Gender is binary

Gender is sex, gender being separate from sex came from a psychologist who diddled little boys and forced one to crossdress and called his experiment a success, then the boy who was forced to crossdressed all his life realized he was in fact a boy and went back to live as a boy disproving the theory that gender is separate from sex. Then he killed himself because of the trauma, as did the other boy.

Just because there are genetic mistakes does not make them legitimate genders. That's like saying a bridge that can't bear more than its own weight is as food a bridge as a functioning one just because it exists. Sure there are more variations than XX and XY but they are mistakes, mostly not functioning.

Two bits of information to define gender should be sufficient.

Four genders then?

Man, Woman, Man with lady bits, woman with man bits. I can't think of any more than this.

> Gender is sex
one depends on your chromosomes, other depends on your preferences. get biology 101 retard

this thread is not science and belongs to

Like I said, there are many gender disorders that blur the line:
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
> Has a Y chromosome
> testees never leave the body
> develops both a vagina and breasts

"Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955."

And here is the finest example of his work.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

Veeky Forums is not for asking questions or debating things that have already been proven.

At this point it's turned into a "tell me again" and a "no ur a faggot lololololol" cesspool.

Some guy did something fucked up, therefore my poisoning the well shit is totally acceptable derp.

I mean, stupid Americans nuked Japan, therefore all radiation is used for murder, OBVIOUSLY.

This reminds me of how communists try to disassociate themselves from failed/failing communist countries.

Maybe not binary, but it certainly doesn't have to do with personality.

He said sex not sexual preference you mongoloid.

What in the flying fuck are you talking about.

in response to
>gender is sex

he disagreed, claiming that sex is a biological term and gender a psychological one, Christ, read and maybe even think before posting.

> I can't read

>Is this scientifically correct?

"Scientifically correct" doesnt' mean a damn thing.

>is this correct?

Depends. What do you mean, "correct"?

It is certainly correct if you mean that society expects exactly two genders.

It is certainly incorrect if you mean that everybody disagrees that they fit into two standard genders.

>Sex is binary.

Even sex is kind of binary~ instead of just being Binary. You have all of Pic Related, and on top of that you have e.g. things like Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.

Let me help you LGBTASEFRSDF retard.

Male-Fertilizer
Female-Produces the eggs to be fertilized

>Just because there are genetic mistakes does not make them legitimate genders

Alright so you're conceding that there exist three genders, then? Male, Female and Illegitimate?

Tag yourself I'm etc...

>Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between and from masculinity and femininity, as discerned in reference to genetic and cultural programming

>Gender identity is one's personal experience of one's own gender

And I trust that you all know what biological sex is.

Gender as used in these discussions is shorthand for "gender identity" which is and has always been a seperate concept from biological sex

Disorders don't define what sex is. You're trying way too hard. You're not gonna be able to fool anyone who had highschool biology and learned what chromosomes are.

Sexual identity and subsequent behaviour is not governed by sex.

We have evidence that sexual behaviour can clash with biological sex, depending on genetic make up.

Take this garbage off of the science board

Sex is binary = order

Sex ins't binary = disorder

Define sex strictly then

penis and vagina are binary, they arousal is not, cut your cock for better precision, it grows back

>We have evidence that sexual behaviour can clash with biological sex, depending on genetic make up.
If you brain doesnt match your biological sex then it means you are crazy user end of story.

Sex is defined by your chromosomes. It either gives you balls to produce sperm or it gives you ovaries to process that sperm.
Gender is your preference in what you like and it has much relevance to the discussion as someones preference in icecream flavors.

I said strict definition, not the general quality the definition is based on

Well, that's why people are given new bodies via hormone therapy and surgery.

define strict definition

Still crazy.

BY YOUR CHROMOSOMES
LITERALLY XX OR XY

>muh genetic disorder XXX XXY
DISORDER

Crazy just means a deviation from the norm.

Who cares?

>>muh genetic disorder XXX XXY
So what sex are they?

Why is this hard to understand for people that they still ask what sex is or how its defined ? Are chromosomes really that hard of a concept to comprehend ?

Mutants.

What sex are they?

