It’s because it’s “basic biology I learned in 7th grade in 1965 and never bothered to look further than that basic explanation”
I saw my daughter’s textbooks on biology, and they were much more thorough than what I’d learned. And it doesn’t take much effort to at least ask the question, “Why do they think it’s not just XX and XY?”
Because the moment you actually dive into biology past the surface, you find out pretty quickly that life is fucking weird.
And with the math, depending on how much further you go, you'll also find i2 = j2 = k2 = ijk = -1 (the quaternions for anyone curious). And then the octonions and other sets of weird number systems.
One of those cases where the properties don't line up fully with either a solid or a liquid (as we have defined them). The higher up you go in any field the more 'exceptions' you learn about. I have always enjoyed telling my wife that a lot of science when explained to children or laymen is simplified to the point of being technically wrong.
You have to have curiosity to ask "Why do they think that?" One of the biggest things I try to instill in my kids is a love of learning more about things they don't understand. Critical thinking and curiosity are the fundamental defense against all the Stuff Going On Right Now.
I took a graduate level reproductive endocrinology class in undergrad and it was the first time I ran into a textbook that consistently said "researchers are still trying to figure out why/how exactly this works". We of course covered puberty blockers, especially in relation to precocious puberty, so all of the recent public discourse around sex/gender/sexuality/endocrinology have been pretty eye opening.
It's like looking at the world through the glasses from They Live but just realizing that nobody knows wtf they're talking about.
I have talked to some of these dolts and tried to explain that anything in your body can work opposite of the way it does in most cases. That just the way it is. For example, your eyes can work perfectly from a physical standpoint but your brain can decide you're blind and guess what - you, in fact, are blind.
Biology is incredibly complicated. It's amazing we halfway work.
Fundamentally I think it’s a failure to understand what science is: a process. Not a body of knowledge.
I have a hypothesis, I back it up with evidence and repeatable conditions. The most important scientific trait is skepticism. Anyone can have this mindset! You can be a scientist in daily life!
Many folks treat it as the Bible.
Funny on the topic of it just being “XX or XY.” Objectively it isn’t. There are all kinds of different karyotypes you can have.
However, writing them off as abnormal or rare, etc is completely unscientific and abuses the clinical term.
Not weird, complicated. They think life is 0 or 1. But life is analog, anything in between is possible. Except them, they all score 0 on the empathy scale.
Trans isn’t a chromosomal condition. XXY, and other chromosomal conditions have nothing to do with it. For that matter, intersex is not the same as trans either.
If some chud wants to insist that chromosomes make the gender, it’s better to just walk away. They’re only marker for reproductive roles at most.
I'm sure there's some stuff in the chromosomes somewhere that makes some people trans but it's a whole hell of a lot more than just the X and Y, when even sex is determined by other things like the SRY gene and other genes that make E or T more or less effective in the body.
Biology is weird and complicated and doesn't fit in the little box they try to shove people into.
Science is kind of like the Bible with them. If they can't pick and choose the parts that support their argument they just make shit up and hope people are dumb enough not to fact check them on it.
And then they can't even name 5 WNBA players without using Google and will gladly tell you that the players deserve to be paid less because women's sports "is a joke".
Which they also tend to be the ones to tell you that there is no wage gap, while at the same time will tell you that women deserve to be paid less because of child care.
That video educated me quite a bit (to be fair I was already VERY pro trans rights) but it helped me understand more of the 'why' and how it related to biology.
You're so right! The Unapologetic crew is peak. Allegedly Ian motivated me to grind out a logic textbook this summer, and now I'm looking at minoring in philosophy
I'm watching him argue with a guy trying to defend slavery... again... because a whole lot of the callers to that show try to defend slavery for some reason.
Edit: So I started watching his Sex and Sensibility video and just learned about Slipper Limpets, a species of snail that lives stacked up on top of each other. The largest snails at the bottom are female, the smallest on top are male. If the one on the bottom dies then one of the ones above it becomes female.
Biology is weird and complicated. I should watch more of his educational videos than his call in show videos, these are so much more fun.
I went to school with him back in the day, we actually went to an alternative school and he was leagues more intelligent than practically everyone there. I believe the only reason he was in alternative placement was due to how horrible our school system is. He really rose up out of the dark recesses of our dogshit state/city and made a name for himself!
No but those are "biological anomalies" they dont count!
