Why Sex Is Binary
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 тра 2020
- A binary is a system composed of two parts--a duality, a pair. In developmental biology, sex is binary. Here’s why.
Download the transcripts to our videos from our website:
www.theparadoxinstitute.com/
Sources:
[1] Kumar et al. (2019). Anisogamy. Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior.
[2] Lehtonen, J., Parker, G. (2014). Gamete competition, gamete limitation, and the evolution of two sexes. Molecular Human Reproduction, 20(12).
[3] Cox, P., Togashi, T. (2011). The Evolution of Anisogamy, A Fundamental Phenomenon Underlying Sexual Selection. New York Cambridge University Press. 17.
[4] Czaran, T., Hoekstra. R. (2004). Evolution of sexual asymmetry. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 4(34).
[5] Kodric-Brown et al. (1987). Anisogamy, sexual selection, and the evolution and maintenance of sex. Evolutionary Ecology, 1, 95-105.
[6] Sax, L. (2002). How common is lntersex? A response to Anne Fausto‐Sterling.
[7] Wright, C. & Hilton, E. (2020). The Dangerous Denial of Sex. Wall Street Journal.
[8] Jones, R., Lopez, K. (2014). Chapter 5: Sexual differentiation. Human Reproductive Biology, 4th edition. Elsevier. 95.
[9] Sekido, R., Lovell-Badge, R. (2009) Sex determination and SRY, Down to a wink and a nudge. Trends in Genetics, 25(1).
[10] Kashimada, K., Koopman, P. (2010). Sry, the master switch in mammalian sex determination. Development, 137.
[11] Kimball, J. (2020). Sex chromosomes. LibreText.org.
[12] Gilbert, SF. (2000). Chromosomal sex determination in mammals. Developmental Biology, 6th edition. Sunderland (MA), Sinauer Associates.
[13] Wizemann, TM., Pardue ML, editors. (2001). Sex begins in the womb. Exploring the biological contributions to human health: Does sex matter? US Institute of Medicine.
[14] Carlson, B. (2014). Chapter 16, Urogenital System. Human Embryology and Developmental Biology. 404-407.
[15] Witchel, S. (2017). Disorders of sex development. Best Practice and Research in Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 48, 90-102.
[16] Heying, H. (2019) Boundaries in biology are fuzzy, but gametes aren't. Twitter.
[ HeatherEHeying/st...]
[17] Graham, C. (2019). Is sex a spectrum? Sex determination and differentiation. MRKHVoice.
[18] Bachtrog, D., et al. (2014). Sex determination, Why so many ways of doing it. PLOS Biology, 12(7).
You can support our work by becoming a member:
www.theparadoxinstitute.com/p... - Наука та технологія
So you're saying the high school biology I learned 12 years ago was right?? I'm shocked!
@Josh the Art Critic Are you talking of klienfelters (XXY)?
Josh the Art Critic yeah anti trans activists shot themselves in the foot with that. We need to stick to a gamete level definition.
Oh my- I guess things never change and that something you learn 12 years ago will never be proved wrong by science.
@@ApplePi3.1415 Well so far so good and find a new gamete and you might win a Nobel prize
@@mrana2424 You mean people who don't deny basic biology, such as sex is binary and immutable, only man and woman, intersex people are either of those two, with the singularity that they have a chromosome anomaly. Speaking facts proven by science doesn't make you transphobic, in the other hand, if you want to harm them, denying basic rights such as education, healthcare and dignified employment (not prostitution), you're a true transphobic piece a human waste.
I literally had a heated debate with someone about sex. He was trying to convince me there are more than two sexes. It was honestly, one of the most disturbing conversations I've had with anyone. What has the world been coming too 😣
I had the same kind of argument in my social media circle too.. apparently saying there's two gamete and that sex is binary is transphobic and not inclusive enough. Not scientific. Is the world going crazy???
with post modernism trust me, that will be the least worrying conversation you will have.
Tahir Rawther unfortunately the world seems to be going in a crazy. I guess it’s always been crazy tho. Humans are too much sometimes
I had a similar conversation.
Just had a similar argument with someone lol
Yup and within intersex conditions all variations still point to either male or female because of the SRY gene.
It's really sad to so how few views this video has, while various types of pseudoscience based on postmodernist misconceptions get hundreds and thousands of views.
Thats the world we live in sadly
Ju Doh
It's also the algorithms leftist run UA-cam writes
*This* video is pseudoscience wdym.
@@asmrplushpaws Lol a this video just use pure and simple biological fact.
If you want to see pseudoscience go watch channels that use feelings as "science".
@@samuelsouza3054 nah
How long before this is considered hate speech
Thanks for making this. UA-cam forces the other side in you.
It already is. Clown world.
It really is amazing that we have to explain something that is so plainly obvious and that no one would have even considered disputing 10 years ago.
They did dispute it 10 years ago. In fact this video is out of date by 30 years - and monstrously inaccurate.
@@jaydeeoldboy9903 Oh right because men can menstruate and get pregnant. Thank you for enlightening us cultist- I mean scientist.
@@jaydeeoldboy9903 You didn’t believe any of the things you do now about sex and gender 10 years ago and you know it.
@@cz7425 That depends on how you define "man". Millions of "women" can't menstruate either, or get pregnant. There are intersex people with almost entirely male DNA but exhibits female phenotypes, and can even get pregnant and give birth.
Sex is a spectrum, not binary, the last 30 years of research has shown us this. These videos are based on outdated information - some of which is just wrong and was never believed.
@@cz7425 If anyone thinks that men can menstruate and get pregnant then they are stupid, lol.
It's mind boggling that this even has to be explained. Critical theory has reduced people to idiots.
It's regressivism
It’s not critical theory that believes in this, per se - it’s gender theory. Just FYI.
Don't mistake gender science and gender theory it for critical theory. They ain't critical they are just dumb. Critical theories don't throw reality out the window :)
This has nothing to do with Critical Theory. Critical Theory is a method in social sciences.
@@user-ol7bt4wp1j No, it does not. Critical race theory is a "critical theory" as much as the Nazis were socialist workers.
In my last year of college going to become a teacher and my final class professor is out here telling our class of future educators that biological sex is a spectrum. Absolute lunacy
Because an scientifically illiterate architect told you so?
Some calfs get born with 2 heads so the number of heads in calfs is on a spectrum.
Binary is oppressive.
(sarcasm)
You mean the doctor observes the sex at birth and doesn't assign it after all?
THANK YOU. As a biologist, thank you.
the fact this even needs to be said is really depressing lol people who think sex is a spectrum (or, god forbid, a social construct) tell you to learn something other than high school biology but what they're really saying is to apply fallacies and political ideology to science. i didn't learn about developmental biology in depth in high school and i doubt most people have. learning about the actual mechanisms behind sex determination and thinking about that knowledge in an unbiased manner led me to the conclusion that sex is a binary.
You do realise that sex doesn’t end at determination? Differentiation exists too.
But even then sex is a socially constructed category like all categories.
What exists in nature for humans are sex characteristics which affect reproductive roles. Viewing sex solely as the reproductive roles is a drastic oversimplification of sexual biology.
@@ellewilliams5162 ...yes? sex differentiation is a thing, what about it?
of course the way we classify sex is a social construct, language is a social construct... but you can make that argument about anything. we call domestic cats felis catus, does that mean cats are also a social construct?
my original point stands, sex is binary. there is nothing between ova and sperm, two, binary. there is nothing between testicular tissue and ovarian tissue, two, binary. although a lot of chromosome pairings are possible, there are still only x and y, two, binary. testosterone is a male hormone and females with higher testosterone levels don't change that, testosterone isn't suddenly a female hormone, they're females with high levels of male hormones. vice versa with estrogen and males. the variations that may happen in nature do not change the fact sex in humans can only develop in two directions.
@jinti !! i agree
@@ellewilliams5162 Social constructionism is completly unscientific. It's like young earth creationism.
Literally everything is a social construct
Sex is binary because Pornhub runs on computers.
Social warriors are PISSED right now.
Thank you for this.... I'm shocked that in 2020 we are still dsicussing this
OMG Thank you for saving common sense. It should not be so refreshing to hear this.
I mean he's wrong so theres no real common sense
@@sharktenko267 how
@@sharktenko267 just because you say so?… sounds about right :/
Because sex is NOT a binary, it is bimodal. This means that there are two extremes (male and female) and everything in between. The biggest example of "in between" is intersex people. There are women who have facial hair because of gene expression, and men who develop breasts. There are few things that can only express in one sex.
@@justinframe2887did you not watch the video? There are only two gametes, there are only two paths your body will choose. Ultimately. Indefinitely. Regardless of what condition makes a person grow different tissues unalike to their birth sex
You are saving science thank you.
Real biologists think you are a dumbfuck.
@@derpythean-comdoge8608 Were you talking about yourself or-?
Vlad Lu I’m not a biologist. I know biologists, I read studies.
@@derpythean-comdoge8608 I'm studying biology. I read scientific articles. Most biologists would laugh at your face.
@@derpythean-comdoge8608 Opinion articles on Nature or Scientific American are not studies. Sociology and gender studies books are also not biology papers. Next time you try to run an experiment on fruit flies, make sure to include all of their intersex conditions as discrete variables. Good luck with those p values lol.
So...does that mean that people who can't produce gametes have no sex?
It seems this definition only works if you completely discount secondary sex characteristics. Yet, if you discount secondary characteristics, how can you assign a person to either category when someone doesn't have the ability to make gametes?
