"Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Discuss

[dunBle]

To save further derailment of the Sandie Peggie tribunal threads with people debating Tandora's statements on the above theme, I've started this thread to point them to instead.

Maybe some links to papers in your field would help?

which field, please?

Please outline the misinformation.

Another example of females with a Y chromosome would be women with swyer syndrome.
It’s really hard to get accurate prevalence estimates as such conditions may be hidden/ remain undiagnosed. However , they are certainly rare.
But these are just two specific typologies of DSD- there are loads. And the more we understand about sex development the more variations we discover. I have to go to bed but will try to return in am if people have questions.

if biological sex is a multidimensional variable, what are the dimensions?

if we set aside the (very small) population with differences of sexual development (who are not trans), are any of those dimensions continuous? Or do they all remain categorical / strongly bimodal?

Are you clear on the difference, when you are putting forward ideas around 'sex variance' & 'gender variance'? These are very much not the same thing.

Also, can you clarify the basis on which you are choosing 'scientific papers' to link to? Some posters do like to link to fairly ropey sources, so it would be helpful to understand your methodology.

Everyone has been so unfair.
Human sex is multi-dimensional.
It has 2 dimensions: male and female, neither of which can be changed.

karyotype?

Is the genetic coding in our cells i.e which genes are present.

The karyotype for females is XX and Males is XY.

The point that is being made is that the genetic coding doesn't always reflect the hormones being produced and how those hormones are used by the body.

The argument for sex being a multidimensional is based on this premise i.e. you could have "masculine" traits e.g. a facial beard but have XX chomosomes in the case of PCOS.

Have I got this right @Tandora ?

I was just wondering about the alternative spelling. Whether kareotype(sic) was a new thing.

Ah I see.

I was using your post to make sure that I had a good understanding of the position that @Tandora was taking.

Sex in UK law was set down in Corbett vs Corbett as chromosomal and gonadal.
So if he was born with XY chromosomes and has/had testicles even if they're internal hes male
If she has XX chromosomes and ovaries she's female.
Nothing else counts, @Tandora is just trying to muddy the water

As I said earlier, just start your own thread, and stop derailing this one.

The problem as always with these pseudoscientists like tandora, is that give themselves away by not defining terms. You cannot discuss women and men unless you define what they are.
We know that men have evolved to produce sperm, women to produce ova.
All else is irrelevant. All of it. What you feel, what you wear, who you want to have sex with, whether your endocrine system Is working properly or not.
Mother nature doesn't care, it just wants the male and female of the species to combine their gametes and procreate.
So transwomen cannot be women it's biologically impossible. People like tandora know this, in their heart but they want to look jolly important and like all conspiracy theorists, to think they know something us common people don't! It makes them feel superior so frustratingly there's no arguing with that.

I am always reminded of Terry Pratchett's Science of Discworld books with this discussion. Sex and sex determination is an area where there are many layers of 'lies to children', and people think they know better than someone because they know a layer or two more than the general population where actually the other person may be even more layers of complexity in.

The other problem is people commonly confuse sex determination with the definition of sex in general or the observation of sex in a particular individual.

Sex determination is a very complex and fascinating process. For humans, first layer of lies to children is that sex is XX or XY chromosomes. Second layer is understanding that it's actually whether or not there's a Y chromosome that matters. Third layer is understanding that it's not just the Y chromosome, but whether there's an SRY gene on it. Then we can go into hormones and ability to use them and all the different ways this process can be nonstandard resulting in DSDs.

The definition of sex is simple and used across biology. Sexual reproduction, small gametes, large gametes, a female organism or part is one that is structured to produce large gametes (regardless of whether currently or ever actually in the process of doing so).

The observation of sex in humans is in almost all cases entirely straightforward, take a peek inside the baby's nappy. Correct for everyone without DSDs and almost everyone with them. In a tiny proportion of cases doctors might need further checks. In an even smaller number, it may be a case of sitting down and having a discussion with the family, explaining what the child's biology is and how they're likely to develop. And occasionally, particularly in places with less sophisticated medical checks, it may be got wrong, for example for babies with 5ARD where actual sex is uncontroversial but the child's external anatomy may be misleading.

Going back to the definition of sex though, it's entirely irrelevant if there are genetic or gestation environmental factors that increase the chances of someone suffering dysphoria. Sex is not defined by how your brain is structured or how you feel about your body, it is defined by your body, specifically what gamete type you have structures to produce.

Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components

Sounds like Lyra and Roger need to be investigating this.

‘Into this wilde Abyss,The Womb of nature and perhaps her Grave, Of neither Sea, nor Shore, nor Air, nor Fire, But all these in their pregnant causes mixt Confus'dly, and which thus must ever fight, Unless th' Almighty Maker them ordain His dark materials to create more Worlds, Into this wilde Abyss the warie fiend, Stood on the brink of Hell and look'd a while, Pondering his Voyage; for no narrow frith He had to cross.’

————————
Back in this world, it is the consequences for everyone’s health and safety that are of importance. Which means single sex spaces are best.

