Serious PC thread

[Murat Baslamisli]

Something from a biologist on why gender/sex is complicated in terms of biology. Since some people do see it as very binary:

A Biology Professor Explained Why Defining Sex and Gender Is Actually Not Simple At All – fakuto

fakuto.com

For every biologist that think like her, there will be a hundred who will say sex is binary. You will believe the one you want to believe.

 

[Moxie]

For every biologist that think like her, there will be a hundred who will say sex is binary. You will believe the one you want to believe.

Really? Are you a biologist? Otherwise, you don't have to find me 100 examples of the other, but how about one convincing one?

PS: I saw this thing on FB and I just thought it was interesting based on the conversation we've been having. I don't necessarily want to get into another back and forth over it.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Really? Are you a biologist? Otherwise, you don't have to find me 100 examples of the other, but how about one convincing one?

PS: I saw this thing on FB and I just thought it was interesting based on the conversation we've been having. I don't necessarily want to get into another back and forth over it.

There is a Neuroscientist with a phd.

Science Shows Sex Is Binary, Not a Spectrum | RealClearPolitics

Last week, The New York Times ran an op-ed by Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies at Brown University, arguing that biological sex is not binary. The piece joined a long...

www.realclearpolitics.com

But see, the key word in your post is "convincing". What would convince you? Nature and how it works doesn't, evolutionary biology doesn't, I am not sure I can manage

 

[Moxie]

She has a PhD in genetics, so she knows a thing or two about it. I googled "biologist says gender is binary," and came up with a lot of scientific articles that say it's not. The first one that said it is was a political blog. You can google it yourself and see if you come up with anything...let's say "plausible" from the science community. This is an editorial from the journal "Nature."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07238-8

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Let's just say sex is biology and gender is ideology and leave it at that. Every side of this argument is always telling the other side to "educate" themselves. It goes nowhere.

 

[Moxie]

Let's just say sex is biology and gender is ideology and leave it at that. Every side of this argument is always telling the other side to "educate" themselves. It goes nowhere.

That's your take on it. Scientists say differently. I've already offered you why the biology may not be that straightforward. That's what the scientists say. I don't know that gender is "ideology," (you should look that up,) though there is an argument that it's as much cultural/societal construct as anything. Think of "gender norms." How women are "supposed" to look and act, how men are "supposed" to look and act, and how that differs/changes not only amongst cultures, but across eras. If you don't want to read and open your mind, that's on you. I've offered you some science. You're offering only politics. Or closed-mindedness. The earth isn't flat. I didn't tell you to educate yourself. I offered something that was interesting...I thought...as a by-the-way.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

That's your take on it. Scientists say differently. I've already offered you why the biology may not be that straightforward. That's what the scientists say. I don't know that gender is "ideology," (you should look that up,) though there is an argument that it's as much cultural/societal construct as anything. Think of "gender norms." How women are "supposed" to look and act, how men are "supposed" to look and act, and how that differs/changes not only amongst cultures, but across eras. If you don't want to read and open your mind, that's on you. I've offered you some science. You're offering only politics. Or closed-mindedness. The earth isn't flat. I didn't tell you to educate yourself. I offered something that was interesting...I thought...as a by-the-way.

That's exactly what you are doing, telling people to educate themselves, while yourself not being able to do such. I sent you a link. written by a scientist that disagrees with you 100%. Did that change your ideology? Did it make you "open your mind"? Nope. But you are totally comfortable telling others to do just that and that is why we never go anywhere. You did not agree with the scientist with a phd in genetics and you gracefully conceded she may know a thing or two about the subject at hand...Wouldn't you concede she may know a tiny bit more than you? Or me? But you will not open your mind to her. Why not? Because your own belief system crumbles if you do that. So don't expect from others what you are not willing to do yourself.

 

[Moxie]

That's exactly what you are doing, telling people to educate themselves, while yourself not being able to do such. I sent you a link. written by a scientist that disagrees with you 100%. Did that change your ideology? Did it make you "open your mind"? Nope. But you are totally comfortable telling others to do just that and that is why we never go anywhere. You did not agree with the scientist with a phd in genetics and you gracefully conceded she may know a thing or two about the subject at hand...Wouldn't you concede she may know a tiny bit more than you? Or me? But you will not open your mind to her. Why not? Because your own belief system crumbles if you do that. So don't expect from others what you are not willing to do yourself.

I didn't willfully ignore that. I thought it was just a copy of my own link. I will read it.

 

[Moxie]

Ok, I read it. Firstly, the author does not disagree with me 100%. It is a political site, not a scientific one, I think it needs to be pointed out, and one on the conservative side of the spectrum. This:

Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.

It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.

