Sexuality and gender ID - a discussion

[Tree]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

For starters, the neuter gender is seen throughout nature in everything from insects to crustaceans to mammals - there's even something expressly Darwinian to it.

In fact, the American biologist E. O. Wilson labeled humans a eusocial species in The Social Conquest of the Earth (2012).

Look up eusociality, then form an opinion.

Next up, hermaphroditism, particularly common in fish, can either be sequential or simultaneous. In the former case, an organism can switch sexes sometimes many times over the course of their lives. Guppies are a great example of this: fill a tank with females and some of them will begin to change shape and eventually become males - actually, the ones further back in the switch will stop when too many males become present and slowly switch back to being female. In simultaneous hermaphroditism, more common in annelids, gastropods and again fish, animals possess both sets of reproductive organs meaning that in a bonding species the couple can switch back and forth being mother or father, and some can even self-fertilize meaning their offspring's genetic material is wholly derived from a single parent.

So perhaps first inform yourself, then make informed assertions?

That's nice, we're talking about HUMAN reproduction here, I specifically said HUMAN reproduction in the last post. That's sexual and binary. You can't do it alone, you can't do it with 3 people (you can have a threesome but the result will still have only 2 parents), you can't do it with 2 dudes or 2 gals and you certainly can't divide yourself into two people. What other species are like in this regard is not my concern today and is wholly irrelevant for this topic. Are you really this dense that you're going to imply that because guppies can change sex then that somehow applies to human biology by some weird extrapolation?

To equate intersex people or people born without genitals (who have a birth defect and are often infertile) with say gastropods (containing many species that are hermaphrodites inherently, not as some genetic defect) is totally disingenuous of you. I'm surprised you didn't bring up cellular division of microorganisms (equally irrelevant).

So funny when someone is so confident while being so utterly ignorant of reality.

Says the guy who thinks gender distinctions and the way certain non-human species reproduce can be extrapolated to humans.

How does lacking any sexual orientation at all, or finding both sexes equally attractive equate to an 'illness'? Do you have any actual scientific sources to back up your supposedly scientific claims?

I love that you said "both sexes", yes, only two.

I wasn't talking about asexuality or homosexuality. I don't claim that either are illnesses, although now that you mentioned it, male on male anal sex is a particularly high risk behavior.

That said, asexuality is a weird one, sexual drive is part of our biology so if you have none, that's kind of like not being able to sense smell. Somewhere, something is probably broken. I don't think it's considered an illness of any kind, although it can certainly be caused by some medical condition.

So how does one tell the difference between a genuine asexual (assuming they exist) and someone with so low testosterone that he just can't get aroused? A healthy young male especially should not be able to resist for long without getting the urge to at least masturbate, typically at the thought of naked ladies. Or somehow who went through trauma early in life (rape) and has been totally put off from sex for life? Or some other medical condition I don't know about. Sorry, I'm not really buying that this is a genuine "orientation". People who think they're asexuals should at least be encouraged to see a doctor, just like people who can't smell stuff or taste food should see a doctor.

 

[australopithecus]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

As someone who is asexual I'd be happy to take any/all questions about my experiences, lest we venture into clumsy stereotypes and misinformed assumptions. That way stupid lies.

Also to get the points raised above out of the way: 1) I don't have low testosterone levels and 2) no experience of sexualised trauma.

So how does one tell the difference between a genuine asexual (assuming they exist) and someone with so low testosterone that he just can't get aroused?

You test their testosterone levels, obvs. Or, alternatively, it doesn't matter either way. Someone's elses sex drive, or lack thereof, whatever the reason, is nobodies business but theirs. Do you walk down the street angry that you can't tell the sexual orientation of people you see? Why do you need to tell if someone is asexual or not? Answer: you don't. Moving on...

A healthy young male especially should not be able to resist for long without getting the urge to at least masturbate, typically at the thought of naked ladies

Young(ish) healthy male here to tell you that's bollocks. Further more asexuality is a spectrum from people who are repulsed by the thought of sex, through people who aren't interested in sexual intercourse but have sex drive enough to masturbate to people who require a romantic attachment to be sexually interested in someone.

