I always find it a delicious irony when a mansplaining Dunning-Kruger syndrome gamma-type like you encounters someone like me who is actually more of an expert in the scientific field you claim to be involved in. I am doubting, actually, that you are involved in the field of genetics because you clearly don't understand the subject. It's essentially something called 'biochemistry'. There is a difference between a 'gene' and 'gene expression', which is called 'epigenetics'. Epigenetics requires 'triggers' which is where chemistry comes into it. Triggers can include, for example, hormones, which are just chemical catalysts. Brain development (let's call it 'neuroscience') proceeds epigenetically, not 'socially constructed'.
You also seem to be ignoring the rare cases when gene expression 'misfires' or goes wrong, which results in developmental disorders, of which 'gender incongruence' (i.e. trans) is one of many. Specifically in the case of gender incongruence the misfiring in question relates to the brain, not the body.
So this is where 'neuroscience' comes into it - clearly another branch of science of which you are woefully ignorant.
Now, to provide you with definitive proof that you are objectively wrong I could simply point you towards umpteen brain imaging studies showing 1/ the brains of male and female humans are differently configured (and act differently) and 2/ the brains of trans people more closely match their gender identity, which is at odds with their physical sex characteristics. I doubt you'd either understand or acknowledge these scientific research papers, however.
This is what's known in science as 'objective evidence'. I would've thought that even a materialist ('bioessentialist' is the word) like yourself might at least understand the concept of 'objective, demonstrable evidence', but clearly not. Or are you just wilfully ignorant in order to preserve your obvious prejudice?
Either way, I would strongly suggest that if you really are employed in the field of genetics then you consider a change of career, because people like you, with a low level capacity for understanding, do an immense amount of damage to the study of science. And the teaching of science for that matter. Like I said, I am something of an expert in these areas, which is why it is a delicious irony to encounter an ignorant mansplainer and make him look like a total twat in front of everyone reading this!
So yeah, from now on, once you've wiped the egg off your face, please do reconsider your chosen profession before you do any more damage.
Holy frijoles, you just did multiple paragraphs of iamverysmart without citing a SINGLE actual case of exception to the following:
*Y chromsome = male = cannot gestate ..no exceptions.*
Even the only person with a female body and XY chromosomes (a person with COMPLETE Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) cannot gestate. And those people are not the ones "trans"ing to "woman", as they have been raised as girls to begin with. They have nothing to do with dudes in dresses demanding access to women's spaces (in biology, we call this "sexual mimicry"..look it up).
Intersex people are tired of being used to shoehorn this bullshit. Have some respect for them; they already have enough to deal with in society as it is.
Actually a more succinct way of formulating the irony is thus: your mention of intersex is ironic because intersex proves that gender identity is separate and unaffected by the status of the genitalia (i.e. the chromosomes). In other words, it’s proof of the reality of gender incongruence as a non-psychological condition. The fact that you don’t seem to understand this very basic, simple fact pretty much tells me that you really don’t know anything about genetics. In which case, shut up.
Oh well. Quite clearly no amount of objective scientific fact is going to teach you anything, if you are not open to learning. Ironically this means you're not a scientist, because the scientific method is in part about examining hypotheses against objective evidence. If the evidence contradicts a hypothesis or opinion, as in your case, a proper, mature scientist changes their mind. You are clearly not capable of that.
Another irony - which also tells me you know nothing about genetics and must've been being somewhat economical with the truth when you said genetics was your subject - is your mention of the phenomenon of intersex, which anyone who knows their stuff will know can be caused by faulty or, indeed, extra chromosomes. It's possible after all, albeit rarely, for people to have, say, XXXY. Their gender identity only becomes apparent once they reach the age of about 7 or so, according to brain development. That sort of person doesn't fit into your paradigm so there's no point me trying to educate you about it.
Whilst Intersex is a disorder of physiological genitalia development, perhaps you have failed to notice how that has no bearing on the gender identity (i.e. the brain's gender configuration) of that individual? 'Gender incongruence' is a disorder of brain development, and completely unaffected by the physiological sex characteristics (what you call 'chromosomes'). The genome is a very long nucleotide. How the genes relating to the reproductive organs develop epigenetically has no effect whatsoever on how the genes for, say, the amygdala develops epigenetically. This is how you can end up with 'gender incongruence' in which one of those develops 'normally' but the other doesn't. Of course, epigenetic variations in development are what give rise to something called 'evolution'. Have you heard of evolution, by the way, or are you one of these pseudo-Christian/evangelist idiots?
