Is on the Gin
- May 26, 2020
- United Kingdom
It entirely depends on the condition.Intersex people? Hardly, unless you really stretch the definitions of the male and female sex to allow almost any traits of the opposite sex.
Sometimes it just means as a male they're shorter and as a woman they're taller.
I have a friend whose 5'3 and he's not intersex. A flatmate at uni was 5'4 and he wasn't intersex. It entirely depends on the specific condition and intersex is a very broad range of conditions.
Except Dr Verma's imaging technique and method would allow a far more educated guess. Yes you wouldn't know right away but it would be possible counting the required things to give a pretty good guess.Neurology is one of the least understood areas in terms of gender differentiation. There's a huge amount of research, and countless trends and tendencies have been identified.... but if you show a neuroscientist a single brain image, they will not be able to determine with much certainty whether it's male or female. There's enormous overlap, even in those areas which show differentiation.
Except that is what the intersex argument appears to be making that the present approach isn't applicable due to edge cases and must be revised due to themWhy the fuck is that relevant? We're not determining the "standard image". We're describing morphologies that exist.
Though usually will define them as male or female in general for ease....We have. The umbrella term "intersex" includes various sub-types which have been identified and scientifically described. And scientists usually don't ascribe them as entirely male or female.
Except Dr Verma in the video did claim there was a clear observable difference which was a bigger / more clear pattern than they expected to ever see. Also it is seemingly controversial because people still are unwilling to accept the neurological differences even exist let alone argue over the reason for them.Why would it? You're expecting rebuttal for a fairly uncontroversial study.
The issue isn't any flaw in Verma's research which requires rebuttal. The issue is that you seem to believe the research indicates something that it doesn't, and that Verma never claimed.
Yet it's seemingly what Anita was doing and has been pushing for said kind of treatment.Right, so your analogy is just someone claiming that male and female are exactly the same thing, which nobody is doing and nobody has said. We're back to strawmanning.