Or somehow who went through trauma early in life (rape) and has been totally put off from sex for life?

In some cases that is true. Victims of sexual abuse are more likely to become sex repulsed.

Sorry, I'm not really buying that this is a genuine "orientation"

You don't have to buy it, it's none of your concern.

People who think they're asexuals should at least be encouraged to see a doctor, just like people who can't smell stuff or taste food should see a doctor.

Alternatively, people who may think they're asexual should be encouraged to tell people encouraging them to do anything to fuck off.

What people do or not do in their bedrooms is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS. If two men want to go balls deep in each other then more power to them. If I want to read Catch 22 while listening to shitty early 00's nu-metal then that's up to me.

I genuinely don't get this obsession with those of a right wing political persuasion, most of whom ironically describe themselves as libertarian, with how other people identify either with regards to their gender or sexuality. None of it affects you. A socially accepting climate where people are comfortable expressing that they don't conform to historic social norms isn't going to make you wake up on day, put on a dress and start craving dick.

You are who you are, I am who I am, they are who they are. Deal with it. Or don't. Either way, your opinion isn't relevant when it comes to the lives of others.

 

[Gnug215]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Armpitiecus, that was pretty damn awesome.

Who were you responding to?


And this next one is for everyone in the thread...

Wtf happened to North Korea?

 

[australopithecus]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Responding to Tree, fuck knows about North Korea. I assume it's still there.

 

[Tree]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Alternatively, people who may think they're asexual should be encouraged to tell people encouraging them to do anything to fuck off.

Even to their parents?

What people do or not do in their bedrooms is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS. If two men want to go balls deep in each other then more power to them. If I want to read Catch 22 while listening to shitty early 00's nu-metal then that's up to me.

Well, it's technically not my business if you want to have untreated cancer and die from it if you want to extrapolate that to its logical conclusion, but if the issue comes up, I'm entitled to state my opinion on the matter and it's the same one: See a doctor.

This may apply to strangers, it doesn't apply to family members. I would be deeply concerned if my children were not showing any signs of sexual interest in their peers by their mid teens. It would be my duty as a parent to get them checked at a doctor (if nothing else to rule out low hormones, past undisclosed abuse and the numerous other conditions that are indistinguishable from asexuality) and the same applies if they claimed to be unable to smell things or taste food.

I genuinely don't get this obsession with those of a right wing political persuasion, most of whom ironically describe themselves as libertarian, with how other people identify either with regards to their gender or sexuality. None of it affects you.

The problem is when people want to force others (especially children) to acknowledge their subjective perception of reality as you can see the case with trans activists wanting to impose special pronouns or fine people who "misgender" or insist that you're a "bigot" if you raise children according to their biological sex.

Ultimately I don't care if you choose to identify as someone born on the planet Mercury, you're free to be crazy to some extent, but if you were to argue that the state should actually write "Planet Mercury" on your place of birth in your documentation or that others must proclaim that you're from Mercury otherwise they're mercuryphobes denying your identity and that textbooks should be edited to factually state humans can survive on Mercury - that's going too far

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

It affects us when the law mandates it. In Canada this is, I believe, already the case. The schools teach it to children and the laws where I live will have Health and Human Services at your doorstep if your child intimates to a teacher you won’t acknowledge their identification as another gender in elementary school. They also are mandated
By law to disregard the parents opinions on the matter and go with the child’s expressed gender identity, as well.

When the schools are trying to interfere with parents rights this becomes a problem. It becomes tyranny.

 

[Collecemall]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

What if a same sex couple comes to your place of worship and insists on having a wedding there, though? It is a public place in the public space which provides service to the community. Would you require a Muslim Imam to marry a same sex couple in a Mosque?

The only way this comes up is if the place is in fact a business charging for it's services and not a religious place specifically for worship. And there is a distinct difference in how these are treated by the law. If they want to set themselves up as a profit making business they can't be discriminatory. Period.

