Yet another MP, ignorant about biology.

Herefornow

You do realise they teach a very simplified version narrative re chromosomes in high schools?

Probably, and genetics were not taught at all in my High School in the 1950s and 60s 😁

I've learnt a bit since; however, Kirsty Blackman has presumably not undergone genetic testing and only assumes she has XY chromosomes.

Doodledog

You said "you said you enjoy being annoying on threads"

I said no, I shared this quote with another poster

You then shared an image of the quote of me saying that to another poster

You have only managed to prove I was telling the truth

Mollygo

Sorry, I didn’t know KB was a he. The same still applies. If you’re going to make a public speech, you don’t say you assume something you can easily check. I believe KB also says that a transwoman is an adult human female. Definitely no idea about biology. Saying what you want to be true doesn’t make a lie into the truth.

Sorry, I didn’t know KB was a he.

I don't know either, I should have repeated the if in my second post.

It was an assumption on my part, based on her assertion that she has XY chromosomes.

AGAA4

I find the description of lesbians as non men very offensive to that group of women. Erosion of women's rights is happening slowly but surely.

It is offensive. Lesbians are still women and still female. I haven’t met a lesbian who wants to be a man, or even a transman.
It could almost be called a compliment if you accept that it means lesbians are not male, but it wasn’t meant as such.
There are those who, ignoring the reference to lesbians, would quite happily use that term for females.
I noticed they don’t refer to males as non-women. It’s just as accurate, but
males made that impossible when they misappropriated the words woman/women for themselves.

Katie59

I dont believe that 1.7% have chromosome differences, there are many other reasons that sexual characteristics don’t develop fully at puberty.

It is more or less correct As I posted early most of these have Klinefelter syndrome. They are male with all the male bits except reproductive gonads.

Glorianny

Keeper1

Did anyone see in the news that John Hopkins University now calls women non-men.

We should be very very worried

The non-men was on a glossary of LGBTQ+ words. It was an attempt to include non-binary people. The university has removed it “Upon becoming aware of the language in question, we have begun working to determine the origin and context of the glossary’s definitions,” officials wrote. “We have removed the page from our website while we gather more information.

“Johns Hopkins strives to create a campus culture that is inclusive and welcoming for all gender identities, sexual orientations, experiences and viewpoints, and we are committed to ensuring Johns Hopkins is a place where LGBTQ people feel supported,” the statement added.

Is there a point in there, Glorianny?

As I said upthread, that is erasing lesbians, who are not 'non-men', but same-sex attracted women.

I find the description of lesbians as non men very offensive to that group of women. Erosion of women's rights is happening slowly but surely.

I dont believe that 1.7% have chromosome differences, there are many other reasons that sexual characteristics don’t develop fully at puberty.

Keeper1

Did anyone see in the news that John Hopkins University now calls women non-men.

We should be very very worried

The non-men was on a glossary of LGBTQ+ words. It was an attempt to include non-binary people. The university has removed it “Upon becoming aware of the language in question, we have begun working to determine the origin and context of the glossary’s definitions,” officials wrote. “We have removed the page from our website while we gather more information.

“Johns Hopkins strives to create a campus culture that is inclusive and welcoming for all gender identities, sexual orientations, experiences and viewpoints, and we are committed to ensuring Johns Hopkins is a place where LGBTQ people feel supported,” the statement added.

Doodledog

If someone wants to ‘live as’ the opposite sex that’s up to them, although I wish someone would tell me what that means.

For the gazillionth time though, someone of male sex will remain male and as such should respect women’s boundaries enough to refrain from being in our safe spaces when we are vulnerable, and not try to cheat the system by claiming to be female when it comes to sport or women’s prizes or shortlists. I don’t know what’s so difficult to understand. A four year old can grasp that boys use one loo (for instance) and girls another. Adults pretending not to grasp this concept don’t convince me much.

The tiny number of people who don’t fit the norm when it comes to chromosomes can go on their physical attributes. If they cannot be determined as male or female (is that likely? I doubt it, but will go along with it for the sake of argument) and they have a penis, they are male and should refrain from entering women’s safe spaces. They can otherwise decide for themselves whether to ‘live as’ male or female. The more people who did this, the more accepting ‘society’ is likely to become. As it is, the more we have men simply saying they are women and forcing themselves into safe spaces where women are vulnerable the more it will be resisted.

As usual, I totally agree with Doodledog on this. The voice of common sense.

"non-men" how ridiculous.

I've Googled, and it seems that the actual terminology refers to lesbians, and they are being referred to as 'non-men attracted to non-men'.

Not quite erasing all women, but erasing the notion of homosexuality. Again, people have been saying for ages that far from being LGB-inclusive the trans narrative is actually very homophobic indeed.

Keeper1

Did anyone see in the news that John Hopkins University now calls women non-men.

We should be very very worried

Many of us are very worried.

Thanks for mentioning that, Keeper1. I hadn't heard it, but it is the logical conclusion of what's been happening, isn't it? Women ceasing to exist in our own right is exactly what we have been saying on here since what feels like the dawn of time.

Terrifying.

Did anyone see in the news that John Hopkins University now calls women non-men.

