Sex isn't chromosomes
December 2, 2017 1:50 PM Subscribe
Sex Itself is a comprehensive demolition of the very term “sex chromosomes” – a taxonomy from nearly a century ago, stumbling along half-alive in the public’s imagination but long overdue a visit to the glue factory
This was great! And I really want to hear more about Nettie Stevens!
posted by ChuraChura at 3:46 PM on December 2, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by ChuraChura at 3:46 PM on December 2, 2017 [3 favorites]
Great read, thanks for posting!
posted by Neely O'Hara at 4:03 PM on December 2, 2017
posted by Neely O'Hara at 4:03 PM on December 2, 2017
I have been working hard to get better about how I talk about the X and Y chromosomes in freshman biology. On the one hand, working genetics problems about the inheritance of recessive traits in the 23rd pair of chromosomes is good practice and requires some critical thinking skills. On the other hand, I never ever want to say to a group of freshmen that having an X and a Y makes you a man. I do my best, offer some outside reading (this semester, I had them go through this case study, and offer my openness to talk about the topic with anyone at anytime. This summary might be good additional reading for them, and now I want to read the book.
posted by hydropsyche at 4:45 PM on December 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 4:45 PM on December 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
Mod note: Flagged a big derail into one poster's opinion about how gender works, HOWEVER it would be a big help to me if people flagged and let me have a second to look at it instead of flagging and immediately responding to start fights. It's also a big help if you can be clear in your e-mails or comments what the problem is, since I'm rolling into the thread without context from other busy threads, and I can't solve snide insinuations without a lot more background.
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 8:33 PM on December 2, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 8:33 PM on December 2, 2017 [6 favorites]
Another thing is that it's only placental mammals that have X and Y chromosomes. Most people who say "it's all about chromosomes" would also say that a rooster is male and a hen is female.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:30 PM on December 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:30 PM on December 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
What does determine sex in chickens?
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:12 PM on December 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:12 PM on December 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
What does determine sex in chickens?
It's still chromosomes, but different ones: ZW. Different creatures have all kinds of sex-determination systems.
posted by A Thousand Baited Hooks at 10:23 PM on December 2, 2017 [6 favorites]
It's still chromosomes, but different ones: ZW. Different creatures have all kinds of sex-determination systems.
posted by A Thousand Baited Hooks at 10:23 PM on December 2, 2017 [6 favorites]
Another thing is that it's only placental mammals that have X and Y chromosomes.
Also fruit flies and gingko trees and? But the bigger point that sex, gender, and all associated traits are non binary and not tightly linked is absolutely true and needs to be spread far and wide. I am very ashamed as someone in the medical profession to hear colleagues/coworkers dismiss people who don't fit neatly into the male/female dichotomy as mere voyeurs who decide "I think I'll be a girl today so I can go in the girl's locker room." And it always seems to be a concern about boys/men passing themselves off as girls; never worries about girls/women passing themselves off as men. Of course there's a whole rabbit hole of sexual fears you can go down from there, so I'll stop, with the acknowledgment that as a group we men have pretty much brought a reputation as sexual predators on ourselves.
posted by TedW at 10:39 PM on December 2, 2017 [9 favorites]
Also fruit flies and gingko trees and? But the bigger point that sex, gender, and all associated traits are non binary and not tightly linked is absolutely true and needs to be spread far and wide. I am very ashamed as someone in the medical profession to hear colleagues/coworkers dismiss people who don't fit neatly into the male/female dichotomy as mere voyeurs who decide "I think I'll be a girl today so I can go in the girl's locker room." And it always seems to be a concern about boys/men passing themselves off as girls; never worries about girls/women passing themselves off as men. Of course there's a whole rabbit hole of sexual fears you can go down from there, so I'll stop, with the acknowledgment that as a group we men have pretty much brought a reputation as sexual predators on ourselves.
posted by TedW at 10:39 PM on December 2, 2017 [9 favorites]
Presence of Y (and/or multiple X's) does _something_. It would be good if we could find vocabulary that encodes the measurable effects therein without stepping on anyone's identity. For example, color blindness is much more common in half the population because they don't have a backup X. Neither nature nor nuture is *future*, agency is really the thing I think a lot of people justifiably want, but we should be able to talk about which half of the population is more likely to be color blind.