Let's be realistic, everyone knows that 99.9% of the human populations have clear genetic markers of being either a male or female. We also know that the only way any human on earth can exist or was born was by way of binary system in which a female egg was fertilized by a male egg.
The term species is defined as a living organism which is capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding and humans are a species. However because there are humans who are not capable of interbreeding we don't claim they are not human. Therefore, why would this change in terms of biological sex, an individuals not being able to produce gametes would still fall under the category of either male or female because chromosomes also determines biological sex.
@@mystic22g4 Your first words are wrong. It's actually 0.5 to 1.5% of people who are intersex, not 0.1% It's a small point but I think it's an important distinction.
If a person has XY chromosomes and present as female?
Would you allow themselves to identify as a woman or would you insist that they are a man even though they are physiologically female?
@@canislupusfool You are incorrect the percentages you gave includes conditions which most clinicians do not recognize as intersex, such as Klinefelter syndrome [47,XXY], Turner syndrome [45,X], and late-onset adrenal hyperplasia. The true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%, almost 100 times lower than Fausto-Sterling’s estimate of 1.7%.
The condition you describing is known as Swyer syndrome their chromosomes XY are not true male chromosomes because the SRY male gene is missing from the Y chromosomes and they develop primarily as female. They are born with a vagina, cervix, fallopian tubes and uterus, but will not have developed or functioning female ovaries. They are recognized and female and raised as female. So yes, I would describe them as females who have an intersex conditions.
@@mystic22g4 I'll concede that Fausto-Sterling's numbers could be considered a little high but I think the higher number does illustrate something important which is that genetics is messy and is definitely not as binary as many people desperately wish it to be. I also think you should have begun your point with "everyone knows" because I don't think everyone does.
You seem to accept that gamete production alone isn't enough to assign someone all people as being either male or female which is my main issue with the video.
Biological sex is not "messy" as some claim. The existence of over 8 billion people on the planet and the ability of humans to reproduce for over a million years as an anisogamous species support the binary nature of human sex. Intersex conditions, while valid, are still part of the binary system, as all humans, including those with intersex variations, are the result of sperm fertilizing an egg. Variations in biological sex are not a third kind of sex but rather variations within the binary system, leading to those intersex individuals primarily developing as either male or female which was mentioned in this UA-cam channel
Even in the case of intersex conditions, DNA or gametes can determine a person's sex. The entire existence of the human species is based on anisogamy, a form of sexual reproduction where males produce small gametes (sperm) and females produce larger gametes (eggs).
The claim that humans are not binary due to the existence of intersex conditions is countered by the fact that all humans are products of a binary system. While it is important to respect and acknowledge individuals with intersex conditions, it is not accurate to claim that humans are not binary based on the small percentage of the population who are intersex.
Also, different gender identities which now consist of over 72 gender identities does not change the binary nature of human sex, which has been the basis of human existence for millions of years.
Im amazed we live in a time when this has to be explained. I mean it used to be common sense.
It's fucking insane!!! It really knocked the wind out of me that Ph.D level biologists are saying that it isn't and get this, because there are xxy and other variations, which are chromosal DISORDERS which have impact on development and health. It's the equivalent of saying albinism is proof that black people can be white.
Zach, can I get an interview with you on my channel?
Could you guys do a video on intersex people explaining mullerian and wolffian ducts?
We're currently working on a multi-part intersex series, which will cover each major intersex condition. This means we'll be covering the basic development of the wolffian and mullerian ducts for each condition, so yes!
@@ParadoxInstitute Thank You. You make topics easy to understand :)
LGBTQ: “such transphobic content!😡🤬”
Lol that is what a lot of silly billies on Reddit think.
@@aspiknfthat’s what uneducated people think
@@ricardofalcon7889that's what uninformed people think.
I get that gametes only have two options. But what about people who produce both?
Also, I am wondering, if this is true, why is sex assignment at birth done by genitalia?
So, nobody
Nobody produces "both." If you were alluding to intersex, then you're just telling us you don't understand what intersex means.
What about people who have green skin and tusks?
Nobody is "assigning" anything. The doctors recognize and record the sex.
Because genitalia match up to each sex 99% of the time or close to it. The time + energy + cost associated with testing the chromosomes of each individual to determine the sex of the >1% who may not match up is simply not worth it.
What happens when someone cannot produce gametes? What would their sex be?
@Antoine Wilson I agree that sex is binary, I'm just trying to understand this argument so I can use it myself when discussing this with others. What I don't get is what happens if someone has the basis of producing both or neither of the gametes? For example someone with a testicle and an ovary or neither.
@@wtsunyu if i say that humans are bipedal does that mean im saying that people who have no legs arent human??
As the video explains, their sex would be somewhere between, but without a new gamete type nothing new.
What happen when some people are born with no arms? Can we say than “the no. of arm of human is a spectrum form 0-2”?
You either have the SRY gene or you dont,not that hard mate
Slovak translation...
Title: Prečo je pohlavie binárne
0:02
A binary is a system composed of two parts--a duality, a pair. In developmental biology,
T:
Binárnym je taký systém, ktorý je zložený z dvoch častí- z duality, páru. Vo vývinovej biológii
0:10
sex is binary. Here's why. An organism's sex is defined as the type of gamete their
T:
je pohlavie binárne. Tu je odôvodnenie.: Pohlavie organizmov je definované ako typ pohlavných buniek -(gamét),
0:18
reproductive anatomy is organized to produce: Male bodies develop towards the production of
T:
ktoré je ich reprodukčná anatómia zostavená produkovať: Mužské telá sa vyvinú pre produkciu
0:23
small gametes (sperm), whereas female bodies develop towards the production
T:
malých gamét (spermii), zatiaľ čo ženské telá sa vyvinú k produkcii
0:27
of large gametes (ova). Because there are no intermediate gametes between sperm and eggs
T:
veľkých gamét (vajíčok). Pretože neexistujú žiadne prostredné gaméty medzi spermiou a vajíčkom
0:34
(such as the often joked about sperg or speggs), there are therefore only two sexes. In humans,
T:
(ako to často zaznieva v žartoch o „spergoch“ alebo „spegoch“ ), hovoríme preto len o dvoch pohlaviach. U ľudí
0:42
this sexual dimorphism is so consistent that 99.98% of births are unambiguously male or
T:
je tento pohlavný dimorfizmus natoľko konzistentný, že 99,98% všetkých narodení je jednoznačne mužských alebo
0:50
female. As developmental biologist Dr. Emma Hilton and evolutionary biologist Dr. Colin Wright note,
T:
ženských. Ako vývinová biologička Dr. Emma Hilton a evolučný biológ Dr. Colin Wright poznamenávajú:
0:57
"The evolutionary function of these two anatomies is to aid in reproduction via
T:
„Evolučná funkcia týchto dvoch anatómii je napomáhať v reprodukcii prostredníctvom
1:03
the fusion of sperm and ova. No third type of sex cell exists in humans, and therefore there
T:
splynutia spermie a vajíčka. Žiadny tretí typ pohlavnej bunky u ľudí neexistuje, a preto tu
1:09
is no sex 'spectrum' or additional sexes beyond male and female. Sex is binary."
T:
ani nie je žiadne pohlavné „spektrum“ alebo doplnkové pohlavia pomimo mužské a ženské. Pohlavie je binárne. “
1:16
To understand how this binary system is produced, let's explore the process of sex determination.
T:
Pre porozumenie ako vzniká tento binárny systém, poďme preskúmať proces pohlavného určenia.
1:23
Sex in humans is genetically determined at conception, solely by the presence or absence
T:
Pohlavie u ľudí je geneticky určené pri počatí. A to výlučne prítomnosťou alebo absenciou
1:31
of a functioning SRY gene, which is located on the short arm of the Y chromosome. With SRY
T:
funkčného génu SRY, ktorý je umiestnený na krátkom ramene chromozómu Y.
1:39
activation, the gonads differentiate into testes, and the fetus develops anatomy to support the
T:
Spoločne s SRY aktiváciou sa gonády diferencujú v semeníky a plod sa anatomicky vyvíja pre podporu
1:45
production of small gametes. In the absence of SRY activation, the gonads differentiate into ovaries,
T:
produkcie malých gamét. Pri neprítomnosti aktivácie SRY sa gonády diferencujú vo vaječníky
1:53
and the fetus develops anatomy to support the production of large gametes. This is
T:
a plod si vyvíja anatómiu pre podporu produkcie veľkých gamét. To je dôvod
1:59
why developmental biologists refer to SRY as the "master switch" gene for mammalian
T:
prečo vývinoví biológovia označujú SRY ako gén - „hlavný spínač“ pre cicavčie
2:04
sex determination, because without its activation, the fetus develops as a female.
T:
pohlavné určenie, pretože bez jeho aktivácie sa plod vyvíja ako samica.
2:10
The critical importance of SRY for sex determination can be seen in
T:
Kritická dôležitosť SRY génu pre pohlavné určenie môže byť pozorovaná v
2:14
differences of sex development. Here's 3 examples:
T:
rozdieloch pohlavného vývinu. Tu sú tri príklady:
2:20
On very rare occasions, a fetus may develop with two X chromosomes and one Y,
T:
Vo veľmi zriedkavých prípadoch sa plod môže vyvinúť s dvoma X chromozómami a jedným Y,
2:25
or three Xs and one Y, or even four Xs and one Y. Despite the extra X chromosomes,
T:
alebo s troma X a jedným Y, alebo dokonca štyrmi X a jedným Y. Napriek extra chromozómom X
2:32
all these cases develop as males thanks to the presence of SRY on the Y chromosome.