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

What if a same sex couple comes to your place of worship and insists on having a wedding there, though? It is a public place in the public space which provides service to the community. Would you require a Muslim Imam to marry a same sex couple in a Mosque?

The only way this comes up is if the place is in fact a business charging for it's services and not a religious place specifically for worship. And there is a distinct difference in how these are treated by the law. If they want to set themselves up as a profit making business they can't be discriminatory. Period.

Right now this is true. As long as there are people who want to make it mandated by law it can happen. An awful lot of people don’t care about religion therefore freedom of religion means little to them. It remains to be seen how far this contest between religious liberty and perceived injustice against protected minorities by religions will go.

 

[Collecemall]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Right now this is true. As long as there are people who want to make it mandated by law it can happen. An awful lot of people don’t care about religion therefore freedom of religion means little to them. It remains to be seen how far this contest between religious liberty and perceived injustice against protected minorities by religions will go.

Can we focus on reality right now? Rather than the bottom of some slippery slope you feel your imagined persecution is leading to.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

That's nice, we're talking about HUMAN reproduction here, I specifically said HUMAN reproduction in the last post.

:lol:

I knew the goalposts would shift, but I also knew it wouldn't matter when there are ample records of both hermaphroditism and asexuality in humans in the scientific literature.

https://www.britannica.com/science/hermaphroditism

https://www.nature.com/articles/3880645

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15497056

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26999225

Consequently, the moment you started wiggling, I'd be able to pin you down.

What were you saying about Creationism? :lol:

That's sexual and binary.

Wrong - is your science denial religiously motivated?

You can't do it alone, you can't do it with 3 people (you can have a threesome but the result will still have only 2 parents), you can't do it with 2 dudes or 2 gals and you certainly can't divide yourself into two people.

Essentially all of this is just untrue, but Tree's ignorance lets him think that his ignorance dictates reality.

What other species are like in this regard is not my concern today and is wholly irrelevant for this topic.

Of course not, because you were wrong, you made a false statement showing your ignorance, but rather than learn and modify your position, you want to pretend you were right.

Tell us about Creationism again.

Are you really this dense that you're going to imply that because guppies can change sex then that somehow applies to human biology by some weird extrapolation?

Aww look! It's Tree doing what Tree does best: beating his little chest on the internet!

How can someone so ignorant, caught with their pants round their ankles tugging away, still be so belligerent? Only ignorant Creationist-like cretins such as Tree could turn a scenario where they were shown publicly wrong into a means of abusing the person who edified them.

Tell us about Creationists again, Tree!

Incidentally, the amusing this is that you are actually are a Creationist, aren't you? Well, a theistic evolutionist, as you'd say.

To equate intersex people or people born without genitals (who have a birth defect and are often infertile) with say gastropods (containing many species that are hermaphrodites inherently, not as some genetic defect) is totally disingenuous of you. I'm surprised you didn't bring up cellular division of microorganisms (equally irrelevant).

Nothing remotely disingenuous to anyone with a shred of honesty, competence or integrity.

Of course, everyone reading knows the actual exchange which provoked me to educate you:

Biological sex: male, female, intersex (born with genitalia of both sexes), and asexual (born without any discernible genitalia);

Actually it's just male and female.

:lol:

It's like you're intent on damaging your credibility beyond repair.

So funny when someone is so confident while being so utterly ignorant of reality.

Says the guy who thinks gender distinctions and the way certain non-human species reproduce can be extrapolated to humans.

Says the guy who has just been shown to have no fucking clue at all what he's flapping about, but rather than learn he wants to be a cunt as usual.

How very Creationist.

How does lacking any sexual orientation at all, or finding both sexes equally attractive equate to an 'illness'? Do you have any actual scientific sources to back up your supposedly scientific claims?

I love that you said "both sexes", yes, only two.

So do you have any scientific sources to support your supposedly scientific claim?