I mean, a *lot* of science has fallen by the wayside as we've learned reality is not very compliant with our ivory tower taxonomies. It's worth noting it's not all smoke and mirrors.
posted by effugas at 12:49 AM on December 3, 2017
I mean, a *lot* of science has fallen by the wayside as we've learned reality is not very compliant with our ivory tower taxonomies. It's worth noting it's not all smoke and mirrors.
posted by effugas at 12:49 AM on December 3, 2017
If I'm understanding the Wikipedia article right, we share the XY system with fruit flies, but the actual chromosomes are different. The common ancestor of humans and insects is pretty darn remote, so we're not talking about a particular chromosome shared by both species. As the end of the article says, the mammalian XY system derives from an earlier temperature-sensitive system (i.e., no sex chromosomes at all).
Rather, humans and fruit flies are both XY because that's how we label species where the gender with two copies of a sex chromosome also bears the young. If the gender with mixed chromosomes bears the young, we call it ZW.
(The point of the New Statesman article, of course, is that it's even more complicated than that, which is cool.)
posted by zompist at 1:29 AM on December 3, 2017
Rather, humans and fruit flies are both XY because that's how we label species where the gender with two copies of a sex chromosome also bears the young. If the gender with mixed chromosomes bears the young, we call it ZW.
(The point of the New Statesman article, of course, is that it's even more complicated than that, which is cool.)
posted by zompist at 1:29 AM on December 3, 2017
Fun thing: fruit flies are called XY, but it's different than our XY. In humans, it's presence of the Y that leads to the "male" phenotype. In fruit flies, it's having two X chromosomes that leads to the "female".
An X0 human is closer to "female", but an X0 fruit fly is closer to male.
There are a zillion different systems.
And beyond that, it's not even that there's an underlying "male" and "female" that's being triggered different ways. We know the phenotypes are all over the place. But the packages of genes getting activated are all over the place, too. As far as I can tell, people end up calling "male" whatever has a motile gamete.
My favorite on that: in our standard nematode, C. elegans, the sperm crawls along like an amoeba, instead of swimming with a tail. This is because it used to be an egg. It acquired motility, so now we call it the sperm. (This is from memory of my reading papers that are out of my expertise, please correct if I'm overstating.)
posted by away for regrooving at 2:07 AM on December 3, 2017 [14 favorites]
An X0 human is closer to "female", but an X0 fruit fly is closer to male.
There are a zillion different systems.
And beyond that, it's not even that there's an underlying "male" and "female" that's being triggered different ways. We know the phenotypes are all over the place. But the packages of genes getting activated are all over the place, too. As far as I can tell, people end up calling "male" whatever has a motile gamete.
My favorite on that: in our standard nematode, C. elegans, the sperm crawls along like an amoeba, instead of swimming with a tail. This is because it used to be an egg. It acquired motility, so now we call it the sperm. (This is from memory of my reading papers that are out of my expertise, please correct if I'm overstating.)
posted by away for regrooving at 2:07 AM on December 3, 2017 [14 favorites]
My favorite species, beating out even the XYXYXYXYXY / XXXXXXXXXX platypus, is the Transcaucasian mole vole. Nobody knows what their system is. Their diploid number is 17, yes I said diploid and I said 17, that is to say both sexes are X0, but beyond that it's undiscovered.
posted by away for regrooving at 2:11 AM on December 3, 2017 [9 favorites]
posted by away for regrooving at 2:11 AM on December 3, 2017 [9 favorites]
away,
I dunno, sequence a couple males and a couple females and look for universals? I guess the samples sizes need to be pretty large to have high confidence.
regrowing,
That's *amazing*.
posted by effugas at 2:24 AM on December 3, 2017
I dunno, sequence a couple males and a couple females and look for universals? I guess the samples sizes need to be pretty large to have high confidence.
regrowing,
That's *amazing*.
posted by effugas at 2:24 AM on December 3, 2017
Reminder: we're talking about sexual reproduction in animals here. If we look outside the box, for example at fungal mating types, the whole idea of having two sexes—or ten, or a hundred—just looks laughably reductionist.
