Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

restoredcdc.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 195 posts

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#151

Post by Vuska »

defrost wrote: post #146
Vuska wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sex is defined by which gametes are produced, not chromosomes.

What of the people that are born who don't produce gametes? ( For example, no gametes are produced in 85% of individuals with streak gonads ) The whole human sex | gender thing seems superficially clearcut but the real world edge cases are messy AF. The aspect I personally find confusing is that the exceptions are relatively rare .. human births are straighforward enough for 98% of births, and of the 2% that pose a c…

A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced.

There are messy edge cases. Not all people have 8 fingers and two thumbs, but we don't say digit count is on a spectrum because some people are born with more or less, or that some people have had digits amputated.

The vast, vast majority of people are not messy edge cases. And some of them find language like "pregnant people" or "people with protates" awkward and vaguely dehumanising as opposed to the more understandable and specific terms: "women" and "men".

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#152

Post by account42 »

steego wrote: post #136
unification_fan wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pregnant people I'm usually not a bigot but that one is dumb

Let's find out if you're a bigot or not. I'll throw up Webster's definition for reference. Bigot – a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The capacity for pregnancy is not confined to individuals with a female (46,XX) chromosomal pattern. The real world is complicated, and intersex people can be born with a (46,XY) karyotype or mixed (46,XX) and (46,XY) karyotyp…

Some people being born with additional/missing digits or limbs doesn't mean we should stop saying that humans have two arms and two legs with five fingers/toes each. At the end this is all performative - no one was ever actually harmed by women being called women.

And if anything those who insist of forcing this newspeak onto others by attacking anyone that doesn't go along also fit your definition of being "obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices".

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#153

Post by defrost »

account42 wrote: post #152
steego wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's find out if you're a bigot or not. I'll throw up Webster's definition for reference. Bigot – a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The capacity for pregnancy is not confined to individuals with a female (46,XX) chromosomal pattern. The real world is complicated, and intersex people can be born with a (46,XY) karyotype or mixed (46,XX) and (46,XY) karyotyp…

Some people being born with additional/missing digits or limbs doesn't mean we should stop saying that humans have two arms and two legs with five fingers/toes each. At the end this is all performative - no one was ever actually harmed by women being called women. And if anything those who insist of forcing this newspeak onto others by attacking anyone that doesn't go along also fit your definition of being "obstinat…

> doesn't mean we should stop saying that humans have two arms and two legs with five fingers/toes each.

In the context of a loose generalisation that's pefectly fine.

However in the context of delivering public services to insist that all humans have two arms and two legs with five fingers/toes each with no exceptions is just wrong.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#154

Post by account42 »

gamegod wrote: post #5
gotoeleven wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's absolutely abhorrent that you think combating the effects of racism in the healthcare system is political. Do you also believe that about sexism in the healthcare system?

You don't combat racims and sexism by being racist and sexist.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#155

Post by novemp »

ciiiicii wrote: post #143
novemp wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't want to acknowledge trans men existing... women are still people. Pregnant women are pregnant people.

[flagged]

Yes, because it would be unforgivably woke to acknowledge women as people.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#156

Post by asacrowflies »

Vuska wrote: post #151
defrost wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of the people that are born who don't produce gametes? ( For example, no gametes are produced in 85% of individuals with streak gonads ) The whole human sex | gender thing seems superficially clearcut but the real world edge cases are messy AF. The aspect I personally find confusing is that the exceptions are relatively rare .. human births are straighforward enough for 98% of births, and of the 2% that pose a c…

A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced. There are messy edge cases. Not all people have 8 fingers and two thumbs, but we don't say digit count is on a spectrum because some people are born with more or less, or that some people have had digits amputated. The vast, vast majority of people are not messy edge cases. And some of…

> A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced.

So how can we determine what "should" be from a scientific basis if all study of these outliers is policed and censored like this?

