JK Rowling's gender policing finally caught up to her

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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 guys clearly don’t understand science but like to pretend that you do.

SEX IS BINARY. There is no NATURALLY OCCURRING category other than XX or XY.

Um, yes there is. There are many other NATURALLY OCCURRING categories, including XXY and XXX and others. There are also XX with male genitalia and XY with female genitalia. You can call them "errors" if you want, but they are 100% natural. And these people actually really exist.

You are misinterpreting. Yes they are natural in terms that these things happen in nature, but they happen when something goes wrong. It is not what is “supposed” to happen. It is not the outcome of the “correct” process. There are not three categories of that TYPICALLY happens during conception and development. There are two. The third is things that went wrong.

I’m not sure how else to explain it.

So these people just don't exist at all according you. They are just errors. That's a neat way of defining "binary."

Dp- of course they exist. Mistakes exist in nature. Duh.

Should these "mistakes" be allowed to participate in sports or use public restrooms? Or do you prefer to put them on a deserted island?

Depends on the person. Depends on the mistake.
It’s complicated.
But sex is binary and doesn’t care.

[Anonymous]

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.

Actually it is. Sexual reproduction requires a male and female gamete. Binary.

The existence of some very rare disorders doesn’t change primordial biological reality.

So if someone is not capable of sexual reproduction, then what are they?

— of no use to society if the are women (credit for this quote to JD Vance).

[Anonymous]

what if the "mistake" ends up being beneficial to the organism, such as the sickle cell mutation?

At some point, that isn't a "mistake." right now there are people identified who are abnormal in that they have genetic mutation making them resistant to HIV. If this spreads, and there are more of them than people without, are they still the "mistake?"

https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1601663113
Genetic mutations you want

To get to your conclusion, you have to posit the end you want and write the argument backwards to get there. That's not science; it's just bad philosophy.

[Anonymous]

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?

Do you think Siamese twins are an error? Or someone born with 3 legs? Or no brain?

[Anonymous]

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 do these people with "errors" not exist in your view? How do they fit into your binary?

Of course they exist. A colorblind or blind person has errors with their eyes, and their eyes still exist. lol.

If I said, "All people can see. It's unitary." And then you pointed out that actually some people can't see because of a variety of issues, and I responded, "well, that's just an error, It's not what should happen," that would be really dumb.

I do not have discussions with irrational actors. Health disabilities and disorders are real.

[Anonymous]

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.

+100
Dp- mistakes aren’t all bad.

[Anonymous]

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.

Right.

Science is the deliberate method of allowing reality to resist your preconceptions about it. That is why it is the null hypothesis posited.

You're doing it backwards and cosplaying scientist.

[Anonymous]

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.

Can you Mrs. Scientist point us to a peer reviewed scientific article that explains the scientific consensus that sex is binary and everyone who doesn't fit in the binary is a "literal error?"

[Anonymous]

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.

Right.

Science is the deliberate method of allowing reality to resist your preconceptions about it. That is why it is the null hypothesis posited.

You're doing it backwards and cosplaying scientist.

Sure. Keep screaming into the wind about sex being a spectrum. Let me know how that goes.

[Anonymous]

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.

I’m more concerned you will have then, arrested if they have to use the bathroom at school in a red state. Because which one do they use. And choose wrong and there are criminal penalties.

[Anonymous]

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.

So people with mutations can’t be athletes?

That’s not what I’m saying. I’m merely telling PP that they’re wrong. Sex is 100% binary. There is either male or female. Genetic mutations don’t make sex “non binary.”

XO chromosomes with penis - male or female?
XO chromosomes with vagina - male or female?
XXY chromosomes with penis - male or female?
XXY chromosomes with vagina - male or female?
XY chromosomes but with no penis and a female womb - male or female?
XY chromosomes with interior testicles - male or female?
XX chromosomes with vagina but no womb - male or female?
XX chromosomes with both ovarian and testicular tissue - male or female?

You said its binary, so you should easily be able to tell me the sex in each case that holds for every person born with each profile.

What type of gametes do they produce?

Most people in these categories are sterile.

This is a good point.

So let me see if I have the Rowling defenders position correctly summarized.

In order to participate in women's sports or use the women's restroom you must have all of the following:
-XX chromosomal profile (no deviations!)
-Female external and internal sex organs
-Female gametes
-Be fertile
-Typical female levels of estrogen, androgen, testosterone, etc.
-Secondary female sex characteristics

Am I missing anything? Who gets to do the inspections?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think JK Rowling has an obsession, and she's going down with her obsession and hate. That being said, the Algerian athlete's gender is not a no brainer. She was declared female at birth, but it doesn't mean she is biologically female. It's a complicated situation and doesn't fit anyone's agenda.

But why does JK Rowling care or get an opinion about this?

This is a person who has been female since birth. If her chromosomes do not match (and that is not something that has been established), she has a medical condition. Regardless, JK believes you cannot change gender and the boxer was female at birth.

Because she is a billionaire, and billionaires think they need the rest of us peons to know their opinions on EVERYTHING and guess what, we really can’t escape from them no matter who sues them.

I’ve actually thought JK Rowling had a more nuanced opinion than just being “hateful” but going after Imane Khalif was really jumping the shark. There was no reason to jump into the frey here.

[Anonymous]

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 do these people with "errors" not exist in your view? How do they fit into your binary?

Of course they exist. A colorblind or blind person has errors with their eyes, and their eyes still exist. lol.

If I said, "All people can see. It's unitary." And then you pointed out that actually some people can't see because of a variety of issues, and I responded, "well, that's just an error, It's not what should happen," that would be really dumb.

I do not have discussions with irrational actors. Health disabilities and disorders are real.

I guess we should all stop having discussions with you then.

[Anonymous]

Most people pretending not to know that sex is binary, male or female, are people who want men to be included in the female category.

What men want, men get. This is just another way to oppress women.