JK Rowling's gender policing finally caught up to her

[Anonymous]

Watch this interview if you don't understand the biology. There seems to be a lot of confusion around individuals with a DSD and the potential biological advantages they may face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

You literally cannot prove anything you just wrote. Khelif is a biological female, per her own words and her country's assertions. She's even lost boxing matches to other women! You would - maybe - have a point if she was undefeated.

[Anonymous]

As a larger taller woman, who was born a woman and experienced a lot of mean things, I say good for Khelif.

It's so weird people think all women are born small and dainty and all men are born large and tall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

Because it isn't actually taught in science courses? I could see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

And you’ll always be a dick. Proudly, it seems.

Yep. That comes with having facts on my side.

For this to be a brag, you have to actually know what you are talking about. Otherwise it's just called being a dick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

But that’s “mean” or something.

Exactly. Thats what it comes down to for people who think that intersex and trans should compete in the category the identify with. There is no science behind that. Just “oh it’s the nice and accepting thing to do.” Please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

And you’ll always be a dick. Proudly, it seems.

Right. Because “ Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.
Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know” isn’t dickish. At all.

Different people, PP.

You see, the "Anonymous" tag isn't just one person. You could be conversing with 2, or 3, or even 20 people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

And you’ll always be a dick. Proudly, it seems.

Yep. That comes with having facts on my side.

For this to be a brag, you have to actually know what you are talking about. Otherwise it's just called being a dick.

Oh I am. You know, having a science degree and all. I know very well. Clearly more than the progressives on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

But that’s “mean” or something.

Exactly. Thats what it comes down to for people who think that intersex and trans should compete in the category the identify with. There is no science behind that. Just “oh it’s the nice and accepting thing to do.” Please.

At least you're now acknowledging that they exist? GOOD FOR YOU!

*golf clap*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

You literally cannot prove anything you just wrote. Khelif is a biological female, per her own words and her country's assertions. She's even lost boxing matches to other women! You would - maybe - have a point if she was undefeated.

There is a daily mail article that says otherwise. It’s looking like she may be XY. Unless you mean that her just saying it makes it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

But that’s “mean” or something.

Exactly. Thats what it comes down to for people who think that intersex and trans should compete in the category the identify with. There is no science behind that. Just “oh it’s the nice and accepting thing to do.” Please.

At least you're now acknowledging that they exist? GOOD FOR YOU!

*golf clap*

When did I ever say they didn’t?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

And you’ll always be a dick. Proudly, it seems.

Right. Because “ Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.
Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know” isn’t dickish. At all.

Different people, PP.

You see, the "Anonymous" tag isn't just one person. You could be conversing with 2, or 3, or even 20 people.

Then you identify yourself as a DP. So I know who I’m responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

Science says it’s not always so clear. You rest to accept complexity and nuance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how any of this is an issue. There are a tiny percentage of human beings that are born intersex. Which, fine. All accommodations should be made. But - scientifically - men are stronger, faster, have more endurance etc. Sure, Sydney McLauglin is going to beat your grandpa at anything. But she is not beating the times of the best male athletes. Intersex athletes like Caster Semenya and Imane Khalif have an unfair advantage. We all know that. They should compete with the men.

And running is one thing. But using that testosterone advantage for boxing? I mean, c'mon. Not remotely fair. It is abusive.

You literally cannot prove anything you just wrote. Khelif is a biological female, per her own words and her country's assertions. She's even lost boxing matches to other women! You would - maybe - have a point if she was undefeated.

There is a daily mail article that says otherwise. It’s looking like she may be XY. Unless you mean that her just saying it makes it so.

Why does your just saying so make her have XY chromosomes? Have you actually seen the results of a chromosomal test that she did?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A laboratory test seems like the easiest way to put this to rest.

If there are any “Y” chromosomes detected, the boxer is male. If not, the boxer is female. This is a binary outcome. One or the other. And then we’ll know the answer.


I trust science.

According to science, it is possible for females to have Y chromosomes. It is not binary.

Are you a scientist? Because you are misreading this. It is binary. The only time it isn’t is when there is a mutation.

It's binary, except when it's not binary. So it's not actually binary.

You can keep saying this, but that doesn’t make it true. It is binary. There are only two options. An error in transcription or translation is just that - an error.

So you are saying that someone is a man, a woman, or an “error”? First, that’s not binary (bi meaning two, and even if “error” were an okay think to say about a human being, it’s still a third option) . Second— WTF is wrong with you?

An intersex person is 100% an error of nature. I am a scientist. It is what it is. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be here, or don’t count. But they are literal errors. Sorry that hurts your feelings.

+1
It’s hilarious that all the “trust the science!” people are all about science UNTIL science says something that disagrees with their feelz.

Then it becomes “it’s complicated” or “no one can really say for certain”.

Yeah, NO.

I think the objection is calling people with these "abnormalities" abnormal. Or a mistake. Or an error. It's mean. Unnecessary. And rude af. Would you call someone with other "abnormalities" resulting in physical or mental disabilities a mistake?

No. You wouldn't.

I wouldn’t be shocked if they do.

Scientifically I absolutely do. Why does that shock you?

You would tell parents of a child with Downs Syndrome that their kid is a mistake?

Of course not. I’m doing it here. And I would anywhere else science was being discussed with other scientists.

Having a discussion in a lab, hospital or university (or online message board) about genetic mutations is different than speaking with a parent about their child. I thought that would go without saying.

You can rest easy now.

There are parents on here with children with Downs Syndrome. It’s a parenting forum, not medical.

Again, not shocked at all that bigots don’t mind being a dick.

I’m a scientist, not a bigot.

I care more about facts than feelings.

Always have, always will.

Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.

Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know.

Believe me what I’ve forgotten about science you’ll never know.

And you’ll always be a dick. Proudly, it seems.

Right. Because “ Ooohhh, someone's social challenges slip is showing.
Wouldn't be so sad if you were actually good at science, but, you know” isn’t dickish. At all.

Different people, PP.

You see, the "Anonymous" tag isn't just one person. You could be conversing with 2, or 3, or even 20 people.

Then you identify yourself as a DP. So I know who I’m responding to.

Hey, we're just dealing with facts. Do we have to protect your feelings by making sure you don't misread the situation? Why is that?