Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022)

“Theseus has been taken to the Erkstag.”

dankmemeuniversity:

Obi Wan Kenobi S01E03
↳By Request(✚)

The Mandolorian S01E08

Olivia Wilde Reposts Poem About Ukraine Invasion, Gets Dragged on Twitter – The A-List Hype

lucas–joshua:

random-fandom-whump:

Stargate Atlantis S01E05
↳RFW’s Favorite Stargate Whump Moments

not-your-intersex-pawn:

enigmatic-insect:

not-your-intersex-pawn:

plant-with-a-penis:

enigmatic-insect:

plant-with-a-penis:

enigmatic-insect:

In discussions about gender and sex, it’s very likely that sooner or later, someone will claim that “biological sex is a spectrum”. Usually, they will point to intersex conditions as a way to argue that male and female aren’t clearly defined categories, or that there are multiple sexes that exist on a continuum. Here’s why this is not true: 

An organism’s biological sex is defined by the type of gamete their reproductive anatomy is organized to produce: sperm or eggs. Males develop towards the production of small gametes, called sperm; and females develop towards the production of large gametes, called ova. 

Since there are no intermediate gametes between sperm and eggs, and since there is no third kind of gamete, there are only two sexes: male or female. There are only two kind of sex cells, therefore, only two kinds of sexes. 

Sex is binary: there are no additional sexes other than male or female, and sex does not fall on a spectrum of infinite possibilities. Your sex corresponds to one of two possible developmental pathways your body went down on to support the production of either sperm or eggs. 

Human sexual dimorphism is so consistent, that more than 99.98% of births are unambiguously male or female. We rely on these clear differences between males and females to sexually reproduce, via the fusion of sperm and ova, in order to perpetuate the species. 

Sex in humans is genetically determined at conception (when the sperm fertilizes the egg), specifically by the presence or absence of a functioning SRY gene, which typicallly finds itself on the Y chromosome provided by the father. 

• The present (and active) SRY gene differentiates the baby’s gonads into testes, and supports the production of small gametes (sperm). The fetus develops male.
• The absent (or inactive) SRY gene differentiates the baby’s gonads into ovaries, and supports the production of large gametes (eggs). The fetus develops female. 

Thanks to the SRY gene, sex determination in humans (and mammals in general) is completely dimorphic. This doesn’t mean, however, that variations don’t occur within this binary system. This is where intersex people come in.

Intersex people have rare conditions called Differences in Sex Development (DSDs for short). Intersex conditions are contingent on innate, physical bodily characteristics, not personal identity or expression. What defines intersex people is that their innate sex characteristics differ from medical norms. Intersex is not an identity or a feeling, but a biological reality. 

Intersex people are neither an amorphous mixture of sex characteristics, nor a third sex, nor “hermaphrodites”. People with DSDs are still male or female like every single other human being, they simply have differences in how their bodies developed in anatomy and physiology towards being male or female. 

Differences in Sex Development are congenital medical conditions of the reproductive system which affect males and females differently. DSDs are sex-specific. There are males who have intersex conditions and females who have intersex conditions. 

To illustrate how DSDs are not exceptions to the binary system of sex, I’ll use three examples:

1. In very rare circumstances, a fetus may develop with a chormosome variation of XXY. Or even rarer, XXXY. Despite the extra X chromosome, these cases develop as male, thanks to the present and active SRY gene on the Y chromosome that triggers the developmental pathway that supports gonadal differentiation into testes and sperm production. These babies are male. 
2. Sometimes, a fetus with an XX karyotype has a translocation of the SRY gene that results on the SRY being present on the X chromosome, instead of the Y. Thanks to the present and active SRY gene on the X chromosome, testicular tissue is developed and the baby develops towards the production of sperm. These babies are also male.
3. In some intersex cases, a fetus with an XY karyotype, but with an inactive, although present, SRY gene, develops as female. With this gene being inactive, the gonadal tissue differentiates into ovaries that support the production of eggs. These babies are female. 

