Changing Sexes

[mutebim]

I have not seen this anywhere so here is the question. What do you think about people who claim to have "changed sex" from female to male or male to female. Isn't being a man more than just shooting sperms into a vagina using a syringe? Does being a woman only has to do with having breasts and looking like a female? Do you think that "legally" changing your sex really means that you have changed from the sex you were born? How far will people go to obstruct the truth and change things around? What do you think?

[Lycurgus]

Your post has the inherent implication that man and woman have predefined roles to play in society. That being a man is more than the physical parts, and doing manly things is something women shouldn't do.

No, being a male only refers to the set of genitalia you have. If you snip 'em off, you're a Eunuch, but still male. As long as you have an XY chromosome, from a genetic standpoint, you're a male. But if you decide to get the snip'n fip, you're physically a woman.

Personally, I don't care what you are. Enjoy your life, live it as you see fit, and I like my current set of sex organs, so I'll stick to what I've got - thanks.

[Valiyn]

I think it's a valid option and part of the human need is to feel a sense of belonging. If your physical body doesn't feel like it belongs to you, then you are going to have some problems working towards that need Maslow describes.

[mutebim]

Your post has the inherent implication that man and woman have predefined roles to play in society. That being a man is more than the physical parts, and doing manly things is something women shouldn't do.


Exactly, to me it is those people who claim to have changed sexes who think that being man or woman has to do with roles. Notice that I am not stating, but asking... read carefully! So the thing is if a man gets breasts, does that mean he has changed his Chromosome? No! notice what I am saying

[Lycurgus]

Exactly, to me it is those people who claim to have changed sexes who think that being man or woman has to do with roles. Notice that I am not stating, but asking... read carefully! So the thing is if a man gets breasts, does that mean he has changed his Chromosome? No! notice what I am sayingI read carefully, and your post comes off as supporting the idea of Gender roles, whether intentional or not.

And, those who change sexes don't necessarily feel it has to do with roles, they may just feel 'out of their own body,' and want to be a man, or woman, opposite their current status.

[mutebim]

And, those who change sexes don't necessarily feel it has to do with roles, they may just feel 'out of their own body,' and want to be a man, or woman, opposite their current status.

You definitely did not read my post very well, where and what clues tell you that I think role is what defines male or female? You don't seem to differentiate a question from a statement. And secondly you keep on supporting something and then say I am the one supporting it. You said it again... "they may just feel 'out of their own body,' and want to be a man, or woman, opposite their current status." just because they will seem man or woman on the outside doesn't mean they are what they look, which brings it back to the thread. How can one say that they are not male or female anymore just because they don't look so... I mean you can't just say that now you're not male or female anymore just because you may have breasts or a beard... Lycurgus reread the thread you don't seem to understand it just yet.

[Lycurgus]

You definitely did not read my post very well, where and what clues tell you that I think role is what defines male or female?Here:Isn't being a man more than just shooting sperms into a vagina using a syringe?Isn't implies it's something to be disproved. It's the basic, it's the norm.

"Being a man is more than just your body part. It's a way you act. It's a gender role." That's how that statement reads, whether it was intended or isn't what I'm saying.


You don't seem to differentiate a question from a statement. By reading how things are phrased, you often gain a greater understanding of intent than what is actually said. Since I can't judge tone or inflection online, I must judge based on the information you provide; your phrasing.

And secondly you keep on supporting something and then say I am the one supporting it. I can't see one statement I've made here that indicates I support gender roles, if that's how you read it, that's your opinion.

You said it again... "they may just feel 'out of their own body,' and want to be a man, or woman, opposite their current status." just because they will seem man or woman on the outside doesn't mean they are what they look, which brings it back to the thread. How is that supporting Gender roles?

If someone feels uncomfortable in their body, it's their prerogative to fix that, should they so choose.

And, second, because someone was born with a different set of genitalia than they currently have does that give you the right to say they can't call themselves the opposite sex, should they choose?
How can one say that they are not male or female anymore just because they don't look so... I mean you can't just say that now you're not male or female anymore just because you may have breasts or a beard... Because part of the definition of male is 'having male reproductive organs', in typical conversation. If one no longer has male reproductive organs, he is no longer a male.
1 a: a male person : a man or a boy b: an individual that produces small usually motile gametes (as spermatozoa or spermatozoids) which fertilize the eggs of a female

Cite (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)
This doesn't always apply, but it applies so often that we have a name for a male with not testicles: Eunuch.

And, female, by the same source...
1 a (1): of, relating to, or being the sex that bears young or produces eggs (2): pistillate b (1): composed of members of the female sex <the female population> (2): characteristic of girls or women <composed for female voices> <a female name>2: having some quality (as gentleness) associated with the female sex3: designed with a hollow or groove into which a corresponding male part fits <the female coupling of a hose>

cite (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)
Again, that definition doesn't always apply.

Lycurgus reread the thread you don't seem to understand it just yet.I understand perfectly, you just don't like my understanding.

There is a distinct difference between 'not understanding' and 'not agreeing.'


You are implying that since I don't agree, I must not understand. I understand, I still do not agree.

[mutebim]

Here:Isn't implies it's something to be disproved. It's the basic, it's the norm.
"Being a man is more than just your body part. It's a way you act. It's a gender role." That's how that statement reads, whether it was intended or isn't what I'm saying.

