Oryx_404, oryx_404@lemmy.today
Instance: lemmy.today
Joined: 2 weeks ago
Posts: 24
Comments: 17
Posts and Comments by Oryx_404, oryx_404@lemmy.today
Comments by Oryx_404, oryx_404@lemmy.today
That argument applies much more to other organizations listed in the report. But even in the article, Beira’s Place is described as
a sexual assault support center founded and funded by billionaire J.K. Rowling that explicitly excludes transgender women from its services and was established after Rowling objected to Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre’s inclusive policies.
She didn’t like the way an organization was run, and made her own. The case can be made that it’s anti-rights, but thoughtlessly throwing around labels like Amnesty UK did here against someone with the time, money, and motivation to respond with lawyers was an own goal.
Regardless of your feelings on Rowling, Amnesty UK fucked up big time and realized it. For better or worse, the UK doesn’t have the same speech protections or values that other countries like the US do. Throwing around vague labels like “anti-rights” was a terrible idea.
Plain garbage propaganda. Throwing in “excluding the top 1 percent of households (the outliers in how they spend their wealth)” to massage inconvenient numbers is plain lying with statistics.
What a terrible, terrible paper.
And yet it was cited seriously on Lemmy over in https://lemmy.today/post/57474308. Here’s a takedown of it:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2024/03/17/the-journal-cell-endorses-the-view-that-sex-isnt-binary/
Here are the main problems with Velocci’s paper:
- It conflates sex differentiation, sex determination, and the definition of sex
- It argues, wrongly, that no progress has been made in understanding the nature and definition of biological sex
- Its argument is ideological rather than scientific, yet is given the trappings of science
- It argues that the binary nature of sex, which the author rejects, somehow erases transgender and nonbinary people
- And, as usual, its supposed examples that make sex nonbinary, like the long clitoris of the hyena, are wrong. But where are the clownfish? Send in the clownfish!
Another short critique, summed up as “it’s relatively safe to assume that sexual orientation confounded the results in the original paper.”
Bad headline, bad article. Here’s a site with some commentary on this and a related case:
No idea if that site has any particular slant, but it has copies of the rulings:
https://lawandreligionaustralia.blog/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/dennis-v-smith_26.8.25-for-blog.pdf
https://lawandreligionaustralia.blog/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/dennis-v-smith-no-2-for-blog.pdf
Regardless of if anyone was injured, the posts Smith made say “alleged”, and the court case isn’t about those being truthful or not. As the ruling notes,
The ultimate issue is whether the acts or conduct of the Defendant as particularised, amount to unlawful vilification of the Plaintiff pursuant to Section 38S, of the Act.
To be clear, those are mating types, which is the analogue to sex in isogamous species. The claim about the sex binary is limited to only anisogamous species.
Looks like this has been politicized, with the Good Law Project making the case that there’s no plagiarism and this is all about race:
https://xcancel.com/GoodLawProject/status/2082089176107786376
But this looks pretty damning:

You can verify those passages here:
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1784057434
There’s no indication that it’s citing the previous paper, and the quotes exist as shown
Valiant effort. Biggest challenge will be convincing people that it’s not just an ideological trojan horse
Interesting study but it relies on self-reported views and is limited to the question of endorsing political violence, not whether that translates to such violence occurring.
The logic in the image is specious. Surely that’s not serious?
There’s been a string of recent victories for sex-based sports advocates like the IOC splitting up sports by sex, and the answer seems to be increasingly that people think it matters.
Semenya’s response to IOC ruling:
https://time.com/article/2026/04/01/caster-semenya-the-ioc-s-ruling-is-a-disgrace/
The takeaway is that probably, people worry too much about penis size. Women are good at accurately recalling penis size, and express a preference for only slightly above average. There’s also almost no difference between preference in one-night stand vs long-term sizes. Study was limited in demographics, but it was also more about developing a better process. Sadly the Thingiverse file no longer exists.
Got downvoted, probably from people not reading past the title. To be clear: bigger doesn’t mean smarter. Brain-to-body ratio might have more of a case, but otoh grey wolves don’t strike me as dumb.

