4 ms·

Are the numbers of intersex individuals large enough to actually matter? And how many of them are fertile?

danharaj 9y ago
It was a question about categories. Are there two categories of gender / sex? The answer is no. These people exist. They have entire lives which are as meaningful as any other. Why wouldn't they matter?
- angersock 9y ago
  When it comes to policymaking, any prudent work requires the analysis of how many people would be impacted. It's not enough to just say "well there's like 100 people in a population of 300M we should change everything just for them".
  - tiles 9y ago
    The OP asked what evidence exists that gender and sex are non-binary. It's in reference to the words someone said in the article, not hypothetical policymaking.
    - angersock 9y ago
      There are degrees of "are", right, implicit in such a statement.
jasonwatkinspdx 9y ago
Every single one of them matters and deserves the same dignity and respect you expect for yourself.
vertex-four 9y ago
Intersex traits cover a fairly broad range of things, and there's a reasonable argument that up to 1.7% of people are intersex. Visibly atypical genitals are fairly rare (1 in 1500 births or so), on the other hand, but don't cover the entire range of intersex traits.
- angersock 9y ago
  What sort of things typically fall into that range other than atypical genitals?
  - vertex-four 9y ago
    Complicated, but simplest explanation is from wikipedia: In biological terms, sex may be determined by a number of factors present at birth, including: the number and type of sex chromosomes; the type of gonads—ovaries or testicles; the sex hormones; the internal reproductive anatomy (such as the uterus in females); and the external genitalia. People whose characteristics are not either all typically male or all typically female at birth are intersex.
    - angersock 9y ago
      Sure, but what are the rates for things like that? And in the case of different chromosomes, what are the variations that still result in a fertile and "normal" human being? My concern is that people are attempting to use the existence of intersex folks (at widely varying claimed incidence rates) to make faulty arguments about what is and is not normal physiology.
      - vertex-four 9y ago
        As I said, up to 1.7% according to at least one (albeit rather criticised) study - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11534012 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11534012 The criticisms are more about terminology than the core argument though - they mostly argue that "intersex" should only cover a small number of conditions that result in an arbitrarily substantial differentiation from a "normal" male or female, rather than any significant differentiation. So if the question is about sexual dimorphism, those criticisms are mostly irrelevant. But here's a question: why is it important that they can reproduce? Gay men and women are unlikely to reproduce either, so should we ignore them in policy-making too? Are gay people abnormal?

It was a question about categories. Are there two categories of gender / sex? The answer is no. These people exist. They have entire lives which are as meaningful as any other. Why wouldn't they matter?

angersock 9y ago
When it comes to policymaking, any prudent work requires the analysis of how many people would be impacted. It's not enough to just say "well there's like 100 people in a population of 300M we should change everything just for them".
- tiles 9y ago
  The OP asked what evidence exists that gender and sex are non-binary. It's in reference to the words someone said in the article, not hypothetical policymaking.
  - angersock 9y ago
    There are degrees of "are", right, implicit in such a statement.

jasonwatkinspdx 9y ago

Every single one of them matters and deserves the same dignity and respect you expect for yourself.

vertex-four 9y ago

Intersex traits cover a fairly broad range of things, and there's a reasonable argument that up to 1.7% of people are intersex. Visibly atypical genitals are fairly rare (1 in 1500 births or so), on the other hand, but don't cover the entire range of intersex traits.

angersock 9y ago
What sort of things typically fall into that range other than atypical genitals?
- vertex-four 9y ago
  Complicated, but simplest explanation is from wikipedia: In biological terms, sex may be determined by a number of factors present at birth, including: the number and type of sex chromosomes; the type of gonads—ovaries or testicles; the sex hormones; the internal reproductive anatomy (such as the uterus in females); and the external genitalia. People whose characteristics are not either all typically male or all typically female at birth are intersex.
  - angersock 9y ago
    Sure, but what are the rates for things like that? And in the case of different chromosomes, what are the variations that still result in a fertile and "normal" human being? My concern is that people are attempting to use the existence of intersex folks (at widely varying claimed incidence rates) to make faulty arguments about what is and is not normal physiology.
    - vertex-four 9y ago
      As I said, up to 1.7% according to at least one (albeit rather criticised) study - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11534012 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11534012 The criticisms are more about terminology than the core argument though - they mostly argue that "intersex" should only cover a small number of conditions that result in an arbitrarily substantial differentiation from a "normal" male or female, rather than any significant differentiation. So if the question is about sexual dimorphism, those criticisms are mostly irrelevant. But here's a question: why is it important that they can reproduce? Gay men and women are unlikely to reproduce either, so should we ignore them in policy-making too? Are gay people abnormal?