LogFAQs > #878529440

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Netflix removes chromosome explanation of sexes from Bill Nye the Science Guy
darkknight109 05/05/17 1:52:33 PM #143:	OhhhJa posted... The radical left claims to be pro science but even that seems negotiable if it hurts someone's feelings One of us is posting established medical practice. It's not you. OhhhJa posted... Nowhere did I say that. One more time for the people in the back: OhhhJa posted... The bottom line is still that the parts between your legs determine your biological sex. [...] Not at all odd to normal people. If you have produce seed you are male. If you produce eggs, you are female. What on earth could be considered odd about that? Statement A: "Your biological sex is determined by your genitals." Statement B: "Your biological sex is determined by your reproductive capabilities [which is governed by gonads and is independent of genitals]." I mean, to consider how ridiculous this is, consider someone with a vagina and testes. By your first quote, you'd say they're a woman, but if we go by your second quote, you'd say they're a man. The two definitions - which, I feel I should stress, you rattled off right after one another in the exact same post - completely contradict each other (and, in doing so, demonstrate a rather poor understanding of basic biology). Bit of advice: Don't bother trying to argue what you did or did not say in a forum when I can easily quote your previous posts. chaosbowser posted... I don't think so. She's basically all female except for some chromosomes. People get hung up on absolutes and 100% certainties with chromosome. Having an XY in the vast majority of cases indicates you will have a male but sometimes it doesn't. That would be this case. Precisely. chaosbowser posted... It's not wrong to state its a spectrum but its somewhat unnecessary when we don't use a spectrum for maleness and femaleness of people in the first place. Medical professionals do have scales that they use for such things; they're just not widely known (or used by the public, for the most part), because the majority of the population sits on one of the two far ends of the scale. adjl posted... chaosbowser posted... It'd be more accurate to say its a spectrum with 3 discrete approximations. Or rather a spectrum with two discrete approximations and a bunch of fringe cases that can be lumped together under "other" for most people's purposes. This is a good summation of it, yes. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! <cite>darkknight109 posted [p:878529440] in Netflix re... [t:75311149]...</cite> <quote><cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>The radical left claims to be pro science but even that seems negotiable if it hurts someone's feelings</quote> One of us is posting established medical practice. It's not you. <cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>Nowhere did I say that.</quote> One more time for the people in the back: <cite>OhhhJa posted...</cite> <quote>The bottom line is still that the parts between your legs determine your biological sex. [...] Not at all odd to normal people. If you have produce seed you are male. If you produce eggs, you are female. What on earth could be considered odd about that?</quote> Statement A: "Your biological sex is determined by your genitals." Statement B: "Your biological sex is determined by your reproductive capabilities [which is governed by gonads and is independent of genitals]." I mean, to consider how ridiculous this is, consider someone with a vagina and testes. By your first quote, you'd say they're a woman, but if we go by your second quote, you'd say they're a man. The two definitions - which, I feel I should stress, you rattled off right after one another in the exact same post - completely contradict each other (and, in doing so, demonstrate a rather poor understanding of basic biology). Bit of advice: Don't bother trying to argue what you did or did not say in a forum when I can easily quote your previous posts. <cite>chaosbowser posted...</cite> <quote>I don't think so. She's basically all female except for some chromosomes. People get hung up on absolutes and 100% certainties with chromosome. Having an XY in the vast majority of cases indicates you will have a male but sometimes it doesn't. That would be this case. </quote> Precisely. <cite>chaosbowser posted...</cite> <quote>It's not wrong to state its a spectrum but its somewhat unnecessary when we don't use a spectrum for maleness and femaleness of people in the first place.</quote> Medical professionals do have scales that they use for such things; they're just not widely known (or used by the public, for the most part), because the majority of the population sits on one of the two far ends of the scale. <cite>adjl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>chaosbowser posted...</cite> <quote>It'd be more accurate to say its a spectrum with 3 discrete approximations.</quote> Or rather a spectrum with two discrete approximations and a bunch of fringe cases that can be lumped together under "other" for most people's purposes.</quote> This is a good summation of it, yes. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1