For the 500th time, they are not even defined because they are not the norm. But you can call them mutants if you like.

I mean obviously im baiting you, there are 2 different simple solutions to this and either would be fine

Pretty weak definition if its incapable of dealing with outsiders

They are mutated outside the norm, which makes them mutants. At this point I'm not even sure you're familiar with any scientific terminology going on in this thread.

What does "the norm" have to do with classifications? If your system of classification doesnt include all members of the group you are trying to classify then your system needs to be modified

> I don't know what norm means
k

You don't add thousands of disfunctional disorders that are not norm to the list of norms you retard.

We aren't discussing norms. We are discussing scientific classifications. You say sex/gender is binary. So classify the sex of XXY and XXX. There are only two options according to you.

Of course not. You add one category for all the weird shit, which is what is generally done. In this case its called intersex. Personally however, I like to keep the binary intact since there is a very clear genetic dimorphism. So in the definition I prefer, Male is defined in humans by the presence of at least one activate SRY gene, and female as the lack thereof

Why would I bother classifying disorders if they aren't getting into the list ?

Here we have a reasonable answer that not "muh norms" but maintains his stance. Even includes words like "preference" as it acknowledges that we do not have absolutes for definitions yet.

0/10

Because the topic at hand is
>is gender being binary scientifically correct

There are clearly irregularities to the average so do we create a separate classification for them? Why? Is it more appropriate to simply add more terms to gender in order to encompass these irregularities under one umbrella? If you want to discuss this scientifically you need to give reasons beyond an appeal to emotion for the decisions to separate or group things.

The man made his point and reasoned it. He had no scientific facts to back it up, acknowledged that, but maintained his stance. There is not a damn thing wrong with what he said.

>is gender being binary scientifically correct
oooh you're still there. I didn't know you were lacking the highschool level biology education. Even one youtube video on XX and XY would tell you how it's binary though. As for disorders, they are called disorders for a reason, and trying to label them with extra names won't magically make them a part of the functioning genetic norm.

I'm quite aware that they are binary chromosomally. XY, XXY, XYY are all male. Anything lacking a Y is female. Just waiting on the other user to at least acknowledge that instead of getting his panties in a twist over it.

Because a system of classification should account for every entity its trying to classify

>I'm quite aware that they are binary chromosomally
If you were, you wouldn't ask such biology-illiterate questions like that.

I'm still confused as to exactly what category(s) you apply to all the outliers

Friend, the entire point I'm arguing is solely to get at least a quasi reasonable response that is more than "it's binary because I say so and anything else is crazy people" and "terminology and understanding of genetics/human behavior/sexuality/social roles were set in stone prior to 1955 and cannot change".

If people want to come talk about a subject matter that is still highly debated biologically, medically, and socially on Veeky Forums they at least need to step it up a bit beyond /pol/-tier info graph material.

Until then I will poke around with questions that have simple answers until I'm sure the ones arguing are at least have as knowledgeable as they came to be in the above fields.

Why are we even arguing about biological sex? Its a pretty much settled topic, all the issues are around gender identity

They are arguing on what norms are not classifications. It's another daily bait thread. Tomorrow it will be
>Science proves whites are superior thread #21365
And the day after we will be back to gender/sex hubbaloo. The argument won't change even if you had verifiable proof in opposition of the OP's stance as it will quickly be discarded because a researcher involved was Jewish.

Its depressing how not wrong you are

Gross false equiv. + poisoning the well.

Reasonable:

Because the argument is that biological sex and gender identity are the same thing. It is important to know whether or not they classify variations differently them differently and apparently according to: XYY, XXY aren't even male, they are mutants and outside of the norm.

I believe this line of inquiry was very important to assess the base.

actually, medical science recognises three sexual variations... gender identity is another question belonging to psicology, sociology or psichiatry, depending on how do you front it

>Because the argument is that biological sex and gender identity are the same thing
Well this is demonstrably untrue, since transgender people exist

>XYY, XXY aren't even male
Also untrue, maleness is determined by the activation of the SRY gene on the y chromosome, so long as you have at least one and the gene gets activated you can be considered male

>they are mutants
Literally everyone is a mutant, this is a worthless label

>and outside of the norm
So? Your classification is weak if it only classifies common occurences

Your whole opinion is unscientific, clearly emotionally biased and of no value

and that is alll alinged by siemens and microsoft and apple pcs to population reduction

some call it hermafroditsm, but this term is incorrect as they lack reproduction capability... a more correct term to refer this people is intersex

uhm, what?