(Mating types are genetic loci that control compatibility between gametes — they can only undergo gamete fusion if they're complementary. Many fungi have lots of mating types: think of it as the fungal equivalent of a geek code, and two gametes can only get it on if they have complementary geek codes ... with dozens or hundreds or traits. I think. People study fungal sex as a career track: I'm just paddling in the shallow end of wikipedia here.)
posted by cstross at 4:14 AM on December 3, 2017 [4 favorites]
(Mating types are genetic loci that control compatibility between gametes — they can only undergo gamete fusion if they're complementary. Many fungi have lots of mating types: think of it as the fungal equivalent of a geek code, and two gametes can only get it on if they have complementary geek codes ... with dozens or hundreds or traits. I think. People study fungal sex as a career track: I'm just paddling in the shallow end of wikipedia here.)
posted by cstross at 4:14 AM on December 3, 2017 [4 favorites]
It's still chromosomes
s/chromosomes/genes/
In humans anyway, you can get XX men if, somewhere in the father's testicles, you get a sperm where the SRY gene is copied onto the X. Likewise you can get XY women if their androgen receptors are borked, in which case no ovaries or uterus, or if their gonads don't form, in which case they end up with a uterus but no ovaries. ISTR that there was a unique case recently of an XY girl where it looks like the SRY (or another gene shortly after it in the train of things that happen to make sex) is just turned off so she seems to have fully functional ovaries and uterus but, being a wee bairn, it's unknown for sure.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 5:52 AM on December 3, 2017
s/chromosomes/genes/
In humans anyway, you can get XX men if, somewhere in the father's testicles, you get a sperm where the SRY gene is copied onto the X. Likewise you can get XY women if their androgen receptors are borked, in which case no ovaries or uterus, or if their gonads don't form, in which case they end up with a uterus but no ovaries. ISTR that there was a unique case recently of an XY girl where it looks like the SRY (or another gene shortly after it in the train of things that happen to make sex) is just turned off so she seems to have fully functional ovaries and uterus but, being a wee bairn, it's unknown for sure.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 5:52 AM on December 3, 2017
Love all the anecdotes of the complexity of the sex continuum (patchwork? Mulligan Stew?) of gender in various animals!
One thing I didn't understand from the article, which I imagine is explained in the book, is what are X & Y chromosomes exactly? What is the significance of carrying an X? A Y? Both? Two XXs and Y? Etc?
I never took biology so...
posted by latkes at 7:14 AM on December 3, 2017
One thing I didn't understand from the article, which I imagine is explained in the book, is what are X & Y chromosomes exactly? What is the significance of carrying an X? A Y? Both? Two XXs and Y? Etc?
I never took biology so...
posted by latkes at 7:14 AM on December 3, 2017
I dunno, sequence a couple males and a couple females and look for universals?
Gosh, if only those idiot biologists had thought to try this. Go run down to the NFS and collect your grant money, stat!
posted by tobascodagama at 7:23 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
Gosh, if only those idiot biologists had thought to try this. Go run down to the NFS and collect your grant money, stat!
posted by tobascodagama at 7:23 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
Hermann Henking found a weird, unpaired chromosome in the sperm of a fire wasp in 1891. He called it the “X element”I don't quite understand what he discovered. I thought wasps used haplodiploid sex determination in which case they wouldn't have X/Y chromosomes, would they? Are fire wasps an exception to most wasps? And aren't all chromosomes in a sperm going to be unpaired anyway? They're ready to get paired with the chromosomes in an egg, right?
posted by RobotHero at 9:31 AM on December 3, 2017
tobasco,
Ah, I apologize. What I was trying to say was:
"Away, I am curious if you know more about the sexual non-specificity in mole voles. This seems like a straightforward problem to statistically analyze, could you explain more about what I am not understanding?"
What I did not mean to say was:
"Stupid biologists."
I actually know biologists. They're not stupid.
posted by effugas at 9:33 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
Ah, I apologize. What I was trying to say was:
"Away, I am curious if you know more about the sexual non-specificity in mole voles. This seems like a straightforward problem to statistically analyze, could you explain more about what I am not understanding?"
What I did not mean to say was:
"Stupid biologists."
