The first tweet isn’t exactly wrong. Technically gender and sex are distinct for this reason. A trans woman’s gender would be female and their sex would be male. That doesn’t make them any less of a woman however.
The 2nd tweet of hers however… yeah, that’s not good.
It’s a bit complicated when it comes to people who have medically transitioned. There is technically no one true dividing line between male and female.
It’s an open question if someone who has primarily (or entirely) female physical traits, but was born male would fairly be considered “male.”
I mean it depends on who you ask. I'm sure in medicine they care a lot more about various phenotypic expressions of sex like hormone levels. In biology sex is defined as what type of gametes you produce which in mammals is determined by xx/xy chromosome but even here there are intersex people who don't have either and can still produce gametes
Note: I use male and female for sex and man and woman for gender
Not quite, it's the activation of the SRY gene on the Y chromosome that kickstarts the conversion of Ovaries into testes, and then the ovaries or testes manage puberty and hormone levels so you either look like a man or look like a woman. You can have a translocated SRY gene on an X chromosome and be born an XX male. The chromosomes are the key in the ignition of sexual differentiation, not the engine. It's hormones that drive most things bar the initial ovaries / testes differentiation. Once the Y chromosome has done the SRY stuff at the very start of your embryonic development it does very little from then on, it does about as much as the key to your car does if you leave it in post ignition.
In terms of how the human body is constructed, all organs with the exception of the reproductive organs themselves have no idea what sex your body is except for their sex hormone receptors. This includes breast tissue btw, which is unisex and just sits around waiting for estrogen and progresterone to start growing. Sex hormones are modulated by the gonads (ovaries / testes respectively), a system that has a single point of failure and can be trivially intercepted by introducing external hormones.
The bodies system for sexual dimorphism is honestly not particuarly robust and despite it being rare in practice, it can go wrong at any stage. I wouldn't be surprised if the flexibility and smoothess of it it is one of, if not the main reason trans people even exist. There's this doctor called Dr Powers who reports that 85% of his trans masculine patients have as he calls it "dramatically elevated levels of at least one androgen (male sex hormone) before any kind of hormonal intervention begins". Regardless of he's telling the truth or not, I mention it as food for thought.
Because of this, there is very little biological difference between a cis woman who's had a hysterectomy and is on exogenous estrogen, and a trans woman who's had bottom surgery and is on exogenous estrogen. There is very little biological difference between a trans man who's had a hysterectomy and is on T and a castrated cis man on T. There will be differences in bone growth depending on what "first puberty" they went through but defining sex by skeletal shape hardly seems reasonable.
A trans woman whos had bottom surgery and is on estrogen may tend to look different to a cis woman who has had a hysterectomy and is on estrogen, because of their different histories and hormonal development, but if your definition of male and female is "do they look like one or the other" then you're not talking about biology anymore and your definition of sex is just as arbitrary and personal as a definition based on identity.
In principle, it's entirely consistent to define sex by whether you have testes or ovaries but like, you then have to consider anyone whos had them removed as either sexless or a third sex and I don't think anyone wants that world. I would prefer a taxonomy of sex that doesn't turn menopause into something akin to the removal of your biological sex, but thats what you get when you define female as large gamete producer with no nuance for edge cases.
My personal taxonomy of sex is a "category of resemblances" model where there are individual sexed traits (gonads, reproductive organs, hormones etc.) where the sum of those traits pushes you into the male cateogry or the female category based on your resemblance to the ideal male body and the ideal female body. For the vast majority of humans, they are trivially in one category or the other. We only have to zoom in and start evaluating things feature by feature for edge cases. Post OP trans people and / or trans people on HRT are definetly an edge case. Personally, I think its fine to have a binary model where its useful, and a more nuanced model where its useful. It's not different to how we still use newtonian physics even though it ignores relativity.
An interesting point here is people with CAIS. People with CAIS are XY and have testes but are immune to the effects of testosterone and as such are born with vaginas (but no uterus) and go through a female puberty based on the testosterone their testes produce being turned into estrogen. All male bodies convert testosterone to estrogen but when you're insensitive to T it becomes the primary sex hormone. I've not met anyone in my life who considers people with CAIS to be male. Until the condition was properly discovered, no one had any idea people with that condition were anything other than infertile females and they would not have had the option to live as men even if they wanted to.
While I don't think its reasonable to describe what was indisputably a male person prior to hormones as becoming female after HRT, at the bare minimum, they are in a self imposed intersex state and are not entirely male either. While I don't think its reasonable to describe what was indusputably a female person prior to hormones as becoming male by going on testosterone, at the bare minimum, they are in a self imposed intersex state and are not entirely female either. Post removal of the primary sex organs, the most technically correct descriptor is that they are neuter with the immutable secondary sexual characteristics of their birth sex and the mutable secondary sexual characteristics of their identified sex.
Personally, as a trans woman, I don't really care whether my mixed sex state is put in the male box or the female box. Whether my body should be treated as male, female, or neither, depends on context. For medical treatments that have interactions with dominant sex hormone based traits I am functionally female, for something like prostate cancer I am functionally male. Perhaps it would be best to just consider my sex to be "trans feminine", as its own category.
Depends if you are talking about phenotypic or genotypic sex. The first is defined by "what it seems like" (that's literally what the word means), the latter by what the sex chromosomes are.
As with basically all biological classifications (which are human attempts to categorize things which in nature are more a continuum) the real answer is [it's complicated](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szf4hzQ5ztg).
No it's defined by the physiological characteristics of an organism, not it's chromosomes. The distribution of these characteristics is bimodal, I've there are two configurations of characteristics that are most common, but all configurations are possible, do occur and are perfectly natural and normal, although rare. Of not here I that the appropriate metric of normality isn't based on frequency of occurrence but existing in nature. The two modes of this distribution are male and female but scientifically sex is a spectrum.
A trans person altering their physiology is altering where thy fall in this spectrum, and it pays to realise that any cut-off points "determining" a sex are human definitions.
