23 ms·
Nothing in nature can ever be described with 100% accuracy by any model. But that doesn't mean models are useless. So imagine why we would use the binary sex mo
by crypteur 1y ago
Nothing in nature can ever be described with 100% accuracy by any model. But that doesn't mean models are useless. So imagine why we would use the binary sex model instead of three or a spectrum or what have you.
- TheCoelacanth 1y agoThere are only two elements in the universe: hydrogen and helium. The binary element model is 98% accurate.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- BriggyDwiggs42 1y agoIs a bimodal distribution, or a somewhat reductive “typical male, typical female, intersex” model, so difficult to understand that we can’t use it? I don’t think people are stupid.
- ck2 1y agoRandom but nature related: some birds have four sexes
- aaaja 1y agoYou may be thinking of species like the white-throated sparrow. These have two morphs with distinct behaviours which lead to there being four mating combinations. Still two sexes though.
- nathan_compton 1y agoSimple models are useful, but they shouldn't determine who is allowed to live a normal, productive, life without some very compelling justification. Like the "binary sex model" is handy, but nothing about it makes it obvious that we should definitely and always lock gender (another non-binary model often simplified usefully into a binary) directly to biological sex.