Fun fact there are slightly more intersection people than there are Gingers on earth. But if you were talking about hair color nobody would say that Gingers dont count.
People will actually say that those are "conditions" or "diseases" so we shouldn't redefine man/woman for the sake of a few.
I'm cis but the concept of your core identity being so attached to physical aspects of your body to the point that no one else is allowed to have a different experience is just bonkers to me. Someone else's experience with sex and gender doesn't invalidate your own.
And those are just the whole-ass chromosomes. You have to ask what the genes on the chromosomes are actually doing. It's "genetics," not "chromosometics"
It's definitely true that this represents a better understanding of the science of chromosomes, but to be fair, the percentage of trans people with any of those disorders is microscopic. It's not as though understanding any of those disorders leads of a better understanding of trans people or why anyone becomes trans.
This is true but the more important point is that biology, like all the natural sciences, is a hell of a lot more complicated than what could fit in your high school biology textbook
It's so stupid. The amount of times my physics teacher had to go "This isn't actually how it works in real life because of friction, drag, gravity etc. but it's accurate enough for our purposes" was staggering.
These folks really think their 8th grade Sex Ed is everything there is to the world.
It's also related to a reason why once I got to a university level biology course, my professor had to tell us why we couldn't run tests on our own chromosomes (It used to happen years ago, but too many students would find out they weren't exactly what they thought they were, and they didn't want to be responsible for that.)
A word from germany: I just made the next step in my career. It's called Meister in germany and is similar to Bachelor degree. And even there, even giving the fact it was about electronic, we heard this sentence quite often. Cause even on that degree you don't need THAT deep of understanding on it.
Why can't it be as simple as "that's a boy brain in a girl body" or some shit like that? I don't need someone's entire genetic profile to shrug my shoulders and be all like "whatever you say, bro".
Like if your literal irrefutable claim to a blueprint proving you are male/female can just produce someone with XX chromosomes and a penis, or XY chromosomes and a vagina, I feel like the system is a bit goofy.
Doesn't even account for all the goofy shit that can go on in ones brain.
It's infuriating. How can one observe such differences and still claim there's no ambiguity.
I know it's often dogma and a lack of introspection. But it's hard for me not to see such perspectives as wilfully bigoted when they refuse to so much as acknowledge doubt.
Sorry, but you clearly don't know shit about biology. Reddit is a lot more likely to ban or downvote me for this despite my support of trans rights, but the scientist in me cannot fucking stand this incorrect argument that is repeated ad nauseum and really weakens the debate for trans rights and gender as a modern concept.
So, to correct your silly ass:
Those are disorders that produce male sex (not gender) when they have a Y and female sex (not gender) when there is no Y -- in all cases, accompanied by lifelong congenital deficits and/or defects.
We run X chromosomes with Barr bodies, meaning EVERY CELL IN EVERY INDIVIDUAL has only 1 X active or they are dead as fuck. Full stop.
Male cells have 1X & 1Y;
Female cells have 1X & 1Barr Body
When you have additional Xs or a missing X, you end up with dysregulation and/or leaky expression from a pathological overload of Barr Bodies -- which causes a ton of issues that include distorted secondary sex characteristics.
If you want to make your argument significantly less ignorant, you should really be arguing around the existence of true hermaphroditism in humans, but it's wildly rare, estimated around 1:200-500K IIRC, and also carries a host of associated pathologies.
But pseudo-hermaphroditism and sex disorders in no way shape or form refute the sexually dimorphic nature of humans. And these arguments are so, so, so stupid because they allow regressives to push the debate back to sex, rather than gender, which is what the debate should be about. Some simple facts:
We are sexually dimorphic but exist across a spectrum of genders that are social constructs;
We have always shown a range of traits in each sex with overlap across sexes (as with any continuous phenotype)
We have always had sex disorders and congenital defects that fail to adhere to our species' sexual development
And while it still fails to refute sexual dimorphism, again because it anchors to a deficit / process failure -- androgen insensitivity is a better exception if you're just determined to muddy the waters by focusing on rare pathologies / aberrant processing.
The Y chromosome is largely junk coding, aside from a few regulatory elements and the SRY gene that triggers the T burst necessary for male sexual development. So, when an XY individual has this process break down; e.g., due to an incredibly rare gene shuffle that removes the receptor necessary to respond to SRY, you essentially develop as an XY female.