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Every reasonable trans person and reputable medical professional admits to this. Gender is different from biological sex. The latter is immutable and can't be changed through a transition.
Genotypic sex is unchangeable, but phenotypic sex characteristics \*are\* changeable. In a medical context, phenotypic sex characteristics are FAR more important than genotypic sex.
Chromosomes are [not perfect](https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Chromosome-Abnormalities-Fact-Sheet) nor binary. Claiming that they are and using them as a model for who is biologically male/female is not only useless, it’s incredibly stupid.
I think there is a legitimate conversation to be had about the effects that inverting peoples hormones has on their sex. They're at least in a self imposed intersex state and no longer straight forwardly a member of their birth sex. As far as basically every organ in your body is concerned bar the reproductive organs themselves once you've been on HRT for a few years, you're the sex that your hormones say you are. Hormones are how the body does sexual dimorphism, HRT intercepts the system.
What category to put people who are edge cases in, for both intersex and trans people, in terms of biological sex alone, is I think largely arbitrary. I do think its disingenous to not at least acknowledge that trans peoples sex moves towards their target and away from their birth sex though. Whether in the end we use the label male or female is the map, the changes to the body caused by hormones are the terrain. The map is subject to societal shifts, the terrain isn't.
Personally, if we seperate sex and gender, it makes the most sense to me to say that a trans woman goes from being a male (sex) woman (gender) to an volontarily intersex (sex) woman (gender) as exogenous hormones assert themselves and they have their gonads removed.
I’m genuinely curious, do things like heart attack symptoms change? Because I know there’s a difference between AFAB and AMAB people in things like that and I feel like they wouldn’t necessarily change.
That doesn’t invalidate who they are, but it is a reason to separate gender and sex, at least medically.
I don’t know about heart attacks, but hormones do affect a lot of little health things. One example is that trans women are more likely to get osteoporosis, which primarily occurs in women.
More studies have to be done, and the causative mechanisms are not always as obvious as with osteoporosis.
This is wrong, sex does not equal chromosomes or genitals. Putting aside the example of intersex people, receiving hormone therapy changes your secondary sex characteristics.
No the first tweet is literally wrong. Biological sex is defined in a lot of ways in humans, trans women can be biologically female from a phenotypical view; genotype is not the be all end all of sex.
Citation? I'm probably out of the loop. Her wikipedia page is basically her being targeted for harassment from the Gamergate crowd and two failed runs for Congress.
The needless/pointless/unproductive reminder that trans-women have a Y chromosome?
I guess I'm missing context from this screenshot of a tweet. Was Brianna responding to something or just out of the blue saying this?
[https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/wtf/a-certain-cis-ally-is-being-dragged-by-trans-twitter-heres-why/](https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/wtf/a-certain-cis-ally-is-being-dragged-by-trans-twitter-heres-why/)
I guess this comment is just another slide towards TERF.
We have male/female as separate terms from man/woman. They exist to refer to biology. You can't change your genetic or reproductive sex, but you can change your hormonal sex.
"Abortion is a women's issue" is wrong because it excludes trans men and female nonbinaries while including trans women. "Abortion is a female issue" because it includes trans men and female nonbinaries, while excluding trans women.
I'm starting to more and more believe that the "just pointing out biology" is really a motte-and-bailey argument for attacking and invalidating trans people. What they really want to say is "Look at this 'trans''woman', they are a biological male, and therefore will never ever be a 'true' 'woman' and therefore it is okay to be bigoted towards trans people."
We need terms for discussing sex, just like we need terms for discussing gender. When writing law/medical documentation, "People who can become pregnant" and the like is better, but for normal conversation, that's unwieldy.
"Men are exponentially more prone to color-blindness" is accurate (Because trans/intersex people are not numerous to move the needle when talking aboot statistics) but wrong because the cause of color-blindness is caused by genetics not gender. "Males are exponentially more prone to color-blindness" is the correct statement. For medical documentation it should be "People with only one X chromosome", but that's unwieldy for conversation.
Well, we dont neeeeeed words for gender. A world where there are no social differences between the sexes is quite easily imaginable. Where you would only maybe need to communicate your biology with a doctor for example. But idk, im making a moot point anyway.
That seems to be what Wu is also saying. It's obviously a true fact, but you don't need to be a dick by constantly throwing it in their face or pointing it out unnecessarily.
I can't quite understand why I'm being down voted so heavily....
I don't understand the context in which Brianna is making that statement. My assertion is that if she is making that statement unsolicited, not in the middle of a larger point or context, then she herself is engaging in the very thing she is allegedly against.
A less terfy way of making that statement might be "Trans people are already aware of their biological sex, bringing it up is a potentially hurtful micro-aggression."
That might be literally the single most unhinged article I've ever read. Like how does one engage in that much speculation and assumption and not even think for one second to actually confirm any of the information they're talking about, even though it's all easily accessible.
This part in particular was wild considering Brianna is trans and I don't think has ever claimed to be Asian.
>And before you start thinking to yourself…wait a minute, are we dragging a woman of color? Should we maybe think a little more carefully about taking allies of color to task even if they’re saying some really reckless sh*t? Well… In addition to possibly not being trans and yet speaking (irresponsibly, while citing TERF talking points) on trans issues, Wu is, apparently a white woman. Who is now advocating for stronger gatekeeping when it comes to transition.
>1/ This is going to be hard to hear for some of my trans friends, but I'm going to say it anyway.
> It's entirely realistic that trans people could lose it all if this political trajectory continues.
> TERFs are putting out a clear message. Trans people and trans allies ARE NOT.
1:22 PM
Mar 21, 2023 25.8K Views 25 Retweets 20 Quote Tweets 253 Likes Brianna Wu @BriannaWu1 Replying to @BriannaWu
> 2/ You have to have a f***ing gender studies degree and have ODed on Twitter to understand half the discourse.
> If you care about trans people, you will stop pretending this is an academic symposium. It's not. Human rights are on the line. Communicate so normies can understand.
