Thread #43276348
File: IMG_7141.jpg (157.4 KB)
157.4 KB JPG
Human sexual dimorphism is one of the most robust facts in biology. Mammals, including humans, are determined by gametes: small gametes (sperm) define males, large gametes (ova) define females. Chromosomal sex (XX/XY), gonadal development (testes/ovaries), and secondary characteristics are downstream of the SRY gene on the Y chromosome. Disorders of sexual development (DSDs, formerly “intersex”)—such as CAH, AIS, or 5-ARD—are rare medical conditions (roughly 0.018% for true ambiguity requiring clinical intervention) and do not constitute a “spectrum” proving gender fluidity; they are developmental disorders, not evidence that sex is socially constructed. Brain studies show average sex differences in structure (hypothalamus, corpus callosum, amygdala volume) and function (spatial vs. verbal tasks, aggression patterns), influenced heavily by prenatal testosterone surges. Twin studies indicate moderate heritability for gender dysphoria (20-40%), but concordance in identical twins is far from 100%, pointing to strong environmental modulation rather than a simple “born this way” genetic determinism.
11 RepliesView Thread
Showing all 11 replies.>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>43276348
small issue there, models never determine phenomena, they describe them, and if the descriptions are good enough, they can be used to make predictions
all models are constructs as a matter of simple
the reason to reject sex or gender spectrum as a means of organizing descriptions is cos it has poor predictive power and is very brittle to counter examples, but most importantly, cos the implied assumption that there are two extremes is poorly justified
the problem basically becomes that w/e the concept of 'gender dysphoria' captures is not merely derived from genetic evidence, the evidence has to match and explain the phenomenon, not the other way around
what studies ought to investigate more and clarify is which developmental trajectories precede or predispose a person to developing gender dysphoria, but the devil is in the detail
if u look at a few studies like joel et al 2014 u find that the general population also expresses some level of gender dysphoria in alignment w/ wpath
so there are two sets of questions, one is what is it that we're actually investigating in the first place? and are these different but similarly presenting or related things?
and the second concerns the developmental mechanisms, to what extent environmental interactions modulate the onset and prognosis of gid, and so on
>>
>>
>>43276399
>intellectual
That's a stretch.
>>43276348
It used to be thought gender dysphoria was about an order of magnitude more rare than being born with ambiguous genitals. It's unreasonable to think gender identity is more reliably solidified than physical sex. One might conclude that GID/GD were historically profoundly underdiagnosed.
You're probably right that gender identity develops from multiple influences but you just admitted evidence for a genetic bias.
I don't believe intersex is an outdated term at all, or that DSD is its replacement. It serves a different purpose. Activists refer to intersex or intrinsic variation in sex characteristics. A disorder of sex development is a specific diagnosable cause of IVSC.
>>
>>
File: 1775305013833529.png (13.9 KB)
13.9 KB PNG
>>43276348
Everyone without a reason to support the trans cult knows it's a social contagion. The amount of cognitive dissonance is staggering with how they have to redefine terms and bully people into acceptance.