Jump to content
  • Welcome to the TransPulse Forums!

    We offer a safe, inclusive community for transgender and gender non-conforming folks, as well as their loved ones, to find support and information.  Join today!

The scientific definition of biological sex


Dana Michelle

Recommended Posts

I've seen people make claims that scientifically, transition does not actually change someone's sex, and that transgender women will always be biological males and transgender men always biological females. I think most of these people are probably assuming instead of researching the science. Does anyone know what the scientific interpretation really is? Is there even a scientifically correct answer? When a biology teacher was discussing the categorization of organisms into kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species, she said there is no right or wrong way to categorize. Could it be the same for the definition of biological sex?

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, MaryMary said:

But if you use the following language : sex = genitals and reproductive organs and gender = the social construct, psychological aspect. Then, no, transition do not change your sex. But, it can certainly have an effect on how well you sexual functions will work... lol

I am asking about the sex of the body not the gender of the mind. One thing I am wondering is if the definition of biological sex is exclusively based on genitals or if it includes secondary sex characteristics. If sex is determined by genitals and if transition does not change sex, does that mean after vaginoplasty or phalloplasty, transgender women's vaginas are still technically penises, and transgender men's penises are still technically vaginas?

Link to comment
  • Forum Moderator

I think that biologists would be the first to admit that the classification of sex is very superficial.  A field biologist studying squirrels or foxes or whatever is going to look for visible genitalia.  It is exactly the same as a doctor attending the birth of a human baby: "Congratulations, Mrs. Smith.  It's a boy!"  Same thing: it is a very superficial classification based on what they can see at a glance.

 

Anything more rigorous than that is going to be very specific.  They will say that they are studying chromosomes, or hormone levels, or social interactions.  None of which are the kind of thing that you get from a quick glance.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

In high school biology, a student was doing a presentation on Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. He said the encyclopedia said people with AIS are men because they have a Y chromosome. The teacher discussed things a bit during the presentation and did not correct the student. At another time the teacher said all fetuses start out female because they have female characteristics in the early weeks of pregnancy. However, the Y chromosome still exists at this time, so if chromosomes are the definition, doesn't that still technically make XY fetuses male, even before sexual differentiation? I've heard many, many times that fetuses start out female, leading me to believe that someone with female characteristics but a Y chromosome does not necessarily mean they are technically male.


Long ago I've also read things that made it sound like gonads were the definition of sex. This definition would imply those with AIS are technically male since they have testicles. In any case, I think people who claim that is "basic biology" that transwomen are male and transmen are female should cite scientific sources to back up their claims. I haven't been able to find scientific sources to answer the question, but Wikipedia says, "Anisogamy, or the size differences of gametes (sex cells), is the defining feature of the two sexes. By definition, males have small, mobile gametes (sperm); females have large and generally immobile gametes (ova or eggs)."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction. The rest of the section then describes ordinary dictionary definitions rather than scientific definitions.  Using gametes as the definition of sex does not explain how to categorize those who don't produce gametes.

 

Link to comment

Classification is messy and is based on groupings by majority of similar indicators, they typically do not account for all variation.  Sex is no different.  There are species that have little to no sexual dimorphism (differences between sexual groups) and the rest that do have a wide range of levels of variance between groups.  Even with a single sexually dimorphic species, there is typical a wide variety of expression.  Where most people fall down is limiting the grouping to only 2 classifications (male/female).  This is a result of limited scientific knowledge in the past and has become so entrenched in societies around the world, it's hard to get people to update their knowledge.  In species like ours, where there is a lot indicators that allow for grouping into 2 groups, this is based on average indicators based on 2 overwhelming majorities.  In reality there are likely many smaller populations that should have a classification as well, but we run into the problem of where do you draw the line at refining those populations. Do you add intersex and transgender as 2 additional classifications? Or do you further breakdown those groups and add more classifications? What about individuals that are born missing some of the key characteristics used do define any of the groups?  There are people born without gonads, a vulva, a penis, a uterus, etc.  There are people born with many different combinations of chromosomes.  This is why I prefer the sliding scales of gender or sexual attraction (not perfect as they leave out the ability to not even be on the scale), with a large majority of individuals containing most of the characteristics of male/female or hetero/homo  to develop the poles and having the degrees of variation represented in between the poles.

