I’m tired, so I’m not looking it up but iirc intersex is WAY more fucking common than you think and there are SO MANY ways it can happen. It’s not very rare outliers, but people also fuckin mutilate their kids over that shit and plenty of stupid shit so here we are thinking it’s like .01% of people.
Anecdotally, one of my friends eventually discovered through a lot of digging that he was very literally assigned female at birth, as he was born intersex and surgically “corrected” at birth without even his parents being told. They only discovered it when the family did DNA tests for some family history thing.
Ya there is that one guy Brian D. Earp who talked about how babies who are born intersex are mutilated like its nothing to assign them a certain sex . And then of course we have babies that are born with perfectly healthy genatalia who are also mutilated like its nothing. THATS what happened to me. And to so many other babies in our world today as I type this…
Rare, sure, but keep in mind that even a 0.2% incidence rate means that 16 million people wouldn’t fit the binary gender model. And that’s the most conservative estimate for the condition given in the article. 6% puts it closer to half a billion people.
And the sad truth is that we dont even know if its 0.1 or 0.2% or even higher than 6% cause we are curreently choosing not to and have not chosen to research the commonality and impact of this type of person being born deeper.
We are for some reason choosing to be stuck on these estimates when we should be trying to be as caring and exact as possible, ESPECIALLY when it comes to a babie’s gender and their bodily autonomy!
The outliers are the exception that prove the rule though. The very fact that intersex people exist at all shows that the physical process of inducing the development of sexual characteristics is complicated and messy, and not a simple switch. It’s just that evolution has fine-tuned the process enough that in the majority of cases it leads to people who are within ranges that can be considered “wholly male” or “wholly female”. So the sexual binary model isn’t useless, but it’s important to be aware that it is just a model and not reality.
That’s true. But also, for 99.9% of physics problems people use day to day, Newton’s model works great.
If people need the “relativistic model” of gender to understand their own situation, i.e. if they’re intersex, thats great and im glad thats available. But theres no need for people to account for relativity if they’re just trying to determine how fast a pendulum is swinging or something, and if someone meets the generally accepted definition of male or female biological sex (which 99.9% of people do), i dont think there’s much need to complicate things.
I actually think youre correct and that we oughta rely on such complex models only whhen the person in question is a person with a very complex gender identity since easily 90% or 80% of hukans obviously fall under the easily understandable binary model .
Physics and biology are two very differenr fields.
Physics equation dont care about the livelihood of the object theyre involved in
…The equations of biology do worry about suchbthings . In biology you deal with animate , beings and even with species that are comprised of numerous ither species. Like the human gut’s immune system is comprised mostly of non-human cells interestingly
…Though I do wonder if future research will actually prove to us that the mosaic models of gender have to start being applied to EVERYONE because it turns out that most people fit into all types of genders, and forms of gender expression…
When humanity decides that it is time for us to prioritize other things than bombing and ostracizing Iranians , and dubai chocolates and getting a newer , more gas -guzzling car every year maybe we’ll finally be able to find out…
This is a science community that should be open to reasoned and reasonable debate, the moderator that removed my reply has no scientific education and no place here.
If youre going to debate CITE research of your own. Dont just come in with random opinions with little research backing them.
The point of scientific debate is that YOUR science is larger and /or more rigorous than your opponent’s thus proving thst youre probably more correct on the matter than they are.
If someone or I say ‘im the reincarnation of Mao-Tse-Tung!’ , does anybody hare have to believe me unless I can prove it? How would I be able to prove that without medical records that prove that it is the undeniable truth?
But you do not know what my original response was because it was removed, is that what your proposal is? To remove any counter views without any discourse at all. Is that your idea of debate within a community or how research is reviewed.
I actuallt saw your first message before it was deleted and I also saw that you didnt cite a single thing to prove your point so thats enough to convince me that you were talking garbage.
Let me be clear what your muddled posts are stating, in a discussion forum like Lemmy your opinion is that it is good practice to remove reasoned alternative views which run counter to general opinion and any comments without citations are garbage. I think that is an admittance that your own ideas cannot stand scrutiny.
No I said if you come in with a countersrgumrnt or series of counterarguments to a researcher’s ideas you need to come in with citations or resesrch that is more rigourous or has more subjects or both than the researchers’. If you have ANYTHING that you can cite to twerk in her?! Please do it. NEVER bbe afraid to prove others wrong when you have the citations to do it.
