Hannah Mathis 

@gamemasterrukia @JeffDye What ever you may believe...but if I'm a woman or not was not the topic. Not at all! But you are too stupid to realize that.

@semanthis @JeffDye except that you're not and you need to accept the reality that you'll always be a man and never a woman

@BentsCristin @LeucojumV Danke!

@LeucojumV Ob eine Frau sowas trägt oder nicht, entscheidet nur eine: Die Frau selber. Gosh, Frauen, die anderen Frauen absprechen, für sich selbst solche Entscheidungen zu treffen und sie abwerten, sind genauso schlimm wie Männer, die das tun. Es nervt!

Wie sehr können sich Frauen selbst hassen wenn sie sowas tragen?

@DrCigol @datadriven_tdoc You can't? Shure you can't because we both know what the definition used in the ICD11 is. And that reproduction is only one aspect of the definition of sex you could find there.

@DrCigol @datadriven_tdoc Are you a philosopher? Otherwise please leave the philosophical part up to them and follow your profession by finally sending me the link to the god-damned taxonomy.

Male and female (if defined by gametic status) is a binary and is immutable Maleness to femaleness is a spectrum and is hormonally and surgically modifiable

@daniellismore Thank you for the fantastic summary. We absolutely should not accept any further discussion that stay behind these facts.

Terf: Science disagrees. Science: Science does not contain a single sentence that decides who counts as a woman. What science does describe is how human sex development works and why variation exists. Human sex development begins in the womb from a shared template. Early embryos have the same structures regardless of eventual sex traits. Nipples exist in everyone because they form before sex differentiation. Around six to seven weeks of gestation, gene expression linked to the SRY gene can initiate testicular development. If that pathway is not activated, ovarian development proceeds. That is only the first layer. Hormones then shape the body. Testosterone and dihydrotestosterone guide development of internal ducts and external genital structures during specific windows. If hormones are absent, mistimed, or cells cannot respond to them, development follows different pathways. Medicine recognises multiple variations here including androgen insensitivity syndrome, 5-alpha reductase deficiency, and chromosomal mosaics. These are not theoretical exceptions. They are documented outcomes showing that sex traits emerge from interacting systems rather than a single switch. Brain development unfolds on its own timeline during gestation and early life. Neuroendocrinology research shows that prenatal hormone exposure influences neural circuits related to body perception, identity and social behaviour. Sexual differentiation of the brain occurs later than genital differentiation and through partially independent mechanisms. Because of this timing difference, divergence between brain sex traits and other sex characteristics is biologically plausible. Transgender identity is studied within this developmental context. There is no single cause, but evidence across neuroscience, endocrinology and psychology shows that gender identity is a stable aspect of human experience that emerges early and is resistant to external pressure to change. Major medical organisations including the World Health Organization and many national professional bodies recognise gender incongruence as a real phenomenon rather than a delusional belief. Social science and clinical data add another layer. Attempts to force transgender people to live as their assigned sex have not been shown to change identity but are associated with worse mental health outcomes. Supportive environments and gender-affirming care are associated with improved wellbeing. That pattern indicates identity is not arbitrary self-description but a deeply rooted component of self. The category “woman” itself is not purely biological even within science. Biological sex involves chromosomes, gonads, hormones, anatomy and secondary characteristics. These dimensions do not always align perfectly. Gender identity describes a person’s internal sense of belonging within social sex categories. In everyday life, societies already rely on this composite reality rather than chromosome testing to recognise women. From a scientific standpoint, the accurate statement is that transgender women are individuals whose gender identity and social role align with the category woman despite differing aspects of sex development. Recognising them as women reflects the combined understanding of developmental biology, psychology and social reality rather than the reduction of sex to a single variable. Science does not produce moral rules about recognition. It describes complexity. The evidence shows that human sex and gender development are multi-layered processes with natural variation. Within that framework, transgender women represent one form of human diversity rather than a contradiction of biology.

@GeumpyCabin @daniellismore Who said others? Please first read then comment!

@daniellismore Human sex is either m or f no variations

@MaryKRe @genome_gov @NLM_NIH @Nature And no - if you would actually be what you claim to be then you would also know, that none of these sources are sufficient.

@MaryKRe @genome_gov @NLM_NIH @Nature That's a joke? Or are you serious, that one of these screenies could act as a reference to a official taxonomy defining sex of human beings based only on gamet size and mobility? You are a joke.

@semanthis Are @genome_gov @NLM_NIH @Nature sufficient for you?! 🤔👀

@MaryKRe #DunningKruger!

@DrCigol @datadriven_tdoc But they don't work in any other context then reproduction. And because basic reproduction is quite simple this definition makes no sense. And that's why you won't find it in any official taxonomy. Please proof me wrong.

@semanthis @datadriven_tdoc Gametes are the essential component of human reproduction - arguably the single most important factor to a sexual reproducing species over time. This is why the gamete definition is the most salient & useful.

@datadriven_tdoc 1/11 The focus on gametes to define biological sex is the hallmark of a debate where one side is dogmatically committed to a pre-ordained outcome. Scientifically, this definition lacks any "fruitfulness"—a core requirement for scientific explication (cf. Rudolf Carnap, 1950).

@datadriven_tdoc 11/11 By clinging to an unfruitful, teleological definition of sex, we create the very problems we claim to solve. We need a language that respects the complexity of the transition—not a reductive dogma that prioritizes abstract categories over biological and social reality.

@datadriven_tdoc 10/11 This deficiency is why political debates, such as those over public spaces, are so toxic. Our current vocabulary fails to distinguish between a "man in a dress" and someone whose entire rational and emotional apparatus operates under female-pattern hormonal influence.

@datadriven_tdoc 9/11 If a definition of "sex" cannot account for these massive shifts in hormones, neurochemistry, and lived experience, it is descriptively deficient. A definition based on static chromosomes or gametes is blind to the actual biological life of the individual.