3 ms·

> No one has to accept it, that’s what’s what. Sure; language is an agreement. No one can force you to communicate clearly and if it is your desire, you can go

by esarbe 3y ago

> No one has to accept it, that’s what’s what. Sure; language is an agreement. No one can force you to communicate clearly and if it is your desire, you can go all day long babbling nonsensical syllables. No one can stop you; do as your heart commands you. > Pre-pubescent boys do not produce gametes either but that doesn’t stop them being male. So, you're arguing that we should not only consider the current state of an organism to determine its sex but rather the normal lifecycle and what kind of gametes the organism would have produced? Sure, we can go with that, if you prefer that. Does it change anything?

brigandish 3y ago
I’m not arguing anything, that is the definition, based on current understanding that just so happens to align perfectly with observations of reality. It’s going to take a miracle of the sort that starts religions to change that, although it seems that there are plenty willing to believe already.
- esarbe 3y ago
  You might want to have a look here for the complete definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex I again ask; does it change anything?
  - brigandish 3y ago
    Did you seriously post an entire Wikipedia article? I gave you the definition of anisogamety, from something a bit better than Wikipedia, but since this is the level we're at, from [1]: > Anisogamy is a form of sexual reproduction that involves the union or fusion of two gametes that differ in size and/or form. The smaller gamete is male, a sperm cell, whereas the larger gamete is female, typically an egg cell. Anisogamy is predominant among multicellular organisms. In both plants and animals gamete size difference is the fundamental difference between females and males. It goes on: > Anisogamy is a core element of sexual dimorphism that helps explain phenotypic differences between sexes. I hope this is the end of this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisogamy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisogamy
    - esarbe 3y ago
      No, I didn't post an entire Wikipedia article; I posted a link to an entire Wikipedia article. But anyhow; I still don't see why your distinction between the formulations of > If you don't have the capacity to produce functional gametes, you're asexual. and > In both plants and animals gamete size difference is the fundamental difference between females and males. makes any difference to the argument I made, namely: > It makes sense to differentiate between sex and gender Does it make any difference? Thanks!
      - brigandish 3y ago
        > No, I didn't post an entire Wikipedia article; I posted a link to an entire Wikipedia article. Oh, I see. My mistake, you wanted me to read the actual URL! /s No, you wanted me to read part of the article but since you lazily posted a URL instead of that then the URL stands in for the entire article as I have no way to read your mind to work out which part of the article you wanted read. Please, keep the pedantry, and the laziness, to an absolute minimum. Secondly, humans are not asexual. Asexuality is a reproduction strategy not involving gametes. Humans produce gametes. Talking about asexuality with regard to human sexuality is a) erroneous, and b) irrelevant. If we were involving plants in this discussion it might make sense, but we're not. Please stop mentioning it. Lastly, you claimed that I had conflated two concepts when - quite ironically - your novel use actually conflates its new meaning with an existing psychological concept known as temperament or personality. So, your use of asexual in this conversation, no it makes no difference because it is wholly irrelevant. That humans are sexually dimorphic does make a difference (the word is relevance), because you've taken a word that describes that and applied it erroneously (again) while mixing it up with a different word, and largely based on gender stereotypes to boot! There are many temperaments and personalities, they certainly have a spectrum (or something far more profoundly complex). Gender does not, and I have no interest - except to oppose it wherever necessary - in the pseudo-science from which silly claims like "sex and gender are fundamentally different" that it cannot validate or support, beyond borderline fraudulent citations and repetition among those with not the first clue about biology or basic reasoning.
        3y ago

by esarbe 3y ago

brigandish 3y ago

I’m not arguing anything, that is the definition, based on current understanding that just so happens to align perfectly with observations of reality. It’s going to take a miracle of the sort that starts religions to change that, although it seems that there are plenty willing to believe already.

esarbe 3y ago
You might want to have a look here for the complete definition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex I again ask; does it change anything?
- brigandish 3y ago
  Did you seriously post an entire Wikipedia article? I gave you the definition of anisogamety, from something a bit better than Wikipedia, but since this is the level we're at, from [1]: > Anisogamy is a form of sexual reproduction that involves the union or fusion of two gametes that differ in size and/or form. The smaller gamete is male, a sperm cell, whereas the larger gamete is female, typically an egg cell. Anisogamy is predominant among multicellular organisms. In both plants and animals gamete size difference is the fundamental difference between females and males. It goes on: > Anisogamy is a core element of sexual dimorphism that helps explain phenotypic differences between sexes. I hope this is the end of this. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisogamy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisogamy
  - esarbe 3y ago
    No, I didn't post an entire Wikipedia article; I posted a link to an entire Wikipedia article. But anyhow; I still don't see why your distinction between the formulations of > If you don't have the capacity to produce functional gametes, you're asexual. and > In both plants and animals gamete size difference is the fundamental difference between females and males. makes any difference to the argument I made, namely: > It makes sense to differentiate between sex and gender Does it make any difference? Thanks!
    - brigandish 3y ago
      > No, I didn't post an entire Wikipedia article; I posted a link to an entire Wikipedia article. Oh, I see. My mistake, you wanted me to read the actual URL! /s No, you wanted me to read part of the article but since you lazily posted a URL instead of that then the URL stands in for the entire article as I have no way to read your mind to work out which part of the article you wanted read. Please, keep the pedantry, and the laziness, to an absolute minimum. Secondly, humans are not asexual. Asexuality is a reproduction strategy not involving gametes. Humans produce gametes. Talking about asexuality with regard to human sexuality is a) erroneous, and b) irrelevant. If we were involving plants in this discussion it might make sense, but we're not. Please stop mentioning it. Lastly, you claimed that I had conflated two concepts when - quite ironically - your novel use actually conflates its new meaning with an existing psychological concept known as temperament or personality. So, your use of asexual in this conversation, no it makes no difference because it is wholly irrelevant. That humans are sexually dimorphic does make a difference (the word is relevance), because you've taken a word that describes that and applied it erroneously (again) while mixing it up with a different word, and largely based on gender stereotypes to boot! There are many temperaments and personalities, they certainly have a spectrum (or something far more profoundly complex). Gender does not, and I have no interest - except to oppose it wherever necessary - in the pseudo-science from which silly claims like "sex and gender are fundamentally different" that it cannot validate or support, beyond borderline fraudulent citations and repetition among those with not the first clue about biology or basic reasoning.
      - 3y ago