The New Science of Sex and Gender

[rangerrebew]

The New Science of Sex and Gender

Why the new science of sex & gender matters for everyone

    By THE EDITORS | Scientific American September 2017 Issue
 

Sex is supposed to be simple—at least at the molecular level. The biological explanations that appear in textbooks amount to X + X = and X + Y = . Venus or Mars, pink or blue. As science looks more closely, however, it becomes increasingly clear that a pair of chromosomes do not always suffice to distinguish girl/boy—either from the standpoint of sex (biological traits) or of gender (social identity).

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-new-science-of-sex-and-gender/

[Joe Wooten]

Looks like SA has been converged now.

[Free Vulcan]

This is the basis of their whole article:

To varying extents, many of us are biological hybrids on a male-female continuum. Researchers have found XY cells in a 94-year-old woman, and surgeons discovered a womb in a 70-year-old man, a father of four. New evidence suggests that the brain consists of a “mosaic” of cell types, some more yin, others further along the yang scale.

Wow! Objective science! Two whole people and a 'suggests!'

The rest is a speculative lead up, and followed by a politically correct social justice rant worthy of the World Workers Party quarterly newsletter.

[Smokin Joe]

I was filling out the forms in the Superintendent of Schools office to transfer one of the grandkids to a new school. I asked him what gender he was. Without skipping a beat, he replied "Toaster."  Great kid...

[The_Reader_David]

This is the basis of their whole article:

Wow! Objective science! Two whole people and a 'suggests!'

The rest is a speculative lead up, and followed by a politically correct social justice rant worthy of the World Workers Party quarterly newsletter.

Yes, of course, this is why I always characterize the belief that one is the opposite sex to that indicated by both one's genetics and external morphology as a delusion, and ask why that delusion is treated differently from any other (as another poster observed when I posted my view, we do not issue gold epaulets to people who believe they are Napoleon). 

There is a very rare phenomenon called complete androgen insensivity that results in genetic males (XY) maturing in female form (always infertile).  If such a person had a deep-seated belief they were male, they would present a case in which the female-to-male "sex-change" surgery procedure would be appropriately applied (though I'm not sure it could be called "sex-change" in that case).

I am perfectly willing to regard "transgenderism" in case where chromosome and morphology disagree, or morphology was ambiguous at birth, as a condition that should be regarded as a condition that should be treated with compassion, probably including accepting the person's feeling as a basis for resolving which sex the person should be regarded as being.  (Perhaps not surprisingly, since I am an Orthodox Christian, and the one definitive statement issued by any Orthodox Holy Synod on the matter is that which I hold.  cf. The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, issued a few years back by the Holy Synod of Moscow.)

[Free Vulcan]

Yes, of course, this is why I always characterize the belief that one is the opposite sex to that indicated by both one's genetics and external morphology as a delusion, and ask why that delusion is treated differently from any other (as another poster observed when I posted my view, we do not issue gold epaulets to people who believe they are Napoleon). 

There is a very rare phenomenon called complete androgen insensivity that results in genetic males (XY) maturing in female form (always infertile).  If such a person had a deep-seated belief they were male, they would present a case in which the female-to-male "sex-change" surgery procedure would be appropriately applied (though I'm not sure it could be called "sex-change" in that case).

I am perfectly willing to regard "transgenderism" in case where chromosome and morphology disagree, or morphology was ambiguous at birth, as a condition that should be regarded as a condition that should be treated with compassion, probably including accepting the person's feeling as a basis for resolving which sex the person should be regarded as being.  (Perhaps not surprisingly, since I am an Orthodox Christian, and the one definitive statement issued by any Orthodox Holy Synod on the matter is that which I hold.  cf. The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church, issued a few years back by the Holy Synod of Moscow.)

That's the two step shuffle the leftists play with this issue. They want to cite 14th amendment equality to these little deviant groups that claim psychology as the basis for their minority status. Yet they will not equally honor that status to others.

If I say I'm a cat, should that not be honored? Do I not have the right to demand for litter boxes in all public restrooms? Does a 50-something y/o man not have the right to date a 13 y/o girl because he is 'transageist' 14 y/o trapped in a 50-something body? Or a polygamist who believes he cannot be with one woman, or feels he is so special that his line must be continued?

I find the unequal application of the 14th amendment by liberals hilariously hypocritical, and they can never answer me when I pose the question.