5 ms·

Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now?

by azth 5y ago

sorethescore 5y ago
You're understanding of biology is rather outdated. There are several X & Y chromosomal variations that are rather common but frequently undiagnosed. The X & Y Variations include 47, XXY OR Klinefelter Syndrome, 47, XYY (Jacob’s Syndrome) , 47, XXX (Triple X). There are also several variant disorders which include Tetrasomy X, Pentasomy X, 49, XXXX, 48, XXXY, 48, XXYY, and 49, XXXXY. So no, it's not quite simple.
- azth 5y ago
  Not outdated. The cases you mentioned are extremely extremely rare, and are indicative of physical ailments. The are no excuse to generalize across the population to attempt to redefine what "man" and "woman" mean. A child can tell you what a man and woman are.
  - becquerel 5y ago
    Minorities still matter even if there aren't many of them. At what boundary does something being rare enough mean it's ok to not consider it a seperate form of sex? Is it 10% of the population, 5%, or 0.5%? Why?
    - _Algernon_ 5y ago
      Calling genetic abnormalities in sex chromosomes separate sexes makes about as much sex as considering cancer a developmental stage.
    - Ourgon 5y ago
      We do not consider people who suffer from dwarfism a separate species, they are humans with a condition which limited their growth. People with Hypertrichosis are not seen as a separate species either, they are humans who show abnormal hair growth over their bodies. People with Syndactyly are just as human as those who do not have webbing between their fingers or toes. In short, the presence of abnormal conditions does not create separate categories nor does it void existing categorisations, it just means that the individual who has that condition differs from the normal in some way.
    - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
      Yeah but it's a matter of perspective. It's logical that the majority matters so much more, won't someone think of the majority? Majorities have rights, too
- refurb 5y ago
  Exceptions to a rule are just that - exceptions. They don't refute the general rule. I might draw a hand with a thumb and four fingers. The fact that some people are born with more or fewer fingers doesn't change the fact I drew a hand.
  - becquerel 5y ago
    Those people still have hands.
    - refurb 5y ago
      Right, but we don't look at someone who was born without a hand and say "ok, clearly our definition of a hand is wrong."
- Ekaros 5y ago
  So how many full percentages those affect in general population?
- esja 5y ago
  Lia Thomas has XY chromosomes, always has, has benefited from their advantages, and continues to do so. Everyone knows DSDs exist, but most of the time they are brought into this debate, they are merely a rhetorical device rather than any real attempt to address the specific situation. One of my close relatives has Klinefelter's, and I can assure you he finds this sort of thing extremely upsetting.
  - boppo1 5y ago
    Upsetting in which manner? The support of "xx doesn't define a woman" or vice versa?
    - esja 5y ago
      I think he feels like a prop for someone else's agenda. Imagine living a long life with congenital issues that seriously impacted your physical development, made you infertile etc., then suddenly loads of people are talking about your condition. But it's rarely in order to benefit you, and very often just a sort of debating tactic, to advance the goals of XY people who don't share your condition at all and whose goals you disagree with. I would also find that upsetting.
- da39a3ee 5y ago
  I have a PhD in biology. You are wrong: the idea that human sex isn't essentially binary (with the usual rare edge cases of biology) is something that has been pushed by non-scientists with an ideological axe to grind; the essentially binary nature of human (and mammalian) sex is not something that mainstream researchers question in any significant numbers.
  - azth 5y ago
    When actual scientists speak out, they get downvoted by the delusional who refuse to accept reality. Thank you for speaking up, and keep at it please. We live in a clown world today that is hanging on to the last remaining strands of sanity.
protl 5y ago
> Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now? This is a really common response, and I do honestly empathise with it because for most people (me included most of the time) in everyday life there's not really any need to think about it too deeply. Like you said in another comment "A child can tell you what a man and woman are." But can they? Or can they just point at people and guess, with about the same accuracy as you or me? They probably can't _actually_ tell you what a man and woman _are_ in any useful way any more than most grown-ups. Like you agreed in that other comment too, there are some "extremely extremely rare" cases where a child would probably say they're a man or woman but their chromosones aren't what you'd expect. That highlights that chromosones aren't really a deciding factor though right? The child isn't using chromosones when they decide, and I've never been asked about my chromosones, or heard of anyone else being asked about theirs outside of a hospital. So to answer your question, I don't think anyone is denying biology, it's just that biology isn't as relevant as it might seem at first thought.
- esja 5y ago
