[someplaceguy]

Well, I don't even know what her argument is because I can't even find it by skimming this huge article. Perhaps if the article went straight to the point, her argument wouldn't be lost in all the noise.

For the record, I'm not interested in reading whether someone selected a 'yellow dress' or 'purpley pink flowers' or who picked someone up when. I'd be more interested in reading about actual intersex issues.

I am in favor of protecting the rights of everyone, but I don't even know what 'rights' you are talking about.

The intersex prevalence depends on how you define "intersex", with some definitions (those who argue "if the term intersex is to retain any meaning") making the prevalence at 0.018%, which is 2 orders of magnitude less than 2%.

Whether that invalidates her argument or not I don't know, because again, I don't know what her argument is. I was just replying to the parent poster who was surprised by a figure which I was arguing was exaggerated.

[oftenwrong]

>For the record, I'm not interested in reading whether someone selected a 'yellow dress' or 'purpley pink flowers' or who picked someone up when. I'd be more interested in reading about actual intersex issues.

That is all relevant. The immense gravity of her decision to become openly, publicly intersex, and the hours of apprehension and coaching required to go through with it, is a significant aspect.

[someplaceguy]

What is having someone pick a yellow dress or selecting purpley pink flowers have to do with the gravity of a situation?

If the dress was pink, would the situation be different? If the flowers were green, would that matter?

It's all irrelevant details, like 95% of the article probably is, from what I've skimmed. I'm willing to bet her argument could be summarized in less than 5% of the length of this article.

And I'm sorry, but I'm not willing to waste my time reading these sorts of articles, as I have many, many other things which are more important to me.

Which is a shame, because again, I'd be willing to read and learn about her issues if it was written in a more succinct, straight-to-the point style (which can still be long, but not filled with irrelevant details).

I can understand that there are people who like to read these articles, but I'm not one of them. I'm here in Hacker News to read articles to learn about interesting issues and discuss them with interesting people, as efficiently as possible. I'm not here to spend hours reading novels about random people...

[DamonHD]

Her point was to dress pretty and feminine and shock those who would casually assume that would mean something about genes and phenotype (and consider making a pass at her) into possibly realising that their presumptions are just that, and wrong.

The details are called human interest, and there were some interesting unstaged coincidences in there.

Not much was more important to her.

[someplaceguy]

Well, thank you for summarizing that part of the article.

If you had written it, I'd probably be a lot more willing to read it, as you seem to write in the more direct style I was mentioning, unlike in these articles that are written in a style that reads more like a novel.

Now all that's left is for someone to summarize the rest of the article.

[foogazi]

> Now all that's left is for someone to summarize the rest of the article.

Chatgpt - or just read it yourself

[someplaceguy]

ChatGPT's context length is much smaller than the length of the article.

[readthenotes1]

Real life bts of la cage aux folles, Tootsie or Mrs Doubtfire