Once again, for those still quoting primary school level science:
Rebecca Helm, a biologist and an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina, Asheville US writes:
"Friendly neighborhood biologist here. I see a lot of people are talking about biological sexes and gender right now. Lots of folks make biological sex sex seem really simple. Well, since it’s so simple, let’s find the biological roots, shall we? Let’s talk about sex...[a thread]
If you know a bit about biology you will probably say that biological sex is caused by chromosomes, XX and you’re female, XY and you’re male. This is “chromosomal sex” but is it “biological sex”? Well...
Turns out there is only ONE GENE on the Y chromosome that really matters to sex. It’s called the SRY gene. During human embryonic development the SRY protein turns on male-associated genes. Having an SRY gene makes you “genetically male”. But is this “biological sex”?
Sometimes that SRY gene pops off the Y chromosome and over to an X chromosome. Surprise! So now you’ve got an X with an SRY and a Y without an SRY. What does this mean?
A Y with no SRY means physically you’re female, chromosomally you’re male (XY) and genetically you’re female (no SRY). An X with an SRY means you’re physically male, chromsomally female (XX) and genetically male (SRY). But biological sex is simple! There must be another answer...
Sex-related genes ultimately turn on hormones in specifics areas on the body, and reception of those hormones by cells throughout the body. Is this the root of “biological sex”??
“Hormonal male” means you produce ‘normal’ levels of male-associated hormones. Except some percentage of females will have higher levels of ‘male’ hormones than some percentage of males. Ditto ditto ‘female’ hormones. And...
...if you’re developing, your body may not produce enough hormones for your genetic sex. Leading you to be genetically male or female, chromosomally male or female, hormonally non-binary, and physically non-binary. Well, except cells have something to say about this...
Maybe cells are the answer to “biological sex”?? Right?? Cells have receptors that “hear” the signal from sex hormones. But sometimes those receptors don’t work. Like a mobile phone that’s on “do not disturb’. Call and cell, they will not answer.
What does this all mean?
It means you may be genetically male or female, chromosomally male or female, hormonally male/female/non-binary, with cells that may or may not hear the male/female/non-binary call, and all this leading to a body that can be male/non-binary/female.
Try out some combinations for yourself. Notice how confusing it gets? Can you point to what the absolute cause of biological sex is? Is it fair to judge people by it?
Of course you could try appealing to the numbers. “Most people are either male or female” you say. Except that as a biologist professor I will tell you...
The reason I don’t have my students look at their own chromosome in class is because people could learn that their chromosomal sex doesn’t match their physical sex, and learning that in the middle of a 10-point assignment is JUST NOT THE TIME.
Biological sex is complicated. Before you discriminate against someone on the basis of “biological sex” & identity, ask yourself: have you seen YOUR chromosomes? Do you know the genes of the people you love? The hormones of the people you work with? The state of their cells?
Since the answer will obviously be no, please be kind, respect people’s right to tell you who they are, and remember that you don’t have all the answers. Again: biology is complicated. Kindness and respect don’t have to be.
Note: Biological classifications exist. XX, XY, XXY XXYY and all manner of variation which is why sex isn't classified as binary. You can't have a binary classification system with more than two configurations even if two of those configurations are more common than others.
These laws need to be removed from the statue books. It’s concerning there is an increase in charges, and cases before the courts, around womens personal decisions and their personal trauma. That police or others claim to be using ‘sensitivity’ or investigating because they have ‘concerns for the health and welfare’ of the mother is obvious bollox. #ProChoice#Autonomy
Abortion guidelines branded horrifying by grieving mum - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wgqxl0ywjo
The federal abortion ban bill is here. "Leave it to the states" was, of course, a smokescreen.
H.R.722 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): To implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/722
Given the corporate media sane-washing and general kissing of the ring, I choose to believe what has been shared with me directly over the "actchually, it was an awkward gesture of exuberance" milquetoast media.
Especially when the list looks like this:
Hastags that have also apparently been blocked from user experiences. Will keep updating. Range is worldwide.
I’m shocked by how misinformed the men in my life are on abortion bans. Most of them support a woman’s right to choose - but they don’t understand that the bans put lives at risk. One said to me “I’m sure they don’t impact women who WANT to start a family”.
They do - and here’s why:
Abortion bans put lives at risk. When you criminalize abortion - you’re practically criminalizing pregnancy. It sounds harsh - but women have been arrested for having miscarriages. Doctors face jail time for intervening to save a woman’s life if she’s having pregnancy complications.
When a woman is having an early miscarriage - you can’t tell whether it happened naturally or was induced. The police should not be involved in making that call. Yet if they have ANY reason to suspect you wanted to end that pregnancy? You could be arrested.
Have an ectopic? An abruption? A fetus with lethal anomalies? Doctors are going to hesitate before intervening even IF your life is at risk. They have to consult the legal department, they have to fear for their licence and the possibility of jail time.
Pregnancy is NOT a health neutral state. Anything you can be at risk for - you’re higher risk for in pregnancy. When things go sideways - it can happen incredibly quickly. Waiting to intervene can and does cost the life of the mother AND the baby.
Doctors are also fleeing states with abortion bans - leaving women in those states with even less access to qualified care. They don’t want to practice somewhere that the government is going to dictate what happens to their patient. They don’t want to worry about criminal charges.
All of this adds up to bad news for women - many of who WANT children but will choose not to become pregnant in the face of these archaic and dangerous laws. It’s not “your body my choice”. It’s “my body my choice”. Until people realize that - we continue to be in danger. #abortion#prochoice#abortionishealthcare#womenshealth#mybodymychoice#reproductivehealth
"For years, the right has galvanized behind a so-called 'right to life' cause. Labeled by liberals as a forced birth agenda, the right’s pro-life efforts never extended to opposition to the death penalty, nor support for prenatal, postpartum, or reproductive healthcare, nor to programs to feed or house infants and children.
Pro-life? Hardly. It was an anti-abortion, anti-contraceptive, anti-sex education, misogynist agenda all along."
@georgetakei
"Pro-life" has never been pro-life. It's anti-choice. Anyone left of Mussolini who uses "pro-life" to describe the anti-choicers is Doing It Wrong™.
I'm far too fascinated with far too many topics. I've compiled an exhaustive list of hashtags for some of those interests; I'll try to do better about keeping it current and updated.
Instagram blocked searches for #democrats and other political hashtags ( www.engadget.com )
Instagram unterdrückt Suchtreffer ( www.spiegel.de )
Hier noch der deutsche Artikel zum Beitrag ...
Meta Censors #Democrat when searched for
The Censorship has begun