UCI bars transgender cyclist Emily Bridges from debut as woman at National Omnium Championships this weekend

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise definiton then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

When you say "science is being sidelined", that must mean you have proof  otherwise you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement 

come on then. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise debit on then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

 

come on then. 

Please stop with the heterophobia.

Please stop

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise definiton then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

When you say "science is being sidelined", that must mean you have proof  otherwise you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement 

come on then. 

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

The LGB community spent decades fighting for civil and legal rights and improving acceptance. Then the T got tacked on and what happened? You rewrite our history, you accuse us of transphobia because you can't get a date, you demolish female sports, you call ordinary people transphobic for not agreeing with you, you accuse straight white men of everything you can think of, you harass people out of their jobs for disagreeing. You're largely bullies and the way you treat the detrans community, the LGB community, and even straight people is disgusting.

You are the reason LGBT acceptance is actually declining in the west. Decades of work to make people realise we're normal and just want our own families thrown to the fire by nutcases like you with a radical homophobic and even heterophobic agenda.

Jenova20 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise definiton then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

When you say "science is being sidelined", that must mean you have proof  otherwise you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement 

come on then. 

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

The LGB community spent decades fighting for civil and legal rights and improving acceptance. Then the T got tacked on and what happened? You rewrite our history, you accuse us of transphobia because you can't get a date, you demolish female sports, you call ordinary people transphobic for not agreeing with you, you accuse straight white men of everything you can think of, you harass people out of their jobs for disagreeing. You're largely bullies and the way you treat the detrans community, the LGB community, and even straight people is disgusting.

You are the reason LGBT acceptance is actually declining in the west. Decades of work to make people realise we're normal and just want our own families thrown to the fire by nutcases like you with a radical homophobic and even heterophobic agenda.

bye TERF

It was the LGBT community first.  Go back to the LGB alliance echo chamber where you can think you're in some way relevant or representative of the queer community  

no LGB withiut the T

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise definiton then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

When you say "science is being sidelined", that must mean you have proof  otherwise you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement 

come on then. 

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

The LGB community spent decades fighting for civil and legal rights and improving acceptance. Then the T got tacked on and what happened? You rewrite our history, you accuse us of transphobia because you can't get a date, you demolish female sports, you call ordinary people transphobic for not agreeing with you, you accuse straight white men of everything you can think of, you harass people out of their jobs for disagreeing. You're largely bullies and the way you treat the detrans community, the LGB community, and even straight people is disgusting.

You are the reason LGBT acceptance is actually declining in the west. Decades of work to make people realise we're normal and just want our own families thrown to the fire by nutcases like you with a radical homophobic and even heterophobic agenda.

bye TERF

It was the LGBT community first.  Go back to the LGB alliance echo chamber where you can think you're in some way relevant or representative of the queer community  

no LGB withiut the T

Your ignorance on Lesbian and Gay history is staggering, though the ignorance you've displayed here is telling. The T actually has nothing in common with the LGB community. Also i'm not a Terf, since i'm not a feminist (neither are around 93% of Brits based on studies). As i've pointed out, all you can do is attack others. Grow up you homophobe.

it's not staggering, I've learned enough from community friends and through lived experiences to know when someone is talking crap. 
 

the T is intrinsically bound to the LGB, which is why it is LGBTQIA+. Sorry that yiur bigotry isn't working. 
 

I'll go back to loving the same gender as I identify as, which apparently makes me a homophobe. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

Oooh, pleas show us the peer reviewed paper where you've come up with a precise definiton then! Since you've been so confident about what you've posted, should be trivial to prove your credentials on the topic.

When you say "science is being sidelined", that must mean you have proof  otherwise you wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement 

come on then. 

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

The LGB community spent decades fighting for civil and legal rights and improving acceptance. Then the T got tacked on and what happened? You rewrite our history, you accuse us of transphobia because you can't get a date, you demolish female sports, you call ordinary people transphobic for not agreeing with you, you accuse straight white men of everything you can think of, you harass people out of their jobs for disagreeing. You're largely bullies and the way you treat the detrans community, the LGB community, and even straight people is disgusting.

You are the reason LGBT acceptance is actually declining in the west. Decades of work to make people realise we're normal and just want our own families thrown to the fire by nutcases like you with a radical homophobic and even heterophobic agenda.

bye TERF

It was the LGBT community first.  Go back to the LGB alliance echo chamber where you can think you're in some way relevant or representative of the queer community  

no LGB withiut the T

You keep saying "bye", then reappearing. Can't you mean it this time? 

Jenova20 wrote:

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

https://www.livescience.com/medieval-grave-non-binary-warrior-finland.html

From a quick search, the last instance I could find was August 2021 which feels like a long time ago.