No don't take the isn't out read it all out. you replace isn't with shouldn't. In the end, it is a question. If I ask a question, you can't say that that is what I believe. Take it as a question because punctuation matters. yes! Being man or woman is more than just body parts. So how can one claim that they have changed from one sex to another. "By reading how things are phrased, you often gain a greater understanding of intent than what is actually said." But does whatever intent you get make you right? no it is what you read you can get an intent but you cannot base anything on that intent because then it becomes your personal opinion.

If someone feels uncomfortable in their body, it's their prerogative to fix that, should they so choose.

but you cannot change your chromosomes so how can you fix it by changing sexes?

And, second, because someone was born with a different set of genitalia than they currently have does that give you the right to say they can't call themselves the opposite sex, should they choose?

It doesn't give me the right but that does not mean they are telling the truth...

Because part of the definition of male is 'having male reproductive organs', in typical conversation. If one no longer has male reproductive organs, he is no longer a male.

If one no longer has male reproductive organs, he is no longer a male. Really???

I understand perfectly, you just don't like my understanding.

Before you said you were taking the intent. So you are ignoring what I am actually saying, and taking what I might have intended to say...

[Lycurgus]

No don't take the isn't out read it all out.I did read it all out.
you replace isn't with shouldn't. To illustrate a point. Isn't is a contraction for "Is not," which is replaceable without changing the definition to should not, in this particular instance.
In the end, it is a question. If I ask a question, you can't say that that is what I believe. Take it as a question because punctuation matters. Yes, yes you can.

If I was to ask the question, "Isn't it wrong to be an Atheist?" it implies that I have a personal belief that it's wrong to be an Atheist, if I ask "Is it wrong to be an Atheist?" it's the same question, with an entirely different meaning.

yes! Being man or woman is more than just body parts. So, there are gender roles? Or do you mean physically, that chromosomes play a part?

So how can one claim that they have changed from one sex to another. By stating it, one claims it. That is how. They have physically changed sexes.

"By reading how things are phrased, you often gain a greater understanding of intent than what is actually said." But does whatever intent you get make you right? no it is what you read you can get an intent but you cannot base anything on that intent because then it becomes your personal opinion.I find it's best to argue from the position that I am correct, rather than arguing from the position I am wrong. It works better that way.

but you cannot change your chromosomes so how can you fix it by changing sexes?Because Chromosomes aren't really obvious. We don't walk around with an X on our left, and a Y on our right arms, do we?

It doesn't give me the right but that does not mean they are telling the truth...A


You also agree with that definition???I didn't say I agreed, however I do agree that to be male, one must have testicles.

To lack testicles, would make you a Eunuch.

To be female, one must have a vagina. To lack a vagina would also make you a Eunuch.


Before you said you were taking the intent. So you are ignoring what I am actually saying, and taking what I might have intended to say...No, I am not ignoring what you are actually saying. I am factoring in your intent to understand the best way to discuss something with.

Referencing my question about Atheist earlier, it would be best to understand where the questioner was coming from, a position of (thinly veiled) dislike of atheism, or general curiosity.

[Synamon]

How far will people go to obstruct the truth and change things around? What do you think?
What "truth"? Gender is not a black and white issue, it is a spectrum. It isn't just about chromosomes as Lycurgus has said, it can include physical traits, hormones, or even how people think of themselves.

Perhaps we are missing the point of your questions. Could you clarify what gender is to you and why you care what sex someone claims for themselves?

[mutebim]

Yes, yes you can.
How can you? and if you do, does that make you right.

If I was to ask the question, "Isn't it wrong to be an Atheist?" it implies that I have a personal belief that it's wrong to be an Atheist
that does not mean that the person asking with "isn't" believes it... it could be because of the society in which he/she lives.

So, there are gender roles? Or do you mean physically, that chromosomes play a part?
What "truth"? Gender is not a black and white issue, it is a spectrum. It isn't just about chromosomes as Lycurgus has said, it can include physical traits, hormones, or even how people think of themselves.
Chromosomes play a role when the sperm first meets the ovule. from there and then, you can not change anything your sex anymore... The truth I am talking about is the fact that it was a certain chromosome combination, and not what one may say after growing up and yet it really wasn't.

I didn't say I agreed, however I do agree that to be male, one must have testicles.
You went on and said If one no longer has male reproductive organs, he is no longer a male. that was your opinion, which means you agreed with it.

No, I am not ignoring what you are actually saying. I am factoring in your intent to understand the best way to discuss something with.
Like I said, the intent is your own opinion. In this case, you happen to factor in the wrong intent. Just take it as it was typed.

[nacht]

You clearly have never knowingly met anyone with gender identity disorder (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and you aren't familiar with sexual reassignment surgery (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.). Some education might be in order on this point, but suffice it to say that even if gender is ingrained from birth, it doesn't necessarily match the sex of the individual.

You can also see a difference in the brain structure (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) where parts of a transsexual's brain look more like their gender rather than their born sex. Quoting that study:


In the present study, we show regardless of sexual orientation: 1) a sex difference in SOM neuron numbers in the human BSTc, with males having almost twice as many SOM neurons as females; 2) a number of SOM neurons in the BSTc of male-to-female transsexuals in the female range; and 3) an opposite pattern in the BSTc of a female-to-male transsexual with a SOM neuron number in the male range.



Chromosomes play a role when the sperm first meets the ovule. from there and then, you can not change anything your sex anymore... The truth I am talking about is the fact that it was a certain chromosome combination, and not what one may say after growing up and yet it really wasn't.


I don't have time to reply to most of this right now, but let me just say in response to this:

Bull.