My forecast: Big win for Rowling. The UK has strong defamation laws, and Amnesty UK depends on government funding. They’re already caving to pressure. The FWS ruling from the post shows UK courts probably wouldn’t agree that Beira’s Place is anti-rights.
https://xcancel.com/JamesLNuzzo/status/1891781779578925492
This study is a great example of why DOGE is needed.
Anyone over the age of 18 knows these things and you spent time doing this “research” and publishing a paper and now expecting others to read it for any reason other than parody value.
Brilliant.
Before criticizing my research, how about you actually read the paper and explore all the graphs, analyses, and discussion points?
No government funding was received for this project. I completed it entirely unpaid and in my spare time. In fact, because this was the case, I set up a designated crowdfunding account for people to make volunteer donations. Many people who value this research made donations. In fact, on the title page of the paper, just underneath the title, in a section titled “Funding,” it states that that crowdfunding (not a government grant) was used to support this research.
Did you really know that there was a sex difference in grip strength in the earliest years of development? It would be odd for you to know such a thing considering that no one has ever meta-analyzed data prior to age 5, and the one previous meta-analysis that examined kids above the age of 5 included results from only 4 studies. Your certainty about this result is further odd because if you actually look at one of the graphs in the paper, you will see that, although the aggregate data show a sex difference in grip strength favouring boys prior to puberty, some studies show no difference and others show that girls are actually stronger.
Did you really know that the sex difference in grip strength remains stable between ages 5 to 10? Are you sure that you wouldn’t have predicted the size of the sex difference in grip strength to increase or decrease between the ages of 5 and 10?
And what about the narrowing of the sex difference in grip strength at age 11? Did you really know about that prior to this paper? And did you really know the likely reason for that specific result (i.e., girls reaching puberty before boys)?
And what about the finding about sex differences in grip strength being roughly equal across countries (both before and after puberty). Are you 100% certain that you would have predicted that?
Finally, the analysis examined the size of the sex difference in grip strength over the past 60 years. Are you certain that you knew that the size of that sex difference has remained roughly the same each decade from 1960 to now?
https://xcancel.com/datadriven_tdoc/status/2078214837063020674
Good news!
There’s a new paper out that suggests that puberty blockers are associated with a decreased likelihood of mood disorders and suicidality
Bad news!
The paper is so methodologically flawed it would take me the rest of my career to detail them….
I cant understand for the life of me why researchers (whether they be gender critical or trans supportive) can’t nail down a well-designed analysis of routinely collected health data….
these people seriously keep breaking my heart….
the data is there; you can do so much better!
Missing from this paper is any explanation of why the effect occurs, making it unclear if these results would hold up in actual work scenarios or across longer durations. There’s also the matter of the gender-specific math finding, it only appeared when slicing the data by subgroup, so there might be p-hacking involved. Still, worth investigating more.
RetroFed








🎓 MAGA Republicans’ views of American democracy and society and support for political violence in the United States: Findings from a nationwide population-representative survey (journals.plos.org)
Identifying groups at increased risk for political violence can support prevention efforts. We determine whether “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) Republicans, as defined, are potentially such a group.
The logic in the image is specious. Surely that’s not serious?
There’s been a string of recent victories for sex-based sports advocates like the IOC splitting up sports by sex, and the answer seems to be increasingly that people think it matters.
Semenya’s response to IOC ruling:
https://time.com/article/2026/04/01/caster-semenya-the-ioc-s-ruling-is-a-disgrace/
⚔️ On Sinclair, SRY and the destruction of a legacy.
Marked as culture wars even though it’s within academia. It’s a critique of the guy that discovered SRY, in the context of the controversy around Caster Semenya.
The takeaway is that probably, people worry too much about penis size. Women are good at accurately recalling penis size, and express a preference for only slightly above average. There’s also almost no difference between preference in one-night stand vs long-term sizes. Study was limited in demographics, but it was also more about developing a better process. Sadly the Thingiverse file no longer exists.