Also, just found this article: https://psmag.com/social-justice/our-bones-reveal-sex-is-not-binary

and this one: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jan/16/archaeology-sexual-revolution-bones-sex-dna-birka-lovers

TLDR; science shows that you more you examine human development, the less certain you can be about "obvious" differences between skeletons. Ultimately, bone shape is going to be related to the individual's hormone output which doesn't always match their chromosomes.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

You realise we can dig up the dead and tell what sex they were right? It's been a long time since an archaologist dug up a Pharaoh and claimed them to be a demi two-spirit genderqueer feminist otherkin hasn't it.

https://www.livescience.com/medieval-grave-non-binary-warrior-finland.html

From a quick search, the last instance I could find was August 2021 which feels like a long time ago.

Also, just found this article: https://psmag.com/social-justice/our-bones-reveal-sex-is-not-binary

and this one: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jan/16/archaeology-sexual-revolution-bones-sex-dna-birka-lovers

TLDR; science shows that you more you examine human development, the less certain you can be about "obvious" differences between skeletons. Ultimately, bone shape is going to be related to the individual's hormone output which doesn't always match their chromosomes.

thanks for digging that up (pun intended) - I knew they were wrong but I really couldn't be bothered. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

thanks for digging that up (pun intended) - I knew they were wrong but I really couldn't be bothered. 

I very nearly didn't, but it bugged me that they were invoking "science" without actually having any idea of the complexities involved. I'm not in any way a biologist, but it's trivial to find this kind of information at which point most people think "that's a complicated issue", so I reckon Jenova20 is suffering from a case of Dunning-Kruger.

hawkinspeter wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

thanks for digging that up (pun intended) - I knew they were wrong but I really couldn't be bothered. 

I very nearly didn't, but it bugged me that they were invoking "science" without actually having any idea of the complexities involved. I'm not in any way a biologist, but it's trivial to find this kind of information at which point most people think "that's a complicated issue", so I reckon Jenova20 is suffering from a case of Dunning-Kruger.

The only way trans deniers such as Jeniva can operate is by trying to pretend a complicated reality is actually simple, and will deny anything contradictory 

Very well said. 

biker phil wrote:

Very well said. 

Would that be the bit where Jenova invoked "science" which it turns out they completely made up? That bit? 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

biker phil wrote:

Very well said. 

Would that be the bit where Jenova invoked "science" which it turns out they completely made up? That bit? 

oh yes, can you maybe remember to comment on the fact you stated that trans men don't compete against (other) men, then when I proved you wrong (yet again) you seemed to go really quiet?

I wonder why that would be...

Jenova20 wrote:

You don't need to be a biologist to know that males and females are different and develop differently. They have different chromosones, they look different, they develop differently, and they're observably different on a biological level. There is only one observed sport where females have a genetic advantage over males, and that's long distance running.

Unfortunately science is being sidelined or called offensive by ridiculous extremist activists.

I showed you my science - show me yours.

For extra credit: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

Quote:

Many people never discover their condition unless they seek help for infertility, or discover it through some other brush with medicine. Last year, for example, surgeons reported that they had been operating on a hernia in a man, when they discovered that he had a womb. The man was 70, and had fathered four children.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Someone who has their sex assigned as male at birth isn't necessarily a biological male. That's because there is no actual accepted definition of such. That's why sparrowlegs won't answer - or rather, manages to reduce the gender "woman" to "can bear children" and wonders why people are angry. 
You're reducing a complex topic down, and that just doesn't do when you're dealing with peoples lives. 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

alansmurphy wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Someone who has their sex assigned as male at birth isn't necessarily a biological male. That's because there is no actual accepted definition of such. That's why sparrowlegs won't answer - or rather, manages to reduce the gender "woman" to "can bear children" and wonders why people are angry. 
You're reducing a complex topic down, and that just doesn't do when you're dealing with peoples lives. 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

Quote:

words have a meaning.

Unless you're debating trans activists who can't tell a male from a female, but also want to be the experts on the matter. Bye homophobe

Jenova20 wrote:

Quote:

words have a meaning.

Unless you're debating trans activists who can't tell a male from a female, but also want to be the experts on the matter. Bye homophobe

cis gay, none homophobic male here.

bye idiot. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

Quote:

words have a meaning.

Unless you're debating trans activists who can't tell a male from a female, but also want to be the experts on the matter. Bye homophobe

cis gay, none homophobic male here.

bye idiot. 

Bye homophobe

Jenova20 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

Quote:

words have a meaning.

Unless you're debating trans activists who can't tell a male from a female, but also want to be the experts on the matter. Bye homophobe

cis gay, none homophobic male here.

bye idiot. 

Bye homophobe

ok I'll bite. Why am I homophobic? 
I mean, we know you're transphobic, and claim to speak for the LGB sub-community  when you in reality aren't even close to doing so. 

alansmurphy wrote:

 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

[/quote]

Agree, gender reveal parnties are odd!

