🇳🇱
What is it with conservatives and this "there are only two sexes" nonsense... Are they trying to convince us they arent any smarter than a grade schooler or something. Anyone who has had more than an elementary school education knows full well its not that simple...
@freemo They actually don’t say that, they say “there are only two genders”, which shows how little they know about the nomenclature
What they actually mean is “there are only two sexes”, which is indeed correct, but sex and gender are two VERY different things and you’re not going to have a constructive conversation about trans issues, trans rights and the trans agenda if you don’t have a full understanding of the basics such as the difference between gender and biological sex
the controversy today was spurred by a congresswoman literally saying there are only 2 sexes, not genders. In fact she went out of her way to have the word sexes printed on her little sign... So clearly your not speaking accurately of conservatives.
@realcaseyrollins I stand corrected.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins there are only two sexes though, none of the other situations (intersex, Klinefelter’s, etc) are healthy specimens of the species and are not able to reproduce, so biologically speaking, homo sapiens is a sexually dimorphic species
“gender” is a word that has been rendered meaningless by postmodernism
Well few things..
1) you are correct that the examples I gave were not necceseraly fertile or healthy conditions. However there are plenty of intersex individuals who are perfectly healthy, so thats not really much of a point overall.
2) yes intersex people do tend to be infertile (though not all are)..
However, how does either of those 2 points prove that sex is any less of a spectrum? Sounds like what your saying is that people at either extreme of the spectrum tend to be physically more healthy, which is fine, but doesnt negate the fact that its a spectrum.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins the sex of an organism refers to its reproductive capacity, so there are only two roles to be filled in the sexual reproductive capacity of homo sapiens, hence the species being labelled “dimorphic.” A disorder like intersexuality obviously does not diminish the value of the person who has it, and hopefully it doesn’t diminish from their life, but ‘intersex’ isn’t a sex because it doesn’t describe one of the roles that the species needs to be fulfilled in order to procreate: one produces an egg, and the other sperm. Klinefelter’s is not a sex for the same reason. There are two sexes: male, and female. End of list.
> the sex of an organism refers to its reproductive capacity,
Not really, its part of it, but not the whole of the definition.
If you have a woman who is born infertile but otherwise has every indication of being a woman, would you declare she has no sex because we only define sex through reproductive capacity? Of course not, because we dont, sex is defined in a much more nuanced way than just your ability to have kids.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I’m not saying that intersex people have no sex, I’m saying that they exhibit a mix of the two sexes. They are not, however, a novel sex. ‘Infertile woman’ is also not a novel sex, it is a woman who cannot reproduce.
Its really not that difficult.. they have qualities of both sex.. sex is not a simple "male" or "female".. its a bunch of traits that are considered one or the other and a person has some combination of those traits to varying degrees.
its a bunch of traits that are considered one or the other
right, we have traits, and they’re one or the other, either male or female. The two sexes. We describe aberrations from this pattern in relation to these two categories. There is no other sex that features, for instance, novel sexual organs that nonetheless interface with penises and vaginas. Now that would be another sex.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins the sex describes the name of the category. Intersex people are by definition between the two sexes.
Yes much like hot and cold define two categories at either extremes of a spectrum and warm exists inbetwee... male and female is no different in that regard, they represent the two extremes of the spectrum and intersex is the space inbetween on that spectrum.
Sadly the specific cutoff points arent clearly defined so it isnt always obvious where male ends and intersex begins for example.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins except that when the biological specimen is healthy (fertile) it is never intersex, and the word ‘sex’ refers to the category as it pertains to healthy specimens from the species
Incorrect, while an intersexed person is less likely to be fertile, to claim that a fertile healthy person can **never** be intersexed is patently false. Intersex people can be perfectly healthy and fertile, they are just less likely to be so than a person at the extremes of the spectrum.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I need a citation for that sorry
@freemo @realcaseyrollins regardless, individuals that represent a vanishing minority aberration in a species that doesn’t become a trait found in any large portion of the population doesn’t seem like it warrants a category, no? If 10% of the population was women with penises growing out of their pubic mounds then now that would be a new sex, we’d give it a name, you know?