---------

So it does acknowledge that there are intersex people. I don't know when anyone has tried to say that being intersex or transgender or non-binary is "typical."

_____

"The piece also references the work of psychologist John Money, which contradicts Fausto-Sterling’s very thesis. Not only have Money’s ideas pertaining to gender identity been widely discredited, but they also demonstrate how gender is biological."

_____

Fausto-Sterling herself mentioned that Money's work was from the 50s and discusses it on a continuum. This is out of context.

_____

"It isn’t necessary to redefine “sex” in order to facilitate the acceptance of people who are different. Pushing for social change for the sake of change, as many of those on the left seem wont to do, only leads to misguided policies and unnecessary confusion for the public.
Going beyond Fausto-Sterling’s op-ed, this argument has been extended to include the transgender community, with its proponents contending that transgender people defy male and female categorization, and offer proof that sex and gender are a spectrum. But in reality, the term “transgender” means that a person identifies more as the opposite sex than their birth sex—which still operates within a framework of sex being binary.
For the intersex community, there has been a long history of physicians failing to respect their bodily autonomy, or incorrectly assuming that they were not the sex they grew up to identify as in adulthood. In these cases, individuals should be allowed to change the sex marked on their birth certificate if, later in life, an intersex condition becomes known.
We can, and should, advocate for the rights of intersex people and those who do not fit typical gender norms, while at the same time acknowledging these scientific truths."

_____

While I think the above is a political opinion, not a scientific one, it does support more what I'm saying than what you are. It still says that some people don't conform to their genital sex. And I think the above bolded is just reaching for a "binary" when there isn't necessarily one. The 21st C. is finding things a bit more complicated to categorize. You don't live where I do, but here I have seen a spectrum change. It's not just trannies and bull-dykes holding up the far end of gender-nonconforming. There is a lot more subtle gender-neutral, and it's not just a fashion statement.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Moxie, we have a fundamental difference in looking at this issue. I accept the existence of intersex folks. I have all the respect and sympathy for them. They deserve everything you and I have. Have you read the 10 finger analogy up there? That is the issue. We do not create a new level of being because there are some people that have 9 fingers. Overwhelming majority of gay, lesbian or trans people have male or female chromosomes, not intersex chromosomes. What they identify as is not a scientific designation that I could not care less. Identifying as something or the other is a social thing that does not change your chromosomes. I will still respect you as a person but do not make me a part of your fantasy and make me disregard millions of years of biology.
Again, what you identify as has zero effect on your chromosome make up.
This by the way is extremely easy to prove. Look at the genetic and chromosome make up of every person that identify as something else than their biological sex. Over 99% of the time, you will see they are man or woman. If you find the common smoking gun gene or chromosome that points to another direction , we'll talk then. I will still love you, respect you and call you what you want me to call you...he,she, zir, they, unicorn, because I am nice, but you are not fooling evolutionary biology. Your subjective belief of yourself is just that, subjective.
I identify as a 70 year old but the Canadian government still won't give me my old age pension, as woke as they are. And believe me someone's age is far less important than someone's sex.

 

[Moxie]

Murat, I offered some info from scientists as interesting, as most of them do say the answer is not as simple as X & Y. We even learned that in school. However, if subtle is too difficult for you, you carry on believing what you like. I really don't care.

 

[tented]

There is a Neuroscientist with a phd.

Science Shows Sex Is Binary, Not a Spectrum | RealClearPolitics

Last week, The New York Times ran an op-ed by Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies at Brown University, arguing that biological sex is not binary. The piece joined a long...

www.realclearpolitics.com

But see, the key word in your post is "convincing". What would convince you? Nature and how it works doesn't, evolutionary biology doesn't, I am not sure I can manage

This part is striking:

”Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.
It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.”

It’s safe to say something which affects only 1% of the population isn’t typical. It can’t be, really. That’s the nature (!) of statistics. People born with ambiguous or both male and female genitals aren’t to be condemned, either, despite their rarity. I’ve always thought it would be a difficult position for everyone involved, especially with a newborn infant, who has others making decisions for them.

Gender is different from the biology of intersex genitals, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a biological component. Think of the Kinsey scale: an array of sexuality, from 0 (exclusively heterosexual) to 6 (exclusively homosexual). Obviously this leaves most people, in categories 1-5, as somewhere between the two exclusive ends. (Based on my personal background, I agree with this. By far the majority of gay men I’ve known have had some heterosexual experiences.) I suspect this part of is where the gender factor is entering the picture, especially in a more accepting, open society, in which homosexuality is increasingly accepted. In other words, those in the in-between categories are feeling freer to express and explore their various inclinations — their one-through-five-ness.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

This part is striking:

”Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.
It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.”