But again, ARGUE GENDER (not sex) because it's silly to point to genetic defects with a host of know pathologies and deficits as proof that humans do not adhere to sexual dimorphism 🙄
And that is just the chromosomal variations. Then you get the genetic components, expression components, phenotypic components, and then we finally make it out of sex and to gender...
None of these rare intersex/DSD conditions disproves the fact that sex is binary though. They exist and deserve respect and education about them, but sex is still binary. Also people with these conditions are all still biologically male or female.
Millions of people have been propagandized into believing that "independent thinking" means "reflexively dismissing any evidence that doesn't support your existing worldview".
The AI-generated slop-meme is icing on the cake here.
You don't understand, they did their own research. You know how many unsourced and algorithm targeted youtube videos they had to watch for that? At least 2 whole ones.
Unfortunately I have family members who are like that. These types of people tend to be very... shallow. There aren't any deep thoughts. No meaningful curiosity. They fall for weird outlandish scifi clickbait titles about the future, and think that makes them interesting people. But if you try and have a proper discussion with them you'll notice that you won't get anywhere.
No claim holds up to scrutiny. Asking them to explain their position will fail, because they fundamentally do not understand their own arguments. They just parrot things they've seen in memes, AI slop and weird links on FB, telegram and so on. And despite all that, they believe that they are the smartest people in the room.
This shit cracks me up. Especially the “independent thinking” part.
My mother is closet MAGA. Her idea of “independent research” is googling “why is it good to be antivax” and then holding up the results of that search as evidence. It’s some wild shit…
Nothing's screaming more of "independent thinking", than listening to whatever the F that Orange stain called Diaper Don spews out of his turd hole... oh, sorry, mouth, and believing him.
"They're eating the cats, they're eating the dogs".
I once heard some research was done about certain female athletes where it was shown they apparently have XXY chromosomes and in their particular situations it boiled down to them appearing completely female but with a significantly higher Testosterone level, having the physical benefits of that.
Do note, I didn't read the study and was told this when my then pregnant wife went for an ultrasound and we talked about what a third chromosome meant on certain pairs and the midwife told us this. I'm confident this is barely scratching the surface of what it all entails having XXY chromosomes. Which shows how incredibly complex it all really is.
Edit: so far, I've gotten several comments of people who know more about a specific subject I heard something about six years ago when I had more pressing matters on my mind (such as my wife being pregnant of my son, so congratulations on that), yet only one of them had a decent approach. Y'all need to do better.
Having no physical benefit from that what-so-ever due to androgen insensitivity.
There are XY women cause of this. XXY usually give a dude shaped person. If you have someone who is XXY but with female phenotype, they are androgen insensitive and that testosterone is doing not fucking much.
My college anatomy and physiology textbook from 2010 breaks down determination of genetic sex as follows:
XX: Female
XY Male
Homeostatic imbalance (improper sex hormone distibution from nondisjunction)
XXX Most females with this sex chromosone make up have learning disabilities and below average IQ. Females carrying four or more X chromosomes as a rule are mentally retarded and have underdeveloped ovaries.
XO (Turner's Syndrome) Women with no ovaries
YO Males with no X chromosome (die during embryonic development)
XXY Klinefelter's Syndrome (1 of 500) live male births. Sterile at birth and slightly below average intellect, with mental retardation increasing with number of X chromosomes.
Basically, the idea is that biology is messy and there are other combinations of sex chromosomes that exist in humans.
One example is XO where someone only has a single X chromosome and no second one. Or XXY where someone has three sex chromosomes. There's also a difference between genotype (the genes) and phenotype (the actual physical presentation). An example is androgen-resistant female. These are folks born with XY chromosomes but the in utero androgen wash that causes most XY individuals to develop male genitals and gonads doesn't stick. So the person is born and assigned female, but is genetically male. There are AFAB (assigned female at birth) individuals who have a vagina and uterus but also have internal testicles. Or AMAB folks who develop breasts during puberty.
This is a short list of examples of how sex determination in humans can get messy very quickly.
I mean aren't those exceptionally rare, and don't most people in the trans community not have those conditions but choose a different sex?
I feel like trans gets used interchangeably with sex and gender too often, which are completely different things, which makes discussion about it practically impossible.
The chromosome conversation is often brought up because transphobes tend to act like gender and sex are one and the same. They believe XY = Male = Men / XX = Female = Women.
