Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sex describes physical characteristics while gender describes societal roles. Humans have both sex and gender, animals typically do not have gender.
I'm not sure where you are getting this from? In many species, sex determination is genetic: Humans are one such species where sex determination is genetic.
This is nothing new as sex determination was discovered in the mealworm by the American geneticist Nettie Stevens in 1903.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Sex can be defined in a number of ways; the particular choice depends on the purpose of the definition. In most cases these definitions are all consistent with each other. The most fundamental definition is based on the size of the gametes. Males have small, motile gametes while females have larger, immobile ones. There is genetic sex, which is the chromosomal differences you describe. This is naturally less fundamental; not all sexual species use the Y chromosome. There are also a host of sex-specific features, often related to successful reproduction. These are things like the penis and vagina, the testes and uterus, as well as thing like large antlers in deer.
You're simply describing phenotypes. Keep in mind that a phenotype is not the genotype.
The genetic constitution of an organism is called the genotype, and the phenotype is the observable trait or set of traits (structural and functional) of an organism produced by the interaction between the genotype and the environment.
For example the phenotype of a male with Klinefelter syndrome is underdeveloped testes and often are taller than the average male. They show some degree of breast development ,and some show subnormal intelligence. However their genotype is XXX.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Not everyone fits neatly into these categories, however.
I have no clue what neat categories you're referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Some people are totally infertile. Some people have an a Y chromosome and vagina.
People usually have 46 chromosomes in each cell. Two of the 46 chromosomes, known as X and Y, are called sex chromosomes because they help determine whether a person will develop male or female sex characteristics. Girls and women typically have two X chromosomes (46,XX karyotype), while boys and men usually have one X chromosome and one Y chromosome (46,XY karyotype).
In Swyer syndrome, individuals with one X chromosome and one Y chromosome in each cell, the pattern typically found in boys and men, have female reproductive structures.
These people are typically classified as intersex.
Most causes of intersex are congenital. That means people are born with it, usually because of a genetic condition as in the case of Swyer syndrome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Its not generally scientific to make a strict distinction if none exists, so definitive classification beyond that is a societal question, not a scientific one.
This makes zero sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Historically, genetic testing was not possible (or even really known), so sex-specific traits were used.
Welcome to the 21st Century where genetics testing is the biggest breakthrough in the medical and research world.
Matadora, what you know often depends on who you ask. I haven't been in school in years. But I was always fair minded and I'm going to look hard into much of what you presented. I'll stick by the Morals of Chess by Ben Franklin as long as the other forum members do the same.
Well I did not earn my Master's in Molecular Diagnostics (2015) and walk away with zero understanding of genetics.
I also learned a lot about genetics with my first undergrad degree. (BS Biology with a Minor in Chemistry).
I also learned a lot about genetics when I studied at M.D. Anderson in Houston to become a medical professional.
I am here to help people learn. I'm not here to debate well established science.
However I will correct when people make unsubstantiated claims about science.
There is genetic sex, which is the chromosomal differences you describe. This is naturally less fundamental; not all sexual species use the Y chromosome.
I posted a Khan Academy video that touched upon this.
Wiki gives a decent assessment of all the different ways gender/sex is determined in our species as well as others. In humans its Y-centered sex determination.
I'm not sure where you are getting this from? In many species, sex determination is genetic: Humans are one such species where sex determination is genetic.
This is nothing new as sex determination was discovered in the mealworm by the American geneticist Nettie Stevens in 1903.
You're simply describing phenotypes. Keep in mind that a phenotype is not the genotype.
The genetic constitution of an organism is called the genotype, and the phenotype is the observable trait or set of traits (structural and functional) of an organism produced by the interaction between the genotype and the environment.
For example the phenotype of a male with Klinefelter syndrome is underdeveloped testes and often are taller than the average male. They show some degree of breast development ,and some show subnormal intelligence. However their genotype is XXX.
I have no clue what neat categories you're referring to?
Yes we know about this syndrome. Swyer syndrome
People usually have 46 chromosomes in each cell. Two of the 46 chromosomes, known as X and Y, are called sex chromosomes because they help determine whether a person will develop male or female sex characteristics. Girls and women typically have two X chromosomes (46,XX karyotype), while boys and men usually have one X chromosome and one Y chromosome (46,XY karyotype).
