"There are only two genders, change my mind".

[Childrenofthestones]

Not my words but Steven Crowder's (like him or loathe him). in this interesting experiment on a campus.

Bad science is to use the rules of the result your trying to prove to manipulate the data used in the analysis

In this instance, taking the things that don't look quite like male and female and saying they are close enough and lumping them into the data set using the theory your trying to prove true, when those things that are not quite a fit are the very things that may prove the theory is false.

That is bad science.

In this instance, taking the things that don't look quite like male and female and saying they are close enough and lumping them into the data set using the theory your trying to prove true, when those things that are not quite a fit are the very things that may prove the theory is false.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Male, Female, Intersex. Nothing lumped together, everyone accounted for.

When making these discoveries, we also found some people that don't easily fit into either the male, or the female category. Their existence doesn't negate that the male and female categories both exist, and you need one of each to make a new human.

That breaks the very rules of binary though, there is a third option. Nobody is eliminating male and female and that they make babies, they just might not fully represent "sex"

What theory are you actually talking about? The theory that humans are a sexually dimorphic species? Which means that we need a female and male to reproduce?

Male, Female, Intersex. Nothing lumped together, everyone accounted for. so you agree there are three or more sexes then other wise where did intersex go?

There is not a third option. The vast majority of intersex people are infertile. It's sad, but it's true.
Transgender people are not the same as intersex.
Hence the amazing news story about the first 'man' to give birth. They were, of course, actually female.

That breaks the very rules of binary though, there is a third option. Nobody is eliminating male and female and that they make babies, they just might not fully represent "sex"

Jesus, no, the binary is because you need one female and one male to make a baby.

Human reproduction requires both of two sexes - that's what makes it a binary.

If you needed a male, a female, and some other, third sex, then it wouldn't be a binary, it would be a ternary, but that isn't the case for human reproduction.

That breaks the very rules of binary though, there is a third option. Nobody is eliminating male and female and that they make babies, they just might not fully represent "sex"

Jesus, no, the binary is because you need one female and one male to make a baby.

Human reproduction requires both of two sexes - that's what makes it a binary.

If you needed a male, a female, and some other, third sex, then it wouldn't be a binary, it would be a ternary, but that isn't the case for human reproduction.

Of course that then brings in the female penis and male vagina and definitions of sex that people are not comfortable with

Its not that we aren't comfortable with them, is is that there is no such thing. It's like saying hot ice, it doesn't and can't exist. It's an oxymoron, there is no such thing as a female penis of male vagina.

But as we can see here, no one has yet completely defined sex without causing unintended divisions

We all have, you just don't seem to understand. it does not create divisions. You seem obsessed with trying to create them though?

Thanks to post it on here for clarifying this for me.

I think, like Debbie, I had been working backwards (although not concluding anything like her/him).

Discussions I have seen around this issue let me to believe binary meant very existence of male and female, not the fact that to reproduce required a male and a female.

Although, obviously I knew that. It’s the act of reproduction and what it requires that determines whether it’s a binary?

Is that right?

I think Debbie is going for a world record in sealioning, personally.

OR not OF.

MentholBreeze

So sex designation is only about reproductive ability. Where does that leave people who can't

You see, no matter how you try and define it you always leave someone out or force things into the model with a leap of faith and "just is"

Debbie6666

Thank you for sticking around and arguing this through. I understand the point you are making, but remain completely unconvinced.

As I understand it, science = 'this is my theory, let's try and disprove it'.

I see several huge, concrete, testable and provable challenges to your position (listed by PPs). I still don't see challenges beyond the level of thought experiment to the accepted scientific and medical position.

You seem obsessed with trying to create them though?

Yes it seems with great effort too!
Debbie how about you go and speak to a fertility doctor about your theory?

MentholBreeze

So, could we have fictional human beings with say 10 different types of chromosomes - J chromosomes and W chromosomes, but if only taking a representative of XX at XY produces offspring, and none of the others do, would that mean we are still binary?