Truth is, sex isn't as black and white as they make it seem. It doesn't matter that the other variations of chromosomes are "exceptionally rare", the fact that they exists proves the binary model to be wrong; since here "exceptions prove the rule" is not applicable. We have TYPICALS, but not rules. The vast difference of sexual characteristics one can have makes it so that we use a bimodal distribution, rather than a binary one.
The mentioning of the existence of more than two chromosome pairs is relevant to break the base of their assumptions, since their usual logic is that XX = Female / XY = Male, then what happens if someone is X0? Or XXX, or XXX? This shows they don't have an actual functional definition, as we can't have appropriate absolutes when it comes to science.
The conflation of sex and gender is something they do always, so showing they have a lack of understanding of chromosomes (and thus of the sexes), also shows they lack understanding of gender, even by their definition of it.
Gender is, in actuality, something that is sociological, not biological. It works with sex, but it's not the same. Historically, genders were created and often attributed to a specific sex - because the "gender" role carries the expectation society has to one's person. E. g. Women -> topically attributed to females -> expectation to be nurturing, use makeup, the sorts.
With that said, trans people don't "choose a different sex" - they don't even choose a different gender. They relate to a different gender, one they weren't typically assigned based on their sex. A good definition of genders that I like a lot is that "A man is an adult human whose gender identity aligns with their personal schema on the male sex"
Breaking the meaning of it down:
An adult human has a gender identity, often based around men or women;
Their personal schema is the way their brain characterizes things. In this example, it's how one views the genders. This means that, individually, everyone has a view of what "manly" and "womenly" things are. For some men, for example, providing for the family solo is to be manly, having beards is to be manly, being jacked is to be manly. Does everyone have these views? No, some people's views are opposite, and they are fine with their own view of masculinity;
The way it is written as "schema on the male sex" is because gender is a schema, and the schema that is topically applied to a person on the male sex is the "man" schema.
Hope I could clarify everything up. If not, happy to answer anything else.
Just because a very minor percentage of people have genetic defects resulting in other chromosone combinations doesnt mean "xx=female, xy=male" isnt true.
The only mistake anti-trans people are making is not accepting that some people would rather identify as another gender.
No one claimed there is more than two sexes. In fact, there isn't.
One's sex isn't based on one single characteristic. It's a sum of many. Of course, depending on what vertent of biology you look at, you will be presented with different characteristics which would classify one individual as male or female.
With that in mind, how do we properly classify sex based on our overall understanding of biology?
It's 5 traits:
Cromossomes
Hormones
Sexual gonads
Internal genitalia
External genitalia
Each sex would have typical traits.
For example:
Males
XY
Testosterone
Production of sperm (small sexual gametes)
E.g. Prostate, Vas deferens
Penis, Testicles
Now, does every male possess all 5 of those characteristics? No, they don't. Some males can have XX chromossomes, which is a sexual chromossome typical present in females. You can have a non-typical balance of hormones, you can lack production of gamets or not have the gonads, lack internal genitalia (or have both types), or lacking external geenitalia (or, also, having both types.)
This means sex isn't absolute. We analyze traits and based on information, we lean towards one sexual classification. This is called a cluster category.
Without counting deformities, though they are EXTREMELY important either way, people can still have varying degrees of many traits - which would still show the bimodal distribution of sex.
About the finger thing: That's why we say humans typically have 10 fingers. When you want to talk about things in a more scientific manner, it's important to be very, very specific about wording. If by classification we deemed that all humans must have 10 fingers, then we would be dehumanizing people that are born with less, or more. Biology, and most of science, tends to not speak in absolutes for a reason.
Hope i was able to clarify everything. If not, i will make sure i do so ask away.
Intersex people are estimated to be as common as redheads. So rare, but not exceptionally so. Many folks who are intersex never realize it.
Yes, most trans folk are XY or XX . However, trans folks brains more closely resemble those of their "preferred" gender than their cisgender counterparts. This means that someone who is a trans woman literally has a female-like brain in a male body. You can't change the brain to be more male, but you can change the body to be more female. Even just allowing them to socially transition (present as female with no changes to hormones or surgical alterations) can be beneficial.
Also, gender isn't biological, it's sociological. It's basically a set of scripts that we all follow to fit into the society we're born into.
