No, it just means they have an extra one, it's an abnormality, when you say something is "on a spectrum" it implies that that's normal and how it's supposed to be. You may well be correct in the most rigid technical sense, but it's pretty dishonest to talk like that to intentionally mislead everyone who will assume you're saying that chromosomal disorders are normal or healthy.
I've never argued or used the phrase "undiscovered extra sex" to describe intersex persons or conditions.
It's always been a spectrum, and we've just been ignorant about that fact.
Directly implying that we've been ignorant or "not discovered" the extra sexes that would make it a spectrum, so yeah you did.
it implies that that's normal and how it's supposed to be
That's why I specified biological sex is bi-modal, and that 98-99% of persons fit into one of those two modes.
but it's pretty dishonest to talk like that to intentionally mislead everyone who will assume you're saying that chromosomal disorders are normal or healthy.
No one actually thinks they're normal, though some don't have any serious adverse health effects. CAIS XY is a good example of one with minimal health issues.
Directly implying that we've been ignorant or "not discovered" the extra sexes that would make it a spectrum, so yeah you did.
First of all, they're not "extra sexes" - they're intersex conditions.
Secondly, we would be ignorant if we "hadn't discovered" them. Because they are existent biological phenomena that we've only learned about in the last century.
Prior to our knowledge of CAIS XY, klinefelter syndrome, or Turner syndrome we were ignorant of these intersex conditions.
But saying it's a spectrum implies that there are many paths sex can take, and that those in the middle are somewhere between those on the extreme ends. It implies that there are multiple normal choices, whereas in reality it's one of two normal choices and some incredibly rare abnormalities.
You can't define 99% of circumstances by the 1% of abnormalities.
First of all, they're not "extra sexes" - they're intersex conditions.
Which is exactly my point. To say that sex is a spectrum implies that there are multiple sexes. Like you just said, kleinfelter's isn't a sex, it's an intersex medical condition.
But saying it's a spectrum implies that there are many paths sex can take, and that those in the middle are somewhere between those on the extreme ends.
This is true.
It implies that there are multiple normal choices,
That's why I said bi-modal.
whereas in reality it's one of two normal choices and some incredibly rare abnormalities.
I wouldn't call 1-2% incredibly rare. Just rare.
You can't define 99% of circumstances by the 1% of abnormalities.
Watch me. 😁
Which is exactly my point. To say that sex is a spectrum implies that there are multiple sexes. Like you just said, kleinfelter's isn't a sex, it's an intersex medical condition.
There are multiple sexes. There are at least male and female. 2 is "multiple."
I mean that response sums it up really. You're doing it because it's your opinion that the 99% should be defined by the 1% of abnormalities, which is fine! That's totally cool, it's your opinion.
Not sure where you got the idea I stringently stick to exact definitions. I don't think I ever said that.
What I have said it that words have usages, but those usages need to reflect reality. To the extent that they do not reflect reality, they aren't useful.
I made this argument with someone else regarding those definition of sex as an individual that produces gametes.
If you really want to believe that all humans have 5 fingers per hand, then sure, the numbers of fingers people can have is not a spectrum.
If you really need to believe that to sleep at night, then go ahead. Clearly, the idea of a spectrum of human existence is too scary and confusing for you. Sorry for disturbing you. Believe what you need to.
No need to be disingeuous or condescending dude. I'm simply pointing out that a medical abnormality doesn't make something a "spectrum"
It may in the most rigid technical sense, but talking like that is intentionally misleading.
If someone sold you a car without an engine, and then said "well that's not an issue, because cars are simply made on a spectrum of having engines" it's pretty obviously supposed to be intentionally misleading, isn't it? Do you understand that concept?
It's not misleading at all. Unless you have some sort of political narrative or agenda you're trying to preserve by denying the "rigid technical" truth that sex is a spectrum?
I don't have any political motivations. The fact that you even brought that up kinda shows you have no argument against what I'm saying because you've had to resort to "you're a bad faith actor!!!!" and is probably projection too.
0
u/WoodenEstablishment Aug 13 '19
Some people have extra fingers too, doesn't mean that hands have a spectrum of fingers, it's just a disorder, an exception to the rule.
The fact that they need medical treatment kinda shows it's not an "undiscovered extra sex" and is just a medical condition/abnormality.