It’s safe to say something which affects only 1% of the population isn’t typical. It can’t be, really. That’s the nature (!) of statistics. People born with ambiguous or both male and female genitals aren’t to be condemned, either, despite their rarity. I’ve always thought it would be a difficult position for everyone involved, especially with a newborn infant, who has others making decisions for them.

Gender is different from the biology of intersex genitals, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a biological component. Think of the Kinsey scale: an array of sexuality, from 0 (exclusively heterosexual) to 6 (exclusively homosexual). Obviously this leaves most people, in categories 1-5, as somewhere between the two exclusive ends. (Based on my personal background, I agree with this. By far the majority of gay men I’ve known have had some heterosexual experiences.) I suspect this part of is where the gender factor is entering the picture, especially in a more accepting, open society, in which homosexuality is increasingly accepted. In other words, those in the in-between categories are feeling freer to express and explore their various inclinations — their one-through-five-ness.

No arguments from me. Every human deserves respect. My ONLY problem is , no matter how you feel about yourself, or identify as, you cannot magically change your genetic or chromosome make up. That's it. Shit man, Trump believes he is the best president ever. I am not willing to take his word for it.
People really do not understand, and this is beyond sex and gender issues, how little they truly know about themselves and how subjective their attitude towards themselves are. Looking inwards and seeing the shadow, that is scary for most people man. I know I scare myself sometimes.

 

[tented]

No arguments from me. Every human deserves respect. My ONLY problem is , no matter how you feel about yourself, or identify as, you cannot magically change your genetic or chromosome make up. That's it.

That’s interesting. I admit I hadn’t thought of it this way, so I looked it up on Wikipedia to remind myself how genetics works. I found this:

”The XY sex-determination system is the sex-determination system found in humans, most other mammals, some insects (Drosophila), some snakes, some fish (guppies), and some plants (Ginkgo). In this system, the sex of an individual is determined by a pair of sex chromosomes. Females typically have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and are called the homogametic sex. Males typically have two different kinds of sex chromosomes (XY), and are called the heterogametic sex.

In humans, the presence of the Y chromosome is responsible for triggering male development; in the absence of the Y chromosome, the fetus will undergo female development. More specifically, it is the SRY gene located on the Y chromosome that is of importance to male differentiation. Variations to the sex gene karyotype could include rare disorders such as XX males (often due to translocation of the SRY gene to the X chromosome) or XY gonadal dysgenesisin people who are externally female (due to mutations in the SRY gene). In addition, other rare genetic variations such as Turners (XO) and Klinefelters (XXY) are seen as well.”

In other words, if I’m understanding this correctly, it’s an explanation for the 1% who are born intersex, and provides biological/genetic proof of humans not being 100% binary. But, as with the example of people who aren’t born with 10 fingers, I agree that the existence of 1% intersex doesn’t necessitate a radical redefinition of biological sex.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

That’s interesting. I admit I hadn’t thought of it this way, so I looked it up on Wikipedia to remind myself how genetics works. I found this:

”The XY sex-determination system is the sex-determination system found in humans, most other mammals, some insects (Drosophila), some snakes, some fish (guppies), and some plants (Ginkgo). In this system, the sex of an individual is determined by a pair of sex chromosomes. Females typically have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and are called the homogametic sex. Males typically have two different kinds of sex chromosomes (XY), and are called the heterogametic sex.

In humans, the presence of the Y chromosome is responsible for triggering male development; in the absence of the Y chromosome, the fetus will undergo female development. More specifically, it is the SRY gene located on the Y chromosome that is of importance to male differentiation. Variations to the sex gene karyotype could include rare disorders such as XX males (often due to translocation of the SRY gene to the X chromosome) or XY gonadal dysgenesisin people who are externally female (due to mutations in the SRY gene). In addition, other rare genetic variations such as Turners (XO) and Klinefelters (XXY) are seen as well.”

In other words, if I’m understanding this correctly, it’s an explanation for the 1% who are born intersex, and provides biological/genetic proof of humans not being 100% binary. But, as with the example of people who aren’t born with 10 fingers, I agree that the existence of 1% intersex doesn’t necessitate a radical redefinition of biological sex.

That is all I am saying Let me rephrase, having the tiny percentage of intersex people should not stop us from saying that biological sex is binary. Yes there are outliers but they exist in every shape and form. We say human beings have 10 fingers. We never have a need to qualify it but we know damn well there are some people with 9. Humans have two kidneys. I have a friend born with one. We still say human being have two kidneys. He is not offended.

