keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz: keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz:keyhollow:blowjob-blazkowicz:keyh
keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz: keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz: keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz: keyhollow: blowjob-blazkowicz: sexy-androgynous-satan: forthegaytergood: closet-keys: agoodcartoon: fucking lol I’m vibing with this #aesthetic: layered long sleeve shirt, under a t-shirt, under an androgynous rainbow tunic; medieval executioner’s hood; waist cinching belt; work boots. we gotta do this with a lot more textbooks Redrawing characters in these kinda comics to make em better is the current thing aint it Gender literally isn’t even biology. It’s social prescriptions that we tend to associate with sex. Sex is biological, and sex is not a strict binary either. Sex is a strict binary, that being male and female, though disorders and deformities can occur. There is no third sex. Gender is an opinion at this point, so who literally cares and it holds no water. Is being redheaded a disorder? Only about 2% of the world’s population are redheaded. This source here says that as many as 1.7% of people may have intersex characteristics. Intersex people aside, sexual characteristics still do not fit a strict binary. Reproductive organs a super majority of the times are one or the other, but again intersex people exist. Now what about secondary sexual characteristics? There are scrawny twink thin shouldered men and butch big shoulder women. Hip size also varies. Men can have big hips, women can have small hips. There are trends, and men on average have their bodies a certain way, and women on average have their bodies a certain way. If it were a strict binary, women would all be one exact way, and men would all be one exact way. One way or another. Sex differences can be best described as a bimodal distribution, not as a strict binary. If I go on google scholar, type in “sex bimodality”, look what happens :0 WOW. Legitimate academic sources that have been cited about a hundred times about sexual characteristics that use the term “bimodality” pertaining to sex. The top one is from 1976 and I clicked on it. It seems to describe glucose levels between men and women in a specific native american racial/ethnic group. This is not a new idea. The other ones seem to describe bimodality in ANIMALS too. AMAZIN. Now let’s see what happens if I type up “sex binary” in google scholar. At a glance, it seems ALL of them criticize the idea that sex is a strict binary. I know a few of them are feminist or gender studies sources, and feminism is supposedly spooky or whatever, but still. I think I remember you from back when I followed a bunch of chuds on tumblr. Aren’t you a biology graduate or something? You’re supposed to know this. Or maybe you do know this, and you intentionally lie to your followers to give this antiquated and patriarchal idea some legitimacy. Either way, that’s a nice meme. Being a redhead is not a disorder, it is a mutation. A disorder has to disrupt function, which being intersex does. Again, being intersex is a disorder. Much like how Down syndrome isn’t a subspecies of human, intersex isn’t a third sex, and saying so is pretty ableist. Animals are not humans. Using animal sexes to attempt to prove human sexes is a fallacy at best. I’d also like you to look closer at your sources. They say GENDER binary. Gender and sex are not the same thing, they haven’t been since the early 70s, your earliest source. Gender and gender identity =\= sex. Bimodality is a statistical term, meaning that within a sample, the distribution is focused at two peaks (male and female in this case) with some minor inbetween distribution (the intersex). This still does not support a third sex, only that there are a spectrum of sex disorders. Your issue isn’t the validity of the sources, it’s the actual content. All the “beyond binary!” you see above is NEVER just sex. It’s either about gender, sexual orientation, or both of those in relation to sex. Please learn to read. Reading the shit you’re trying to site is a pretty important part of research, and it looks like you didn’t click more than a single link or provide a single citation. Just a headline, which tells you even less than the abstract. I have a BS in biological sciences, and if you think your google search is worth more than my degree, enjoy being an anti vaxxer. Okay. I think I get it. Very nice. :) So yeah, I did say that with an understanding that bimodal distribution refers to statistical averages. In fact didn’t I kind of talk about it in a way showing that understanding? Also when I typed that, I even had the two little bell curves imagined in my head that you’ve displayed here, just without the colors. Now I will be honest. You actually did half-way sell me on the point of intersex being a disorder. Sure, it effects reproduction. Really it depends more on a normative claim on if it should be considered a disorder rather than a descriptive claim on what being intersex entails. So with that said, is sex a strict binary, or is it a bimodal distribution of traits? ANSWUR DUH QUESTION You did, but sometimes people display somewhat of an understanding, and it turns out they don’t have a complete picture, so I reiterate. So onward to the disorder portion. Let’s start with the medical definition so we can really hit all the points. “A medical disorder is a relatively distinct condition resulting from an organismic dysfunction which in its fully developed or extreme form is directly and intrinsically associated with distress, disability, or certain other types of disadvantage.