Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 3 days agomales and females are defined universally by the type of gamete they have the biological function to produce—not by karyotypes, secondary sexual characteristics, or other correlates
That’s not typically the definition people use, but I do admit it’s a way of “solving” the issues of a binary that often arise when using the more common definitions. You’re either a sperm-maker or egg-maker.
So using this definition, there are likely still some intersex people or at the very least people who have an “undefined” sex.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
That’s the definition biologists have always used. It’s just a description of the reality that they found in their field. Lay people have started using it recently because of culture wars, but they’re not incorrect to do so.
There still aren’t “intersex” people as you’re probably thinking. The closest you’ll find in humans is en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovotestis, but that’s not “fully functioning gonads of both types, producing healthy gametes of both types”. It’s “maybe a functioning gonad of one type, with a bit of non-functional tissue of the other type”. Their sex can still be determined, even if it’s not readily apparent.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Oh my God this is hilarious. Just caught it.
Who are these lay people?
Dude you trolling online without an advanced degree or research history. XD
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I think the meaning is clear. You seem rather upset. Are you having trouble understanding it?
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Lol. The meaning is a bit delusional. You are implying that you elevate your own academic status and understanding to something that is well outside of what you can claim. XD
usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
I’m actually thinking of people who have neither sets, working or not, but you’ve got me thinking: if a non-functional set would still count in the case of it being the only one (I.e. someone infertile but otherwise nothing out of the ordinary) I’m not sure why it wouldn’t when it’s beside a working one. If it’s binary, surely they either count or they don’t?
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
That falls into the “organized around” bit. They won’t have any other structures necessary for supporting the bit of tissue, and their body won’t be trying to create those structures. As a loose analogy, think of it like transplanting an ovary into a human male. You haven’t changed his sex, you’ve merely created a man with an ovary grafted onto him. His body is still organized around production of sperm.
In the case of someone that’s infertile, if you fixed the issue that was causing their infertility, they would produce the normal gametes that their body is organized around producing. They wouldn’t then magically start producing both gametes or gametes from the other sex.
usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
Fair enough. So somebody with no plumbing at all would just be undefined in terms of sex then?