T:
všetky tieto prípady sa vyvíjajú mužsky vďaka prezencii SRY na Y chromozóme.
2:41
Sometimes, a translocation of the SRY gene results in it being placed
T:
Niekedy translokácia SRY génu vyústi do jeho umiestnenia
2:45
on an X chromosome in a fetus with two X chromosomes. Thanks to the presence of SRY,
T:
na X chromozóme u plodu s dvoma X chromozómami. Vďaka prítomnosti SRY
2:51
the fetus develops testicular tissue despite having no Y chromosome.
T:
si plod začne vyvíjať testikulárne tkanivo, hoci nemá žiadny Y chromozóm.
2:59
In exceptional cases, a fetus may develop a female phenotype
T:
Vo výnimočných prípadoch si plod môže vyvinúť ženský fenotyp
3:03
with an XY karyotype. Because the SRY gene remained inactive, they developed as females.
T:
s XY karyotypom. Pretože SRY gén zostal neaktívny, vyvinuli sa žensky.
3:10
Thanks to the master switch SRY gene, we can see that sex determination is
T:
Vďaka hlavnému spínaciemu SRY génu môžeme vidieť, že pohlavné určenie je
3:17
entirely dimorphic. However, this does not exclude variation within the binary system.
T:
úplne dvojtvaré. Avšak to nevylučuje variácie vrámci binárneho systému.
3:23
Sex differences between males and females are commonplace. There is variation of chromosomes,
T:
Pohlavné rozdiely medzi mužmi a ženami sú bežnými. Existuje tu možná variácia chromozómov
3:29
gene expression, gonadal tissue, hormone production, genital morphology, height,
T:
génovej expresie, gonadálneho tkaniva, hormonálnej produkcie, morfológie genitálii, výšky,
3:35
weight, voice pitch, muscle mass, bone density, and more.
T:
váhy, výšky hlasu, svalovej hmoty, hustoty kostí a ďalších.
3:40
But, no matter the variation of traits, the principle remains:
T:
Ale bez ohľadu na varírovanie čŕt, princíp zostáva:
3:45
sex is defined by the type of gamete your anatomy is organized to produce. Two gamete types,
T:
pohlavie je definované typom gamét, ktorý je vaša anatómia zostavená produkovať.
Dva gametické typy,-
3:52
two sexes. As Hilton and Wright note, "Not everyone needs to be discretely assignable to
T:
- dve pohlavia. Ako Hiltonová a Wright poznamenali: „Nemusí byť každý samostatne priraditeľný k
4:00
one or the other sex in order for biological sex to be functionally binary. To assume
T:
jednému alebo druhému pohlaviu na to, aby bolo biologické pohlavie funkčne binárne.
4:07
otherwise--to confuse secondary sexual traits with biological sex itself--is a category error."
T:
Predpokladať opak - zamieňať si druhotné pohlavné znaky so samotným biologickým pohlavím - je kategorickou chybou."
4:14
Such boundaries in biology can be fuzzy, but the boundaries of gametes are clear. Or,
T:
Také hranice v biológii môžu byť nejasné, ale hranice gamét sú jasné.
4:21
as evolutionary biologist Dr. Heather Heying writes, "The boundaries between
T:
Alebo ako evolučná biologička Dr. Heather Heying píše, „Hranice medzi
4:28
species are almost always fuzzy. The moment of change, when one species becomes two,
T:
druhmi sú takmer vždy nejasné. Moment zmeny, keď sa z jedného druhu stanú dva,
4:33
is rarely known. It is this fuzziness, in part, that explains why we have so many species
T:
je zriedkakedy známy. Je to táto zmätočnosť, ktorá z časti vysvetľuje prečo máme tak veľa ponímaní druhov.
4:39
concepts. So many species concepts, but only two types of gametes. In animals, the borders
T:
Tak veľa druhových konceptov, ale len dva typy gamét. U zvierat hranice
4:47
between gamete types aren't fuzzy. Gametes are always male or female. There is no in between."
T:
medzi typmi gamét nie sú zmätočné. Gaméty sú vždy buď mužské alebo ženské.
Neexistuje nič medzi tým.“
4:55
This is why sex is binary--not because there is no spectrum of human body types,
T:
To je dôvodom prečo je pohlavie binárne.-Nie pretože by neexistovalo spektrum typov ľudských tiel,
5:01
there is. Sex is binary because there are only two
T:
tak ako vskutku existuje. Pohlavie je binárne pretože existujú iba dva
5:05
gamete types bodies can be organized around: sperm and eggs. If, however,
T:
gametické typy, pre ktoré sa môžu telá zostaviť. Spermie a vajíčka. Ak by ste však
5:11
you happen to find the mythical intermediate gametes spergs or speggs, let us know.
T:
náhodou objavili oné vymyslené prechodné gaméty „spergy“ alebo „speggy“ dajte nám vedieť.
5:17
I'm Zach, for the Paradox Institute.
T:
Ja som Zach. Pre Paradoxový Inštitút.
Who's giving "thumbs down" on this? "I hate science!" Come on, Man....
The T in LGBT
TRA's and woke losers
ideologues science deniers
@@rialimpe Or at least the Trans-Trender tornado.
Trans-Trender Tornado is…
* Non-binary
* Genderqueer
* Cross-dressers
* Drag
* Genderfluid
* Agender
* Pseudotranssexuals
Transgender Umbrella is…
* Transsexual
* Gender Dysphoria
* MtF
* ItF
* FtM
* ItM
* Detransitioners
* MtFtM
* ItFtI
* FtMtF
* ItMtI
I added detransitioners because they know what it means to be trans, having transed before, and also having detransed.
Please, someone add subtitles in Spanish.
I would myself but I currently don't have a laptop.
thank you so much for this video, it clarified sex determination more for me
Ive seen many spergs while playing World of Warcraft XD
Thank you for making this clear!
Are the gametes always male or female for hermaphroditic animals? How about plants?
Yes, hermaphrodites are by definition male *and* female. They therefore produce both many small motile gametes (male) and few large sessile gametes (female). This includes hermaphroditic plants. :)
@jinti !! Yes, if you’re something like a plant or a slug. :)
Clear and informative. Thank you and please keep producing these short simple videos that are useful for sharing on Twitter etc. Cheers 👍🏻
No it isn't. First it says 99.98 percent of all humans have binary gametes. Then it says gametes are ALWAYS male or female. So which is it? Because according to the first statement, with a human population of 8+ billion means there are 1.6 MILLION humans that DO NOT fit the second statement - "ALWAYS male or female"
Wonderful explanation! Thank you.
Interesting stuff.
Query: is a species that reproduces asexually considered a different sex or do they generally have a sex determibed by chromosomes?
Most organism with asexual reproduction have no sex.
How is developmental biology different from evolutionary biology?
Evolutinary biology studies the evolution of organisms, while developmental biology studies the way living beings develop from a cygote to adult, if you merge both, you end up with evo-devo, there is a funny musical video that explains it a little bit.
ua-cam.com/video/ydqReeTV_vk/v-deo.html
Great video!
Your work is invaluable. Thank you, thank you.
While yes, s¢xual reproduction is binary, some species don't have separate s¢xes and have both organs on one body. Is he-she a valid pronoun then? My question is how do you address some intersex; ppl who aren't explicitly male or female. Yes, it's a defect, but the question still stands.
Edit:
Only one condition develops secondary sex characteristics. All are still explicit male/female (mostly male) with a defect in s¢x development.
@Antoine Wilson-Guay so do we really call someone a guy if they have xy chromosomes and testes but a womb because the rest of his genitals never developed? Plus went through female puberty because of this defect?
@Antoine Wilson-Guay (repost, UA-cam deleted my comment)
AIS affects a section of the XY population that is physically unable to react to androgens. In Complete AIS (CAIS), t¢stes exist in the abdomen while the external g¢nitals are female. At puberty, CAIS individuals grow br¢asts but do not m¢nstruate.
@@halfofakitty People with CAIS are female.
Paradox Institute has another video about DSDs, but really this information can be found in many places on the internet.
Unlike some species, humans don't present true hermaphroditism.
Don't compare humans with other animals, every animals and insects have different ways of reproduction. They don't have to fit the narrative of how you view them.
FOR HUMANS, only a MALE and FEMALE exist and IS GENETICALLY DETERMINED. It cannot be any further.
I'm transsexual and adore you for making this video (this whole series)... Thankyou, thankyou Thankyou...
How can you be transexual if sex is just gametes?
@@ellewilliams5162 It's because of small and large gametes that we have transsexuals. We need the two sexes to create the desire to transition from one gender to the other... We don't actually change sexes, we change genders, but social gender definitions have been formed by the innate characteristics of the two biologic sexes.
@@bootchick1875 I just think hat going by the gamete model isn't helpful as it doesn't account for differences of sexual development. And also transexual people like us would be considered the same as our assigned sex at birth, which just isn't accurate, it doesn't account for the reality that I have some male and female sex characteristics.
@@ellewilliams5162 It doesn't matter if it's not helpful or not.. It's the biological reality. Transsexual/transgender people have either small (male) or large (female) gamete, not both, not partial, not none, true also for intersex people... A transsexual women has small gamete, there can be no denying of this biological fact. It's an utter fantasy to to be claim otherwise. Characteristics are just qualities that can be associated to anyone or anything. I have the characteristics of a bitching mama, still doesn't make me a biological woman... Maybe you need to watch more of the videos in this series? (try watching: Is Sex Bimodal)
@@bootchick1875 System of categorisation are there to serve us. No one is denying this, just that sex by your definition doesn't account for biological reality of intersex and transexual people.
