GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"?

submitted by BigSecret from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]strictly 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

Were those male rats really "pregnant"?

With sophistic word games it's easy to define anything as anything. We could define inanimate incubators for early born babies as "pregnant", and that would have more merit than calling the non-pregnant male rats "pregnant" as at least inanimate incubators wouldn't be claiming the credit of someone else’s body parts while incubating babies. It's the female rat that is pregnant, putting the pregnant part of the female rat inside a male rat doesn't make the male rat pregnant, it's makes the female rat pregnant inside a male rat.

Is it even true that "males can not get pregnant", and "females can not have penises"?

It’s true that flat-chested females can get pregnant and that males can have breasts. You should just call it what is instead of using misnomers, and then there is nothing confusing or strange about it.

Males in the past have been born with uterus

Are you talking about chimeras who are the result of a male and female embryo getting fused? Anyone producing ova is by definition at least part female.

Cis men can impregnate trans men.

Human males can impregnate human females, nothing new or strange about that.

Why isn't it possible to transfer a uterus, ovary, vagina, etc to the body of a male? Why isn't it possible to transfer penis, testes, etc to the body of a female?

We can as a hypothetical imagine taking the ovaries and uterus of a brain dead female human and putting it inside a male human and imagine a pregnancy. That would be the living body parts of the brain dead female human getting pregnant inside a male human, still not the male being pregnant. A female could attach the penis of a brain dead male to her body, she still doesn’t have a penis, she is just using the penis of someone else.

If only men can have testes and penises, and if testes and penises are only male organs, why is it that women with certain intersex conditions have testes and penises?

Anyone who produces sperm (by themselves, letting the living sex organs of a brain dead male person produce it doesn’t count) is by definition male. Anyone who produces ovas (by themselves, letting the living sex organs of a brain dead female person produce it doesn’t count) is by definition female. In a hypothetical case that someone would produce both sperm and ovas (with their own sex organs, not using the living sex organs of a brain dead person) then that person would be both male and female. So either you are saying there exists males who produce sperm, and we completely agree those who produce sperm are male, or you are inventing a dilemma by incorrectly claiming we would consider sperm producers as not being male. Non-males who produce sperm don’t exist simply because anyone producing sperm is already defined as male to begin with.

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (25 children)

Are you talking about chimeras who are the result of a male and female embryo getting fused?

That, and there are men with, for example, persistent mullerian duct syndrome that have a uterus and fallopian tubes: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome/#:~:text=Persistent%20M%C3%BCllerian%20duct%20syndrome%20is,which%20are%20female%20reproductive%20organs%20.

Males with this disorder have normal male reproductive organs, though they also have a uterus and fallopian tubes

Then there are "females" with testes and penis. One example is CAIS: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/androgen-insensitivity-syndrome/symptoms/#:~:text=Complete%20androgen%20insensitivity%20syndrome%20(CAIS,side%20of%20the%20vaginal%20opening).

CAIS is not usually obvious from birth because affected babies have female genitals, including a vagina and labia (folds of skin either side of the vaginal opening)

https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/androgen-insensitivity-syndrome/

They [CAIS] typically have a female gender identity. Affected individuals have male internal sex organs (testes) that are undescended, which means they are abnormally located in the pelvis or abdomen.

So females can have penises and testes, and males can have uteruses ...?

Why would testes and penis be male-only organs when females can have them too? Or why would uteruses, vaginas, ovaries, etc be female-only organs when males can have them too?

[–]strictly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

That, and there are men with, for example, persistent Mullerian duct syndrome that have a uterus and fallopian tubes: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/persistent-mullerian-duct-syndrome/#:~:text=Persistent%20M%C3%BCllerian%20duct%20syndrome%20is,which%20are%20female%20reproductive%20organs%20.

If there is ova production then that person is female by definition regardless of chromosomes. Usually chromosomes indicates sex unless ova production/sperm production show otherwise. But we are talking about intersex cases here, and they are called intersex for a reason.

So females can have penises and testes, and males can have uteruses ...?

Dyadic females never have penis/testes. Dyadic males never have uterus. In intersex conditions sex organ can look in-between, so I don't know if what they call a penis look exactly like the penis of a dyadic male or if it's very masculinized clitoris they call a penis, but intersex people are not dyadic so they are not examples of how it is like for dyadic people. Either way, someone who produces ova would be female by definition, and someone who produces sperm would be male by definition. And most of these "chicks with dicks" are just regular dyadic men with breasts capable of producing sperm (or could if they had not been taking estrogen).

Why would testes and penis be male-only organs when females can have them too?

Testes and penis are male-only organs for dyadic people, and the great majority of trans people are dyadic, not intersex.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Usually chromosomes indicates sex

In 99.999% they do. And SRY gene indicates sex in 100% of cases.

intersex

Also this word is misnomer as not representing reality, it was not in use for 20-30 years now - I think it was considered as slur, same as hermaphrodite, until gender identity appeared recently and made slurs like queer or intersex - to be overused again.

clitoris

Virilized clitoris still acts like regular clitoris - they can't pee through it, they can't produce sperm. It just bigger or weird shaped clitoris, that's it.

Testes and penis are male-only organs for dyadic people, and the great majority of trans people are dyadic, not intersex.

Technically even for intersex they are, if you add word "Working", because intersex people have only one set of sexual organs working and other one is not working and is underdeveloped.

[–]strictly 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

And SRY gene indicates sex in 100% of cases.

I've heard of extremely rare cases where it didn't (like once in a billion) so I wanted to cover it all.

I think it was considered as slur, same as hermaphrodite, until gender identity appeared recently and made slurs like queer or intersex - to be overused again.

I am ESL (English second language) so I am not always familiar what is considered outdated terminology in English.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've heard of extremely rare cases where it didn't (like once in a billion) so I wanted to cover it all.