I actually know biologists. They're not stupid.
posted by effugas at 9:33 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
Huh. So apparently there's a "TDF", or Testes Determining Factor at a SRY (Sex Determining Region on the Y Chromosome) in almost all mammals. But not on this Vole, which has dropped Y entirely. There's chunks of mouse Y floating around, but none with the SRY TDF, and they continue to look for what's flipping the switch. I found the following papers:
Ellobius lutescens : Sex Determination and Sex Chromosome
Genomes of Ellobius species provide insight into the evolutionary dynamics of mammalian sex chromosomes
The latter actually links to genomes; we appear to only have a handful. We may just not have enough of these creatures to do the blind stats game.
posted by effugas at 9:53 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
Ellobius lutescens : Sex Determination and Sex Chromosome
Genomes of Ellobius species provide insight into the evolutionary dynamics of mammalian sex chromosomes
The latter actually links to genomes; we appear to only have a handful. We may just not have enough of these creatures to do the blind stats game.
posted by effugas at 9:53 AM on December 3, 2017 [1 favorite]
latkes,
Chromosomes contain the code that builds us. Women have two X chromosomes, men have an X and a Y. A region on the Y chromosomes causes the testicles to form, which emit hormones that cause the rest of the body to express certain male characteristics.
Having two X chromosomes mean women are less likely to suffer from certain genetic diseases, such as color blindness. They have a backup. There are also classes of diseases that occur in the case of entire extra copies of X or Y.
posted by effugas at 10:01 AM on December 3, 2017
Chromosomes contain the code that builds us. Women have two X chromosomes, men have an X and a Y. A region on the Y chromosomes causes the testicles to form, which emit hormones that cause the rest of the body to express certain male characteristics.
Having two X chromosomes mean women are less likely to suffer from certain genetic diseases, such as color blindness. They have a backup. There are also classes of diseases that occur in the case of entire extra copies of X or Y.
posted by effugas at 10:01 AM on December 3, 2017
I spent some time last night reading about Dr. Nettie Stevens. Thomas Hunt Morgan, who won the Nobel Prize for discovering that chromosomes are the mechanism for inheritance, wrote in a letter of recommendation, "Of the graduate students that I have had during the last twelve years I have had no one that was as capable and independent in research as Miss Stevens." She did all sorts of really interesting early research on embryology, cytology, and so on. It looks like Bryn Mawr still has her microscopes and students get to use them occasionally. Thomas Hunt Morgan also wrote her obituary in Science when she died of breast cancer just 9 years after her PhD, right after being offered a research professorship at Bryn Mawr. There are some solid backhanded compliments in there, but it's generally a very lovely remembrance of an impressive scientist I'd never heard of.
posted by ChuraChura at 10:17 AM on December 3, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by ChuraChura at 10:17 AM on December 3, 2017 [4 favorites]
What I really like about bio is it as much as we know, we're still just *pawing* at the actual underlying systems. Brilliant thinking but, gods, our tools are like skyscraper cranes typing on a keyboard. We're getting so much better so quickly, but there's such a way to go.
Also, if there's ever a community that _actually releases it's data_, it's the genetics people. Yeowzers.
posted by effugas at 10:29 AM on December 3, 2017
Also, if there's ever a community that _actually releases it's data_, it's the genetics people. Yeowzers.
posted by effugas at 10:29 AM on December 3, 2017
This is fascinating and more than a little challenging to read. I was able to get through "Delusions of Gender", but I'm not sure I could get through this book. By chance, has anyone here read part of it? Any estimate how much specialized knowledge you might need? I haven't gone past high school biology.
We treat the X and Y chromosomes in a way we’d never think of treating other physical characteristics – many people who would think it absurd or rude to tell a stranger that “really you’re male, though” because they have short hair, or a penis, or excess body hair, nevertheless think nothing of doing so when it comes to having XY chromosomes.
I just fell out my chair. what the fuck do they think transphobia even is
It's literally "you're male because you have a penis." Tons and tons of people think that's what gender is. Not even that - "you're male because you were born with a penis, whether or not you have one now." And the body hair thing, they're not so definite about that, but if some hormonal condition gives a woman excess body hair, tons and tons of people will feel like that condition makes her not entirely a woman.
Anyone who's open-minded about genitals-and-gender is going to be open-minded about chromosomes too. What the fuck is with that sentence
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 11:04 AM on December 3, 2017 [7 favorites]
We treat the X and Y chromosomes in a way we’d never think of treating other physical characteristics – many people who would think it absurd or rude to tell a stranger that “really you’re male, though” because they have short hair, or a penis, or excess body hair, nevertheless think nothing of doing so when it comes to having XY chromosomes.
