GC: Scientists say sex is a spectrum, even an illusory man-made social construct

submitted by Fastandthecurious from (self.GCdebatesQT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (21 children)

In the post, this article claims a honey bee was made by two males and no females: https://www.forbes.com/sites/grrlscientist/2018/11/28/a-honeybee-with-two-fathers-and-no-mother/#740bc6f84405

Genetic analysis revealed that nine of the 11 gynandromorphs had either two or three fathers. Astonishingly, one gynandromorph -- the seemingly normal female control -- actually had two fathers and no mother -- an event that could only have resulted from sperm fusion.

“The female bee that had two fathers created by the fusion of two sperms is the first reported in haplodiploids and is an interesting phenomena considering that attempts to fuse two sperm in mammalians have not [been] found to be possible,” Ms. Aamidor elaborated in email.

This study begins to expand our limited understanding of the truly unusual ways that sexual animals can fuse their genomes.

Two sperms come together to create a zygote, which means there is no difference between a sperm and an egg. Two sperms can fertilize each other. Two eggs can fertilize each other. There isn't a difference between a male and a female.

[–]Poppy29252 24 insightful - 1 fun24 insightful - 0 fun25 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A man in a dress isn't a bee.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 16 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

And humans are exactly like bees so I guess you’ve won the whole debate sub lol

Surely you realize there’s a reason this was worth being written about?

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 2 insightful - 8 fun2 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 8 fun -  (15 children)

Humans are not bees. But the bee shows sex being a binary is not universal across animals. It means there is no actual difference between a male and a female because two eggs or two sperms can make a zygote too, and male and female are social constructs that only work for humans, not other animals.

[–]kwallio 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Please argue from human biology. Bees are not humans. Fungi are not humans.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

That wouldn’t show that there’s no difference between the sexes. The fact that you mentioned two different things indicated that they are… wait for it… two different things.

All this would mean is that, in bees at least, two eggs or two sperm could possibly maybe accomplish this rarity. Males and females still exist lol

That’s what I don’t get about this insistance on a spectrum. It does nobody any favors. You fit where you’re born on the spectrum, and cosmetics or feelings won’t change that. So what does the existence of a spectrum as opposed to a binary accomplish? “Transwoman” would still be a euphemism for man, and TW would still be male (same but opposite for transmen). Like what is gained from us accepting a spectrum?

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 3 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 5 fun -  (7 children)

It might have looked like I mentioned two different things, but the reason there is a "male" or "female" is because only these two can come together and create a zygote. That's what they call sexual reproduction. Now that it's clear two sperm or two eggs can create a zygote too, it goes to show there isn't a difference between an "egg" or a "sperm", because two "sperms" or two "eggs" can create a zygote too, and so there isn't a "male" or a "female".

That’s what I don’t get about this insistance on a spectrum. It does nobody any favors. You fit where you’re born on the spectrum, and cosmetics or feelings won’t change that. So what does the existence of a spectrum as opposed to a binary accomplish? “Transwoman” would still be a euphemism for man, and TW would still be male (same but opposite for transmen). Like what is gained from us accepting a spectrum?

If sex were a spectrum, then it would mean if a woman takes hormones or undergoes surgery, she, or they, would stop being fully a woman and enter the spectrum in which they are a bit of a woman and a bit of a man.

That's what they want to tell others with "sex is a spectrum". With "sex is a spectrum" there's also "sex can change" after it. By changing certain characteristics, they believe they can become less of a woman, more of a man for example.

[–]MarkTwainiac 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Now that it's clear two sperm or two eggs can create a zygote too, it goes to show there isn't a difference between an "egg" or a "sperm"

Maybe it's clear to you, but it's not clear to me or others. Humans have been combining bird & fish eggs together for millennia, but AFAIK this has never resulted in a new chick or fish coming into being - instead, it's yielded scrambled eggs, omelets, souffles & caviar.

Boys & men have been merging & mixing their sperm together for millennia too. But a human zygote - much less a embryo, fetus or baby - has never been created as a result.