Let's start with umpteen varities of intersex (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and chimerism (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) and we can go from there.

See also The Five Sexes: Why Male and Female Are Not Enough (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.).

[Lycurgus]

I think this is one of those threads where the poster has his opinion, and won't change it, ever. Akin to a creationist starting a thread about evolution (in which case I normally just take a fossil, and chuck it over their head).

In this particular instance, the Original poster had already decided that Chromosomes define sex, and that's all their is to it. And rather than having discourse about it, mutebim has chosen to educate us on his, obviously correct, views on the world.

Mutebim, you've let your bias and your thinly veiled contempt for those (liars) who either are or choose to be of the opposite sex (depending on your viewpoint) show through in your writing. And when called out on it, you've chosen, rather than to admit it, deny it. And continue to your, apparent, tirade about people who have sex change operations are liars.


Here's a little surprise for you, mutebim: Not all males are completely XY, and not all females are completely XX. In (presumably) half of Chimera cases, the host holds DNA opposite of that of their sibling.





Lycurgus added to this post, 0 minutes and 53 seconds later...

Darnit, nacht beat me to the punch while I was typing!

[SeaCzar]

I have not seen this anywhere so here is the question. What do you think about people who claim to have "changed sex" from female to male or male to female. Isn't being a man more than just shooting sperms into a vagina using a syringe? Does being a woman only has to do with having breasts and looking like a female?

While the term is tossed around these days to mean people actually changing their sexes, I think that certain people are truly transgendered, meaning that they have a physical appearance of a woman, and all of the equipment, but carry the Y chromosome (and vice-versa).

Do you think that "legally" changing your sex really means that you have changed from the sex you were born? How far will people go to obstruct the truth and change things around? What do you think?

In such cases, I think that the person is correcting a genetic mutation, and revealing the truth. Further, people can be whatever they want to be as far as I am concerned. That said, I am very happy as a guy, thank you very much.





SeaCzar added to this post, 1 minutes and 22 seconds later...

Darnit, nacht beat me to the punch while I was typing!

Me too!

[mutebim]

I believe we just see reality in different ways... to me, as of now, I have never heard of a woman who becomes a male and can make sperms and all that stuff. They have to use donated sperms. And I wonder how one can go on and say that that child is "his" That just doesn't add up at all, and there is a big hole there. Nonetheless, going back to the question I put forth, "What do you think?" I have got the opinions from you guys, but to me, I just don't believe that one can change their sex after fertilization. (even if people have claimed to have changed) I know that is my opinion. And there is nothing wrong I mean people are right to say that they are not male or female any more, but I can't believe it and consider it a fact...

[Lycurgus]

I believe we just see reality in different ways... to me, as of now, I have never heard of a woman who becomes a male and can make sperms and all that stuff. They have to use donated sperms. And I wonder how one can go on and say that that child is "his" That just doesn't add up at all, and there is a big hole there. Nonetheless, going back to the question I put forth, "What do you think?" I have got the opinion from you guys, but to me, I just don't believe that one can change their sex after fertilization. (even if people have claimed to have changed) I know that is my opinion. And there is nothing wrong I mean people are right to say that they are not male or female any more, but I can't believe it and consider it a fact...How can an adoptive parent think that a child his "his" or "hers"? How can an step father think a child is "his" or a step mother "hers"?

I don't think there is a hole there, parenting isn't just genetics. Meet any adoptive parent and tell them that child isn't "theirs" or any man who marries a woman with a baby who he knows isn't "his" and tell them that it's not "his" child.





Lycurgus added to this post, 2 minutes and 55 seconds later...

Your view of the world is sadly rigid and close minded.

I would hate to go through life that way.


Tell me this, what's the difference between an asteroid and planet?

[nacht]

to me, as of now, I have never heard of a woman who becomes a male and can make sperms and all that stuff.


Since when did making sperm become a criteria for being male?

There are a lot of people with an XY chromosome set who cannot produce sperm, not even getting into injuries. See, for example, Azoospermia and Aspermia.


And I wonder how one can go on and say that that child is "his" That just doesn't add up at all, and there is a big hole there.


Clearly you have never heard of adoption. If you adopt a child, then genetics aside that child is yours.


Nonetheless, going back to the question I put forth, "What do you think?" I have got the opinion from you guys, but to me, I just don't believe that one can change their sex after fertilization.


You are objectively wrong. Again, Intersex and Chimerism spring immediately to mind, as several varieties of intersex and all forms of chimerism occur by definition after fertilization.

Kleinfelter, turner syndrome, triple X syndrome, etc also have some distinct characteristics and could be considered separate sexes without too much work.

Gender identity disorder--I'm guessing you don't know what that is--also appears to have a genetic component and directly involves the structure of the brain. Since the brain doesn't develop until some time after fertilization,

A portion of the male brain is structured in a particular way. This pattern is seen in FTM transgenders. A portion of the female brain is structured in a particular way. This pattern is seen in MTF transgenders.

Kindly actually read the references that I am supplying.



(even if people have claimed to have changed) I know that is my opinion. And there is nothing wrong I mean people are right to say that they are not male or female any more, but I can't believe it and consider it a fact...

In what way can you not "consider it a fact"?





nacht added to this post, 12 minutes and 23 seconds later...

While the term is tossed around these days to mean people actually changing their sexes, I think that certain people are truly transgendered, meaning that they have a physical appearance of a woman, and all of the equipment, but carry the Y chromosome (and vice-versa).



I think we need to distinguish between transgender and certain forms of intersex.