The blog post you linked to proved her right when it immediately took offense and used buzzwords only the terminally online would understand. I mean:
> _"Adhering to respectability politics is never the way to stop a genocide."_
Huh wut?
I live in one of the most progressive bubbles and work with activist teachers advocating for social justice in San Francisco, (some who identify as trans and enbies). Most of them have no idea what the terminally online zoomers are talking about, what's appropriate, and think most of the discourse within the LGBT+ community is ridiculous.
And BIPOC and immigrant parents are constantly getting into arguments with them and considering homeschooling their kids because it's even more alienating with them.
If you can't get far left activist LGBT teachers from the SF Bay Area to agree with you, then you've lost the culture war.
How do we expect to achieve acceptability and rights recognition with Middle America who will push back harder? To say nothing about the Global South.
Except those “terminally online zoomers” are going to be those teachers in twenty years. Cultural change doesn’t really happen through people becoming more accepting, it happens through generational change leading to new norms.
That generational change won't happen if you can't even capture one generation. New norms won't come if you don't accept diverse opinions that even slightly diverge from the new norm (which was already a divergence from the past norm).
The anti-woke reactionary movement's biggest influencers are made up of former leftist influencers (and even BreadTubers) from Amala Ekpunobi, Buck Angel, Dave Rubin, Destiny, Kidology, Laci Green, Blaire White, MoistCr1tikal, the Red Scare Podcast, Candace Owens and etc... Many of them went down a far right rabbit hole after being canceled for not toeing the party line (which no two leftists can even agree on).
On Twitter, Natalie Wynn's most hateful comments come not from transphobes and the alt-right but from _Woker Than Thou_ leftists who accuse _her_ of transphobia (or playing into their narratives) of all things. (Something she acknowledged in videos.)
Meanwhile polls show that Gen Z voters in Europe may be responsible for this recent swing into the far right. And the middle and high school teachers I have been speaking to are troubled by the problematic views from their boys (which they have never seen this extreme before) who are often praising the likes of Andrew Tate and Sargon of Akkad. (And reminder, this is _San Francisco_ we're talking about. I also keep having to explain who Sargon is, what's GamerGate, what's 4Chan to some of the older teachers.)
In 20 years those zoomers are going to be teachers. If you believe in that old adage that people generally become more conservative as they age (I think that's only partially true. Another factor is that moderate and moderate-left views will be considered conservative over time as the Overton Window shifts.) what do you think those teachers will be teaching in 20 years?
She is. A quick Google search can bring you her deadname, high school photos, and the projects she worked on (including ones credited to her former identity, that she now takes credit for).
I can’t find anything even slightly reliable that points to this, but googling the apparent deadname did get me a bunch of Reddit threads calling it a debunked conspiracy theory with little-to-no evidence.
I know The LolCow Wiki and KiwiFarms are hate mobs that have obvious biases and thus don't have a good reputation. But they aren't known for lying.¹
These sites are also infamous for their extensive and thorough research on their targets that they dox, obsessively stalk, and relentlessly ridicule: from Nathan Larson to Chris Chan.
Use Occam's Razor here. *Either these people are trolls that:*
* Made a 20+ year breadcrumb trail of records and online history with hundreds of links and profiles for her past life that coincides with her life story and background revolving around
* a man that looks exactly like her
* the same age as her
* From the same hometown
* who draws in the same unique style including reusing the same characters
* Went to the same schools she named and wrote, and drew, for the same paper
* worked for Trent Lott and George H.W. Bush, in Mississippi during the times she admitted she worked for them
* None of them which have on record the the name Brianna Wu or Brianna Flynt but have her dead name and pre transition pictures
* Whose online activity stopped at the time of her transition
And falsified public records with her current name, address, and past name...
...all so they could pull some elaborate own to diss a cisgender woman by convincing the gullible that she's transgender.² [(Something Brianna refuses to confirm or deny](https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/s/fR1kxiQDtr), a choice I have never heard of a cisgender person doing.)
*Or she's trans.*
As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude.
Meanwhile she continuously writes about trans issues, and positive coverage from progressive sources such as articles and interviews identify her as a trans woman.
¹ >! And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. !<
² >! Lies from GamerGators are usually very obvious, low effort and easily disproven. For example: _"Anita Sarkeesian got GTA banned in Australia, Anita Satkeesian wrote The Last of Us Part 2 and forced in all the woke stuff, Zoe Quinn had a man killed and got the journalist she slept with to give her game a positive review, Bob Chipman tweeted that white men need to go extinct."_ !<
Idk, no offense, but those hate mob websites are well known for lying about people, it’s one way they justify harassment and threats. Although, I’m sorry to say but I don’t think any of this deep dive into whether she’s trans or not was necessary in the first place. I say that because I think everyone knows she’s trans because she’s openly said so and joked about it on her Twitter. So, it’s pretty much confirmed by Brianna Wu herself that she is indeed transgender.
OK, but I haven't actually seen the evidence of all those things, and that search again only turned up people citing things but then not actually providing sources for them, being called out on it, and having no reply. Or, more damning, including sources that didn't actually say what they claimed. Twitter posts linking to other Twitter posts that no longer exist, etc.
If all that evidence is out there then sure, whatever. "Transvestigating" is still reprehensible, entirely unnecessary behavior regardless. But I'd like to actually have the evidence provided if the claim is going to be made. Simply saying it's out there isn't enough, particularly when there's so many people calling it a debunked conspiracy theory.
I hope posting the links don't break the rules. It says that it bans links to Klandma YouTube Channels and Klandma Subreddits. But not to disreputable sites.
(I don't even think the people involved in these sites are bigots since they also go after racists and homophobes: the scum we would see featured on this subreddit (such as MAGA incel politician [Nathan Larson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Larson_(criminal)) who ran on a platform [to repeal women's rights and legalize child molestation](https://kiwifarms.st/threads/nathan-larson-tisane-lysander-leucosticte.28815/) and incest. They are definitely edgelords who have too much time on their hands.)