I wasn't talking about asexuality or homosexuality. I don't claim that either are illnesses, although now that you mentioned it, male on male anal sex is a particularly high risk behavior.

You weren't talking about asexuality? But you were already informed that this is a valid 3rd gender.

So do you have any scientific sources because your inane folksy assertions lack even a shred of credibility; something to show that your flapping is worth listening to?

Otherwise, feel free to admit to being all mouth and no trousers.

That said, asexuality is a weird one, sexual drive is part of our biology so if you have none, that's kind of like not being able to sense smell.

:lol:

No, no it's really not. Maybe you should turn it into a nautical analogy to make your point clearer? :lol:

Somewhere, something is probably broken. I don't think it's considered an illness of any kind, although it can certainly be caused by some medical condition.

Somewhere, something? Is it the same place where your scientific sources for your supposedly scientific claims exist?

So how does one tell the difference between a genuine asexual (assuming they exist) and someone with so low testosterone that he just can't get aroused?

How we would try to tell the difference? Science.

How you would try to tell the difference? Bluster and chest-beating.

A healthy young male especially should not be able to resist for long without getting the urge to at least masturbate, typically at the thought of naked ladies.

Eh? Non-sequitur much?

Or somehow who went through trauma early in life (rape) and has been totally put off from sex for life?

Wha...?

Or some other medical condition I don't know about. Sorry, I'm not really buying that this is a genuine "orientation".

:lol:

Tree goes from declaiming how others are acting like Creationists for disagreeing with what he believes, then shows he knows fuck all useful about the subject, prattles on vacuously about nothing, appeals to a medical condition, then admits he doesn't fucking know but hey, he still doesn't buy it anyway.

Talk about being pulled around by forces you are lacking control over.

People who think they're asexuals should at least be encouraged to see a doctor, just like people who can't smell stuff or taste food should see a doctor.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Right now this is true. As long as there are people who want to make it mandated by law it can happen. An awful lot of people don’t care about religion therefore freedom of religion means little to them. It remains to be seen how far this contest between religious liberty and perceived injustice against protected minorities by religions will go.

Can we focus on reality right now? Rather than the bottom of some slippery slope you feel your imagined persecution is leading to.

The reality is that he highest levels of leadership in many faiths are now occupied by LGBT persons who are changing their core doctrines. Whether the law will force them or not is irrelevant because the law isn’t the only method the lobbies can use to get their way. It is a denial of reality to try and ignore the gains made by the LGBT lobbies in the last twenty years. This didn’t just happen. There are dozens of well funded advocacy groups, legal and faith based, which are dedicatedly working to this end.

It’s not a slippery slope. It’s a progression of legal and institutional gains for an ideology which have been acquired with much effort and money over two decades. They are in university leadership, government, and church leadership and they have a goal which they seek to achieve. It’s not so hard to believe. The civil rights movement started this way,

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

The reality is that he highest levels of leadership in many faiths are now occupied by LGBT persons who are changing their core doctrines. Whether the law will force them or not is irrelevant because the law isn’t the only method the lobbies can use to get their way. It is a denial of reality to try and ignore the gains made by the LGBT lobbies in the last twenty years. This didn’t just happen. There are dozens of well funded advocacy groups, legal and faith based, which are dedicatedly working to this end.

If so, then congratulations to them! Whatever it takes to drag us knuckle-walkers out of self-prejudice and self-hatred.

It’s not a slippery slope. It’s a progression of legal and institutional gains for an ideology which have been acquired with much effort and money over two decades.

Quick factual point in the crackpot tirade...

LGBT = not ideology
Anti-LGBT = ideology, usually nasty, unexplored one.

They are in university leadership, government, and church leadership and they have a goal which they seek to achieve.

It’s not so hard to believe. The civil rights movement started this way,

It is, in fact, very hard to believe.

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Sparhafoc:

I know I don’t know much about biology so I’ll ask a few questions about what you and tree are discussing because
It seems like the answer is clear and you aren’t really explaining anything that says to me he is wrong...