 

So classification of any populations is arbitrary and messy, someone(s) has to select which criteria result in the classification into one of the groups that they decided exist based on their observed data and then convince the majority of people that this is the best system.  For sex, I have seen several different models of classification employed, none are right, none are wrong, it all depends on your data set and the selected sorting criteria. Where people go wrong is in using those classifications for anything other than scientific study or medically relevant purposes.  There is no good argument for policy governing rights to be driven or guided by these classifications, sex, race, gender, etc.  The group we all belong to is homo sapien and all homo sapiens should have the same unalienable rights.

Link to comment
  • Forum Moderator

This is very good descriptive narrative on this difficult subject. You can see why we as children (without the assistance of our parents or some scholar specializing in gender and sexuality) had no chance to figure things out for ourselves. Even at my age, I’m trying to figure out exactly where I fit into this spectrum although it is clearer now than it’s ever been.

 

3 hours ago, SaraAW said:

There is no good argument for policy governing rights to be driven or guided by these classifications, sex, race, gender, etc.  The group we all belong to is homo sapien and all homo sapiens should have the same unalienable rights.

I agree. In a perfect world, you would have to hope this would be the case. For centuries, money, power, and politics have corrupted the system at its core with these ever-increasing classifications to ‘divide and conquer’ it’s citizenry. We’ve seen it used in the past as it is being used today and likely our future.

 

Susan R?

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 190 Guests (See full list)

    • MaryEllen
    • MaybeRob
    • SamC
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      80.7k
    • Total Posts
      768.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      12,025
    • Most Online
      8,356

    JamesyGreen
    Newest Member
    JamesyGreen
    Joined
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Anyatimenow
      Anyatimenow
      (23 years old)
    2. Aria00
      Aria00
    3. Ava B.
      Ava B.
      (24 years old)
    4. Claire Heshi
      Claire Heshi
    5. CrystalMatthews0426
      CrystalMatthews0426
      (41 years old)
  • Posts