So, looking at sex determination and the role of the SRY gene in the development of reproductive anatomy, we can clearly see that sex is completely binary. The baby either supports sperm production, or egg production. There is no “in-between” or a third kind of development. In no way is sex a spectrum or an undefinable category. 

There are plenty of sex differences between males and females: chromosomes, hormone levels, gonadal tissue, gene expression, genital anatomy, weight, height, muscle mass and bone density, for example. No matter the type of variation in characteristics, biological sex is and forever will be, defined by the type of gamete your body develops to produce. Males support small gamete production and females support large gamete production. Two gametes = two sexes. 

Biologists do not support the claim that variation of chromosomes, gonads or hormones is equivalent to “new sexes”. Sex is the developmental pathway your body went on to produce sperm or eggs. Variation in development does not mean one becomes a different sex. Intersex conditions are anatomical variations within males and females, not “new sexes”. XXY males are still males, and XO females are still females. 

Intersex people are tired of being used as pawns in anti-scientific arguments made by activists who use the complexity of DSD conditions as a way to muddle and confuse the discussion about biological sex. Sex is still binary, even when you consider intersex conditions.

Don’t let activists confuse you and convince you that your scientific knowledge is “outdated” or “bigoted”. Don’t let social justice activists persuade you by taking advantage of your likely unfamiliarity with intersex conditions and fool you into thinking science supports the existence of more than two sexes. Gender theorists are not scientists, and they lack severe understanding of biology and DSD conditions. 

In these arguments, don’t let it slip your mind that sex is, always has been and always will be universally defined by the kind of gamete production your body supports; not by anatomical variations in sex development. When the definition of biological sex is clear to you, it will become much less likely that these con artists manage to confuse you into thinking “sex is a spectrum”, that there are “more than two sexes” or that “it’s impossible to clearly define male and female categories”. 

Using intersex conditions as a “gotcha” in arguments about gender and sex serves trans activists and gender theorists no purpose: the fact that people with DSDs exist does not mean that human beings can switch sex, that sex is a spectrum or that unambiguously male and female people (99.98%+ of births) can become the opposite sex. 

Social justice activists do not need to lie about science and erase the reality of the sex binary in order to advocate for acceptance and inclusion of people who express themselves in different ways in society. SexIS still a binary.

WHY SEX IS NOT BINARY

OK I dont normally reblog this kinds of stuff but as a geneticist (AKA a Biologist) this post has me livid. OP makes throws in a lot of biology facts to “support” the argument that sex is binary. They present an argument that biological sex is binary, then makes a blanket statement about ALL biologists believing that sex is binary. BOTH of these statements are untrue BUT the main argument presented is fundamentally wrong.

They argue that sex is defined by the gonads you can make. The entire argument and all the supporting facts HINGE on this assumption. But this is wrong for 2 very big resons.

Reason 1: Sex cannot binary if defined by Gonad production because doing so would would result in either 4 sexes or an incomplete definition of sex. Firstly OP is correct that in humans two types of gonads are possible. However there are at least 4 distinct sexes possible based on biological outcomes that have been observed in humans. 1) Those that make sperm, 2) those that make eggs, 3) those that make both (i.e. True hermaphroditism), and 4) those that make none. Thus there are at least 4 sexes (by this definition sex is not binary). You could argue that cases 3 and 4 dont count as sexes, BUT if you do that you are excluding a proportion of the population and thus the definition itself is inadequate and that’s why many IF NOT MOST biologists DON’T use gonad production do define sex. A definition that only sometimes works is not a good definition, and that way most biologists actually moved away from using phenotypes to define sex and actually is standard NOW to use genotypes (chromosomes present) to define sex.