I am talking about primary sex chaaterstics. which are biological reality.
There are utility aspects of this, especially when it comes to medicine which deals with biology.
For example trans women will also need to have prostate checkups as well as breast check ups. defining them purely as their assigned sex at birth is really not useful because it doesn't account for the reality that they have characteristics of both sexes. Transexual people are comparable to intersex people but they acquired their characteristics later in life rather than at birth.
Why is sky is blue.
Great vid.
This video don't looks to talk about sex binarism, but about how severely can be descripted something. I only see closure of mind and eccessive harshness for not said porpouse. A text book could say sex is binary even if there are other sexes. What's the point of all this, it make me anxious.
tripe
How tf are there other sexes,if theres only two gametes. Small or large(male or female respectively)
@@theoslegos2034 Are you small or big? ah ah ah XD
@@AndreaPenso npc fr
This is great! But I've run into one potential problem and wondering how it would be resolved.
It seems that, theoretically, humans could fall into 4 total categories based on two descriptors: male, female, neither, both
It's theoretically possible for an organism to have no sex, and it's also possible that it have both reproductive systems and produce both gametes
So would this still be considered a binary distribution, or does having more than 2 possibilities make it something else (discrete multinomial distribution perhaps?)
You either have the sry gene or you dont
Commented here just to make the algorithm work.
For all the npcs hating: You either have the SRY gene or you don't
IT'S NOT THAT DIFFICULT FFS
As I've just replied to you; this doesn't define sex.
@@Dr.Ian-Plect and as ive asked you,please tell me how it is defined then? Or are you going to tell me the meaning is subjective or some shit like that
@@theoslegos2034 NO, it's NOT subjective, and as I said in my reply on the other thread; calm down and temper your attitude. Learn from someone with a good knowledge of the subject!
- Sex is ONLY defined by the production of 1 of 2 gametes that an individual has the organs to produce. These components (gametes and gonads) are the primary sex traits.
That's IT, no other aspect is involved in the definition; not SRY, chromosomes, genitalia, hormone types/levels, breasts etc. There is of course strong correlation with these things and gametes, but they don't form part of the definition.
This would mean that someone who produces no gametes (perhaps for any reason or due to DSDs) has no sex. While that is a philosophically arguable position considering the "purpose" of human sex as per evolution, SRY on the Y chromosome and its subsequent allowance of anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) does significantly direct the inherent path of one's sex by preventing fallopian tubes, a uterus, ovaries, etc., in favor of testes. From there, potential androgen receptor error may prevent AMH from allowing the person to fully develop internally and externally as the male they otherwise are.
If the SRY is on an X chromosome, this person develops as if male, (and this channel would classify them as such), but they are sterile.
The chromosomes are not the sex. They signal directions for which endpoint the body will attempt to reach.
@@SassyTwofer "This would mean that someone who produces no gametes (perhaps for any reason or due to DSDs) has no sex"
- if one chooses to be so obtuse or are unable to discern their way to reconciling how it doesn't, sobeit
Thank you for making these kinds of content.
Brilliant!! Thanks for your work!
SRY is important for testis formation, but it still takes a lot of active differentiation to turn the bipotential gonad into an ovary (compare a functional ovary vs a streak gonad, and the situation of individuals with Turner’s syndrome). Not to nit pick your video, but it’s overly simplified and inaccurate to say “female is the default” in the absence of SRY....
Yes, there are many genes which lead ovarian development. And it is not inaccurate to say that SRY is the master switch sex determining gene for mammals. Of course, we cannot get into advanced genetics in a five minute video focused on fundamental principles.
Yes the *gametes* are binary but I don't think that means the broader organisms built around them are.
I suspect this is a bit like saying that because a bolt of electricity and a cup of gasoline are "binarily" distinct that *cars* must be binarily either "gasoline powered" or "electricity powered", when in fact cars can combine features and mechanisms of both power sources and hence exist on a spectrum.
I think a lot of what you are doing with respect to some of the various forms atypical gender development is basically a subjective value judgement, x atypical development pattern or disorder is "really" just a male development that went slightly awry or "really" female development that went slightly wrong. I think in many cases that's a subjective categorization on your part.
Food for thought: here's an example of something similar: Creationists claim that it's simply not possible for organisms to evolve from, say dinosaurs to birds, hence there can be no spectrum of transitional forms as species evolved mutation by mutation and bridged the divide between categories like "dinosaur" and "bird". "Dinosaur" and "bird" are strict binaries, eternally separate kinds that were created separately. So when you show them fossils of all the various organisms that look an awful lot like transitional forms between dinosaurs and birds (velociraptors with feathers, flying bird-like archeopteryx with clawed wings and teeth, Modern Hoatzins that are "fully bird" but develop claws on their wings early in devleopment, etc etc)They try to pigeonhole (heh heh) each transitional form into either the "bird" or "dinosaur" categories by saying that archeopteryx was "really" just a bird with a few stray dino characteristics thrown in as an aberration, or that Velociraptor was "really" just a dinosaur with a few stray mutant bird-like characteristics thrown in.
They do this with every fossil sequence of transitional forms charting the great macroevolutionary changes (humans from earlier apes, land mammals to whales, fish to tetrapods) I think you're doing the same basic thing with respect to people that exist between the endpoints on the spectrum between male and female. Rounding each to one of the binary categories when in fact they exist on a spectrum.
So in a nutshell, you mean that males can have typically female reproductive organs and features?
Translation: "My parents never explained how babies are made."
Humans are not cars and there's no human that can produce both gametes.
You either have the SRY gene or you dont
What do dinosaurs and birds have to do with gametes? What was your point?
I have a question. What IS sex? I agree that the TYPE of gamete is binary (sperm and eggs). But the sex of an individual is not "the type of gamete", it is the type of gamete production their body is organized around. And that is defined by sex characteristics, which is bimodal?
The video explains it. The SRY Gene is the best way to define sex.
Keep saying "bimodal" like "Amen" or "Abracadabra". Maybe one day the prayer/spell will come true.
Sex is how humans reproduce. Your mother and father should have explained this to you before they let you onto Twitter.
No, characteristics are not sex. Men are generally taller than women and have more bodh hair. A woman being and hairier than a man doesn't make _her_ the man and him the woman. Physical characteristics are a mixture of attributes from your mother and your father. They don't determine sex.
"Sex is the trait that determines whether a sexually reproducing organism produces male or female gametes."
What if you body is incapable of producing gametes?
and this is probably less likey but, what if your body produced both somehow?
Sure, this would seem impossible given your explanation, but since ovotestes are possible (not to say that they produce both) it seems possible that this could happen.
Additionally, while you mention the SRY gene, you fail to mention the WNT4 gene, which can suppress the SRY gene if both are present. This can lead to ambigous sex organs, like the ovotestis I mentioned above. This is possible in other animals, something we've known since at least 1975. So far, I haven't seen any sources that say this is possible in humans, however, I did find one source that says that "Most (folks with ovotestis) are infertile but ovulation or spermatogenesis is possible."
That doesn't say and of course, so it does still fit your binary definition.
So far, I've only found a hypothesis that a male/female human chimera would be able to produce both gametes and even self fertilize (link, because this hypothesis is wild: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20452130/). If true, this would seemingly indicate a third sex if I'm following your definition, as it leaves no room for exceptions like this one.
There also seems to be cases in which a person can have both ovaries and testis instead of ovotestis (link for that study as well: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1033669/)
@Grabbed You By The Pussy so which would I be if my body produced ovum and sperm? How do you choose?
@Grabbed You By The Pussy lolol eggs and ovum are the same thing. Go back to the kids table and read a biology book please
@Grabbed You By The Pussy ok then smart guy, whats the difference between an egg and an ova?
great video. concise, precise.
It seems that the video is saying that
a) If a person's body produces (at least at some time during their life) ova, then that person is called a Female
b) If a person's body produces (at least at some time during their life) sperm, then that person is called a Male
It seems to be saying that if the SRY is activated, the person will always go on to be a sperm producer, and likewise if not activated, the person will always go on to be an ova producer. Is it possible that this might not be the case in rare circumstances?
What do we call a person who never produces either ova or sperm? What do we call a person who produces both?
The video is defining the term 'sex' as 'the resultant state of the SRY activation, which is either activated or NOT activated - there is no other possibility'. Is that correct?
Thanks for the comment! The video is saying that an organism’s sex is defined through the type of gamete their reproductive anatomy is organized to support. This means that males develop reproductive anatomy to support small gametes, and females develop reproductive anatomy to support large gametes. You are male or female regardless of past, present, or future functionality. Sex is not defined through one’s ability to produce the gamete at a specific time, but rather the type of reproductive anatomy developed to support those gametes. This is why we say male bodies “develop towards” small gamete production, and female bodies “develop towards” large gamete production.
The SRY gene is not the same as your sex. It’s simply the initial genetic mechanism which, when activated, begins a complex set of gene cascades leading to gonadal differentiation, where the bipotential gonads differentiate into testes, rather than ovaries.
@@ParadoxInstitute So, to simplify, a person is either a male or a female, depending on which set of gonads their body develops. Is that what you are saying? Can one have no gonads? Can one have both sets?
@@derekjparnell yes, actually, there are women with XY chromosomes and they don't have ovaries, plus they don't produce gametes and men with XX chromosomes (viceversa)
Conclusion of this video: ...
