Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)P

powerstruggle

@ powerstruggle @sh.itjust.works

Posts
723
Comments
327
Joined
6 mo. ago

Why?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • There isn't any "detangling" like you're thinking, because you misunderstand the chart. For example, multiple conditions can lead to infertility. That doesn't mean the conditions can't be distinguished from each other, that just means the chart is kind of confusing.

    At any rate, these conditions have a clear sex. For example, "Klinefelter syndrome (KS), also known as 47,XXY, is a chromosome anomaly where a male has an extra X chromosome". The term mixed gonadal dysgenesis isn't very specific, but sex can still be determined in each case, e.g. Turner syndrome.

    Are there any examples from the chart you think disprove the sex binary?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Sigh. I linked to a comment I had previously made, which links to the author of Sex Redefined (peer-reviewed paper) clarifying that there are two sexes, and quote her inline for easy reading.

    You're right that I don't link to the paper there, but it's in the grandparent comment. Hit the "Show Context" button to get the link. Just so you can't evade again, here's the link:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/518288a

    That's a peer-reviewed paper published in Nature by a PhD Developmental Biology. When asked to clarify, She directly stated that the papers claims there are two sexes.

    You have no excuse to not engage with it. Stop acting in bad faith.

    EDIT: You originally responded in the thread for my comment that linked directly to this peer reviewed paper, so you have no excuse. Stop your bullshit:

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03348-3

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Right, so you're refusing to engage with peer-reviewed sources.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • If you think science is anti trans, that's completely on you.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • It's not unknowable, you're just being intentionally obtuse. It's knowable with better science, it's just possible that an expert is wrong. If they're wrong, that doesn't change reality.

    Someone's sex exists regardless of my ability to discern it. Your example is bad faith trolling.

    If it's irrelevant then just ignore it. You can't handle the truth and so you troll and try to derail and accuse and insult.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • The closest analogy I can think of where this is applicable is that qubits could be compared to an embryo that could be said to not yet have a sex, with a measurement of a qubit being roughly the same as an embryo developing to the point of being sexed. Which sure, it's an interesting analogy, but doesn't dispute the sex binary.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • You're once again refusing to engage with peer-reviewed sources. Stop bullshitting.

    Ask your biologist friends to explain to you slowly why you're wrong.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Lol. You keep ignoring the papers I link you, then disparaging a well-respected biologist in the field by calling him a rando. If you don't even know who Jerry Coyne is, you have no business bullshitting about the field of biology. He's not the end-all-be-all but you've just displayed an amazing lack of knowledge about the field in general.

    I'll spell it out for you, since I fear you might have a learning disability: I've linked peer-reviewed papers. Read them and learn. I also cited Jerry Coyne writing on his blog about his field of expertise, as an example of an expert opinion on this matter. That's a reasonable source for that purpose. I also cited a project led by a PhD developmental biology, collecting signatures from other scientists with relevant credentials. That it was published on wordpress is immaterial.

    If your PhD is even real, you're a perfect example of why they're a mark of perseverance, not intelligence. I suggest you persevere at something more productive than wallowing in ignorance.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • You got things worth reading in my original comment. Stop bullshitting.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Any more‽ You didn't start!

    I just cited two worthwhile papers (and also cited them at the start, you've had this whole time to read them, don't give me any bullshit about reading more).

    By wordpress, do you mean https://projectnettie.wordpress.com/? Jesus, are you really that dense? Did you not even bother to read one word from it? I'm citing the project spearheaded by someone with a PhD in Developmental Biology, collecting signatures from other scientists affirming a statement about the sex binary. You can go look at their credentials. Where the list is published is irrelevant, it's the fact that a) the statement is clear about the sex binary, b) the project was started by an expert in the field, and c) it has many signatories with relevant credentials. Are you sure your degree isn't just "i r smrt" written in crayon? I mean, come on.

    Look, you're a lost cause, but for anyone else curious:

    Project Nettie is an online and regularly updated record of scientists, medics and those in related disciplines who, by signing their support for the Project Nettie statement (below), assert the material reality of biological sex and reject attempts to reframe it as a malleable social construct.

    I guess I'll go edit my previous comment to add that bit in. I didn't think it was necessary, but, some people.

    I don't think you're capable of engaging in good faith. For anyone that's bothered to read down this far, feel free to ignore this user. The thread speaks for itself ("masses of articles" lol get the fuck outta here).

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • What are you actually proposing? That an entire person exists in a superposition until they produce gametes?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • I'm irrelevant. The science is what matters.

    This article was peer reviewed and cites sources:

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-025-03348-3

    Here's another that people have linked to, thinking it supports their argument.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/518288a

    In fact, the author states:

    In your piece ‘Sex Redefined’ are you making the claim there are more than 2 sexes?

    No, not at all. Two sexes, with a continuum of variation in anatomy/physiology.

    Two papers demonstrating that you're wrong, and both better than anything you've linked to. Note that I linked these already and you apparently didn't bother reading them, but maybe try again? I'd love it for you if you tried learning.

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Why do you care so much?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • So you still have nothing?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Why do you care so much?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • I wish the best for you and your relationship with your gender

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • So you don't have a mass of articles then, much less anything academic

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Why do you care so much?

  • Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy

    Jump

  • Everyone here would love to see this mass of articles that you totally found without effort lol.

    I've linked to actual papers that cite many sources, and also blogs from people with highly relevant credentials, respected in their field. I'm not personally making arguments, merely pointing out that the overwhelming consensus is that sex is binary, according to experts in the field.

    You have nothing, so you're reverting to insults. Do better.