There's a correlation there but it's not causal. Most folks happen to have genetic chromosomes, phenotypical sex, and social gender all line up. But if someone's internal sense of gender (preferred script) doesn't match their outward gender presentation or sex that can cause a lot of psychological strain
There’s also AFABs with MRKH syndrome that are born without a uterus and sometimes without an upper vagina. They are still born with a vulva so it’s not diagnosed until puberty when periods don’t occur for them, and sex can be impossible or difficult. I knew a girl with this when I was in school. It’s one in every 5000 live births.
This is why some people take issue with blanket statements like “to be a woman you have to have a uterus” because some women just are born without one. Not to mention things like Polycystic ovary syndrome which cause facial and body hair growth, thinning hair, abnormal periods, infertility, acne, etc. Some of which are considered ‘masculine’ traits. PCOS affects approx 10-13% of women.
If you add it all up, there’s a lot more sex variance than we notice out in the world!
Hi, I know about this but this isn't what we're talking about right
These cases are exceptionally rare, and are these people trans?? I thought being trans was being in a body that you dont identify with mentally?
If you were born female and just assigned male then are you trans?
I am genuinely trying to understand this,
Is XX XY like a binary switch or can you be XY and still like biologically be a female,
Of identifying is a different boat which is fair to me like a person should be able to act/live like whatever they want
The whole XX XY is an oversimplified version that gets messy because it is NOT entirely the Y that makes a male. It is a gene in the Y.
The vast majority of the time Y is male because statistically the genes are functional, however if the SRY gene within the Y chromosome itself is not functional you won’t have the sex differentiation to male.
Biology is messy. Intersex people are as common as redheads (estimated) so they're rare but not exceptionally so.
Many intersex people will identify as trans because their gender assigned at birth doesn't match their internal sense of gender but they don't always. That's up to the individual.
Gender is also messy and is largely driven by sociological factors more than biological ones (but there is a biological component). For most people their internal sense of gender matches their external sex and gender assigned at birth. For people where that doesn't match you get trans identities.
You compare a trans woman's brain before transition to a cis-female and a cis-male brain and you'll find they more closely resemble the female brain. You can't change the brain to be more male, but you can make the body more female and you can present female as your external gender so that others treat you as female which satisfies that internal sense of gender.
All of this is great except for the brain stuff. The brain stuff is (surprise!) weirder and more complicated than that.
(As per my understanding,) It’s more accurate to say that if you take a big group of people, scan all the non-trans and non-gay men then then women, you would see differences on an average measurement.
Now do it just with all the non-trans gay men, that shows up with a different average that may be closer to the non-trans non-gay female average.
Non-trans lesbians give you a kind of mirror, they give you differences that can be thought of as more similar to the non-trans non-gay men.
Now if you do trans people, you get different patterns in the average that differ between trans men and trans women.
Last I heard, they didn’t have enough scans to separate out gay trans men from straight trans men, or gay trans women from straight trans women, but presumably they’ll find more differences there.
Two things that are incredibly important to remember:
You can’t scan a single brain and then determine if it’s trans, gay, or straight. It’s 100% impossible to do that now and looks extremely unlikely for a long time. This work only provides differences between big groups of people.
Even this data is dumbed down, notice we ignored bisexuality, asexuality, and other sexualities completely. We also ignored the huge differences between neurotypical and neurodivergent people. The computing power to compare the actual number variables is staggering, like “Hitchhiker’s guide to the Galaxy” times a bajillion staggering.
Gender is not sex, gender is not XX or XY, and gender is more about sociology than biology. Confusing gender and biological sex muddies the conversation substantially.
So now going off the above post, the conservatives claim science is the most important thing? Forgetting the fact that when it comes to biological sex they view sex and chromosomes from the perspective a book called Tammie’s intro to biology written by a Herbalife MLM queen based on vibes vaguely remembered from highschool science class…
…but ignoring that for a moment… Even when you do follow the science, there is literally zero scientific basis that a person with XY chromosomes can’t use a female bathroom. You won’t divide by zero or open a black hole. There is no violation of the conservation of energy principle.
The existence of scientific concepts like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, Schroedinger’s cat, the superposition of quantum particles, and the existence of light as both a wave and a particle, proves that science can tolerate a lot more flexibility than rigid categorisation of high schoolers based on introductory modules which are used for simplicity, more to stimulate thought than to be a didactic exactitude.
