Chromosomal Confusion

[Bara_no_Hime]

What are your thought?

I think that in the next century or two they will have the technology to change your DNA to match.

I also think that if you live as a gender, then that's your gender, no matter what your DNA says. DNA can be wrong.

 

[Treblaine]

despite what you think about yourself or what you DO to yourself, in 2000 years when they dig up your bones and test your DNA you will be labeled as a male or a female.

because at the end of the day... isn't that all that REALLY matters? (sarc)

Wait, no!

Of course does not! Your chromosomes are not relevant to your day to day living, to your relationships, to how your brain works.

What DOES matter is hormones, organs and your own psychological self-image.

She is a woman. Not an ideal woman, not always a woman, but for all intents and purposes a woman.

Here is a good rule of thumb: if this girl got busted for tax evasion and had to be sent to jail... would you put her in mens prison or women's prison? You think this woman should share the showers with male rapists? That would be insane.

So before you say "no you're not a woman" ask which prison they should be sent to.

GOD! People just do not understand DNA, and especially do not understand chromosomes as they are and INDICATOR of sex, NOT the final deciding factor!

For example some "males" with XY chromosomes have a genetic disease that means the SINGLE GENE to control Testosterone receptor is malfunctioning, so their body is completely non-responsive to testosterone, the result is they grow testicles as a foetus in mother's womb but they never descend, in fact they grow a vagina, a womb (that a fertilised egg can be implanted in) and fallopian tubes to the testicles where the ovaries would be. The are born and grow up looking 100% female with a bit or hormone therapy will go through puberty to be female.

 

[Altanese]

I'd just like to give a big thank you to everyone who had the guts to say something as profound as "No matter what you do you will always be your birth sex." It's really something intersex, transgender, gender confused, and gender queer (like myself) people love to hear about.

 

[pieguy259]

To quote Dirk Gently: "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands." If this person thought of herself as a woman, and lived as a woman, then it was only fair that she be treated as a woman. Biologically male or not.

Oh, and in regard to "you are who you choose to be": just please don't choose to be a gun.

 

[master m99]

i agree with you point abou her being male, i tend to use guy, girl when talking about a person normaly, but male, female when speaking scientificly, so i guess i would call this person a girl who happens to be male, i know that weird but there we go

 

[Treblaine]

despite what you think about yourself or what you DO to yourself, in 2000 years when they dig up your bones and test your DNA you will be labeled as a male or a female.

because at the end of the day... isn't that all that REALLY matters? (sarc)

Wait, no!

Of course does not! Your chromosomes are not relevant to your day to day living, to your relationships, to how your brain works.

What DOES matter is hormones, organs and your own psychological self-image.

She is a woman. Not an ideal woman, not always a woman, but for all intents and purposes a woman.

Here is a good rule of thumb: if this girl got busted for tax evasion and had to be sent to jail... would you put her in mens prison or women's prison? You think this woman should share the showers with male rapists? That would be insane.

So before you say "no you're not a woman" ask which prison they should be sent to.

GOD! People just do not understand DNA, and especially do not understand chromosomes as they are and INDICATOR of sex, NOT the final deciding factor!

For example some "males" with XY chromosomes have a genetic disease that means the SINGLE GENE to control Testosterone receptor is malfunctioning, so their body is completely non-responsive to testosterone, the result is they grow testicles as a foetus in mother's womb but they never descend, in fact they grow a vagina, a womb (that a fertilised egg can be implanted in) and fallopian tubes to the testicles where the ovaries would be. The are born and grow up looking 100% female with a bit or hormone therapy will go through puberty to be female.

 

[xdom125x]

I think sex is determined in womb as xx or xy but gender is a whole other can of worms that can only be known in a persons lifetime by that person themself.

To quote Dirk Gently: "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family Anatidae on our hands." If this person thought of herself as a woman, and lived as a woman, then it was only fair that she be treated as a woman. Biologically male or not.

Oh, and in regard to "you are who you choose to be": just please don't choose to be a gun.

But hypothetically, if there was a genetic test to determine the species of that "duck" wouldn't that be more reliable than the behavior?