We should be very very worried

AGAA4

Slightly out of context but the BBC has been accused of trying to indoctrinate under sevens by telling them that boy fish can become girl fish.
I think this is far too confusing for that age group.

Ridiculous, and clearly ideologically driven.

I understand the 'boy/girl' terminology being age appropriate (I think this went out on CBeebies?) but it is just inaccurate. 'Boy fish' don't become 'girl fish', clownfish are biologically hermaphrodite.

The programme used 'changing gender' as a way of describing the fish behaviour, when obviously fish don't operate on the basis of so-called 'gender'. Interestingly (and tellingly) this is a quote from the programme:
Let's look at the clownfish. Aren't they beautiful? They live in a big group and their leader is always a female fish. But if the group needs a new leader, that male fish can change into a female fish in order to become the leader.

Does that remind you of anything?

AGAA4 Really?
Clever people will understand that the animal is a fish and that Fishes are the only vertebrates that undergo sex change during their lifetime. (1.5% of teleosts).
7 year olds don’t usually do percentages or fractions of percentages, so the lesson would be doubly confusing.
Some people will try to extrapolate from that, that humans can also change sex. I sincerely hope that none of them are in a position to teach that lie to children.

Herefornow

I'm not sure how commonly available a chromosome test is for the average person, so it would possibly be difficult to get that confirmation. Perhaps someone will be along to advise.

It's entirely possible that her chromosomes are not XY, or XX.

You do realise they teach a very simplified version narrative re chromosomes in high schools? An estimated 1.7% globally have different sex chromosomes to the 2 aforementioned categories of xx and xy. In the UK that's over a million people? This whole 'sex is binary' thing is factually inaccurate. We can look down an electron microscope and see that it is inaccurate.

All that being said, you're perfectly right, no amount of surgery will change your chromosomes. In that case, if you're not strictly male or female, what do you do? This is a serious question, I'm actually asking? You've been raised as a boy, you desperately feel that you're a girl, turns out your chromosomes are neither. How are you supposed to participate in society where people literally take to the Internet to discuss how your existence is impossible because their high school science teacher told them so 50 years ago? Please someone explain?

Can we just clear up something about the 1.7% quoted here.

The vast majority of these are XXY -Klinefelter syndrome- and they are not intersex or a third sex or anything like that. They are males with an extra X chromosome. Approximately 1 in 650.

Many are totally unaware until in a relationship where fertility becomes an issue although it can cause other medical problems.

It might be compared in genetic terms to Down’s syndrome which is also the result of an extra chromosome.

Those with Klinefelter syndrome have repeatedly asked for their syndrome not to be included in discussions on trans issues. Infertility is enough to deal with without people suggesting you are not a real male. It’s disrespectful and hurtful.

There is no question that they are male.

Slightly out of context but the BBC has been accused of trying to indoctrinate under sevens by telling them that boy fish can become girl fish.
I think this is far too confusing for that age group.

VioletSky

I've reported that

I've never said it and I don't do it

I once shared a quote with another user which was "if people don't like you take joy in being as annoyingly yourself as possible'

They are a nice person and should be happy with who they are

It's not right to misrepresent others and it has an impact on how they are treated by other members unfairly

Not true, VS.

Here is just one example. Please apologise and withdraw your report?

The point I made at the start, was that if you’re going to speak about something on a public stage, where you expect people to listen to you, e.g. as an MP, or a teacher or a TA, you should check your facts before you speak.
If you’re talking about sex and chromosomes then you should know that females are not XY. She didn’t go into all the tiny percentages of scientifically proven mixtures. With the limited knowledge she displayed, she may not even know about them.
Also, she said transwomen (TW) are adult human females (AHF).
Even on GN, amid the TWAW chanters, who claim, (safe in the knowledge that misogynistic males made it possible to use that word for males if they want), I haven’t come across the lie that TW are AHF being claimed before.
Waits . . .

VioletSky

They don't test chromosomes at birth. They just have a look at what's between your legs.

Everything she said is true, not sure what terrible thing she has done to deserve a gransnet thread

We generally don't know what is in people's pants

People aren't defined by their genitals either and doing so is sexist

Seeing as it's pushed in our faces every touch and turn, are you surprised. That the transgender lobby minority are inserting it into every day speak. I don't care what they "identify" as but please keep it to yourself. Don't push it in our faces . We don't want to know what you believe you are, any more than you want to know what I am.

Well the point is proved .

The operative words in Kirsty Blackman's speech is "probably xy", which means that she is "probably" unlikely to be one of the 1.7% Herefornow refers to, and was "probably" raised as a to consider herself male.

What was being debated at the time was "“Update the Equality Act to make clear the characteristic “sex” is biological sex” Surely when 98.3% of people are of the same biological and chromosomal sex as the rest of their cohort but only 1.7% are chromosomally at odds with that, then the characteristic sex is the biological sex whatever the subsequent life choices of each (chromosomally unchanged) individual. The 1.7% are outliers, not representatives of the characteristic.

I've reported that

I've never said it and I don't do it

I once shared a quote with another user which was "if people don't like you take joy in being as annoyingly yourself as possible'

They are a nice person and should be happy with who they are

It's not right to misrepresent others and it has an impact on how they are treated by other members unfairly

How bizarre to try to be annoying on purpose. The world’s a funny place.