There is a lot of debate over how to approach people who identify as non-Binary. There are medical questions about the evidence for the safety and efficacy of specific interventions and the ethics of treating minor. There is a good faith debate that could benefit from the inclusion of trans athletes.
Unfortunately, discussion around transgender issues suffers from at least two sources. First, it has been coopted as part of a politically-motivated culture war. This reality is exactly the opposite of thoughtful good-faith discussion. Second, for most people wrapping their head around a reality that may not conform to traditional notions of strictly binary sex and gender takes a lot or processing. Misconceptions about the basic science are rampant, and are, in fact, encouraged by the culture warriors.
Many of the people who are pushing back against trans healthcare and broader acceptance claim that biological sex is clearly and definitely not a choice. People who question the biological fact are the ones who are engaged in pseudoscience.
James Lyons-Weiler wrote an article titled "Biology is the biology is the biology".
“Most of us are born male of (sic) female. This is not our “assigned gender”: it’s our biological sex. An individuals’s sex is determined in animals (and plants) via the chromosomes one is born with.”
Correct, right out of the way of the walking. The man goes on.
“For most of us, we ARE male, or we ARE female. Unfortunately, early scientific articles conflated “gender” and “sex”, and much of society conflate them this as well. Depending on context, someone might need to know your sex (karyotype).”
Sex is determined by karyotype and is completely different from gender. Those who are critical of the trans identity are not the only ones who are wrong.
Biological sex is not something that is done in pairs.
Sex isn't strictly binary, that's not a controversial idea. It's an inescapable conclusion among experts because they understand the biology of sex. Bimodal sex in humans is more accurate. There are two dimensions to the sex life. Sex needs to be non-overlapping and unambiguous, but there isn't. Bimodal overlap is one of the possible types of overlap in the middle.
The point of the discussion is the overlap in the middle. There is an overlap between a trans identity and that middle. Let's take a look at the biology of sex.
Humans have a typical male and female set of characteristics. There is no third sex. This can be seen as a triangle with individuals falling somewhere between the three poles. There is one axis of variation between the poles of biological sex. You can see the main image for a good representation of the two types.
The majority of people cluster around one of the two poles of sex. At first glance, it may seem like it's two different things. If you don't dig into the details, you can see that the two are very similar. Let's do that
We need to look at all the differences in the sex distribution. The language and concepts for these traits have been evolving as well.
• Genetic sex • Morphological sex, which includes reproductive organs, external genitalia, gametes and secondary morphological sexual characteristics (sometimes these and genetic sex are referred to collectively as biological sex, but this is problematic for reasons I will go over) • Sexual orientation (sexual attraction) • Gender identity (how one understands and feels about their own gender)
• Gender expression (how one expresses their gender to the world)
Genetic sex is the first thing we should discuss. This may seem like a home run for both genders, but on closer inspection it's not true. Yes, most people fall into one of the two patterns, but we also see other patterns, such as XYY, XXX, etc.
The story of the genetics of sexual dimorphism is not fully told by chromosomes alone. There are a number of genes involved in sexual characteristics, not all located on the sex chromosomes, and they can vary dramatically within chromosomal sex types, and even among the cells in an individual person. The situation is described by John Achermann, who studies sex development and endocrinology at University College London.
“I think there’s much greater diversity within male or female, and there is certainly an area of overlap where some people can’t easily define themselves within the binary structure.”
Gene copy number is one of the layers of genetics. A person with extra copies of the WNT4 gene can have atypical genitals and gonads.
Genes are only part of the picture of sex. There are a number of factors at play, including hormones at different stages of development. Sexual characteristics can vary along a spectrum due to all of these factors. There are XY females who are chromosomal males who are mostly female because of androgen insensitivity. Women are walking around without knowing they have XY chromosomes.
The internal reproductive organs and external genitalia are the primary sexual characteristics for females and males. Is it possible for these characteristics to be in a strictly bimodal way? Egg or sperm are the only two types of gametes. There are intersex individuals withovotestes who can make both eggs and sperm. Sex is more important than reproduction when it comes to the system.
