In light of recent controversy and its handling, the twice-a-year FediForum unconference for April 1st and 2nd has been canceled by its organizer.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    none of these transphobic losers who use autism to attack trans people even gives a flip about autistic people

    • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 days ago

      none of these transphobic losers who use autism to attack trans people even gives a flip about people

      Ftfy

  • flamingos-cant@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    Sex isn’t a “gender orientation” it is really simple biology.

    Gamete size – its really simple.

    Congratulations infertile people, you are now officially sexless.

    • LostXOR@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      That is usually how males and females of a species are differentiated in general: males have the small gamete and females have the large one. (As you said, some individuals may not produce gametes so it only applies in general).

      Of course humans are a lot more complicated. We have a concept of gender which doesn’t necessarily align with biological sex, and many people modify their sex characteristics to match their gender, so applying generalizations blindly gets you nowhere.

      • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Indeed, just as gender is a spectrum so is sex. I love when someone says “Its basic biology” because the best response is “and this is intermediate biology”.

        • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          With all due respect, sex is not a spectrum.

          It’s a clearly a binary. Yes, there are many exceptions and edge cases, but they are all based around a universal binary biological structure.

          You don’t have say three distinct sexes required for reproduction outside of sci-fi. It is a binary with some edge cases and variations in how exactly the two parts of the binary interact.

          • rowinxavier@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Sex is indeed a spectrum. Intersex presentation makes up a meaningful though small percentage, somewhere around the 0.05% range. If it were a binary there would be two options, mutually exclusive. This is a bimodal distribution, with two very strong peaks for XX or XY karyotype and a bunch of variation around either different karyotypes, XXY etc, or differing activation or expression of those karyotypes, eg androgen insensitivity etc.

            On top of that, what would you say sex is exactly? Which gamete is larger? In seahorses the males have the smaller gametes but the females use something very similar to a penis to deposit the egg into the male who then raises it and performs all the roles we associate with females in humans.

            Is it based on which chroonosomes? In some animals it is a WZ or W karyotypes, so that can’t be it. In others it is just a presence or absence of a sex chromosome. In some plants they have more than two sets of everything, like strawberries with 7 copies of each chromosome. In others they have one, two, or four in some parts of the life cycle, but sometimes the thing we see is the higher number, sometimes it is the lower number. Some have a mix of male and female parts, having sperm and egg producers on the same plant but separated, some have both right next to each other in groupings. Some animals can undergo sex changing due to environmental factors.

            Nothing in biology is as simple as the models we use to represent them. Sex is complex and while it sometimes seems simple that is the less common state. Genes are not often all the way on or all the way off, they are usually moderated and running at different levels across the organism cell by cell, and changing with time. The same goes for traits.

            I would recommend learning more about ut biology if you really do believe sex is a simple binary. The world of biology is far more complex and varied than that idea can capture and honestly it is fascinating, I find it extremely exciting to find the examples of my own ignorance, they are usually super cool. Good luck!

          • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            It is a binary with some edge cases

            So in other words, not a binary? What you’re describing is more accurately described as a bimodal distribution.

            • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              It’s far closer to a binary distribution than a bi-modal distribution. You can be pedantic, but that’s not a real arguement. I admitted there are edge cases.

              This is not tied to pure outcomes and is derived from actual earth bio-chemistry.

              There is no triple helix or quadruple helix as a foundational system of genetic bio-chemical reproduction.

              When you flip a coin, there is a chance that it will land on the side, yet we still use a coin flip for a 50:50 probability scenario because it is close enough.

              • Ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I admitted there are edge cases.

                Then it’s not binary.

                When you flip a coin, there is a chance that it will land on the side, yet we still use a coin flip for a 50:50 probability scenario because it is close enough.

                Absolutely. For day to day life, “there are two outcomes” is safe way to describe coin flips. But given that a coin landing on its side can happen, it’s not a binary system. It only becomes binary when we ignore the edge cases. Just like sex…

                And that’s before we get to the point that there isn’t even a single definition of sex that accounts for all scenarios. People can change their legal sex, people can change their morphological sex, “genetic sex” isn’t foolproof, as it doesn’t always correlate with morphological sexual characteristics, or even gamete production.

                Calling sex binary is either a generalisation, or something you want to be true. At no point is it reality of the situation though…

                • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I strongly disagree. I am only happy for people to be the best version of themselves and to feel comfortable in their skin.

                  Changes in legal or morphological sex is not relevant. This is not what we are discussing.

                  I already mentioned that there are edge cases. Edge cases do not discredit foundational frameworks that define reality.

                  The bio-chemistry of terrestrial life is built upon a binary sex framework. This has been true for hundreds of millions of years. There is no such things as a triple helix or quadruple helix in terms of reproduction. Even trees and plants have a binary sex.

                  You claim that this is something I want to be true. I would argue the same (on a vice versa basis) for you and that you’re framing the discussion using irrelevant examples (how is a morphological change in sex even relevant to what we are discussing).

  • zbyte64@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    Stop confusing young autistic vulnerable people.

    — Date Unknown

    I’m old and autistic and not confused by the fact trans women are women. Hope that helps.