this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
156 points (95.9% liked)

World News

56210 readers
1954 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 4 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

I wasn't saying "organs" was an indicator. Obviously that's not the question on the medical form. I was using it as a placeholder because apparently I'm not allowed to use the term "biological sex." If you rule out the basic term used to describe something, don't be surprised when people use a less reliable descriptor to get the point across.

We have the language to be specific.

Yes, and the language for that is "biological sex." If you go to the doctor, they will ask you for your biological sex. Are you saying every medical questionnaire is really using transphobic dogwhistles?

Besides, doctors don't even know what to do with trans people regardless of gender or surgeries because all medical research on the topic has been blocked, erased, or burned by knuckledraggers

Doctors don't immediately get amnesia when something gets defunded. If a doctor already specialized in gender-affirming care, then they still know as much as they did before this administration shut down new research. If they didn't specialize in it before, then they were already ignorant about it anyway so it's not like this makes them more ignorant.

Using the government to hamper medical research is a bad thing, yes. Giving bigoted doctors an excuse to let their religion or politics influence the care they give is a bad thing too. And so is making doctors who do care have to fear for their medical licenses in order to continue providing medically necessary treatments. But claiming that doctors suddenly don't know what to do is a hyperbole that misses the actual issue.

and if it comes up, it is a discussion between the patient and the doctor and no one else.

I wasn't saying otherwise. You said "biological sex" is a useless concept and nothing but a dogwhistle, so I gave a counterexample of a situation where it's has a legitimate use as a concept.

If a trans man goes to the doctor, it's not transphobic for that doctor to ask if he may be pregnant or when his last period was. That's standard information that doctors ask every patient who has ovaries. When it comes to routine medical exams, gender simply doesn't matter as much as biological sex.

Obviously if someone is on hormone therapy then it changes the indicators and target ranges for lab work. It changes the specific things to mainly look out for, like types of cancers and bone density or cholesterol issues. Having organs removed, whether cis or trans, changes risk factors for a variety of diseases and renders some screenings less necessary. That should all be taken into account, of course, but pretending that "biological sex" is useless in medical contexts is an ignorant take.

And besides, if "biological sex" is such a bogus concept, then what do we even contrast "gender" with in the first place? If those are different things, then each one logically must be something, or else there wouldn't be two different concepts, in which case the two concepts would collapse in on each other and become functionally the same. If you want them to be distinct, then pretending one of them doesn't really exist is counterproductive.

It's like race and ethnicity. Race is a social construct, sure, but nobody takes that to mean ethnicity doesn't exist or is just a useless dogwhistle.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 1 points 3 minutes ago

Yes, and the language for that is "biological sex." If you go to the doctor, they will ask you for your biological sex.

"Biological sex" is poor language because it doesn't actually provide any useful information. It says nothing about my hormone levels, it says nothing about my fat distribution, it says nothing about my (in)ability to have kids, it says nothing about my dose requirements, it says nothing about my genitals, it has never actually achieved anything useful at the doctor's office other than cause bureaucratic headaches.

If a medical form needs to know if I can get pregnant, the correct language is "are you able to get pregnant". It's not transphobic to ask that in a medical context, if anything it's expected. It is transphobic to assume a trans person can't answer that truthfully. Besides, a lot of cis women can't get pregnant either, and it covers the case of trans men who can.

Doctors don't immediately get amnesia when something gets defunded ... But claiming that doctors suddenly don't know what to do is a hyperbole that misses the actual issue.

Yes, they literally do get amnesia. One of the main complaints trans people about doctors is how they blame everything on us being trans. I've heard it described as "trans broken arm syndrome". It's a similar issue to what cis women face, almost like it's a systematic issue that affects anyone who isn't a cis man.

That should all be taken into account, of course, but pretending that "biological sex" is useless in medical contexts is an ignorant take.

This is contradictory. Trans people already gave discrimination and confusion from doctors on the norm. Eg: I've even had issues with my ophthalmologist, as if being trans has any effect whatsoever on my eyes. A single binary "biological sex" marker erases all the nuance involved and strips us of the language needed to properly convey it.

And besides, if "biological sex" is such a bogus concept, then what do we even contrast "gender" with in the first place?

Individual physical characteristics. If you want to argue that this can be packaged into a nice little binary then at least us


Finally, your persistent sealioning only contributes to the problem that no one ever fucking listens to trans people. We are a tiny minority to begin with, and are constantly being drowned out by cis folk who think they know the trans experience better than us (eg: when was the last time you saw NYT quote a trans person in an article about trans issues?). You have easily typed out more than any trans person in the conversation and have learned absolutely nothing from it.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

You are sealioning. You don't speak to your doctor in order to use the loos. In this context, "biological sex" is a transphobic dog whistle.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not commenting on the top-level post, I was replying to a comment that said:

Biological sex is a dogwhistle made digestible to appease the apathetic moderate

That's not sealioning.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

You don’t speak to your doctor in order to use the loos. In this context, “biological sex” is a transphobic dog whistle.

[–] thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

the term "biological sex" doesnt make much sense tho

what are all of those complex medical treatments trans people can get, if not biology? far more advanced and interesting biology at that

and "biological sex" isnt a binary either, 1 in 40 people are intersex, mostly with almost no effect, but not in the binary either

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 9 hours ago

So what do you want to call it then? It's not like I'm attached to the term itself, but the point is that it's a useful and necessary concept in some contexts so there needs to be a term that refers to it, and you can't just assume anyone who uses the most common term to describe it is transphobic.

And I never said it's a binary, but if a person is intersex then that's probably important information for their doctors to know because there may be certain medical complications that they're more at risk for as a result.