I totally agree with you. Even the Cass Report/Review is captured! Thank you for pointing out in which sections this is evident. I'm not impressed at all! And what about girls and women being 'collateral damage'?!!! Same shit, different century.... :((
I haven’t read the whole Report , almost 400 pages but I, too am bothered by the language that accepts the trans words ..like “ cis” as a prefix . Accepting their language is tantamount to accepting their ideology.! The fact that a report which makes sure it is neutral is still attacked hysterically by the trans cult shows the weakness of their ideology.
I still view the whole trans movement as one of mentally disturbed individuals..every single one of them to a greater or lesser degree is abnormal . How this has become so authoritarian is what is most alarming. That normal people have to bow down to and be ruled by an abnormality is dangerous. After all, we are all creatures of evolution, and the binary nature of sex is what produced us as a species. If we deny it, we also deny evolution. By accepting the ridiculous assertion that someone can be “ born in the wrong body” we deny science ,and for those who are religious , deny any higher power…i e. ,it’s like playing god!
I am totally disgusted with governments that let themselves be governed by a false ideology! It’s only conservatives at this time who are for truth..the liberals have all caved in to falsehood!
I agree. It's ALL in the mind, people who think they're really the opposite sex are mentally ill and should receive appropriate mental health treatments.
I agree with your points, it's clear there are concessions in language to the gender religionists- I found it hard to read the introduction at all.
But let's not let perfect be the enemy of good. It's a great report in what it does -it's a beachhead for reversing what has been happening and it explicitly bans puberty blockers.
The more I look into medicine, the more I am aware that it encompasses a lot of things that aren't particularly scientific. Doctors are a particular kind of smart but they're not scientifically curious on the whole. The attempts of the DSM to categorise and provide treatment for psychological conditions (always some drug) has always struck me, in addition to being corrupt as grossly naive.
Medicine is downstream and while it would have been nice of Cass to point out that there gender identity has no scientific basis and as such is a belief system, it is up to others across society broadly to step up to counter these insidious ideas.
Cass gives people the authority and confidence to do this and so I celebrate it.
Nice one Alessandra, you make some compelling points. But rather than conclude from these that we should reject the report in any way, I think you've laid down a challenge: how to use it as a step towards a more general debunking of trans ideology? The fact Cass has shown that sheer stupidity and/or evil can lie at the heart of some TRA beliefs can open the door to a realisation they lie at the heart of all such beliefs.
The fact that you state the language became more ideological from the interim report to the final repost means she was ‘leaned on’. The quotes you provide look like someone has gone through and changed her original text to the ‘permitted’ ideological text. The ‘trans lobby/activists’ have edited the report to ensure it can contain the final outcomes to be within their their scope of acceptability.
This has to be to ensure the continuation of the trans agenda ( social, medical, economic and legal ). Synthetic sex concepts have to be kept in law to enable the move to ‘human rights for robots’ that is planned to come sometime in the future by the likes of Martine Rothblatt etc.
The bit about development 6.4 is an accurate description of developmental reality. She is not saying they are female but that males who are insensitive to Testosterone do develop female typical genitalia.
Remember female is the physical default if the male program fails. In mice where SRY is knocked out male mice are born with female genitalia.
So the wording in Cass is misleading without the "external" qualifier.
Saying "female is the default" is also misleading. None of the various genetic or teratogenic mutations that can befall a zygote with a Y chromosome will result in a fully-functional female.
Besides the above, the closest you can get is one-in-a-billion single-X chimerics, who are XY in most of their body but X- in part of their gonads, who are sterile but have a uterus, one of whom is on record as giving birth with the help of IVF and a lot of other medical assistance.
To be clear, there is no such thing as a true human hermaphrodite, with functional organs of both sexes.
Disorders of Sexual Development are the exceptions that prove the rule of 2 sexes.
If any TRA starts in on the "sex is a spectrum" nonsense, just tell them "You're talking about mutations, not sexes. You're basically trying to argue that we can't say humans have a brain, because some babies are born without one."
".. so I know that sex is binary and immutable ..."
Some very good points and cogent criticisms of the Cass report. I too was "disconcerted" by the missing or biased definitions.
However, your "immutable" is simply not true, at least by the standard biological definitions promulgated in reputable biological journals, encyclopedias, and dictionaries. They stipulate that to have a sex is to have functional gonads of either of two types, those with neither being, ipso facto, sexless.
For example, see the definitions in the Glossary of this article in the Journal of Molecular Human Reproduction:
But that sex is binary does NOT mean that every human HAS a sex. The sexes are not exhaustive categories.
