Is there a spectrum for biological sex (as diff to gender?)

[MacaroonMama]

Hi All,

Had feminist Book Group on Saturday and I decided to try and present the whole self-ID thing to them!

We are five mums in our 30s/40s, all in different lines of work, all v into books and feminism. We had a great discussion and, thanks to Mumsnet, I felt able to answer their questions and give largely evidence-based answers.

One friend's work is science-based and yesterday she emailed us this article which is really thought-provoking, about new scientifically developments in research to do with sex and biology - hormonal influences, genetic/chromosomal issues, etc.

It has concerned me a bit! I had always thought of gender as invented but if people want to consider their gende as being on a spectrum, fine - while I believed biological sex to be binary, with intersex conditions as anomalies (not in an unkind way, just as in different from the normal pattern of things.)

Any thoughts and ideas? I still am totally against self-ID as a concept btw.

Many thanks.

www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

Sorry I can't do clicky links!

I think the best way to think of it is that, no, gender isn't binary. But it is strongly bi-modal.

I have seen this elsewhere.
But I keep coming back to the fact the mammals only have 2 gametes which is the basic fundamentals to sex based reproduction. As a result mammalian bodies develop physical structures and organs to accommodate reproduction.
Surely if sex was a spectrum we would have a range of gametes and a range of different organs to accommodate them.
Also mammals have (normally) 2 of each chromosome (excluding sex chromosomes) which also supports that biologically there are 2 contributors to successful reproduction.

Or am I just being too simplistic ?

www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

I've clickied your link for you :)

This 15min programme is really interesting on why there are two sexes for humans and other systems that exist for other animals. The Curious Cases of Rutherford & Fry - Series 9, The Enigma of Sex, Part 2 - @bbcradio4 www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09sn980

I think sex in terms of reproduction (gametes) it's definitely sperm or egg - one or the other. But when it comes to sex in terms of body types or physiologies - so physical biologies, hormones and everything that comes with that - perhaps it isn't that simple. Does that make sense?

FWIW I know absolutely nothing about this sort of thing, although I find it absolutely fascinating. Definitely not someone with any deep understanding though.

That article still makes it very clear that the fuzzy border is DSDs - that these are rare, and that for the vast majority of people, it is very clear which sex they are.

Quote
It has been, in a sense, a philosophical change in our way of looking at sex; that it's a balance,” says Eric Vilain, a clinician and the director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It's more of a systems-biology view of the world of sex.”

Hmm the centre for gender based biology .. now he wouldn’t be at all biased would he??

This may be worth a read, it addresses the science in parts (and that article that you linked)

medium.com/@LogicalMarcus/is-julia-serano-right-that-transwomen-are-female-a989dca9d026

Sex is not a spectrum. For reproductive purposes you are male or female. Everyone is one or the other and 99% of the population have secondary sex characteristics that reflect their chromosomes. A very small number of people are intersex, I.e. they are still chromosomally female or male, but usually have a hormonal or chromosomal disorder that means their sex characteristics are amibiguous. But the human race still has two sexes. Just like most people have two legs, but occasionally a child is born with one. The human race is still overwhelmingly bipedal!

There are two sexes, it's not a spectrum. As I have always interpreted it, even those who have a DSD will have either just X chromosomes (female) or a mix of x and y (male), regardless of what their outward phenotype is.

But I'm going to tag @Anatidae to see if she can provide a better explanation, as I'm by no means an expert in genetics (and she is)

No
sex is bimodal

think of your analogies
How many legs do humans have? Do amputees make number of legs a spectrum? Do conjoined twins?

Does extra testosterone change a female to a male? No, it modifies some of her features without changing her sex.

How many types of gametes are there?

Sex is binary. Exceptions are exceptions to that binary.
Skin colour is a spectrum
personality

But sex is female and male.

The categorisation of animals esp mammals as male / female is something that existed before humans started naming things and thinking about science and what have you....

Whatever we say about all this, male mammals and female mammals (including humans) will continue to know which are which and will fuck and make babies. The fucking and making babies is kind of fundamental, unless we are getting to disagreement with that now, with trans-human and ideas about loading consciousness into the internet and sex robots and growing babies in bags and all of that...

Irrespective, 99.9% of humans and know what male and female are and what it means.

If we haev decided that male female sperm egg etc are no longer relevant to anything / or aren't how it really is then someone needs to get onto the Biologists ASAP.

Gender is bollocks and madeup so there can be as many of them as you want.

A bull doesn't need genetics degress to know what a cow is.

A ewe doesn't need genetics to know what a ram is.

If it's all so fucking complicated how did we ever get to grips with farming?

That article is an op-ed OP - it's NOT a scientific peer reviewed article and as such has no fact-based value.