This seems to be missing the point that would and should are objective vs whatever YOU and yours decided... Almost universally decided by religious or cultural dogma ... And not biology or science

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#157

Post by Vuska »

asacrowflies wrote: post #156
Vuska wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced. There are messy edge cases. Not all people have 8 fingers and two thumbs, but we don't say digit count is on a spectrum because some people are born with more or less, or that some people have had digits amputated. The vast, vast majority of people are not messy edge cases. And some of…

> A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced. So how can we determine what "should" be from a scientific basis if all study of these outliers is policed and censored like this? This seems to be missing the point that would and should are objective vs whatever YOU and yours decided... Almost universally decided by religious or cul…

We've been able to observe that there are two sexes since time immemorial based on secondary sex characteristics. There is a very strong correlation between these characteristics and gametes produced. This isn't what I or anyone else has decided nor is it based on religion or culture.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#158

Post by asacrowflies »

Vuska wrote: post #157
asacrowflies wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced. So how can we determine what "should" be from a scientific basis if all study of these outliers is policed and censored like this? This seems to be missing the point that would and should are objective vs whatever YOU and yours decided... Almost universally decided by religious or cul…

We've been able to observe that there are two sexes since time immemorial based on secondary sex characteristics. There is a very strong correlation between these characteristics and gametes produced. This isn't what I or anyone else has decided nor is it based on religion or culture.

Why is a strong correlation need to forced into a false binary true or false by the law or government?? Myself and others have already gone over the outliers... Again you are focusing on "should be" vs what objectively and scientifically just IS. which is the very definition of culture vs science.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#159

Post by me-vs-cat »

Vuska wrote: post #151
defrost wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of the people that are born who don't produce gametes? ( For example, no gametes are produced in 85% of individuals with streak gonads ) The whole human sex | gender thing seems superficially clearcut but the real world edge cases are messy AF. The aspect I personally find confusing is that the exceptions are relatively rare .. human births are straighforward enough for 98% of births, and of the 2% that pose a c…

A less succinct way of phrasing it would be something like: which gametes are produced, were produced, or should have been produced. There are messy edge cases. Not all people have 8 fingers and two thumbs, but we don't say digit count is on a spectrum because some people are born with more or less, or that some people have had digits amputated. The vast, vast majority of people are not messy edge cases. And some of…

Like you, I find those terms awkward, at best. I refuse to use them.

Yet, "what should have been produced" is no better. Everytime I hear it, from you and anyone else, it sounds like numbskulls all too pleased at themselves for what they believe is a clever definition, without realizing it's merely "because I said so".

Maybe I'm missing something, and one day I will hear it differently. Not many such things change for me after years. Maybe I'll win the lottery, too.

Since you mentioned fingers... I used to know a shop teacher who adamantly wouldn't count themselves among the 10-fingered, and would give you a safety lecture if you brought it up. Just like that lecture would ignore your joke about opening soda cans and proceed into a near-diatribe that, 30 years later, is still an effective reminder on machine safety, this exemplifies the crux of the gender terminology problem: you're focusing on the wrong thing.

Why are you so insistent on telling other people about their bodies, to the point of declaring to them what their body "should have produced"?

You appear as the middle-schooler that thought youself clever, and your close group of friends seemed to agree, but most everyone else is trying to ignore you. This only became a problem when that close group of friends started stealing lunch money, saying it "should have" been given to them.

Re: Public health data disappeared. RestoredCDC.org is bringing it back

#160

Post by Vuska »

asacrowflies wrote: post #158
Vuska wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been able to observe that there are two sexes since time immemorial based on secondary sex characteristics. There is a very strong correlation between these characteristics and gametes produced. This isn't what I or anyone else has decided nor is it based on religion or culture.

Why is a strong correlation need to forced into a false binary true or false by the law or government?? Myself and others have already gone over the outliers... Again you are focusing on "should be" vs what objectively and scientifically just IS. which is the very definition of culture vs science.

It's not a forced binary. There are no in-between gametes. There are large gametes (eggs) and small gametes (sperm).

The law and government doesn't get to decide this, as you say, it just is. How the law reacts to the scientific fact of the sex binary is a different matter.

Post reply on HN