4 ms·

> biologists and anthropologists recognize that human biological sex is complex Have you got any credible sources which support this statement? I have only see

> biologists and anthropologists recognize that human biological sex is complex Have you got any credible sources which support this statement? I have only seen papers which confirm that sex is binary and immutable.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
beeforpork 1y ago
Are you trolling? Biological sex is not binary. There are (at least) three criteria to be considered: (1) cromosomes. females are XX, males are XY. But other combinations exist: XXY, XXX, XXXY, etc. There is no universal agreement of how those combinations should be best matched to the binary system. (2) phenotype. females have a vulva, a vagina, and ovaries, males have a scrotum, a penis, and testicles. But some people have no, or half, or a large, or small of one or another. Furthermore, the phenotype might not match with the chromosomes: one example is an XY chromosome type while the person has a vulva, vagina, and internal testicles. There is no universal agreement of how those people should best be classified to the binary system -- the best is probably to recognise that they are non-binary. (3) hormone level. females have a typical level of hormons and males have different levels. But this is not universally clear-cut. This is one of the most frequent reasons for dispute at sport events when otherwise very obvious women have hormone levels that are 'too male'. Again, no universal agreement of what to do here: ignore the hormone levels in these cases? But why? Usually, they match. But not always. There are also male outliers that have hormone levels that are higher than for males. These males might also be excluded from sports competitions for the same reason, despite being on the right side of the binary scale, but they are too far on that side. Again -- there is no agreement whether this is still the normal male category or maybe non-binary. And this is just the biological sex. For gender and identification, there is more. If it wasn't so serious, it would be funny how some governments define sex as binary by reducing it to biological sex or maybe assigned sex -- it is really like making a law that pi is 3. But note that the judges here made it clear that it is not their place to make a judgement on this complex topics.
- dustedcodes 1y ago
  Isn't what you described here just a variation of chromosomes? We know there are more than two combinations, but Sex is still determined binary via the existence or absence of the Y chromosome, no?
  - vaidhy 1y ago
    No.. you can have one set of chromosomes, but completely different hormonal influence.
  - taylodl 1y ago
    Most people typically look at genitals to determine sex. However, as beeforpork pointed out, there are individuals with XY chromosomes who have a vulva, a vagina, and internal testicles. Based on physical appearance alone, which is often the basis for sex determination at birth or during annual physicals, they would be classified as female. Yet, their chromosomes tell a different story. This complexity suggests that it may be inappropriate to strictly categorize them as either male or female. This is what it means to be non-binary. Beeforpork did a good job of detailing other instances where biological markers of sex don't align with the so-called sex chromosomes.
    - dustedcodes 1y ago
      Ok what you both say makes sense but none of what you said so far negates the fact that strictly speaking sex is binary, defined by the existence of a Y chromosome and that this is also immutable. It’s completely possible that the externalities presented at birth may lead to a wrong sex assignment, but that is a separate issue of human error isn’t it?
      - fzzzy 1y ago
        So you are saying that someone with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome should use the men's bathroom, even though they have fully female genetalia?

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

beeforpork 1y ago

Are you trolling? Biological sex is not binary. There are (at least) three criteria to be considered: (1) cromosomes. females are XX, males are XY. But other combinations exist: XXY, XXX, XXXY, etc. There is no universal agreement of how those combinations should be best matched to the binary system. (2) phenotype. females have a vulva, a vagina, and ovaries, males have a scrotum, a penis, and testicles. But some people have no, or half, or a large, or small of one or another. Furthermore, the phenotype might not match with the chromosomes: one example is an XY chromosome type while the person has a vulva, vagina, and internal testicles. There is no universal agreement of how those people should best be classified to the binary system -- the best is probably to recognise that they are non-binary. (3) hormone level. females have a typical level of hormons and males have different levels. But this is not universally clear-cut. This is one of the most frequent reasons for dispute at sport events when otherwise very obvious women have hormone levels that are 'too male'. Again, no universal agreement of what to do here: ignore the hormone levels in these cases? But why? Usually, they match. But not always. There are also male outliers that have hormone levels that are higher than for males. These males might also be excluded from sports competitions for the same reason, despite being on the right side of the binary scale, but they are too far on that side. Again -- there is no agreement whether this is still the normal male category or maybe non-binary. And this is just the biological sex. For gender and identification, there is more. If it wasn't so serious, it would be funny how some governments define sex as binary by reducing it to biological sex or maybe assigned sex -- it is really like making a law that pi is 3. But note that the judges here made it clear that it is not their place to make a judgement on this complex topics.

dustedcodes 1y ago
Isn't what you described here just a variation of chromosomes? We know there are more than two combinations, but Sex is still determined binary via the existence or absence of the Y chromosome, no?
- vaidhy 1y ago
  No.. you can have one set of chromosomes, but completely different hormonal influence.
- taylodl 1y ago
  Most people typically look at genitals to determine sex. However, as beeforpork pointed out, there are individuals with XY chromosomes who have a vulva, a vagina, and internal testicles. Based on physical appearance alone, which is often the basis for sex determination at birth or during annual physicals, they would be classified as female. Yet, their chromosomes tell a different story. This complexity suggests that it may be inappropriate to strictly categorize them as either male or female. This is what it means to be non-binary. Beeforpork did a good job of detailing other instances where biological markers of sex don't align with the so-called sex chromosomes.
  - dustedcodes 1y ago
    Ok what you both say makes sense but none of what you said so far negates the fact that strictly speaking sex is binary, defined by the existence of a Y chromosome and that this is also immutable. It’s completely possible that the externalities presented at birth may lead to a wrong sex assignment, but that is a separate issue of human error isn’t it?
    - fzzzy 1y ago
      So you are saying that someone with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome should use the men's bathroom, even though they have fully female genetalia?