fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #6006 ]

[ SECRET POST #6006 ]

⌈ Secret Post #6006 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

[From]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Youtube channel "Hello Future Me"]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Monark]

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Across the Spiderverse]

__________________________________________________

10. [WARNING for transphobia/standard JKR stuff]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #858.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

...on the off chance that you're not a troll, which is very slim at present, the argument is that hormones--in this case testosterone--CAUSE the differences in muscle and build. As in, a cis woman with a naturally high testosterone level should be disqualified from competing with other, less-testosterone-high cis women, because her body's natural levels since birth give her an "unfair advantage".

And no, this isn't a hypothetical, this is several real cases with professional athletes and Olympians, unlike your example.

I'm not a troll. Are you? Because saying that hormones change everything about a person is delusional. Sexual dimorphism is a thing and it doesn't disapear when someone changes their gender. Which they are welcome to do btw. You do not see any FtM athlets competing, do you? Why is that?

I do not know anything about girls with abnormally high testosterone levels but I suspect that they're taking some drugs to improve their perfomance or need to have their levels treated for health reasons if it's that high. OR they need to adjust the testosterone window if it's not dangerous to girls and is natural. Idk.

Tell me you don't understand the science without saying you don't understand the science...

The "Science" you see doesn't always work like that in homo sapiens.

AYRT

Yeah? That's the point. Troll anon I was responding to seems to think that all men have a specific amount of testosterone and THAT is what makes them hurhur strong. And that all women have a specific amount of estrogen which makes them hurhur weak. That's what we tell 3rd graders. It's not actually how this works. The graph of natural hormones in men and women overlap SIGNIFICANTLY. Women can naturally have high testosterone and men can naturally have weak testosterone and it does not effect their physical abilities at all. Don't even get me started on intersex, xx male syndrome, swyer syndrome, or klinefelter syndrome. It's almost like the human body is complicated, unable to be categorized neatly, and very individualized.....

I'm that so called troll and nowhere did I say that.
I don't know why you suddenly brought up testosterone. I just replied to you once saying I don't know much about testosterone. I din't speak about it anywhere else.

DA that's...the hormone (or at least one of them) that causes the dimorphism you're adamantly defending. The hormone that some cis women have naturally high levels of and are interrogated and banned from pro sports despite being born and raised as women.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_verification_in_sports

I can quote the study by some University about muscle mass and lung capacity in trans women but I don't know how credible is that University. My account for science journals has expired so I'm left with Google.
Wikipedia is not a credible source btw.
There is no FtM world level athlets. There's a few MtF ones. That is facts that I'm sure about.

sa
I'm too lazy checking this University. Here's the link if anyone's interested.
https://bigthink.com/health/truth-about-transgender-womens-athletic-ability/

lol Big Think is funded by Peter Thiel (science denialist libertarian fascist who conducted unsupervised medical research on human beings) and the Koch foundation (fascists) among others. Try again.

DA

I'd say there's a difference between "funding" and "initial investment".

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/big-think/

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-17 18:49 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-17 18:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-17 22:03 (UTC) - Expand

Why are you so focused on winning and making records? MOST athletes don't win or make records. Let them compete as themselves for godsake.

Yeah, who cares who wins or loses? Sport is about participation. /s

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-17 22:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-18 13:56 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-19 15:17 (UTC) - Expand

I'm that so called troll and nowhere did I say that.
I don't know why you suddenly brought up testosterone.

Because you did. Right here:

I do not know anything about girls with abnormally high testosterone levels but I suspect that they're taking some drugs to improve their perfomance

How can high testosterone levels make you suspect that they're taking performance enhancing drugs unless you think that testosterone makes you better at physical performances? I'll wait.

You do not see any FtM athlets competing, do you? Why is that?

We do. There's a list down below.

As you've said, you don't know a whole lot, so maybe shut up? About things you don't know about? Especially when people are using the same uneducated OPINION your spewing to oppress and abuse children.

Yes, this is me replying to you. I said I replied after you bought it up? And so you quoted it for some reason.
I commented under the list, thanks.
Ok, yes, I'm wrong and you are right. You're very very right and correct about everything. No one but you knows about these things. I'm an uneducated troll. You did well winning the argument. Aplause. You're so awesome and good.

Good. I'm glad you understand yourself better. Cause... I noticed you had nothing to say with the actual points of the argument, so.... you unintentionally did a true! Even if it was unintentional, you said something true, I'm so proud!

clap-cplap! You won the argument! Go you!

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2023-06-17 22:08 (UTC) - Expand

Is it all you can say? I thought you'll give me FtM athlets names. Oh, well.

I don't disagree with your main point, but here's a tip: humans are not "sexually dimorphic." That term is reserved by people who actually do science for species where the sex difference is really dramatic, like one gender is five times larger than the other. Whereas, with humans, there are a lot of situations where people can reasonably assume they're looking at a skeleton of a man, and get it wrong. "You can be wrong about this without being an idiot" is not really a thing, with actual sexual dimorphism. I suspect someone influential wanted to underscore "men and women are different" with a sciencey-sounding word and they picked the wrong word. But, like ... you will make biologists flinch and judge you by using it like that.

+1 humans have way too much natural overlap, despite our general population curves, to be called dimorphic.

Actually adult sceletons sex is easy to identify based on scull stracture, pelvic bones, etc.
Here's a relevant study:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15567621/

As an artist I'm aware of the diferences as well.
Btw, here's the metal plate we've sent into space. Pretty neat, isn't it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_plaque
I think the

Nope, too much overlap:

https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/12112/Merrington-Honors-Thesis.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1108&context=curce

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/srichard/files/richardson_sexing_the_x.pdf

1) The study just says that we need a better database for Hispanic sceletons and bones. Wich is fare enough.

In conclusion, while forensic anthropologists have many techniques for estimating
the sex of an individual, many of these techniques do not work as well on Hispanic
individuals. This is for many reasons, such as fragility of remains, small samples, and
most methods being developed primarily with samples that are not of Hispanic ancestry.

2) Yes, intersex is hard to identify. Same is true for the sceletons of trans people. Wich should be obvious. Nice paper otherwise, pretty ineresting.

3) This is some soft science nonsense on genders definition. We're talking sex, not genders. I had better opinion about Harvard tbh.

Currently, there is a broad popular, scientific, and medical conception of the X chromosome as the mediator of the differences between males and females, as the carrier of female-specific traits, or otherwise as a substrate of femaleness. As this essay has documented, associations between the X and femaleness are the accumulated product of contingent historical and material processes and events, and they are inflected by beliefs rooted in gender ideology. The still very contemporary view that the double X makes females unpredictable, mysterious, chimeric, and conservative, while the single X allows men to learn, evolve, and have bigger brains but also makes them the more risk taking of the two sexes, shows how conceptions of X chromosome structure and function often reflect and support traditional gender stereotypes.

1) this shows that what is considered sexual dimorphism ISN'T. It's a product of your lifestyle/culture. Scientists were over-attributing the male sex to skeletons that weren't, because they started with bad data. Kinda like you are.

3) There are at least 4 recognized human sexes.... and your sex chromosomes aren't a binary switch.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/

I see. I'll read it in more depth then. I jumped straight to the Conclusion sections.
I hated how the third paper is presented but I'll give it another go as well.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only