New Zealand

[transam]

On the same dvd series there was a fish that cannot swim so cannot live in the water

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

It is the opinion of the medical and scientific world.

no it isn't.

Yes it is. I have posted numerous articles supporting that assertion. You have posted absolutely nothing to support your assertion.

What do you suppose happens when a man who considers his gender to be female turns up for a cervical smear?
or refuses to have a prostate check?

This is a ridiculous and irrelevant hypothetical scenario, and you're descending into condescending and patronising comments again. If you're not capable of an intelligent and rational discussion, why bother at all?
We're not talking about ridiculous hypothetical scenarios, we're talking about genuine cases of babies born with ambiguous genital anatomy.
I have posited numerous times that sex is not the choice of the person concerned, at the time of the birth. Of course it's not, a baby is not capable of making such a choice at that age.
The choice is made by the person in attendance, who makes the best decision that they are capable of making based on the sometimes ambiguous evidence presented to them. That decision is sometimes incorrect. It is only later in life that the person concerned may grow up to realise it, and proceed to correct the decision made.
On that basis, although the choice/decision must be a binary decision, sex itself is not binary and is sometime ambiguous. Hence the discussion and the incidences of incorrect decisions made, incorrect labels assigned, and people finding the need to transition to the opposite sex.
There are also incidences of people genuinely being both sexes, or neither sex.

Globally, some intersex infants and children, such as those with ambiguous outer genitalia, are surgically or hormonally altered to create more socially acceptable sex characteristics. However, this is considered controversial, with no firm evidence of favorable outcomes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex​

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Sex is fact. Gender is opinion. Fact trumps opinion.

No-one is arguing any different.
But sex can be ambiguous. Therefore it is not binary.
The choice or decision is made by the person in attendance, or delayed in some more advanced countries, until a medical examination can determine the best decision.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Good grief - can you still not understand the point I was making about people using wrong words?

You mean like, "I received an email once"?
Or like, "for ounce in my life"?
There's wrong words and contextually inappropriate words. That's two different issues.
"Sex is not binary" is correct, in a medical and scientific context.
"Sex is binary" is only socially correct because currently there are the only two options available. It isn't medically nor scientifically correct.

Arguing that sex is based on a biological basis, whereas gender isn't, does not alter the fact that sex is not medically, nor scientifically binary.
It is only binary in a socially constructed concept, because society constrains the choices to be just the two options.

 

[JohnD]

This is a ridiculous and irrelevant hypothetical scenario

it is certainly ridiculous, but it is neither hypothetical nor irrelevant.

Perhaps you should pay more attention to womens rights, and their erosion by invasion of single-space womens places by people who are not women.

Unless, of course, you believe that there is no such thing as a "woman", and that my cat is an owl.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

it is certainly ridiculous, but it is neither hypothetical nor irrelevant.

Perhaps you can provide evidence of any man arriving for a cervical smear test, or any woman refusing a prostrate check?
If not, we can safely assume it is a ridiculous, hypothetical example, and therefore irrelevant.

Perhaps you should pay more attention to womens rights, and their erosion by invasion of single-space womens places by people who are not women.

Perhaps you should pay more attention to the topic of discussion instead of resorting to ridiculous, hypothetical, irrelevant examples, and resorting to condescending and patronising comments.
Nowhere have I discussed the issue of women's rights nor expressed any opinion on them.
If peoples' birth certificate labels them as female, they have every right to enter women's only spaces. It is irrelevant what label they were assigned at birth, male, female, cat or owl, it is what the label says now that counts.
As said before, you can't protect one group's rights by trashing another group's.
People who are not women have no right to enter a women's only space. But if the birth certificate says they are a woman they have that right.

Unless, of course, you believe that there is no such thing as a "woman", and that my cat is an owl.

You're resorting to ridiculous and irrelevant comments again. No-one, but you, has raised the possibility of there not being any women, or your cat being an owl.

 

[JohnD]

Nowhere have I discussed the issue of women's rights nor expressed any opinion on them.

no, but perhaps you should.

 

[JohnD]

People who are not women have no right to enter a women's only space. But if the birth certificate says they are a woman they have that right.

interesting you should track back to such cases, of which the numbers are tiny, and not relevant to the NZ weightlifter.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

no, but perhaps you should.

Why should I discuss women's rights or express an opinion on them?
The last time I checked, there was no obligation to discuss anything, nor to express an opinion.

Perhaps you should keep to the topic of the thread instead of trying to divert onto some other issue.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

interesting you should track back to such cases, of which the numbers are tiny, and not relevant to the NZ weightlifter.

It doesn't matter how tiny the numbers are, if it affects the athlete which is the topic of this thread, then it is very relevant.
You have no idea of the athlete's genital anatomy, nor her medical history, so you're in no position to decide whether it is relevant or not.
Just because she was assigned a male gender at birth, lived her life as a male, and competed as a male does not determine that she is a male. Only a medical examination can determine that, and she has undergone a medical examination to compete in women's sports, which reassigned her as a women.

 

[transam]

Dazzler gives not a jot about woman’s rights

his support for some of the most oppressive regimes on the planet is legendary

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Dazzler gives not a jot about woman’s rights

his support for some of the most oppressive regimes on the planet is legendary

transam gives not a jot about truth, his creation of lies and fantasy is legendary.

 

[transam]

Dazzler gives not a jot about woman’s rights

his support for some of the most oppressive regimes on the planet is legendary

he is a total disgrace ( dazzler)

sexist anti woman’s rights ignores cruelty to woman which amounts to tacit support imo

and a porkie pier to boot as well

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

he is a total disgrace ( dazzler)

sexist anti woman’s rights ignores cruelty to woman which amounts to tacit support imo

transam is on a roll with his lies and fantasy. There'll be no stopping him now until he's constructed an entire parallel universe.

 

[JohnD]

Why should I discuss women's rights or express an opinion on them?

Your lack of concern is no doubt why you cannot grasp the concept of unfairness to female athletes, and the relevance to this thread.