I just fell out my chair. what the fuck do they think transphobia even is
It's literally "you're male because you have a penis." Tons and tons of people think that's what gender is. Not even that - "you're male because you were born with a penis, whether or not you have one now." And the body hair thing, they're not so definite about that, but if some hormonal condition gives a woman excess body hair, tons and tons of people will feel like that condition makes her not entirely a woman.
Anyone who's open-minded about genitals-and-gender is going to be open-minded about chromosomes too. What the fuck is with that sentence
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 11:04 AM on December 3, 2017 [7 favorites]
I find it really frustrating that this is an entire article actually titled "Sex isn't chromosomes" and then we have people in here in the thread repeatedly saying "Women have two X chromosomes, men have an X and a Y"
People with two X chromosomes are not necessarily women; people with an X and a Y are not necessarily men
Like I don't know why in the year 2017 I need to remind ya'll that trans people exist?
posted by elsilnora at 11:20 AM on December 3, 2017 [7 favorites]
People with two X chromosomes are not necessarily women; people with an X and a Y are not necessarily men
Like I don't know why in the year 2017 I need to remind ya'll that trans people exist?
posted by elsilnora at 11:20 AM on December 3, 2017 [7 favorites]
Also, in response to Rainbo Vagrant saying: "Anyone who's open-minded about genitals-and-gender is going to be open-minded about chromosomes too. What the fuck is with that sentence"
Yeah I agree that is really baffling. I kept thinking I was reading that sentence wrong, but it's clearly saying there are transphobes who aren't transphobic about genitals and body hair, but are about chromosomes, which is absurd. And the "short hair" thing is just bizarre, like... hair length isn't determined by chromosomes or hormones, it's determined... by whether you've cut your hair?
posted by elsilnora at 11:23 AM on December 3, 2017
Yeah I agree that is really baffling. I kept thinking I was reading that sentence wrong, but it's clearly saying there are transphobes who aren't transphobic about genitals and body hair, but are about chromosomes, which is absurd. And the "short hair" thing is just bizarre, like... hair length isn't determined by chromosomes or hormones, it's determined... by whether you've cut your hair?
posted by elsilnora at 11:23 AM on December 3, 2017
There was this case of a fully-female expressing individual, who in fact had an X chromosome. Ovaries and everything.
I doubt even the most transphobic out there would blink at calling her a girl.
I think athletics is a thing. Genetically intersex individuals with many of the male genetic expressions pretty much wipe out the segregated female divisions. The social pressures -- hair length, interest selection, sexual behavior -- are things a lot of people wouldn't dream of being their business to comment on. But, just as a matter of *matter*, hormones commonly expressed in men cause competitively significant differences in musculatures.
So, yeah. You can be "that's none of my damn business" on every social aspect, and still have opinions that derive from genetics. The problem, which does not at all resolve cleanly, is that the harm of saying "intersex kids can't compete in any league" is absolutely nontrivial.
That there are differences, doesn't actually tell us how to manage them. Kenyans are remarkable runners and there's probably some adaptation there; we certainly wouldn't dream of banning them from marathons.
posted by effugas at 12:22 PM on December 3, 2017
I doubt even the most transphobic out there would blink at calling her a girl.
I think athletics is a thing. Genetically intersex individuals with many of the male genetic expressions pretty much wipe out the segregated female divisions. The social pressures -- hair length, interest selection, sexual behavior -- are things a lot of people wouldn't dream of being their business to comment on. But, just as a matter of *matter*, hormones commonly expressed in men cause competitively significant differences in musculatures.
So, yeah. You can be "that's none of my damn business" on every social aspect, and still have opinions that derive from genetics. The problem, which does not at all resolve cleanly, is that the harm of saying "intersex kids can't compete in any league" is absolutely nontrivial.
