🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@wiggles

I literally shared with you a chart from the biology community showing one way they grade sex on a spectrum... so not sure what your on about.

Gender studies people get a lot wrong and you have every right to criticise a lot of the nonsense that comes out of them. But the idea of sex being a nuanced property with many factors, each one on a scale, and thus creating a spectrum, is not their creation, and goes back a good ways in biology studies in general, its not some new aged thing.

The gender studies contribution, and where it gets rather absurd, is when they start claiming there are multiple genders/sexes and not just a double-ended spectrum.

@realcaseyrollins

@mittimithai

I told you I was done, anyone who discounts peer reviewed scinece out of hand as "dishonest science" simply because it disagrees with them, without even following the link first, is **not** someone I wish to engage with.. please dont make me mute you, I'd like you to have a chance in the future to talk with me on a different subject (I always give people a second chance)... the conversation is over now.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Except for all the ones linked earlier in the conversation that directly contradicted you I guess... but other than those...

I'm done here, please move along, the last 5 or so mewssages are just you being either rude or repeating yourself, I have no more time for that.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Repeating the same disproven facts over and over isnt going to suddenly make you right.. again, going to stick with the scietnist and medical dictionary, thanks.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

I never claimed there was a category other than female or male, and we already covered the topic of continuous values and why, like eye color, they dont tend to be used in most studies. Though I did provide examples earlier in the thread of how medical professionals do use continuous values when it is necessary.

Not sure why we are repeating it, I get it, when scientific sources directly prove your wrong as you said earlier they are just wrong , cause your right..but some link to a study that doesnt even address the topic can be twisted into some sort of reasoning to support you, you are all for it it seems...

Been down that road, we did that, im over it.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Looked at every link you sent actually.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Yea I might be smarter than the entire medical community, peer reviewed journals, and the medical dictionary just like you.. but alas we cant all be the smartest person in the world.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Was literally one of the developers on the Human Genome Project .. but thanks mr "I know better than everyone in medical science and even the medical dictionary"... clearly you read all the books.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

And to be clear, despite being **capable** of measuring color accurately, we still dont in most studies, most of the time it would just list a color simply as "blue"..

So you seemed to miss the point there, there point is, just because color, like ones eye color, and sex lie on a spectrum doesnt mean every study will care to ellucidate where on the spectrum it is in any detail beyond the vaguest description... the reason being, for most studies it simply isnt important to go into that level of detail.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

You can repeat incorrect information as many times as you want, wont start making it right.

I'll stick with my medical dictionary that disagrees with you and the multiple studies from actual doctors who also disagreed with you, thanks.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Thats because, as we discussed earlier, sex is a bimodal, low-variance distribution. Therefore for most purposes it works just fine to identify a person by which peak in the spectrum they belong to.

People can have a thousand shades of blue in their eyes too, yet you never see scientific data list the exact RGB value of a persons eyes, it will just say "blue".

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@louiscouture Are you trying to sell me an agenda or make an objective fact? If your trying to make a case relevant to the discussion you'd have to compare democrat (obama is all we have enough info on, but joe was part of that) vs Trump. If Obama is dropping a bomb every 6 minutes then that paints a pretty different picture.

Based on your choice of links and the nature of the article it appears you arent trying to sell objective facts to reach the truth but rather an agenda you already decided on before you even linked the article.

Now I can tell you trying to look at the facts over the last decade or so I have watched the numbers of each (and I mean objective numbers, not some propaganda piece which is all that link is)... while some of it is hard to quantify I can say I've seen consistent descalation out of trump compared to Obama. The only figure I know off the top of my head come from the figured published by the US department of defense. On Average Obama had a little under 300K troops deployed overseas per year of his presidency. By comparison Trump had only an average of 175K, quite a bit less.

So yes, what numbers I am aware of paint a pretty clear picture of trumps deescalation (even engaging in peace talks Obama refused to) with Obama clearly more aggressive.

Though really, you need to check your bias, it seems 100% of the time your engagement is always "Trump is a bad guy you should hate him more, here is some propaganda piece as to why"... why is it never "Here is some objective data that touches on both sides, lets try to discuss whats going on here and find the truth"... do you understand the pattern of how you go out to cherry pick data specifically to try to deface trump as a clear agenda as your default causes crippling bias?

@mittimithai

Huh, just because sex is a spectrum in no way implies that people cant be largely categorized under one or the other...

Hot and cold is a spectrum, I can still tell if something is hot or cold.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Suprisingly the "basic biology" you were taught in 3rd grade was only intended to be an introduction. Real biology is far more nuanced and complicated than what your 3rd grade teacher taught you about.

Not sure what it is with people lately trying to insist their grade school teachings are more right because they are simpler.. I see it with people against core math, the PEMDAS "riddle" that circulated, the sexes.. Real science is not that simple, never was.

But hey, like I said, the medical dictionary I quoted earlier directly disagrees with you. If you want to insist you know what medical terms mean more than a medical dictionary, go for it, I'll stick with the professional source until you get some credentials of your own.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Your opinion is noted. It is incorrect, but noted.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@louiscouture notice the wording "without too much".. you do realize that isnt the same as "never" right?

@mittimithai

never said it was a clearly defined technical term.. in fact it cant be since sex is a spectrum there is naturally no cut off point on that spectrum where male ends and intersex begins.. which is kinda the whole point here...

Regardless male and female **are** technical terms and scientists use intersex to mean, to varying degrees, anyone that isnt going to fit perfectly and wholly the technical definition of either of these. Some may be stricter others may be weaker but in all cases they are defining intersex in terms of technical definitions of male and female

So yes, I am going to trust scientists a hell of a lot more to ensure they are drawing that line based on those technical definitions than some guy from the fediverse who "spent a lot of time on it"

The fact is, biologists know a hell of a lot better than you what the technical definition of the sexes are and your own definition appears ill informed and limited wholly to if a person has X or Y genes which not only are NOT the only genes that determine sex, they are not even the technical definition of sex which includes expression and function in the technical definition.

So yea, ill stick with the science on this one, sorry.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Well technically you are the one disputting numbers. I mentioned (and earlier in the coversation linked) scientific sources (professionals and some peer reviewed papers) that gave numbers on intersexed people in the population ranging from 1 in 50 to 1 in 1000.

You are the one claiming that all the scientists who gave such numbers are wrong.

Like i said that holds very little weight for me compared to actual licensed and respected professionals in their field.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

I'm not trying to explain anything to you.. I'm just saying a random dude on social media saying "I know this inside and out" and claiming peer reviewed scientific literature is wrong and he is right is worth very little to me.

Now if you wish to show me how you "know this inside and out" by sharing a paper you got published ina scientific journal that disputes the existing numbers then by all means I'll be happy to listen to you and give your opinion equal weighting as those professional scientists who disagree with you.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles

@mittimithai

Ahh so the scientific and peer reviewed papers that claim you are wrong and give other percentages are just wrong and your right, got it.. talk to me when you get some scientists to agree with you then, until that point its just your (incorrect) opinion.

@realcaseyrollins @wiggles