BTW, you seem unaware that male scientists & physicians for hundreds of years have been trying to make new life in various ways, & since the mid-20th century extensive experiments have been done in an effort to make zygotes out of just sperm or just eggs.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If you’re basing this spectrum on zygotes and chromosomes etc then trans people are the sex they were born. It doesn’t work both ways. You’d need two spectrums, and trans people wouldn’t be the sex they wish to be in at least one by default. You can’t measure sex in a way that satisfies trans people, accounts for intersex conditions, and acknowledges the other almost 100% of the population that is neither trans nor intersex.

As for the idea that there’s no difference between male and female- there obviously is. We can see it. You discussed it at the end of your own comment. Regardless of the weird anomaly of two dude bees making a baby, even if that meant that any two males or any two females can reproduce (it doesn’t mean that but I’ll go with it), there are still thousands of obvious, provable, observable, and constant differences between the two sexes of any species. it’s kind of why the sexes were separated to begin with.

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (3 children)

it’s kind of why the sexes were separated to begin with.

They were separated that way because only a "sperm" and an "egg" can make a zygote. But if two "sperm" or two "eggs" can make a zygote too, then the differences between a "male" and a "female" that we see are arbitrary. The differences could as easily exist between "males" themselves, or "females" themselves because two "eggs" or two "sperms" can do the exact same thing a "sperm" and an "egg" do.

These words are in quotes, not because "sperm" and "egg", "male" and "female" are different, but because otherwise noone would understand what I'm saying.

If you’re basing this spectrum on zygotes and chromosomes etc then trans people are the sex they were born. It doesn’t work both ways. You’d need two spectrums, and trans people wouldn’t be the sex they wish to be in at least one by default. You can’t measure sex in a way that satisfies trans people, accounts for intersex conditions, and acknowledges the other almost 100% of the population that is neither trans nor intersex.

Yeah. If it's based on chromosomes, even if sex were a spectrum, noone would be able to change their sex. The thing is they don't base the spectrum on chromosomes. They base it on secondary sex characteristics, and genitalia. If a woman takes hormones, then in the "sex spectrum", this is not "just a woman" but "a bit of a woman, a bit of a man" due to having some secondary sex characteristics associated with males as well.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

  1. They weren’t separated just because sperm and egg. Female and male bodies are so obviously different and have such obviously different functions that I can’t take you pretending this isn’t the case seriously. You really think the first humans saw that half of them had breasts and vaginas and the other half had no breasts and had dicks and they said “oh gee no differences here”? And only noticed that we differed in some ways after they found out about sperm and eggs? How did they find out about sperm and eggs then? Why aren’t there more cases of double male made babies? Or even one in humans? And if there aren’t any cases of this occurring amongst humans- how and why is it relevant to humans?

    There’s a reason the bee thing made the news- it’s not a common thing. It’s an extraordinary thing. But as I said, even if two males and two females can reproduce together- there’s still two sexes. It’s ridiculous that you’re pretending this isn’t the case. It’s not arbitrary if we still experience different health concerns and bodily functions based on our sex, it’s not arbitrary if our bodies naturally form and develop in specific ways according to our sex. Even if it doesn’t matter that we have two sexes- we still do have two sexes

  2. This would mean that trans people have a spectrum all their own.

Which would mean that their spectrum is worthless and irrelevant to the rest of us. If they want to measure transness on a spectrum go for it, but they’d still be the sex they were born on any other spectrum when compared to the rest of the world’s population- which was my point. There’s no way to make transwomen women with females and transmen men with males. It can only be done if we isolate them. Because there’s the common denominator of biology/chromosomes, even if we accepted a spectrum that accounts for intersex conditions. It only makes sense to measure sex based on what connects the most people. And inevitably it’s gonna come down to those pesky chromosomes.

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

They weren’t separated just because sperm and egg. Female and male bodies are so obviously different ...

