Hi all!

Often when I want to rant about small things that happens to me / I encounter, I either too shy to open a whole post about it or doesn't have the time at the moment. But it usually doesn't stop bothering me and I'm still angry about it. So I collected a few such rants and I will post it right here.

I will number the rants so if you want to want to comment on a certain rant you can also just refer to it by its number, although you don't have to.

The first two just happened to me about an hour ago, the others are from earlier. All things had happened in the last few weeks at most.

So, the rants:

Rant #1: I have access to Scientific American and happened to see their issue of September 2017. This issue is dedicated to the issue of sex and "gender". Scientific American define, again and again in the different articles, what gender is, and the differences between sex and gender; at the same time, they keep conflate the two so all of this become an incoherent mess.

For example, in an article about "transgender kids", they say: "“Sex” refers to the biological categories male and female, whereas “gender” references one’s identification with the social and cultural attributes and categories traditionally attached to each sex." In an admittedly pretty infographic about DSD, that can be seen also here, they define transgender woman for example as "a person who was assigned male at birth based on her anatomy but who identifies as a woman" and nonbinary person as "someone who identifies as neither completely female nor completely male. Such an individual may identify with both genders or neither gender, or they may be gender fluid, meaning their gender fluctuates between female and male."

Okay, saying that someone is "identifies as neither completely female nor completely male" and that "gender fluctuates between female and male" is extremely weird in and of itself in my opinion, because a moment ago you said that gender is different than sex, you talked about how transgender woman is "identifies as a woman", how come suddenly you talk about identifying as male or female"? Female and male refer to sex, you just said that an article ago, "“Sex” refers to the biological categories male and female" you said, "transgender woman identifies as a woman" you said, can't you be consistent with your terminology and explanations?

But what really irked me is the next article, titled "NOT JUST FOR MEN: Researchers and doctors must dig deeper into gender differences before they can provide women with better treatments". This article talks about how scientists and researchers hadn't bothered to study both male and female humans and animals, such as mice, and basically just most of the times studied males in anything that isn't specific to the female sex such as pregnancies:

The vast majority of animal research has been conducted only on males, mostly on rodents. And women have been grossly underrepresented in human clinical trials. Even when both sexes are included, sex-specific analyses are generally not reported—and because most subjects are men, the findings may not pertain to women.

Scientists and researchers discovered over the years that the differences between sexes are not just restricted to the reproductive system, but are much more comprehensive:

More change came in 2001, when a landmark Institute of Medicine (IOM) report emphasized the important role that “sex” played in the basic biology that underpins health care. It concluded that “every cell has a sex.” Yet almost no cell biologists consider, or even know, the sex of the cells or tissues they study. Nor do they address how sex chromosomes affect the systems they are investigating.

And then:

The IOM report defined sex as a biological quality or classification of sexually reproducing organisms, generally male or female, derived from chromosomes and sex hormones. Gender was defined, in human studies, as sociocultural—a person’s “self-representation as male or female.”

"Self-representation as male or female"? What about non-binary people? Forgot about them? Also - why did you titled the article "gender differences" then, when the article clearly talks about sex differences? Oh, but wait, they found a way to incorporate gender somehow! This is the next paragraph:

This concept can be expanded to include gender norms (social expectations of “masculine” and “feminine” behaviors) and gender relations (how people react to one another because of gender), all of which can exert powerful influences on biology. For example, men are generally stronger than women not only because of biological factors such as larger muscles but also because of gender roles: in many societies, men lift and carry most of the heavy objects. Another example might be the twofold greater incidence of (unipolar) depression in women, which may result from an interaction of biological and social factors, such as women being more likely to be sexually assaulted.

No you buffoons, your whole article is about how the female sex is underrepresented in research. Stop pretending that this have anything to do with "gender"!

Next paragraph:

Since the IOM report, scientists, academicians and health policy advocates have been urging their institutions, journals and government agencies to confront the need to include women and female animals in research and to study sex differences.

This is about sex differences. This is about the underrepresentation of the female sex in research. You know it too fucking well, Scientific American. You are just pretending.

In the end there is another infographic titled "Note to Doctor: Women Are Not Men" and in the description: "Medical studies relied heavily on men or male animals in the past, which slowed progress in women’s health care, according to the Institute of Medicine. Although researchers are finally improving the mix, women and female animals are still in the minority. Parity is needed because many illnesses affect women differently than men. Women often respond differently to treatments as well. Here is just a sample."

Females. You are talking about females. You say women and you know you mean "female humans". Why do you pretend this has anything to do with "gender". Just stop.

Of course they don't stop. not in this issue (I stopped reading after that) and not in current issues. This is just maddening, how so-called "scientific" journal is all captured by an ideology and just lie and confuse people who actually believe them.

Rant #2: I also read this comment titled Let’s talk about (biological) sex in Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (it's free to read), which basically say the same about the underrepresentation of the female sex in research and the sex differences, and it's much clearer and devoid of gender nonsense - almost entirely. They had to insert the obligatory gender bullshit in there, of course.

