A renowned reproductive expert entered the heated discussion over transgender and women’s rights last night and stated that although humans can change their gender, they cannot alter their sex.
A person cannot change their sex, according to Professor Robert Winston of Imperial College London, “because it is embedded in genes in every cell in the body.”
His remarks came amid a debate about what constitutes a woman that has recently gained significant attention in politics and sports, including whether trans women should be permitted to compete in female-only events.
After a bishop stated that there were now “complexities related with gender identity,” the discussion earlier this week reached the highest levels of the Church of England.
We “cannot escape our DNA,” according to Professor Winston, a prominent fertility expert in the world and a Labour lord in the House of Lords, who offered his opinion on the topic last night.
There is no doubt that we have the ability to change our gender. We can do this by mutilating ourselves, by removing parts of our bodies to alter our shape, and in a variety of other ways.
The distinction is that you cannot change your sex because it is literally encoded in every cell of your body through your DNA.
That truly becomes a problem since, on occasion, a man will be born who later decides she wants to be a woman.
In that case, a mutilating procedure might be necessary.
Then, the issue becomes whether they should be permitted to participate in sports.
That’s a big issue because they still have some stereotypically masculine traits that will probably set them apart from other women.
So, I believe that is where the true issue is. Of course, there is also the problem of basic social behaviour under many circumstances.
The use of restrooms and other facilities is just one of several issues that rightly bother women.
In a discussion on Piers Morgan’s Uncensored regarding sex and gender, Professor Winston also referred to a woman as a “female,” which he claimed was determined by “the genes she had.”
“A woman often has two X chromosomes,” he stated. Males are perhaps easier to characterize since we have particular manly genes that set us apart from women.
“The female position is the default human position, which means you are born as a woman if there are no male genes present.”
“I am a group of at least 8 billion cells, each of which contains my maleness.
Every cell in my body contains those male genes, which defines me genetically. The same thing would apply to a woman who lacks those genes.
That is what distinguishes them. And we are unable to escape the fact that we are so genetically predisposed.
It follows the Church of England’s admission earlier this week that it lacks a definition for the term “woman.”
The definition of the phrase used to be “self-evident,” according to a bishop.
However, he went on to say that there are currently “complexities linked with gender identity” that are being investigated by a church initiative on relationships and sexuality.
It drew criticism last night. The revelation was made in a formal report that was written for the meeting of its governing board this weekend.
It happens despite the fact that Anglicanism continues to forbid same-sex unions and has just lately permitted women to serve as bishops.
Campaigner Maya Forstater stated: “The Church of England could have persisted with its long-established perspective, which makes sense whether your starting point is biology or the Bible,” when the Government redefined women through the Gender Recognition Act.
It is shocking how easily people agreed to the state changing the definition of what a man or woman is, as if this essential truth didn’t matter.
And Rev. Angela Berners-Wilson, the first woman to be ordained as an Anglican priest in 1994, admitted to The Telegraph that she wasn’t quite satisfied with it.
Men cannot have children, to state the blatantly obvious, is one of the things I do believe.
She continued, “But I think we need to be extremely sensitive and perhaps re-examine our boundaries.”
It follows months in which the political world has been consumed by the meaning of the word “woman.”
While leader Sir Keir Starmer argued that it was incorrect to say that only women may have a cervix, a number of Labour MPs refused to define it.
Contrarily, Cabinet ministers have made it plain that anyone born a male should not compete against women in sports and that women are defined by biology.
One of the over 200 questions posed to the church’s “assembly,” the General Synod, this weekend in York, put the church on the spot.
A lay member of the military named Adam Kendry merely inquired, “What is the Church of England’s definition of a woman?”
The Bishop of Europe, Rt Rev Robert Innes, responded, “There is no formal definition, which reflects the fact that definitions of this kind were regarded to be self-evident, as expressed in the marriage liturgy, until quite recently.”
The church “has started to address the complications linked with gender identification,” he continued.
Mr. Kendry’s inquiry, according to Jayne Ozanne, a member of the Government’s LGBT+ advisory body, was “passive aggressive… meant to disturb the LGBT+ community.”
The Church has faced criticism for its views on gender in the past.
In order to allow transgender Christians to celebrate their new identities, advice for a new kind of baptism rite sparked objections from thousands of clergy in 2019.