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003448718302099 Medical and mental disorder: Proposed definition and criteria So! Intersex. It’s not a singular condition, but much like the word “cancer” it encompasses a variety of conditions that fit into a single category, that being abnormalities within the secondary or primary sexual characteristics (so hormones, chromosomes, genitals, breasts, hair growth, and more). Now regardless of how it occurs (chromosomal, imbalance, deformity, so on), it will still impede upon sexual reproduction, which is an organismic dysfunction. All that being said, it can be clearly seen that, without a disorder, there are only two compete and functional sets, the male and female set. They are the only intended sexes and functions, as being intersex only impeded upon reproduction, and doesn’t really provide any third function or advantage. That being said, there are also intersex conditions that don’t SERIOUSLY impede upon reproduction as an actual act, but can make getting pregnant or keeping a pregnancy difficult. Some people may not even notice their is an issue until they’re medically examined or attempt to reproduce Edit: All that being said, there is NOTHING wrong with being intersex. It is nothing to be ashamed of, and there is no reason to dehumanize or discriminate against those with the condition. Disorders are nothing to be ashamed of, and people shouldn’t be assholes about it. You don’t need to be a third sex to be valid. Thank you for that addition at the end. I was a little concerned for a second that you were dehumanizing intersex people for their inability to make bebbays. However there are still a couple issues. Are men with XY chromosomes who are sterile not men, and are women with XX chromosomes with barren wombs not women? You seem to be defining man vs woman based on their role or lack thereof in the whole cooming on the eggs to make bebbay thing. “Male and female are the only functional sets” you say regarding reproduction. Even if you want to consider being unable to reproduce a disorder (I’m halfway sold on that as I said), people who can’t reproduce exist.So let’s say that people with Klinefelter Syndrome are men with disorders. Fair enough. Now how about Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (Have 2 sources 1, 2), or Swyer Syndrome? Both of which involve people with XY chromosomes, but female morphology and many biological characteristics typical of XX females. Alright, people with Swyer Syndrome have no gonads, and people with CAID have testicles located within their abdomen that sometimes herniate into a nearby body cavity, but female traits otherwise. Are they men with disorders, or are they women with XY chromosomes biologically speaking? This presumes that either you’re 100% biologically a man or 100% biologically a woman. All three of my sources used gendered language describing them as “women” and “girls”, but biologically speaking people with CAID and Swyer Syndrome have characteristics of both sexes. I’ve speaking fairly strictly in terms of biology so far, but I think in terms of gender, people should be gendered depending on their gender identity and how they self identify. Also, I’m not a biologist. So it’s for people in that field (like you) to decide whether or not there should be “a third sex”. What I am saying is that “man” and “woman” biologically speaking aren’t two strict binaries where you’re one or the other, no variations, full stop. There are wide variations of secondary sex characteristics that can be plotted on the cute wittle bell curves. This is true even if we were to examine only XY men and XX men. As I said initially, there are big shouldered butch women with small hips, and there are small shouldered twink men with dummy thicc hips. I know this. You know this.So I’ll ask again, is sex a strict binary, or is it a bimodal distribution of characteristics? No. Because there are multiple causes for sterility. If they are a sterile woman they are a sterile woman. The functionality of the reproductive system doesn’t define that. The secondary and primary sex characteristics do. Same with a sterile man. You can also be intersex and still male or female, like how turners syndrome is an intersex condition that only affects women. Again, it’s just a woman with a disorder. Gender and gender identity =\= sex and isn’t really a part of this conversation. Identity isn’t the question here, just biology and categorization based on that.In order for a third sex to exist, there would have to be a third set of sex characteristics that have a third type of functionality in human reproduction. This does not exist. Of course there are variations within each sex, eye color, hair color, hip width, shoulder width, and so on, however the person with that variation is still decidedly male or female unless they have an exceptionally rare intersex condition, in which case they simply have a nonfunctional mixture of sexual characteristics. So yes, I would still say it is a binary, even with variations due to the fact the subject will still be biologically male or female, even disorders considered, except in some extremely rare conditions, in which case it still isn’t a third sex and still isn’t disobeying the binary, it’s just a mixture due to a severe disorder. -- source link
Tumblr Blog : agoodcartoon.tumblr.com