These "differences" are the result of "sperm" and "egg" coming together to form a zygote though. Once upon a time, there were no organisms that had vaginas or penises. Gametes started forming and differentiating. Limbs, and genitals didn't pop out of nowhere on their own.

even if two males and two females can reproduce together- there’s still two sexes. It’s ridiculous that you’re pretending this isn’t the case.

You think it's ridiculous because you think "female" and "male" are separate from gametes ... they aren't. If "sperm" and "egg" weren't the only things capable of creating a zygote, then there would be no "differences" between "males" and "females".

That two "sperm" or two "eggs" can do the exact same thing a "sperm" and "egg" do though makes this blurry. It goes to show whatever "difference" exists between a "male" and "female" is arbitrary, and could easily occur between two "females" or two "males", because two "eggs" or two "sperms" can do the same thing a "sperm" and "egg" do.

Which would mean that their spectrum is worthless and irrelevant to the rest of us. If they want to measure transness on a spectrum go for it, but they’d still be the sex they were born on any other spectrum when compared to the rest of the world’s population- which was my point. There’s no way to make transwomen women with females and transmen men with males. It can only be done if we isolate them. Because there’s the common denominator of biology/chromosomes, even if we accepted a spectrum that accounts for intersex conditions. It only makes sense to measure sex based on what connects the most people. And inevitably it’s gonna come down to those pesky chromosomes.

They want most people to change everything for them. Why do they call most people "cis"? They make most people use a language that validates their "gender identity", whatever it is. They make them think they have a "gender identity" too, and then they claimed "sex is a spectrum" and "actually, sex doesn't exist at all, it's man-made and a social construct".

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

  1. I understand that that’s the reason for the difference- what I’m saying is we didn’t “separate” ourselves- we are just two different sexes. Nature or biology or whatever the fuck is in charge separated us, and pretending that separation doesn’t matter isn’t going to magically make us the same. Our bodies look and function and develop differently. There’s no escaping that. My point is that even if it doesn’t matter that this is true- it is still true. I just happen to think that it does matter, but that’s irrelevant.

  2. No. I think it’s ridiculous because I know how humans function and you seem not to or to be unwilling to acknowledge that female bodies function differently than male bodies. They just do. This is fact. It’s absurd that you’re glossing over this and I’m sure your next comment if you respond will continue to ignore this.

  3. I agree, but I’m not quite sure what you believe anymore lol. Are you qt or gc, or neither? Just curious. Are you advocating for a sex spectrum but not in the same way and for the same reasons as trans people? Just confused lol

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Now that it's clear two sperm or two eggs can create a zygote too, it goes to show there isn't a difference between an "egg" or a "sperm", because two "sperms" or two "eggs" can create a zygote too, and so there isn't a "male" or a "female".

https://youtu.be/TplrVWRFV8E

Also, sperm is both singular & plural.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

sex being a binary is not universal across animals

This is known -- e.g. the humble planaria worm of countless high school biology classes.

IMO it's not "new" knowledge, it's being sensationalized by activists who desperately want to redefine demonstrated biological norms in terms of rare exceptions. It's also (often) a conflation of human cognitive/emotional behavior (desire, preference, expression re gender) with the cellular mechanics of human reproduction (sex), which isn't science at all.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

sex being a binary is not universal across animals

Yes, it only occurs in organisms that reproduce sexually. No one ever said sex & the sex binary are universal across all living things - what is known about sex & sexual reproduction applies only to animal & plant species that have evolved to reproduce in this particular way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_reproduction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parthenogenesis

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Even with asexual reproduction and parthenogenesis, almost always it is only two sexes or only females who are present during it.

I believe only some bacteria and mushrooms have more than two types of gametes, the rest of living creatures are either all female, have two sexes or sexless.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Totally. (Where are they getting all that nonsense? Besides Tumblr?)

[–]MarkTwainiac 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

But even that Forbes article makes it very clear that reproduction in bees is very different to reproduction in humans & other mammals:

Female bees, ants and wasps (Hymenoptera) arise from fertilized eggs that have one set of chromosomes from each parent, whilst males result from unfertilized eggs. In honeybees, females -- queens and workers -- have a total of 32 chromosomes, whereas males (drones) only have half as many.

