Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 3h

Depends on age of transition, but early transitioners definitely do

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 3h

Between the impacts of sex hormones and the impacts of surgeries on homologous tissues, the boundary of sex in a social and functional and medical sense is crossed. I genuinely don’t get the skepticism about this, much less the rigid insistence.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 5h

And I am saying there are no material or biological parallels to be drawn between (species to species change) and (sex to sex within a species). You can’t induce a dog phenotype in a cat with dog hormones (not a thing). You can induce a female skeletal and secondary and soft tissue phenotype w HRT

2

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

No. It’s not alike because species and sex are nothing alike, and the things about sex that are or remain mutable via medicine in humans are radically different because of the shared genes and hormone receptors and tissue types and so on.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

Apart from your generalizations, which appear to be stereotyping in the most extreme way, I do not believe for one moment that you think someone like Caroline Cossey or Kim Petras has a phenotype noticeably distinct from other women, much less that you would be able to distinguish it so easily

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

There are tons of intersex conditions, even as profound as XY women who have given birth to XY daughters. Conversely, no cat and dog have ever bred and never ever has a cat been born to a dog or vice versa, nor is there a puberty where a proto-dog transforms into a cat, and so on etc

Maddening

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

And once again you resort to an even less coherent comparison (species differences!) as an analogy to an extremely fragile difference that remains highly mutable WITHIN a species due to shared genes and tissues and hormone receptors and anatomy and tissue types and so on.

2

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

Transsexuality, an extraordinarily heavily researched thing going back many decades now, is the thing I have emphasized every time for dozens of posts in this thread and yet you all seem to believe this is arguing about self ID, so I am sorry it’s just beyond tiring at this point

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 6h

??? No because sex is real; the explanations for transsexualism as an innate condition, like being gay, are rooted in prenatal hormones and gene variants and the general fragility of sex as a categorical system, and sex remains mutable precisely because of hormones and genetic and tissue homology.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 7h

Apart from the fact that whether ethnic or racial groupings are considered inviolable versus fluid is very much culturally dependent, as are questions of mixed race ancestries as borders, but race and sex are not alike. There are no race hormones or racial puberties or race genitals etcetera.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 7h

Medically inducing a change of sex, operating off of an extant cross sex neurobiological condition, has nothing to do with clownfish or other examples of *spontaneous* changes of sex. it’s even more absurd when the issue of spaces or legal protections are at play, where phenotype is the key anyway

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 7h

I have no idea what this post is meant to mean except that you like the others reject what science can or cannot do by comparing conceptual categories that are both largely false (race is rare more a construct than a robust scientific distinction) and irrelevant (sex is mutable in individuals).

2

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 15h

Vance is just smart Posobiec so not sure it matters.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

And obviously you never respond to any of these things because it’s not about legitimate discussion or consideration, nor about nuance, nor about historical or scientific accuracy, it’s just about the thrill you get from bludgeoning other people’s lives into dust, of vague blood-in-teeth vengeance.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

Also you guys keep calling extremely clear sentences, with accurate uses of terminology, “word salad” solely because you don’t wish to actually address any of the plain claims I laid out.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

And you also just conflated an empirical definition (deafness is someone who can’t hear) with a non empirical teleology definition! It’s genuinely crazy to see this.

Your definition is like you saying nobody is deaf because evolution intended everyone to hear, even if they no longer can hear!

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

No. Sex was never defined this way except by Catholic natural law theologians and now a handful of GC anti trans extremists, and the reason why the only places that expressly adopted that definition is the U.S. (and Hungary perhaps) under a far right christian nationalist regime.. is obvious.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

Like how is it that people think they aren’t using fascistic or nativist reasoning when their arguments literally come down to “everything in its right place in its right hierarchy according to the intent of God or nature” as opposed to liberal “human variety and diversity will always occur”

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

And the whole claim is insane. Trans women were transitioning, even getting married, and living as normal women with normal access to normal female spaces and protections, throughout the developed world (and some pockets of the developing world ) for decades and decades, and now you retcon reality

1 1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

No that’s precisely what we all did and you are seeking to redefine and throw out all these women who have integrated as women and relied on decades of legal precedent and medical requirements only to have a bunch of reactionary proto fascists seek to retroactively strip them of their sex class.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

Have or have now? Because now is what is empirically real, and it’s a vagina and vulva and clitoris. And a general female phenotype from female typical hormone ratios for decades. And so on.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

Intended? What absolutely bonkers teleologic craziness. Evolution doesn’t intent things, it isn’t a person or an agent or a designer. Thats not how any of it works.

And an entity with no gonads crazed to have even this blinkered “intended” gamete pathway.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

For someone who transitioned MtF at puberty and has remained on female normative hormone ratios for years or decades, and has had sex reassignment surgery, that analysis is going to very clearly classify them as female.

This is not remotely like your single variable example.

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 16h

No. For those who make no gametes, it is an analysis of the components of sex, as it has been for decades, looking at endocrinological sex, phenotypic sex, anatomical sex, gene transcription and expressions (which are primarily driven by hormones), etc… and not some faux simplistic claim.

1

Persephone Meadowfeather @lurkermcgoo.bsky.social · 17h

Doesn’t care and probably is like a lot of very conservative gay people in wanting to be seen as “normal” and straight in literally every social situation except the bedroom. Also see the “no fats no femmes” subset of gay men.