How many types of gametes are there?

Can an intersex or hermaphrodite produce all of the types of human gametes at once?

Has there ever been a human with two functioning sets of reproductive organs?

Has a human ever spontaneously changed sex and began to produce the biological opposite type of gamete?

What is the purpose of sex beyond reproduction that would make gender an inherent characteristic of personality rather than simply part of attracting a mate?

How many reproductively successful chromosome configurations are there other than XX and XY and how often are they produced?

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

Sparhafoc:

I know I don’t know much about biology so I’ll ask a few questions about what you and tree are discussing because
It seems like the answer is clear and you aren’t really explaining anything that says to me he is wrong...

How many types of gametes are there?

How many types of species are there?

Of course, you're talking about anisogamy, but there are still multiple types of gamete - some have flagella, some have cycles of haploid and diploid, and some species, as already pointed out possess two simultaneously or sequentially - look up heterogamy.

Can an intersex or hermaphrodite produce all of the types of human gametes at once?

Usually, they can produce one, or the other, or neither.

Has there ever been a human with two functioning sets of reproductive organs?

I am not sure what you mean exactly by functioning (do you mean capable of producing both gametes if so how is this different to the last question?) but you can look up things like Persistent Mullerian Duct Syndrome to see that a human can certainly be born with both anatomical parts.

Has a human ever spontaneously changed sex and began to produce the biological opposite type of gamete?

Not that I am aware of.

What is the purpose of sex beyond reproduction that would make gender an inherent characteristic of personality rather than simply part of attracting a mate?

I don't understand your question in total, only parts of it. The purpose of sex is predominately to promote variation in the gene pool - if sex was just about reproduction, it'd be a damn sight less efficient than mitosis.

With respect to the 'gender an inherent characteristic of personality' - all I can say to you is that you are obviously quite aware that possession of male organs, for example, corresponds in humans to the production of testosterone, while possession of female reproductive organs corresponds to the production of oestrogen and progesterone. Given that all these hormones have a measurable impact on personality, then the possible combinations of influences on 'inherent characteristics of personality' are numerous depending on the relative and absolute quantities produced. Your final point is bizarrely adaptationist - there's no suggestion that the production of hormones is an evolutionary strategy for attracting mates, rather they're produced for physical needs - on the converse, we may well have evolved to be attracted to varying levels of hormone production.

How many reproductively successful chromosome configurations are there other than XX and XY and how often are they produced?

How many species are there? In many species, sex isn't even determined by chromosome, but by a variety of factors such as temperature or distribution of sexes in a population as I've already pointed out.

In humans, there are 23 autosomes and 1 allosome and each chromosome is comprised of all the genetic information of the host, billions of bases... so how many chromosomal combinations are there? I can't write a number that high - not infinite, but possibly more than the number of detectable stars and galaxies combined.

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

I failed to specify and that was assumptive on my
Part. I was specifically referring to humans in each case. That may make answering the questions less complex.
Typing on a phone in this forum is less efficient.

Also I don’t understand how hormones aren’t part of atttacting a mate. Aren’t hormones responsible for sex characteristics that attract male and female humans like muscle tone, voice pitch, breast development, etc...? The same hormones a transgender person would take to emulate the characteristics of their identified gender?

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

I failed to specify and that was assumptive on my
Part. I was specifically referring to humans in each case. That may make answering the questions less complex.
Typing on a phone in this forum is less efficient.

The problem is that you have things the wrong way round.

This is not a story where woolly notions fuel beliefs, but rather that the advance of science has completely turned old notions on their head. You appear to think that XX or XY maps directly to gender, but this is around 40 years out of date.

For one simple example, go look up the Guevedoces. These are a people in the Dominican Republic where girls, possessing all the stuff girls would possess, and none of the male characteristics suddenly at puberty grow a penis, have balls descend, and their previous aperture close up. Regardless of possessing a XY chromosome, if your body fails to produce dihydro-testosterone (or in this case, an enzyme that helps to produce it) then you will not possess male sexual reproductive organs. Interestingly, this group of people are presenting studies that may help us minimize prostate cancer and cure baldness.