That there are differences, doesn't actually tell us how to manage them. Kenyans are remarkable runners and there's probably some adaptation there; we certainly wouldn't dream of banning them from marathons.
posted by effugas at 12:22 PM on December 3, 2017
Yeah I definitely know the story that XX=WOMEN and XY=MEN but I understand and this article emphasises that this is not correct and both sex and chromosomes are much more complicated. What I was missing in this article is, so if that simplistic explanation is wrong, then what are X &Y chromosomes?
posted by latkes at 1:19 PM on December 3, 2017
posted by latkes at 1:19 PM on December 3, 2017
They are a pair of chromosomes that contain information related to development and phenotype, just like your other 22 pairs. Little information other than SRY is located on the Y, but a fair amount of information is located on the X. How many Xs you have affects how that information is used in your development and phenotype. If you have only 1 X, all of the information on that X can be used. If you have 2 or more Xs, how much and how the information is used is further complicated by X-inactivation.
posted by hydropsyche at 1:30 PM on December 3, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 1:30 PM on December 3, 2017 [3 favorites]
There are a few more resources I found helpful when first learning about the fallaciousness of XY/XX being male/female.
Two books: Dr Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation (lots of examples of animal sex determination and differing numbers of sexes).
And for humans, Middlesex. It is about one individual so it really only discusses that particular syndrome, but it discusses some of the problems with trying to lump individual humans into two sexes in general.
And next, in a previous metafilter thread, several excellent comments by DrMew, and a link to DrMew’s blog. (Sorry if the last link is dead, my internet connection is too slow to test it).
posted by nat at 1:47 AM on December 4, 2017 [2 favorites]
Two books: Dr Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation (lots of examples of animal sex determination and differing numbers of sexes).
And for humans, Middlesex. It is about one individual so it really only discusses that particular syndrome, but it discusses some of the problems with trying to lump individual humans into two sexes in general.
And next, in a previous metafilter thread, several excellent comments by DrMew, and a link to DrMew’s blog. (Sorry if the last link is dead, my internet connection is too slow to test it).
posted by nat at 1:47 AM on December 4, 2017 [2 favorites]
I think the sentence about people being rude on the subject of chromosomes but not on physical characteristics is less about people being transphobic or not, and more about whether they would feel comfortable commenting on it.
There are people who know that it's rude to comment on perceived gender and wouldn't comment on that regardless of their personal opinions; there are a set of those people who would also quite happily discuss X and Y chromosomes and make statements about what that means.
I think the people who are transphobic about chromosomes are ALSO transphobic about penises etc, but they wouldn't openly comment on the latter?
posted by trif at 5:58 AM on December 4, 2017
There are people who know that it's rude to comment on perceived gender and wouldn't comment on that regardless of their personal opinions; there are a set of those people who would also quite happily discuss X and Y chromosomes and make statements about what that means.
I think the people who are transphobic about chromosomes are ALSO transphobic about penises etc, but they wouldn't openly comment on the latter?
posted by trif at 5:58 AM on December 4, 2017
I loved Middlesex when it first came out but I reread it recently and was now able to see how problematic so much of it is. Reading a cis guy's imagined account of being an intersex man AFAB is maybe not the most accurate account of the issues involved (and Eugenides apparently made it a thing not to talk to any intersex people (knowingly, at least!) before or during the writing because he didn't want facts to interfere with his imagination). I seem to remember him also talking about how he wanted to use intersex people as a metaphor, not necessarily give an accurate view of their experience.
posted by lazuli at 5:58 AM on December 4, 2017
posted by lazuli at 5:58 AM on December 4, 2017
I think the people who are transphobic about chromosomes are ALSO transphobic about penises etc, but they wouldn't openly comment on the latter?
No, they comment about genitals and reproductive organs at all time.
posted by lazuli at 6:00 AM on December 4, 2017
No, they comment about genitals and reproductive organs at all time.
posted by lazuli at 6:00 AM on December 4, 2017
trif,
Science is frequently trotted out to support statements like "Well that's just not natural!" Yeah, neither are seven billion people are the planet, agriculture's a hell of a drug. So there's an entire line of social argument along the lines of "You should follow these or those social mores because your genes command it". It's as BS as it sounds.
I don't think, then, there are two transphobias -- there's just excusing one with the other. Probably some pretending to be talking science when really they're just expressing disgust.
