What's new
By:

On genders

One Brow

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Contributor
LogGrad98 said:
We can agree to disagree, or you can start another thread. Either way I think it is a HUGE stretch to start saying that gender should be multi-faceted in any meaningful way. What percentage of viable embryos with mixed gender DNA actually get born anyway? In any realistic way this would be viewed as an anomaly and a mutation that will realistically never be passed into the gene pool as a viable DNA construct.
Click to expand...

If we are talking just DNA, one type (Klinefelter occurs in 1 out of every 1000 births (perhaps more frequently).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome

However, my point is that you can have, for example, female genitals with a quite normal XY DNA (various forms of testosterone immunity) or male genitals with an XX DNA (syr-region transfer). There are other links in the chain for your gonads to develop as testes/ovaries, and these can be altered regardless of your chromosomes.

I find your last sentence unsettling. Why is whether something can be realistically never be passed into the gene pool as a viable DNA construct" relevant to deciding whether or not they should be forced to fit into a societal gender role?
 
Turkish Nightmare said:
I think only two genders. Determined entirely if they have a y Chromosome. All other 'genders' are branches off of those.
Click to expand...

Of course you can arbitrarily limit genders by the process of limiting your personal category choices, but that only means how you categorize things will not be a good reflection of reality.
 
Was that little kid in any other movies?

Strange thing is he looks just like my nephew did at about the same age.
 
One Brow said:
If we are talking just DNA, one type (Klinefelter occurs in 1 out of every 1000 births (perhaps more frequently).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klinefelter_syndrome

However, my point is that you can have, for example, female genitals with a quite normal XY DNA (various forms of testosterone immunity) or male genitals with an XX DNA (syr-region transfer). There are other links in the chain for your gonads to develop as testes/ovaries, and these can be altered regardless of your chromosomes.

I find your last sentence unsettling. Why is whether something can be realistically never be passed into the gene pool as a viable DNA construct" relevant to deciding whether or not they should be forced to fit into a societal gender role?
Click to expand...

If you have a Y chromosome you are male. Everything else is female.
 
One Brow said:
An argument worthy of a creationist.
Click to expand...

Demeaning myself as well as people who are creationists in one fell swoop. You must have really impressive credentials to have such a high opinion of yourself.

Y chromosome is the primary test the Olympics goes off of. Of course there are grey areas in almost everything but the presence or absence of a Y chromosome for determining gender is the most logical choice.

If you were a University dorm what else would you ask of it's residents in order to arrange the rooms with roommates? Whether or not they were female or male.

If you were the Olympics what else would you use to determine who gets to compete with whom?

What other criteria is better than the presence of Y chromosome? This would take care of > 99.99% of cases. There are some rare situations that may be monitored on a case by case basis.
 
I feel like there was a time when you weren't nearly as horrible as you are now and you'd occasionally try to make a valid point. Am I misremembering? If not what happened? You've been pretty unbearable lately.
 
Gameface said:
I feel like there was a time when you weren't nearly as horrible as you are now and you'd occasionally try to make a valid point. Am I misremembering? If not what happened? You've been pretty unbearable lately.
Click to expand...

0.jpg
 
Yeah you. Did you suffer some sort of head trauma or take up paint huffing?
 
Turkish Nightmare said:
Demeaning myself as well as people who are creationists in one fell swoop. You must have really impressive credentials to have such a high opinion of yourself.
Click to expand...

I have a fair understanding of what does and does not make for a reasonable argument.

Turkish Nightmare said:
Y chromosome is the primary test the Olympics goes off of. Of course there are grey areas in almost everything but the presence or absence of a Y chromosome for determining gender is the most logical choice.
Click to expand...

So, you are saying that a person with breasts, a uterus, ovaries, and a Y chromosome would be man. I understand the scheme. It's simplicity means that, as a determination of reality, it's a failure when it comes to understanding people with this set of circumstances.

Turkish Nightmare said:
If you were a University dorm what else would you ask of it's residents in order to arrange the rooms with roommates? Whether or not they were female or male.
Click to expand...

Were I running a university dorm, and I were presented with the decision of whether to pair a person with breasts, a uterus, ovaries, and a Y chromosome, I would probably room them with a female unless they asked otherwise, particularly since they probably have been raised as a female from birth. Would you room them with a male?

Turkish Nightmare said:
If you were the Olympics what else would you use to determine who gets to compete with whom?
Click to expand...

I have no advice for the Olympics nor any objections to the standards they choose to set.

Turkish Nightmare said:
What other criteria is better than the presence of Y chromosome? This would take care of > 99.99% of cases. There are some rare situations that may be monitored on a case by case basis.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's more like 98% of cases, and we shouldn't decide human rights based on what's easy for us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top