Reason 2: Sex is NOT defined by developmental pathway and has not been for quite sometime. OP makes the argument that genotype (chromosome number) is not used to define sex but it actually is. And it has been done so for quite sometime in most of biology. This is because whereas genotypes are concrete/defined, phenotypes ( example developmental pathways) are not. Phenotypes can come about through complex combinations of genetics and environment and in the Biology they have been shown time and time again to be inadequate for defining biological categories conclusively. My favorite example is the tumblr joke about coconuts. You look at a coconut and say this “This coconut has hair and it makes milk, it must be a mammal” but obviously its not. This is an extreme example but the point it makes is actually that using phenotypic characteristics to place biological organisms into categories is shaky at best and can be outright wrong. That’s why Evolutionary Biologists EXCLUSIVELY look at DNA sequence to infer evolutionary histories. Thats also why SEX cannot be defined by phenotype and must be defined by genotype, and thats why most biologists dont actually use gonad production OR developmental pathway to define sex. Because genotype is just a MUCH better definition of sex. THUS if sex is defined by genotype then that means that it cannot be binary. This is because many different combinations of chromosomes and genes exist!

NOW one last thing I want to add is that OP throws in a lot of biological examples but that breaks down because the fundamental argument is flawed. HOWEVER, I notice that OP also adds some non-biology based rhetoric to try to discredit/cover their argument, that i think is worth addressing.

1- OP presents a FALSE statistic that states that 99.98% of people are born either Male or Female. This places .02% of births as sexually non-dimorphic ie NOT male or female. This statistic flat out wrong and it is estimated that 1.7% of births are actually sexually non-dimorphic (source).

2- OP uses blanket statements to make it seem that EVERONE in a particular group is of a similar mindset as them. for example : “Intersex people are tired of being used as pawns in anti-scientific arguments made by activists…”, “Biologists do not support the claim that…” This is untrue as variation in opinions is a thing that just exists. I cannot speak for intersex peoples BUT as a biologists I very clearly support the claim SEX IS NOT BINARY.

3- OP per-emptively tries to discredit facts or opinions that discredit thier own view by appealing to the emotional side of the reader. example : “Don’t let activists confuse you and convince you that your scientific knowledge is “outdated” or “bigoted” .” “Social justice activists do not need to lie about science” This makes it pretty clear that OP’s logic is not sound enough to hold the argument together by itself. OP knows the holes in their argument and while the may superficially sound correct because of the use scientific terminology OP knows the flaws of their argument and so has to rely on appealing to the emotional side of the reader to make up for lack soundness in logic.

4- OP has disabled comments preventing discussion DESPITE providing a supposedly “evidence-based” argument for the support of their view.

OK sorry for the long post but I simply could not let this slide past my dash and keep getting notes. Ive been doing studying genetics/gene expression for the the better part of a decade and I will not stand for this. MOST biologists agree Sex is not binary no matter the definition you use.

TLDR: Sex is not binary no matter the definition you use, its that simple.

The only reason you’re “livid” is because you literally didn’t understand the post. This reblog is just you misinterpreting my argument at every corner. 

Sex is defined by the kind of gamete production your reproductive anatomy develops to support. That definition works 100% of the time. Males support sperm production, females support egg production. I literally never said sex is defined solely by gonads, but by reproductive organization. That was just your personal interpretation getting in the way. 

Alright, adressing your “points”: 

1. What you’re referring to is called “ovotesticular disorder” (OT-DSD), formerly referred to as “true hermaphroditism” (the name you used is very outdated) which is an intersex condition where an individual develops both ovarian and testicular tissue. That is so absurdly rare, that only about 500 cases of this disorder were seen in medical literature. Like ever. Less than 500 cases in the history of Medicine. I’ll adress it regardless.

But still, even fetuses that develop both ovarian and testicular tissue are still male or female. Because one tissue predominates over the other, and based on that, a team of doctors and medical specialists will determine the individual’s sex. They fit within the sex binary. 

How are you a biologist if you deadass think human beings can be hermaphrodites? Did you seriously claim there are human beings who produce both gametes? People with OT-DSD will not have both tissues functioning on the same body, at the same time. There are no cases of people having both fully functioning ovaries and fully functioning testes on the same body. They cannot produce both gametes at the same time. Where did you get the informtion that they produce both gametes? One reproductive organization will always predominate over the other. People with ovotesticular disorder do not possess both sets of reproductive anatomy. 