That being said there are totally statements to be made about X and Y chromosomes, that are in fact scientifically valid. People shouldn't, like, die of breast cancer because other people make shitty arguments about biological determinism.
posted by effugas at 8:46 AM on December 4, 2017
Science is frequently trotted out to support statements like "Well that's just not natural!" Yeah, neither are seven billion people are the planet, agriculture's a hell of a drug. So there's an entire line of social argument along the lines of "You should follow these or those social mores because your genes command it". It's as BS as it sounds.
I don't think, then, there are two transphobias -- there's just excusing one with the other. Probably some pretending to be talking science when really they're just expressing disgust.
That being said there are totally statements to be made about X and Y chromosomes, that are in fact scientifically valid. People shouldn't, like, die of breast cancer because other people make shitty arguments about biological determinism.
posted by effugas at 8:46 AM on December 4, 2017
People with all combinations of X and Y chromosomes get breast cancer.
posted by hydropsyche at 10:35 AM on December 4, 2017
posted by hydropsyche at 10:35 AM on December 4, 2017
I'm not really sure where you're coming from, effugas. No one is trying to pretend chromosomes don't exist or something. No one, not even the article, is saying that they don't create differences in phenotype. No one was talking about athletics. It feels like you're reaching for things to reinforce the segregated classes of men and women. But the whole point of this whole everything is that that classification isn't based in biology. Biology alone would lead us to a different method of classifying people.
I get that you're trying to find a way to talk about biological differences, but your focusing on that just ... feels really uncomfortable. Anyway, you can say "people with a Y chromosome" if the Y chromosome is relevant to the thing you're talking about. Or "people with testosterone as their dominant hormone" if that's the relevant thing. Tumblr ha that figured out a while ago.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 9:02 PM on December 4, 2017 [3 favorites]
I get that you're trying to find a way to talk about biological differences, but your focusing on that just ... feels really uncomfortable. Anyway, you can say "people with a Y chromosome" if the Y chromosome is relevant to the thing you're talking about. Or "people with testosterone as their dominant hormone" if that's the relevant thing. Tumblr ha that figured out a while ago.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 9:02 PM on December 4, 2017 [3 favorites]
The bottom line takeaway I get from this and other sources is that we really have a cultural narrative that loves a binary male/female based on chromosomes, the reality is far more complicated, with a lot of mediating developmental factors. Also, because this is basically chemistry, it's not really a matter of rigid boundaries.
posted by happyroach at 11:41 PM on December 4, 2017
posted by happyroach at 11:41 PM on December 4, 2017
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having body hair
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having a penis
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at being born with a penis
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having certain chromosomes
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at not experiencing sufficient sexism
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at preferring music that has a "throbbing male energy"
posted by yaymukund at 5:57 AM on December 5, 2017 [2 favorites]
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having a penis
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at being born with a penis
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having certain chromosomes
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at not experiencing sufficient sexism
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at preferring music that has a "throbbing male energy"
posted by yaymukund at 5:57 AM on December 5, 2017 [2 favorites]
there are transmisogynists who will draw the line at having body hair
Which is utterly ridiculous, because everyone has body hair. Their line excludes the entire human race.
posted by happyroach at 6:51 AM on December 5, 2017
Which is utterly ridiculous, because everyone has body hair. Their line excludes the entire human race.
posted by happyroach at 6:51 AM on December 5, 2017
(and Eugenides apparently made it a thing not to talk to any intersex people (knowingly, at least!) before or during the writing because he didn't want facts to interfere with his imagination)
I hadn't heard that, lazuli. Thanks for the info, I'll keep it in mind. (And the "knowingly" part there is pretty important, given how common intersex people actually are!)
I suppose I should also admit that I haven't reread Dr. Tatiana recently; I don't recall it making any mindbogglingly stupid comments about human sexes, because it's mostly about animal ones, but if I'm wrong and it does I'd like to know.
posted by nat at 5:38 AM on December 7, 2017
I hadn't heard that, lazuli. Thanks for the info, I'll keep it in mind. (And the "knowingly" part there is pretty important, given how common intersex people actually are!)
I suppose I should also admit that I haven't reread Dr. Tatiana recently; I don't recall it making any mindbogglingly stupid comments about human sexes, because it's mostly about animal ones, but if I'm wrong and it does I'd like to know.
posted by nat at 5:38 AM on December 7, 2017
« Older A . for CompuServe | ctrl-c, ctrl-v Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by The Toad at 3:14 PM on December 2, 2017 [1 favorite]