Also I don’t understand how hormones aren’t part of atttacting a mate.

If you read what I wrote, I think I already answered this.

We may have evolved to find the production of specific balances of hormones attractive, but this doesn't mean that it's their purpose.

Aren’t hormones responsible for sex characteristics that attract male and female humans like muscle tone, voice pitch, breast development, etc...?

Yes, but so are many other things. Plus, attraction may be normative in any given population group, but it's not normative across the entire distribution of humanity.

The same hormones a transgender person would take to emulate the characteristics of their identified gender?

In order to become closer to the norm of their society? Possibly, yes. This is, however, confusing the map and the terrain.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

The start of sex

That the two sexes are physically different is obvious, but at the start of life, it is not. Five weeks into development, a human embryo has the potential to form both male and female anatomy. Next to the developing kidneys, two bulges known as the gonadal ridges emerge alongside two pairs of ducts, one of which can form the uterus and Fallopian tubes, and the other the male internal genital plumbing: the epididymes, vas deferentia and seminal vesicles. At six weeks, the gonad switches on the developmental pathway to become an ovary or a testis. If a testis develops, it secretes testosterone, which supports the development of the male ducts. It also makes other hormones that force the presumptive uterus and Fallopian tubes to shrink away. If the gonad becomes an ovary, it makes oestrogen, and the lack of testosterone causes the male plumbing to wither. The sex hormones also dictate the development of the external genitalia, and they come into play once more at puberty, triggering the development of secondary sexual characteristics such as breasts or facial hair.

Changes to any of these processes can have dramatic effects on an individual's sex. Gene mutations affecting gonad development can result in a person with XY chromosomes developing typically female characteristics, whereas alterations in hormone signalling can cause XX individuals to develop along male lines.

For many years, scientists believed that female development was the default programme, and that male development was actively switched on by the presence of a particular gene on the Y chromosome. In 1990, researchers made headlines when they uncovered the identity of this gene3, 4, which they called SRY. Just by itself, this gene can switch the gonad from ovarian to testicular development. For example, XX individuals who carry a fragment of the Y chromosome that contains SRY develop as males.

By the turn of the millennium, however, the idea of femaleness being a passive default option had been toppled by the discovery of genes that actively promote ovarian development and suppress the testicular programme — such as one called WNT4. XY individuals with extra copies of this gene can develop atypical genitals and gonads, and a rudimentary uterus and Fallopian tubes5. In 2011, researchers showed6 that if another key ovarian gene, RSPO1, is not working normally, it causes XX people to develop an ovotestis — a gonad with areas of both ovarian and testicular development.

These discoveries have pointed to a complex process of sex determination, in which the identity of the gonad emerges from a contest between two opposing networks of gene activity. Changes in the activity or amounts of molecules (such as WNT4) in the networks can tip the balance towards or away from the sex seemingly spelled out by the chromosomes. “It has been, in a sense, a philosophical change in our way of looking at sex; that it's a balance,” says Eric Vilain, a clinician and the director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It's more of a systems-biology view of the world of sex.”

As I said, Biology has made significant discoveries that the general populace are wholly ignorant of, preferring their handed-down folk wisdom.

In reality, sex is a tug-of-war pulling from one side to another. Perhaps normatively, one side of that tug-of-war wins, but in a statistically significant number of cases (around 1% of the population, or the same percentage as red-heads) the tug of war never stops, or stops far from either extreme. How do we define these people? Well, intersex is one word used - I don't care what label we put on it, it still remains indisputable fact that reality is far more complex than the binary we used to believe.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

The problem is when people want to force others (especially children) to acknowledge their subjective perception of reality as you can see the case with trans activists wanting to impose special pronouns or fine people who "misgender" or insist that you're a "bigot" if you raise children according to their biological sex.