That is why people with OT-DSD are not hermaphrodites: they cannot fulfill both reproductive roles at the same time. They are always male or female. 

Using peopple with OT-DSD as a way to argue that because some babies are born with tissues of both sexes, then sex isn’t a binary is the same thing as to use people who -because of a genetic malformation- are born with only one leg as a way to argue that humans aren’t bipedal. That logic you used is profoundly unsound. 

There are only three kinds of human beings: A) Those who functionally produce sperm (males), B) those who functionally produce eggs (females), and C) those who produce neither gamete (still male or female, depending on their reproductive organization). There are NO human beings who functionally produce both sperm AND eggs on the same body, at the same time. That’s a lie. Seriously can’t believe you just tried to argue otherwise. 

2. Also, where did you get the information that “karyotype alone defines biological sex exclusively”? Here’s why karyotype variations are not sexes.

If sex isn’t defined by your reproductive organization to support gamete production, then what is it defined by? Let me ask you this: what other reproductive organizations are there other than male and female in humans? What other reproductive sex cells are there? What other developmental pathways to gamete production are there? I really wanna hear your answers to that. 

Again, I literally never said “someone’s phenotypic characteristics define their biological sex”. You just can’t read. You inferred that on your own. 

Where did you get the information that chromosomes exclusively define biological sex? In your social studies class?

You seem to be extremely confused by my argument: I do not think sex is defined by phenotype, nor by gonads, nor by sex characteristics, nor by karyotype, nor by anything else you individually interpreted from my very clear post. Sex is defined based on the gamete production your body supports. If you’re a male, your body develops to support sperm production. If you’re a female, your body develops to support egg production. If you wrote an entire text because you didn’t understand that from the original post, that’s on you.

Here’s what evolutionary biologist Colin Wright has to say about that: sex is not a spectrum

This means that even individuals who have variations in their anatomy, karyotype, sex development, genital morphology, hormone levels and secondary sex characteristics are NOT “new sexes”, but variations within males and within females. Human beings either develop to support egg production or sperm production. That’s it. 

Intersex people produce atypical chromosomal, hormonal and genital variations, but these variations do not create “new sexes”. Sex is your type of reproductive organization to support either sperm or egg production. Even if intersex people have atypical combinations of hormones, genitals and chromosomes, their biology is still organized around either sperm or ova. Sex related traits may vary, but the ultimate distinction between the sexes is found in gametes. DSDs do not form new sexes, but rather show the variation within males and within females.

As to the non-scientific aspect of the post (not that the first aspect was particularly scientific in the first place, but okay):

1. The “1.7% prevelance of intersex conditions” presented by Dr Anne Fausto Sterling was completely debunked in this scientific article. 

99.98% of births are unambiguously male or female. The remaining 0.02% can be a little harder to classify, but they are still male or female. The “1.7% of births being ambiguous” statistic you cited is absurd. It included babies with Klinefelter Syndrome, for example, which most clinicians do not even consider “intersex”, because only males develop that condition. Saying that would mean that intersex conditions are as common as red hair. Think things through, maybe.

2. This is simply tone policing. Ridiculous. Ask real intersex people on this app to find out just how thrilled they are to be used as pawns by transgender activists. And yes, some biologists (like yourself) like to twist around definitions and purposely ignore the universal definition of biological sex being the kind gamete production your body supportsjust so they can twist around, be politically correct and claim “sex is a spectrum”. You purposely ignored that specific definition of biological sex because there’s no way you could argue that there are infinite sexes with that one, lmao

3. Genuiney: what? I presented my argument of biological sex being a binary with facts and logic. Again, this is just more tone policing from you: I am completely against pseudoscientific gender activists using DSD conditions they literally don’t understand to argue “sex is a spectrum”. Of course I am going to criticize that deplorable behavior on MY post about this specific phenomena, and just because it bothers you specifically, doesn’t mean it shows any “holes in my logic”, as you arrogantly pointed out. Not all of us feel the need to be politically correct all the time, so that’s why it bothers you to see others not doing that

4. Comments are literally enabled. And everything I presented IS fact-based. Unlike you, who failed to present a single peer reviewed, scientific article describing the other reproductive organizations other than male and female there are in humans. 

