So none have born children due to the expense, the failure rate, the time and effort expended. Cost is a huge factor.
Technically no, not yet, but it is certainly very theoretically possible, even at the current level of medical technology that exists. They're probably not that far away from being able to grow a womb from the man's own stem cells. Then it would truly be a male womb. Of course, this would still have nothing to do with the question in the opening post, whether there are more than two genders.
Theoretically we may also stand on Jupiter but I would not buy stock in such an enterprise now. Briefly, two sexes is very clear, very easy to understand. Very easy to work laws and regulations with. But open the door and Pandora will leap out and consume us.
Where do intersexed people fit into your “very clear” world? And when you step outside of homosapiens it gets even more varied.
I hope there are more than two genders, (not "sexes"), because I am not very lucky getting sex, so the more genders there are the more chances I have!
There are two biological "sex" . You can argue about "genders" all you want since it's a subjective construct anyways.
I know, you've been working overtime on this for a long time. Boys will be girls and girls will be boys. There are no men. There are no women. Just robots of the government. No Churches. No families. Babies produced in test tubes. Population greatly reduced. Only the elite living a life we once called normal.
Are you confusing biological sexes and genders? The number of biological sexes is a question for scientists, and if you think the answer is obviously "two", then you need to read what the scientists are actually saying. I find it amazing that so few people seem to have bothered to look this up. The number of genders is however many people come up with. It is a common Straw Man to pretend that someone's belief in multiple genders implies a belief in multiple biological sexes.
If anybody is interested in the medical definitions, I can provide them. I'd assume people here are more interested in the ideological/political aspect, but since you asked for a biological concept ("sex") I guess the biological answer is appropriate, and I'll add the psychosocial one, at the end. Humans come in these categories: a) Male b) Female c) Intersex The latter has 4 subtypes: 1) 46 XX intersex 2) 46 XY intersex 3) True gonadal intersex 4) Complex or indeterminate intersex Explaining the subtypes: 1) Female chromosomes and ovaries but male external organs; most commonly due to congenital adrenal hyperplasia; also possible if during pregnancy the mother had a hormone-producing ovarian tumor, or took male hormones. Also possible in the case of an enzyme deficiency called aromatase deficiency which affects the transformation of male into female hormones. 2) Male chromosomes but external genitalia incompletely formed, or female, or ambiguous. Several pathologies lead to this, such as androgen insensitivity syndrome (a.k.a. testicular feminization), several enzymatic issues with the formation of testosterone, and imperfect formation of testes called gonadal dysgenesis. 3) Someone who has both ovaries and testes. Could be a hybrid called ovotestis, or the person could have one ovary and one testis. Genitalia is ambiguous and male and female can coexist. This is what used to be called true hermafroditism. Causes are largely unknown. Could be due to exposure to toxins. 4) Several chromosome abnormalities. 45 X0, 47 XXY, 47 XXX. Usually internal and external sex organs belong to either male or female but other problems may exist such as altered puberty development and altered hormone levels. ---------- Diagnosis of these conditions can be done through chromosome analysis, inspection of the genitalia and sexual development characteristics (breasts, soft tissue distribution, hair distribution, muscle mass), endoscopy, ultrasound, MRI, hormone levels, hormone stimulation tests, and others. It is important to realize that intersex conditions are pathologies. They are not the normal development. They may need hormonal and/or surgical treatments. ---------- So the above is what applies to biological sexes. Then you have two other concepts: A) Sexual orientation B) Gender Sexual orientation relates to who you are attracted to, therefore comes in four flavors: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual, meaning that you are attracted to someone of the opposite sex from yours, same sex, both, or neither. Gender is an identity, like a role that you identify with and/or has been assigned to you; this way, it is more a psychosocial than a biological concept. The genders are male and female, but the identification comes in two flavors: cisgender and transgender. Cisgender means that you identify with the role that has been assigned to you (often this assignment coincides to how your external organs or secondary sexual development characteristics suggest or look although they may be misleading in intersex cases). Transgender means that you identify with the opposite gender from the one that has been assigned to you. Regarding whether or not there is pathology, relates to whether or not there is dysphoria. If you are content with your identity and it doesn't distress you, then there is no dysphoria. If the gender you've been assigned to provokes in you a profound sense of uneasy, anxiety, and distress, then it's called gender dysphoria. Some people express their gender in ways that do not fit into traditional binary social norms of male or female gender. This is called non-binary, gender non-conforming, genderqueer, or gender-expansive. In general, most transgender people do not identify as non-binary. They simply identify with one of the societal genders of male or female although that gender doesn't match their initially assigned gender. ------------ So, obviously, what is the most common situation? a) A person is 46 XX, has internal female organs, well-formed external female organs and secondary female sexual development characteristics, has normal female hormone levels, is assigned the gender of female, identifies with it, feels fine with this identification, and is heterosexual, being attracted to males. Or, vice-versa for 46 XY, internal male organs, well-formed external male organs and secondary male sexual development characteristics, normal male hormone levels, is assigned the gender of male, identifies with it, feels fine with this identification, and is heterosexual, being attracted to females. It doesn't mean that these are the only possibilities. Although in the minority, as explained above, there are... b)... many other possibilities. Human beings are biologically and psychosocially complex, and a lot of other people generally acknowledge that the binary situation above is not the only one that exists. A lot of people generally only acknowledge as "normal," the letter a) above. They do have a point in the fact that it is the statistical norm so if by normal we mean the most dominant situation, then the above are the only normal ones. If instead you focus this concept of normal on the distress aspect, there certainly are homosexuals who are quite happy with their orientation and transgenders who are quite happy with their identity and these people don't desire or require any help so in this aspect, they could be perfectly be called "normal" in the sense of an absence of treatment-requiring pathology despite their differences from the societal "norm." Others, though, are very distressed. ------------ Ideologically speaking, of course most conservative folks feel that only letter a) above is normal. Most liberal folks will acknowledge b). As a centrist physician, my focus is on what makes people suffer. a) is fine (my case and my wife's). b) can be fine too. If for an individual, a) or b) is fine then I have no say. If for an individual, b) is distressful then I think the person needs to be offered help, and I'm tolerant and understanding of that person's ordeal, given that my professional mission in life and vocation is to try to ease pain and suffering.
How lovely for them all. Here's an idea... I'm perfectly willing to ignore behavior in others that I don't understand or possibly that I simply disagree with, so long as they do not attempt to COMPEL me to accept them under threat of legal sanction. What's wrong with such an agreement? Back in the olden days, we used to call that approach to our neighbors "Live and Let Live".
Back in the “olden days” they could have been assaulted if not murdered. They were not allowed to even exist without harassment. The same people saying “live and let live” are trying to ban them from the military, are trying to void marriages, are trying to prevent them from adopting, want legal protections like public accommodation that others have to revoked for them, are trying to ban schools from even acknowledging they exist — these “live and let live” did (are doing) the same things to gay people, they did many of the same things to blacks, and to women. You don’t have to “accept” anything or anyone but everyone is deserving of equal treatment under the law.
This is a great writeup! Thank you People expect everything to be black and white which is strange because very few things are.