A MTF transgender usually has XY chromosomes and (generally) has fully functioning male parts at birth. They will develop male secondary sex characteristics, but their brain is female, or all intents and purposes.

Someone who has CAIS (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.) (a form of intersex condition, karyotype 46,XY)--will be born with the appearance of a woman and probably won't know anything is amiss until they don't menstruate. They have no ovaries or uterus, and have undescended testes. They can develop the secondary sex characteristics of women along with the body fat and reshaping of the pelvis common to women.

There are other forms of intersex, with different karyotypes and causes.

[firebee]

Hon, you are confused. That's okay, so am I. For help in untangling, please to sex the following scenarios:

1) A person has XY chromosomes, is to all appearances male, but is missing their testicles.
2) A person has XY chromosomes, but appears externally female and produces neither sperm nor eggs.
3) A person has both XX and XY chromosomes, depending on which cells of the body you test.
4) A person has a beard, a deep voice, and the fat / muscle deposition patterns of a male, but is short of stature and has XX chromosomes.

Bonus question: If you met cases 2 and 4 on a street, how would you determine their gender according to your standards?





firebee added to this post, 5 minutes and 2 seconds later...

Other bonus question: Do you know what chromosomes you have?

[Lycurgus]

This thread is great, thanks for the elaboration nacht! I hadn't heard about triple X syndrome.

My answers to Firebee:
1) A person has XY chromosomes, is to all appearances male, but is missing their testicles.Eunuch.
2) A person has XY chromosomes, but appears externally female and produces neither sperm nor eggs.Elaboration on why?
3) A person has both XX and XY chromosomes, depending on which cells of the body you test.They would be a chimera, and that would likely be dependent on their given body parts.
4) A person has a beard, a deep voice, and the fat / muscle deposition patterns of a male, but is short of stature and has XX chromosomes.Sounds like a chika to me!

Do they have male parts or lady bits? :P

[nacht]

It actually goes up to 49,XXXXX o_o There are ~25 of them worldwide. 47,XXX makes up around 1 out of every 1000 live births.

My answers to Firebee:
Elaboration on why?


Among other things could be CAIS. It does exactly that.

[mutebim]

Since when did making sperm become a criteria for being male?
If you adopt a child, then genetics aside that child is yours.
In what way can you not "consider it a fact"?
"genetics aside" did I say that I have put genetics aside? okay the sperm example was just one example, but at least that particular example is one that leads to another bigger paradox... for a woman who becomes a male, they have to get sperms somehow in order to have any "offspring" in reality, that woman who "became male" would not be in anyway related to that offspring. It is an example but you build on it.



I don't think there is a hole there, parenting isn't just genetics. Meet any adoptive parent and tell them that child isn't "theirs" or any man who marries a woman with a baby who he knows isn't "his" and tell them that it's not "his" child.
But I am not talking about parenting and parents who adopt. I think adopting is good but I also think that those parents who adopt should be able to tell their adopted children that they are not the real genetic parents.


Your view of the world is sadly rigid and close minded.
I would hate to go through life that way.
To you, it seems close minded, and you would hate to, but I have no problem with it. In fact I love it. I would rather live knowing the reality and fact instead of a lion in a sheep's clothing...


Tell me this, what's the difference between an asteroid and planet?
I can just refer you to the definition of those 2. they are indeed different.

[firebee]

nacht, Lycurgus -- So much with the spoilers! I have a fair idea already how you see gender, but I don't understand what mutebim thinks.

As to you, mutebim, I don't even understand what you think is male and female yet. Before we can talk about "pretending to be otherwise", let's figure out what we are.

[mutebim]

I am going to be as simple as possible... sex is black and white. Someone who is male has a penis and and a female has a vagina. Let's put it this way. All people who have a penis are male and all those who have a vagina are female. I have heard of hermaphrodites in other species, never heard of one in humans -- where a person has a penis and a vagina. it is that simple to me.

[firebee]

What about a person who has neither a penis nor a vagina?

I've another set of scenarios for you:
-- A person who, in an accident, loses his penis at age 7 days.
-- A person who, in an accident, loses his penis at age 40.

[noueux]

If you'd like to see the world objectively through chromosomal identification (which we've already seen is more complicated than we generally think), that's perfect. Call out a "lion in sheep's clothing", if you will. My preference is not to identify or define a person's gender as anything other than what that person chooses. I happen to think my way works out particularly nicely.

I guess my real question is: What is the purpose of determining a person's sex (in the manner you choose to define it)? What questions does it answer? Does reducing people to narrow and rigid restraints help you to ignore natural human complexity? (That's the only purpose I can see in it, myself.)

Also, all four of my siblings are adopted. They all always knew they were adopted. They also always knew exactly who their real parents were. And those were the parents that raised them. Aside from keeping good records of genetic disorders and diseases, what is the purpose of emphasizing biological familial relationships?

Basically, you can define whatever you want, however you want. I respect your right to do that. I also respect your right to assign arbitrary moral values to certain definitions (which seems to be your point, but I could be missing it). But none of that helps me understand why you think your opinion is important.

[mutebim]

But none of that helps me understand why you think your opinion is important.

You almost got the point, but went too far... that was the whole point of the thread. to get opinions from other points of view. It is not about whose opinion or why a certain opinion is more important. It was really a simple thing. "What do you think?" Tell me what you think without necessarily accusing my point of view, because you will really just be wasting your time accusing an opinion, any opinion... In the end all these are opinions...