 

[Lyndraco]

I think alot of you put too much emphasis on DNA results--while it codes for our entire being, it is only the blueprint. Who you grow up to be is just as dependent on that as on your culture, family, environment, and social life.

DNA is also capable of mutating, deleting bits of itself, duplicating bits of itself, misreading itself, and any other number of issues. I'm more amazed that people can even exist with how complicated we are and how many problems can happen with our DNA. My point is that even DNA is not the clear cut answer to gender/biological sex issues.

To put this in perspective, think about what we "knew" about medicine 60 years ago--we've learned a lot since then. Think of what we may possibly know 60 years in the future--we may learn that hard science can detect discrepancies in gender and biological sex. You should not be so quick to say that XX is only female and XY is only male, because you can't possibly KNOW that for 100% certain unless you know exactly what every little bit of your DNA does and how it interacts with the environment. And if you do know that, why haven't you cured cancer?

If she wants to be female, and has gone to that much trouble to do so, then she's female.

 

[TheDarkestDerp]

The degree of ignorance displayed on this issue is about what I expected to see. Seems every time I've gotten into a discussion with even collegiate level thinkers this naive school of thought always comes up.

You are male if you have an XY(ZZ) chromosome.
You are female if you have an XX(ZW) chromosome.

I couldn't care less how you want to be perceived.

So if you are 1% negroid you are 'Black' then?

Check your quotes. I wasn't the fellow that originally said that, someone named "Slippers" is. Sure, I agreed with him, but give him your wall of text and not me.

As for the rest of it - if you would have read on the same guy already made the argument that this is the rule, and that there are exceptions. Only a handful of exceptions, mind you. I would think someone looking for a collegiate-level discussion would know that there are exceptions to almost everything.

Now, I would apologize, as I am wan to make errors with PC's and coding and such relatively simple things, sorry- but, well, I would think that someone so clever would realize by agreeing with him as you just did, de facto it matters not if he originally made the quote or not. You hold the same outdated opinion, so bob's your uncle then.

And you would still be wrong. Spend enough time in actual textbook research, like someone looking for a collegiate level discussion who has collegiate level understanding, or someone who has just spent enough time on the fetish scene hon, and you'll eventually meet the exact reasoning behind why. As a fetus develops, it begins female, ALL do, and not all fully develop from female to male at the point of maturation, many get caught at some point in between, resulting in TG or herm persons. Literally someone who's genetic code is NOT as simple as XX or XY, which are not the only two chromosomal codes anyways is often a "____ trapped in a ___'s body." It's not all that complicated, easily proven scientifically and far more common than most people are comfortable with thinking, just a matter of degrees. As minor as a woman with very manly features, thick jaw and shoulders, to the more severe male with ovaries and excessive mammalial tissue or further yet to varying levels of functional outward hermaphrodism.

And (I did read on, thank you very much) regardless of if this is the exception or not, these are still people you are pointing a very divisive and derisive finger at, rather incorrectly. One in a million is still 350 people in Amerika, and the percentage of herm/TG/TS/GQ is FAR more than that. Transgendered people cut across all races and creeds as a law of genetic probability, and including all colors of the rainbow, you get roughly 5-7%. In Amerika alone that is about 15 to 24.5 million people. Maybe not all even realize or accept the facts of their own biology and couldn't care less, it's often the case. But if we're going by biology, they have no choice, do they? Would you say this entire chunk of the populace is beneath deserving of recognition because they are simply "an exception to a rule"? Being the odd man (or woman) out somehow makes you less valid?

Majority rule implies minority right, otherwise all you see is the Tyranny of the majority.

 

[TheDarkestDerp]

Pointing a finger at? I'm not making any sort of divisive or derisive finger. Fuck, I hate it when people assume that I'm totally against something when I make a statement. And I never claimed to be clever, either.

Alright. I'm not a collegiate level thinker. I'm only in my freshman year of college, and I have little to no interest in the field of biology. Call me ignorant. Sorry.

Here's what I'd like to know - are you arguing that there are different degrees of being male/female, like 10% male, 90% female? Or are you just saying that I shouldn't give one huge dividing line between males who were born males and males who want to be female? Because I'm not trying to do the latter.