Ultimately I don't care if you choose to identify as someone born on the planet Mercury, you're free to be crazy to some extent, but if you were to argue that the state should actually write "Planet Mercury" on your place of birth in your documentation or that others must proclaim that you're from Mercury otherwise they're mercuryphobes denying your identity and that textbooks should be edited to factually state humans can survive on Mercury - that's going too far

The problem is when ignorant fuckwits think that the content of their navels dictates reality, when they refuse to modify their beliefs based on objective, empirical evidence, and demand their feelies take precedence over reality.

Ultimately, no one cares if you refuse to acknowledge reality, if you demand that the world conforms to the silly little undereducated preening you possess in place of knowledge, if your belief contradicts empirical reality, then quite simply your beliefs aren't worth a wazz and you don't have a chair at the table of informed discourse. However, trying to impose those pathetic biases onto reality in the form of limiting the freedoms and liberties of others is what would make you a bigot.

 

[MatthewLee]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

thus fsr we have established that specifically for humans there are two gametes. Sperm and egg, correct? No sex produces both at once. Males produce one and females produce the other.

The genitals are designed to meet these two together for the purpose of reproduction. Is there disagreement about this?

The sexual characteristics each sex displays attracts a mate so that reproduction can occur.

This would indicate there is no third sex if there is no third possible participant in reproduction despite the additional information you have provided.

Beyond reproduction and the attracting of a mate of the opposite sex with which you can join the binary gametes what possible purpose could gender have in humans? Gender characteristics are produced by sex hormones of two sexes.

It seems that all the described multitudes of genders are simply mixing sex characteristics of both sexes to more or less of a degree...

It also seems like the idea that a small percentage of deviation is anything more than abnormality. Aren’t most human sex chromosome deviations labeled syndrome or some other indication that they are undesired effects of unexpected malformation or abberration of the vastly more common binary configuration?

If there are two kinds of gametes and only two sexes that produce them the distinction is obviously lost on me where sex and therefore gender isn’t binary. Even if you identify with another gender you express the characteristics of the one you identify with. Caitlyn Jenner has long hair, a feminized face, and wears clothes traditional associted with the female gender. This person takes hormones to more effectively emulate the characteristics of the other sex.

This doesn’t seem like folksy wisdom but rather an easily understood common fact of the vast majority of human sexual development and reproduction.

I have two parents, one was male and one was female. I am unaware of anyone else who did not emerge from a womb as the result of the joining of a male and a female gamete. Every human ever born to my
Knowledge has this in common with me. All the other exceptional
Cases you present or alternative species behavioral information don’t seem to recontextualize this for me.

Biology is not my subject to be sure but it seems like Occam’s razor applies here.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Re: What to do about North Korea?

thus fsr we have established that specifically for humans there are two gametes. Sperm and egg, correct? No sex produces both at once. Males produce one and females produce the other.

The genitals are designed to meet these two together for the purpose of reproduction. Is there disagreement about this?

The sexual characteristics each sex displays attracts a mate so that reproduction can occur.

This would indicate there is no third sex if there is no third possible participant in reproduction despite the additional information you have provided.

Mistake: if gender is derived from one's capacity to participate in sexual reproduction, then not being able to participate in sexual reproduction would be a gender. Given that not being able to participate in sexual reproduction can take numerous forms, it's actually more the case that there are multiple genders which we subsume under one heading: intersex.

Beyond reproduction and the attracting of a mate of the opposite sex with which you can join the binary gametes what possible purpose could gender have in humans? Gender characteristics are produced by sex hormones of two sexes.

My suggestion would be to stop thinking of things in terms of purpose, because it's a philosophical concept that is largely inapplicable to evolution. Think function, instead.

It seems that all the described multitudes of genders are simply mixing sex characteristics of both sexes to more or less of a degree...

Even if it were that simple, then the logical fact still remains there are more than 2 genders: A+ & B-, A- & B+, A+ & B+, A- & B-. That's indisputable.

Of course, it's actually not that simple because it's not a switch, but rather a gradient.