    • KymmieL
      Hey, everyone. my life is going down the tubes. at least I think. So, today. A customer called about his car, I told him that the oil change was done. The parts to fix the check engine light are ordered. He can come and get it. For the weekend if he wants. Customer says I didn't want an oil change. it was check the engine light and check for an oil leak. Checking the work order says oil change. The boss wrote the vehicle up. checking with the customer on services wanted.   Being that I wrote down the appointment in the book. and clearly states oil leak. She is complaining because she can't read my small ish writing. It seems she read oil and assumed it as an oil change. It seems like she is blaming me.  She wound up going home because she was too upset. She is stressing about an eye problem she has, she has to get eye surgery it seems she has a tear in her eye.    I feel that I am short for this job. because of the BS they are blaming me on. Plus I am still upset about the trust issue. If either one of the bosses start their Shite tomorrow. I am walking out.    
    • Davie
    • Abigail Genevieve
      "I love you so much,"  Lois said.  They met in the driveway. "I could not live without you." "Neither could I." "What are we going to do?" "Find another counselor?" "No. I think we need to solve this ourselves." "Do you think we can?" "I don't know.  But what I know is that I don't want to go through that again.  I think we have to hope we can find a solution." "Otherwise, despair." "Yeah.   Truce?" "Okay,  truce." And they hugged.   "When we know what we want we can figure out how to get there."   That began six years of angry battles, with Odie insisted he could dress as he pleased and Lois insisting it did not please her at all.  He told her she was not going to control him and she replied that she still had rights as a wife to a husband. Neither was willing to give in, neither was willing to quit, and their heated arguments ended in hugs and more.   They went to a Crossdressers' Club, where they hoped to meet other couples with the same problems, the same conflicts, and the same answers, if anyone had any.  It took them four tries before they settled on a group that they were both willing to participate in.  This was four couples their own age, each with a cross dressing husband and a wife who was dealing with it.  They met monthly.  It was led by a 'mediator' who wanted people to express how they felt about the situation.  Odie and Lois, as newcomers, got the floor, and the meeting was finally dismissed at 1:30 in the morning - it was supposed to be over at 10 - and everyone knew how they felt about the situation.   There was silence in the car on the way home.   "We aren't the only ones dealing with this." Odie finally said.   "Who would have thought that?  You are right."   "Somebody out there has a solution." "I hope you are right."   "I hope in hope, not in despair."   "That's my Odie."    
    • Abigail Genevieve
      The counseling session was heated, if you could call it a counseling session.  Sometimes Lois felt he was on Odie's side, and sometimes on hers.  When he was on her side, Odie got defensive. She found herself being defensive when it seemed they were ganging up on each other.   "This is not working," Lois said angrily, and walked out.  "Never again. I want my husband back. Dr. Smith you are complicit in this."   "What?" said Odie.   The counselor looked at him.  "You will have to learn some listening skills."   "That is it? Listening skills?  You just destroyed my marriage, and you told me I need to learn listening skills?"   Dr. Smith said calmly,"I think you both need to cool off."   Odie looked at him and walked out, saying "And you call yourself a counselor."   "Wait a minute."   "No."
    • Ashley0616
      Just a comfortable gray sweater dress and some sneakers. Nothing special today. 
    • VickySGV
      I do still carry a Swiss Army knife along with my car keys.  
    • Timi
      Jeans and a white sweater. And cute white sneakers. Delivering balloons to a bunch of restaurants supporting our LGBT Community Center fundraiser today!
    • April Marie
      Congratulations to you!!!This is so wonderful!!
    • missyjo
      I've no desire to present androgynous..nothing wrong with it but I am a girl n wish to present as a girl. shrugs, if androgynous works fir others good. always happy someone finds a solution or happiness    today black jeans  black wedges..purple camisole under white n black polka dot blouse half open   soft smile to all 
    • MaeBe
      I have read some of it, mostly in areas specifically targeted at the LGBTQ+ peoples.   You also have to take into account what and who is behind the words, not just the words themselves. Together that creates context, right? Let's take some examples, under the Department of Health & Human Services section:   "Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of “gender identity” and bases a person’s worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of “equity,” threatens American’s fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike."   or   "Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families."   From a wording perspective, who doesn't want to protect the health and well-being of Americans or think that families aren't good for America? But let's take a look at the author, Roger Severino. He's well-quoted to be against LGBTQ+ anything, has standard christian nationalist views, supports conversion therapy, etc.   So when he uses words like "threatens the health and well-being of children and adults alike" it's not about actual health, it's about enforcing cis-gendered ideology because he (and the rest of the Heritage Foundation) believe LGBTQ+ people and communities are harmful. Or when he invokes the family through the lens of, let's just say dog whistles including the "penalization of marriage" (how and where?!), he idealizes families involving marriage of a "biological male to a biological female" and associates LGBTQ+ family equity as something unhealthy.   Who are the radical actors? Who is telling people to be trans, gay, or queer in general? No one. The idea that there can be any sort of equity between LGBTQ+ people and "normal" cis people is abhorrent to the author, so the loaded language of radical/destructive/guise/threaten are used. Families that he believes are "good" are stable/well-ordered/healthy, specifically married/nuclear ones.   Start looking into intersectionality of oppression of non-privileged groups and how that affects the concept of the family and you will understand that these platitudes are thinly veiled wrappers for christian nationalist ideology.   What's wrong with equity for queer families, to allow them full rights as parents, who are bringing up smart and able children? Or single mothers who are working three jobs to get food on plates?
    • Ashley0616
      Well yesterday didn't work like I wanted to. I met a guy and started talking and he was wanting to be in a relationship. I asked my kids on how they thought of me dating a man and they said gross and said no. I guess it's time to look for women. I think that is going to be harder. Oh well I guess.  
    • Ashley0616
      I don't have anything in my dress pocket
    • Carolyn Marie
      This topic reminds me of the lyrics to the Beatles song, "A Little Help From My Friends."   "What do you see when you turn out the lights?"   "I can't tell you but I know it's mine."   Carolyn Marie
    • Abigail Genevieve
      @Ivy have you read the actual document?   Has anyone else out there read it?
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I am reading the Project 2025 document https://www.project2025.org/policy/   This will take some time.  I read the forward and I want to read it again later.   I read some criticism of it outside here and I will be looking for it in the light of what has been posted here and there.  Some of the criticism is bosh.   @MaeBe have you read the actual document?
  • Upcoming Events

Contact TransPulse

TransPulse can be contacted in the following ways:

Email: Click Here.

To report an error on this page.

Legal

Your use of this site is subject to the following rules and policies, whether you have read them or not.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
DMCA Policy
Community Rules

Hosting

Upstream hosting for TransPulse provided by QnEZ.

Sponsorship

Special consideration for TransPulse is kindly provided by The Breast Form Store.
×
×
  • Create New...