[Muumeh]

mutebiem, are you serious? There have been recorded documents about human hermaphrodites for centuries... here's one example.

Hermaphrodites have created some interesting situations. In 1843, Levi Suydam, a 23 year old resident of Salisbury, Connecticut, asked the town magistrates to validate his right to vote as a Whig in a particularly divisive local election. The opposition party raised objections, saying that Levi was really a woman and therefore unable to vote. A doctor examined him and declared that he had a penis and was therefore a man. Duydam voted and the Whig candidate won by a single vote. Within a few days after the election, Suydam had his monthly menstrual bleeding (Fausto-Sterling, 1993). Hugh Young (1937) relates that one of his patients, a hermaphrodite named Emma had a penis-sized clitoris and a vagina. Raised as a girl, she could have "normal" heterosexual relationships with both men and women. And she did. She functioned sexually as both male and female all her adult life.

The whole article can be found here: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[noueux]

You almost got the point, but went too far... that was the whole point of the thread. to get opinions from other points of view. It is not about whose opinion or why a certain opinion is more important. It was really a simple thing. "What do you think?" Tell me what you think without necessarily accusing my point of view, because you will really just be wasting your time accusing an opinion, any opinion... In the end all these are opinions...

Well, from what I can see, a lot of other people are giving you a lot of compelling reasons behind their beliefs, and I haven't seen much evidence to support yours. This kind of opinion-evaluation is what generally happens in debate.

[Lycurgus]

I am going to be as simple as possible... sex is black and white. Someone who is male has a penis and and a female has a vagina. Let's put it this way. All people who have a penis are male and all those who have a vagina are female. I have heard of hermaphrodites in other species, never heard of one in humans -- where a person has a penis and a vagina. it is that simple to me.There are human hermaphrodites, although they typically have one set of genitalia removed.

[Storm]

I have not seen this anywhere so here is the question. What do you think about people who claim to have "changed sex" from female to male or male to female. Isn't being a man more than just shooting sperms into a vagina using a syringe? Does being a woman only has to do with having breasts and looking like a female? Do you think that "legally" changing your sex really means that you have changed from the sex you were born? How far will people go to obstruct the truth and change things around? What do you think?


It sounds like you are confusing things here. A person changes sex because they feel/believe/ARE they are actually the opposite sex mentally than what their physical body appears to be. Surgery is not always undertaken (expensive and risky). Some people just chose to dress like the gender they believe they are.

You can believe they are mistaken if you want.

However, I think if they feel they are a woman even though their body appears male or vice versa, then I have no reason to doubt them.

Fun fact: When talking about the past to a transgendered person, it is polite to say "Before you came out as a woman" rather than "When you were a man."

Note on hermaphrodites (Scientific term: intersex) vs Transgendered
Intersexuality is usually considered a separate condition than those who are transgendered. Transgendered is a mental condition, whereas intersexuality is physical. An intersex may chose to go through surgery, but sometimes don't (besides maybe "trimming" organs so they look more male/female). The intersexed does not feel male OR female, because they are not either.
The transgendered does identify with one sex over the other.
Here is the wiki article on Intersexuality (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)

Here is the wiki on: Transgendered (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.)
Human Sexuality: More complicated than wee-wees and hoo-has

[mutebim]

are you serious? There have been recorded documents about human hermaphrodites for centuries... here's one example.

Like I said, I have never seen an hermaphrodite. And they are the ones I would consider a complex case. besides them, gender it is nothing more than black and white. That brings back that saying that "don't judge a book by its cover." Nothing should be able to tell one's sex except what they really have under their clothes. Most humans are just taking it for granted that anyone with breast is a woman, and anyone with a deep voice is a man, which should not be the case.

[amberlinen]

You didn't ask this many questions about why 1+1=2 before you use it in calculations; you also didn't ask why the people who wear pink dresses and have breasts are considred females before you identify them as females in your preschool years. As long you treat them as whichever sex they want you to see them, you're a sensible and good person.

My opinion is I really don't care about the "true version" of a man-made definition. There can be many definitions as long as they serve to make people live happier and suffer less.

[Muumeh]

I am going to be as simple as possible... sex is black and white. Someone who is male has a penis and and a female has a vagina. Let's put it this way. All people who have a penis are male and all those who have a vagina are female. I have heard of hermaphrodites in other species, never heard of one in humans -- where a person has a penis and a vagina. it is that simple to me.

...I'm nitpicking, I know. But I just had to.

[Lycurgus]

It is an example but you build on it.How do you build on it? There's nothing there to build on...
But I am not talking about parenting and parents who adopt. I think adopting is good but I also think that those parents who adopt should be able to tell their adopted children that they are not the real genetic parents. ... And who's to say that a man who's not able to have children isn't able to tell his kids that?

Or a post op female-to-male?
To you, it seems close minded, and you would hate to, but I have no problem with it. In fact I love it. I would rather live knowing the reality and fact instead of a lion in a sheep's clothing...Your 'lion in sheep's clothing' sounds a lot like the knowledge that the Christian-Right has that homosexuals are out there trying to convert kids.
I can just refer you to the definition of those 2. they are indeed different.But the definitions change. I'm asking you where the definition should lie.

Anyone who's studied astronomy knows the current paradox. Mercury is a planet, but if it was located where Ceres is, it wouldn't be, and if Ceres was located where Mercury is, it would be.

Mercury isn't large enough to clear out that orbit, but it's still a planet because of location?