So all in all, you have zero understanding of the subjects of biology, chemistry, biochemistry, psychology, genetics, epigenetics, neuroscience, or, well, I'm guessing any scientific subject relating to the human organism. And given how sadly closed-minded you are, I will repeat what I suggested in my previous reply, which is that you, and people like you, should be kept well away from any social or especially medical decision-making relating to these sorts of scientific subjects. Because your ignorance isn't really a joke. It's actually seriously dangerous. It has a real world damaging effect on people's lives. But I'm guessing your prejudice and ignorant bigotry means you don't actually give a shit about other people. You may self-deceive yourself into thinking you care, but the truth is, you don't. Because empathy is an alien concept for you. Whether that's due to your own social conditioning, or some epigenetic brain-developmental disorder, is not a question I can answer without doing a full range of medical and anamnestic tests. So, sorry, but I can't help you.
Lol. I’m beginning to think you’re a little obsessed with sex. Which it telling.
Anyhow, it’s clear there’s no point in my wasting any more of my time trying to educate you or stop you being a bigot. It’s not going to work. So that’s enough.
We didn't read that, but what we can tell you is that y chromosome means male and that there are no exceptions to that. No one with a Y chromosome has ever gestate a fetus. It is a hard line.
Ok, I'll try one last time (because i have a bit of time before I go off to bed). I guess what I'm really objecting to here is your definition of a human being, male or female, as a fucking baby machine.
Ironically, if you are talking of the human body as a purely mechanistic, materialist organism then sure, male and female is determined by chromosomes like you say. That's somewhat obvious.
However, human beings have minds too. Without delving too deeply into philosophy, one could say there is a male and female essence. Before you say this is just mind-body duality I will remind you of what I said about neuroscience providing definitive proof that you can have - rarely (1 in 10,000 or so) - a male essence/mind in a female body, and a female mind/essence in a male body. This is not open to dispute. It's an epigenetic developmental disorder, not a psychological delusion/condition.
So maybe the question is 'how do you define yourself' - do you define yourself on purely mechanistic terms by what's between your legs, or do you think of yourself as a 'perception', as a 'mind'. What is your 'identity'? Are you just a cock with a body? Isn't that a bit insulting?
So now imagine what it must feel like for a feminine mind or essence to find itself trapped in a male body. And vice versa. What I would seriously like you to do, please, is imagine how you would feel if you woke up tomorrow morning in the body of an ugly woman. And know it's permanent, by the way, not some temporary body swap comedy. I mean sure, if you're a bloke then the first thing you'd do is probably rub one off in the shower, but as the days and months pass, and you insist to everyone you're actually a bloke, but get continually faced with bigotry and disbelief, then I would imagine you might develop some sympathy and empathy for 'trans people'. Because that's exactly how they feel.
'Trans women' are absolutely not 'men who delusionally think they're women'. They *are* women - in terms of their mind/essence - who are unfortunately for their self-awareness/identity, really are 'trapped in a male body'. They know they can't change that. They can do some alterations to their body to make it look a bit more feminine, which might alleviate some of their dysphoric symptoms, but they know they can't change sex. Same principle other way round for 'trans men'.
Once you understand the mind-body duality, which is not just an abstract philosophical idea, but a neuroscientific phenomenon, then I would hope you may just be able to develop some sympathy and empathy. If you can't, then like I said, I am so sorry but I really can't help you to be a better human being.
What I’m saying is you seem to think that reproduction is the predominant, defining feature of what it means to be female. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but we do have brains too, you know?
I always find it a delicious irony when a mansplaining Dunning-Kruger syndrome gamma-type like you encounters someone like me who is actually more of an expert in the scientific field you claim to be involved in. I am doubting, actually, that you are involved in the field of genetics because you clearly don't understand the subject. It's essentially something called 'biochemistry'. There is a difference between a 'gene' and 'gene expression', which is called 'epigenetics'. Epigenetics requires 'triggers' which is where chemistry comes into it. Triggers can include, for example, hormones, which are just chemical catalysts. Brain development (let's call it 'neuroscience') proceeds epigenetically, not 'socially constructed'.
