Quote:
Originally Posted by naraht
So if, to you, chromosomes determine, is it the existence of a Y chromosome that determines gender regardless of what you can see about the person? If the cells have a Y chromosome, but Breasts, a Vagina and no facial hair, that's a guy, right? Even if they by inspection with the naked eye, the child looks female, once the Chromosomes have been looked at, that's a boy?
Part of the reasons that cis/trans in sexual characteristics is so complicated is that instead of measuring one thing, thirty or more are measured. Do they normally line up in 97% (more or less) of the population, sure. But the 3% exists.
And *that* is complete ignoring the Psychology...
|
First, that “to you” part is really cute, but chromosomes being the blueprint for sex isn’t a personal opinion, it’s biology 101. Doctors don’t say, “What do you feel like today?” They run a karyotype if there’s an actual medical anomaly.
Second, you’re describing real disorders of sexual development, which exist, yes. But you just proved my point again. When the visible anatomy doesn’t line up, guess what? They look at the chromosomes to figure it out. Because the blueprint doesn’t lie.
So you’re basically saying, “If a rare glitch happens, does that mean the whole blueprint is flexible?” No. A glitch doesn’t rewrite the design for the other 97%.
And tossing in “psychology” at the end doesn’t change chromosomes either. Feelings can’t swap a Y for an X.
So “to you”? Nope. It’s not to me. It’s just how DNA works.
Hope that clears up the confusion.
Threaded Mode