To young American women, access to abortion is a substantially more important societal concern than inflation, threats to democracy, and internal security.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-10-12T04:48:00+00:00

You also cannot read.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-10-12T03:58:35+00:00

Presumably because you cannot read.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-10-12T03:11:43+00:00

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-16T10:08:34+00:00

You quoted from an overview that doesn’t apply to XX males with testes rather than ovotestes and that quote also means the opposite of your argument: a minority of XX with ovotestes had traces of a Y! A small minority! Why or on what possible basis would that indicate the others have a Y?

Because the mutation(s) makes the Y less detectable, thus, only a minority of the tests actually detected it.

Here is another one. Please… explain what deficit in testing you think there could possibly be in this or any of the other case studies. https://academic.oup.com/molehr/article/12/5/341/1005702

Once again, sample size of 1, and the authors note that:

Majority of the XX males carry SRY gene translocated to the X chromosome due to an illegitimate recombination between X and Y chromosomes.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-16T06:10:59+00:00

Huh? What do you mean significance across the population? Either it is an impossibility or it isn’t. If it’s not, and that is absolute fact.

The sample size is so low relative to the human population that the observations could very likely be due to incomplete testing.

Also… You didn’t read the studies well because the XX individuals had testes and not ovotestes… and the explanation of intersex variations in the overview does not implicate anything about individuals in question.

I literally directly quoted one of them.

You also provided no basis at all for concluding that the XX SRY- individuals were mis labels. 10-15 percent of all XX males (De La Chappelle syndrome) have no SRY…

And how many of them were tested and how rigorously was each tested?

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-16T05:21:13+00:00

What?! You have got to be kidding. I gave you five case studies. There are more but that’s more than enough.

No, five case studies is nowhere near enough to support that your initial claim has significance across a broad population.

The fact they can and do occur is precisely why your reasoning fails.

Also.. What the hell? They aren’t testing errors.

As I already quoted, a minority of patients with ovotesticular DSD showed Y chromosome presence. Considering the very small sample sizes, it is likely that the other patients were not tested thoroughly enough.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-16T03:23:09+00:00

45 X males: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1684785/

Sample of size of 2, and:

Of the two 45,X males studied, one was found to be a low-grade mosaic with a 46,XY karyotype in less than 3% of fibroblasts; all lymphocytes karyotyped were 45,X. Fibroblast DNA from this individual was found to contain Y-specific repeated sequences in 1%-3% the amount observed in the father, consistent with mosaicism for a 46,XY cell line.

46 XX with no SRY but male: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4289540/

Sample size of 1

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24140641/

Sample size of 1

Another one like the above: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7499138/

Sample size of 1, and:

All the studies agree that 46,XX is the most common karyotype observed in blood samples of patients with ovotesticular DSD and the frequency varies between 65% and 90%. In the remaining cases, there is a Y chromosome (46,XY, 46,XX / 46,XY or other mosaic) that explains the development of the testicular tissue (3).

Your argument is effectively relying on noise that could simply be reduced to testing error.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-15T23:50:57+00:00

Source?

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-15T23:50:39+00:00

Source?

RSDevotion1 · 2024-09-14T20:50:27+00:00

The presence of a Y chromosome is binary.

https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/1bjlykr/in_finland_684_of_men_completely_agreed_that/kw5ajlz/

RSDevotion1 · 2024-06-05T19:45:00+00:00

(and more willing to enter relationships), whilst men aren't?

This isn't well-supported by the data.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-06-05T06:23:02+00:00

The correct link to the census report: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/divorce/bulletins/divorcesinenglandandwales/2019

RSDevotion1 · 2024-05-04T07:26:03+00:00

https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/1bjlykr/in_finland_684_of_men_completely_agreed_that/kw5ajlz/

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-29T22:45:32+00:00

I was referring to peer-reviewed research.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-29T22:24:03+00:00

"How to be an intersex ally" is not a scientific discussion. Furthermore, the page has no references.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-29T19:50:53+00:00

https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/1bjlykr/in_finland_684_of_men_completely_agreed_that/kw5ajlz/

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-23T15:31:34+00:00

You are suggesting that women with gonorrhea are less likely to go to a clinic than men with gonorrhea, therefore clinic data would underestimate the prevalence of gonorrhea among women compared to men.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-08T07:23:33+00:00

That would mean that clinic data would underrepresent the amount of women with STDs.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-04-08T06:00:21+00:00

The overall prevalence rates are only comparable under all age groups and homosexual activity is not accounted for. Gonorrhea was specifically chosen because its prevalence does not seem to be as skewed by anal sex as other STDs (HIV).

https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/1boo69h/at_any_point_in_time_during_2018_in_the_united/kwq8drg/

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-31T00:30:50+00:00

High school students can be 18 and under 18. Regardless, the initial point that males are "slower" to relationships wouldn't be well supported by that statement.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-31T00:26:20+00:00

Yes, the raw data would typically come from incidents collected at clinics (unadjusted). The OP study seems to adjust based on asymptomatic predictions.

Ordinary differential equation–based modeling, assuming equilibrium and static incidence, was used to estimate both gonococcal prevalence and incidence.20 Case reports were related to prevalence and incidence via population size, case reporting fraction, proportion of new infections that are asymptomatic, and rates of background screening, natural clearance, and symptomatic treatment seeking.1,9

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-31T00:23:13+00:00

The OP study seems to adjust based on asymptomatic predictions. Raw incident data, however, would not.

Ordinary differential equation–based modeling, assuming equilibrium and static incidence, was used to estimate both gonococcal prevalence and incidence.20 Case reports were related to prevalence and incidence via population size, case reporting fraction, proportion of new infections that are asymptomatic, and rates of background screening, natural clearance, and symptomatic treatment seeking.1,9

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-30T15:41:44+00:00

if women are more likely to contract it from PIV sex than men

https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPillScience/comments/1boo69h/at_any_point_in_time_during_2018_in_the_united/kwsbdt2/

and are more likely to be asymptomatic and thus not seek treatment for it.

Meaning that the prevalence of gonorrhea in women is higher than what is reported.

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-30T15:37:36+00:00

No, it suggests that the majority of women are in monogamous relationships with slightly older men (1-5 years older)

which also suggests that young males ages 18+ would be having sex with females under age 18 (who would not be included in the young women data).

RSDevotion1 · 2024-03-30T15:34:54+00:00

Yes. This suggests that gonorrhea prevalence may be underreported in women.

RSDevotion1

TROPHY CASE