No, don't simplify, sex is the intended function acquired by inherent facilities to develop and produce one of the two required gametes essential for human reproduction.
1. If a person becomes infertile or cant reproduce (genetic disorder, environment, cancer, surgery, diet, trauma etc) , that doesn't affect the intention, it affects the outcome.
2. If a person develops both sets of gonads, that's not a third and unique sexual organ system viable to human reproduction, you have both, both of 2 possibilities.
3. If your genetics point one way, and you develop the other, you still developed one of the two possibilities.
4. If you develop none of the two, that is not a third and unique sex. Sex still requires both to which that unfortunate individual in regards to sexual production, has none.
All of these mind you, are deviations to the intended principle and not exceptions to the principle, which is why they are classified as medical disorders and come along with it, a lot of potentially serious health issues.
You either have the sry gene or you dont. Stop trying to grasp at straws
Thank you for something SANE!
Generally, that is inaccurate. The absence or presence of Y chromosomic composition (Y chromosome) in general, is what determines sex in mammalian vertebrates. Generally, sex in an organism is determined by the heterogametic genetic factor, which can vary throughout different classes of organisms, however the principle remains the same, even in plants. The SRY gene (sex determining region Y) is what determines developmental sex factors (sexual physicality and gametic composition), but sex is defined and determined by the absence or presence of the heterogametic genetic factor.
Translation: "I don't know how sex works."
@@TagSpamCop I do know how sex works.
@@TagSpamCop I explicitly stated that sex determination can vary throughout different classes. One sex evolves to carry a small gamete and the other a large gamete; the actual determination of such relies on genetic properties.
@@TagSpamCop Could you express an accurate model of sex determination?
Considering this video relies on legitimate sources of information, please state your sources that support your claim that his explanation is in fact "not accurate".
This whole conflict needs to stop. We know that sex IS binary and we should agree with it. We have no way to deny that claim and we already proved that multiple times. People who say that "sex is a spectrum" are complete liars and are completely ignorant about biology at that level. I mean all of them. This conflict is over. Agree that sex is binary. Your sex cannot be changed and that is the way it is.
"We know that sex IS binary"
F8ck you. You are not an authorit.
@@jaykanta4326 consult a biology dictionary. Let me know when you can provide more than two sexes
@@jaykanta4326 hello uneducated layperson, your objections are not relevant. This is well accepted in literature. Please do some reading
0:45 0.02% is about 1.5 million worldwide. That's still a lot of people: more than the population of Estonia and four times more than the population of Iceland.
It doesnt matter how many interesex people they are ultimately.
@@danb4900 It's interesting that you don't explain why you think that but perhaps it's not that surprising.
@@QT5656 I didnt feel the need to elaborate it because the fucking video explains why.
Thank you for this video.
Lovely-and citations! Thank you. LOL.
Why can't people just understand that one can watch this video, read his thread and not become a transphobe?
@Josh the Art Critic No it's not, that definition means people without gametes don't have a sex. If you want to argue it's about the plumbing to make gametes, then that is an entirely different discussion that is going to involve bimodality. His argument is beyond crap and doesn't hold up to the most miniscule of scrutiny.
@@killraven123 Instead of having a tantrum, *prove* its full of crap
@@Grandmaster_Dragonborn I already posed a question that causes his entire argument to fall apart. Is it strictly about the gametes produced, in which case someone who doesn't produce them is without a sex? Or is it about plumbing for gametes in which case it's undeniably bimodal? You can't have it both ways and it took me 60 seconds of thought to realize he's full of crap.
@@killraven123 Again, I’m really struggling to take you seriously?
Get rid of the insults, and make an argument.
Stop saying he’s full of crap and just say you’re argument.
Christ alive 🤦🏼
@@killraven123 In addition to that, explain how this means that sex is indeed *not binary* ?
Yes we get it: Sex is binary because uncertain generalization of two states of a species is the way to go. Ignoring of course that if 1 and 0 are not a spectrum, then 1 is only "1" with only the characteristics of "1", and 0 is the same.
1 and 0 (men and women) if they were actually binary, would mean that both men and women would be different species without shared sexual ligaments, gametes and sexual parts of the body (although mostly unfunctional).
That would also contradict darwinsim to an extent, did we come from a binary pair of living organisms? I though evolution was all about cell division, mutations, enviroment.
If sex was binary then there were two "species" of cells at the beginning, not one.
Edit: Sex is a continuum, not a "spectrum". Stop with the politically charged comments already lol
Evolution? Oh you mean by the laws of nature
For example, A clown fish can naturally change their sex, right?
How does a man change his sex? And how does he do it naturally? Without the Man made machines, surgery, money being spent etc?
@@_steamfunk_2271 Who said a living being could change it's biology?
What I addressed was the mis-use of the concept of sex, by clarifying that sex isn't binary, but rather a continuum with only two sides, and intersex people falling into somewhere the middle. Furthermore supported by biologists and epigenetics.
As of now, changing sex is impossible, if that was your concern.
Also many of recent discoveries have proven the original theory of darwinism wrong, as of right now it's called evolution.
Darwinism and evolution are considered two different theories by modern standarts.
I don't think that's what species means. If there's a species difference, they will not give rise to fertile offspring and continue their descent to the modern eras.
Consider this: if the last pair of Equus genus species alive were a donkey and a horse. They could only reproduce to give mules which are infertile and cannot reproduce, ultimately causing extinction after a while unless some mutation may occur.
You are very confused. A science class woudl halp. Drop the Identity Studies classes and go over to the STEM building and sign up for evolutionary and developmental biology classes.
@@TagSpamCop I'm not confused, you are misinterpreting my message.
To say sex is binary is to say that it equals the state of 0s and 1s, which is not the case because all of the human beings in existence are not fully male or fully female. If you did a little research you would find out that as babies are developing, males and females share the same organic tissues for their reproductive parts, as well as males having nipples, a leftover from developing in the womb.
A full male human wouldn't have organic tissues that females would also have, but scrotum exists as well as women's labia.
This isn't about science (because I already broke it down to you) it's about definitions.
Sex as a function is obviously binary, one has sperm other has an egg, simple enough.
But sex as a state of a human is entirely different, both male and female share parts of each other if you didn't know, a little research on evolutionary development wouldn't hurt too much for you.
Edit: Darwinsim further proves my point, first there was cell division (meaning all cells were "one sex" so to speak) then as they evolved, mammals were born and now there are two beings who share parts of one same base (their species) which need each other to reproduce and survive.
To say sex is binary in this case, is to disregard the line in evolution in which cell division transformed into sex within living beings.
The alphabet community will be outraged
I wish my teachers did it as succinctly as this.
Feel like I'm watching a PragerU vid
@Josh the Art Critic I wouldn't cite a theistic evolutionist as a reliable source in the scientific community xD
@@killraven123
Why not? Do you hate theists?
@@MZONE991 do you really not see the problem with a scientist saying a magic man in the sky influenced evolutionary processes when there is no evidence for that claim? Bringing your religion into the scientific process is a good way to trash your reputation.
@@killraven123
What does a metaphysical discussion have to do with science?
If someone is a good scientist why should i care whether he believes in God or not?
@@killraven123
Also your science is outdated
Recently we have discovered a ton of evidence that evolution is fine tuned and not a random process
If you are interested i can give you some books
Or maybe some shirt videos to watch
I’m disappointed in the comments. Smh
Thank you Zae Lefty!
Ok, sex is binary. So what happens with a person that, as you stated in the video, can't possibly be assigned one of the two binary sexes. Either this person will be categorized as male or female, or not, depending on the legislation. And guess what happens? If the person is categorized REGARDLESS of the non assignability, the person will have a name of the corresponding sex, they will use the corresponding pronouns, probably use certain clothes, and so on and so forth. But all of that is social. Social elements that are related to this biological sex. Social construct. And we call that social construct (DIFFERENT FROM "BIOLOGICAL" SEX) Gender. Thank you.
Actually.... in biology the sex isn’t binary
You can see this video for answers: ua-cam.com/video/kT0HJkr1jj4/v-deo.html
And also gender and sex aren’t the same thing
Sex is biological and gender is a social construct
Nothing in that video supports their conclusion that sex isn't binary--nor could it in principle, since Hank never defined the word "sex".
Also, this video never mentioned gender. Stop being hyper-corrective.
Everything including math is technically a social construct doesn't make it a any less invaluable tool
Gender is a social construct. That's why I don't have one >;)>
Repeat with me:
SEX AND GENDER ARE NOT THE SAME THINGS. SEX IS BINARY, GENDER ISN’T.
Thank you.
I would agree that sex is typically binary, but 1.7% of the population falls into the umbrella of intersex (or dsd if you prefer)
1.7% of the population do not fit into the box of sexually male or female.
This is because sex is not purely gametes, but sex and sexual characteristics are comprised of a wide range of things moving from hormones to chromosomes to bone structure to genitals to even things like the structure of your skin!
Though humans are typically sexually dimorphic, what is typical does not comprise everyone.
About 2% of the worlds population are redheads. Do you say that all people have either dark hair or blonde hair? No! People can have red hair as well (yes there are other hair colors, just for sake of analogy things are simplified.)
About 2% of people have green eyes. Do you say that nobody has green eyes? As with non-sexual phenotypic traits, sex is comprised of many things, and different aspects can fall on different sides of a spectrum
You can be born with ambiguous genitalia, having both a penis and vagina.
You can be born with male genetals but have a testosterone resistance, and develop as sexually female.