Many people think in simplistic ways about this concept. Sex is only about reproduction, and sex in total is not, according to the arguments. This is a reductionist and misses the fact that there are many different evolutionary ends. Bonding, social relationships, power, and dominance are all related to sex. What percentage of the time do humans have sex? How many people have an active sex life even though they don't want to have kids? Is it possible to have romance without sex. There are a lot of aspects of sex that are not reproductive.
Other primary sexual characteristics are also bimodal. The penis is related to the clitoris. In rare cases they meet in the middle in what is called "ambiguous genitalia". Labia can be fused into a scrotum. It's not clear how large a clitoris has to be or how small a penis has to be in order to be considered "ambiguous" It's not uncommon to have such conditions. There was a 2000 review.
“We surveyed the medical literature from 1955 to the present for studies of the frequency of deviation from the ideal male or female. We conclude that this frequency may be as high as 2% of live births. The frequency of individuals receiving “corrective” genital surgery, however, probably runs between 1 and 2 per 1,000 live births (0.1-0.2%).”
The estimate for the year was put at 1.7%. Some might argue that this is irrelevant to the question of gender identity. The complexity of sexual development can be traced back to a host of genes, hormones, and metabolism. There isn't a single measure that can determine biological sex. There is a lot of variation in the secondary sexual characteristics of the subpopulation who have both male and female chromosomes, gametes, and genitals.
From a young age, bone structure, fat distribution, muscular development, height, pitch of voice, and degree and pattern of hairiness are some of the secondary sexual characteristics. There are clusters of males and females, but they are only statistical with great variation within groups. You wouldn't be able to determine a person's sex if you only knew how tall they were or how hairy they were. Some men are taller and stronger than others. I don't have a lot of body hair.
I don't think the topic would be controversial if I had only talked about sex. Sexual characteristics are not an exception and are a complex and messy trait. Sexual dimorphism and the brain are controversial topics. There are more statistical differences between the sexes than between them.
Sexual orientation is one of the brain features that gets a lot of attention. The current consensus of scientific evidence and opinion says that sexual orientation is determined by brain development. Even if they don't fully realize their sexual orientation until they go through puberty, people are born with it. I think sexual orientation is a part of biological sex.
This was a controversial question before the science dealt with it. Some people who opposed gay rights claimed that homosexuality is a choice or a result of social influences. The conclusion of years of research is that sexual orientation is more fluid than it used to be. Heterosexual, gay, bisexual, pansexual, and everything in between are what people are. I don't think anyone can justify the position that sexual orientation is only a set of rules.
Sexual orientation is a brain function that is largely determined by genes, hormones, receptor sensitivity, and other epigenetic factors. Dick F. Swaab is a neurobiologist.
“Current evidence indicates that sexual differentiation of the human brain occurs during fetal and neonatal development and programs our gender identity—our feeling of being male or female and our sexual orientation as hetero-, homo-, or bisexual.”
What does this mean when it comes to sex questions? The fact that we can see any combination of sexual characteristics and sexual orientation makes it pretty clear that biological sex isn't always straight.
It's difficult to communicate these ideas because some experts might say that there are more than two genders. This may be counter productive. I like the approach of thebimodal but notbinary approach. It is not possible to capture all of the variation of biological sex in a single definition. The claim that there are only two sexes is hopelessly reductionist and poorly informed.
When we look at gender identity, the situation gets more complicated. The old arguments against homosexuality are being applied to people with a non-traditional gender identity. The scientific research for sexual orientation isn't as developed as it is for gender identity, but what we have so far suggests that people are born with their gender identity. People who identify as trans know their gender identity from a very young age. The principle of parsimony suggests that gender identity is a brain phenomenon.
When researchers describe gender in the population, they find people who display a wide range of sex, gender identity, expression, and sexual orientation. Sex orientation does not seem to fall into any of the categories of gender identity. Some people don't identify with the sex that they were assigned when they were born. I don't know why I'd say it that way. Sex is an opinion, as if it is an opinion. What is the alternative? Sex that includes gender identity is self-contradictory. Sex is assigned at birth based on the exam of the external genitalia. This is a good marker for biological sex for a lot of people. It doesn't capture all of the biological aspects of sex, it doesn't capture sexual characteristics that don't emerge until puberty, and it doesn't capture brain development.