So,@plant-with-a-penis, how about you actually read my argument through before you started implying I defined biological sex according to gonads only? How about you actually understood the argument thoroughly before claiming I thought phenotypes and genitals define sex? How about you didn’t invent that humans can be hermaphrodites? How about you didn’t use tone policing as a way to pretend my arguments “have holes” in them? How about you didn’t use debunked statistics on the prevalence of intersex conditions in your politically correct arguments? 

Everything you did in this reblog was exactly what gender activists attempt to do in their arguments about gender and sex. Do you not realize that? Here’s what you did, in this reblog alone:

• Attempted to use intersex conditions as a way to argue sex is a spectrum
• Complete disinformation about DSDs (see what you said about OT-DSD)
• Minsinterpretation of scientific arguments and biological facts
• Attempted to confuse others to muddle the conversation
• Used debunked statistics and outdated medical terms

I guess it couldn’t be more stereotypical if you tried. Sex IS still a binary even when you consider chromosome variations, genital morphology variations and differences in sex development. Are you still “livid”? Nice try though

SEX IS NOT BINARY (response)

Oof there was a lot to parse through here but for the sake of true and accurate information and taking into account time restrictions, Ipulled out to be the key points of OPs logic that are the most important:

Arguement: “Sex is defined by the kind of gamete production your reproductive anatomy develops to support”

Again, this definition does not take into account individuals that are able to support production BOTH gametes or who cannot support production of either gametes. By OPs own definition there are again at least 4 sexes. OP does not seem to understand that reproductive anatomy/organization is infact phenotype.

Argument: OP argues that individuals that are unable to produce gametes will be considered male or female based on reproductive organization.

Unfortunatley this is not true as individuals unable to produce Gametes can have a mixture of reproductive organization/structure this again breaks down the main point of OPs logic.

Arguement: OP argues that true hermaphroditism is rare enough to constitute NOT being classified as its own sex. As evidence OP uses Ovotesticular disorder (OP-DSD).

This is where we get into semantics. Individuals with OP-DSD is not true hermaphrodites as by definition ( see the video OP linked) these individuals cannot fulfill both reproductive roles. OP is choosing an arbitrary threshold to discredited cases of true hermaphroditism. The truth is that rare or not the cases exist. Their very existence discredits the argument that sex is binary no matter how rare.

Arguement: Variations in the number and combination of sex chromosomes do not constitute a different sexes. OP cites post by the non-peer reviewed group “paradox institute”.

This one is actually really easy! More and more biologists are moving away from using larger phenotypes (reproductive structures included ) for categorizing biological organisms. This is because as I mentioned before using phenotypic categories to classify organisms is shaky at best and flat out wrong at worst. The article cited by OP does not actually provide reasoning beyond WHY reproductive role is a better definition of sex over sex chromosome number or combination. Instead, the writer chooses to state that reproductive role is a “better definition” but no concrete biological evidence is given above the “this is how it was done in the past” self-affirming argument.

Last remarks!

Beyond that I would like to point out that OP again chooses to appeal to the readers emotional response RATHER than relying on sound logic. Insults and false equivalences are very prominent throughout their response. In particular OP attempts to bait, distract and also flood the readers in order to distract readers from picking up on the flawed logic.

That being said I would like to reiterate that even by OPs own definition sex is not Binary.