It still was, there was just misunderstanding, as doctors were not qualified enough for this.

However, if speak about ALL cases, then true - there are such cases, but they all deadly, childs with it are dying before being born, they can't develop as both male and female or as neither - it is incompatible with being alive in humans.

I am ESL (English second language) so I am not always familiar what is considered outdated terminology in English.

Neither do I. I just know personally person with intersex condition. Or more like, I learned she has such condition only when TRA started misusing her condition and she complained about it, and especially about stuff like in NZ - when they can be denied vital healthcare because now it is not medical condition but just "identity". Before that we never talked about it.

Also, my language never even had such term until last few years, when LGBT organizations from the USA started promoting homophobia and gender ideology. I think in my language it is called something like "group of congenital disorders of sexual development". And they all are not even grouped together, as there are like 3-4 different groups in them.

[–]strictly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It still was, there was just misunderstanding, as doctors were not qualified enough for this.

You mean this has been debunked? https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/16/4/717/3114050 I would be interested in seeing the study of the debunking.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it was in one of their peer reviews, which found a lot of mistakes and the fact that public is lacking any ability to check their findings. I don't think I will be able to find it, I am just reading stuff and that's it - not bookmarking it, sorry.

They said it is 6th reported case, thought.

On the other hand, maybe SRY gene is not the only thing that is determining sex of a person. However, there only 6 reported cases in 50 years from 15 billions people who lived during this time, so it is almost impossible to research...

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not talking about "trans".

This is about intersex, and how they might indicate that the definitions of male and female may be flawed. If intersex females have penises, and testes, as mentioned, and intersex males have uteruses, as again mentioned, then how can penises and testes be male-only organs when females can have them too? How can vagina, uteruses, ovaries, etc be female-only organs when males can have them too?

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

How can vagina, uteruses, ovaries, etc be female-only organs when males can have them too?

I don't know which particular conditions you talk about here, or the state of these vaginas/uterus/ovaries and therefore I can't know which sex I consider these people to be. A person who produces ova is female by definition though.

they might indicate that the definitions of male and female may be flawed

You do realize that language has a limit and that has nothing to do with the definition of male/female in particular? There are tales of Socrates going around asking people to define the most basic things and making fun of them as nobody ever succeeded in giving the perfect definition to anything, all definitions were ambiguous in some way. You can try with what a chair. How would you define chair so it includes exactly all chairs and exactly zero of everything that isn't a chair? It's not possible. Instead you have to be consistent with your rigor, expect the same level of rigor of the definition as you would of other definitions you believe in. You can't expect the impossible though, the first perfect definitions that can be put into words when nothing else in world yet has perfectly worded definitions. In your head though, even though you might not be be to find the perfect words, you probably have a very clear picture of what male and female is, no? The same with the moon, sun, stone, you know what they are, even if your worded definitions could end up somewhat ambiguous.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

See, I've explained PMDS and CAIS to you before. Pretty sure I was the one who sent you those links, but keep pretending you have memory issues.

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (13 children)

Those links are the top of the searches on google. All I did was search the intersex conditions up and they were there: https://imgur.com/a/FrWqgp5

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

males

Right there in your search it is stated they are males, and here you are, saying they are females.

And "gender identity" has nothing to do with biology. Anyone can identify as anything - that is completely subjective thing. Objective reality does not depends on subjective thoughts.

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (11 children)

Right ... the male part is for persistent mullerian duct syndrome, and I did say they are males (males with uteruses apparently). For CAIS they said 'people', and that they have a "female" gender identify. Do you mean CAIS are actually males, who think they are women? Are there any sources on CAIS being males?

[–]BiologyIsReal[M] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Maybe try to read the links you posted... This has been explained to you before. Stop playing dumb or I'll ban you again.

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe try to give me better links that don't say things like "CAIS are females with testes and penises" and "males with persistent mullerian duct syndrome have uteruses". That's exactly what those links say and I highlighted them in quotes.

If that's not what the articles meant, they shouldn't have said the things they did, which I quoted, in the first place.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Why are your questions so weird and self-contradictory?

I already just answered to those questions: https://saidit.net/s/GCdebatesQT/comments/8560/gc_how_can_there_be_such_things_as_male_and/u9ss?context=3

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (7 children)

I saw that. Do you have sources though?

First of all, males with PMDS can not produce ova and can produce sperm.

Second, males with CAIS do NOT have penises, and do NOT have any female reproductive organs, they do have testes, but their organism fails to interract with testosterone.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (6 children)

Sources for what?

You mean why PMDS people can't produce ova when lacking ovaries? Well, because they lack ovaries.

Or why CAIS are capable of supporting sperm-production because they have prostate and working testes? Well, because it is what prostate does, duh.

It is just logical, there no sources needed. But in the links you linked it is stated - the lack of needed organs, so I can send you back to them to read more clearly.

[–]AlexisK 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, because they lack ovaries.

Good one, ahah.

[–]BigSecret[S] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

The links I shared said, very clearly, CAIS generally identify as women and have penises and testes. That's why I asked "how can penises and testes be male-only organs when females can have them too?". But you say "male CAIS do not have penises, they have testes".

Are you saying CAIS can be either male or female, female CAIS have no penises and testes, and it's the male CAIS that have testes and think they are women when they aren't?

Or are you saying all CAIS are actually males who think they are women when they aren't?

I want good articles, not the ones from before that said, again very clearly, that "CAIS identify as women and have penises and testes", and "males with PMDS have uteruses"

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are misrepresenting the cases. And I am explaining this not for the first time...

First of all, males with PMDS can not produce ova and can produce sperm.

Second, males with CAIS do NOT have penises, and do NOT have any female reproductive organs, they do have testes, but their organism fails to interract with testosterone.