Who is giving them a category? We are recognizing the nature of sex as a continuous thing rather than discrete.
With intersex being 2% of the population if we use the broadest definition of intersex I'd say thats more than common enough to understand and describe it.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins hopefully biologists. It’s not helpful to anyone to have more than two categories, or three really with the third being intersex which is defined in relation to the other two as we established, it’s only helpful to gender ideologues
Why do you keep going on about more than two categories, no one said anything about multiple categories... again we are talking about a spectrum, spectrums always have two ends.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins because there’s not nearly the same number of individuals between the categories as there are inside of them
@freemo @realcaseyrollins it’s not a spectrum, a spectrum implies some kind of even distribution, or continuous, as you said, and the one-time aberrations are just that, aberrations with no relation to one another, and very rare
your mincing terms.. I think you may misunderstand what continuous means.. an "even distribution" means something entirely different than a "continuous distribution" and I suspect your confusing these two may be where the problem lies.
A spectrum implies a continuous distribution NOT an even (uniform) distribution.
and no they arent one-time aberrations, there are literally 20 million intersexed people on the planet, far from one time aberrations. They arent all that exceptionally rare, just uncommon.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I’ll tell you what, I’ll meet you halfway. Intersex is a spectrum. Intersex people can have any number of traits from males and females, and account for .25% of the population. But since intersex is a spectrum of sexes and not a sex, then that leaves 99.75% of the population with two distinct categories. Most of the .25% cannot reproduce.
Now, you’re a biologist. How many sexes does this species have? It has two, and a very small number of individuals that exhibit a mixture of the two but not a consistent mixture, it varies from individual to individual, so basically it’s two.
If the rainbow was the ‘sex spectrum’ as you describe it, it would be a red bar that covered 49.875% of the length that was solid red and 49.875% that’s solid violet and a tiny sliver in the middle of all the other colors.
Is that really a spectrum? Is that the most descriptive term you’d use for that pattern? No, it’s two categories, with some un-inheritable exceptions.
Well no, your still trying to apply discrete thinking to a spectrum.. you were closer with your lead-in statement about it being a bimodal distribution.. it is still continuous and even in the majority where we like to simplify things and say "male" there is still a spectrum there, we just dont really bother to make the distinction in any useful way.
you will have some males that are more male than others, women who are more women than others. Its rude to point that out in humans, but no less true. A guy with a larger penis, more testosterone, less estrogen, bigger muscles, broader shoulders, more facial hair, he is closer to to the extreme end of male than someone who has much less of those qualities.
Moreover there isnt some point where all of a sudden its intersex, the point on the intersex part of the spectrum as you call it that is closest to the part where you start saying "male" isnt all that different either.
You are discribing a **continuous** spectrum, bimodal as you said, but with relatively low variance, thats all. The fact that you want to categorize things into discrete terms is imaginary, there is no cutoff where if you step a toe over the line and have just a little less testosterone your suddenly intersex or something. its continuous but the distribution is not uniform, thats **all**
>you will have some males that are more male than others, women who are more women than others. Its rude to point that out in humans, but no less true. A guy with a larger penis, more testosterone, less estrogen, bigger muscles, broader shoulders, more facial hair, he is closer to to the extreme end of male than someone who has much less of those qualities.
no, this isn’t true, sex isn’t just hormones. You know why? You pump a guy full of estrogen and he will never menstruate and he will never be able to bear a child. It’s about the roles fulfilled by the healthy members of the species during reproduction, and that’s it, that’s what ‘sex’ is describing. There is no ‘intersex’ role during reproduction. There is a male role, and a female role. What is the intersex role? What other role could there be, for a dimorphic species?
sex, unsurprisingly, is about sex! and babies!
@freemo @realcaseyrollins the fact that sometimes an intersex person has enough sex traits from one of the two categories to successfully reproduce doesn’t imply that there are other sexes along some spectrum. What spectrum? A man who produces slightly less testosterone than another is not, in fact, more of a woman, unless he also has a uterus and bleeds monthly
> the fact that sometimes an intersex person has enough sex traits from one of the two categories to successfully reproduce doesn’t imply that there are other sexes along some spectrum.
Why do you keep saying this when several times now I told you and reiterated over and over again that neither I nor anyone who discusses the topic for the most part, are claiming there are other sexes.. yet you keep saying it like your arguing against that point which was never made.
There is a spectrum, a spectrum that has two ends, male on one, female on the other, period. There is not more than 2 sexes, sex is a spectrum consisting of those 2, and only those 2 ends on either side of the spectrum
> What spectrum? A man who produces slightly less testosterone than another is not, in fact, more of a woman, unless he also has a uterus and bleeds monthly
he is though, but only slightly, hormones as I said is such a small part.. however if is a man and has a uterus even if he doesnt bleed, then even more so, if he bleeds too, even more so than that, if he fertile, again more so... every male or female characteristic adds to where you are on the spectrum. No one thing makes you a woman but it will push you to one end of the spectrum or another.
I do? where did I imply it was common?
As we covered early on the spectrum is non-uniform.. non uniform spectrums are still spectrums.
Individuals cluster closely to being strongly on one end of the spectrum of the other.. it is a bimodal distribution with low variance, thats all.
Also while it isnt common it isnt so extremely uncommon either... You probably pass at least one significantly intersexed person every day, and have worked with them and had them as friends and never even knew it.. They are more than common enough to be part of everyday life.
@freemo @wiggles @realcaseyrollins No you don’t. ‘Significantly intersexed’ doesn’t mean anything. I’ve attached a useful graph.
thats the chromosomes, we are talking intersexed, that includes ambiguous genitalia (regardless of your XY makeup) as well as hormone sensitivity, and a host of other qualities.
According to peer reviewed papers (I'll be happy to link one) depending on which of several scientificially accurate definitions of intersex you use your looking at anywhere from 1 in 50 people being intersexed to about 1 in 1000... even at 1 in 1000 your probably encountering them more than often enough to be significant.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles Nope. Every condition not listed there (CAH, LOCAH etc.) that is under the intersex umbrella are people who are plain old males and females.
Ahh so the scientific and peer reviewed papers that claim you are wrong and give other percentages are just wrong and your right, got it.. talk to me when you get some scientists to agree with you then, until that point its just your (incorrect) opinion.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles I know this area inside and out. I made that graph and I have read all the papers from where those numbers come from. But go ahead, explain to me how people with conditions like CAH are somehow a mix of male and female.
I'm not trying to explain anything to you.. I'm just saying a random dude on social media saying "I know this inside and out" and claiming peer reviewed scientific literature is wrong and he is right is worth very little to me.
Now if you wish to show me how you "know this inside and out" by sharing a paper you got published ina scientific journal that disputes the existing numbers then by all means I'll be happy to listen to you and give your opinion equal weighting as those professional scientists who disagree with you.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles Which numbers are you disputing?
Well technically you are the one disputting numbers. I mentioned (and earlier in the coversation linked) scientific sources (professionals and some peer reviewed papers) that gave numbers on intersexed people in the population ranging from 1 in 50 to 1 in 1000.
You are the one claiming that all the scientists who gave such numbers are wrong.
Like i said that holds very little weight for me compared to actual licensed and respected professionals in their field.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles ‘intersex’ isn’t a scientific term, it covers a large set of completely unrelated conditions. Most people who are intersex are merely either male or female. The number of people with very specific conditions where SRY status isn’t aligned with sex phenotype (or the sex phenotype cannot be classified) is < 2/10,000. That stat should jump out at you an immediately remind you of the well known peer reviewed paper that it is from.
never said it was a clearly defined technical term.. in fact it cant be since sex is a spectrum there is naturally no cut off point on that spectrum where male ends and intersex begins.. which is kinda the whole point here...