Ok, so could cycling events not be based on sex instead of gender, or sex at birth?

alansmurphy wrote:

 

 

alansmurphy wrote:

 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

Agree, gender reveal parnties are odd!

Ok, so could cycling events not be based on sex instead of gender, or sex at birth?

[/quote]

They could, but most people would find it very odd to have to "prove" their status , and in practice what would,happen is you end up only asking those who you don't think "look" right. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Someone who has their sex assigned as male at birth isn't necessarily a biological male. That's because there is no actual accepted definition of such. That's why sparrowlegs won't answer - or rather, manages to reduce the gender "woman" to "can bear children" and wonders why people are angry. 
You're reducing a complex topic down, and that just doesn't do when you're dealing with peoples lives. 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

You find gender reveal parties weird, yet keep chanting transwomen are women. Why not just be, instead of revealing a gender to people that aren't interested? Weird.

Mark_1973_ wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Someone who has their sex assigned as male at birth isn't necessarily a biological male. That's because there is no actual accepted definition of such. That's why sparrowlegs won't answer - or rather, manages to reduce the gender "woman" to "can bear children" and wonders why people are angry. 
You're reducing a complex topic down, and that just doesn't do when you're dealing with peoples lives. 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

You find gender reveal parties weird, yet keep chanting transwomen are women. Why not just be, instead of revealing a gender to people that aren't interested? Weird.

Youre still here? Weird. 
im not revealing any one's gender. You don't seem to understand how prefixes work.  The gender is "woman", the prefix cis or trans indicates more information about that persons relationship to their assigned sex. 
You seem to not really understand very much about this topic - if you'd like I can point you to some starting educational pieces. 

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Mark_1973_ wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Someone who has their sex assigned as male at birth isn't necessarily a biological male. That's because there is no actual accepted definition of such. That's why sparrowlegs won't answer - or rather, manages to reduce the gender "woman" to "can bear children" and wonders why people are angry. 
You're reducing a complex topic down, and that just doesn't do when you're dealing with peoples lives. 

 

Can you explain how a gender reveal party works? Or when a pregnant lady (if she is indeed a lady) goes for a scan they determine that the child is male or female?

 

they're assigning sex, not gender (identity). 
words have a meaning. 
also, I find "gender" reveal parties really weird - this obsession some people have with proclaiming to the world the contents of their child's pants is very odd, no? 

You find gender reveal parties weird, yet keep chanting transwomen are women. Why not just be, instead of revealing a gender to people that aren't interested? Weird.

Youre still here? Weird. 
im not revealing any one's gender. You don't seem to understand how prefixes work.  The gender is "woman", the prefix cis or trans indicates more information about that persons relationship to their assigned sex. 
You seem to not really understand very much about this topic - if you'd like I can point you to some starting educational pieces. 

Thanks, but millions of years of human evolution have served me and billions of others just fine in telling men and women apart. A bunch of activists claiming otherwise won't undo that.

Mark_1973_ wrote:

Thanks, but millions of years of human evolution have served me and billions of others just fine in telling men and women apart. A bunch of activists claiming otherwise won't undo that.

You seem as equally ignorant of evolution as you do of biology.  Perhaps you stop there before the hole you're digging collapses in on itself?  There is little value in debating with the wilfully ignorant.

Mark_1973_ wrote:

Thanks, but millions of years of human evolution have served me and billions of others just fine in telling men and women apart. A bunch of activists claiming otherwise won't undo that.

One doesn't have to favour either side of this argument to see that's pretty weak; in the 16th and 17th centuries many were saying to Copernicus and Galileo that since time immemorial we've known the sun orbits the earth and no bunch of heretics claiming otherwise won't undo that. Knowledge grows, understanding changes. I'm not sufficiently scientifically literate, nor well enough read in this area, to know if there is a sound scientific basis for either your contentions or those of nosferatu, but saying "this is what's always been understood so it must be right" is not really an argument.

Rendel Harris wrote:

Mark_1973_ wrote:

Thanks, but millions of years of human evolution have served me and billions of others just fine in telling men and women apart. A bunch of activists claiming otherwise won't undo that.

One doesn't have to favour either side of this argument to see that's pretty weak; in the 16th and 17th centuries many were saying to Copernicus and Galileo that since time immemorial we've known the sun orbits the earth and no bunch of heretics claiming otherwise won't undo that. Knowledge grows, understanding changes. I'm not sufficiently scientifically literate, nor well enough read in this area, to know if there is a sound scientific basis for either your contentions or those of nosferatu, but saying "this is what's always been understood so it must be right" is not really an argument.

I don't even know how the world has changed so much in so short a time that people will actually go on a public forum, quite comfortably, and argue (virtue signal) that women can have a penis. I do note, however, that it's mainly men who support this argument. If it's not misogynistic, I really don't know what is.