you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There are exactly two distinct sexes in their own right. Intersex is a corruption/mashup of those two, not its own distinct sex.

So:

1) There are exactly two distinct sexes in their own right.
2) There are people who don't fit exactly into either of those two distinct sexes.
3) You claim this isn't a contradiction, because we're not talking about the sex that people are, we're only talking about the platonic form of what defines human sexes.

The salient social point seems to be: "Some people don't fit in your boxes. The correct way to deal with that is acceptance and support."

[–]Vulptex 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

What I'm trying to say is intersex is not a sex, it's miscellaneous. There's no set of traits that denotes intersex, only the fact that it isn't wholly male or female. All males have penises, all females have a uterus, but an intersex person might have a penis, a uterus, both, neither, or a hybrid. Males are XY, females are XX, but intersex can be XY, XX, XXY, X, Y, YY, XXYY, and any possible combination. Also, intersex does not have any of its own traits, they are all derived from male and female. Curse the matrix for making it near-impossible for me to communicate my thoughts, but I don't think it gets any simpler than that.

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

What I'm trying to say is intersex is not a sex, it's miscellaneous.

What I'm trying to say, is there are people who are intersex, and that means intellectual claims about "exactly two sexes" aren't a sensible approach to social policy.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not completely binary no. But still one-dimensional.