Regardless male and female **are** technical terms and scientists use intersex to mean, to varying degrees, anyone that isnt going to fit perfectly and wholly the technical definition of either of these. Some may be stricter others may be weaker but in all cases they are defining intersex in terms of technical definitions of male and female
So yes, I am going to trust scientists a hell of a lot more to ensure they are drawing that line based on those technical definitions than some guy from the fediverse who "spent a lot of time on it"
The fact is, biologists know a hell of a lot better than you what the technical definition of the sexes are and your own definition appears ill informed and limited wholly to if a person has X or Y genes which not only are NOT the only genes that determine sex, they are not even the technical definition of sex which includes expression and function in the technical definition.
So yea, ill stick with the science on this one, sorry.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles sex is not a spectrum. male, female and 0.02% people who don’t fall into either of those two categories.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles nope. basic biology. sperm and ova. bipotential gonads, sexual dimorphism etc. look in any clinical trial and tell me how many level you find in the ‘sex’ column.
Suprisingly the "basic biology" you were taught in 3rd grade was only intended to be an introduction. Real biology is far more nuanced and complicated than what your 3rd grade teacher taught you about.
Not sure what it is with people lately trying to insist their grade school teachings are more right because they are simpler.. I see it with people against core math, the PEMDAS "riddle" that circulated, the sexes.. Real science is not that simple, never was.
But hey, like I said, the medical dictionary I quoted earlier directly disagrees with you. If you want to insist you know what medical terms mean more than a medical dictionary, go for it, I'll stick with the professional source until you get some credentials of your own.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles Sigh. Here is the database of clinical trials in the US:
https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/search/advanced?cond=&term=&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=
How many categories do you find under ‘sex’? Why do you think people involved in the serious business of clinical trials organize their data this way? You live in an imaginary world where sex means more than male and female when it doesn’t.
How many sex categories do you find here in this perspective on sex differentiation? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5369239/ Count how many sex categories you find on
How many sex categories do you find in paper that call for the standardization of reporting sex of tissue culture? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919971/
I could go on with 1000s of papers and you’ll never be able to name a sex category in humans apart from male and female.
Huh, just because sex is a spectrum in no way implies that people cant be largely categorized under one or the other...
Hot and cold is a spectrum, I can still tell if something is hot or cold.
@BeachBleach @freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles And it is even well known how non-nucleated blood cells are sexed! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5065383/
It is hard to imagine that they wouldn’t be since they were sexed all that time making proteins when they had a nucleus.
@Yemaya @BeachBleach @freemo @realcaseyrollins @wiggles Yep, lots of these sorts of people. Biology PhDs are a dime a dozen and it doesn’t certify someone is capable of elementary critical thinking.
Translation: you have no degree or any formal study of any kind, you spent a day once googling shit to try to argue for assumptions you already made and nowyou go around arguing nonsense that isnt remotely in line with the scientific literature because scientists are dumb and you know better.
Its not about credentials, its about demonstrating ones expertise and knowledge.
I would give just as much credit and due consideration to a high school drop out who happened to publish a peer-reviewed article as I would a PhD. A PhD just requires one finish a thesis and will typically have more than one peer reviewed article they managed to post. So its a good bet they have demonstrated their knowledge and skill..
But yea i guess its so horrible of me to give more credit to someone who has actually demonstrated they are an expert than some random dude who has never accomplished anything in the field but still thinks they know better than those who have.