I did not read this, i retract but still most of the intersex people cannot reproduce.

0/10

Great response, well reasoned points

But it's pointless, it's obviously related to genitalia and such. Gender was just a word that meant the same thing as sex without also meaning bumping genits, that doesn't mean it was inappropriately used as a euphemism for sex, that's like saying that poop must have a completely different denotation than shit. It doesn't, one just isn't considered offensive. The idea pushing that we should for whatever reason encourage everyone who doesn't fit into the stereotype of their sex and say "well must just not be that sex" is retarded.

Male, Female or defective.

Well then he didn't read his post, gender Isn't and never has been your "preferred" sex. It isn't psychological, the only thing pertaining to personality is gender roles, which are stereotypes, not defenitions of the genders. His point was that the guy who tried to distinguish them was a shitter.

Why would I assume you literally just threw away everything the other poster said and re claimed the opposite?

>connotation = denotation
You're a real faggot ya know that

>defective
The term is intersex because its not pointlessly offensive

>gender Isn't and never has been your "preferred" sex
True, but "gender identity" does mean something like that, and whenever anyone is talking about sex and gender as different things they are referring to biological sex and gender identity

It would be racist to say "I am born Caucasian, but I steal bikes and eat kfc, I have always associates these with black people, therefore I must be a black person." How is not sexist to say " I was born a male, but I'm very passive and kind, which I have always associates with the female, therefore I must be female"?

/thread

But gender identity is bullshit, "identifying" as something you aren't is just flat out being wrong. Although I guess I really shouldn't try at this point, since pretending you're a squirrel is a perfectly legitimate thing to these people. Really the whole argument is about the definition of the word "gender", and in my opinion to say that it's whatever is associated with a certain sex is pointless, you could easily describe your personality without it.

>But gender identity is bullshit
I literally dont care that the concept of gender identity triggers you. Whether you like it or not though, the machinery that determines your biological sex and the machinery the controls your mental image of yourself are not the same thing, and they dont always agree

This post is explains everything. Gender and sex don't mean different things. Gender is just easier to say to your kids because you don't want them saying it out loud and making you look bad. There's no reason they need different definitions and the proposed other definition is retarded.

gender is not a subject of science and it is bullshit

Then you just have a mental disorder. If that's legitimate than so are the fucking dragon kin autists who plague the Internet. Is species identity a legitimate thing now?

MOOOOOOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDSS
/lgbt/ is leaking again !!

Of course its a mental disorder, what the hell else would it be?

OK, you have to take a look at the brain, and what it means to have a gender, or any other form of personality trait.

But first, let's take a look at Drosophila (fruit fly), perhaps the most experimented on organism in the world.

Researchers have been able to effectively change the gendered behaviour of the fruit fly, by targeting a specific gene.

They discovered that switching a certain gene on or off actually changed the sexual behaviour of the fly.

Essentially they were able to induce male specific behaviour in females, such as chasing other females, tapping their abdomens and performing wing-beating love serenades.

This indicates that genetic infrastructure pertinent to the behaviour of both sexes is present in every brain, regardless of actual sex.

One could quite easily extrapolate that in an animal which experiences an enhanced sense of awareness, such as humans, that self- perception of one’s sex is likely to be determined by genetic infrastructure pertinent to sexual behaviour.

Therefore, the notion that some individuals are likely to develop self-perceived sexual identity, or gender, that it out of alignment with their actual sex, is not only plausible, but given a large enough sample size, it is likely to be significantly prevalent.

sooo gender is dependant on binary factors ? they're not gonna be happy to hear that.

This.

news.stanford.edu/news/2005/july13/flygene-071305.html

Gender behavior in this particular fly seems to be regulated by a specific binary gene switch yes