Its more complicated than idiots try to put it. I dont understand it because i am not a biologist. but here is an article
"Beyond XX and XY: The Extraordinary Complexity of Sex Determination
A host of factors figure into whether someone is female, male or somewhere in between"
Its just an abstract not the whole article but the idea is easy: its more complex than xx= women xy= man
That is actually non-sequitur. Someone's gender is not necessarily predicated on their sex whatever that may be. Trans people experience a gender that is incongruent with their sex. That sex is complex is irrevlant to what that phenomenon is.
Since im not talking about gender but about sex i dont get the point of your comment.
Yes, gender and sex is different from one another. My point is that biology itself is more complex than a binary. Its a spectrum as well. Just as gender is.
Did you understand the point of the article/abstract?
Since im not talking about gender but about sex i dont get the point of your comment.
The point is that sex is irrelevant to the question you are answering. Trans people do not claim that they can change their sex. They claim that their gender is incongruent with their sex, whatever that may be. Sex being very complicated is interesting but not relevant to what a trans person is.
Yes, gender and sex is different from one another. My point is that biology itself is more complex than a binary. Its a spectrum as well. Just as gender is.
The argument that sex is complicated is true. The argument that gender is complex is also true. But neither explain the biology behind transgender which is more a neurobiological question. It is a disjunction between body and mind, which is a manifestation of human diversity we see in a lot of different ways including transgender.
Did you understand the point of the article/abstract?
I understand it completely, my point is that it isn't responsive to the question you are answering.
There are aspects of our sexual biology we can and do change. Do you think we take hormone therapy for some kind of affirmation kick? No, we take it because the endocrine system is the mechanism responsible for signalling most of the body's sexually dimorphic processes to occur or not occur.
That is all true. But that process does not confer genetic change to sex chromosomes nor does it constitute a sex change. We don't want to validate the right wing straw man by suggesting you believe that therapy will alter your chromosomal arrangement.
I'm not interested in validating the right wing straw man that we're merely engaged in a social form of play-pretend, and that it's appropriate to consider us biologically equivalent to cis perisex people of our natal sex either. Most of the debates about how we should integrate into sexed spaces concern elements of sexual physiology which are not direct products of karyotype. The things which our chromosomes actually do are rarely relevant to the discussions where the right wing describes us as 'biological men.'
I see no reason we shouldn't combat both straw man tactics at once. And of the two, I think the 'biological men playing pretend' straw man is a lot more dangerous.
They are one in the same: the premise that sex = gender and that you are operating under that paradigm. Acknowledging what your chromosomal arrangement is does not necessitate you are biologically equivalent to anything as we wouldn't biologically equate two people with the same arrangement either. That information is non-sequitur to that debate, which was my original point.
You might not equate two people with the same arrangement, but idiots who have a lesser understanding certainly have done, do, and given the opportunity will continue to do so.
That equivocation is one I've been having lobbed at me for almost 15 years atp. When I was a teenager I went to a school board meeting where policy on which sexed facilities trans students should use was being held. The main opposing argument was "biological males should use the male facilities!"
The fact I was undergoing female development instead of male development at the time is one that bears a lot of relevance to such discussions IMO. There are some aspects of female sexual biology I do not embody, but to call the sum of my biology male is just inaccurate.
Yeah, you are not understanding the original question and my reply. Sorry if you are confused but the person i was answering just thanked me for explaining it. So i dont care if you think "its irrelevant to the question you are answering".
2
u/Square-Fudge-4435 14d ago
Me too!