Scientists: Sex Chromosomes are a "belief system"

submitted by GuacLettuceBacon from self.GenderCritical

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MarkTwainiac 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm with you generally speaking, and think sex chromosome testing should be done to determine who qualifies for participation in female sports. But outlier conditions like CAIS and mosaicism would make doing this impolitic for society as a whole.

Also, it wouldn't be fair - or IMO morally right - to put rules and customs into place that would out people with unusual sex chromosomes (X0 for example) and constantly force them to disclose and be identified by their rare medical conditions.

but at the end of the day their identity xx, xy, xxy will be based on scientific evidence that can't be refuted.

A person's sex chromosomes are not an "identity." I know I have XX chromosomes coz I've had genetic testing. But I don't "identify" as XX, just as I don't "identify as" a woman, or as mother, or as old. Those are just facts about me.

If we started "calling people by their sex chromosomes" as you suggest, that could easily lead to people being referred to - and discriminated against - coz of other aspects of our genetic profiles.

Most people have mutations or "genetic defects" that they are entirely unaware of that are causative, predictive or associated with one or another of the many known rare inherited diseases. If we classify and identify people based on sex chromosomes, it opens the door to all of us being identified and classified based on what genetic defects we carry - or don't carry. If history is any indication, this would not take the human race to a good place.

Identifying people based on their chromosomes would most likely lead to another caste system like they have in India and South Africa based on the hue of one's skin. Or to mass slaughter and genocide like what was done to the Armenians circa 1915 and the Jews during the Holocaust.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I thought I accounted for variations.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, you did account for variations, but the way I read your post I thought you were saying that we should all have our sex chromosomes stated on ID documents, and that we should

start calling people by their sex chromosomes and do away

with the two sex categories, male and female.

No more women, no more men, just xx, xy, xxy and whatever other variations exist. Dating sites can be xy seeking xx, xx seeking xx etc. A driver's license or birth certificate can state your sex chromosomes.

But in terms of sex chromosomes, it's the presence or absence of a Y that is most important - or rather, the presence of the SRY gene that's usually on the Y chromosome. Coz that usually is what determines sex. Someone who is XXY is just as male as someone who is XY. Just as someone who is XO is just as female as someone who is XX, coz of the absence of a Y.

I took your proposal that there should be "No more women, no more men" just people identified by sex chromosomes at face value, and tried to express one of the many reason I think that an unwise approach. Perhaps I misunderstood? If so, apologies.

Also, perhaps I am oversensitive to this topic because I and other members of my family were denied health insurance coverage in the USA because we carry genetic "defects" associated with/causative of a fatal disease, and one family member was fired from their job once the employer was informed by the employer-funded insurance carrier what genetic testing revealed about my family member. As a result, I was involved in the push for legislation that would make discrimination based on genetic information illegal in the US. This finally led to the US passing landmark federal legislation in 2008:

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 protects Americans from discrimination based on their genetic information in both health insurance (Title I) and employment (Title II). Title I amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), through the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), as well as the Social Security Act, to prohibit health insurers from engaging in genetic discrimination. Title II of GINA is implemented by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and prevents employers from using genetic information in employment decisions and prevents employers from requesting and requiring genetic information from employees or those applying for jobs.

https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/policy-issues/Genetic-Discrimination

[–]chrysthefeminist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

XO is just as female as someone who is XX, coz of the absence of a Y.

Except if the X has a transposed SRY on it. I agree with you, don't want to nitpick, just going by what you said about the SRY, not the Y per se, being determinative. Yes, the SRY gene is normally and mostly found on the Y chromosome, except in the case of rare transpositions to the X.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed.