"Cis" and "trans" are different types of a person's.... what?
"Cis" and "trans" are different types of a person's.... what?
What are cis and trans alternate types of? I don't think it's "gender identity" because wouldn't that just be man, woman or nonbinary regardless of whether they're cis or trans? Cis/trans just being a qualifier?
If the answer is "I am cis" or "I am trans", what is the question?
Edit: Someone came up with the term "gender congruity" and (after looking up the definition of "congruity") I think this describes what I'm talking about perfectly.
You're viewing part of a thread.
No, sex is a biological characteristic and the doctor is describing your phenotypic sex based on observable characteristics. This really isn't that complicated. There are two* combinations of chromosomes that determine sex, so there are two sexes. This is basic biology and has absolutely fuckall to do with gender as a social construct.
* Really there are around a half dozen sex chromosome combinations because they occasionally get duplicated. Functionally there are two because all of the combinations except 1 have a y chromosome and are male
Nope. They don't even check your chromosomes when you're born. There are also many possible genital configurations at birth. Odd that we don't treat every one of those possibilities uniquely and instead force them to get surgery so the doctor can assign a gender to them. You'd think if it was all basic biology we would just have a unique gender for every one wouldn't you?
There are also many, many more possible configurations of your chromosomes than half a dozen lol. You can also have XY and be assigned female at birth. And vice versa.
Your doctor is assigning you a gender. Thats what he's doing. He calls you either a boy or a girl based on your genital configuration and then as I said in my previous comment that assigned gender goes on to affect every single aspect of your life for the rest of your life.
You don't seem to know what we're even talking about. Sex is not binary and is not enshrined in biology. If we wanted to talk about biology, if the point was biology, if the doctor assigning genders to babies primary concern was biology, then he would assign a unique gender to every single possible genital configuration at birth. All of them would be unique. Instead he's assigning you a gender so that society can treat you a certain way. It's that simple.
Is this some type of competition to see who can know the least about biology? Because you're definitely acting like it's a competition to know the least about biology. I think the walrus is still edging you out slightly. Maybe up your game a bit.
We do have a unique gender for everyone, we just don't have words for each specific position on the spectrum because it's so variable. That's why we have umbrella terms like nonbinary or gender fluid.
Sex is binary. It is "enshrined in biology". There are exactly two sexes. Female (x only) and male (x and y). The doctor classifies your phenotypic sex (what genitalia you have) at birth because it's the same as your genotypic sex (whether you have a y chromosome) 99.99% (before you waste your time claiming it's AkShEwAlLy 99.98%, Google hyperbole) of the time. You can be a genotype male and present as a phenotype female. Your sex in this case is male, but your doctor would have filled out your birth certificate as female.
You just do not have any idea what you are talking about about but seem unwilling to let that stop you. It's that simple.
Tell me you don't understand biology and genetics without telling me you don't understand biology and genetics. You've succeeded.
Also biology hates binaries. Nature hates binaries. They're exceedingly rare.
Use a stupid meme to cover up your lack of point or even basic understanding without using a stupid meme to cover up your lack of point or even basic understanding.
You’d think if it was all basic biology we would just have a unique gender for every one wouldn’t you?
Nothing in biology is exactly identical between individuums. A common eye color is brown, although there are as many shades of brown as there are people.
It is just practical and how language, or even perception works, that we tend to categorize similarities, and strongly favor common occurrances over outliers.
the doctor is describing your phenotypic sex based on observable characteristics.
Your doctor is assigning you a gender.
Maybe you two aren't even disagreeing?
I'd say the doctor tries to assign the new born into male or female according to biological sex, and gender is inferred from that.
He calls you either a boy or a girl based on your genital configuration
Yes, that's what I mean. A two-step process. First, biological expression is assessed. Next, based on #1, social gender is inferred.
Youre right, we do just use language to describe things in a convenient manner that is not actually universally true. Do you think language just springs out of the ground or something? Humans make it. We make it socially. One might say we socially construct these concepts.
Biological sex is not a thing. There are people with dicks and people with vaginas and people with neither and people with both and people with stuff that isn't even classifiable in terms of the terms dick and vagina. Why is there not a sex for each possible genital configuration? Why not one for each possible chromosomal configuration? Because sex is a concept we as humans created that does not map 1 to 1 with biological reality. Biological sex is not a thing, there is biology and then there is the human made concept of sex. They are 2 different things.
Your doctor assigns you a gender at birth. In most countries he is legally required to mark down one at the time of your birth. That gender is used for all the reasons I listed in a previous comment. Your mother then picks you up and affirms that gender assessment. From then on your gender is assigned until you yourself revoke it.
Sexing in humans isn't phenotypic though. It is chromosomal.
It's both. Phenotyping sex is the common method of determining it because it's really easy and it's accurate enough in 99% of cases.
Sexing through genotyping is 100% accurate, but it's time consuming, comparatively expensive, and only relevant in a tiny handful of cases.
Phenotype doesn't determine sex. It's a function of it. You literally agreed with me on this.
I'm terribly sorry that I've had to dumb down my point so far for people to understand it that you now think it's yours.
Good day.
If your point is that phenotype at all defines sex, you are objectively wrong. It is a function of sex. If your point is that phenotype is a reliable indicator of sexing in humans, you are also objectively wrong.
I rest my case. I guess I can add wrong and objectively to the list of words you don't know.
See now you're both wrong and a prick.