“By definition in all haplodiploids (bees, ants and wasps) the male is haploid -- created from an unfertilized egg, meaning it only has one set of chromosomes from its mother,“ said molecular biologist, Sarah Aamidor, lead author of the study and a graduate student in biology at the University of Sydney, in email."

Haplodiploid means

denoting or possessing a genetic system in which females develop from fertilized (diploid) eggs and males from unfertilized (haploid) ones.

Which is quite different to how things work in humans & other mammals.

The Forbes article goes on:

The haplodiploid sex determination system allows for the development of a remarkable variety of biological phenomena, including female cloning, male cloning -- and gynandromorphy. A gynandromorph has both male and female characteristics and a mix of tissue from both genders [or sex, rather]. Gynandromorphs differ from hermaphrodites, which have both male and female reproductive organs.

In honeybees, gynandromorphs typically develop from the combination of a diploid zygote and a haploid male tissue originating from a second sperm. This is made possible by the fact that honeybees are polyspermic, a situation where more than one sperm enters the egg and fuses to the initial cell cluster. These cells then begin to divide and give rise to tissues that become part of the developing embryo.

But what causes a gynandromorph honeybee? This was one of the questions that motivated Ms. Aamidor and her colleagues to undertake this study using some *“abnormal bees” * collected by another researcher whilst conducting a previous study.

“These bees were strange because they are gynandromorphs (sex mosaics): they have bits that look male and bits that look female,” study co-author, Isobel Ronai, who was a graduate student at the University of Sydney at the time, tweeted on Twitter (thread). “For example, male honey bee eyes are much larger than female eyes and this gynandromorph has a male eye on a female body.”

Sorry, I don't trust biologists who use "gender" when they mean "sex" and who assign a sex to eyes based on their size & appearance. If she had stuck with saying these "strange" sex mosaic bees "have bits that look male and bits that look female," fine. But she went further to claim that this one lone bee "has a male eye on a female body." Not an eye that in her view looks typical for males on a body that appears outwardly female due to the mosaicism of this bee - no, she claimed this bee "has a male eye on a female body."

That claim sounds very much like standard pro-trans rhetoric, specifically the common assertion that kids like Jazz Jennings have "a girl brain in a boy's body."

The idea of "a male eye on a female body" reminds me of a report of a famous case from the early 80s that confounded scientists & got the world in a tizzy:https://youtu.be/9OFpfTd0EIs

FYI, here is the actual paper described in Forbes, not a writeup in a secondary, non-scientific source. I know you'd put more trust in a Tumblr blog, but hey sometimes you gotta go to the primary source. Also please note, this is a paper whose findings have not been replicated: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0670

If you can cite a paper showing that a human, other mammal or other animal that is not a "strange" insect or fungi has been created by the the fusion of two sperm, I'm all ears.

More on how bees reproduce in laypersons' terms: https://carolinahoneybees.com/how-do-bees-reproduce/

[–]Fastandthecurious[S] 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

FYI, here is the actual paper described in Forbes, not a writeup in a secondary, non-scientific source. But note, this is a paper whose findings have not been replicated: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsbl.2018.0670

I read half of it, and reached this part:

Bee K was female and diploid throughout, but lacked any maternal nuclear genetic material. We propose that K was created by a fusion of two sperm nuclei, resulting in an androgenic diploid bee. This is the first report of an individual created by the fusion of two sperm in any Hymenopteran. K was able to develop to the adult stage, showing that a bi-paternal bee is viable ... The viability of K suggests that there are no impediments to the development of a bi-paternal female honeybee, as has previously been shown for bi-maternal

If the result was not replicated, does that mean the claims in the paper are not supported by anything, and the bee might not actually be from two sperms, contrary to what the people who wrote the paper propose?

What about the "bi-maternal" part? Does that mean contrary to what these people propose, these bees might not be from two eggs or two sperms?

[–]MarkTwainiac 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If the result was not replicated, does that mean the claims in the paper are not supported

Yes, that's an essential part of the scientific method.