Under the title "Sex as well as gender", they say this:

A pet peeve of many researchers with an interest in sex differences is the incorrect use of sex and gender — in particular, the use of the latter as a synonym for the former. Sex refers to biological attributes that distinguish organisms as male, female, intersex and hermaphrodite. Gender is a social construct, encompassing various psychological and social characteristics that collectively define individuals as men, women, non-binary or trans.

It is important to recognize that both apply to humans: gender does not negate or override sex differences, but, equally, not all differences between the sexes in humans are socially constructed. Perhaps more surprisingly, both sex and gender can independently or synergistically modulate specific traits (for example, pain) and act as independent risk factors for disease (for example, ‘female’ gender roles are associated with higher risk of cardiovascular disease independently of sex effects).

Oh, stop. You are talking about sex and you know it. Stop shoehorn gender nonsense into everything and everywhere. Had you had to write that, otherwise you wouldn't be able to publish this piece? I seriously think they had to at this point.

Rant #3: I encountered a book titled something like "The wonder down below: the complete guide to the vagina". The title is a translation from English and therefore the title I just gave in English is not the exact wording; the original book is apparently in another language (Norwegian?) and is called "Gleden med skjeden - alt du trenger å vite om underlivet". In a very brief search I conducted, I couldn't find the English version this book was supposedly translated from.

ANYWAY... The book is about the female body - the female reproductive system, female puberty, sex from the female perspective (as in, how does sex feels with with vagina, clitoris, volva, female sexual drive, female orgasm, etc.), etc. But there is a part in the book when they "explain" the different between sex and gender. It includes this little part (my [possibly lame but as exact as I can] translation, empathize is mine):

Trans man is a person that is born in a female body, but identify as man. Many trans people had known since childhood that they belong to the gender that does not fit their sex. For many parents that may sound scary, the same way anything unfamiliar may sound scary. This is why it's important we talk about trans people and raise awareness to the issue. If parents think their child is "born in the wrong body", they can take the child to a pediatrician.

It's important to note, there is no gender clinic for children or something like the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) of the UK in my country, which is why I suppose it says to go to a pediatrician and not some doctor specialized in "gender identity development" or whatever.

There is another paragraph about trans people after that, the risen awareness to the trans issue via popular culture, and not much more. But even just this angers me. This is a book about the female human body. Must you shoehorn this fucking "gender" into every fucking thing that is about women and girls, especially when it is specifically and exclusively about women's and girls' bodies, AKA the female human body? And your sentence about how parents should take their child to a doctor if they are "born in the wrong body" is wrong and immoral. It's scary how you spread your immoral and extremely harmful message about transing kids to people like that.

Rant #4: I watched some woman YouTube creator talking about her very difficult pregnancy and she repeatedly talk about herself as a "pregnant person" and refer to pregnant women in general as "pregnant people". Of course, she also have pronouns in her Instagram bio (she posted a screenshot of it in the video, I didn't look for it).

No, nope, sorry, can't do that. I really liked her delivery but I can't listen to such nonsense without my blood pressure rising, so no thanks. Bye woman YouTuber who I'd have probably subscribe to if not for this gender bullshit.

(Also - in another video posted about a year ago about Trisha Paytas she refers to her as "they". Trisha Paytas, one of the biggest trolls, drama and attention seeker on the internet had identified back then as transman or non-binary - can't remember which, possibly both at different points - and said her proffered pronouns is "they". I don't know if she still claim that, I lost track. But she had been back then. I remember watching in amazement as people, like sheep, all started to call her "they". This woman was ridiculed and made fun of about basically anything else she had done and said, no one believed any of her other claims, but this, this one made everything change the way they refer her. I remember that annoying man Youtuber whose channel name I forgot, making fun on her with several videos, but suddenly posted this solemn post about how he has to take time to reflect and that he respects Trisha's gender identity or some bullshit like that, and it was jus so surreal to see. Yes, this woman who constantly promotes her womanly body, who posts reviews on women's sex toys, who talks about wanting to be pregnant and a mother, who never showed any sign she feels uncomfortable with her sex or body, yes, this woman is a "they". Whatever.)

Rant #5: My friend recommended me a local group in Facebook about books. I barely get into Facebook, but I entered and what's the first post I see? A post about Harry Potter. So of course the group members just started pilling in and shitting on Rowling for being TraNsPhoBiC. I especially remember one member who said something like "There is not enough place to say all the things I have to say about this horrible woman". Of course she is not just "transphobic" at this point but also anti-women (lmao I swear to god), anti-Semitic (lol), and in general just awful, hateful and unpleasant woman.

This woman, who was always on the side of the weak and underprivileged, whose most famous series have strong messages against racism and hate, who is a philanthrope who is no longer a billionaire because she donated so much money to charities (especially charities for children), who [helped save hundreds of Afghans] (https://tvpworld.com/65915372/jk-rowling-helps-save-hundreds-of-afghans), who never resorted to hate despite her defamation, vilification, rape and death threats by the media and TRA, this hateful woman? This one?

Needless to say, I did not join this group.

Few! That's all for now...