In the top case has it been arbitrarily decided to include space in between the would-be victims? Or is the top a like number line comparison to the bottom? Because if thats the case it becomes relevant if there is one body for every real number unit of distance. (One body at 0.1 meter, and at 0.01 meter, at 0.001, etc)

If so then there’s an infinite amount of victims on the first planck length of the bottom track. An infinite number of victims would contain every possible victim. Every single possible person on the first plank length. So on the next planck length would be every possible person again.

Which would mean that the bottom track is actually choosing a universe of perpetual endless suffering and death for every single possible person. The top track would eventually cause infinite suffering but it would take infinite time to get there. The bottom track starts at infinite suffering and extends infinitely in this manner. Every possible version of every possible person dying, forever.

Back in the mid 2000s I made a fan website dedicated to my favorite game character, kirby, on one of those “build your own website” type sites. I remember I was like 8 and working on it quite a lot. The site was aimed at like kids / teenagers I think. Can’t remember what it was called to save my life. It definitely does not still exist, but the idea is that I could somehow find the site I made in a backup somewhere. Ive done some pretty deliberate searching over the years but still cant remember what the site builder/hoster was called. Something that started with a P, or had a P in the name, maybe?

We are. You keep ignoring the majority of what I say. You also haven’t really pushed back in any way on the majority of what I’ve said. Scientists work with different definitions, right, and so we are talking about sex as it relates to people and how we categorize people. I am asking how we can use a definition of sex based exclusively on gametes in specific situations, specifically to highlight to you that that definition itself is not all that useful when applied to people.

Let me return to your original comment, again.

No, we only have 2 sexes. Sperm producers and egg producers. We call those male and female. All of the other stuff is window dressing.

And the comment I was responding to.

Since I don’t think fungi have a social structure, those are sexes. Humans have two Sexes but also gender expression, conflating those is how transphobes come to their views.

We have been talking about sex in humans this entire time, a subject you are for some reason determined to avoid? Lol

You didnt answer if theyre still female after menopause though. They don’t produce gametes. So they no longer meet the stated definition. And would therefore now be sexless. As would any sterile person. This is an inherent limitation of equating sex 1 to 1 with gametes production. Animals and plants couldnt care less what we think about them. Other people however do tend to care how we talk about them. And I doubt anyone, literally anyone, would agree that anyone who is sterile is no longer male or female. This is an example of the way that the definitions of terms can be one thing in one context and another in a different one. When the word sex is used in common parlance it is usually not as a reference to gametes.

What we are discussing is how to discuss people who are neither male or female. Sex, yes even in the literal Wikipedia definition, defines 2 categories. Not all organisms fit within those 2 categories. Therefore there are more than 2 categories. That is the entirety of my held position.

Your reductive approach to understanding biology is unhelpful in the context of humans. A better statement is “humans only produce 2 gametes”, which is at least accurate. Sex as it exists for people and as it relates to people has really nothing to do with gametes. It is associated with gametes, but is for the most part unrelated to them. The window dressing you mentioned is actually what people generally mean by sex. All of the other things. Even biologists usually mean the window dressing. They dont ask to test subjects gametes before performing studies on them. They accept their stated sex (which is nearly always their assigned sex, and therefore based on external appearance) or what it says on some legal documentation (same as previous) and then accept that assignment.

The word sex used in the context of human traits just does not refer to gametes. You can define it that way, the same way I might define apples as vegetables, but if that definition is entirely divorced from what the word actually means in every day life then what is the purpose of the definition? It serves no purpose. Humans and mushrooms can hardly be equated, and approaching the concept of sex the same in each case is going to do very little except ostracize intersex people and make society generally inhospitable to them.

You essentially avoided answering my previous questions here. Are you saying that post menopausal women are no longer female? Just clarifying. I am pretty sure that if that is the case and you stand by that definition then you stand very much alone.

So you would define them as each as sexless and therefore belonging to the same sex category? I would argue that youve assigned a “third sex” category to them in doing so. If the options are male/female/neither/both, then you’re proposing a system of 4 categories. One which is solely focused on reproductive cells, which is not and never has been the definition of sex in humans.

You said earlier that all secondary sex characteristics, being secondary characteristics, are “window dressing”. Downstream consequences of reproductive cells. How do we account for this in the example I mentioned in my previous comment? The 2 sterile humans, one assigned female at birth and one assigned male at birth. They have the same “sex category”, neither has any reproductive cells of any kind. They should both have no secondary sex characteristics if that is the case, using your own statements. Why then is that not the case? And more to a direct point, why doesnt their drivers license have a “N/A” next to the “Sex” marker?

What happens when someone loses their ability to produce reproductive cells? Are cis women going through menopause “formerly female” and therefore now “sterile, sexless”? Are cis men who have had to have their reproductive organs removed “formerly male” and therefore now “sterile, sexless”?

I’ll now return to your original comment.

No, we only have 2 sexes. Sperm producers and egg producers. We call those male and female. All of the other stuff is window dressing.

Some people do not produce a gamete. Some people can produce both. What sex are each of those people? One person is assigned female at birth and another person is assigned male at birth, but they are both sterile and incapable of producing any gametes. Are they the same sex? What sex are they?