TLDR: Sex is still not binary

There are many different reasons why biologists do not classify humans by karyotype alone, including the fact chromosomal aneuploidy and monosomy are already diagnosable conditions within the male and female sexes and apply to the forty-four other chromosomes (autosomes) as well. “[Extra chromosomes] arising through chromosome mis-segregation during meiosis is a major cause of infertility and inherited birth defects… Nevertheless, most aneuploid mammalian embryos do not develop properly and it is well documented that monosomies and most trisomies fail embryonic development. This represents the major cause for reduced fecundity in humans, and demonstrates that when aneuploidy arises at the time of fertilization that it severely compromises embryonic development.” Designating someone a different sex over chromosomal irregularities makes no sense when an active SRY gene determines more than the Y chromosome’s presence in general. I can’t tell if the refusal to refute anything within her links was not reading them or not being able to. But I do highly recommend biologist Zach Elliott’s animated work for anyone who wants to learn more about intersex conditions through short and informative animations:

Paradox Institute

A credentialed biologist would know better. No DSD supports sperm and ova within one person, which is also why intersex rights organizations campaigned to move away from the inaccurate ‘hermaphrodite’ label because humans never have fully formed and functional sets of both sex organs, the ability to swap reproductive role, or the ability to impregnate themselves, as hermaphroditic species do. Although grouped under the same diagnosis, people with ovotesticular disorder will only have features of both ovarian and testicular tissue in common with one another. They would not make up a discrete new sex anymore than arbitrarily grouping males and females with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia together under a new sex.

• The gonads may present any combination of ovary, testes, or combined ovary and testes (ovotestes). An ovotestis is present in about two-thirds of the affected individuals. The gonad may also appear as a streak gonad which is characterized by a non-functional dysgenetic tissue with increased fibrous component. Being reported to occur in only 1.2% of all cases of ovotesticular DSD, the combination of ovotestis-streak gonad is extremely rare.
• Most commonly detected chromosomal makeup among patients with ovotesticular DSD is a 46, XX karyotype. In approximately 10% of patients with a 46, XX karyotype, the presence of the testicular tissue is the result of the SRY gene being translocated to the X chromosome or another chromosome. Genetic variations of other genes, such as duplication of SOX9, mutations in RSPO1, or NR5A1 genes, can also be present in cases with a 46, XX karyotype.

As of 2008, there have been only 11 reported cases of fertility in a true hermaphrodite (sic) which makes this contention of having both even dumber since most don’t produce any gamete. Ovotestis and streak gonads never contain viable haploid cells. This is an obvious confusion of gonadal tissue with gametes. Nothing the Op argued supports four sexes enough to raise twice in counterpoint. A credentialed biologist would also know sterility does not negate anyone’s sex, and we’re no different than those without DSDs.

Biological sex is determined by our role in reproduction because…this is the entire purpose behind sexual dimorphism in any species! Please go back to biology class when sex determination and sex differentiation were introduced, or ask a real biologist for clarification.

Our blog can receive messages through @notyourintersexpawn​ if further information on the science behind human sexual development is required, or if you’re open to a conversation how ostracizing us over variations of sex development follows a cruel legacy.

Thank you so much for elaborating on this so clearly and being so evidence based! @not-your-intersex-pawn

Sex isn’t strictly a matter of potential for gamete production either, which explains why intersex births with true ambiguity necessitate a multidisciplinary team to interpret the results of comprehensive medical testing. (More on whyandhow.)

Both the original argument and Plant-with-a-penis had one element correct. His contradiction would’ve made more sense if, instead of ignoring how extra or missing chromosomes are already grouped into the two sexes, he emphasized how chromosomal makeup is noted on medical charts and in literature as something like “45,X/46,XX” “49,XXXXY” “47,XYY” “48,XXXX” to distinguish the pathophysiology within their sex. He’d still be wrong, of course, since we don’t have a credible scientific-based justification for the arbitrary expulsion of intersex males with x-inactivation systems neutralizing their extra chromosome. 

This also reflects back on previous conversations about the failure of so-called inclusive language isolating body parts or functions excluding intersex people, and how we need laypeople to understand external intersex traits directly reflect on dysfunctional internal systems. Nothing about the human body can be regarded in isolation. We belong to a whole and need to be regarded as such. Intersex conditions actually prove we’re not interchangeable parts.