In Swyer syndrome, individuals with one X chromosome and one Y chromosome in each cell, the pattern typically found in boys and men, have female reproductive structures.
XY gonadal dysgenesis
Most causes of intersex are congenital. That means people are born with it, usually because of a genetic condition as in the case of Swyer syndrome.
This makes zero sense.
Welcome to the 21st Century where genetics testing is the biggest breakthrough in the medical and research world.
I feel like we're answering different questions. It seems like you're answering the question "what is the biological process for generating sex in humans" and I'm trying to answer "how does a scientist define who is a 'man' and who is a 'woman'". To put it in a physics context, it seems like I'm answering "what defines the kilogram?" and you're answering "how is mass generated?" I agree that human sex is generated genetically.
Depending on context, scientists will use genotypic or phenotypic definitions. What they won't do is use a strictly binary classification when one is inappropriate. A scientist will not in general unflinchingly refer to a Swyer syndrome individual as a man. I doubt they'd pass peer review if they tried.
You seem to either be ignorant of or purposely contemptuous of the sex/gender distinction. Sex is generally considered to be distinct from gender; gender is not generally considered to be strictly genetic. [1][2][3]
I feel like we're answering different questions. It seems like you're answering the question "what is the biological process for generating sex in humans"
If that's what you got out of my responses I think you need to go back and re-read them. Sex determination in humans is clearly defined and yes a biological process is switched on based on the presence of the sex determination gene/genes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
and I'm trying to answer "how does a scientist define who is a 'man' and who is a 'woman'".
It's been answered over and over in my responses. I suppose the answer would vary if you are asking scientists who have no knoweldge of sex determination in humans. However scientists who have an understanding of genetics and who work in this field of research fully understand how sex is determined in humans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Depending on context, scientists will use genotypic or phenotypic definitions.
Again what are you talking about here? I don't know of any person who understands the difference between genotype and phenotype to only focus on one and ignore the other. It would be like knowing a certain cancer has a specific gene (genotype) associated with it but the scientist only focusing on the tumor (phenotype). Does that sound logical?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
What they won't do is use a strictly binary classification when one is inappropriate. A scientist will not in general unflinchingly refer to a Swyer syndrome individual as a man. I doubt they'd pass peer review if they tried.
Again you are not making much sense here. Sexual development is usually determined by an individual's chromosomes (genotype); however, in Swyer syndrome, sexual development (phenotype) does not match the affected individual's chromosomal (genotype) makeup. Thus they diagnose this syndrome via genetic (genotype) testing. 46,XY disorder of sex development and 46,XY complete gonadal dysgenesis
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
You seem to either be ignorant of or purposely contemptuous of the sex/gender distinction.
I think you are trying to reach for something that's just not there. Before ascribing unsubstantiated nonsense to me make sure you understand clearly what I'm stating. I've made it clear that sex is determined genetically regardless of what a person thinks they are psychologically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayrandom
Sex is generally considered to be distinct from gender; gender is not generally considered to be strictly genetic.
I suppose it depends on the context of where the term gender is being used.
The gender taxonomy is a classification of the range of different levels at which humans vary in sexual characteristics. It is mainly used by medical specialists working in the area of sex research.[1] John Money and Milton Diamond are probably the best known researchers in this field. Money earned his PhD for research into human hermaphroditism and pseudohermaphroditism, now known as intersex conditions. The taxonomy starts at the simplest, biological level and traces differentiations expressed at the increasingly complicated levels produced over the course of the human life cycle.
I'm using gender strictly in the biological sense not the social sense.
For example if you have a male who is XY and their sex developed normally meaning the switch was turned so that the SRY gene encodes a unique transcription factor that activates a testis-forming pathway...but this male is very feminine...does this make him a female? Perhaps he really believes he's a female born into a males body. Socially this might fly but biologically it does not.
"I'm using gender strictly in the biological sense not the social sense.