I cant make ANY effective counteraguments against this lady even though I do disagree eith her in some things because
I have no degree , award, or tutelage in the fields of gender studies or biology , or whatever else field is covered in the artcile.
I have no research I can cite to shut her up.
…So she has won an eternal victory over me and pretty much. everyone else here until I csn prove otherwise. Or until anyone else proves her wrong
We can still read your comment in the mod log (I’m not mod, regular users like me can see it). It’s not rigurous, it’s not sharing any sources, it’s just speculation, and while personally I don’t mind speculation in general, this is clearly a very sensitive issue for lots of folks. At any rate, if you wanna be able to have a good faith debate it’s good to share sources, especially with complicated, sensitive topics like this. It also helps if in addition to sources you make sure to show empathy towards people who might be dealing with crap due to the broader assumptions around the topic (in this case mainly intersex people, to a lesser degree also trans people) just so everyone will relax and understand that you do wanna talk in good faith. I believe you do, but we’re all anonymous strangers here and we’re so used to reading reactionary trolls, so a lot of people understandably won’t give you the benefit of the doubt.
As I recall all that I said was in the special case of humans the physicality of gender was most usually far more simply delineated and discreet than the intellectual expression of it which was on a more continuous spectrum that can slide for an individual through time. It is a given that while physical complexity nevertheless does occur the far more common situation is cognitive complexity. It seems to me that is a reasonable assertion to put forward and is on topic and in no way aggressive or threatening and I see no cause in it to warrant its removal by a moderator. At the very least it initiated discussion which is the purpose of these boards.
Removed by mod
That’s an interesting reply to make with no further details, in response to an article that directly contradicts you.
I’m tired, so I’m not looking it up but iirc intersex is WAY more fucking common than you think and there are SO MANY ways it can happen. It’s not very rare outliers, but people also fuckin mutilate their kids over that shit and plenty of stupid shit so here we are thinking it’s like .01% of people.
Anecdotally, one of my friends eventually discovered through a lot of digging that he was very literally assigned female at birth, as he was born intersex and surgically “corrected” at birth without even his parents being told. They only discovered it when the family did DNA tests for some family history thing.
Ya there is that one guy Brian D. Earp who talked about how babies who are born intersex are mutilated like its nothing to assign them a certain sex . And then of course we have babies that are born with perfectly healthy genatalia who are also mutilated like its nothing. THATS what happened to me. And to so many other babies in our world today as I type this…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQQTIpBWqvY
The thing that makes me think is that these are such MAAASSIVE issues and yet most of society chooses to …sweep them under the rug?..Why?
Why are we choosing to not confromt such important issues right now?! Why not before?! What are we doing!?
Rare, sure, but keep in mind that even a 0.2% incidence rate means that 16 million people wouldn’t fit the binary gender model. And that’s the most conservative estimate for the condition given in the article. 6% puts it closer to half a billion people.
That’s what I took from it as well 0.2 is 1 in 500, ok its quite a lot, but 6% is just over 1 in 16 people.
And the sad truth is that we dont even know if its 0.1 or 0.2% or even higher than 6% cause we are curreently choosing not to and have not chosen to research the commonality and impact of this type of person being born deeper.
We are for some reason choosing to be stuck on these estimates when we should be trying to be as caring and exact as possible, ESPECIALLY when it comes to a babie’s gender and their bodily autonomy!
The outliers are the exception that prove the rule though. The very fact that intersex people exist at all shows that the physical process of inducing the development of sexual characteristics is complicated and messy, and not a simple switch. It’s just that evolution has fine-tuned the process enough that in the majority of cases it leads to people who are within ranges that can be considered “wholly male” or “wholly female”. So the sexual binary model isn’t useless, but it’s important to be aware that it is just a model and not reality.
Indeed its a model. A somewhat accurate model. BUT An outdated one
Like I think about it like this .
We have newton’s model of the gravitational equation, right? Its just a model .A somewhat accurate model… But An outdated model.
…Then we have Einstein’s… which is far more accurate.