This is a GREAT question. Chromosomes only mostly determine sex. You also must have a hormonal cascade that needs to fall into place in order to turn the gamete from female (default stage) to male (if an XY baby). Then you have epigenetic factors. These are outside influences on gene expression. But what is really nifty is that the exchange between sperm and ova isn't always peefect. A transformation of genetic material can occur flipping things around making a female (chromosomally) baby male (physically). So think about the Bible. If we got into our way back machine and watched monks transcribe Biblical texts, we'd see skipped lines, doubly copied lines, missing words, etc. Because people get tired, lazy, they simply make mistakes, whatever. Copying DNA is similar. Mistakes get made. This protein docks up in the wrong place and suddenly slot 1 is filled with the info from slot 2. You can also get issues where the SRY gene gets mislocated on a y chromosome. I could go on... basically there are plenty of ways people could be chromosomally one sex and physically have the genitals of the other.

The beauty of nature is that she allows beings to live despite miscodings and other " mistakes". Ultimately, it's not my business what people have in their pants and here in the US it's a false flag bs issue because when women wanted to get equal pay in soccer no one gave a flying fart about women's sports and actually complained that women just didn't deserve to make as much as men because..."boring". Buncha cogs, this lot.

I think what bothers me about the need for single sex spaces is the absolute assumption that men are just that awful. Isn't that a sad commentary? They really need to step up and quit diddling people who don't want a diddling.

You have nailed the point I was hoping to build up to.

In biology sex is defined by the size of the gametes in a sexually reproducing species. Large gamete producing organisms (seeds, eggs etc) are female, small gamete producer are male. This is why the male seahorse is still male even though they do the gestation part of reproduction.

There are examples in the animal kingdom of transgenderism and transsexuality in fish. For transexualism Clown Fish males can transition to females if the environmental conditions call for it. An example of transgenerism is seen the Red Bellied Perch where some males have evolved to take on the appearance of a female (smaller bodied) to engage in deceptive mating practices so they can swarm with the females and get their sperm to the eggs more quickly.

Humans have not evolved this biology- probably because we are too complex of an organism. Males cannot develop ova producing organs if enviromental conditions change, and if a male chooses to engage in deceptive mating practices they cannot change their body enough to be undected AND remain fertile. In fact in humans the higher the ratio of females to males in a given circumstance the more a transgender woman stands out.

Therefore there will always remain some cirucmstances in which females will need to be separated from males to reduce their risk of harm. We know from history/crime data that the majority of violence towards females comes a) from males and is b) is sexually motivated. It is then reasonable that females should have an expectation to have a space separate from males when they are mixing with people that they don't know, and when the physical size advantage that males have puts females at a disadvantage i.e. sports.

Having a hormonal disruption/DSD/pyschiatric condition doesn't change any of the above. The majority of the population (over 95%) is male or female within the range of normal and therefore societal structure reflects that.

Ok if you're a man who knows.

Sex, male, female in both plants and animals is all designed for reproduction. OK sometimes nature screws up and creates something infertile, like an Ass, or Mule.

What was the first animal to have a complex reproduction system?

And if animals evolved from single cell organisms, how did they reproduce

if animals evolved from single cell organisms, how did they reproduce as they do now, by in effect cloning themselves. However this isn't a great way to create diversity and therefore they are easily wiped out by disease etc. Hence heterosexual reproduction is a better bet.

Well let's be honest, some men are?

What woman has started a war ever?
War - something started by the privileged sending other people's children to die.

Every other week some woman is killed by a ex or partner.

But its not just that its comfort.
Many women don't even like getting changed in front of other women, never mind a man who's potentially eyeing her up.

And actually I bet lots of men wouldn't be that comfy being in open plan mixed sex changing either

Oh god the the condescension. Do you really think you are the only person that understands DSDs? They have all been discussed on here millions of times. Of course CAIS individuals have a Y chromosome but are women. Of course we understand that its not really about the Y chromosome anyway, its about SRY gene expression. Of course we understand genetic mosaicism, rare as it is. Of course there are other downstream genetic disorders that stop sex hormones working properly. None of these rare genetic disorders change the fact that there are only 2 sex developmental pathways that humans beings can go down and they are mutually exclusive. There are no humans producing both eggs and sperm. There are no hermaphrodites. Sex is binary in humans and normal SRY gene expression, normaly found on the Y chromosome, works correctly 99.9% of the time in kicking off the male developmental pathway. Its all been discussed 1000 times. DSD individuals arent a third sex.

All well understood, for years, and explained at the molecular level with pictures here: https://theparadoxinstitute.org/read/sex-development-charts

Even in the rarest cases (extremely rare) or weird mosaicisms where some cells have Y chromosome/SRY activation/androgen sensitivity and some don't, the resultant human being is still female or male, has ovarian or testes or streak gonads. None of these extremely rare genetic mistakes gives a thrid sex or an actual hermaphrodite.

Men are much more of a risk to a womans safety than a men is to a woman. This is actually multi-dimensional.

1. Men are physically bigger than women. The average man has 145% more strength than the average woman in the upper body. This is significant and women cannot compete with this.
2. For most of human civilisation it has mainly been males in decision making positions and shaping culture, even though the represenation has been around 50% in the population. This is what is currently referred to as the patriachy.
3. Crime statistics demonstrate that a) more men attack/harm women then the other way around b) the majority of these assaults are sexual. Therefore a woman is most at risk in a room with a man on their own.

We don't make laws for the majority of the population, we make them to protect society from the extremists.

To the above post, add item 4. Statistics show that although there are a limited number of transwomen in prison because there are a limited number in the population as a whole, a higher proportion of transwomen are imprisoned for sex offences than among the other male prison population.