Socially it depends on how well they manage to disguise themselves as male. Being visibly pregnant is a very obvious indicator that a woman who is attempting to present herself as a man is not actually a man.
Who would go to the trouble of transitioning, against the vicious judgement of some people, if not to try to live a more authentic life? I am (visibly) non-binary, and I can tell you, I don’t do this just for the hell of it.
Are you having a nice time repeatedly misgendering one of my trans siblings? I see what you’re doing. A bit of basic social respect costs nothing, you know.
And “visibly” as in I get funny looks and sometimes shouted abuse from passing cars. Is that enough for you?
So is looking unusual in some undefined way is what "visibly non-binary" means? I genuinely do not have any reference point for this description, and certainly couldn't tell if someone is or isn't based on looks.
My male colleague who self-describes with a "non-binary" identity has no obvious visual markers of this.
This applies very narrowly. A GRC allows "acquired gender" to replace sex when sex is ascertained by birth certificate, which is only done in limited circumstances. This is distinct, in law, from actually being that sex.
Irrelevant, we are talking about gender, which is distinct from sex. It remains that “pregnant people” is a plainer and more accurate way of talking about people that are pregnant.
I don't think you'll get anywhere arguing with these people, especially the ones who've bought into this cult to the extent that they've transed their own children.
They have to convince themselves they've done the right thing, because the alternative is horrifying.
Agreed. Now that web access is so readily available, it's about time online service providers started taking more responsibility for what they publish and who can access it. That short-lived era of the Internet being only for tech-savvy adults is long gone. The online world is the real world now.
People often use the phrase "think of the children!" mockingly, but we really do need to think about their welfare and what sort of society we want them to develop and grow up in, and that includes the part of society that is mediated online.
Despite the criticisms people have over some of the detail in these new regulations, I see this as a very positive first step in the right direction.
World Athletics' policymakers are well aware of this, and it is addressed in the article where it discusses eligibility for the female category:
"Biological males who have Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome and therefore have not gone through male sexual development including any type of male puberty."
At the 2016 Olympics in Rio, all three medalists in the women's 800m were male athletes with male physiological advantage. None of the three has, or had, a transgender identity.
Fundamentally, this issue isn't about trans. The problem is, competition organizers across many sports decided that including males in the female category is more important than fair competition for female athletes. That's the problem that needs to be addressed.
Some of the most interesting organisms can be found in these sort of extreme environments.
Not really related to the article, but I'm really fond of this one, found in salt pools, for its beautiful and unique morphology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haloquadratum
There are a lot of interesting organisms. Some eats away plastic, some grows back their limbs, and so on. I am pretty sure people are doing researches on them, as we would like to have that kind of regenerative power. I do not have a better list now, but I have ran across a lot more, interesting ones.