That Rutherford and Fry program is very refreshing in that they categorically state right at the beginning that sex and gender are different.

Thanks beyond

The ‘what about intersex’ argument is a TRA method and it’s a prime example of whataboutery - a summary of which is here: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

You may also encounter ‘what about circumcision’ on FGM threads and ‘what about the menz ‘ on ummm.., yeah pretty much all threads. :)

Anyway. Humans have a bimodal sex distribution. Male and female. Everyone can be categorised genetically into Male or female on the basis of their sex chromosomes if we assume (as we do) that if you’ve got a Y or more than one you’re Male.

The analogy of the legs above is a good one. Intersex conditions and sex chromosome conditions are abberations (by which I dont mean anything negative towards the people who have these conditions, but they are not the norm, they are conditions where things go wrong, like conjoined twinning. A conjoined twin is an abberation of development while still of course being a human with all the dignity and rights we confer in any human, regardless of physical ability.)

There’s a saying that rare cases make bad laws. No truer than here.

The rise in transgenderism (not the old school transsexuals and trannies, who by and large were a pretty peaceful subculture who actually - shock - LIKED women) is cultural. It started as a pushback to women’s rights and feminism. Ten years ago I’d have thought that it was the last dying gasp of a particularly unpleasant type of man who couldn’t grasp that equality was the thing now. Now I don’t think that. I think it’s a concerted and violent campaign to put women back where they ‘should’ be - under men.

Intersex conditions tell us nothing about equality laws. It’s a very good way of derailing debate though.

If a TIM is buying 2 pet rabbits and doesn't want to end up with 100 rabbits, how on earth do they decide which rabbits to get?

I mean there's no way to tell without asking and rabbits can't talk, so...?

Whole thing is ridiculous.

The reason people get so tied up when the TIMs go OHO what about these genetic mutations then and women who've had hysterectomies and all of that is because Male / Female is so utterly fundamental that we've never had to define it - everyone knows what is means, they really do. Anyone pretending they don't know what male means and calling a penis a clitoris or an "outy vagina" is, well.

There are calls for inclusive sex education, how do we teach kids how to avoid pregnancy if the categories of male / female are "social" not biological, and your organs are whatever you call them e.g. a penis can be called a clitoris if that's what the person it's attached to says it is?

If a TIM is buying 2 pet rabbits and doesn't want to end up with 100 rabbits, how on earth do they decide which rabbits to get?

They probably buy one of each then shout aubuse at the female one until she is too stressed to breed

Sorry to have dumped the article then run! Today has become busier than I thought. Really helpful comments and things to thing about - I thought it was more peer-reviewed than somebody above who pointed out it is op-ed (I am arts background-based not sciencey!) I will have a closer look but thanks so far everyone

Okay so Anatidae are the examples in the article all examples of what you term intersex conditions then? There seem to be such a variety!

I know and usually recognise whataboutery but there just seemed to be so many different types of non-normal male and female here, I find it confusing. The father of four with a womb, for example!

Is it the sperm/egg distinction that you would say is crucial here?

if clitorises are now also penises do you think that one upside could be that sex education actually teaches how to use one?

Thanks everyone for extra info and links etc - I will read and watch later and reply properly.

I absolutely agree that whatever the biological state of play, this whole thing has been hijacked by MRAs and narcissists. That is very clear, horribly so. I suppose I was just concerned for the tiny number of people for whom biological sex is not that simple. I think an intersex support or info group in the UK has released a statement asking not to be brought into the current trans debate, haven't they?

As possible have said this is an OP-ed piece not a peer reviewed paper.

Sex in humans isn’t a spectrum. In normal humans it’s binary. So that I disagree with (as does the law and biology in general.)

The spectrum argument I think is incorrect because spectrum implies variation within normality - things like chimerism for example are not the norm in sex determinationation (they can be for other aspects.)

I think not all of those conditions meet the intersex definition - DSDs seems to be the preferred term now.

The law as it is is fine - sex is a binary, cases of intersex etc should be taken on an individual basis with great care and sensitivity to the individual.
It’s also very interesting that there’s a big backlash against early surgery for Children. I agree with that wholeheartedly- it’s too damaging, children should be left to develop before they make choices that can lead to sterility. It’s also the polar opposite of what the TRA movement (looking at you mermaids) is pushing for kids - they want puberty blockers and surgery early.

This whole issue is interesting and I think needs to be addressed in a far more nuanced manner. Right now the TRA groups are solely focused on a mememe Male supremacist/erase of women as a class drive. That has to be resisted because it’s an ideology driven by hate, and it does no good at all to any person who has a DSD/intersex condition, nor anyone with gender dysphoria. There has to be a way through this that results in safety and dignity for all parties without removing vital Safety protections for all parties.