You obviously don't understand the question. ;)

What about a person who has neither a penis nor a vagina?

I've another set of scenarios for you:
-- A person who, in an accident, loses his penis at age 7 days.
-- A person who, in an accident, loses his penis at age 40.All Eunuchs!



What about, as mentioned before, CAIS, mutebim?

Pseudohermaphroditism (To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.), for instance, can leave an XY male with absolutely gorgeous breasts, beautiful feminine features, and an inverted penis (which resembles a vagina... ) and undescended gonads (which very much resemble Ovaries).

Why? Because they can be completely resistant to Testosterone. Gotchya thinkin' yet?





Lycurgus added to this post, 4 minutes and 9 seconds later...

Like I said, I have never seen an hermaphrodite. And they are the ones I would consider a complex case. besides them, gender it is nothing more than black and white. That brings back that saying that "don't judge a book by its cover." Nothing should be able to tell one's sex except what they really have under their clothes. Most humans are just taking it for granted that anyone with breast is a woman, and anyone with a deep voice is a man, which should not be the case."True" hermaphroditism is impossible, that is, one with a full functional penis & testicles and fully functional vagina & ovaries.

However, it is not impossible to have someone with penis and vagina, and nonfunctional testicles or ovaries.

[firebee]

It strikes me I never answered mutebim's question... if he's going to answer all my nagging INTP questions I ought to be polite...

I'm an engineer, not a doctor. I don't generally encounter people in situations where their chromosomal gender or their born gender has a significance to me any more than any other part of their personal history. Consequently, my definition of what is a "man" and what is a "woman" is -- is what the person considers themself to be. Most of the time this is denoted by obvious markers of dress -- sometimes, as for example in my case, it is denoted more by physiological markers, and once I was rather puzzled by encountering a man with decidedly gynoid bone structure. After that last case I learned to assume less.

So the questions based on shooting sperm into vaginas and the presence of breasts (one might consider the matter of gynecomastia, incidentally), don't really matter to me -- I certainly don't see how a person goes about inseminating their partner, if they choose to. And likewise, the question of "How far will people go to obstruct the truth?" fails to make sense, unless you are referring to the assertion that someone with a beard, a deep voice, and a penis should use the bathroom designated for women because they once had the outward appearance of a woman. That's going pretty damn far to obstruct the truth, IMHO.

[Visum]

Personally and generally speaking I feel that if someone wants to "change" their sex, they may have psychological issues. It really doesn't matter how we define male or female because we are speaking in a relative manner in respect to the person who believes or wants to change. If they "feel" they are now the other sex, who cares how we define male or female? Let them believe or be whatever they want. It may or may not be reality, but they will at least have accomplished their goal of feeling or "changing” their sex. "But wait, we wouldn't want them to think they changed sex when they really didn't." This discussion is all about them and how they feel, not about what we think is reality.

[mutebim]

It strikes me I never answered mutebim's question... if he's going to answer all my nagging INTP questions I ought to be polite...
Not at all


So the questions based on shooting sperm into vaginas and the presence of breasts (one might consider the matter of gynecomastia, incidentally), And likewise, the question of "How far will people go to obstruct the truth?" fails to make sense, unless you are referring to the assertion that someone with a beard, a deep voice, and a penis should use the bathroom designated for women because they once had the outward appearance of a woman. That's going pretty damn far to obstruct the truth, IMHO.

Okay how would a woman who becomes a man have to get those sperms into another woman? considering it gynecomastia would be really off topic.
My initial thinking was that okay, those people can be whatever sex they claim to be, but in the end, it should be about what they really were when they were born. That is what I would see. You may have a different view. So those people should use the appropriate bathrooms. But I think either way, those people would just be going to help themselves and as long as no one goes to try to peep, everyone will be fine.

[Storm]

Ok, it sounds like mutebim may actually be much more open-minded than people are taking him for.

It sounds like he considers the gender roles so unfixed that for someone to say they feel they are one gender over the other is meaningless since there are no true gender roles.
Therefore, the definition of male/female is necessarily limited to a mere biological/physical definition, and people who change that are engagin in a rather futile exercise.

I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth mutebim.
But even if I am, I think the above conclusion is rather interesting.

[mutebim]

Therefore, the definition of male/female is necessarily limited to a mere biological/physical definition, and people who change that are engagin in a rather futile exercise.
But even if I am, I think the above conclusion is rather interesting.

Well, put... and interesting indeed. Was wondering why others can't just throw out their opinion instead of attacking mine.

[firebee]

Okay how would a woman who becomes a man have to get those sperms into another woman? considering it gynecomastia would be really off topic.
My initial thinking was that okay, those people can be whatever sex they claim to be, but in the end, it should be about what they really were when they were born. That is what I would see. You may have a different view. So those people should use the appropriate bathrooms. But I think either way, those people would just be going to help themselves and as long as no one goes to try to peep, everyone will be fine.


Presumably he uses donor sperm and a turkey baster. Or he stops taking testosterone and his wife uses donor sperm and a turkey baster. But the point is, you don't necessarily know from looking at someone how they go about procreating.

The matter of gynecomastia is that men can also have breasts. In fact -- someone who understands fetal development a bit better can correct me on this -- but we all start from the same place or mostly the same place when it comes to physical differentiation of the sexes. The differences in body hair, voice, skin texture, and I believe also bone structure between men and women are caused by testosterone that comes from the gonads in puberty. If you administer testosterone in sufficient quantity to a woman, those changes will happen just the same way. Likewise, the erectile tissues of the penis and clitoris come from the same structure, as do... I believe the labia and scrotum come from the same structure. The differentiation here, I believe, is triggered by hormones during fetal development. There's also a component from the genes, as I do not think that an XY-person can be a fertile man or vice versa. This is how, in fact, someone with CAIS ends up being a woman in almost every sense -- they do not respond to testosterone at any stage in development, and consequently their development takes the default path, which is female.