@BeachBleach @Yemaya @realcaseyrollins @wiggles @mittimithai
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I mean, “spectrum” implies changing smoothly from one thing, to another, to another, and like I said, that’s not what you see, you have 49.875 in one color, no gradient, 49.875 in another, and a tiny sliver in between with randomly assigned traits, no patterns to group them by, to create a new category, and there’s no distinctive trait that applies to this group, nothing analogous to ‘sperm’ or ‘egg’. All the distinctiveness is at the individual level and the sexes are for describing the species as a sum total
it is a bimodal distribution with low variance, thats all.
right, I said this earlier, but I couldn’t think of the word ‘variance’ because I’m awful at statistics
we’re agreeing on the basic facts, and arguing semantics, but I’m staking my ground because this is fundamentally a semantic issue. It’s not a spectrum because “spectrum” doesn’t adequately communicate the observed pattern. “bimodal distribution with low variance” does, perfectly, but then you’re admitting that all that the two sexes are is names for the two groups in that bimodal distribution.
We’ll agree that an individual can express certain sex traits along a spectrum (like amounts of hormones) but other sex traits are more binary (uterus or not?) especially when looking at healthy (fertile) individuals.
But “there are two sexes” means that there are two groups in the bimodal distribution that we named because it makes things like separating sports leagues easier, and describing who needs to see a gynecologist and who doesn’t. For the .25% of the population that doesn’t neatly fit in one of those categories, I trust they can sort themselves out. I have known people I suspected of being intersex, and they were doing just fine.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins further, not only is “spectrum” not a good descriptor for the bimodal distribution of sex, it’s injected here accidentally from the concept of “the gender spectrum,” which is a term unrelated to intersexuality or the two sexes and based on anti-scientific Continental philosophy
They do change smoothly, the percentages you indicate show a particularly small variance value, but that doesnt make the transition non-continuous (not smooth)... your trying desperately to redefine words to fit the language and view you really want to have. The slope is steep when variation is low, but it is still continuous and not disjoint, so your assertion doesnt apply here, if it were non-continuous you'd be correct.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins sorry, you’ve used too many unqualified pronouns and I’m not sure what you mean, “they do change smoothly,” — what is “they”?
they refers to male-female.. Literally doctors grade male-female on a spectrum.. im not making this shit up, its literally a continuous scale for each sexual characteristics (which together form the overall sex).
Take the attached image as an example, it is a continuous transition from one to the other, the fact that 1 and 7 are the most common and 2 - 6 are less common doesnt make it any less of a continuous spectrum, there is no abrupt difference between one or the other, nor any one point you can say "this is when you stop being male".. This particular image is only about the genitalia, but if you consider every sexual characteristic whether its hormones, hair, figure, breasts, or reproduction, each and every one exists on a similar scale, a spectrum and none of them are discrete.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins there is a point where the genitalia stops functioning and I do think that’s relevant for categorization. You wouldn’t describe any of the images, 2 - 6, as novel genitalia, would you? There are two normal ones in this image, and several unhealthy ones, I’m sorry, I know that’s rude and I’m sorry to anyone reading this who that hurts to hear, but that’s the breaks
As we already covered, an infertile individual still has a sex, so the argument that some of these people may be infertile is not a valid one.
Moreover having any of the genitalia on this chart does not guarantee you are infertile, though it is more likely to coincide with ambiguous genitalia... so its really not a very good argument on either front.
If your going to say its "unhealthy" in what sense, I think you can say its not "normal" but thats already covered by the fact that its less common to be intersex and close to the middle of the spectrum than it is to be towards the extreme ends of the spectrum.. so not being common (aka not normal) isnt saying anything useful either.
I think there comes a point where you have to admit to yourself your tryign desperately to fit the reality to your world view rather than the other way around.
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I am not arguing that the transition is continuous or disjoint; I am arguing that it does not matter
@freemo @realcaseyrollins I’m arguing that as a metaphor, “spectrum” is the wrong one regardless, especially because of its origin in the overall dialectic
@freemo @realcaseyrollins you say this like every third guy has a uterus