It also seems like the idea that a small percentage of deviation is anything more than abnormality.

Not only erroneous, but also unthinkingly nasty - this is really the problem with your lack of being informed, not that you are uninformed, but that you use your poor information to make stupid value judgments which actively harm people.

Aren’t most human sex chromosome deviations labeled syndrome or some other indication that they are undesired effects of unexpected malformation or abberration of the vastly more common binary configuration?

Not in the slightest, that's complete hogwash. A syndrome is a group of associated symptoms that routinely occur together.

If there are two kinds of gametes and only two sexes that produce them the distinction is obviously lost on me where sex and therefore gender isn’t binary.

I mean, even in the absence of any knowledge of biology, I would have thought basic logic should have furnished you with greater comprehension here. If you have two variables, how many possible combinations are there? 2?

Even if you identify with another gender you express the characteristics of the one you identify with. Caitlyn Jenner has long hair, a feminized face, and wears clothes traditional associted with the female gender. This person takes hormones to more effectively emulate the characteristics of the other sex.

The 'characteristics of the other sex' as per the normative cultural expectation of the population and time in which she resides. Map, terrain.

This doesn’t seem like folksy wisdom but rather an easily understood common fact of the vast majority of human sexual development and reproduction.

Funny, I spent years studying human biology, and it looks exactly like folksy wisdom to me with the added dosage of being totally abstracted even from basic logic.

I have two parents, one was male and one was female. I am unaware of anyone else who did not emerge from a womb as the result of the joining of a male and a female gamete.

Great, and the point with respect to gender is?

Every human ever born to my
Knowledge has this in common with me.

Then you need to update your knowledge because there are ample examples of parents possessing a variety of sex according to their Biology, even sequential cellular hermaphroditism. There are so many ways to be human, we have no way even of measuring that - but you want to make it just 2 and some abberrations?

https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

A 46-year-old pregnant woman had visited his clinic at the Royal Melbourne Hospital in Australia to hear the results of an amniocentesis test to screen her baby's chromosomes for abnormalities. The baby was fine — but follow-up tests had revealed something astonishing about the mother. Her body was built of cells from two individuals, probably from twin embryos that had merged in her own mother's womb. And there was more. One set of cells carried two X chromosomes, the complement that typically makes a person female; the other had an X and a Y. Halfway through her fifth decade and pregnant with her third child, the woman learned for the first time that a large part of her body was chromosomally male

...

When genetics is taken into consideration, the boundary between the sexes becomes even blurrier. Scientists have identified many of the genes involved in the main forms of DSD, and have uncovered variations in these genes that have subtle effects on a person's anatomical or physiological sex. What's more, new technologies in DNA sequencing and cell biology are revealing that almost everyone is, to varying degrees, a patchwork of genetically distinct cells, some with a sex that might not match that of the rest of their body. Some studies even suggest that the sex of each cell drives its behaviour, through a complicated network of molecular interactions. “I think there's much greater diversity within male or female, and there is certainly an area of overlap where some people can't easily define themselves within the binary structure,” says John Achermann, who studies sex development and endocrinology at University College London's Institute of Child Health.

These discoveries do not sit well in a world in which sex is still defined in binary terms. Few legal systems allow for any ambiguity in biological sex, and a person's legal rights and social status can be heavily influenced by whether their birth certificate says male or female.

“The main problem with a strong dichotomy is that there are intermediate cases that push the limits and ask us to figure out exactly where the dividing line is between males and females,” says Arthur Arnold at the University of California, Los Angeles, who studies biological sex differences. “And that's often a very difficult problem, because sex can be defined a number of ways.”

All the other exceptional
Cases you present or alternative species behavioral information don’t seem to recontextualize this for me.

Well, perhaps you need to open your mind a little?

Biology is not my subject to be sure but it seems like Occam’s razor applies here.

In what imaginable way does Occam's Razor apply? Do you think Occam's Razor is used to cut away inconvenient empirical facts to maintain simplistic fictions?