And again, it comes down to how one can tell what someone really is at any time, including when they are born. These structures can develop in intermediate ways -- so for instance you can end up having a difficult time whether to call an infant a "girl with an enlarged clitoris" or a "boy with severe hypospadias".

Now. It's easy to talk about genitalia because it's easy to find them. The brain is also influenced by hormones during development. So even though you don't see it, the brain is also in some state that is influenced towards one gender or another. Right now we don't have very good knowledge in this area, but my suspicion is that hormonal influences on the fetal brain at critical stages of development can influence how the brain develops in terms of self-identity of gender, the characteristics that the person is attracted to, and in the tendencies toward different skill sets in different genders. All of these critical times are at least somewhat independent from each other, and of the critical times for the genitalia. Which is a roundabout way of saying that someone can have an intersex condition of some part of the brain, but of no other body part. So what gender are they "really" at birth then?

[HeyZeus]

The pursuit of happiness is a pretty healthy thing to believe in, without placing conditions on others. A few exceptions: don't harm others and respect others' property.

If it makes them happy to change, then it's positive. Why should an uninterested third party care? But I don't want to think about synthetic genitalia. I wonder if there's any sensation when you flick it? Can anyone authoritatively answer that? No BS pls, unless it's hilarious. Or in other words, no earnest BS. Sometimes the overwhelming earnestness in this forum makes me think one of us is not INTJ, and it ain't me.

[firebee]

The pursuit of happiness is a pretty healthy thing to believe in, without placing conditions on others. A few exceptions: don't harm others and respect others' property.

If it makes them happy to change, then it's positive. Why should an uninterested third party care? But I don't want to think about synthetic genitalia. I wonder if there's any sensation when you flick it? Can anyone authoritatively answer that? No BS pls, unless it's hilarious. Or in other words, no earnest BS. Sometimes the overwhelming earnestness in this forum makes me think one of us is not INTJ, and it ain't me.

You want a serious answer?

Having done some reading on the subject I have a close enough idea for government work. And any experts can feel free to correct me as required.

For FTM guys (born female, now male) -- generally they will take testosterone, which does the bulk of the work in achieving a physical transition. This changes the voice and body hair, as well as muscle mass and fat deposition patterns (abdomen instead of hips). Changes in bone structure may happen over a long period of time. The breasts may shrink somewhat also, but many transmen (if they can afford it) go for chest reconstructive surgery that makes their chest appear male.

Regards the question of genitals, testosterone causes enlargement of the clitoris over the course of... I believe 1-2 years of taking it. Many guys stop with that. It's a natural part of their body and there is most certainly sensation when you flick it. Depending on the guy, the enlargement may not be enough for penetrative sex -- so he might use some manner of artificial substitute (note that women can also do this!). Obviously, something made of rubber isn't going to have sensation, but with clever geometry it can bear on something that does.

Producing a penis of realistic appearance and length for a transman is a nontrivial process. Many choose not to try it, because it is expensive and has considerable disadvantages. I'm not familiar with the exact techniques used, but generally the concept is to build the approprate structures with the patient's own tissue. If I understand correctly, such a reconstruction is going to lack erectile tissue and will hence need some other means to produce an erection -- similar to the implants used by impotent natural men. One of the big sticking points with this surgery is precisely that sensation is extraordinarily tricky -- enough is being moved around that it's difficult to preserve innervation to the crucial areas -- so the person may well have dodgy sensation in that area (much as you might experience from a serious cut that hit nerves -- I have such an area on my foot from an incident with a drywall trowel) and may well lack sexual sensitivity.

For MTF women (born male, now female), the situation is similar but slightly less problematic. Somatically speaking, they often have considerable virilization that can only be partially undone, but the question of genitals is a bit easier since they have more to work with. Here, the general idea is to fashion a clitoris and vagina from the penis and scrotum. Without getting into annoying technical details -- results that are extremely good cosmetically and quite good functionally can be obtained, although again since a lot of tissue is being moved around it's possible to lose sensation for crucial bits.

And I really hope I didn't manage to mortally offend some transperson out there by insensitively referring to one or another part. It's not my intention and I'll apologize in advance...

[mutebim]

The matter of gynecomastia is that men can also have breasts.

The reason I called it off topic is because gynecomastia only does with breasts. so a man who has such a problem will not necessarily have sperm problems and all that.


So what gender are they "really" at birth then?

But getting to the CAIS issue, I think that, that is one case which would actually be exempt from what I was referring to. And usually, people who have to "change" sex, don't really have any such complications at all. But like I said when I referred to the hermaphrodite example, I think CAIS is a complicated case, but not that complicated still. Maybe since there can't exist (at least as of now there is no person who is both male and female and both systems work properly) those people who happen to have "fetal development" of their systems should also be referred to as what they really are. You can't just refer to them as female... at the same time they are not male. I would think that whatever system they use to empty bowls is the one to represent their sex... or if any works, whichever one works would be their sex. But this would probably not be determined at birth so it leave this particular case hanging.

[Lycurgus]

The reason I called it off topic is because gynecomastia only does with breasts. so a man who has such a problem will not necessarily have sperm problems and all that.