You also seem to be ignoring the rare cases when gene expression 'misfires' or goes wrong, which results in developmental disorders, of which 'gender incongruence' (i.e. trans) is one of many. Specifically in the case of gender incongruence the misfiring in question relates to the brain, not the body.
So this is where 'neuroscience' comes into it - clearly another branch of science of which you are woefully ignorant.
Now, to provide you with definitive proof that you are objectively wrong I could simply point you towards umpteen brain imaging studies showing 1/ the brains of male and female humans are differently configured (and act differently) and 2/ the brains of trans people more closely match their gender identity, which is at odds with their physical sex characteristics. I doubt you'd either understand or acknowledge these scientific research papers, however.
This is what's known in science as 'objective evidence'. I would've thought that even a materialist ('bioessentialist' is the word) like yourself might at least understand the concept of 'objective, demonstrable evidence', but clearly not. Or are you just wilfully ignorant in order to preserve your obvious prejudice?
Either way, I would strongly suggest that if you really are employed in the field of genetics then you consider a change of career, because people like you, with a low level capacity for understanding, do an immense amount of damage to the study of science. And the teaching of science for that matter. Like I said, I am something of an expert in these areas, which is why it is a delicious irony to encounter an ignorant mansplainer and make him look like a total twat in front of everyone reading this!
So yeah, from now on, once you've wiped the egg off your face, please do reconsider your chosen profession before you do any more damage.
Holy frijoles, you just did multiple paragraphs of iamverysmart without citing a SINGLE actual case of exception to the following:
*Y chromsome = male = cannot gestate ..no exceptions.*
Even the only person with a female body and XY chromosomes (a person with COMPLETE Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) cannot gestate. And those people are not the ones "trans"ing to "woman", as they have been raised as girls to begin with. They have nothing to do with dudes in dresses demanding access to women's spaces (in biology, we call this "sexual mimicry"..look it up).
Intersex people are tired of being used to shoehorn this bullshit. Have some respect for them; they already have enough to deal with in society as it is.
Actually a more succinct way of formulating the irony is thus: your mention of intersex is ironic because intersex proves that gender identity is separate and unaffected by the status of the genitalia (i.e. the chromosomes). In other words, it’s proof of the reality of gender incongruence as a non-psychological condition. The fact that you don’t seem to understand this very basic, simple fact pretty much tells me that you really don’t know anything about genetics. In which case, shut up.
No, intersex does not prove anything of the sort.
Y chromosome means you cannot gestate. That is the hard line. No exceptions.
Dudes in dresses don't get access to women's spaces. Deal.
Oh well. Quite clearly no amount of objective scientific fact is going to teach you anything, if you are not open to learning. Ironically this means you're not a scientist, because the scientific method is in part about examining hypotheses against objective evidence. If the evidence contradicts a hypothesis or opinion, as in your case, a proper, mature scientist changes their mind. You are clearly not capable of that.
Another irony - which also tells me you know nothing about genetics and must've been being somewhat economical with the truth when you said genetics was your subject - is your mention of the phenomenon of intersex, which anyone who knows their stuff will know can be caused by faulty or, indeed, extra chromosomes. It's possible after all, albeit rarely, for people to have, say, XXXY. Their gender identity only becomes apparent once they reach the age of about 7 or so, according to brain development. That sort of person doesn't fit into your paradigm so there's no point me trying to educate you about it.
Whilst Intersex is a disorder of physiological genitalia development, perhaps you have failed to notice how that has no bearing on the gender identity (i.e. the brain's gender configuration) of that individual? 'Gender incongruence' is a disorder of brain development, and completely unaffected by the physiological sex characteristics (what you call 'chromosomes'). The genome is a very long nucleotide. How the genes relating to the reproductive organs develop epigenetically has no effect whatsoever on how the genes for, say, the amygdala develops epigenetically. This is how you can end up with 'gender incongruence' in which one of those develops 'normally' but the other doesn't. Of course, epigenetic variations in development are what give rise to something called 'evolution'. Have you heard of evolution, by the way, or are you one of these pseudo-Christian/evangelist idiots?