  I can see your point here, but would argue that biology is the underlying reason that you don't have to think about it too much. Think of it this way... in your lifetime of genuine interactions with people (e.g. conversations), how many XX people have you mistaken for XY people, and vice versa? For most people the answer is very close to zero, but why is that? I would argue it's because billions of years of evolution (a biological process) have already helpfully trained us to detect even the tiniest differences between males and females. We have been a sexually dimorphic species for a very long time. And those differences (whether massive or tiny) are directed in large part by the chromosomes inside our trillions of somatic cells - skin, hair, bones, eyes, brain, etc. etc. Also, for those rare cases you mention, the chromosomes often are a major deciding factor in how we do the classification, e.g. we might be confused about someone with a DSD because although they were "assigned female" since birth, they continue to show some male characteristics, due to the Y chromosome present in their organs, skeleton, etc. Surgeons can operate on genitals etc., but they can't alter all of the trillions of somatic cells in the body.z
  - 5y ago
shakna 5y ago
Conflating genetic sex, with cultural identity, is the mistake being made here. One doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the other. There are people who prefer a different outward expression of who they are. The underlying genetics are as important as your blood type. Useful for a doctor, irrelevant when choosing shoes.
- azth 5y ago
  Denying physical reality is a dangerous precedent. A dog can be a cat, and a phone can be a washing machine.
  - shakna 5y ago
    > a phone can be a washing machine. The morphology, function, and complexity of the modern phone is such that it probably isn't even recognisable as a phone from even thirty years ago. The concept of what a phone is has gone through so many changes, from a device that sends audio down a physical line, to what it is today that very rarely even has a physical line attached, that it probably demonstrates how words and identity can evolve new meanings better than any other example you could have picked.
    - azth 5y ago
      This is detracting from the point. Again, a child can tell you that a phone is not a washing machine, just like a child can tell you that a man is not a woman. Men and women have been the same as men and women from thousands of years ago. We did not magically change species or something. Do physical conditions exist (XXY, XYY, etc) exist? Yes they do, but what we're seeing today is mass hysteria around a mental issue. What should be done is start looking at the underlying causes. Hormone imbalances? childhood trauma? Depression? Wanting out of the current lifestyle? Lack of religion? People with too much time on their hands that they start inventing problems? All these and more should be investigated
      - shakna 5y ago
        > just like a child can tell you that a man is not a woman. Men and women have been the same as men and women from thousands of years ago. We did not magically change species or something. Ah. You have a very limited background. Right. We have been the same species for thousands of years. And for thousands of years there have been male and female (sex) groups that have presented as men and women (gender), that is not the same as the one you might assign to them. (The galli priests of Rome, the Hijras of India, the khanith of Arabia, etc.) And no... No, a child is not always able to tell them apart. Nor does a child, necessarily, instinctively call them either man or woman. If you were to ask a child of the Tiwi tribe what one of their ladyboys are, today, man or woman, they would answer "ladyboy". If you press the point - the child becomes confused. The ladyboys have been present in the Tiwi for roughly the last eight to ten thousand years or so ("kirrijamiyagirraga" in Tiwi). They are as much a part of the social fabric as man or woman. Tiwi is a gendered language, and has three genders (kirri - male, makirri - female, rraga - ladyboy), as well as a fourth tense that is used for gender-neutral terms (ramiya). And, well, if you assume that they're all genetic males, you'll get that wrong as well.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
treeman79 5y ago
That has been the trend for years now. Current supreme court nomination can’t define a woman. https://nypost.com/2022/03/24/supreme-court-nominee-judge-ketanji-brown-wont-define-woman/amp/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/24/supreme-court-nominee-judge-ke...
- azth 5y ago
  Postmodernism in action.
redpanda_salami 5y ago
Does it really matter what a woman is? Trans people just want to stop being discriminated against and have the same rights as everyone else. When you start to introduce other moral issues like whether people under the age of 18 should be allowed to take medication that allows them to transition that's a much more debatable subject. Who are we to say what people can / can't feel based on two chromosomes? Sure I have an XY chromosome but I'm not going to let that define every decision I make in life.
- azth 5y ago
  When someone is sick, we point them to proper medical treatment. By indulging in their dissociation from reality, we're not doing anyone a favor.

Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now?

by azth 5y ago

Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now?

You're understanding of biology is rather outdated. There are several X & Y chromosomal variations that are rather common but frequently undiagnosed. The X & Y Variations include 47, XXY OR Klinefelter Syndrome, 47, XYY (Jacob’s Syndrome) , 47, XXX (Triple X). There are also several variant disorders which include Tetrasomy X, Pentasomy X, 49, XXXX, 48, XXXY, 48, XXYY, and 49, XXXXY. So no, it's not quite simple.

azth 5y ago
Not outdated. The cases you mentioned are extremely extremely rare, and are indicative of physical ailments. The are no excuse to generalize across the population to attempt to redefine what "man" and "woman" mean. A child can tell you what a man and woman are.
- becquerel 5y ago
  Minorities still matter even if there aren't many of them. At what boundary does something being rare enough mean it's ok to not consider it a seperate form of sex? Is it 10% of the population, 5%, or 0.5%? Why?
  - _Algernon_ 5y ago
    Calling genetic abnormalities in sex chromosomes separate sexes makes about as much sex as considering cancer a developmental stage.
  - Ourgon 5y ago
    We do not consider people who suffer from dwarfism a separate species, they are humans with a condition which limited their growth. People with Hypertrichosis are not seen as a separate species either, they are humans who show abnormal hair growth over their bodies. People with Syndactyly are just as human as those who do not have webbing between their fingers or toes. In short, the presence of abnormal conditions does not create separate categories nor does it void existing categorisations, it just means that the individual who has that condition differs from the normal in some way.
  - hackerfromthefu 5y ago
    Yeah but it's a matter of perspective. It's logical that the majority matters so much more, won't someone think of the majority? Majorities have rights, too
refurb 5y ago
Exceptions to a rule are just that - exceptions. They don't refute the general rule. I might draw a hand with a thumb and four fingers. The fact that some people are born with more or fewer fingers doesn't change the fact I drew a hand.
- becquerel 5y ago
  Those people still have hands.
  - refurb 5y ago
    Right, but we don't look at someone who was born without a hand and say "ok, clearly our definition of a hand is wrong."
Ekaros 5y ago
So how many full percentages those affect in general population?
esja 5y ago
Lia Thomas has XY chromosomes, always has, has benefited from their advantages, and continues to do so. Everyone knows DSDs exist, but most of the time they are brought into this debate, they are merely a rhetorical device rather than any real attempt to address the specific situation. One of my close relatives has Klinefelter's, and I can assure you he finds this sort of thing extremely upsetting.
- boppo1 5y ago
  Upsetting in which manner? The support of "xx doesn't define a woman" or vice versa?
  - esja 5y ago
    I think he feels like a prop for someone else's agenda. Imagine living a long life with congenital issues that seriously impacted your physical development, made you infertile etc., then suddenly loads of people are talking about your condition. But it's rarely in order to benefit you, and very often just a sort of debating tactic, to advance the goals of XY people who don't share your condition at all and whose goals you disagree with. I would also find that upsetting.
da39a3ee 5y ago
I have a PhD in biology. You are wrong: the idea that human sex isn't essentially binary (with the usual rare edge cases of biology) is something that has been pushed by non-scientists with an ideological axe to grind; the essentially binary nature of human (and mammalian) sex is not something that mainstream researchers question in any significant numbers.
- azth 5y ago
  When actual scientists speak out, they get downvoted by the delusional who refuse to accept reality. Thank you for speaking up, and keep at it please. We live in a clown world today that is hanging on to the last remaining strands of sanity.

protl 5y ago

> Quite simple: a person with XX chromosomes. Or are people starting to deny biology now? This is a really common response, and I do honestly empathise with it because for most people (me included most of the time) in everyday life there's not really any need to think about it too deeply. Like you said in another comment "A child can tell you what a man and woman are." But can they? Or can they just point at people and guess, with about the same accuracy as you or me? They probably can't _actually_ tell you what a man and woman _are_ in any useful way any more than most grown-ups. Like you agreed in that other comment too, there are some "extremely extremely rare" cases where a child would probably say they're a man or woman but their chromosones aren't what you'd expect. That highlights that chromosones aren't really a deciding factor though right? The child isn't using chromosones when they decide, and I've never been asked about my chromosones, or heard of anyone else being asked about theirs outside of a hospital. So to answer your question, I don't think anyone is denying biology, it's just that biology isn't as relevant as it might seem at first thought.

