Can you explain why defining sex as the different sized gametes (egg and sperm) is not conflating sexual dimorphism with sex, because I think it is conflating? And can you tell me why sex is binary and is not a bimodal distribution?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GenderCriticalGuys

[deleted]

all 7 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]jet199 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They are simply wrong (or indeed knowingly lying) about gametes being just one part of many factors of biological sex. This is in fact how sex is defined in every animal not just humans. It's gametes which determine sex because the whole point of sex is to produce offspring. The point of sex is not and never has been to have different body shapes or organs, the point is to reproduce so that's how it's defined.

Sexual dimorphism is actually the difference in body shape and attributes. They are the ones conflating that concept with sex. That's would be the factor which is bimodal.

Intersex conditions prove the binary they don't prove bimodal because they are not in between the sexes, they are not mixtures of the two, but are always developmental disorders of either one sex or the other.

Clearly transmen with large gametes are female. The fact a person is trying to argue otherwise show they are arguing sex as a political definition not a scientific one.

[–]SnowAssMan 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

First of all sex is a term that encompasses many different organisms.

There are organisms whose sex is binary, but are not sexually dimorphic. Wikipedia has an image of two pheasants (the colourful male & "plain" female) as an example of sexual dimorphism, but as we all know, not all species that reproduce sexually are sexually dimorphic (like rabbits). Dimorphism in humans are the physical differences that can be observed between men & women: women have breasts & men having beards for instance. Human children are no sexually dimorphic, this does not affect their sex, which is binary.

People sometimes use exceptions to the rule of dimorphism (men with breasts & women with facial hair) as "evidence" that sex is not binary. These people are confusing sex with dimorphism. medically transitioning does not affect a person's sex whatsoever. Ova remain ova & sperm remains sperm.

Gametes have nothing to do with dimorphism.

This binary vs. bimodal debate is totally irrelevant to the issue. Either way trans-womxyn's sex is unambiguously male, not even intersex & certainly not female.

It's just a way to undermine the differences between the sexes & distract from the fact that there are no significant differences between trans-womxyn & men, likewise no significant similarities between trans-womxyn & women & therefore no justification to distinguish between trans-womxyn & men, & no reason to group trans-womxyn with women.

In truth sex isn't the end of the story. The sex of a person determines their socialisation, which determines their behaviour. Trans-women's sex is male, which lead to them receiving male socialisation, which lead to their male behavioural patterns. For instance: men outnumber women in media, high positions & crime, just like how trans-womxyn outnumber trans-men in media, high positions & crime.

Trans people's behaviour is sex-congruent. Trans-womxyn are not only biologically the same as men, they are socially the same too. Attempts at superficial mimicry don't change that.

[–]yousaythosethings 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It’s not conflating sexual dimorphism and sex. It’s just that sexual dimorphism is the result of sex being binary. There aren’t intermediary gametes and there aren’t smaller large gametes that are less female that other large gametes. It’s a “one or the other” kind of thing. Just like a man isn’t less of a man because he has gynecomastia and a woman isn’t less of a woman because she’s a lesbian. All fun, enlightened things I’ve been hearing with increasing regularity from these woke “progressives.”

[–]FlippyKing 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't accept the idea that anyone is "conflating" sex and sexual dimorphism. They are related, where sex is the causal factor in the dimorphism found in species like humans that display sexual dimorphism. I think it is an act of either ignorance or deception to pretend sex and sexual dimorphism can be conflated when talking about a sexually dimorphic species. Sexual dimorphism is the term for the phenomena of readily observable differences between the two sexes of any species where the distinction between the two sexes are readily observed. Sexual dimorphism does not occur without sex.

I do not see a functional difference between Bimodal Distribution and Binary in this context, and that context is for the purposes of discussion. We are not in a math class, we are not using set theory or doing statistics, we are not expressing ideas via boolean algebra using formal logic. To say there are two human sexes sounds pretty binary to me, and that is fine because it is true. Humans reproduce sexually. Without sexual reproduction the acts we engage in that is called "having sex" would just be called "fooling around" and would be essentially a leisure activity like "wrestling" or "twister" or "hide and go see-- oh never mind you know exactly where I hid it", or it would be a means of expressing affection like hand shaking or hugs or kisses, just messier. That there are people born with something other than or beyond the standard xx or xy chromosomes does not matter at all in any of this and some (I suspect most) can reproduce and engage in exactly the same acts that would potentially lead to reproduction when the xy and xx get together and have sex.

I guess I agree that the gametes involved being large and small doesn't really matter, other than it showing how this is the dominant means of reproduction across all of complex life forms.

The question I have is: what point is being made by saying anyone is conflating sex with sexual dimorphism? Is it a "who vs whom" kind of point? Is it being pedantic for the sake of being pedantic? Is it being a grammar-nazi? Is it akin to someone saying "stop saying vagina when you mean vulva but you probably would rather use the word pussy instead of either of the 'v' words" ? So what, if someone conflates (which I don't think conflation is the right term here as I describe above) sex with sexual dimorphism when talking about a sexual dimorphic species?

You don't have to answer other people's stupid questions. You don't have to satisfy every stupid and bad argument presented by people in bad faith for their purpose of muddying the waters. Gender critical arguments as I understand them are based squarely on observable physical reality. In order to unseat this way of seeing humans and the two sexes, you have to make a compelling argument. There is no such compelling argument that is not based on ridiculous notions of either: socialization, or "innate sense of gender" which does not exist and can never be proven. Intersex conditions do not alter the simple fact that humans reproduce sexually through the intercourse of the two sexes. In the same way that spaghetti and tomato sauce is a meal created by the joining together of spaghetti and tomato sauce and this is not complicated by the thickness of the spaghetti, if is made at home using a chitarra type device, or if the sauce has oregano or parsley, onions or garlic, or anything else. You may ask "what about pesto?" and I answer, it is not spaghetti and tomato sauce, is it? Nothing can possible eliminate the physical reality of the two human sexes even if there are intersex conditions or dudes in dresses who want to use the ladies' rooms.

[–]kwallio 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I did not read your entire comment, but I'm pretty sure that OP thinks that gender dimorphism causes different gamete sizes, as in larger animals have larger gametes and are therefore female. She is pretty ignorant about biology.

[–]Skipdip 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It doesn’t really matter where we draw the lines on sex. It’s obvious reality endures regardless. There is natural variation, just as some people are born with one arm. But there are only two sexes. Even the most ambiguous intersex condition is a combination of both, and is not a “third sex”.