Help explain non binary

What is the one you use?

This is important. If we can establish this, we can compare it with my definition.

And we can see which one has better predictive value for a range of things.

The reason we use sex (reproductive class) to separate other things that are not reproductive is because sex strongly correlates to a lot of other things. Better than anything else we've got.

If Shizuku's definition correlates less strongly for those things, then clearly my definition is superior and should be retained. If Shizuku's definition correlates more strongly for those things, then we should look into adopting for such purposes.

But we need to know what it is first.

academic.oup.com/edrv/advance-article/doi/10.1210/endrev/bnaa034/6159361#.YG386Eqj1v4.twitter

Helleofabore

That article you posted makes a simple but very interesting point about how the word gender came to replace sex and then cause confusion: that (often American) tendency to opt for euphemisms instead of meaningful words eg “passed” instead of “died” etc.

It isn’t as harmless and genteel as it seems, even at its best, because its aim - to be polite, not cause offense- muffles reality and thought. Then Chinese whispers set in.

Now there is this tangled mess of thought mistaking sex for gender and all that goes with the confusion.

( quote from that article below)

“Sex Versus Gender

Much of the American public is surprisingly prudish about the word sex; it has now become commonplace to use the seemingly more genteel term gender when one really means sex. “

Each visible characteristics comes with a probability of being associated with one or other sex and for some of those characteristics if they don't work we would say there is something wrong . So no beard no problem , no period for a female is a problem

But in many cases, most trans people for example , the visible characteristics all point the same way , there is nothing wrong and no ambiguity

I think it's pretty rubbish to essentially be saying that some people have disabilities and therefore people who don't have a disability can use the fact that others have disability to suggest an ambiguity when there isn't one

Like , some people are blind. You are not blind but you expect to taken seriously when you say you can't see , or that you would like your eyes removed as you identify as blind

Pretty disgusting actually

some women have beards.

Please stop politicising female medical conditions like this. It is simply offensive now because you have tried this one before. This exact example if I believe.

Females who have beards suffer from medical conditions. Some of them incredibly debilitating. They are not there for you to use as examples.

That's one way of attempting to divide people into sexes, but it's not the only one, and it's not the one I, and many other people use.

What is the one you use?

The rest of your post is derived from your assumption that it's all about reproduction.

If sex isn't about reproduction, what is it about?

Using your definitions, what makes a person trans? If there aren't two distinct categories to transition between, then how can anyone be trans?

I can see you holding onto an incredibly rare case.

But no XX is still female and XY male and you can’t switch. It might be a tough reality for you I don’t know, but that’s the biological reality.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2190741/

You can act as muddled as you like but there’s no ability to change your chromosomes.

Your sex cannot change.

People can try to warp the language but the biological reality can’t be changed wrt to XX or XY

That's one way of attempting to divide people into sexes, but it's not the only one, and it's not the one I, and many other people use. The rest of your post is derived from your assumption that it's all about reproduction.

"So all we're left with where you'd have to prioritise if you wanted a sex determination is totally infertile individuals with DSDs."

Ask them. Would you categorise someone with CAIS as male because of their testes? Would you then impose a legal and social status of male on them, or would you categorise them as female for pretty much every practical aspects of their daily life?

Sex is made of sex characteristics.

Sex is chromosomes

And yes some characteristics are specific to either sex

Exactly which is why beards are not used to determine sex

They are commonly associated primarily with males , so there is a greater probability that the person with a beard is male but that's all

I agree - beards aren't randomly assigned male, they are observed to be more common on males. never-the-less, some women have beards.

GC people prioritise either gametes, gonads, chromosomes or socialisation

And just to pick on this - in what circumstance would you ever need to prioritise these?

Sex is determined by which of the two roles you take in reproduction. Like all mammals, one male and one female can produce offspring.

Your sex is determined by which sex you can successfully mate with. You're the opposite one. It's as simple as that.

The only time you'd need to look more deeply is if someone is infertile. Even then, there's normally no ambiguity - they would have ALL of one sex's characteristics, so no need to prioritise. No conflict. And you know which way to treat their infertility - whether you're going to try to get sperm or eggs functional.

So all we're left with where you'd have to prioritise if you wanted a sex determination is totally infertile individuals with DSDs. And at that point, you have to question what the sex determination is for. The reason for asking the question may lead to different prioritisations. Eg for sport, you'd be looking at overall body type. For attempts to treat fertility, you'd be looking at gametes.

There are 1000s of biological sex characteristics.

Yes, but sex characteristics are not sex. They're characteristics of a individual of that sex. And you have to know what sex someone/something is to know which sex the sex characteristic is characteristic of.

We didn't just randomly assign "beard = male", "penis = male", "breasts = female", "vagina = female".

Relevant:

For example, a person with testes and a penis, who cannot make sperm, is usually classified as a biological male, as long as the person does not possess female features such as a vagina, ovaries, or uterus. Based on evidence presented, to define male and female individuals in general society, we expand the defining characteristics of sex to include nongonadal traits, as well as classical gonadal traits.

Thanks DonnieDark

Here is more. It was posted up thread but maybe it wasn’t clear that it is from the Endocrine Society.

academic.oup.com/edrv/advance-article/doi/10.1210/endrev/bnaa034/6159361#.YG386Eqj1v4.twitter

Considering Sex as a Biological Variable in Basic and Clinical Studies: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement

11 March 2021

Sex is an important biological variable that must be considered in the design and analysis of human and animal research. The terms sex and gender should not be used interchangeably. Sex is dichotomous, with sex determination in the fertilized zygote stemming from unequal expression of sex chromosomal genes. By contrast, gender includes perception of the individual as male, female, or other, both by the individual and by society; both humans and animals have sex, but only humans have gender.

The Endocrine society also then released this statement though... Which clearly says sex and gender identity are not the same and that biological sex is dimorphic and very much matters.

www.endocrine.org/news-and-advocacy/news-room/2021/biological-differences-between-females-males-need-to-be-considered-in-scientific-studies

You don't have to agree, but that's what we do.

www.endocrine.org/advocacy/position-statements/transgender-health

"The medical consensus in the late 20th century was that transgender and gender incongruent individuals suffered a mental health disorder termed “gender identity disorder.” Gender identity was considered malleable and subject to external influences. Today, however, this attitude is no longer considered valid. Considerable scientific evidence has emerged demonstrating a durable biological element underlying gender identity.1, 2 Individuals may make choices due to other factors in their lives, but there do not seem to be external forces that genuinely cause individuals to change gender identity."

Itreallytiedtheroomtogether

And yet, we are told no one was denying sex anymore.

On other threads last night Shizuku claimed that female was a gender identity. And that woman is not a gender identity.

Seems to be incredibly contradictory. Yet is a classic destabilization tactic. Clumsily done, mind you. I guess it all depends on how heavily invested you are in this.

Shizuku stated:

Yes - trans women don't "change sex" because they were already female. That's the whole reason they had to transition.

I had understood trans people wanting to be called women (TWAW), but I'd not realised that they believed they are actually of the female sex. I thought woman was being used as a gender identity. Is this the accepted view, as I can't see how this isn't treated as a mental health issue if so?