If a person is male, but wants to be percieved as a female, that's fine. I don't care. It isn't my body, why should I care? But if you were born a male, then you really weren't "the first female to be president of some college organization", you were (and kill me for technicality here if you must) the "first transgender male to female to be president of some organization". TransMF and vice-versa need a better name.

What I'm looking for here is clarification - fine if you want to be female, but not being born that way means you can't be fully female. You can look like one, you can dress like one, you can lop your gonads off and pretend you've got the bits of one, but you still aren't fully female. It's not a divisive line, it's just that a person that has a change isn't and can't be as of now a fully formed female. There needs to be a new word for something beyond "used to be male but is now female".

Note that those are mostly hypothetical "you's".

Never said you claimed to be clever, I called you that due to the snarky wording of your quote. Though you may be ignorant of subject matter, I'd hardly use the term as an insult, as you do seem intelligent and more well spoken than many, ignorant, not stupid. We're all ignorant of something. Hell, I know jack and squat about automobiles and am lousy at programming...

But I digress. You, not a hypothetical or implied understood you - actually referring to you 'you' are indeed pointing most divisive and derisively. By agreeing with the original statement made you agree with an incorrect understanding of biological science and sociology in a way many people would find rather insulting. MTF or FTM transgenders are treated very differently by the law in Amerika than even homosexual persons which they are often misunderstood as. A case comes to mind in which a woman was found to have been post-op TG after her husband died in the line of duty as a firefighter. The couple had been wed for quite some time. And although friends admitted he was aware of this, his aghast parents refused to believe their son would marry 'a man' and sued in court that she be removed from his will, the same 'female' they had known for years and treated as family was now 'something else', despite years of love and loss endured together. By treating her as 'something that used to be a man' and not simply a woman, the parents were defying the wishes of their now dead child, insulting his memory over what amounted to their personal comfort. This example is mostly sociological, but I'm simply using it to prove my point, that by singling them out, Transgenders, it is both divisive and derisive.

And yes, that is...roughly... what I'm saying, your 10-90% question. There are 5 proven chromosomal patterns and studies on another two. It's been a proven fact for quite a long time now, just not a very popular one, for obvious reasons sadly. It's not so simple as just XX or XY, and many times is never going to be. To be 'fully male' or 'fully female' isn't the concept most seem to think it is.

I don't wish to kill you for technicality, but... Por ejemplo- I know many TG's and TS's who are in fact naturally occurring partial hermaphrodites, born somewhere in between their body's expression of their chromosomes' configuration. On the fetish scene, I've met a rather burly looking fellow, 6'2", hairy-chested, 'stache and all who had a vagina just as the counterparts also exist, the more socially fetishized 'she-males'. Now, what did this make them? They were born the way they are, not 'dressing like' or 'acting like' something they were not, because they were not naturally either. Do their chromosomes define their masculinity or femeninity? Or is it now the parts they possess? Or is it the role they play in social settings? Are they 'fully male'? Or 'fully female'? They were what they were to whoever perceived them, what they were perceived as. If one was seen as 'male' or 'female' then for all intents and purposes, they were, regardless of chromosomes, chemistry, hormones, blood counters and so on.

Now, I do agree with you that there should be, and is, different terminology for those identifying as being outside of typical gender boundaries and wishing to be perceived as such. In a growing fashion they are referred to as 3rds, or 3rd gender. But these are not all that is 'male' 'female' or 'other'. What you seem to be seeking is the difference between a GG or GM (genetic girl/man) and a MTF/FTM transgender, one who has been born as such that some physical alteration was required to their body to finish it's formation from one sex or the other. Sometimes, there is very VERY little factual difference.

As the old sayings go "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there's a damn good chance it might be a duck, regardless of what you think." Many 'females' would be surprised to know that biologically speaking, many of them are 'male' in some respects, be it organ content, chemically or chromosomal. And vice versa.

Again, this is no small number of people, millions of human beings, tax-paying, working, living and loving Amerikans, deserving of respect as everyone else. And the science supporting their claims is growing.

As to those 'you's' which were not mostly hypothetical...? Are you seriously questioning my womanhood in some manner of trying to undermine the validity of my argument?