But getting to the CAIS issue, I think that, that is one case which would actually be exempt from what I was referring to. And usually, people who have to "change" sex, don't really have any such complications at all. But like I said when I referred to the hermaphrodite example, I think CAIS is a complicated case, but not that complicated still. Maybe since there can't exist (at least as of now there is no person who is both male and female and both systems work properly) those people who happen to have "fetal development" of their systems should also be referred to as what they really are. You can't just refer to them as female... at the same time they are not male. I would think that whatever system they use to empty bowls is the one to represent their sex... or if any works, whichever one works would be their sex. But this would probably not be determined at birth so it leave this particular case hanging.Everyone, male or female, empties their bowels the same way.

They sit on the toilet and squeeze until the poo comes out.

[mutebim]

Everyone, male or female, empties their bowels the same way.

They sit on the toilet and squeeze until the poo comes out.

oh oh I meant whichever system they use to urinate...

[Lycurgus]

oh oh I meant whichever system they use to urinate...They do that the same way too. Women can pee standing up, just as men can pee sitting down.

I'm not going to bother explaining the specifics (mostly because I only know of them second hand...), but it's perfectly possible.

And, going by your logic, "do they pee standing up or sitting down?" wouldn't a post-op FtM who pees standing up qualify as a man? And a Post-op MtF as a woman?

[mutebim]

And, going by your logic, "do they pee standing up or sitting down?" wouldn't a post-op FtM who pees standing up qualify as a man? And a Post-op MtF as a woman?
Again you are taking what I might have intended to say instead of what I really said. No where did I refer to "whichever system they use to urinate" as being "pee standing up or sitting down"

[Lycurgus]

Again you are taking what I might have intended to say instead of what I really said. No where did I refer to "whichever system they use to urinate" as being "pee standing up or sitting down"They all use the same system to urinate.

They force the urine out of their bladder with muscles, through the urethra and out the body.

[firebee]

But getting to the CAIS issue, I think that, that is one case which would actually be exempt from what I was referring to. And usually, people who have to "change" sex, don't really have any such complications at all. But like I said when I referred to the hermaphrodite example, I think CAIS is a complicated case, but not that complicated still. Maybe since there can't exist (at least as of now there is no person who is both male and female and both systems work properly) those people who happen to have "fetal development" of their systems should also be referred to as what they really are. You can't just refer to them as female... at the same time they are not male. I would think that whatever system they use to empty bowls is the one to represent their sex... or if any works, whichever one works would be their sex. But this would probably not be determined at birth so it leave this particular case hanging.

What do you mean by "empty bowls"?

We are, of course, dealing with unusual cases here. Most of the time there isn't any question what gender someone "really" is -- so one might say that the cases where there is a question, don't come up often enough to worry too much about. Hence, it might be prudent to respect their decision on the subject, being as they are the ones most privy to their own values and constraints.

There is considerable debate on what to do about intersex conditions, and one of the important points is in fact fertility -- since if the person has the potential to become fertile at all, it will only be in one case and not the other. This is part of the reason why some advocate a minimally invasive approach to the problem -- historically, the actions that well-meaning doctors have taken with young children have sometimes closed the door on future fertility or on future enjoyment of intercourse.

And generally transgender people show no sign of intersex conditions as far as their reproductive organs et cetera -- but as nacht mentions somewhere earlier (I think), some studies have shown differences in the brain. I'd get into bizarre scenarios involving mad scientists and brains in jars, but perhaps this thread has taken a strange enough turn already.

Obviously I'm leaning toward the point of view that the gender of the brain is the one that rules -- but possibly it is somewhat narrow minded in these cases to reduce gender to an either/or when the various signifiers show conflicting conclusions.

[Jennifer]

I have not seen this anywhere so here is the question. What do you think about people who claim to have "changed sex" from female to male or male to female. Isn't being a man more than just shooting sperms into a vagina using a syringe? Does being a woman only has to do with having breasts and looking like a female? Do you think that "legally" changing your sex really means that you have changed from the sex you were born? How far will people go to obstruct the truth and change things around? What do you think?


I am a pre-op transexual,male to female. Firstly one must differentiate between ones inherent gender and ones inherent sex. I my gender has always been female though my sex was male. Transexuals who don't get address their gender identity disorder are probably at a higher risk for suicide and major depression than the general population. Essential hormone thearapy and gender reassignment allow the transexual to live as their inherent gender as best as possible.

[Zilal]

I have to admit that I don't really "get" the idea of being a man trapped in a woman's body or vice versa, and can't imagine it, but I also believe that my inability to comprehend it is not a valid reason for me to be against people's right to have a sex change. I mean, lawdy. People know what it's like to be in their own heads, and if they say they were born with the wrong parts, who am I to disagree?

Now... perhaps some of you have also heard of a condition wherein people believe a limb is "extra," that it feels like it doesn't belong, and they can't get relief until the limb is amputated... there's some evidence that this is caused by a particular kind of faulty wiring in the brain. If transgender issues are in fact due to the same kind of thing... not a man's soul being trapped in a woman's body, but bad brain wiring making a person constantly feel that their body is plain wrong... then maybe someday there'll be a neurological treatment to allow people to lead happy lives.

But until then, jeez, people are miserable and desperate and, yes, committing suicide over feeling trapped in a body that doesn't reflect their deepest sense of who they are. I am all for the use of what methods are available to help people, which include counseling, hormone treatments and surgery.