Really? What do you call a person with XX chromosomes and a penis? How about a person with both male and female genitalia? You do know that these people exist. Wouldn't that prove your statement wrong?
Which marker?
It's incredibly easy. We've been doing it without any real trouble for thousands of years. Caster Semenya has been the only real miss in the modern Olympic era, for example.
I'm not pretending it's simplistic. I'm not even pretending it's simple. I'm sincerely saying that in practical terms, it is in fact quite simple. Nobody was ever confused about who had voting rights and who didn't. Nobody was ever confused about whether their monarch was a king or a queen. Nobody was ever confused about who was eligible for Best Actress at the Oscars. Nobody was confused about who wears the hijab, and who wears the taqiya. Nobody was confused about which sex rules a matriarchy. Nobody was ever confused about which restroom to use, or about which restroom they wanted to use. It has always been, and remains today, a very simple matter in practical terms.
Saying what bluntly?
My mistake. Forget it.
Any marker that indicates biological male
How do you know their testosterone levels? Chromosomes? Or game size? Those are biological markers used to determine sex.
What does that mean? Biologist will say that there is multiple criteria in determining sex. And that criteria can and sometimes does contradict. Let's say you have male genitalia but for some reason your body doesn't produce expected levels of testosterone and an overabundance of estrogen. Those are typically understood to be sex hormones. Are you going to feel like a male or a female? Is that pretending?If they are a biological male, and they are Self IDing as (pretending to be) a woman? Male
If they are a biological female, and they are Self IDing as (pretending to be a man? Female
Its biology, not rocket science
Nope
This has nothing to do with transgender identity, transwomen in competitive sports, or trans rights in public policy.
Pretty much we all are all male or all female.
No, we don't. We start out undifferentiated, with primordial mullerian and wolffian ducts both present, and with preliminary structures that look more like labia than like scrotum. Without the testosterone surge triggered by the SRY gene, the wolffian ducts will atrophy and development proceeds along the female course. You could reasonable say that female is the default developmental course (even though that's not strictly true) but it's not true that we all start out female. We all start out nothing.
No, we observe that all anisogamous species we've ever seen or interacted with has males and females and nothing else. It's not a model, it's an observation that spans hundreds of thousands of years and hundreds of thousands of species. So well established in fact that we have never found an exception. It's at least as well tested and well established as quantum theory.
I will happily change my mind as soon as you can present me with a single individual who has :
I'm not convinced there should be public policy. Organizational policy however might be justified. I support segregated sports. I support Title IX. But Smartcooky said in his post that people are "pretending."
Yeah. Smartcooky is talking about transgender identity, not about extremely rare biological edge cases. Remember the thread title?
Individual human beings don't "evolve." Evolution happens over generations. Any discussion of any individual organism "evolving" is simply wrong. However, there have been individuals with XY chromosomes that have a uterus and given birth.
Yeah, he saying that anyone that identifies differenty than specific biological markers are pretending.
Totally why we see so many males wandering around with fetuses growing out the side of their stomachs, and females getting vasectomies so they stop ejaculating viable sperm?
Absolute balderdash. Sex is how our species reproduces. And given that we're an anisogamous species (along with every single mammal, every single bird, and the overwhelming majority of vertebrates) there are exactly and only two sexes, and there is no such thing as an "in between" of any sort.
Akshooalleee... no, it's not "far more nuanced". It's very, very simple. What we have is an extremely small group of people who have formed an ideological narrative that they've managed to foist off on a bunch of people who can't be arsed to think for themselves, and which is entirely reliant on 1) human's evolved tendency toward empathy and 2) a surprising number of people not giving a ◊◊◊◊ about females at all.