You can have more than just xx and xy chromosomes (being x, xxy, xxxy, xxx, xyy as the main pairings)
People like things to be simple, people like things to be categorized into neat little boxes, and that is okay most of the time, but that some of the time, when you exclude and invalidate 2% of the world's population, that can really hurt those people who fall into that group. Just pretending that some people don't exist doesn't solve the problem.
None of this is to even bring up the topic of utilizing things such as genetic engineering to alter sex characteristics - if a person uses genetic engineering to modify their body to fit into the typical box of a different sex, are they that sex? I would say yes, but it is a complex issue.
Life isn't simple, life isn't put into neat little boxes, and sex is the same.
Gender ofc isn't binary though thank you for recognizing my gnc pals.
So what is gender
@@judoh1678 Gender is comprised of psychology (your identity, currently we do not have a biological explanation for what dictates this other than environment raised influences it, defined by what you feel good and what you feel bad being called, known as euphoria and dysphoria), your presentation (What gender roles you abide by and what norms you follow, not exclusive to any gender but a component of your gender nonetheless, this is stuff like mannerisms, clothing, makeup, speech patterns, etc), and your identifiers (what you like people to call you, like name and pronouns)
these 3 components make up gender, each one is a spectrum of itself, and each one can partner with any of the others - EX:
You could be a masculine person who identifies as male and uses he/him, but you could also be a masculine person who uses she/they and identifies as nonbinary, or you could be an androgynous person who uses any pronouns and who's identity fluxuates, and anything else.
Sex is more complex, and is dictated by a combination of chromosomes, genes making up chromosomes, hormones, skeletal structure, reproductive organs, etc.
None of these are exclusive to any other, and sex can be comprised of any combination of these traits.
Essentially - Sex is your biological characteristics and identifiers which may change over time, or may deviate from the common dimorphism of humans, and gender is your psychological preferences and presentation - the social aspect of 'you'.
Does that clear it up?
@@entropy7999 thats bs
You say the Earth is not flat?
Let's be honest mojority of people talking about biological sex aren't talking about presence od SRY gene, they mean genital morphology. That's also by what measure you are assigned sex at birth.
Yeah because it almost always correlates with the specific sex you have.
I was thinking of doing a masters in Spegtroscopy, I think I'll become a plumber instead. Even plumbing joints like bicycles are Binary.!
Well i can see your points but i can't fully comprehend your definition. You are saying that sex is when you produce either sperm or eggs. So far so good. Some disagree with you and claim that this can't be correct because there are people who can't produce those gametes. You oppose it and say that this doesn't matter because their reproductive anatomy is organized in a such way. So far so good. But then you describe the OT DSD's as having two reproductive anatomies and only one functional. If the actual production of sperm or eggs is irrelevant and the basic factor that defines sex is the reproductive anatomy then why we should exclude the non functional reproductive system from the OT DSD's as a sex defining factor? Isn't that a contradiction? What am i missing here?
No, you hit the nail on the head. The entire thing is a contradiction. First it's all about gametes until someone brings up that some people don't produce any. Then it's about the reproductive anatomy of gametes, but that doesn't hold up either because of the bimodality of gonads and genitalia. His definition just simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
@@killraven123 I think his definition still holds up. He is basing his definition on the reproductive capacities of the sexes. I think that this is perfectly logical. What is the "purpose" of sex after all? And i think there is not a contradiction because even in the OT DSD's cases their reproductive anatomy is still organized around the production of sperm or eggs. One of the two anatomies will have an advantage over the other, so still a predominant reproductive anatomy organized around the production of sperm or eggs. In every other cases, where production of sperm or eggs is impossible, there is one anatomy organized around the production of sperm or eggs, so there is not a comparison here. I think the basic factor still exists because in every case the anatomy is organized, fully or mostly, around the production of female or male gametes. By the end of the day you can only fertilize or be fertilized or have the structure to do so. There is not self - fertilization in humans thus the sexes can only be two. I just needed an answer to clarify some things but i think he is right.
@@nemiarhs the definition of sex on gametes simply doesn't work unless you accept people without gametes don't have a sex. If you accept that it is based on sexual organ anatomy then sex is clearly bimodal based on the huge variation from totally male to totally female we see. His definition of sex as binary doesn't hold water, and based on his true definition of anatomy he cleverly disguises as being based on gametes trans women would be able to successfully transition to the female side of the spectrum because after surgery the remaining primary sex characteristics fall on the female spectrum. This is nothing more than cleverly disguised hate that actually argues for sex being bimodal.
@@killraven123 He does not tell you that sex is only about being capable to produce gametes. He tells you that sex is when your internal reproductive system (mullerian or wolfian structure) is organized AROUND the production of sperm or eggs. In most intersex there is only one internal reproductive anatomy. Only in OT DSDs (0,0018%) there are two but as i said only one is the predominant. That means that under normal circumstances you could only fertilize or be fertilized. OT DSDs have not an equal bimodal internal reproductive system thus when they are capable of reproducing they will either fertilize or be fertilized. They can`t self fertilized as hermaphrodite species do. Sex is a category and it is defined through its reproductive function. All other are characteristics of sex not sex itself and can be on a continuum. And trans are only altering their phenotype or the external genitalia or their hormone levels. They are not altering their internal reproductive anatomy to produce eggs from the initial sperm or vice versa. And please if you want me to take you seriously i would prefer leaving "woke" speech aside. There are many scientific evidence to back up his conclusions. This is a hard scientific discussion. You can`t just say "sex is not binary". You have to prove it through hard scientific evidence.
@@nemiarhs Admitting that the organization around the reproductive structure is what is important makes sex as a binary untenable because of the spectrum of the organization we see. If you admit that sex is more than just the gametes produced then you admit it is bimodal, anything else is cognitive dissonance. People who posses reproductive structures of both sexes fundamentally disprove a strict binary around sex. Sex is only binary if you ignore intersex people, but in reality we acknowledge that there is a spectrum of reproductive anatomy therefore making a binary impossible. You can't even argue gametes are binary because there are 4 possible options for production within an organism, small, large, small and large, or none. He is fundamentally wrong and going against scientific consensus.
If we accept that it is reproductive structure then when a trans woman has her reproductive structure removed (including her ability to produce gametes) and now has a vagina with all basic functions aside from allowing pregnancy, she has fundamentally changed her sex to the female side of the bimodal peaks. It isn't about being woke, its about science and the way we define sex. If you'd bother to read the guys Twitter you'd know that his motivation around trying to define sex as a binary based on gamete production is to attack trans people, it is political not science based.
I don't believe sex is consensually defined solely by gametes by the human biology field, but do let me know if you think I'm wrong and why.
We all know that biological sex can be ambiguous or atypical but what I would argue is that biological sex is binary because the only way that humans get to exist/reproduce is by way of a binary system.
All humans are a product of an egg being fertilized by a sperm including intersex conditions therefore they are a part of the binary system. The fact they there are variations simply means that biological sex can have variations and can have both male and female characteristics and still primarily develop as male or female. Intersex conditions does not negate binary because they are a product of that binary system.
It is. That’s because it is an evolutionary understanding. It is reflected in taxonomy, where we know the male is the one that holds the offspring because it produces sperm. That the male clownfish changes to female because it starts producing ova.
Every new anisogamous species they look at which one produces which gamete to say what sex they are.
Outcomes of tossing a nickel coin. 1 in 5000 cases it lands on edge.
And it wouldn't mean that the round faces of the coin are more than 2.
It’s 1 in 6000 actually.
I'm wondering when this video will be taken down
Hopefully soon.
@@PinkieRockStar878 Lol!
Hopefully never. Let's see how UA-cam deals with opposing narratives to the pushed narrative.
@@L4v4molly Shadow banning that's how they deal with it
English please
Bicycles are binary. A man cycling afemale bike may be a autogynephyle
Has science gone too far?
When you say paradox institute, you're not wrong.
You corrected a right-wing argument, and specified a left-wing defense.
Interesting. Truly is...
I don't think it's a correction of the right wing "chromosome" argument. We would have to see how often the Y chromosome has the SRY gene connected and I would argue it's probably 99 point something percent of the time. This would mean the argument is still valid that boys have XY and girls have XX. The exceptions prove the rule.
@@rakshitragav3747 yes, in less than 0.05% of the population.
What about that 0.02% whose sex can't be unambiguously identified at birth? If their bodies are not developed for female or male gamete production then this definition doesn't seem to be able to deal with them.
dude they still have gametes just because you cant always literally see them. you can't see a baby's DNA either at birth
Translation: "I don't understand the difference between ambiguous and absent."
...because there's no third gamete *roll credits*
You are basing it on the idea of the duality of gametes. However this variation in characteristics you talked about like hormonal level could very well indicate the behaviour of a person in relation to male or female ryt ? Like if a women who has more testosterone than normal would have more masculine traits. So wouldn't that make gender a spectrum?
See his video on the difference between sex and gender.
There is a wide variety in human appearance, behavior, hormone levels, etcetera. We are all unique individuals. Stating that sex is binary in no way contradicts this.
Is every human on the planet a different species because they don't look identical to each other?
Once balls always balls
lol its like you didn't even watch the video... what an idiot.
4:45 WHAT THE HECK IS SHE TALKING ABOUT??? There are plenty of species with loads of different gametes
Well of course, Species like the Clown fish, they can naturally change their sex, right?
How is genital mutilation natural by the way?
Gametes are haploid, egg and sperm and the like.
Which means that the parts that make up a zygote will be from a male and female. This means the gamete will be male or female depending on the sex of the individual that gives rise to the gamete.
