SkyBlueFlux
Well-Known Member
Nearly all people born in the developed world are assigned a sex at birth and it almost never has anything to do with their individual genetic profile (as that is almost never tested at birth). The only criterion used to determine the sex to be placed on someone’s birth certificate for 99% of individuals is whether they have a vagina or a penis.
The point @SkyBlueFlux was making is that sex (and, by extension, the entirely social construct of “gender”) is far more complex than that, with people who possess vaginas and/or penises exhibiting collections of characteristics (genetic in origin or otherwise) that do not neatly fit in to either societies normally narrow “male” or “female” constructs, or the very limited and simplistic nature of sex and gender that most have been taught in school (which itself causes many of the problems already discussed in the thread).
FWIW, there are 6 “common” sex karyotypes, with many more less common ones based on permutational possession of X and Y chromosomes, with scientists still debating whether it is accurate to define humans as only have two sexes based on possession of XY or XX combinations.
I think this is an interesting primer on the debate for anyone interested.
Sex Redefined: The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic
Biologists now think there is a larger spectrum than just binary female and malewww.scientificamerican.com
I appreciate you trying. I gave up on attempting discussions about this on here long ago. Not referencing any of the posters on this thread specifically, but this place has a definite transphobic tilt which goes mostly unchallenged, and I find it disappointing given I think BM is usually progressive and tolerant on most fronts. It's not the (bad) attempts at humour or people's genuine opinions that are the problem, but I see plenty of comments which just come across as mean-spirited and nasty.
To get it back on topic - this boxer is from Algeria, an orthodox and strict Islamic country. There is absolutely no way she could even consider transitioning genders even if she wanted to. She has just lived her life in what she might see as a super traditional way, she was born as a woman and she's competing as a woman. Clearly, she has some kind of gender ambiguity that she may have been completely unaware of growing up, and may give her a physiological advantage. And quite justifiably, competitions have guidelines in place to deal with this. But the IOC said she's being allowed to compete and that's not her fault. So my point is, is there really any need for people to be spitting bile, calling her a man and ridiculing her? It just feels wrong, doesn't it? If people don't think that feels wrong and can't have some empathy for the hate currently being thrown her way, then I really question their moral fortitude.
It's not a lot to ask for people to recognise that this is a nuanced and complicated issue and can't be boiled down into simplistic dogmas. I just find it endlessly frustrating that I've been making this argument about sex/gender being more nuanced than genitalia for years. Now we have this example which showcases that perfectly, and rather than that being some epiphany to make people go "oh well look, maybe this is complicated after all", they are just finding a new way to project hate.
Love - don't hate - always choose empathy and seek to understand. That's literally all I want, and it doesn't feel like a lot to ask for.