Yeah, there's no hiding from that hypocrisy.

Both are real and attested cross-culturally and at many historical periods, and both throw a simplistic binary view of gender into question. (And here, on a simplistic meme template for your enjoyment.)

Thank you

Indeed

I never said they weren't real, I said they are not analogous.

Intersex is biology based and is according to the Mayo Clinic, "a group of conditions in which there is a discrepancy between the external genitals and the internal genitals (the testes and ovaries) caused by a mutation of the chromosomes."

Transgenderism or Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), a manual published by the American Psychiatric Association to diagnose mental conditions.

The mods can delete this post as they did my other post, but it doesn't change the fact that one is a biological condition and the other is a mental condition. Fact don't care about your feelings.

Considering how strongly rooted the condition of transgenderism is in the people who experience it, it might be sensible to be open to the idea that it is also a biological condition. The brain and its chemistry are complicated biological things, not opposed to the body but part of it and interacting with it.

Based on research I have just recently been exposed to, I agree, transgenderism may have a biological aspect and may not be just psychological, but I am not a biologist or psychologist.

However, there doesn't appear conclusive research showing a direct correlation between a biological condition and transgenderism. I believe the consensus among scientists is still that transgenderism is primarily a psychological condition.

Humans are a very complex organism and science still has a lot to discover.

The video that Cerebrophage just posted a link to cites a demonstrable physical difference in brain anatomy between men (whether they are trans men or men born with testes) and women (trans or born with ovaries). And the last 2-3 minutes of the video is the bibliography, so you can go and read the original studies.

Already watched it, which is why my opinion has changed that there might be a link between biology and transgenderism.

However, the citations in the video I have reviewed so far support that there are biological difference between male and female, and that there are many variations and anomalies that effect sexuality, but so far it does not show a biological link causing transgenderism.

Read my reply to Cerebrophage.

The brain structure stuff is (neuro)biology.

They are absolutely analogous. 100%.

Facts dont care about what you want to be facts.

Yeah, this kinda shuts down your argument as a biologist explains the false XY chromosome dilemma.

If you are in such an appeal to science and authority, then this guy should be of complete interest and in line with your thinking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szf4hzQ5ztg

I just watched the video you referenced and all I can say is THANK YOU, THANK YOU. It was extremely informative and thought provoking.

While I am not a biologist and can not argue his data, this video brought up points that I had never considered. I don't agree with all his conclusions as I find some to be a leap of logic, but that could be due more to the limitations of video and time constraints. I also don't think comparing humans to other animals is that relevant as each species evolved differently to handle different challenges.

The major problem I have the presentation is that his whole premise is that there are exceptions so therefore there are no rules. I find this rather simplistic.

That would be like saying that because somebody is born with 4 legs then humans are quadrupeds. An exception, but not the rule.

I have no doubt that there are hundreds of variations that many millions of us collectively carry, but the question is if any of those individual variations are consequential. If there is a variation that would blur the lines between male and female that, say, 15% of males and/or females carried then we'd be on a path to saying biological sex is not a dichotomy and is non-binary.

Similarly, if there are several variations and less than 1% of males and/or females carry any one of them then no. Those variations do not define our sex. They are inconsequential exceptions. I really don't know which is correct, but it is something to think about.

However, I now question if basing the sex of a person only on an XX or XY chromosome pair is sufficient to determine sex, or may there be other factors that might need to be considered. I am going to leave that up to the scientists. In the meantime, I will have to stay with the consensus that X and Y chromosomes play the major role in determining sex until the consensus changes.

In any case, this is a video well worth watching and again thank you for bringing it to my attention.

So after watching that video, tell me again, how while the vaccine kills actually less than 1% of those who take it is considered "deadly" while 2% of humans born in USA are born intersex (which is a large umbrella term for "other") is not valid. There is an "other" option for human sexes. It's very rare, but it exists. Period.

You may want to correct your statistic. According to WebMD about 1 in 1000 people are born intersex. This means that the number of people born intersex is .1% not 2%

https://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20190503/study-about-1-in-1000-babies-born-intersex

Both web MD and my source fail to provide a link to the studies referenced

While I hate using Wikipedia as a citation, their article on Intersex does a good job showing that the 1.7% number was from one paper written in 2000 by Professor Anne Fausto-Sterling et. al. and widely quoted by activists.

According to Wikipedia, the argument against this 1.7% number is that "this figure includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex."

Also according to Wikipedia the number may be as low as .018% but "the number of births where the baby is intersex has been reported differently depending on who reports and which definition of intersex is used."

Wikipedia goes on to say that "A 2018 review reported that the number of births with ambiguous genitals is in the range of 0.02% to 0.05%."

So, as with most science, the science in inconclusive.

However, I still believe that intersex is caused by a biological condition with little psychological component since it is identifiable at birth in most cases long before a personality is developed.

While Transgenderism is primarily psychological in nature as it only manifests after development of personality. However, I am open to that it may be the influenced by some underlying biological conditions (I don't believe there is enough consensus on this).

I will be doing more research and may change my mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

Been only able to reply by phone, so not able to say much. Is it "personality is developed"? Or, is it that they're able to start effectively communicating? Because there was that whole bit about hormones, receptors, brain anatomy, genetic genital conditions, etc. Anti lgbtq would chastise a woman born with male parts and vice versa. All men are capable of producing milk.

The guy I posted votes other animals because he is showing that the fine line of male and female is literally a bit or two off. Otherwise can be identical. There are many parts of the human genome that determine someone's sexual identity which is culturally and socially defined.