3 ms·

Bunch of blather. For one thing there are definitely babies born with ambiguous genitalia. For another thing, the author is conflating "sex" and "gender" which

Bunch of blather. For one thing there are definitely babies born with ambiguous genitalia. For another thing, the author is conflating "sex" and "gender" which are two different concepts. Not only that, but among other species, there is tremendous variation in sexual anatomy and behavior. This is a politically motivated rant.

fresh_apples 3y ago
All of your points are addressed in the article, but in short: phenotypic and behavioural diversity within each sex class in gonochoric species does not imply that sex itself is a spectrum. Nor does the existence of hermaphroditic species, in which each individual embodies both female and male reproductive systems, imply this either. It's quite telling that no-one who advocates for a 'sex spectrum' model can actually define it in a way that applies to all anisogamic species, is consistent with the observations of biologists, and has any scientific utility.
quantified 3y ago
Humans appear to have evolved for sex to be a social function as well as reproductive. It is pure speculation that it is for reproduction only. It is also the case in animals for gender and sex to be separate. There was the manatee that had enough anal sex with another male manatee to kill it, recently. Birds regularly turn up as homosexual, like the swans in the Boston Garden. Male dogs will hump almost anything for a portion of their lives.
- lusus_naturae 3y ago
  > Humans appear to have evolved for sex to be a social function as well as reproductive. The context of social activity for any animal (or living thing that socializes) is sexual reproduction. How are you (or any reference you're using) delineating between social vs. reproductive function? Are you going to cite anecdotes of people who have sex for fun but don't want to reproduce? (These questions sound more combative than I want, fyi). Individual behavior, even at scale, doesn't have any bearing on evolution. Evolution requires population level effect on a large time scales. Also, there is no evolution without passing on traits, so any trait that doesn't result in offspring will not have pressures that evolve the organism exhibiting that trait.
  - quantified 3y ago
    Social activity is for sexual reproduction? In that case, what isn't for it? Social interactions easily lead to more offspring even if not directly related to reproduction. My providing hundreds of happy orgasms to my female mate definitely improves the chances I'll get to impregnate her. Supporting reproduction doesn't need to be direct every time.
Gibbon1 3y ago
I'm straight male. I'm happy enough with a male body and being romantically and sexually attracted to women. My attitude toward societies pigeon holing me because of the above? Annoyed. My thought about anyone promoting that? Deeply suspicious.

fresh_apples 3y ago

All of your points are addressed in the article, but in short: phenotypic and behavioural diversity within each sex class in gonochoric species does not imply that sex itself is a spectrum. Nor does the existence of hermaphroditic species, in which each individual embodies both female and male reproductive systems, imply this either. It's quite telling that no-one who advocates for a 'sex spectrum' model can actually define it in a way that applies to all anisogamic species, is consistent with the observations of biologists, and has any scientific utility.

quantified 3y ago

Humans appear to have evolved for sex to be a social function as well as reproductive. It is pure speculation that it is for reproduction only. It is also the case in animals for gender and sex to be separate. There was the manatee that had enough anal sex with another male manatee to kill it, recently. Birds regularly turn up as homosexual, like the swans in the Boston Garden. Male dogs will hump almost anything for a portion of their lives.

lusus_naturae 3y ago
> Humans appear to have evolved for sex to be a social function as well as reproductive. The context of social activity for any animal (or living thing that socializes) is sexual reproduction. How are you (or any reference you're using) delineating between social vs. reproductive function? Are you going to cite anecdotes of people who have sex for fun but don't want to reproduce? (These questions sound more combative than I want, fyi). Individual behavior, even at scale, doesn't have any bearing on evolution. Evolution requires population level effect on a large time scales. Also, there is no evolution without passing on traits, so any trait that doesn't result in offspring will not have pressures that evolve the organism exhibiting that trait.
- quantified 3y ago
  Social activity is for sexual reproduction? In that case, what isn't for it? Social interactions easily lead to more offspring even if not directly related to reproduction. My providing hundreds of happy orgasms to my female mate definitely improves the chances I'll get to impregnate her. Supporting reproduction doesn't need to be direct every time.

Gibbon1 3y ago

I'm straight male. I'm happy enough with a male body and being romantically and sexually attracted to women. My attitude toward societies pigeon holing me because of the above? Annoyed. My thought about anyone promoting that? Deeply suspicious.