To take the position that the gender assigned at birth is completely objective and unambiguous, the beginning and end of biological sex is to also believe that external genitalia at birth are completely determinative of every other aspect of biological sex. This is not true. It is not true for sexual orientation, and it is not true for gender identity.
A person who is trans does not have a gender identity that meshes with their external genitalia. People with a sexual orientation that doesn't align with their external genitalia are the same as this one. We understand the complexity of sexual development. A thorough and objective review of the current scientific understanding of biological sex results in the inescapable conclusion that human sex is bimodal but not strictly binary.
Some people may accept the arguments but not the conclusion. One approach is to ask, what is the practical difference between the two? Why shouldn't sexuality be defined by the 2%, instead of the 98%? Is the 2% part of biological diversity or is it out of existence?
The goal of the fiction is to eliminate the middle ground, and that's what it's about. There are two genders, but not in between. It is clear that anyone who falls in between is anaberration. They say that any conflict between genitals and sexuality must be a mental disorder. It is certain that human sexuality is bimodal, with lots of variation in the middle. Trans individuals are just one example of the diversity of human sexuality.
Pathologize the trans identity is one of the related approaches. This view holds that a trans identity is pathological because there are only two gender identities that align with one's internal genitalia. The position rests on either circular reasoning or a flawed appeal to nature.
The question of nature is easier to answer if you're gay. Homosexuality is common in all animal species. bonobos have high rates of homosexuality. It's difficult to argue that homosexuality is natural. The gender of non-human animals is not comparable to that of humans. It is difficult to study an animal's gender identity because of gender expression. It would be hard to separate from sexual orientation. Some people are interested in researching this question among primate.
It is1-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-65561-6556 Further research is needed to have a confident answer. The simplest answer is that gender identity is just as important as sexual orientation is. The strongest evidence that gender identity awareness is biological is when it's established by age 3. It is not reasonable to place the burden of proof entirely on the biological side of the question.
To see if there is a difference, we could look at the brains ofcis and trans individuals. The research shows some differences between cis and trans brains, but is still in the early stages. Trans brains look more like the identified gender than the biological sex, even before any medical interventions, according to overall studies. There was a 2015 review.
A difference in brain phenotype of people with GI compared to natal sex controls in various brain measures suggests a sex-atypical development of the brain. However, it remains unclear whether these changes originate from prenatal organization alone. Knowledge of the development of the brain during adolescence (Giedd et al., 2012), and the importance of puberty in the clinical presentation of GI (Steensma et al., 2013), suggest that this period is pivotal in understanding the development of GI. Recent work that found subtle deviations in GM volume (Hoekzema et al., 2015), and brain activation during executive functioning from their natal sex (Staphorsius et al., 2015), as well as a response to a pheromone-like substance that was similar to their experienced gender in transgender adolescents (Burke et al., 2014), underscores the need to determine the timing and nature of sex-atypical organization.
The study was found in a year ago.
“These results on brain structure are thus partially in line with a sex-atypical differentiation of the brain during early development in individuals with GD (gender dysphoria), but might also suggest that other mechanisms are involved. Indeed, using resting state MRI, we observed GD-specific functional connectivity in the visual network in adolescent girls with GD. The latter is in support of a more recent hypothesis on alterations in brain networks important for own body perception and self-referential processing in individuals with GD.”
The data indicates that the brains of trans individuals appear to be different than those of cis individuals.
I think an objective look at the science of biological sex indicates that humans are sexually dimorphic and bimodal, but that biological sex is much more complicated than it appears. It seems that variations in gender identity are just one more example of biological sexual variability. Do we use chromosomes, genes, hormone levels, genitalia, gametes, and certainly humanity cannot be placed entirely into two categories. There is a break down in the system.
Steven Novella is the founder and currently Executive Editor of Science-Based Medicine. The Great Courses and The Skeptics Guide to the Universe were both written by Dr. Novella.
All posts are available to view.
You can buy an e- book.
Dr. Hall is teaching a video course.
The text is powered by the internet.
English
All Rights Reserved © 2024