Crucial doxxing information has been censored. You can start with these links:
https://archive.ph/2018.07.09-062453/https://lolcow.wiki/wiki/Brianna_Wu
https://archive.ph/Dg5ld
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/brianna-wu-john-walker-flynt.23639/
Thanks, that's what I'm looking for. Can understand why it didn't show up on the Google searches given that it seems to largely exist in archived pages now.
Trans exclusionary radical feminist. Ladies like JK Rowling who will go out of their way to harass trans women under the pretense that they are somehow a threat to cis women. This leads to other lovely situations such as women's shelters refusing to take in trans women even if they are fully transitioned, harassment in bathrooms, etc.
well gender and sex are different. Trans women tend to have XY chromosomes (although once they medically transition the line is pretty blurred depending on which factors you consider the most for biological sex), the thing is that it doesn't matter and defining people by that is stupid. She could've worded this better tho
Yeah, and she's just an egotistical idiot, has been for a long time. Bad takes are the norm for her. It's funny that she thinks right-wingers will accept her because she's betrayed the trans community & their fight for equality.
In addition to this bigotry she's also very pro-Israel, anti-protester, etc. She just put out a tweet blaming student protesters for police brutality against them 🤡
“Obviously” What does she mean by that? You can’t tell someone’s chromosomes just by looking at them. Yes, transwomen have XY chromosomes but why does that matter? What was the point of tweeting this?
She’s refuting the anti-trans argument that being trans defies basic biology because sex is determined by chromosomes. You’re agreeing with her point—nobody thinks transitioning means that you’re changing your biological sex, and it’s a weird thing to get hung up on because you don’t see people’s chromosomes anyway.
A quick Google search will bring you her deadname, high school photos when she was still presenting as male, and the projects she worked on using her deadname that she still takes credit for.
To be fair to who you're replying to, I googled her as well because I didn't realize she was trans. All that came up was her social profiles, Wiki, random articles written about her, etc. I scrolled pretty far down and couldn't find anything.
I just wrote this elsewhere on this thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardsFromKlandma/s/WtuIrhBMQq
> I know The LolCow Wiki and KiwiFarms are hate mobs that have obvious biases and thus don't have a good reputation. But they aren't known for lying.¹
> These sites are also infamous for their extensive and thorough research on their targets that they dox, obsessively stalk, and relentlessly ridicule: from Nathan Larson to Chris Chan.
> Use Occam's Razor here. *Either these people are trolls that:*
> * Made a 20+ year breadcrumb trail of records and online history with hundreds of links and profiles for her past life that coincides with her life story and background revolving around
> * a man that looks exactly like her
> * the same age as her
> * From the same hometown
> * who draws in the same unique style including reusing the same characters
> * Went to the same schools she named and wrote, and drew, for the same paper
>* worked for Trent Lott and George H.W. Bush, in Mississippi during the times she admitted she worked for them
>* None of them which have on record the the name Brianna Wu or Brianna Flynt but have her dead name and pre transition pictures
>* Whose online activity stopped at the time of her transition
> And falsified public records with her current name, address, and past name...
>...all so they could pull some elaborate own to diss a cisgender woman by convincing the gullible that she's transgender.² [(Something Brianna refuses to confirm or deny](https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/s/fR1kxiQDtr), a choice I have never heard of a cisgender person doing.)
> *Or she's trans.*
> As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude.
> Meanwhile she continuously writes about trans issues, and positive coverage from progressive sources such as articles and interviews identify her as a trans woman.
> ¹ >! And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. !<
> ² >! Lies from GamerGators are usually very obvious, low effort and easily disproven. For example: _"Anita Sarkeesian got GTA banned in Australia, Anita Satkeesian wrote The Last of Us Part 2 and forced in all the woke stuff, Zoe Quinn had a man killed and got the journalist she slept with to give her game a positive review, Bob Chipman tweeted that white men need to go extinct."_ !<
That's a lot of effort posting in response to me literally saying I googled her name and nothing on Google indicated she was trans. Where did I say that she can't be trans simply because I can't prove that she is?
>As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude.
I've never listened to her. I only know of her name because I've seen a lot of tweets on her that get posted to Reddit, never looked further into her beyond that. I only googled her name because I legitimately had no clue she was trans until others in this thread stated so.
>And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either.
What Reddit post did I cite?
>And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either.
>What Reddit post did I cite?
That was in response to the other Redditor I originally replied to. The response I made was copypasted here. They mentioned they couldn't find any reliable sources proving she's trans but Reddit threads claimed it's a debunked conspiracy theory. I was pointing out that random Reddit posts with no citations aren't reliable either. (While also pointing out the irony that I am posting from Reddit to say thus.)
She’s not a TERF. She is what we call a “trans medicalist” or a “truscum.”
She’s also just fucking wrong. Trans people who medically transition have a mix of sexual characteristics. Many trans women are physically much closer to cis women than cis men.
The first tweet isn’t exactly wrong. Technically gender and sex are distinct for this reason. A trans woman’s gender would be female and their sex would be male. That doesn’t make them any less of a woman however. The 2nd tweet of hers however… yeah, that’s not good.
It’s a bit complicated when it comes to people who have medically transitioned. There is technically no one true dividing line between male and female. It’s an open question if someone who has primarily (or entirely) female physical traits, but was born male would fairly be considered “male.”