For example, transwomen who cut their nuts off change from male to sexless. Hardly an "immutable" category.
Though in some ways, one might say that applying "immutable" to the sex categories is a category error -- like saying the musical note C# weighs ten pounds. Or like saying "teenager" is immutable.
There are objective criteria for (most) category memberships: meet them then you get a membership card, but if you had them then can no longer pay the membership dues then you get your membership cards revoked. Logic 101.
Membership in categories aren't identities, much less immutable 🙄 ones. They denote only the presence of the defining traits.
You reasonably complain about the lack of coherent definitions in the Cass report, a situation that characterizes the whole transgender clusterfuck. Virtually every last man, woman, and otherkin has entirely different, totally antithetical, and quite unscientific definitions for both sex and gender. The standard biological definitions for the sexes offers some way of separating wheat and chaff, a beacon in the miasma.
Try reading the Glossary in that MHR article. And try Googling "male definition" and "female definition". The top result is typically from Google/OxfordLanguage which say pretty much the same thing: "produces gametes", present tense, not past or future.
You're a female if you were born with a reproductive system organised to ovulate and gestate - whether that system is working or not. You're a male if you were born with a reproductive system organised to produce small gametes, whether that system is working or not.
You're not *not a woman*/a sexless person if you for some reason have had your ovaries removed. Or when they stop releasing ovas.
Correct.A man can never be a woman, and a woman can never be a man.To say anything else is to submit to the idea of post humanism, which is a deadly idea! Unless one is happy to be ruled by robots, we should all be concerned with the constant lying that all trans cultists indulge in! Truth should never be second class !
Excellent. A mind uncaptured today is a rare and beautiful thing. Thank you.
I totally agree with you. Even the Cass Report/Review is captured! Thank you for pointing out in which sections this is evident. I'm not impressed at all! And what about girls and women being 'collateral damage'?!!! Same shit, different century.... :((
Kellie-Jay also ripped Cass to pieces (on YouTube) for the same reasons you mention. It's really nowhere near what's needed.
I haven’t read the whole Report , almost 400 pages but I, too am bothered by the language that accepts the trans words ..like “ cis” as a prefix . Accepting their language is tantamount to accepting their ideology.! The fact that a report which makes sure it is neutral is still attacked hysterically by the trans cult shows the weakness of their ideology.
I still view the whole trans movement as one of mentally disturbed individuals..every single one of them to a greater or lesser degree is abnormal . How this has become so authoritarian is what is most alarming. That normal people have to bow down to and be ruled by an abnormality is dangerous. After all, we are all creatures of evolution, and the binary nature of sex is what produced us as a species. If we deny it, we also deny evolution. By accepting the ridiculous assertion that someone can be “ born in the wrong body” we deny science ,and for those who are religious , deny any higher power…i e. ,it’s like playing god!
I am totally disgusted with governments that let themselves be governed by a false ideology! It’s only conservatives at this time who are for truth..the liberals have all caved in to falsehood!
I agree. It's ALL in the mind, people who think they're really the opposite sex are mentally ill and should receive appropriate mental health treatments.
I agree with your points, it's clear there are concessions in language to the gender religionists- I found it hard to read the introduction at all.
But let's not let perfect be the enemy of good. It's a great report in what it does -it's a beachhead for reversing what has been happening and it explicitly bans puberty blockers.
The more I look into medicine, the more I am aware that it encompasses a lot of things that aren't particularly scientific. Doctors are a particular kind of smart but they're not scientifically curious on the whole. The attempts of the DSM to categorise and provide treatment for psychological conditions (always some drug) has always struck me, in addition to being corrupt as grossly naive.
Medicine is downstream and while it would have been nice of Cass to point out that there gender identity has no scientific basis and as such is a belief system, it is up to others across society broadly to step up to counter these insidious ideas.
Cass gives people the authority and confidence to do this and so I celebrate it.
Don’t get me wrong, I also welcome and celebrate the Cass Report.
Nice one Alessandra, you make some compelling points. But rather than conclude from these that we should reject the report in any way, I think you've laid down a challenge: how to use it as a step towards a more general debunking of trans ideology? The fact Cass has shown that sheer stupidity and/or evil can lie at the heart of some TRA beliefs can open the door to a realisation they lie at the heart of all such beliefs.
The fact that you state the language became more ideological from the interim report to the final repost means she was ‘leaned on’. The quotes you provide look like someone has gone through and changed her original text to the ‘permitted’ ideological text. The ‘trans lobby/activists’ have edited the report to ensure it can contain the final outcomes to be within their their scope of acceptability.