For example if you have a male who is XY and their sex developed normally meaning the switch was turned so that the SRY gene encodes a unique transcription factor that activates a testis-forming pathway...but this male is very feminine...does this make him a female? Perhaps he really believes he's a female born into a males body. Socially this might fly but biologically it does not."
The social sense is where it starts to get sticky, as the pathways a developing personality can take start diverging almost at conception. The cultural sources and environment play a factor as well. The more enforced standard gender roles are, the less any variations will be accepted. One can suggest that the "male" of one culture - as it defines a male - is not the "male" of a different culture. The alpha males of the French court wore stockings and powdered wigs as they determined life or death for others. The alpha males of the mongol raiders were a bit different.
Because the current tsunami of gender fluidity is attempting to drown the notion that there is anything to fixed or assigned gender at all. Proponents should take the victories at the gross level, where it matters, and move on, not try to keep proving their notions down into the molecular region. Dogma about no-gender is nonsense to geneticists and indeed, most of medicine.
If that's what you got out of my responses I think you need to go back and re-read them. Sex determination in humans is clearly defined and yes a biological process is switched on based on the presence of the sex determination gene/genes.
It's been answered over and over in my responses. I suppose the answer would vary if you are asking scientists who have no knoweldge of sex determination in humans. However scientists who have an understanding of genetics and who work in this field of research fully understand how sex is determined in humans.
Again what are you talking about here? I don't know of any person who understands the difference between genotype and phenotype to only focus on one and ignore the other. It would be like knowing a certain cancer has a specific gene (genotype) associated with it but the scientist only focusing on the tumor (phenotype). Does that sound logical?
Again you are not making much sense here. Sexual development is usually determined by an individual's chromosomes (genotype); however, in Swyer syndrome, sexual development (phenotype) does not match the affected individual's chromosomal (genotype) makeup. Thus they diagnose this syndrome via genetic (genotype) testing. 46,XY disorder of sex development and 46,XY complete gonadal dysgenesis
I think you are trying to reach for something that's just not there. Before ascribing unsubstantiated nonsense to me make sure you understand clearly what I'm stating. I've made it clear that sex is determined genetically regardless of what a person thinks they are psychologically.
I suppose it depends on the context of where the term gender is being used.
I'm using gender strictly in the biological sense not the social sense.
For example if you have a male who is XY and their sex developed normally meaning the switch was turned so that the SRY gene encodes a unique transcription factor that activates a testis-forming pathway...but this male is very feminine...does this make him a female? Perhaps he really believes he's a female born into a males body. Socially this might fly but biologically it does not.
You keep talking about genetics ‘determining’ sex and then explaining how, but as I said before I agree with you. I’m only saying that scientists ‘define’ sex in a myriad of different ways, most of which agree with each other. There is not consensus among scientists that genetics alone determine who is a man and who is a woman. In fact, there is general consensus that this shouldn’t be done:
You keep talking about genetics ‘determining’ sex and then explaining how, but as I said before I agree with you. I’m only saying that scientists ‘define’ sex in a myriad of different ways, most of which agree with each other. There is not consensus among scientists that genetics alone determine who is a man and who is a woman. In fact, there is general consensus that this shouldn’t be done:
A leaked draft memo from HHS on which HHS officials have refused to comment.
The move would make it easier for institutions receiving federal funds, such as universities and health programmes, to discriminate against people on the basis of their gender identity.
I certainly don't find this article convincing in that that there is a unified consensus of research scientists stating what you are claiming.
Every single sexual development disorder this editorial mentions has already been thoroughly researched and understood. I've posted these sexual development disorders in many of my posts.
From the editorial:
Quote:
"people with XY chromosomes can have female characteristics owing to conditions including an inability to respond to testosterone"
For instance, genetic recombination can transfer Y chromosome genes to X chromosomes, resulting in people with XX chromosomes who have male characteristics.
Because the current tsunami of gender fluidity is attempting to drown the notion that there is anything to fixed or assigned gender at all. Proponents should take the victories at the gross level, where it matters, and move on, not try to keep proving their notions down into the molecular region. Dogma about no-gender is nonsense to geneticists and indeed, most of medicine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