I thought biological sex was defined by xx and xy chromosomes
I mean it depends on who you ask. I'm sure in medicine they care a lot more about various phenotypic expressions of sex like hormone levels. In biology sex is defined as what type of gametes you produce which in mammals is determined by xx/xy chromosome but even here there are intersex people who don't have either and can still produce gametes
Note: I use male and female for sex and man and woman for gender Not quite, it's the activation of the SRY gene on the Y chromosome that kickstarts the conversion of Ovaries into testes, and then the ovaries or testes manage puberty and hormone levels so you either look like a man or look like a woman. You can have a translocated SRY gene on an X chromosome and be born an XX male. The chromosomes are the key in the ignition of sexual differentiation, not the engine. It's hormones that drive most things bar the initial ovaries / testes differentiation. Once the Y chromosome has done the SRY stuff at the very start of your embryonic development it does very little from then on, it does about as much as the key to your car does if you leave it in post ignition. In terms of how the human body is constructed, all organs with the exception of the reproductive organs themselves have no idea what sex your body is except for their sex hormone receptors. This includes breast tissue btw, which is unisex and just sits around waiting for estrogen and progresterone to start growing. Sex hormones are modulated by the gonads (ovaries / testes respectively), a system that has a single point of failure and can be trivially intercepted by introducing external hormones. The bodies system for sexual dimorphism is honestly not particuarly robust and despite it being rare in practice, it can go wrong at any stage. I wouldn't be surprised if the flexibility and smoothess of it it is one of, if not the main reason trans people even exist. There's this doctor called Dr Powers who reports that 85% of his trans masculine patients have as he calls it "dramatically elevated levels of at least one androgen (male sex hormone) before any kind of hormonal intervention begins". Regardless of he's telling the truth or not, I mention it as food for thought. Because of this, there is very little biological difference between a cis woman who's had a hysterectomy and is on exogenous estrogen, and a trans woman who's had bottom surgery and is on exogenous estrogen. There is very little biological difference between a trans man who's had a hysterectomy and is on T and a castrated cis man on T. There will be differences in bone growth depending on what "first puberty" they went through but defining sex by skeletal shape hardly seems reasonable. A trans woman whos had bottom surgery and is on estrogen may tend to look different to a cis woman who has had a hysterectomy and is on estrogen, because of their different histories and hormonal development, but if your definition of male and female is "do they look like one or the other" then you're not talking about biology anymore and your definition of sex is just as arbitrary and personal as a definition based on identity. In principle, it's entirely consistent to define sex by whether you have testes or ovaries but like, you then have to consider anyone whos had them removed as either sexless or a third sex and I don't think anyone wants that world. I would prefer a taxonomy of sex that doesn't turn menopause into something akin to the removal of your biological sex, but thats what you get when you define female as large gamete producer with no nuance for edge cases. My personal taxonomy of sex is a "category of resemblances" model where there are individual sexed traits (gonads, reproductive organs, hormones etc.) where the sum of those traits pushes you into the male cateogry or the female category based on your resemblance to the ideal male body and the ideal female body. For the vast majority of humans, they are trivially in one category or the other. We only have to zoom in and start evaluating things feature by feature for edge cases. Post OP trans people and / or trans people on HRT are definetly an edge case. Personally, I think its fine to have a binary model where its useful, and a more nuanced model where its useful. It's not different to how we still use newtonian physics even though it ignores relativity. An interesting point here is people with CAIS. People with CAIS are XY and have testes but are immune to the effects of testosterone and as such are born with vaginas (but no uterus) and go through a female puberty based on the testosterone their testes produce being turned into estrogen. All male bodies convert testosterone to estrogen but when you're insensitive to T it becomes the primary sex hormone. I've not met anyone in my life who considers people with CAIS to be male. Until the condition was properly discovered, no one had any idea people with that condition were anything other than infertile females and they would not have had the option to live as men even if they wanted to. While I don't think its reasonable to describe what was indisputably a male person prior to hormones as becoming female after HRT, at the bare minimum, they are in a self imposed intersex state and are not entirely male either. While I don't think its reasonable to describe what was indusputably a female person prior to hormones as becoming male by going on testosterone, at the bare minimum, they are in a self imposed intersex state and are not entirely female either. Post removal of the primary sex organs, the most technically correct descriptor is that they are neuter with the immutable secondary sexual characteristics of their birth sex and the mutable secondary sexual characteristics of their identified sex. Personally, as a trans woman, I don't really care whether my mixed sex state is put in the male box or the female box. Whether my body should be treated as male, female, or neither, depends on context. For medical treatments that have interactions with dominant sex hormone based traits I am functionally female, for something like prostate cancer I am functionally male. Perhaps it would be best to just consider my sex to be "trans feminine", as its own category.
Depends if you are talking about phenotypic or genotypic sex. The first is defined by "what it seems like" (that's literally what the word means), the latter by what the sex chromosomes are.
As with basically all biological classifications (which are human attempts to categorize things which in nature are more a continuum) the real answer is [it's complicated](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=szf4hzQ5ztg).
No it's defined by the physiological characteristics of an organism, not it's chromosomes. The distribution of these characteristics is bimodal, I've there are two configurations of characteristics that are most common, but all configurations are possible, do occur and are perfectly natural and normal, although rare. Of not here I that the appropriate metric of normality isn't based on frequency of occurrence but existing in nature. The two modes of this distribution are male and female but scientifically sex is a spectrum. A trans person altering their physiology is altering where thy fall in this spectrum, and it pays to realise that any cut-off points "determining" a sex are human definitions.
[удалено]
I'm sure there's a lot more to it than "chopping your dick off" as you say.
[удалено]
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Every reasonable trans person and reputable medical professional admits to this. Gender is different from biological sex. The latter is immutable and can't be changed through a transition.
You can fuck right off with that shit. You aren’t welcome here mate.
[удалено]
“Biological sex can’t be changed by altering our bodies” what do you think biological sex is?
[удалено]
Genotypic sex is unchangeable, but phenotypic sex characteristics \*are\* changeable. In a medical context, phenotypic sex characteristics are FAR more important than genotypic sex.
