Talk:Intersex

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: no consensus, thus not moved.  – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: * In other animals, surely? Not to be nit-picky, but we humans are also animals - Alison talk 16:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

text: *:We are, but that's not how we tend to name such articles. Cf. homosexual behavior in animals. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

text: Support per nom  --- Tbf69 P • T 19:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

text: *Oppose The primary topic is about intersex people. Des Vallee (talk) 01:27, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

text: *Oppose per PRIMARYTOPIC and CONCISION. Adding “people” is unnecessary disambiguation since the title already implies it’s about people. The hatnote to the broader “biology” article is already there and appropriately titled. Nothing to fix or improve when it’s already perfect. —В²C ☎ 21:19, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 19 February 2023 

message: Having recently read the Wiki article Intersex, I elected to edit the phrase "sex assignment" as an individual's sex is not assigned to them, i.e. no-one gives it to me, but is a product of fertilisation. The use of the term "assignment" is false and misleading as an individual cannot reject or chose an alternative sex at the point of birth. Note: I am not talking about sex reassignment surgery later in life.
The edit, which simply said that a child's sex at birth usually aligned with their anatomical sex and phenotype, i.e. if it has a penis it is male and if it has a vagina it is female, has been reverted on a couple of occasions. One by an individual stating "Misunderstanding of text" and the other as "something non-understandable".
While not having experience of intersex, or association with an individual who may suffer from malformed genitalia, the fact is that an individual's sex in the normal and natural development of the fetus is not "assigned" but a product of fertilisation. Something which has been known for eons. Would be interested in knowing what the wider Wiki community thinks about removing the phrase "sex assignment" for something that is factually correct. 86.189.234.69 (talk) 16:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, you seem to have a misunderstanding on how Wikipedia works. I found the essay WP:Verifiability not truth to be very enlightening. The sentence may or may not be changed but I think it is important for you to understand that any change will not come from a community desire for "factual correctness", but rather sources which verify the text. (Roundish ⋆t) 20:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit the phrase "Sex assignment at birth...". 

message: I made small edits to correct grammar (added the missing word "book"), correct style (made unified footnotes) and ambiguities (mentioned in the table, in a form of footnote, that the LOCAH is debated by Leonard Sax, as has been explained in detail in that section). It should not modify the meaning, but should add clarity and simplicity of understanding. Please review. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Intersex&diff=1182732065&oldid=1182609954
--Maxim Masiutin (talk) 01:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits for grammar, style and ambiguities 

message: "A study published by Leonard Sax reports that this figure includes conditions such as late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia and XXY/Klinefelter syndrome which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex"  
Clinicians generally do not use the term 'intersex', they use DSD. With that in mind, the focus on what "clinicians recognise as intersex" does not make sense.
Why does this article push the views of Sax so hard? 31.94.34.221 (talk) 21:40, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You could as easily say why does it push the views of Anne Fausto-Sterling so much.  I think the main issue here is whether people think a "high prevalence" (1.7%) or "low prevalence" (0.018%) is "right".  And this seems driven by political agendas. 2001:8003:8024:B700:E82A:388B:A19B:E670 (talk) 09:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: ????

message: Since when was PCOS considered an "intersex condition"???? The vast majority of those with PCOS do not consider themself intersex, and not even Anne Fausto-Sterling claimed that it is. 
Furthermore, there are no sources that back up the "PCOS is an intersex condition" claim  2d32d23ff322 (talk) 01:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct (given "sources" here meaning WP:MEDRS, as is required).  Thank you for drawing attention to this. Crossroads -talk- 23:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCOS? 

message: In Judaism, the Talmud discusses many categories of intersex people in Jewish law, with emphasis on the androgynous, who exhibit both male and female external sexual organs, and the tumtum, who exhibit neither. The other categories that the Talmud mentions are the aylonit, who are assigned female at birth but later reveal male characteristics, and the saris, who are assigned male at birth but later reveal female characteristics. These categories are furthermore classified by hamah, natural causes, or adam, human intervention. 
<ref>Dzmura, Noach. Balancing on the Mechitza: Transgender in Jewish Community. North Atlantic Books, 2010./ref> Karirig (talk) 17:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 17:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2024