So all in all, you have zero understanding of the subjects of biology, chemistry, biochemistry, psychology, genetics, epigenetics, neuroscience, or, well, I'm guessing any scientific subject relating to the human organism. And given how sadly closed-minded you are, I will repeat what I suggested in my previous reply, which is that you, and people like you, should be kept well away from any social or especially medical decision-making relating to these sorts of scientific subjects. Because your ignorance isn't really a joke. It's actually seriously dangerous. It has a real world damaging effect on people's lives. But I'm guessing your prejudice and ignorant bigotry means you don't actually give a shit about other people. You may self-deceive yourself into thinking you care, but the truth is, you don't. Because empathy is an alien concept for you. Whether that's due to your own social conditioning, or some epigenetic brain-developmental disorder, is not a question I can answer without doing a full range of medical and anamnestic tests. So, sorry, but I can't help you.
You have no scientific understanding. Sorry. You will have to study. If you ever do, you will have the chance to learn that y chromosome means male.
A makeup of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXY.. is still male. Could never gestate.
Males are the group that cannot gestate. That is the hard line. There are no exceptions.
A makeup of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXY.. is still male. Could never gestate.
Lol. I’m beginning to think you’re a little obsessed with sex. Which it telling.
Anyhow, it’s clear there’s no point in my wasting any more of my time trying to educate you or stop you being a bigot. It’s not going to work. So that’s enough.
We didn't read that, but what we can tell you is that y chromosome means male and that there are no exceptions to that. No one with a Y chromosome has ever gestate a fetus. It is a hard line.
If you don’t bother reading it, and you actually say that here in a comment then you are only making yourself look bad in front of everyone.
You should get a job in cinema - they are in need of excellent projectionists.
Ok, I'll try one last time (because i have a bit of time before I go off to bed). I guess what I'm really objecting to here is your definition of a human being, male or female, as a fucking baby machine.
Ironically, if you are talking of the human body as a purely mechanistic, materialist organism then sure, male and female is determined by chromosomes like you say. That's somewhat obvious.
However, human beings have minds too. Without delving too deeply into philosophy, one could say there is a male and female essence. Before you say this is just mind-body duality I will remind you of what I said about neuroscience providing definitive proof that you can have - rarely (1 in 10,000 or so) - a male essence/mind in a female body, and a female mind/essence in a male body. This is not open to dispute. It's an epigenetic developmental disorder, not a psychological delusion/condition.
So maybe the question is 'how do you define yourself' - do you define yourself on purely mechanistic terms by what's between your legs, or do you think of yourself as a 'perception', as a 'mind'. What is your 'identity'? Are you just a cock with a body? Isn't that a bit insulting?
So now imagine what it must feel like for a feminine mind or essence to find itself trapped in a male body. And vice versa. What I would seriously like you to do, please, is imagine how you would feel if you woke up tomorrow morning in the body of an ugly woman. And know it's permanent, by the way, not some temporary body swap comedy. I mean sure, if you're a bloke then the first thing you'd do is probably rub one off in the shower, but as the days and months pass, and you insist to everyone you're actually a bloke, but get continually faced with bigotry and disbelief, then I would imagine you might develop some sympathy and empathy for 'trans people'. Because that's exactly how they feel.
'Trans women' are absolutely not 'men who delusionally think they're women'. They *are* women - in terms of their mind/essence - who are unfortunately for their self-awareness/identity, really are 'trapped in a male body'. They know they can't change that. They can do some alterations to their body to make it look a bit more feminine, which might alleviate some of their dysphoric symptoms, but they know they can't change sex. Same principle other way round for 'trans men'.
Once you understand the mind-body duality, which is not just an abstract philosophical idea, but a neuroscientific phenomenon, then I would hope you may just be able to develop some sympathy and empathy. If you can't, then like I said, I am so sorry but I really can't help you to be a better human being.
What I’m saying is you seem to think that reproduction is the predominant, defining feature of what it means to be female. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but we do have brains too, you know?