esja 5y ago
I can see your point here, but would argue that biology is the underlying reason that you don't have to think about it too much. Think of it this way... in your lifetime of genuine interactions with people (e.g. conversations), how many XX people have you mistaken for XY people, and vice versa? For most people the answer is very close to zero, but why is that? I would argue it's because billions of years of evolution (a biological process) have already helpfully trained us to detect even the tiniest differences between males and females. We have been a sexually dimorphic species for a very long time. And those differences (whether massive or tiny) are directed in large part by the chromosomes inside our trillions of somatic cells - skin, hair, bones, eyes, brain, etc. etc. Also, for those rare cases you mention, the chromosomes often are a major deciding factor in how we do the classification, e.g. we might be confused about someone with a DSD because although they were "assigned female" since birth, they continue to show some male characteristics, due to the Y chromosome present in their organs, skeleton, etc. Surgeons can operate on genitals etc., but they can't alter all of the trillions of somatic cells in the body.z
- 5y ago

shakna 5y ago

Conflating genetic sex, with cultural identity, is the mistake being made here. One doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the other. There are people who prefer a different outward expression of who they are. The underlying genetics are as important as your blood type. Useful for a doctor, irrelevant when choosing shoes.

azth 5y ago
Denying physical reality is a dangerous precedent. A dog can be a cat, and a phone can be a washing machine.
- shakna 5y ago
  > a phone can be a washing machine. The morphology, function, and complexity of the modern phone is such that it probably isn't even recognisable as a phone from even thirty years ago. The concept of what a phone is has gone through so many changes, from a device that sends audio down a physical line, to what it is today that very rarely even has a physical line attached, that it probably demonstrates how words and identity can evolve new meanings better than any other example you could have picked.
  - azth 5y ago
    This is detracting from the point. Again, a child can tell you that a phone is not a washing machine, just like a child can tell you that a man is not a woman. Men and women have been the same as men and women from thousands of years ago. We did not magically change species or something. Do physical conditions exist (XXY, XYY, etc) exist? Yes they do, but what we're seeing today is mass hysteria around a mental issue. What should be done is start looking at the underlying causes. Hormone imbalances? childhood trauma? Depression? Wanting out of the current lifestyle? Lack of religion? People with too much time on their hands that they start inventing problems? All these and more should be investigated
    - shakna 5y ago
      > just like a child can tell you that a man is not a woman. Men and women have been the same as men and women from thousands of years ago. We did not magically change species or something. Ah. You have a very limited background. Right. We have been the same species for thousands of years. And for thousands of years there have been male and female (sex) groups that have presented as men and women (gender), that is not the same as the one you might assign to them. (The galli priests of Rome, the Hijras of India, the khanith of Arabia, etc.) And no... No, a child is not always able to tell them apart. Nor does a child, necessarily, instinctively call them either man or woman. If you were to ask a child of the Tiwi tribe what one of their ladyboys are, today, man or woman, they would answer "ladyboy". If you press the point - the child becomes confused. The ladyboys have been present in the Tiwi for roughly the last eight to ten thousand years or so ("kirrijamiyagirraga" in Tiwi). They are as much a part of the social fabric as man or woman. Tiwi is a gendered language, and has three genders (kirri - male, makirri - female, rraga - ladyboy), as well as a fourth tense that is used for gender-neutral terms (ramiya). And, well, if you assume that they're all genetic males, you'll get that wrong as well.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

treeman79 5y ago

That has been the trend for years now. Current supreme court nomination can’t define a woman. https://nypost.com/2022/03/24/supreme-court-nominee-judge-ketanji-brown-wont-define-woman/amp/ https://nypost.com/2022/03/24/supreme-court-nominee-judge-ke...

azth 5y ago
Postmodernism in action.

redpanda_salami 5y ago

Does it really matter what a woman is? Trans people just want to stop being discriminated against and have the same rights as everyone else. When you start to introduce other moral issues like whether people under the age of 18 should be allowed to take medication that allows them to transition that's a much more debatable subject. Who are we to say what people can / can't feel based on two chromosomes? Sure I have an XY chromosome but I'm not going to let that define every decision I make in life.

azth 5y ago
When someone is sick, we point them to proper medical treatment. By indulging in their dissociation from reality, we're not doing anyone a favor.