Not quite - mating types aren't sex (though the post confuses them). Their gametes are the same size (isogamy), so it's called mating types. Humans have gametes of different sizes, so we have sexes.

Male seahorse get pregnant, but that doesn't make them trans, they're unambiguously male. This is a great example of why sex is defined by gamete size. If it weren't, we couldn't talk about males and females in any useful way across the animal kingdom.

Clownfish would be a better example as they're sequential hermaphrodites, but that doesn't have any bearing on the human sex binary.

Right, "equivalent to" in the sense that legs are "equivalent to" fins in that they provide locomotion.

It can be true that something is both an important right and used unethically by people that don't actually care about the topic. See Rainbow capitalism as a very related example. Nutomic is right that identity politics are used to create division among the working class, because anything that can create division will be used to do so.

lol "re-education" and "de-radicalization" are euphemisms the same as "enhanced interrogation"

tankies are the mirror image of MAGAts

I disagree with everything you've said, but upvoted because you answered the question.

The law states that “reproductive cancer of any type” be covered. Officials added male breast cancer under that category after a working group of experts reviewed the science. The decision noted “the marked similarity of male and female breast cancer.”

The Trump administration’s memo argues that designation is a mistake. “The Biden Administration falsely classified male breasts as reproductive organs,” Kasperowicz said in his statement to ProPublica.

A former official who was involved in the VA’s decision last year said that while there were discussions about how to interpret “reproductive cancer,” the scientific consensus among VA oncologists was clear. “The evidence showed that male and female breast tissue respond similarly to toxic exposures and share nearly identical biological and mutational profiles,” said the former official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, citing concern for his job prospects in government. “Expanding coverage to male breast cancer was the right call.”

Rosie Torres, who advocated for the PACT Act after her husband became sick, said the current administration is putting politics above patriotism and people. “It shouldn’t matter who signed the bill,” Torres said, referring to Biden. “If you don’t like the ‘reproductive’ word, do it under another category. Don’t remove it. These are peoples’ lives.”

That's a dumb technicality. Wonder if they're really that dumb, or this was pushed through because someone's benefiting from denying care. The right thing to do if you want to "well aktually" the term "reproductive cancer" would be to figure out how to cover it under whatever term brings you joy, not just leave them to die.

Yes.

The "people will never vote for a woman" crowd is sort of right. A woman will never be elected with the current DNC, but only because they view a woman candidate as an excuse to be shittier. They think their base will hold their nose and vote for a worse candidate just because of what's in her pants.

AOC might get elected because she's interesting on her own merits and has enough name recognition to not be buried by the DNC. They'll do their best to prevent it though.

This is often a point of confusion, but human sex is binary. There's edge cases that require clarification as to how they fit into the binary, but don't disprove it.

Human sexuality overall is complex and that's why we differentiate gender from sex. The sex binary and gender spectrum complement each other though, and don't clash.

If you're interested in learning more, here's some background reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonochorism

We fall into that category, where we have two body plans, each organized around producing either sperm or ova. Other species have more body plans, such as recognizably distinct males, females, and hermaphrodites:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trioecy

Those species are a good contrast. Humans don't have that variation, and so sex is binary in humans.

There's literature that explains this specifically in detail, though most of it doesn't really explicitly talk about it, much like math papers don't generally explain that integers can be added together.

Far fewer people hate AI in the general population as a percentage than on Lemmy. Your average person either doesn't care or has found it useful in some way.

Pit bulls need to be banned, full stop. The existing ones can live out their lives but we don't need to be breeding more cruelty into the world

You cannot compromise with a bigot

To reiterate the comment you're responding to, you're reducing a complex world to a binary choice. Everyone that has ever existed is bigoted to some degree, therefore no compromise is possible ever?

Yeah, the comment above is kind of a hilarious example of cognitive dissonance. "I've never seen purity tests, other than these tests for ensuring purity". Blanket statements like that are rarely used in good faith.

I think we agree. Maybe I was misreading the above comment, but I was just clarifying that "transform" in that sense for chickens is not actually changing sex, and so is a different situation than clownfish.

Sarcasm. More sarcasm from the comments

Nearly as bad as the cartoon the Guardian fired their cartoonist of 40 years over, so vile and anti-semitic that the Western news articles on the story won't even reproduce it.

Here it is lol (courtesy of the Turkish media)

The Telegraph's cartoonist produced this piece of filth but his career just about survived. The problem, incidentally, wasn't portraying Boris Johnson as a hideous shit-covered monster, but the little squid in the box. Squids and octopuses are anti-semitic, you see.

Since the headline is unclear, here's what it says:

NPR has obtained the draft text of a proposed rule that would prohibit federal Medicaid reimbursement for medical care provided to transgender patients younger than age 18. It also prohibits reimbursement through the Children's Health Insurance Program or CHIP for patients under age 19.

An additional proposed rule would go even further, blocking all Medicaid and Medicare funding for any services at hospitals that provide pediatric gender-affirming care.

The current rule "merely" ends federal funding for GAC through Medicaid, and the proposed rule is de facto banning it since hospitals rely on federal funding:

The proposal to condition a hospital's participation in Medicaid and Medicare on halting gender-affirming care for youth represents an "unprecedented" use of the executive branch's power to control what medical care is available in hospitals, says Keith.

"Because Medicare is such a significant portion of many hospitals' revenue," she explains, the rule would essentially force hospitals to end their gender care programs for transgender youth. That would mean all of those programs' patients — whether they have Medicaid or private insurance — would lose access.

This ruling was a shitshow and a gift to the GC campaigners. This is a GC site that goes over the issues from their perspective:

https://wingsoverscotland.com/...

In summary, crucial aspects of the ruling were completely made up, possibly from AI hallucinations. The decision is getting appealed, and will quite possibly get completely reversed in favor of Sandie Peggie.

I'm not aware of that being an actual change in sex. The hen can develop male characteristics, but won't produce functional sperm.

Some amount of that is literal psyops. Every major country is intentionally trying to cause at least some division in their geopolitical rivals. There's also internal psyops where governments will try to fracture any movements that might cause political change. At a smaller level, there's echo chambers built by people that are already sucked into an ideology, hoping to propagate that ideology. This recent thread that had simple biological truth downvoted to hell is an example:

https://sh.itjust.works/post/50387688/22307005

All in all it's not new though, it's just gotten more efficient. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism is one example of how it's always been this way. Isaac Asimov also had a pithy quote:

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

When you have your basic needs met and aren't starving to death, you can afford to be irrational and embrace comforting lies. It's just the human condition.