🎓 Women's Preferences for Penis Size: A New Research Method Using Selection among 3D Models (journals.plos.org)
Women’s preferences for penis size may affect men’s comfort with their own bodies and may have implications for sexual health. Studies of women’s penis size preferences typically have relied on their abstract ratings or selecting amongst 2D, flaccid images. This study used haptic stimuli to allow assessment of women’s size recall accuracy for the first time, as well as examine their preferences for erect penis sizes in different relationship contexts. Women (N = 75) selected amongst 33, 3D models. Women recalled model size accurately using this method, although they made more errors with respect to penis length than circumference. Women preferred a penis of slightly larger circumference and length for one-time (length = 6.4 inches/16.3 cm, circumference = 5.0 inches/12.7 cm) versus long-term (length = 6.3 inches/16.0 cm, circumference = 4.8 inches/12.2 cm) sexual partners. These first estimates of erect penis size preferences using 3D models suggest women accurately recall size and prefer penises only slightly larger than average.
Got downvoted, probably from people not reading past the title. To be clear: bigger doesn’t mean smarter. Brain-to-body ratio might have more of a case, but otoh grey wolves don’t strike me as dumb.
My forecast: Big win for Rowling. The UK has strong defamation laws, and Amnesty UK depends on government funding. They’re already caving to pressure. The FWS ruling from the post shows UK courts probably wouldn’t agree that Beira’s Place is anti-rights.
⚔️ J. K. Rowling vs Amnesty UK
Trying out some non-academic, dramatic culture war critical analysis. There’s an ongoing kerfluffle involving Amnesty UK and J.K. Rowling. Here’s a timeline that provides some context.
https://xcancel.com/JamesLNuzzo/status/1891781779578925492
🎓 Sex Differences in Grip Strength From Birth to Age 16: A Meta-Analysis (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
In 1985, Thomas and French published results of a meta-analysis that examined sex differences in grip strength in children 5 years of age and older. Their analysis included results from only four studies, and no update has been published. The purpose of the current study was to use meta-analysis to examine sex differences in grip strength from birth to age 16. The analysis included 808 effects from 169 studies conducted in 45 countries between 1961 and 2023. The total sample was 353,676 (178,588 boys, 175,088 girls). From birth to 16 years of age, grip strength was consistently greater in boys than girls. Between 3 and 10 years old, the effect size was small-to-moderate, with female grip strength equaling 90% of male grip strength (Hedges g = 0.33–0.46). At age 11, the effect size decreased slightly, likely due to girls reaching puberty before boys (g = 0.29, 95% confidence intervals (CI) [0.22, 0.35]). At age 13, the effect size increased markedly likely due to male puberty (g = 0.63, 95% CIs [0.55, 0.70]). By age 16, the sex difference in grip strength was substantial, with female grip strength equaling 65% of male grip strength (g = 2.07, 95% CIs [1.86, 2.27]). Secondary analyses revealed that the sex difference in grip strength is broadly similar between countries and has been mostly stable since the 1960s, except for a narrowing of the difference among 5–10-year-olds after 2010. Various biological factors explain why, on average, boys are stronger than girls from birth onward.
https://xcancel.com/datadriven_tdoc/status/2078214837063020674
🎓 Mental Health of Youths Who Use Puberty Blockers (jamanetwork.com)
Question Are puberty blockers associated with lower odds of diagnosed mood disorders and suicidal thoughts and behaviors for transgender compared with cisgender youths?
Missing from this paper is any explanation of why the effect occurs, making it unclear if these results would hold up in actual work scenarios or across longer durations. There’s also the matter of the gender-specific math finding, it only appeared when slicing the data by subgroup, so there might be p-hacking involved. Still, worth investigating more.
🎓 Battle for the thermostat: Gender and the effect of temperature on cognitive performance (journals.plos.org)
🎓 Resource Security Impacts Men’s Female Breast Size Preferences (journals.plos.org)
It has been suggested human female breast size may act as signal of fat reserves, which in turn indicates access to resources. Based on this perspective, two studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that men experiencing relative resource insecurity should perceive larger breast size as more physically attractive than men experiencing resource security. In Study 1, 266 men from three sites in Malaysia varying in relative socioeconomic status (high to low) rated a series of animated figures varying in breast size for physical attractiveness. Results showed that men from the low socioeconomic context rated larger breasts as more attractive than did men from the medium socioeconomic context, who in turn perceived larger breasts as attractive than men from a high socioeconomic context. Study 2 compared the breast size judgements of 66 hungry versus 58 satiated men within the same environmental context in Britain. Results showed that hungry men rated larger breasts as significantly more attractive than satiated men. Taken together, these studies provide evidence that resource security impacts upon men’s attractiveness ratings based on women’s breast size.