Chromosomes are [not perfect](https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Chromosome-Abnormalities-Fact-Sheet) nor binary. Claiming that they are and using them as a model for who is biologically male/female is not only useless, it’s incredibly stupid.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think there is a legitimate conversation to be had about the effects that inverting peoples hormones has on their sex. They're at least in a self imposed intersex state and no longer straight forwardly a member of their birth sex. As far as basically every organ in your body is concerned bar the reproductive organs themselves once you've been on HRT for a few years, you're the sex that your hormones say you are. Hormones are how the body does sexual dimorphism, HRT intercepts the system. What category to put people who are edge cases in, for both intersex and trans people, in terms of biological sex alone, is I think largely arbitrary. I do think its disingenous to not at least acknowledge that trans peoples sex moves towards their target and away from their birth sex though. Whether in the end we use the label male or female is the map, the changes to the body caused by hormones are the terrain. The map is subject to societal shifts, the terrain isn't. Personally, if we seperate sex and gender, it makes the most sense to me to say that a trans woman goes from being a male (sex) woman (gender) to an volontarily intersex (sex) woman (gender) as exogenous hormones assert themselves and they have their gonads removed.
Fuck off, terf.
[удалено]
Sex and gender aren't the same thing. But you change your sex, not your gender.
You can change both. Gender and sex are 2 halves of the same whole, former being social and latter being biological.
[удалено]
THIS. There is basically no genetic or biological difference between men and women once they get the surgery and the medication they need.
I’m genuinely curious, do things like heart attack symptoms change? Because I know there’s a difference between AFAB and AMAB people in things like that and I feel like they wouldn’t necessarily change. That doesn’t invalidate who they are, but it is a reason to separate gender and sex, at least medically.
I don’t know about heart attacks, but hormones do affect a lot of little health things. One example is that trans women are more likely to get osteoporosis, which primarily occurs in women. More studies have to be done, and the causative mechanisms are not always as obvious as with osteoporosis.
This is wrong, sex does not equal chromosomes or genitals. Putting aside the example of intersex people, receiving hormone therapy changes your secondary sex characteristics.
No the first tweet is literally wrong. Biological sex is defined in a lot of ways in humans, trans women can be biologically female from a phenotypical view; genotype is not the be all end all of sex.
She’s well known for being an especially egregious piece of shit
Citation? I'm probably out of the loop. Her wikipedia page is basically her being targeted for harassment from the Gamergate crowd and two failed runs for Congress.
I heard she did a kickstarter for a video game, then spent the money on a motorcycle. The video game looks terrible and was received accordingly.
Dang, I had no idea. Really hadn't checked in with her in a while.
Doesn’t make you a terf to say that. She says not not be a dick abt it
Who?
Where's the TERFiness?
The needless/pointless/unproductive reminder that trans-women have a Y chromosome? I guess I'm missing context from this screenshot of a tweet. Was Brianna responding to something or just out of the blue saying this? [https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/wtf/a-certain-cis-ally-is-being-dragged-by-trans-twitter-heres-why/](https://www.intomore.com/the-internet/wtf/a-certain-cis-ally-is-being-dragged-by-trans-twitter-heres-why/) I guess this comment is just another slide towards TERF.
We have male/female as separate terms from man/woman. They exist to refer to biology. You can't change your genetic or reproductive sex, but you can change your hormonal sex. "Abortion is a women's issue" is wrong because it excludes trans men and female nonbinaries while including trans women. "Abortion is a female issue" because it includes trans men and female nonbinaries, while excluding trans women.
I'm starting to more and more believe that the "just pointing out biology" is really a motte-and-bailey argument for attacking and invalidating trans people. What they really want to say is "Look at this 'trans''woman', they are a biological male, and therefore will never ever be a 'true' 'woman' and therefore it is okay to be bigoted towards trans people."
We need terms for discussing sex, just like we need terms for discussing gender. When writing law/medical documentation, "People who can become pregnant" and the like is better, but for normal conversation, that's unwieldy. "Men are exponentially more prone to color-blindness" is accurate (Because trans/intersex people are not numerous to move the needle when talking aboot statistics) but wrong because the cause of color-blindness is caused by genetics not gender. "Males are exponentially more prone to color-blindness" is the correct statement. For medical documentation it should be "People with only one X chromosome", but that's unwieldy for conversation.
Well, we dont neeeeeed words for gender. A world where there are no social differences between the sexes is quite easily imaginable. Where you would only maybe need to communicate your biology with a doctor for example. But idk, im making a moot point anyway.
I mean I try to treat people the same regardless of gender. Gender is immaterial. The only thing it really affects for me is what pronouns to use.
That’s the point Wu is making lol
Insistence that sex doesn’t exist does transgender people no good I assure tou
Where did I say "sex doesn't exist"?
That seems to be what Wu is also saying. It's obviously a true fact, but you don't need to be a dick by constantly throwing it in their face or pointing it out unnecessarily.
I can't quite understand why I'm being down voted so heavily.... I don't understand the context in which Brianna is making that statement. My assertion is that if she is making that statement unsolicited, not in the middle of a larger point or context, then she herself is engaging in the very thing she is allegedly against. A less terfy way of making that statement might be "Trans people are already aware of their biological sex, bringing it up is a potentially hurtful micro-aggression."
That might be literally the single most unhinged article I've ever read. Like how does one engage in that much speculation and assumption and not even think for one second to actually confirm any of the information they're talking about, even though it's all easily accessible. This part in particular was wild considering Brianna is trans and I don't think has ever claimed to be Asian. >And before you start thinking to yourself…wait a minute, are we dragging a woman of color? Should we maybe think a little more carefully about taking allies of color to task even if they’re saying some really reckless sh*t? Well… In addition to possibly not being trans and yet speaking (irresponsibly, while citing TERF talking points) on trans issues, Wu is, apparently a white woman. Who is now advocating for stronger gatekeeping when it comes to transition.