This has to be to ensure the continuation of the trans agenda ( social, medical, economic and legal ). Synthetic sex concepts have to be kept in law to enable the move to ‘human rights for robots’ that is planned to come sometime in the future by the likes of Martine Rothblatt etc.
He, god help us!
Excellent points. Trans is a pseudoreligion. It is no great win to have those nonsense concepts further validated in an official report.
The bit about development 6.4 is an accurate description of developmental reality. She is not saying they are female but that males who are insensitive to Testosterone do develop female typical genitalia.
Remember female is the physical default if the male program fails. In mice where SRY is knocked out male mice are born with female genitalia.
Biologist here. Not quite. They develop external female genitalia only. They do not develop ovaries, fallopian tubes or a uterus.
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22199-androgen-insensitivity-syndrome
So the wording in Cass is misleading without the "external" qualifier.
Saying "female is the default" is also misleading. None of the various genetic or teratogenic mutations that can befall a zygote with a Y chromosome will result in a fully-functional female.
Besides the above, the closest you can get is one-in-a-billion single-X chimerics, who are XY in most of their body but X- in part of their gonads, who are sterile but have a uterus, one of whom is on record as giving birth with the help of IVF and a lot of other medical assistance.
To be clear, there is no such thing as a true human hermaphrodite, with functional organs of both sexes.
Disorders of Sexual Development are the exceptions that prove the rule of 2 sexes.
If any TRA starts in on the "sex is a spectrum" nonsense, just tell them "You're talking about mutations, not sexes. You're basically trying to argue that we can't say humans have a brain, because some babies are born without one."
Exactly! Using abnormality to prove a point shows very weak thinking.
".. so I know that sex is binary and immutable ..."
Some very good points and cogent criticisms of the Cass report. I too was "disconcerted" by the missing or biased definitions.
However, your "immutable" is simply not true, at least by the standard biological definitions promulgated in reputable biological journals, encyclopedias, and dictionaries. They stipulate that to have a sex is to have functional gonads of either of two types, those with neither being, ipso facto, sexless.
For example, see the definitions in the Glossary of this article in the Journal of Molecular Human Reproduction:
https://academic.oup.com/molehr/article/20/12/1161/1062990
Rather depressing to see so much scientific illiteracy, and on virtually all sides of the transgender clusterfuck.
Humans cannot change sex. Hence, it is immutable in humans
Yes to "cannot change sex".
But that sex is binary does NOT mean that every human HAS a sex. The sexes are not exhaustive categories.
For example, transwomen who cut their nuts off change from male to sexless. Hardly an "immutable" category.
Though in some ways, one might say that applying "immutable" to the sex categories is a category error -- like saying the musical note C# weighs ten pounds. Or like saying "teenager" is immutable.
There are objective criteria for (most) category memberships: meet them then you get a membership card, but if you had them then can no longer pay the membership dues then you get your membership cards revoked. Logic 101.
Membership in categories aren't identities, much less immutable 🙄 ones. They denote only the presence of the defining traits.
A castrated man is not sexless.
Yes, they are. It's the logical consequence of those standard biological definitions.
Try reading, and thinking about this Wiley Online Library article, particularly the bits about "reproductively competent":
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bies.202200173
Oh please dont be ridiculous. I am not wasting any more time
Just the facts ma'am, just facts.
You reasonably complain about the lack of coherent definitions in the Cass report, a situation that characterizes the whole transgender clusterfuck. Virtually every last man, woman, and otherkin has entirely different, totally antithetical, and quite unscientific definitions for both sex and gender. The standard biological definitions for the sexes offers some way of separating wheat and chaff, a beacon in the miasma.
Try reading the Glossary in that MHR article. And try Googling "male definition" and "female definition". The top result is typically from Google/OxfordLanguage which say pretty much the same thing: "produces gametes", present tense, not past or future.
A man who elects to have himself castrated remains male. If an archeologist digs up his remains someday they will have no trouble determining his sex.
You're a female if you were born with a reproductive system organised to ovulate and gestate - whether that system is working or not. You're a male if you were born with a reproductive system organised to produce small gametes, whether that system is working or not.
You're not *not a woman*/a sexless person if you for some reason have had your ovaries removed. Or when they stop releasing ovas.
Correct.A man can never be a woman, and a woman can never be a man.To say anything else is to submit to the idea of post humanism, which is a deadly idea! Unless one is happy to be ruled by robots, we should all be concerned with the constant lying that all trans cultists indulge in! Truth should never be second class !
It is also immutable in all mammals and birds! You cannot escape the laws of evolution!