And who knows? Who is to say thar einstein’s model is COMPLETELY accurate? There could be faults in it we havent encountered yet
That’s true. But also, for 99.9% of physics problems people use day to day, Newton’s model works great.
If people need the “relativistic model” of gender to understand their own situation, i.e. if they’re intersex, thats great and im glad thats available. But theres no need for people to account for relativity if they’re just trying to determine how fast a pendulum is swinging or something, and if someone meets the generally accepted definition of male or female biological sex (which 99.9% of people do), i dont think there’s much need to complicate things.
I actually think youre correct and that we oughta rely on such complex models only whhen the person in question is a person with a very complex gender identity since easily 90% or 80% of hukans obviously fall under the easily understandable binary model .
Physics and biology are two very differenr fields.
Physics equation dont care about the livelihood of the object theyre involved in
…The equations of biology do worry about suchbthings . In biology you deal with animate , beings and even with species that are comprised of numerous ither species. Like the human gut’s immune system is comprised mostly of non-human cells interestingly
…Though I do wonder if future research will actually prove to us that the mosaic models of gender have to start being applied to EVERYONE because it turns out that most people fit into all types of genders, and forms of gender expression…
When humanity decides that it is time for us to prioritize other things than bombing and ostracizing Iranians , and dubai chocolates and getting a newer , more gas -guzzling car every year maybe we’ll finally be able to find out…
Removed by mod
This is a science community that should be open to reasoned and reasonable debate, the moderator that removed my reply has no scientific education and no place here.
If youre going to debate CITE research of your own. Dont just come in with random opinions with little research backing them.
The point of scientific debate is that YOUR science is larger and /or more rigorous than your opponent’s thus proving thst youre probably more correct on the matter than they are.
If someone or I say ‘im the reincarnation of Mao-Tse-Tung!’ , does anybody hare have to believe me unless I can prove it? How would I be able to prove that without medical records that prove that it is the undeniable truth?
But you do not know what my original response was because it was removed, is that what your proposal is? To remove any counter views without any discourse at all. Is that your idea of debate within a community or how research is reviewed.
I actuallt saw your first message before it was deleted and I also saw that you didnt cite a single thing to prove your point so thats enough to convince me that you were talking garbage.
Let me be clear what your muddled posts are stating, in a discussion forum like Lemmy your opinion is that it is good practice to remove reasoned alternative views which run counter to general opinion and any comments without citations are garbage. I think that is an admittance that your own ideas cannot stand scrutiny.
No I said if you come in with a countersrgumrnt or series of counterarguments to a researcher’s ideas you need to come in with citations or resesrch that is more rigourous or has more subjects or both than the researchers’. If you have ANYTHING that you can cite to twerk in her?! Please do it. NEVER bbe afraid to prove others wrong when you have the citations to do it.
I cant make ANY effective counteraguments against this lady even though I do disagree eith her in some things because
I have no degree , award, or tutelage in the fields of gender studies or biology , or whatever else field is covered in the artcile.
I have no research I can cite to shut her up.
…So she has won an eternal victory over me and pretty much. everyone else here until I csn prove otherwise. Or until anyone else proves her wrong
We can still read your comment in the mod log (I’m not mod, regular users like me can see it). It’s not rigurous, it’s not sharing any sources, it’s just speculation, and while personally I don’t mind speculation in general, this is clearly a very sensitive issue for lots of folks. At any rate, if you wanna be able to have a good faith debate it’s good to share sources, especially with complicated, sensitive topics like this. It also helps if in addition to sources you make sure to show empathy towards people who might be dealing with crap due to the broader assumptions around the topic (in this case mainly intersex people, to a lesser degree also trans people) just so everyone will relax and understand that you do wanna talk in good faith. I believe you do, but we’re all anonymous strangers here and we’re so used to reading reactionary trolls, so a lot of people understandably won’t give you the benefit of the doubt.
As I recall all that I said was in the special case of humans the physicality of gender was most usually far more simply delineated and discreet than the intellectual expression of it which was on a more continuous spectrum that can slide for an individual through time. It is a given that while physical complexity nevertheless does occur the far more common situation is cognitive complexity. It seems to me that is a reasonable assertion to put forward and is on topic and in no way aggressive or threatening and I see no cause in it to warrant its removal by a moderator. At the very least it initiated discussion which is the purpose of these boards.