So sex designation is only about reproductive ability. Where does that leave people who can't

You aren't getting it. How we designate a species does not rely on the characteristics of the individual, but of the class.
Humans are bipedal, as a species, yes? They walk upright on 2 legs. Even you cannot argue with that. Sometimes people lose their leg(s) or are born without them. They are still members of a bipedal species. They are still humans and nominally bipedal. They just are not personally bipedal!

Same with sex. You are a male because you have xy chromosomes and a penis and make sperm etc. You may not personally be able to make sperm but that does not mean you are not a male.

This is very simple stuff.

Yes - it's reproductive bloody sex - that's the point of people having sex, it's how people are made? Doesn't mean that people with disorders of sexual reproduction aren't people!

People who aren't male or female - which are reproductive categories, are intersex. That's where it leaves them.

I'm not leaving them out, they're people, humans, with rich and fulfilling lives, they just don't have the ability to sexually reproduce. Having babies isn't the meaning of life (well, it is from nature's point of view I suppose).

What do you mean by 'where does it leave people'?

Where does that leave people who can't

‘Of, or denoting’ the sex who can, presumably. Through numerous markers.

IMHO, there are only 2 human sexes, along with a small number of abnormalities. As far as I know, evolution of vertebrates has never thrown up more than 2, although there are some creatures that can change their sex e.g. Clown Fish. 2 sexes is fundamental to the way animals propagate themselves. This may of course change in the future, but for now, this where we are.

Gender is a human construct based on perceived differences in roles between the 2 sexes. This perception varies according to culture and time, and the fact that that there are physical differences between the sexes e.g. woman bear children and men don't. In an ideal human world, there would be no difference between the gender roles, but that isn't likely to happen any time soon, however much we would like it to.

The consequence is that right now humans cannot change sex. Not completely. But we can change, or attempt to change, how we are perceived in society with regard to our gender role. How effective this is depends on which culture we live in and how strongly the gender roles are perceived by that society.

I cannot comment on why people feel they are a different gender to their biological sex. I don't understand it and have no direct experience of feeling this way. I don't even know what someone in this position believes the 'other gender' to be, as it varies according to their society. But while I do believe that you cannot change sex, since gender is not entirely based on your physical sex, I don't see why you can't attempt to change your perceived gender.

Binary system in nature = how babies are made.

Or did I miss something?

So, could we have fictional human beings with say 10 different types of chromosomes - J chromosomes and W chromosomes, but if only taking a representative of XX at XY produces offspring, and none of the others do, would that mean we are still binary?

As it pertains to sexual reproduction, yes, one of each of two types. Not one of each of 3 or 4 or 10.

You'd have females, males, wergles, burgles, durgles, rurbles etc. TBH though, I don't see that that works even as a thought experiment - if two beings have entirely different chromosomes in that way, they're a completely different species - just like we can't reproduce with birds.

Very disappointed to google 'ternary species' and find that there aren't any.
Great concept for a sci-fi novel though.

Thermostatpolice

Thanks, i'm struggling to keep up to be honest.

I'm trying to show that all the arguments that sex and gender are binary are based on applying that model to the data set of possibilities such that it guarantees that sex and gender are indeed binary.

Ie if we wont accept intersex chromosomes as posibly being another version of sex but instead round them up into the binary male or female as variation and disorders then we can never arrive at any answer other than yes sex is binary. the theory under test has been used to force the data set to prove the theory.

I also have a side argument that nature does not adhere to binary rules, you can apply binary rules to it in an approximation but then all your left with is a model of nature not nature itself. If nature is not binary but rather an analogue system of variation then noting found in nature can be binary either. Everything in nature that we claim to be binary is only that way because we impose a binary model onto it by ignoring and assimilating the things that make the third and so on option viable.

But yeah going to take a break soon you will all be relieved to hear

if two beings have entirely different chromosomes in that way, they're a completely different species - just like we can't reproduce with birds.

I was thinking that as I posted. I just wanted to make sure I had nailed the exact point where the word binary applies.