The model could change if a third gamete type evolved, but that’s not a caveat worth mentioning. Maybe we’d get a sperg! Or a spegg!
Stop being silly because you’re pissy about being wrong. Another quote from the same Phd Evolutionary Biology as above:
contemporary scientific debates have long moved on from questioning whether the sex binary is a fact to questions about how anisogamy evolved, why it persists, and what its evolutionary consequences are.
Anisogomy is by definition binary but we were talking about biological sexes which includes plant and fungi models of sex which are absolutely not binaries and are more complicated.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
What additional context is missing?
Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 days ago
That they are defining the model. The model is based on observations. And the model can change in the future.
That is the fundamental context being abandoned here.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 5 days ago
The model could change if a third gamete type evolved, but that’s not a caveat worth mentioning. Maybe we’d get a sperg! Or a spegg!
Stop being silly because you’re pissy about being wrong. Another quote from the same Phd Evolutionary Biology as above:
Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Anisogomy is by definition binary but we were talking about biological sexes which includes plant and fungi models of sex which are absolutely not binaries and are more complicated.