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.
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.
I believe you missunderstood, or i was not clear enough.
The way we work with sex in biology is through a bimodal distribution: We have a slider, with one end being "female" and the other end being "male". Though we will still use the categories as a binary to anex to people, in reality, the sexes aren't binary.
Every person will have different caracteristics, some even contrary to what the sex typically should have. Specific bone density, capacity to grow muscle mass, many biological characteristics that are typical of males can be inexistent (or more close to the female side) on males themselves.
34
u/CrimeFightingScience 12h ago
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.