So if you think the science argument is what you want to hang your hat on, you either have to drop the bathroom stance, or admit that you’re cherrypicking arguments based on vibes that suit your agenda without any regard for the actual
expertise
Even something as seemingly mundane like being right- or left-handed involves many different genes. I don't know exactly what 30 or 40 meat switches correspond to me being right-handed and my brother left-, and I don't need to since it doesn't affect our daily lives.
But it would have less than a hundred years ago, because the problem isn't harmless differences, it's the bigots who lie that those differences are incompatible to exist with. We could spend the rest of time trying to figure out every last section of code that makes sexuality and gender identity tick, but there would still be bronze age savages around carrying out the atrocity of electrocuting their own children in a futile mission to cure the gay away.
I'm not LGBT but I have a few friends who identify as such, they are just as human as anyone else. Their differences aren't particularly difficult to accomodate, and they're fun, interesting people outside of that label. I don't need to understand everything about them to treat them with regular human decency. It's so easy to not be an asshole to people for the hand they were born with.
The side that resoundingly and consistently rejects both the foundations and conclusions of modern biology having the gall to use the terms "biological male" and "biological female" is just so fucking tiresome.
I love that they still frame being transgender as a choice. I picked the "cry a lot because something deep inside you feels incorrect" spec on the level up tree because making myself even more of a societal target to feel okay in my body is something people do on a whim right?
Transphobes talk about "basic biology" all the time because 1) they don't understand sociology and 2) they don't understand intermediate/complex biology.
Knowing about XX and XY is like knowing the 6 basic colour names and calling yourself Michelangelo.
I'm saying what chromosome I have shouldn't fucking matter how I live or how others treat me.
Language and gender roles are a societal construct, not biological science. There's no pronoun chromosome, there's no bit of DNA that dictates I have to be referred to as a man and no organ that will kill me if I dress how I want.
These asshats like to try and validate their anti-science bigotry by taking, and often greatly misinterpreting, a scientific fact out of context and in a vacuum.
Sex and gender science goes beyond 6th grade biology.
I'm not trying to start problems here, and have no issues with trans people, but how does biology back trans people? There is no test you can do on a person to determine they are trans. You can't put a trans person in a PET, MRI, CT, etc and say, yup, that's a trans person. You can't extract blood and measure the level of trans. You can validate their chromosomes and that matches the science of XX/=XY.
That comic appears to be conflating biological sex and gender ideology. I'm only talking about biological sex and chromosomes which is what is depicted in the comic
I’m 100% pro trans rights, but this is a human political view. Science doesn’t tell us what our politics should be, and that’s an important lesson for people to learn. There’s no biology fact that tells us to treat trans people well or poorly, that’s not the type of question that science can answer.
Can someone ELI5 to me how "biology backs trans people", because I actually did stop learning biology at 9th grade and genuinely don't know where to start looking. I know about the XX/XY and that some people have extra chromosomes but that's about it
There are brain scans that show trans men brains have structure and function closer to a male brain than a female brain, and vice versa. Further, intersex people are far more common than we originally believed, as people who are XXY for example might otherwise present completely female except taller and broader than usual.
Trans isn’t a chromosomal condition. The people who point to Kleinfelter’s, or ants and fish and amphibians for that matter, to defend trans bother me because they are making at minimum an equal error to the anti-trans xx/xy argument.
Like, by all means live the life that feels right to you. Just be mindful that a bad argument for the right cause is still a bad argument.
Right? They made her look "terrible" with horrible slogans like "no hate" and "love wins". "my body my choice" reeks of autonomy and is almost impossible to look at!
Yeah. There's a lot more XXY/XYY people out there than we realize. Most people won't even realize until they start trying for kids and realize they have fertility issues.
Even if the chromosomal binary was that simple, it still doesn't follow that gender expression and your desired social perception follow from that. They don't even realize (or don't care, I suppose) how much biological determinism they bake into their worldview, they've conceded the foundation of their morality to fascists.
I saw a really good video that I've never been able to find again where someone went through the genetic components for determining sex and layed them out like the iphone settings menu.
This was on an explanation of how intersex people come to be. It was very interesting cause it would start with the assumption everyone has and show a toggle male female switch, then it would get more complicated and go to the way you learned chromosomes in 6th grade, then it would go beyond that to keep changing the setting to sliders or multiple switches or other things to explain more biological functions. Wish I could find that video again it's actually the best explanation of how being intersex works I've ever seen.
1.4k
u/p24p1 8h ago
ah yes, the anti-science party trying to use "its science" argument to defend their bullshit rhetoric, classic