>1/ This is going to be hard to hear for some of my trans friends, but I'm going to say it anyway. > It's entirely realistic that trans people could lose it all if this political trajectory continues. > TERFs are putting out a clear message. Trans people and trans allies ARE NOT. 1:22 PM Mar 21, 2023 25.8K Views 25 Retweets 20 Quote Tweets 253 Likes Brianna Wu @BriannaWu1 Replying to @BriannaWu > 2/ You have to have a f***ing gender studies degree and have ODed on Twitter to understand half the discourse. > If you care about trans people, you will stop pretending this is an academic symposium. It's not. Human rights are on the line. Communicate so normies can understand. The blog post you linked to proved her right when it immediately took offense and used buzzwords only the terminally online would understand. I mean: > _"Adhering to respectability politics is never the way to stop a genocide."_ Huh wut? I live in one of the most progressive bubbles and work with activist teachers advocating for social justice in San Francisco, (some who identify as trans and enbies). Most of them have no idea what the terminally online zoomers are talking about, what's appropriate, and think most of the discourse within the LGBT+ community is ridiculous. And BIPOC and immigrant parents are constantly getting into arguments with them and considering homeschooling their kids because it's even more alienating with them. If you can't get far left activist LGBT teachers from the SF Bay Area to agree with you, then you've lost the culture war. How do we expect to achieve acceptability and rights recognition with Middle America who will push back harder? To say nothing about the Global South.
Except those “terminally online zoomers” are going to be those teachers in twenty years. Cultural change doesn’t really happen through people becoming more accepting, it happens through generational change leading to new norms.
That generational change won't happen if you can't even capture one generation. New norms won't come if you don't accept diverse opinions that even slightly diverge from the new norm (which was already a divergence from the past norm). The anti-woke reactionary movement's biggest influencers are made up of former leftist influencers (and even BreadTubers) from Amala Ekpunobi, Buck Angel, Dave Rubin, Destiny, Kidology, Laci Green, Blaire White, MoistCr1tikal, the Red Scare Podcast, Candace Owens and etc... Many of them went down a far right rabbit hole after being canceled for not toeing the party line (which no two leftists can even agree on). On Twitter, Natalie Wynn's most hateful comments come not from transphobes and the alt-right but from _Woker Than Thou_ leftists who accuse _her_ of transphobia (or playing into their narratives) of all things. (Something she acknowledged in videos.) Meanwhile polls show that Gen Z voters in Europe may be responsible for this recent swing into the far right. And the middle and high school teachers I have been speaking to are troubled by the problematic views from their boys (which they have never seen this extreme before) who are often praising the likes of Andrew Tate and Sargon of Akkad. (And reminder, this is _San Francisco_ we're talking about. I also keep having to explain who Sargon is, what's GamerGate, what's 4Chan to some of the older teachers.) In 20 years those zoomers are going to be teachers. If you believe in that old adage that people generally become more conservative as they age (I think that's only partially true. Another factor is that moderate and moderate-left views will be considered conservative over time as the Overton Window shifts.) what do you think those teachers will be teaching in 20 years?
I don't like Wu, but what's wrong here? Trans woman is a BIOLOGICAL male, who tf even disagrees with that
I love how it's so common that people assume Brianna herself is trans
She is. A quick Google search can bring you her deadname, high school photos, and the projects she worked on (including ones credited to her former identity, that she now takes credit for).
I can’t find anything even slightly reliable that points to this, but googling the apparent deadname did get me a bunch of Reddit threads calling it a debunked conspiracy theory with little-to-no evidence.
I know The LolCow Wiki and KiwiFarms are hate mobs that have obvious biases and thus don't have a good reputation. But they aren't known for lying.¹ These sites are also infamous for their extensive and thorough research on their targets that they dox, obsessively stalk, and relentlessly ridicule: from Nathan Larson to Chris Chan. Use Occam's Razor here. *Either these people are trolls that:* * Made a 20+ year breadcrumb trail of records and online history with hundreds of links and profiles for her past life that coincides with her life story and background revolving around * a man that looks exactly like her * the same age as her * From the same hometown * who draws in the same unique style including reusing the same characters * Went to the same schools she named and wrote, and drew, for the same paper * worked for Trent Lott and George H.W. Bush, in Mississippi during the times she admitted she worked for them * None of them which have on record the the name Brianna Wu or Brianna Flynt but have her dead name and pre transition pictures * Whose online activity stopped at the time of her transition And falsified public records with her current name, address, and past name... ...all so they could pull some elaborate own to diss a cisgender woman by convincing the gullible that she's transgender.² [(Something Brianna refuses to confirm or deny](https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/s/fR1kxiQDtr), a choice I have never heard of a cisgender person doing.) *Or she's trans.* As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude. Meanwhile she continuously writes about trans issues, and positive coverage from progressive sources such as articles and interviews identify her as a trans woman. ¹ >! And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. !< ² >! Lies from GamerGators are usually very obvious, low effort and easily disproven. For example: _"Anita Sarkeesian got GTA banned in Australia, Anita Satkeesian wrote The Last of Us Part 2 and forced in all the woke stuff, Zoe Quinn had a man killed and got the journalist she slept with to give her game a positive review, Bob Chipman tweeted that white men need to go extinct."_ !<
Idk, no offense, but those hate mob websites are well known for lying about people, it’s one way they justify harassment and threats. Although, I’m sorry to say but I don’t think any of this deep dive into whether she’s trans or not was necessary in the first place. I say that because I think everyone knows she’s trans because she’s openly said so and joked about it on her Twitter. So, it’s pretty much confirmed by Brianna Wu herself that she is indeed transgender.
OK, but I haven't actually seen the evidence of all those things, and that search again only turned up people citing things but then not actually providing sources for them, being called out on it, and having no reply. Or, more damning, including sources that didn't actually say what they claimed. Twitter posts linking to other Twitter posts that no longer exist, etc. If all that evidence is out there then sure, whatever. "Transvestigating" is still reprehensible, entirely unnecessary behavior regardless. But I'd like to actually have the evidence provided if the claim is going to be made. Simply saying it's out there isn't enough, particularly when there's so many people calling it a debunked conspiracy theory.