Since I don’t think fungi have a social structure, those are sexes. Humans have two Sexes but also gender expression, conflating those is how transphobes come to their views.

This is the comment I was responding to. Rejecting an organism as sterile offspring does literally nothing to answer what sex that organism is. What sex is the “sterile offspring”?

Also to add to what I said in my other comment, sex as a working definition affects many areas of our lives. You may define sex as the production of gametes, but being male or female affects gigantic areas of our social lives and comes with a massive number of tacked on traits. Far from merely being a definition of biology it affects our experience of every single aspect of society. Sex is all of those things too. We can argue that it shouldn’t be, that it should be an entirely unrelated and inconsequential trait (which would also mean that we can easily recognize that people outside of the binary categories exist), but the reality is it doesn’t mean that.

Society requires you to have a sex. If you are an intersex person you are functionally incapable of interacting meaningfully with a society that does not recognize people who are neither male or female. For instance, when bathroom bans are passed, where should intersex people go? Where can you go if society has adopted a rigid binary view of sex and you are not male or female? What social services are you entitled to? What prisons should you be put in? Sex in terms of a rigid binary category dichotomy functionally erases the existence of intersex people and adds a huge amount of barriers to their lives.

I’m not conflating them, I am showing that a textbook definition and working definition are not the same thing. Human society functions on working definitions of sex, which are almost universally appearance based. It all comes down to what a doctor sees when you’re born. Thats the functional definition of sex in terms of human society. Thats what sex means to people in day to day life. What your physical body looks like upon visual examination.

You’ve still refused to answer for the shortcomings of your provided textbook definition. What sex is an organism that produces no gametes? What sex is an organism that produces both? Both of those things are things that can and do happen, to humans as well. Does someone’s sex change once they no longer produce any gametes? Your definition of binary sex must necessarily account for every single one of these cases and still find a way to sort them all into 2 categories without any exceptions.

Gametes are not useful for this definition, not everyone produces any gametes. More to the actual root of the problem, sex is almost never determined by gametes or by chromosomes. Genetics is very rarely the basis by which sex is determined. It is almost exclusively determined by external appearance. Legitimately, almost 100% of the time. In rare circumstances tests are performed to determine intersex status. But for the overwhelming majority of people the only basis by which their sex has ever been determined is by external appearance.

Gamete production is cool and what not. It is also almost entirely irrelevant to the discussion of intersex people and the precise number of sexes there are. Strictly speaking not all organisms are sortable into the categories of male and female. Thats the reality. To ignore them is to deny reality. To define them as malformed is to dehumanize them. To demand they exist in a binary world ignorant to their experience is to discriminate against them.

How kind of you to brush all intersex people off as “window dressing”. Also, I guess you dont exist at all if you dont produce eggs or sperms then.

Humans have more than 2 sexes. Sex is a convenient category based around a phenotype, not a golden rule that all organisms adhere to. People who exist outside those phenotypes are not defective or malformed and do not necessarily require surgeries to ‘correct’ their bodies and make them fall in line with binary sex categories.

The reason that science has been able to assert that sex is binary is by excluding all organisms that exist outside those phenotypes. Its a problem when those organisms are people, as you are functionally erasing their existence or at the least handwaving it away as irrelevant. This is one of the many vectors along which intersex people experience discrimination.

By asserting sex as binary and immutable you are actually doing the legwork of transphobia for transphobes. They also assert that sex is binary and immutable. They deny that any such thing as gender identity or expression exists in the first place, instead asserting that gendered behavior is a direct product of biology.

I am not a ‘male woman’, to even try and state that is to deny my own biology and experience. It is transphobia.

Copyright is mind numbingly stupid.

deleted by creator

Do you just not like shonen? Naruto, especially Shippuden, is great in my opinion. It has highs and lows and plenty of brutal filler, but also some of the most iconic fights in anime history and was hugely influential on the modern shonen genre.

What a… grating comment.

The fascists own all the media organizations. The population has been taught systematically since birth to have unyielding blind faith in the institutions of the state and capital. Many won’t understand that anything unusual is happening until they’re hungry and cold, burying empty caskets for their drafted children sent to die in fascist wars of conquest.

Sex in the sense that we have been talking about it here is in reference to mammals. The moment you wander outside of the mammalian class of vertebrates these concepts of sex start to become far less applicable.

There are many birds that have more than 2 sexes. Reptiles and invertebrates as well. Asexual reproduction would be classed as it’s own sex apart from any male/female system.

You are vastly underestimating the prevalence of chromosomal variations. They are common, especially among cis women.

I like the way you phrased that at the end. Sexes are categories that relate exclusively to the concept of progeny. If you’re not able to reproduce, you’re already kind of excluded from the sex binary. If we break the human concept of sex down to its constituent parts, it is just “can procreate”. The categories are useful in some contexts, but to state them as universal or to try and extrapolate them so widely is significantly disruptive and unhelpful. Humans are and always have been more than our reproductive anatomy. Your doctor and anyone you want to reproduce with are really the only people who need to know whether you fit into either category.