Biological sex is not as simple as male or female \ stacker news ~science

pull down to refresh

Biological sex is not as simple as male or female www.sciencenews.org/article/biological-sex-male-female-intersex

256 sats \ 16 comments \ @IamSINGLE 25 Feb science

Non-paywalled here: https://archive.is/XYxMP

It’s not just about chromosomes. Or reproductive cells. Or any other binary metric. Many genetic, environmental and developmental variations can produce what are thought of as masculine and feminine traits in the same person. And so sex, scientists say, should be viewed in all its complex glory.

Yet a definition of biological sex put forth by U.S. President Donald Trump designates people as either male or female based solely on the size of the reproductive cells they make.

Millions of Americans don’t fit that narrow definition through no fault of their own — and many don’t even know it.

view all related items

110 sats \ 2 replies \ @endothermicdev 25 Feb

Even going with a chromosomal definition gets difficult quickly. It seems like that would make for a binary classification, but that's only mostly the case. There's XX and XY, sure, but 0.15% of people are XXY, and there are some with just a single X chromosome. There's even XXYY, or XXXY combinations (seems like mathematically we're halfway between male and female ratio here.) How about XXXXY? Nature is wild - it keeps life interesting. Also it doesn't care about our labels.

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @alt 25 Feb

Wouldn't you consider those to be exceptions that prove the rule? If a child is born with an extra X chromosome, we don't hold our hands up and say that they are some new third gender, we instead see that they are a man with Klinefelter syndrome.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 25 Feb

The gender identity movement is one sided

Men using female bathrooms Men playing female sports Men joining sororities Men wearing female clothing

60 sats \ 7 replies \ @freetx 25 Feb

genetic, environmental and developmental variations

Convincing people that the environmental contaminants (pthalate poisoning and other estrogen mimicking plastics) that is producing this social disaster is somehow "natural" and "good" is one of the great psyops of the modern world.

Of course to the people affected by this, they will strongly resist the idea that its not natural, since their own biochemical makeup makes this feel completely natural and "who they really are" (which is true in a limited sense). Therefore the biochemically induced disorder is internalized as their own identity.

The really sinister group are the politicians who latch upon these harmed people and farm them for political support....all the while preventing the trillion dollar lawsuits that keeps the environmental contamination profitable.

Then we have these sort of fake "science" pieces written specifically to target the 110IQ crowd: Just smart enough read basic science articles and yet not smart enough to realize the game being played.

120 sats \ 6 replies \ @IamSINGLE OP 25 Feb

these sort of fake "science" pieces

What's fake in here?

Convincing people that the environmental contaminants

I don't think the writer of this artical really meant for contaminants but this is what he meant.

Environmental factors which often influence sex determination during development or sexual maturation include light intensity and photoperiod, temperature, nutrient availability, and pheromones emitted by surrounding plants or animals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_sex_determination

39 sats \ 5 replies \ @freetx 25 Feb

What's fake in here?

The shifting of emphasis from it being a correctable environmental problem to a social issue of lack of acceptance.

It would be like if I cut your arm off and then wrote articles saying: "We must accept IamSINGLE as he is and its societies problem for not accepting him....whatever 'environmental issues' resulted in him losing his arm are subordinate to the wider social issues of acceptance"

21 sats \ 3 replies \ @IamSINGLE OP 25 Feb

The shifting of emphasis from it being a correctable environmental problem to a social issue of lack of acceptance.

Can you quote from the article where you see the shift of emphasis as you mentioned.

First of all the writer is talking about sex determination not the environment.
He's criticizing US president's recent order about sex.
He also presents scientific descriptions to prove his point.

This, It simply addresses that Trump is wrong while signing the executive order that there are only two sexes — male and female.

(And we all know that there aren't only two. Don't we?)

19 sats \ 2 replies \ @denlillaapan 25 Feb

We do?

Where do you see the third, fourth, fifth etc? And what are you relying on to create/generate those categories?

40 sats \ 1 reply \ @IamSINGLE OP 25 Feb

I meant it for the sexual orientation not for the genders.

There's a lot of misunderstanding when people talk interchangeably for sex and gender.

view all 1 replies

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @denlillaapan 25 Feb

💯

Humans have can have any number of arms. It's arbitrary, a social construction

29 sats \ 3 replies \ @denlillaapan 25 Feb

"feminine/masculine traits" ≠ biological sex.

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @IamSINGLE OP 25 Feb

💯 Sexual orientation ≠ Gender.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @denlillaapan 25 Feb

True, but for the purposes of these convos, not really

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 25 Feb

💯 For real

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 25 Feb

Feminine traits vs female biology

Millions of Americans don’t fit a narrow definition? Lies and gaslighting and propaganda