birth sex' of their original birth certificate. The law refuses to avoid explicit assignment, regardless of biological facts.
The only question the courts have to settle is whether amendment due to factual error still counts for that purpose.
Thanks for the response.
I've mostly been frustrated as my first question in all these cases is "what is being used to determine somebody is 'trans'"?
It's given as a statement of fact, as though always apparent, but policy does rely on either data, or appearance discrimination.
Why was there absolutely no deliberation on GDPR?
Struggling to imagine Streeting becoming PM if what ends up ousting Kier is Mandelson.
Labour party electing a new leader -
Hatred turns off critical thinking. If your whole point is "classify intersex people as male or female to dunk on the trans" then you're not doing science, and that will be obvious.
When you learn the biology behind Turner and XY/XO chimerism, then you realise your classification system is dogshit.
As long as it doesn't mean Streeting ;-;
I'll take Rayner though until Greenmageddon
You can be called a 'man' by bullies, then have the same people call you a 'woman' on a shitty infographic they use to attack other people who are different. Intersex people name ourselves as such because we have shared experience living in a world with divergent sex traits.
This shit hurts people.
This chart is hilariously stupid and wrong. If I can summarise it in as few words as I can -
"Gametes you would produce... if you could?" kills this classification system before it exits the header row. It's literally fantasy biology.
Also a bunch of it is factually incorrect.