Female gametes come from females and male gametes from males.
@@L4v4molly There are plenty of animals with both. That's my whole point.
@@_steamfunk_2271 Who says that? That's medical treatment for gender dysphoria that is designed to reduce dysphoria and better life quality. This has zero to do with clownfish
@@makeshift2105 Proof? Are you actually unaware of hemaphrotism within the animal kingdom?
Yeah, sex is binary. Nobody is arrguing against that.
However, gender is different story.
People *are* arguing about that and legislature has already been passed redefining the definition of female.
gender independex of sex does not exist. it is a system based on stereotypes and style choices.
@@rubywhistler869 I don't see your point here. How exactly is the image of gender thet exists in society dependent on biological sex?
@@daca8395 it isn't. it isn't based on anything. it's got no definition, means nothing inherently, and hence doesn't matter at all.
@@rubywhistler869 You have my same exact opinion about Gender. Kudos to you
I appreciate the information and have no reason to doubt it’s accuracy, but I have some problems with its presentation. A few more areas should be touched on because undoubtedly this video will be used to justify peoples transphobia, despite some of the information given within this video itself.
Firstly, this definition of sex is so specific that it’s not helpful the current social issues around the topic. I’ve seen many sources define sex as essentially what gamete’s are produced, not the organization of those gametes production. The former definition does give more leeway to the idea of a less rigid concept of sex. While the latter is more specific, again it doesn’t help with the conversation. All the different variations of sex expression in the body make this definition a somewhat moot point.
Secondly, any modern day discussion of sex should include the clarification that sex does not equal gender. Too many arguments on the topic of sex conflate the two and it’s a serious problem. While I do appreciate shorter videos like this for the sake of useful public information, adding a minute or two for the sake of clarification as well as predicting and responding to potential misuses of the information wouldn’t be a bad idea.
Thirdly, it’s disappointing how glossed over that part about sex expression is. With the common person’s definition of biological sex, expression is most often what they unintentionally are referring to. Touching on the variability of sex expression is far more useful to people who are trying to have conversations about biological sex.
I’m open to and happy to hear criticism of my points as long as they’re respectful. I mentioned transphobia in my comment but I’m not here to call everyone who disagrees with me on this particular topic transphobic.
Biology is NOT about social issues tho. Biology does not change based on what society wants
Oh here we go again. Biology is transphobic to weirdos like you. Get out of here, groomer. The entire concept of gender was invented by a pedophile. How about you stop trying to dismantle science that is inconvenient to your warped politics?
@@frenchbloo information effects how people view the world. The question “is sex binary” is answered using biology, but many will use the information they learn while finding an answer to justify their opinion on social issues. That’s just how information works. So yes, biology studies living organisms, and does not study social issues. But what we learn from biology is absolutely used while discussing other topics.
"'I think this information is accurate, but we should change it because it can possibly justify transphobia".
No.
We don't change science, languague, and truth, to fit socio-political agendas.
So i ve seen pretty much all commentaty on the video
Defining sex is not easy, but i would mostly agree that it is about gametes and the presence of SRY gene.
a man will NEVER be a woman, the whole idea of gender is not above the reality, i will not call you she if you're born a make, that will be a lie.
And whatever if u feel like a woman a puts dress, it does not make you one.
Presence of the SRY gene is not part of defining sex.
@@Dr.Ian-Plect it is actually the video explains it pretty well.
It s what defines the gametes.
@@xertiasstrat8957 "it is actually the video explains it pretty well.
It s what defines the gametes."
- Why would you respond to me stating 'x doesn't define y' with 'actually, z defines y very well, it's in the video'? You are muddled.
@@Dr.Ian-Plect so u just dont get it
@@Dr.Ian-Plect sry is a protein in your body which defines/creates the gonades and especially the gametes which are eggs or sperm.
Means male or female.
You ll never can change your dna
A man cant become a woman.
A he is not a she.
This is such bs. As a social scientist I can assure you this is wrong. You can’t tell me what my anatomy is because it’s unique to me.
@@makeshift2105 I was 100% trolling. These people have lost their minds.
Cope fool
"So when a female has been in a menopause phase, their not a female anymore ?" yeah that makes sense. if i lost my hand to an accident im not a human anymore.
Are you actually trying to be this stupid or did you hit your head when you were a kid? XD
@@frenchbloo explain.
@@frenchbloo he made joke bro.
@@raihanmahajana3579 You didn't pay attention did you. Your organs not actually functionally producing the gametes is irrelevant. They said again and again, organized around their production, not actively producing them. Sex is immutable. Your body's predisposition to produce particular gametes is what the determining factor is. Your sex dosn't change or disappear because you're sterile or hit menopause, any more than a dog stops being a dog because it has only three legs.
What about people that have chromosomal anomalies or congenital conditions that result in no gamete formation? The vast majority of biologists that study animals measure sex by other means (e.g., behavior, morphology, genotyping), not checking gametes. The gamete definition for sex is too narrow and not practical. Even developmental biologists use proxies like genotype or primary sex characteristics, which don't always line up with the gametes that are produced. Another case of biologists trying to force nature into a limited number of boxes while ignoring anomalies and exceptions for their own conveniences.
People that have chromosomal anomalies or congenital conditions that result in no gamete formation still have other characteristics that are either female or male. The characteristics they have don't exist because of a third gamete. And things like the phenotypic sex or chromosomal sex are considered either female or male based on the definition that female=large gamete and male=small gamete at the very core, which is to say, the definition of sex as the differences in structure and size of gametes. Biologists are not ignoring anomalies and exceptions for their own convenience, the concept of sex as defined in this videos takes all this in its stride, despite having only two sexes.
@@Steve-bn8nz Indeed, I am one of those biologist! My argument is that nature cares not for our desire to describe phenomena in discrete categories. Sometimes a chromosomal sex of XX does not = large gametes if the SRY gene has recombined or "jumped". Individuals with complete AIS have internal testicles, make no gametes, have 100% external female genitalia, but largely lack any internal genitalia of either sex beyond the gonads. What biological sex are they? I understand the ultimate perspective of framing everything around anisogamy, the hypothesis being everything else evolved to support the gametes. It is my opinion the definition of sex in this video does a disservice to just how complicated the evolution of and variation in sexual reproduction is. I know that traditional developmental biology nomenclature is on this videos side. However, it is an overly simplistic conceptual model that fails more and more as we discover more and more across sexually reproducing species. Also the argument about how we should define Biological Sex is really a political and cultural one. That is why Hilton and Write published in the WSJ instead of a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Thank for taking the time to respond to my post in such a constructive way.
@@blakejones7489 Well, if you think that the only way to not ignore anomalies and exceptions is to revamp the very fundations of the study of sexual reproduction, then I wish you luck, that has to be a monumental task especially considering the actual model works fine even with this "anomalies and exceptions".
Biological sex is mostly used to denotate the chromosomes, phenotype, gonads, etc, etc and I'll have to agree, today everyone seems to want their own idea pushed forward on that front. That's one of the reasons now I try to explain the definition of sex, saying that it's the one biology made instead of "biological sex" because people get confused why I'm talking about size of gametes when I should be talking about chromosomas according to them. It's true that nature cares very little for us humans trying to study it, but it's also true we are capable of reaching models with great accuracy to describe it.
The fact that there's people who don't clearly fall into female or male categories clearly (here I mean female as a whole a not as female=organism that produces big gametes and similar for male) doesn't mean sex isn't binary. For instance, would you say that the testes people with CAIS tend to have are preparation for making a third type gamete? Or would you say something similar when people have ovotestis, this structure is meant to produce a third gamete? If you're answer for this kind of questions is no, then it remains that sex keeps on being a binary by the very definition. And if you're answer is yes, I suggest you publish because that discovery would indeed shake a lot of what we know. Personally, I will stay with the model we have now, I haven't found yet the knowledge or idea that can shake it. After all, it's observable reality that we only produce two types of gametes.
@@Steve-bn8nz Not a revamp, just expanding the model. I don't need well wishes because developmental biologists are already doing it. (e.g., onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jnr.23884 ). I'll stick with my own little esoteric corner that no one cares about.
I think by the definition of "binary" having intermediates or unrecognizable examples means you don't have a binary. I would agree with the statement that "biological sex is typically binary, but technically it is not because there are persistent exceptions." Unless you want to change the definition of binary.
I agree with the observably reality of typically only two gametes (or none) in most eukaryotes. But that is just it! The argument that you need a third gamete to say sex isn't binary misses the point. Biologists are modifying the definition. The argument is: stop putting the gamete on a pedestal, it over simplifies how we measure sex and the realities we observe as we learn more about how sexual phenotypes develop. The real argument is, "should we change the definition? Is it useful? does it advance the field?" I tend to balk at the old way of "SEX = Gamete, end of story." For example, this recent publication, which is in my neighborhood of research www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0018506X20301768. The utility of using "sex" as egg or sperm is arguably insufficient.
@@blakejones7489 The first link you put leads to nowhere. Change it?
However gender is still a social term, so you can call yourself whatever gender and it doesn't hurt anyone or have anything to do with biological science other than social science
Sex is binary. Gender isnt
Tell me who invented Gender?
Then why are gender affirming surgery include sex change by mutilating genitals and chemical castration?
Then you have to take drugs for the rest of your life so your fake vagina/open wound don't close and try to heal itself or get infected.
So basically take drugs so your open wound dont heal itself.
