not sure I understand what you’re saying in the second half, could you elaborate?
edit:
i think i see what you meant. most women are XX, maybe that was a typo. chromosomes are strongly correlated with sex but are not what determines it. that’s why i didn’t mention chromosomes.
you’re right, not all women are born with a uterus, or with ovaries that actually produce eggs. but from a biological standpoint, we can determine which gametes (egg or sperm) that would be produced, were it the case that everything was functioning.
again “not always” is the answer to your last note" we can determine which gametes (egg or sperm) that would be produced, were it the casethat everything was functioning. - there are individuals born with both sex organs. My point is that this is all exceeding complex and any simple answer is being used to drive another narrative than science.
when you say “both sex organs”, I’d like to clarify that there has never been a recorded case of a human h*rmaphrodite. (NOTE: this is not only an offensive term (when used on humans, as opposed to say, frogs), but also an inaccurate term! just a fun fact for the readers…) to elaborate:
there has never been a recorded case of someone who successfully produces both eggs and sperm (whereas some other animals do). while you are correct that sometimes you may be born with organs that resemble both testes and ovaries, there will only be one that functions, or one that is closer to functioning (one is more dominant). sometimes neither function.
ps - I don’t have a narrative. I just love science! biology is neat. and this is all totally separate from gender identity.
What about true hermaphrodite? That’s a term for a specific type of intersex that has both sex organs fused together. And develop secondary sex characteristics during puberty.
right, “born with”.
not sure I understand what you’re saying in the second half, could you elaborate?
edit: i think i see what you meant. most women are XX, maybe that was a typo. chromosomes are strongly correlated with sex but are not what determines it. that’s why i didn’t mention chromosomes. you’re right, not all women are born with a uterus, or with ovaries that actually produce eggs. but from a biological standpoint, we can determine which gametes (egg or sperm) that would be produced, were it the case that everything was functioning.
XX/XY was typo, yes.
again “not always” is the answer to your last note"
we can determine which gametes (egg or sperm) that would be produced, were it the case that everything was functioning.- there are individuals born with both sex organs. My point is that this is all exceeding complex and any simple answer is being used to drive another narrative than science.when you say “both sex organs”, I’d like to clarify that there has never been a recorded case of a human h*rmaphrodite. (NOTE: this is not only an offensive term (when used on humans, as opposed to say, frogs), but also an inaccurate term! just a fun fact for the readers…) to elaborate: there has never been a recorded case of someone who successfully produces both eggs and sperm (whereas some other animals do). while you are correct that sometimes you may be born with organs that resemble both testes and ovaries, there will only be one that functions, or one that is closer to functioning (one is more dominant). sometimes neither function.
ps - I don’t have a narrative. I just love science! biology is neat. and this is all totally separate from gender identity.
What about true hermaphrodite? That’s a term for a specific type of intersex that has both sex organs fused together. And develop secondary sex characteristics during puberty.
No problem - good call-out and you’re correct as far as I’m aware.