 

[tented]

That is all I am saying

 

[Moxie]

Very thoughtful posts from you, @tented. The transmutation of the SRY is discussed in the original post I put up from Fausto Sterling. I think we've all agreed that intersex exists, and is rare. I don't know that anyone here is calling for a radical redefinition of biological sex. I'm only saying, and as seems proven and agreed upon, that it's not 100% binary. Where this all gets complicated, I think, in the times we live in, is where you point out the 1-5 people on the Kinsey scale, and how some people do not feel they conform, either to an exact binary in terms of sexual preference, and/or to what is considered to be culturally normative behavior/choices/dress, etc. for what society wants women to be or men to be, in a binary world. Even the notion of "trans" has changed, certainly since the 60s to now.

I understand why it freaks people out that there is a whole generation that is choosing to redefine themselves outside of standard hetero-norms. I think this is probably a choice against cultural norms, as much as anything. Caitlin Jenner's choices were very much of her generation. The youngsters now seem to be less restricted by being one thing, or another. We let the strictures out of the box, and some don't want to be boxed in. Perhaps if we consider it to be not biologically non-binary, but culturally non-binary, then we can understand better what is going on.

 

[Federberg]

No one here is freaked out. I don't understand why you constantly feel the need to characterise our views in that way. What this comes down to is that in this era people feel that they can classify themselves anyway they wish and impose that on society whether or not it conforms to fairly basic understandings about the world that we live in. They can produce whatever scientific justification they want to prove that outliers exist, but that is what they are... outliers. Must the fundamental definitions that language has evolved over time be thrown into disarray just to accommodate outliers? It makes no sense. Let them come up with a new gender definition for themselves and I'll be the first person to defend their right to exist and be accommodated. I simply will not accept a man who was a woman being described as a man, as a "he". They are not, they cannot be a "he", sorry...

PS, I'm not sure I've ever mentioned this before, but part of my vehemence on this issue is because a real life situation I observed many years ago. I was out for drinks with my girlfriend at the time, and I happened to bump into one of my friends. He joined us and the evening was rather enjoyable, lots of drinking etc. Somewhere along the way he meets a beautiful woman at the bar and brings her back to our table - I guess he was tired of feeling like a 3rd wheel. Anyway I couldn't figure out what was wrong but the vibe coming from this woman wasn't quite right (in retrospect it was the hands and a rather small adam's apple!). Only after a whispered conversation with my girlfriend did I become more certain about my suspicions. My friend and this woman were just about to start kissing before I stopped them (by this point she was sitting on his lap). I asked the woman..."Are you a woman?" And she said... "What does it matter?" At that point my friend jumped like he'd had a pin stuck in his hand I have no objection to a transvestite seeking to attract the interest of a person, just be honest about who you are and live with the consequences. This whole thing now where we have to call a trans-woman a "woman" and the other way around, forces society to collude in a charade that we shouldn't need to participate in. Find your own separate gender, be honest, and live your life without imposing your personal business on the rest of us I say..

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Very thoughtful posts from you, @tented. The transmutation of the SRY is discussed in the original post I put up from Fausto Sterling. I think we've all agreed that intersex exists, and is rare. I don't know that anyone here is calling for a radical redefinition of biological sex. I'm only saying, and as seems proven and agreed upon, that it's not 100% binary. Where this all gets complicated, I think, in the times we live in, is where you point out the 1-5 people on the Kinsey scale, and how some people do not feel they conform, either to an exact binary in terms of sexual preference, and/or to what is considered to be culturally normative behavior/choices/dress, etc. for what society wants women to be or men to be, in a binary world. Even the notion of "trans" has changed, certainly since the 60s to now.

I understand why it freaks people out that there is a whole generation that is choosing to redefine themselves outside of standard hetero-norms. I think this is probably a choice against cultural norms, as much as anything. Caitlin Jenner's choices were very much of her generation. The youngsters now seem to be less restricted by being one thing, or another. We let the strictures out of the box, and some don't want to be boxed in. Perhaps if we consider it to be not biologically non-binary, but culturally non-binary, then we can understand better what is going on.

Moxie, I think that bolded part is the main disagreement here. You just cannot arbitrarily and subjectively give yourself a definition and expect the society to take your word for it, you just can't. Where do you draw the line then? Everyone's subjective idea of themselves is usually crap ! That's why we have objective norms that we have developed as a society over centuries. I cannot claim that I identify as a NBA player and claim that 5 foot 8 white Turkish men are seriously underrepresented in the NBA and that is a diversity issue and claim racism/sizeism etc. NBA does not and should not care about how I define myself.

 

[Federberg]

This is really scary....

Children's transgender clinic hit by 35 resignations in three years as psychologists warn of gender dysphoria 'over-diagnoses'

A transgender clinic has been hit by 35 resignations in three years, as psychologists warn of “overdiagnoses” of gender dysphoria among children.

www.telegraph.co.uk