🎓 Superiority of magnesium and vitamin B6 over magnesium alone on severe stress in healthy adults with low magnesemia: A randomized, single-blind clinical trial (journals.plos.org)
Introduction
🎓 Sexual diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men (journals.plos.org)
In 2015, we conducted a cross-sectional, Internet-based, U.S. nationally representative probability survey of 2,021 adults (975 men, 1,046 women) focused on a broad range of sexual behaviors. Individuals invited to participate were from the GfK KnowledgePanel®. The survey was titled the 2015 Sexual Exploration in America Study and survey completion took about 12 to 15 minutes. The survey was confidential and the researchers never had access to respondents’ identifiers. Respondents reported on demographic items, lifetime and recent sexual behaviors, and the appeal of 50+ sexual behaviors. Most (>80%) reported lifetime masturbation, vaginal sex, and oral sex. Lifetime anal sex was reported by 43% of men (insertive) and 37% of women (receptive). Common lifetime sexual behaviors included wearing sexy lingerie/underwear (75% women, 26% men), sending/receiving digital nude/semi-nude photos (54% women, 65% men), reading erotic stories (57% of participants), public sex (≥43%), role-playing (≥22%), tying/being tied up (≥20%), spanking (≥30%), and watching sexually explicit videos/DVDs (60% women, 82% men). Having engaged in threesomes (10% women, 18% men) and playful whipping (≥13%) were less common. Lifetime group sex, sex parties, taking a sexuality class/workshop, and going to BDSM parties were uncommon (each <8%). More Americans identified behaviors as “appealing” than had engaged in them. Romantic/affectionate behaviors were among those most commonly identified as appealing for both men and women. The appeal of particular behaviors was associated with greater odds that the individual had ever engaged in the behavior. This study contributes to our understanding of more diverse adult sexual behaviors than has previously been captured in U.S. nationally representative probability surveys. Implications for sexuality educators, clinicians, and individuals in the general population are discussed.
🎓 Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis (journals.plos.org)
Does a woman’s cognitive performance change throughout her menstrual cycle? Menstruation continues to be a taboo topic, subject to myths about how it affects women. Despite the considerable number of empirical studies, there have been few quantitative summaries of what is known. To address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of cognitive performance across the menstrual cycle, including the domains of attention, creativity, executive functioning, intelligence, motor function, spatial ability, and verbal ability. We included studies that measured women’s performance at specific points in the cycle for tasks that have objectively correct responses. Our analysis examined performance differences across phases using Hedges’ g as the effect size metric. Across 102 articles, N = 3,943 participants, and 730 comparisons, we observe no systematic robust evidence for significant cycle shifts in performance across cognitive performance. Although two results appeared significant with respect to differences in spatial ability, they arise from a large number of statistical tests and are not supported in studies that use robust methods to determine cycle phase. Through the use of Egger’s test, and examination of funnel plots, we did not observe evidence of publication bias or small-study effects. We examined speed and accuracy measures separately within each domain, and no robust differences across phases appeared for either speed or accuracy. We conclude that the body of research in this meta-analysis does not support myths that women’s cognitive abilities change across the menstrual cycle. Future research should use larger sample sizes and consistent definitions of the menstrual cycle, using hormonal indicators to confirm cycle phase.
🎓 Femmephobia Is a Uniquely Powerful Predictor of Anti-Gay Behavior (link.springer.com)
The current study explored a form of femmephobia (specifically, negative attitudes toward femininity in men) as a predictor of anti-gay behaviors among a sample of heterosexual men (N = 417). Additional predictor variables included hierarchical worldviews (i.e., social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, narcissism) and prejudicial attitudes (i.e., old-fashioned and modern homonegativity). Femmephobia emerged as a robust predictor, accounting for 23% of the variance in anti-gay behavior, surpassing the explanatory power (15%) of all other considered variables combined. Moreover, social dominance only predicted anti-gay behavior when femmephobia levels were high. Future research on discrimination and violence related to sexual identity and gender expression should incorporate femmephobia as a key predictive factor.
🎓 Why are male brains larger on average?
https://xcancel.com/NeuroSGS/status/2073447631917818301