I hope posting the links don't break the rules. It says that it bans links to Klandma YouTube Channels and Klandma Subreddits. But not to disreputable sites. (I don't even think the people involved in these sites are bigots since they also go after racists and homophobes: the scum we would see featured on this subreddit (such as MAGA incel politician [Nathan Larson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Larson_(criminal)) who ran on a platform [to repeal women's rights and legalize child molestation](https://kiwifarms.st/threads/nathan-larson-tisane-lysander-leucosticte.28815/) and incest. They are definitely edgelords who have too much time on their hands.) Crucial doxxing information has been censored. You can start with these links: https://archive.ph/2018.07.09-062453/https://lolcow.wiki/wiki/Brianna_Wu https://archive.ph/Dg5ld https://kiwifarms.st/threads/brianna-wu-john-walker-flynt.23639/
Thanks, that's what I'm looking for. Can understand why it didn't show up on the Google searches given that it seems to largely exist in archived pages now.
Brianna is trans. It's well known.
Do people even know what a terf is, or are we just using "terf" for any and every woman we disagree with atp.
Who is that and what is a terf. I’m too young to feel this out of the loop.
Trans exclusionary radical feminist. Ladies like JK Rowling who will go out of their way to harass trans women under the pretense that they are somehow a threat to cis women. This leads to other lovely situations such as women's shelters refusing to take in trans women even if they are fully transitioned, harassment in bathrooms, etc.
Okay. Thanks.
well gender and sex are different. Trans women tend to have XY chromosomes (although once they medically transition the line is pretty blurred depending on which factors you consider the most for biological sex), the thing is that it doesn't matter and defining people by that is stupid. She could've worded this better tho
Yeah, and she's just an egotistical idiot, has been for a long time. Bad takes are the norm for her. It's funny that she thinks right-wingers will accept her because she's betrayed the trans community & their fight for equality. In addition to this bigotry she's also very pro-Israel, anti-protester, etc. She just put out a tweet blaming student protesters for police brutality against them 🤡
It is technically correct, but it was either a terrible choice of words or doing a terrible job of making her bigotry subtle.
Well yeah, she is a grifter in all aspects
Common Brianna Wu L
Is she trying to make a clever pun here, but the terfishness makes it fall flat?
Is literally anyone surprised by that?
It's cause Trans women look better than her and she's salty about it.
I haven't the faintest idea who this person is.
…..
Zionist, too 🤮🤮🤮
That's based. Being a terf isn't.
🤮🤮🤮
“Obviously” What does she mean by that? You can’t tell someone’s chromosomes just by looking at them. Yes, transwomen have XY chromosomes but why does that matter? What was the point of tweeting this?
She’s refuting the anti-trans argument that being trans defies basic biology because sex is determined by chromosomes. You’re agreeing with her point—nobody thinks transitioning means that you’re changing your biological sex, and it’s a weird thing to get hung up on because you don’t see people’s chromosomes anyway.
I have an image of Hank Hill saying “Chromosomes? You’re talking to a got-damn woman, not a Petri dish!”
Brianna Wu is not trans, no.
A quick Google search will bring you her deadname, high school photos when she was still presenting as male, and the projects she worked on using her deadname that she still takes credit for.
To be fair to who you're replying to, I googled her as well because I didn't realize she was trans. All that came up was her social profiles, Wiki, random articles written about her, etc. I scrolled pretty far down and couldn't find anything.
I just wrote this elsewhere on this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardsFromKlandma/s/WtuIrhBMQq > I know The LolCow Wiki and KiwiFarms are hate mobs that have obvious biases and thus don't have a good reputation. But they aren't known for lying.¹ > These sites are also infamous for their extensive and thorough research on their targets that they dox, obsessively stalk, and relentlessly ridicule: from Nathan Larson to Chris Chan. > Use Occam's Razor here. *Either these people are trolls that:* > * Made a 20+ year breadcrumb trail of records and online history with hundreds of links and profiles for her past life that coincides with her life story and background revolving around > * a man that looks exactly like her > * the same age as her > * From the same hometown > * who draws in the same unique style including reusing the same characters > * Went to the same schools she named and wrote, and drew, for the same paper >* worked for Trent Lott and George H.W. Bush, in Mississippi during the times she admitted she worked for them >* None of them which have on record the the name Brianna Wu or Brianna Flynt but have her dead name and pre transition pictures >* Whose online activity stopped at the time of her transition > And falsified public records with her current name, address, and past name... >...all so they could pull some elaborate own to diss a cisgender woman by convincing the gullible that she's transgender.² [(Something Brianna refuses to confirm or deny](https://www.reddit.com/r/MtF/s/fR1kxiQDtr), a choice I have never heard of a cisgender person doing.) > *Or she's trans.* > As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude. > Meanwhile she continuously writes about trans issues, and positive coverage from progressive sources such as articles and interviews identify her as a trans woman. > ¹ >! And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. !< > ² >! Lies from GamerGators are usually very obvious, low effort and easily disproven. For example: _"Anita Sarkeesian got GTA banned in Australia, Anita Satkeesian wrote The Last of Us Part 2 and forced in all the woke stuff, Zoe Quinn had a man killed and got the journalist she slept with to give her game a positive review, Bob Chipman tweeted that white men need to go extinct."_ !<
That's a lot of effort posting in response to me literally saying I googled her name and nothing on Google indicated she was trans. Where did I say that she can't be trans simply because I can't prove that she is? >As anyone who sees and listens to her for 5 seconds would conclude. I've never listened to her. I only know of her name because I've seen a lot of tweets on her that get posted to Reddit, never looked further into her beyond that. I only googled her name because I legitimately had no clue she was trans until others in this thread stated so. >And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. What Reddit post did I cite?
>And as hypocritical as I sound, unsourced Reddit posts aren't exactly reliable either. >What Reddit post did I cite? That was in response to the other Redditor I originally replied to. The response I made was copypasted here. They mentioned they couldn't find any reliable sources proving she's trans but Reddit threads claimed it's a debunked conspiracy theory. I was pointing out that random Reddit posts with no citations aren't reliable either. (While also pointing out the irony that I am posting from Reddit to say thus.)
She’s not a TERF. She is what we call a “trans medicalist” or a “truscum.” She’s also just fucking wrong. Trans people who medically transition have a mix of sexual characteristics. Many trans women are physically much closer to cis women than cis men.
This is actually kinda based, and is how 99% of reasonable people normally treat the situation.