In my opinion, these arguments are largely semantic. If we define biological sex exclusively based on whether or not an individual can produce sperm or eggs, then sex can be either male, female, both, or neither (those are the logical possibilities). But if we define biological sex according to a particular constellation of phenotypic traits, including the type of gametes that the person can or cannot produce, chromosomes, reproductive organs, external genitalia, brain circuitry, amount and distribution of hormones and receptors, etc. then biological sex is a multi-dimensional continuum with a bimodal distribution in the human population. This channel prefers the first definition. Others may prefer the second. You are free to pick which definition you want according to personal taste or pragmatics.
The second definition not only is extremely antropocentric, but it also mean that there are people that are more female than others
@@creaomega2643 Indeed it is anthropocentric, which is ok, because we are talking about people in all of their multifaceted glory. And some people do display more 'feminine' traits than others. I don't see why this is controversial.
@@copernicus99 It is controversial because it mean it does not have any taxonomic value, meaning it will be intrinsicly arbitrary and a social construct as much as it is race (currently, for scientist race does not have any taxonomic value)
This without saying that you putting a person in one point of the bimodal distribuition rather than another will be also completely arbitrary as it will depend on how many traits you measure of a person and how many biomarker you gonna consider (is a short woman more woman than a taller one?).
So saying it is a "scientifical definition" would be specious.
Even your average in the bimodal distribuition will mean nothing as you will have extreme variation also there if you give each trait the same value and insert there Women that are very Tall but produce a lot of extrogens, or women that are very short but are physically stronger or have XY chromosomes.
Notice that one of the most impostant variables that define where a person place on your graph will be if it is have a system that favour the potential production of sperm of ova.
At this point, if all of them are women, you may as well use the normal classic classification and that's it.
"Multifaceted glory"
Lol, you are remarkably likely to invalidate them being as female as others or as a male as others.
@@creaomega2643 Yes, the variance in the bimodal distribution of secondary sex characteristics is large, but that does not make classification entirely arbitrary. Just as ancestry or 'race' is not arbitrary or merely a social construct. People do show real genetic clusters that can be differentiated based on their ancestry (Asian, African, Northern European, Middle Eastern, Pacific Islander, etc.).
@@creaomega2643I really hope you don't judge a person's sex by his gametes. This would mean you would have to wank every man you see to confirm he is a man.
We obviously judge a person's sex by a hole of different biological sex traits.
Also this would mean that a man who can't produce sperm isnt a man. I know this is where the "potential" comes into play. But this is not how biology works. There is not a normal person. People just are. There is no plan in nature for humans to be fertil. So if your definition is based on being fertil and there are people who aren't. The definition is shit.
This would be cool, except for the fact that intersex, Turner syndrome, and Klinefelter syndrome all disprove your claim that there are only two sexes.
The argument isn't that there are only two sex cells, but rather that there are only two sexes occurring the human species, XX and XY, which simply isn't the case. Sex is a spectrum of combinations of X chromosomes and Y chromosomes.
Karyotypes are not sexes jajajajajaja DSDs are not sexes. Are you stpid or smthng?
so you didnt watch the video. gametes have only two options, regarlss of one intersex characteristics, they are still either small or large aka male or female
Aren't those abnormal mutations? The exceptions do not refute the general rule.
Kinfelters are males. Turner syndrome are females. Even there the binary stands as rigid as stone
You literally didn't watch the video. The video explains every single instance of intersex using the SRY gene. Go away, groomer.
As a biologist - I don’t even know where to start with this mess of an argument. It’s already firmly established that physiological sex characteristics are bimodal (not binary), existing on spectra. It would be pointless and counter-productive to argue otherwise - these are observable phenomena.
This UA-camr (I’m told he’s an architecture student??) basically presents these same spectra, but makes a semantic argument for considering them as distinct A/B binaries. Actually no, not even just as a series of binaries, but as one giant binary. Just…. wut
He is talking about how many type of gametes. The answer is 2.
Translation: "How do humans reproduce? I have no idea, but I'm a bIoLoGiSt!!1!"
Binary means "number of", and when it comes to biological sex, there are only two. That is how it is for any anisogamic system, as you well know, and that is why the term binary is used. It makes no statement about the quality or distribution of secondary sex characteristics and traits. I suppose it depends on wether one is using the technical form of binary or the colloquial one (which many do in these discussions).
Same goes for binary code. We call it binary because it's a code consisting of 0's and 1's, so 0110001 is stilll... binary.
Considering you're willing to lie about "firmly established" science, I don't doubt you're also lying about being a biologist.
No reputable biology paper treats sex as a spectrum, but as two distinct groups.
Bro got his diploma from the back of a happy meal. You either have the sry gene or you dont
This video is an extreme simplification. If you want more accurate information I recommend this video;
ua-cam.com/video/szf4hzQ5ztg/v-deo.html
The question to ask yourself about Forest Valkai's video (that you linked) is this:
* Where are the negative comments that disagree.
* Even just one.
* If his position is correct and clear, it should speak for itself, no? No need for censorship.
There's many that do _not_ think sex is a spectrum and feel that parts of academia have been captured. I am one of them.
What do gamete types have to do with anything other than that a sperm and an egg is required to make a human? Please do extrapolate as does one of your mentors that therefore gamete type must influence sports, restrooms, the military, etc. Let’s just label everyone sperm or egg producing gamete types and forget about how we assign gamete type to a bathroom. So we are gamete 1 or 2 and that tells us what we contribute in terms of reproduction, if anything (as many humans are unable to reproduce at all). Then we all go on with our real lives which includes all those amazing variations that we have as humans as you inform us comes after the gamete part. AND additionally how unique we all are - as much as a snowflake or a flower! Let’s hear those low brow jokes now about snowflakes and flowers. SAD. Of course this binary thing is all unscientific. The joke is on you as a “biologist”. There are variations as to all aspects of biology including everything in this video. LOOK it up. It will take about 15 minutes of your life. Biology flourishes in variety and although many don’t care for the term evolution, biology loves the concept because variation from the “norm” often becomes the typical through time. Nature has a way of deciding on what it wants to do next completely without us. We impact it but it decides. So just as you are comfortably settling into your erroneous insistence that there are only 2 sexes, binary, nature is rocking your premise out from under you! Stick around another 1000 years (or10 years) because your black and white, this and that mentality is going to get shook even if it doesn’t get woke.
PS for those who want to say, as does Mr. Colin Wright, whom you quote, that smaller samples of human categories deserve less attention and as outliers ultimately don’t matter to a biologist as it doesn’t influence their black and white thinking, well, what makes you so important? In a word, uniqueness. There has never been and will never be again YOU. A sample of one! Damn!
And for those of you who need a little boost up from the kid’s table, I’ll give you some letters of the alphabet: XX X XXY XXX XYY XXXX XXXY XXYY XXXXY XXXXX XY.
Yeah, but it doesn't mean that we cannot recognize specific categories because of that. Otherwise you will be unable to differentiate a pig from a human. The variations you likely talk about is not the main reason that define this categories, so it is irrelevant to the discussion
@@creaomega2643 you just chaffed your own ass by chasing your own tail. The less we differentiate the x’s and y’s, the less we can tell not only a pig from a human but an ass from an idiot.
By the way, for those not named Crea Omega, of course the xy does not differentiate animals but sexual differences. The points I make above are about how stupid we are to limit ourselves to being as much like the other as possible, except when we don’t. The more perfect my comments are about the most essential aspects of ourselves, the more stupid, unthought out responses are touted by those who truly allow themselves to function as idiots. You are all, even Crea, amazingly irreproducible, endlessly valuable beings. Figure that out and don’t allow anyone to reduce you or reduce anyone else. We don’t need to be told by science a pig is not a human and neither do we need to be told that you are not me and I am not you. This is the level Crea and so many others reduce themselves to, not being able to differentiate. We have more variation than we can even imagine. Sad for Crea but not for those who do not lose their minds. Don’t lose your mind peeps.
You're confusing sex and gender.
In a binary category system, if a trait or traits inherent to the definition of one category can be found to varying degrees in members of the second category, then the system isn’t binary, it’s bimodal.
Several confirmed medical conditions are evidence of genotypical male traits being found in physical, chromosomal, and reproductively female persons, and vice versus.
This simply can’t exist in a binary system.
Turns out, nature is really complicated and high school textbooks aren’t actually on the cutting edge of science.
Not several but few.. These variations should be considered as anomalies not as a spectrum of sex..
Sperm or egg.. Whether your secondary characteristics differ it doesn't matter.. Too much variations should be considered as a disease than another labelling as a sex
No, traits/phenotypes are secondary sex determinants AFTER the XY primary sex-determination system.
'Bimodal' sex in humans would see a 'middle ground' chromosomally in the sex-determining heterosomes - XYZ or whatever - which simply does not occur in humans, therefore biological sex is binary.
To summarise, what you are describing is sexual phenotyping, not biological sex. Biological sex is primarily determined at conception and is 100% binary. You are confusing secondary sex determination with the primary.
@@tubey84 Which kind of 'sex' is on a birth certificate, biological or phenotypical?
@@f.e.groenwold2073 It's assigned, so it's phenotypical - as in based on the external visuals; of course babies aren't routinely DNA tested to assign sex, nor should they be. The idea is the assignment is based on the phenotyping strongly indicating a correlation with primary sex determination (or 'playing the odds' as it were; an educated guess.)
If the assigned sex at birth is wrong, the birth certificate doesn't overwrite biological sex determinism.
@@tubey84 Why shouldn't babies be routinely DNA tested to assign 'sex'?